The question of my training philosophy came up again today.
What I’ve noticed is that this conversation tends to follow a predictable pattern: someone asks about my training style; I launch into a long explanation about the ambiguity and lack of black-and-whiteness in dog training; I explain that I don’t stick to just one method but use whatever makes sense for each specific dog; and then the response is: “Oh, my dog learns best through positive reinforcement only, so this isn’t for me.”
On one hand, I consider that outcome a good riddance—it saves me from trying to change a narrow worldview. On the other hand, I’m exhausted from repeating myself. So here it is, once and for all.
Even though it’s the most common question I get, I still haven’t nailed a quick answer. Because the very fact of asking usually means the person has only heard that there’s such a thing as a “training philosophy,” not that they’ve actually stepped into the world of dog training.
I don’t say this to judge anyone’s lack of knowledge. People usually come to me precisely because they need help, and I respect that.
But the way the question is often framed—“force-free” vs. “balanced”—is shallow. It ignores the complexity of approaches informed by all four quadrants of classical conditioning and their endless combinations. More importantly, it tries to box me into a label.
I won’t do that.
Good training is simple and it makes sense. Good things a dog does should be met with positive feedback. Undesirable things should be met with negative feedback. The hard part—and where most people fail—is delivering both consistently, not just when it’s convenient.
That’s it. No magic, no obscure jargon, no hidden agenda.
Yes, if you want to obsess over where every bit of feedback “belongs,” you’ll end up stuck in more philosophical knots than a fly in a spiderweb. I prefer to keep it simple.
My training philosophy isn’t “positive-only” or “balanced.” It is consequential. It is common-sense-driven. It is conditional. It is clear. It is fair. And, most importantly, it is effective.