Ceaser or Victoria?

This is a place to gain some understanding of dog behavior and to assist people in training their dogs and dealing with common behavior problems, regardless of the method(s) used. This can cover the spectrum from non-aversive to traditional methods of dog training. There are many ways to train a dog. Please avoid aggressive responses, and counter ideas and opinions with which you don't agree with friendly and helpful advice. Please refrain from submitting posts that promote off-topic discussions. Keep in mind that you may be receiving advice from other dog owners and lovers... not professionals. If you have a major problem, always seek the advice of a trainer or behaviorist!

Topic closed to new posts.
(Page 2 of 7: Viewing entries 11 to 20)  
1  2  3  4  5  6  7  

Whippy- The- Whipador
Barked: Sun Jan 13, '13 3:33pm PST 
I prefer Victoria. She talks a great deal of sense. Before she crossed the pond, she did a few "It's me or the Dog" series here too and at the time i watched weekly. But i've never watched an American episode of hers. Don't like CM's approach to things and i find his methods very intimidating and provoking.

I'm like- Einstein only- hairier.
Barked: Sun Jan 13, '13 4:24pm PST 
1. Who do you like more and why.
2. Why don't you like the other?
3. And, in your experience how has the two types of training worked for you?

1. I personally prefer Cesar Millan, granted as the seasons have progressed he does seem like he has less patience and is a bit more rough with the dogs, which isn't pleasant. I prefer early Cesar to current Cesar. I like how he explains what to look for when it comes to body language and why dogs react to certain things. He uses tools that the dogs themselves use to communicate with each other VS trying to mollycoddle or bribe the dog into 'performing'. I like the fact that Cesar deals in prevention before problems as well by explaining about the exercise, discipline, and affection to keep a happy, healthy dog.

2. I wouldn't say I dislike Victoria. I've seen only a few shows of hers (It's Me Or The Dog I believe it's called) and I find her methods to be kind of wishy-washy. It always seems like she is waiting to see if the dog gets bored and behaves :/

3. I use Cesars "Tssst!" mostly because it's more fun for me to tsst a dog rather then use a vocal correction like 'no' or 'bad'. I am a strong believer in body language and I have poked my dogs (not savagely) in the neck to get their attention and it has yet to fail me, though my dogs are pretty much angels anyway.

As for the dominance VS positive training I think a good trainer can take pieces from many different methods/styles of training without committing to a certain one. I don't like the term 'dominance training' because it seems to hold a lot of negative connotations and seems to steer the conversation right away towards 'alpha rolling' and abuse. Never would I condone the mental or physical abuse of any animal but on the same hand I have no problem with a slight leash (tug) correction or poke to the neck, gently of course.

Member Since
Barked: Sun Jan 13, '13 5:53pm PST 
Using dominance tacts makes very little sense if you understand the concept of social dominance.

Using force to obtain valued resources. That's basically it in a nutshell. Dominance and submission aren't personality traits. It makes no sense when people say that they have a dominant or submissive dog. The dog can only be that way in regards to the resource at hand.

So it comes down to, should we fight with dogs over these resources? I certainly don't think so. Why fight? Why would someone prefer to use violence and bullying when there's learning theory and other things that we, as humans, can arm ourselves with for a stress free and violence free solution?

We're supposed to the more intelligent species. What does it say about a person's intelligence if they have to resort to base, crude force? That's not really impressive to me. Nor is everyone capable of it. Should they then not have dogs? I'm still waiting for my service dog and pet dog to turn on me if that were the case. I'm physically not capable of employing manhandling tactics though, like I said, I train all kinds of animals, including those with severe behavioral issues. Not using force isn't just one method. It's a variety of methods. But it's violence and bullying free. It's what I enjoy and judging by the animal's body language, it's also what they enjoy. And it works when properly executed.

I would like to know though, how do you know that a dog understands what's expected and thus justifies the need for corrections? Did you ask them?

Dogs don't learn exactly the same way that humans do in all aspects. A dog may know how to sit in the living room but may not understand in the kitchen. A dog may be very well behaved and obeying all cues at home but may be so over threshold in the middle of a busy pet store and that's the handler's fault for not building up to that criteria. You may not have sufficiently rewarded the dog or practiced the behavior enough times. You may have been unclear in your teaching. Poisoned cues, frantic hand waving, mumbling, etc. I see it all the time. And another thing I frequently see with dogs who were claimed to have developed a "stubborn streak". The dog stops obeying certain cues all of a sudden. A vet visit later, or a vet specialist visit and a MRI later and it shows that doing sits, downs, or what have you would have been causing the animal great pain due to arthritis, dislocation, spine issues, thyroid problems, or any great number of things.

Then there are also unrealistic expectations and wanting instant results. Throwing a leash on a dog who's never worn one before and expecting that they'll just understand how it's supposed to work.

Teach well and you won't need corrections. Review how you could have taught better. Don't blame the dog. Read Karen Pryor's book, Don't Shoot The Dog. And don't shoot the dog.

Pooch ~ I- miss you ~

love forever
Barked: Sun Jan 13, '13 6:40pm PST 
I don't really like either trainer but Victoria comes a little closer to the type of training methods I'd use, not that close though.

Edited by author Sun Jan 13, '13 6:41pm PST


too old to eat- any more KD
Barked: Sun Jan 13, '13 6:44pm PST 
"I would like to know though, how do you know that a dog understands what's expected and thus justifies the need for corrections? Did you ask them?"

Why, yes..I do ask them.laugh out loud If my dog is proofed on a command, but chooses not to & flips me the doggie-bird, then he will be corrected.
If a dog is learning something new, mistakes are to be expected. You can not correct something that is not known. He continues learning until he gets it, but when he does get it, & it is proofed, then it becomes an expectation.
Tiller- (Skansen's- Ira in the M

I DO Exist...To- Drive You Batty
Barked: Sun Jan 13, '13 6:55pm PST 
@ Tyler....they actually broadcast those here as well. And funny to say, but those were MUCH better. I think in part because England does love its characters, and the owners were not glossed over....presented much as they are, quirks and all, and it was easy there to see the contributions they made to the problems. Here, it seems a lot more glossy, less informative and far less watchable. It seems that her U.S. show may not have rated well and was moved out of prime slots, but when they aired the original series, it went over very well.

I think that can be a more enlightening/helpful format. Delving into the people also, bettering seeing the dynamics of the problem. Which is more engrossing to watch any way wink I think if shows focused more on quirky owners, you'd still get the entertainment value and not have to focus so much on extreme cases.

Member Since
Barked: Sun Jan 13, '13 6:58pm PST 
But proofed means just that. That the dog won't neglect to follow the cue. Not every dog can be corrected. Either through a mental or physical disability. What then? Find a different kind of correction?

It doesn't really say anything besides "do it or else". But if you're okay with that, then I guess you've done what you set out to do.

It all comes down to each individual and what we want for our animals.
Jackson Tan

Lad about town
Barked: Sun Jan 13, '13 7:04pm PST 
I prefer Ceasar's show to Victoria's. I find him the more entertaining host.

I don't try things I see on TV so whatever they do is no consequence to me.

Both the 'positive' (and when I say that I mean the hard line clicker trainers) and the full on 'CM is god' dominance camps are a bit of a yawn to me. I don't know of ANY dominance trainers on this board, however, so the fights that break out tend to between the clicker crowd and the balanced crew. I'm like Squam and just do what works, and I like Eisenmann a great deal.

I have a friend in real life who practices dominance (in that she walks out the door first and so on) and keeps three entire shepherds in her yard with no issue. Working lines. For a long time there was a female ACD in there too. When she was growing up her parents gave her bouviers. No issues. Just a great dog handler, and with never a mean word for anyone.

And, on the flip side, I have been berated by hardline clicker trainers here a few times. laugh out loud I don't seek them out in real life so I don't know how people who hold that ethos behave away from the computer. I've heard bad things

But .... If given a chance to go to a clicker trainer party or an alpha head party, I think I'd chose the alpha heads based on my experience!! I'd party down like only a lemming can. hamster dance

Haha, seriously though, Vic Stilwell' s methods are closer to mine than CM's.I've never put a dog on his side. I do think his philosophy of 'exercise, discipline, affection' is excellent, though, and jokingly call my family 'the pack.' big grin

Edited by author Sun Jan 13, '13 7:10pm PST

Sanka- I'll Miss- You

The ground is my- newspaper.
Barked: Sun Jan 13, '13 7:27pm PST 
Victoria's shows are too chaotic and more focused on human drama.

The silly noises she tweets out or yells are so annoying that I just can't stand it. The whole concept of a family member being fed up with the other is just stereotypical and too played out...but that's what makes it a show unfortunately.

While many may not like Cesar's technique, the show shows more of the dog and less human drama. It's more calm. Others may disagree, but his approach is so calm that it's worth watching. Just the way he does his thing is rather intriguing to me.

Member Since
Barked: Sun Jan 13, '13 8:46pm PST 
neither, cause i prefer to go to trainers which can see and work with my individual dog and their needs.

also positive and dominance as terms are not mutually exclusive.
(Page 2 of 7: Viewing entries 11 to 20)  
1  2  3  4  5  6  7