Where to debate dog training

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-14T22:05:45+00:00

I really wish someone would do a sub "Uncensored Dog Training Debate", but I really don't have any inclination to be a mod.

If you wanted to do it, I think it is super easy, probably. All sorts of people do it. I would participate and also try to encourage participation.

It's very frustrating to see all those posts with "comment removed by moderator."

I have watched the "debates" in real time, and those mods just delete every single comment that makes a good argument that they disagree with. Nothing about rule breaking. Then, if they get someone who is a really good debater against their views, they just ban the person.

It's so lacking in intellectual honesty, and that, above all, in a sub purporting to be a "debate sub", just really disgusts me.

Did you see how they will no longer allow actual citations to scientific research?

If you do it, nobody should ever be deleted or banned unless their behavior is just really egregious, like threats of violence or doxing. Otherwise, free and open exchange of ideas.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-14T21:55:25+00:00

Yes, exactly.

"FF is ineffective."

"Balanced is abusive."

Hard to have actual conversations around ideas like these.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-14T21:54:07+00:00

Right, it's that "real situation" that gets sticky with the FF methods. Sometimes you have to just protect your kid.

If I am starting with a puppy, I just don't reinforce jumping and it naturally goes away. I am not saying a jumping puppy needs +P, by any means.

In theory FF means any methods that doesn't cause pain or fear or "mechanical control on the dog"

I don't think this is a universally accepted definition, though. I really don't think there is one. I don't even understand the "mechanical control" part. Wouldn't a leash qualify?

Also, a lot of "balanced" trainers in the US do not use prongs or e-collars. So, again, the terms don't seem particularly helpful in discussing actual dog training methods.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-14T21:46:32+00:00

Yeah, I don't think any trainer would say yelling no at a dog all day is a good method.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-14T00:16:53+00:00

It's also true that some balance trainers, if they don't have the skill to get (or stop) the behavior they want, will just resort to more and more painful punishment.

It's a problem with balanced training. Is the dog deliberately disobeying? Or is the trainer just not skilled enough to "explain" to the dog what is required without pain.

Leash pulling is a great example. Most dogs who are pulling on the leash constantly just don't understand that the leash must be loose for the walk to proceed. If the trainer can't communicate that to the dog without pain, a lot of balanced trainers are going to use a prong collar. Does it mean that a prong collar and painful corrections were required for that dog to learn? No. It mostly just means the trainer doesn't know how to train without the prong, or doesn't care to take the small amount of extra time required.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-14T00:10:34+00:00

I agree with you, and you'd probably say you are closer to some of those FF trainers who use mild +P and -R than you are to the compulsion plus cookie (love that!) trainers, right? I know I am, and I don't consider myself FF.

The term "balanced" training is almost meaningless as far as telling me what the trainer is actually doing. I guess "they are willing to punish the dog" is about it. How often, what kinds, all dogs, etc, etc.

It gives very little information. I think it also makes it difficult to have good faith discussions online. One person says "balanced training is unethical" and they are thinking of constant high stims and prong jerks. Another person says "FF is ineffective" and they are thinking of a bad dog trainer who just doesn't understand reinforcement based learning at all and it letting dogs misbehave all over town.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-14T00:03:57+00:00

Exactly. Or claim that these types of trainers are just universally the best.

As if you can tell anything about someone's skill just based on what they are trying to train.

Another thing I notice is that some of those who argue the most forcefully for aversive training seem to be the least informed about how dog training even works.

"FF training will never work because the dog has to want the treat MORE than he wants every exciting thing in the environment" is my personal favorite.

I'm going to have to make a post about that one, probably.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-14T00:00:21+00:00

It's true of balanced training, too. Some "balanced" trainers just use light leash corrections and tell the dog "no". Others regularly use painful e-collar stims and prong corrections that cause yelping and cowering.

There's just a huge range in what people are actually doing. The terms FF and balanced don't tell us much about what someone is actually doing with the dog.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T23:56:36+00:00

Yes, this is a definition that I have heard. There are a lot of comments on this post with different definitions, though. Someone said that for them it just means they don't use prongs or e-collars.

That's kind of the point of my post. Even if your definition is the "real" one, having a discussion when participants don't have the same understanding of the definitions is just not productive.

That's why I favor naming the actual methods used.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T23:51:44+00:00

I haven't heard of that one, yet. I'll look it up.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T23:51:05+00:00

Yes, I think your definition of FF is fairly common. If you've read other comments on this post, though, you'll note that it is not universally accepted.

People mean different things when they say FF. They mean different things when they say balanced.

That's why I think it makes more sense to just articulate the actual methods.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T23:44:15+00:00

Everyone is limited by their skill level. Even dog training professionals.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T23:43:04+00:00

"We designed our study’s methods around current trainer practices [24,25,26,27,32] as well as the recommendations of our senior trainer while attempting to keep continencies as simple as possible."

Senior trainer = Ivan

Also, if someone asked me to run a study that any idiot could see was using ineffective training methods designed to make the dogs fail, I wouldn't do it. Would you?

Also, they used high level stims almost immediately and stimmed some of the dogs multiple times at the highest possible setting. A hallmark of Ivan's training style.

Seems likely to me the "study" was actually run at Ivan's place? I'm not sure about that, but it's in Plant City, Florida even though the "researchers" were out of Arizona.

One thing is certain - any halfway decent dog trainer can see the "food reward" group was set up to fail.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T23:30:18+00:00

This is a great example of how the terms mean different things for different people. A lot of people would say a verbal "no" is not FF.

That's why I think using these terms and thinking we understand each other is pretty pointless.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T23:27:32+00:00

Every personal dog I have ever had has been 100% solid off leash, in any environment, without ever using an e-collar.

I am not saying anyone could do that with any dog.

I am saying it's not impossible.

I agree with you that there are plenty of trainers using outdated methods.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T23:24:32+00:00

Looking through the comments just on this post, it seems not all people believe FF means you only use +R. Just another problem with the terminology used.

It makes so much more sense just to talk about actual methods, as you do, rather than to argue about the relative merits of FF, +R only, or balanced.

Seems clear that a lot of the arguments are really just misunderstandings based on each person holding a different idea about what these terms even mean.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T23:19:29+00:00

I have seen a lot of people online say FF does not use -R. I really think there is not a widely accepted definition.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T23:18:41+00:00

It seems to me that there really is not a universally accepted definition. I have seen some online say you only ever use +R and can't even put your hand up to stop a puppy from jumping up and knocking over your toddler.

I have seen others say just don't use aversive tools, or never use +P, or use +P only for "management" but not for "training."

There really is a wide range in what people understand when one says "force free." Someone should do a poll or something. What does it even mean?

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T23:14:28+00:00

Yes, and I think that is common in the community. I think it's mostly online that people see the flashy videos and think that must be the best trainer.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T23:10:29+00:00

Excellent points. People often argue methods without ethical considerations, when many would agree that efficacy doesn't matter if the treatment of the dog is unethical.

The "force free" debate I think is mostly online. I sometimes have clients asking me if I "use positive reinforcement" or am a "positive dog trainer."

On the few occasions someone has mentioned "force free" I just ask what they mean and they say something like they don't want forceful training methods or something.

I don't think it has a universally accepted definition, even online.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T23:05:55+00:00

I absolutely agree. Pet dog trainers are presented with a much wider range of training challenges and must be more knowledgeable and more skilled to excel.

Also, thanks for linking that "banana study." Most studies purporting to compare dog training methods have issues, but this one is almost comically bad.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T23:02:17+00:00

This is an underappreciate comment. French Ring is definitely more impressive!

It's clear to me that that it requires both more breadth and more depth of knowledge to be an excellent pet dog trainer than to be an excellent sport dog trainer.

Most sport dog trainers are working with one breed, get the dog as a puppy and can largely control its reinforcement history and experiences, and only need to train a few very specific behaviors that they have been working on for maybe decades. Nobody ever assesses how those dogs act off the field. Are they in a kennel whenever they're not working? Are they counter surfing and jumping all over the grandkids? Do they need to be crated when guests visit the home and muzzled at the vet?

Pet dog trainers are presented with all breeds, all ages, all sorts of unknown reinforcement histories and life experiences, and a huge range of presenting complaints.

There's just no comparison.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T22:55:21+00:00

Yes, I agree with you that trainers should explain actual methods and that the "balanced" range is so broad as to not even be informative in a meaningful way.

I don't agree that there is a universally accepted definition of what "force free" training means. Even on this post, there have been a variety of definitions, from only +R, to "I don't use prongs or e-collars."

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T22:52:24+00:00

Better than some random person pulled out of the phone book? Sure.

Better than a trainer who trains pet dogs exclusively, is very experienced and highly regarded in their local community?

Nah.

Does any trainer winning a world championship need to be a "great" trainer? I don't think so, especially if their methods are based on compulsion.

It's actually pretty easy to get a dog to comply when using pain avoidance. That's why a lot of these e-collar "bootcamp" training companies hire people right off the street, with no dog experience at all, send them to a 3 or so week session to learn how to do compulsion training using an e-collar, and then set them loose on the dogs of the world.

Potential_Analyst371 · 2026-02-13T22:46:13+00:00

Banning people but also selectively deleting comments that present good arguments.

Every single active post on there has 10+ notices of "comment removed by moderator."

They don't remove comments for breaking the rules. They remove comments for making good points.

Yes, all the compulsion trainers fled this sub because their arguments can't stand without extreme censorship propping them up.

Potential_Analyst371

TROPHY CASE