What I'm saying Evie is CM on the goggle box is re-addressing dog's with problem's not all dog's have problems I watched one lastnight were the wee lab kept jumping in the pool, i've not watched him everyday so can't say i've seen him train from scratch so thats why i say imo he does problem dog's.

Also the one person I'm on about here admitted to seeing him but not understanding him, I'm not taking everyone who copie's him.(Maybe I should have made myself clearer and for which I'm sorry.)

No his methods are not just for problem dogs, he believes that if we understand dogs and meet their needs from an early age, we can avoid the issues that seem to plague dogs today.
That is where I believe he is so misunderstood, obviously his program is about correcting issues dogs have, but many people seem to use a lot of what they see on a pup or dog that has no issues, their only problem is an owner that doesn't have a clue. As they say a little information is a dangerous thing.

Hi Evie,
an inexperienced owner I would define as someone who is a novice owner or has had 2 dogs in their entire lifetime, someone who has never picked up a behaviour book or dog book at all and doesn't really want to...but is happy to copy methods seen on the tele. People do this all the time, I see them out and about with their rattle bottles, I talk to them...it's scary and does more harm than good in a lot of cases.
Fair enough, you put two trainers in a room and they will slolve a problem in many different ways and possibly argue over it, but some of CM's methods are just not suitable for a novice, but he isn't the only trainer on tv who is like that.

That's also why I don't think it's down to experience surely we've all met people that have had dogs all their lives, but don't have a clue how to treat a dog as a dog, or have any ability to deal with a problem dog. I think it's all about your ability to fully understand the methods used. whichever method that may be.
Many people click and treat inappropriately too

But how many people say 'I've had dogs all my life, I know what I'm doing' and then it turns out they have had 3 dogs that have lived until they are 10...
Yes, I do think people need to comprehend the methods used, but you need experience to do that...a clicker being a perfect example, it doesn't help to just read about it, far better to experience it and see it done properly, whilst you are there.

I guess I have a bit of an issue with cure all dog trainers on tv, because of what you've said, you have to understand the method properly and read round it, before applying it...

OK well I've done clicker training and frankly those that picked up the quickest were usually young first time owners. There was a young boy of 11 with his dog and he was brilliant. Some of the oldies who'd had dogs for years were dire It was comprehension of when to click that was the key not how many dogs they'd had or how old they were.

No need to apologise. I'm just thinking "out loud" about what defines an owner as experianced enough (as mentioned on this thread) to use training methods as described by trainers such as CM.

Alot of people out there think of themselves as well experianced when they don't have a clue.

My personal opinion is that he doesn't fully understand dogs himself; often misinterpretting their body language.

I agree totally with what you say about many dogs problems being owners that don't have a clue!

I think the problem with shows such as this is that many owners believe themselves to be experianced/have a good understanding when they don't. It would be way more constructive to air a basic training programme from which people can learn.

As I've said before (way back) on this thread; I don't agree with Cm's training methods from what I've seen of him in action.

But I def do agree that different trainers adopt differnt methods. I guess the sign of a real good trainer is one that can adopt various methods depending on the dog they are working with.

Take for instance my two. With Wills, taking a dominant "pack leader" type role with her would leave you with a nervous wreck of a dog. Her behaviour needs to be guided and shaped and is very quick to learn with these methods. Archie on the other hand needs an owner that takes the dominant role; I have to be much more comanding with him.

I wonder If his Pack would be so "calm" if they werent castrated?

I agree with whats been said re experince, any method in the world needs to be done correctly & with true understanding of the method, Why it works, how it works & what the outcome will be , & a knowledge to spot when its going wrong & what to do to correct the problem. You also must have a clear idea in your head of what you want to achieve.


Has anyone tried CM methods from Puppy Hood on a "normal" dog?
How is the dog now? personality to people, other dogs, other animals, YOU as a owner, any problems at all? Anything you would like to change?

Summed up perfectly in a nutshell.
(It's just a shame that some people out there believe themselves to be all those things, when nothing near it in reality when it's all put into practice.)

Yes, I have 5 dogs all have been brought up using my interpretation of his methods.
Using Syd my male Dobermann as an example as he is the eldest and at 3 years old would be deemed by most to be mature.
He is a wonderful dog, fantastic personality with people and other dogs, He is a very confident dog and has never been fazed by anything that I can think of. There is not a single thing I would choose to change about him or his personality.
Why did I choose to bring him up in the way that I did? just because it is probably the closest method to the way I have brought up all of my dogs. So I can't claim to be a Cesar convert I'm not, I don't follow any training method slavishly and certainly wouldn't advocate anyone else doing so either.