The World Famous Frawley Castle Website
■■■ Copyright Notice ■■■
VIDEO FILES are in Flash Player (.flv) format. Please install (free) VLC Media Player.
AUDIO FILES are in .mp3 format.
designed for viewing at widescreen resolution - 24" monitor - 1920x1080
The WFFCW was created August 5, 2001 :: we're 16 YEARS OLD!
WHAT IS THIS WEBSITE ABOUT? Some of this is a personal website containing REBUTTAL, REPLY, and COMMENT to (primarily) public statements and accusations made by various self proclaimed "internet dog training experts". The majority of the statements and accusations are FALSE, and refer to me, personally. The nucleus of this website is based on verbatim quotes of public messages, most of which are archived with their respective lists. Unless noted, nothing has been altered, other than formatting line length to screen width and changing the font style. Other parts of this site contain OPINIONS, HUMOR, PARODY, COMEDY, and SARCASM which reflect my own personal sense of humor and viewpoints. The First Amendment of the Constitution adequately, particularly, and specifically provides these rights. This site is for educational and entertainment purposes. This is emphatically not a "hate" site. There is no hate, and never was. Profanity is kept to a minimum, but it does exist. If this website seems offensive to you, in any way, please leave now. Please do not subject yourself to being offended.
TO THOSE IN FEAR OF THIS WEBSITE: Websites can be terrifying places. If you're afraid, we'll never understand why, but what can WE do? You're allowed to be frightened of webpages, or anything else. This website contains NO THREATS of any nature - no direct, indirect, implied, supplied, or personified threats - it never did and never will. There is a lot of SARCASM here. If you're afraid, our heart goes out to you - we don't WANT you to be afraid. We want you to get help. Dial 911, and scream for help. If you wind up in a straight jacket, that's your problem. If you don't, that's your problem, too.
COPYRIGHT © is clearly acknowledged where, when, and if applicable. It's even acknowledged where it's not applicable. The USCO website. This link contains verbatim United States Copyright Law, which clearly allows for rebuttal, comment, criticism, etc. United States Copyright Law specifically states "COPYRIGHT DOES NOT APPLY TO FACTUAL INFORMATION". (Read the law - see for yourself.) Rebutting falsified "factual information" is not a violation of copyright law.
IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE I'M TRUTHFUL, DOWNLOAD ORIGINAL SCREEN CAPTURES
IF I'M NOT 100% HONEST AND ACCURATE, CALL ME A LIAR and CONFRONT ME WITH FACTS
Read this page carefully - it's the basis for the whole Frawley section of the WFFCW.
It's gonna take quite a few minutes, but read the whole thing.
"Expert" Ed Frawley's
text is RED
Steve Leigh's text is BLUE
Here is "Table Expert" Ed LEERKOPF™ Frawley's "expert opinion" article on tabletop training. It contains so much false and misleading information, hysterical misspellings, and ridiculous lies, it's just plain .... IMMORAL.
Can you believe your eyes? Frawley shows you the proof even before you read the story!
You can see VIDEO PROOF with your own eyes!
|SEE Table Torture|
|SEE Marco - the dog we wrecked on the tables|
|See DEATH on the round table|
|Read LEERKOPF'S™ "discussion" all about Gene England|
Here's Frawley's idiotic "challenge"
When "Expert" Ed isn't manufacturing bullshit lies about tables, he peddles "Vidz Fer Kidz" video tapes and discredits people by the dozen.
Within hours of writing my REBUTTAL comments, Frawley contacted me several times via email with more of his threats, insults, and stupidity. You can laugh at his insane messages right here.
He's threatened to include my name in his catalog (it's already on his "web board"), calling me a thief, because I am rebutting his "copyright material". (Which is not copyrighted, according to the United States Copyright Office, Library of Congress.)
If Frawley didn't want anyone to rebut and challenge his lies and misinformation, he never should have publicly exposed his idiotic "article" on a subject of which he knows absolutely nothing.
Frawley comes totally unglued when somebody challenges his "expert" knowledge. Maybe if I said his article was REALLY GREAT, he'd send me a free tape - or who knows? - maybe I'll get life in prison, with nothing on TV except "Vidz Fer Kidz".
As you can easily see below, Frawley is the author of this fairy tale fabrication. Nobody around here is trying to claim ownership of it. We're not even trying to steal all the $billions in profits which this bullshit article generates daily.
We're just calling him a liar. It's that simple.
Are you ready?
Then here we go!
In the RED CORNER - "Expert" Frawley
In the BLUE CORNER - Steve Leigh
Table Training In Protection Work Why I Don't Agree With It
By "Expert" Ed Frawley
[note: no copyright exists in the United States Copyright Office, Library of Congress, for this article]
Over the past couple of years I have heard more and more people talk about in bite work. I am not a fan of this method of protection training. I feel it is not only bad dog training it is morally wrong.
Let's take a minute and explain exactly how table training works.
Sure, let's. But in order to do that, "Expert" Ed would have to understand exactly how table training works.
Two tables are used. A 3-foot square table at waist height
Well, first of all, the 3 foot square table is 4 foot square, and it's about 40" high.
If you happen to be about 8.5 feet tall, well then, that's waist height, isn't it?
and a shorter larger round table closer to the floor. The dog is chained to the taller table by a short chain attached to a swivel that turns 360 degrees.
No, the square (taller) table has no swivel or spinner, the dog is connected directly to the post of the square table. (Real good start, "Expert" Ed.) A few facts and details like dimensions and swivels aren't really that important, they just show "expert" Ed's accuracy in this fairy tale.
When moved to the short table the length of chain is increased. The tall table is used for the beginning work and the short table used for the control work.
Obviously, "Expert" Ed hasn't got any idea what the different purposes of these two tables really are.
Factually, the round table (which is the table with the rotating spinner) is used to do exercises that require the dog to have freedom of motion, whereas the square table is used for the opposite - to do exercises where the dog has very limited freedom of motion. The chain length is adjusted relative to various exercises.
You really have to appreciate such clearly understandable details as "the beginning work" and "the control work". Frawley certainly writes descriptive precise articles. If we were in a court of law, this would be known as "Void For Vagueness". We'd all be tossed out on our asses! In other words, "Nothing From Nothing Leaves Nothing". (thanks, Billy Preston)
Table training is founded in survival drive. Survival is the wrong way to train protection dogs.
No, in fact, table training is founded entirely in the use of a controlled environment, allowing both the dog and the trainer to accomplish tasks in a much more focused manner.
When a dog is placed up on a table and attached to a very short chain it quickly realizes that all avenues of escape have been removed.
This may be "Expert" Ed's most accurate statement so far. (Very good, "Expert" Ed.)
However, when a dog is placed on a very short ANYTHING, he quickly realizes all avenues of escape have been removed. What else is new?
But there's a problem here: "Escape" is predicated on a dog that wants to escape. What if he doesn't want to escape? Then what?
Initially the helper stresses the dog and demands attention and aggression.
Wait a minute - isn't this what "helpers" do everywhere in the world? For the last century or three? Isn't "agitation" work intended to bring the dog's attention and aggression to the helper? Or is the whole purpose NOT to agitate the dogs? I must be missing something vital here.
If the dog turns his back on the helper or does not act aggressive enough the level of stress is increased until the dog is brought into fight.
Here's where "Expert" Ed's "expertise" proves he has no expertise.
Is it the table or the "helper" that increases the level of stress? If it's the table - HOW does the table increase stress? Does it get very cold? Very hot? Does it tilt? Spin? Move around the room? HOW?
Now .... about "the dog is brought into fight" ....
Fight? HOLD ON DAMMIT! Just a minute ago, it was "survival" - "live-or-die", and now it's suddenly "fight". Where did the "survival" go?
The dog quickly learns that if I don't show aggression I get the crap scared out of me and the safest place to be is on the sleeve.
So now "Expert" Ed is saying it's the table that's "scaring the crap" out of the dog, and not the "helper"?
Does the table wear a sleeve? If so, on which leg?
What people don't understand here is that the "fight drive" that they see in this work is coming totally from the "fight or flight" in avoidance.
What "Expert" Ed can't understand here is that ALL dogs choose from only four options during ANY and EVERY training exercise:
All you need to do is read B.F. Skinner's excellent psychology books and see what "Expert" Ed can't even begin to comprehend. Discover what these four options really mean. (I believe B.F. Skinner is required text in every basic college psychology course, but I could be mistaken.)
It does not come from the fight drive that I refer to that is built as a result of a confident foundation started and built through early prey work.
So now the table also prevented the dog from developing prey drive, according to Ed the "Table Expert". In a minute, he'll blame the tables if his phone is disconnected.
If you are confused on the issue of fight drive read my article titled The Definition of Fight Drive.
No, no, NO. Personally, I wouldn't read any more Frawley fairy tales. This misleading article is more than enough.
I had a friend tell me of a Doberman he saw go through its first experience on the table. The dog had questionable nerves to begin with and probably could never do sport work. It was so scared and upset that it lost control of its bowls and bladder while the helper tried working it.
So did the table do this, or did the "helper" do it? If the table is such a terrible, scary, upsetting, immoral training tool, why don't ALL dogs - or at least MOST dogs - lose control of their "bowls and bladder" when they're put on a table for the first time?
Is this "factual article" based on multiple first-hand experiences? Or based on "I had a friend tell me of a Doberman he saw"?
You know what? I had a friend tell me Gene England was at the grocery store, just last week, with Elvis Presley, John Lennon, Otis Redding, and Evan Williams.
Bubba, they scared the living crap out of Evan - they were talking about putting Evan on a table - in his own bottle. Evan was so scared and upset, that he lost control of his bowls and bladder. I heard he ran and hid behind Southern Comfort. I'll be sure to write an "expert article" about that, because "I had a friend tell me".
As far as I am concerned this type of training is morally wrong. We have no right to stress a dog so badly that it looses control of its bowls.
So why not take THAT "moral" issue up with the "helper" who allegedly made the dog "looses control of its bowls", and stop writing these idiotic lies about table training?
And I really want to know, so I just gotta ask:
were they QUALITY stainless bowls, or JUST CHEAP plastic bowls?
If a person needs a protection dog this badly he should find a home for his weak dog and go out and buy a dog better suited for this work.
Of course. Naturally, he'll suggest buying it from the man who thinks he KNOWS dogs ....... "Expert" Ed Frawley.
In protection work, if the dog is exposed to enough stress at some point it will move into the part of defense where it must either fight or run from the threat. Table training removes the option of flight The dog learns that his only option is aggression and a fight.
That's close, but still quite a ways from an accurate and true statement. But it's ALMOST accurate. (Right on, "Expert" Ed. Steve tosses Ed a hot dog.)
But if tables remove the option of flight, then what does a leash do? What do tie outs do?
Does an airline crate remove the option of flight? What if you ship the dog on an airline - is he in flight then?
What happened to "survival"? Where did that go? And what about dogs that will NOT fight?
Is "Expert" Ed claiming that EVERY dog will fight?
When that happens these dogs are fighting for their lives.
"Expert" Ed Frawley is full of shit. Here we are - we're back into "survival" again - "fighting for their lives".
If you understand dog training and know what's going on in the dogs head this is not a pretty sight.
To the contrary - when a dog is agitated for the first time, and discovers that fight is an option, it's a BEAUTIFUL sight. Ask any owner who's ever brought his dog out to train, and he "came out" or "turned on" and showed he wanted to participate. Ask any REAL helper who's turned on a dog for the first time. Most real helpers live for this - they love it.
This is true no matter where the agitation takes place - on a table, training field, car, in somebody's yard, or inside your house.
"Expert" Ed only thinks he knows what goes on in a dog's head. But "Expert" Ed is dead wrong - as usual.
On the other hand novice trainers are impressed because of the intensity of the aggression that survival drive produces. They confuse the intensity of avoidance biting with confident fight drive biting.
Novice trainers are impressed with *anything* - especially "Expert" Ed's triple talk yipyap, and his "expert" allegations about tables. Frawley capitalizes on novices - that's how he makes his money, honey. Remember this: the less you actually KNOW, the more you're ready to SPEND to LEARN.
I guess I am not proud of the fact that there are times I have used avoidance as a last resort to bring a dog around a problem.
"Expert" Ed obviously doesn't know the right word. Avoidance is the wrong word. Again. He needs B.F. Skinner.
"Expert" Ed's also so ashamed of himself, he won't come right out and say he beat the shit out of some dogs - and called that "dog training". Instead, he "guesses" and he's "not proud of the fact". But he claims he "brought dogs around problems" by "using avoidance". I just love Frawley's triple talk yipyap. Some people have another word for it: "BULLSHIT".
Keep reading .... the "BUT" is only a second away, as Frawley somehow tries to JUSTIFY beating the shit out of dogs, and calls that "training police service dogs". Maybe this garbage works on YOU, but it just makes me clearly realize how full of shit Frawley IS.
But even then the dog has had a foundation of prey from which to work off of. I also feel that there is a place for survival sessions in training police service dogs. Where the dog learns to fight at all costs when faced with someone who is trying to kill you. This is something both cops and their dogs have to develop a mental attitude towards. But again, these dogs must have a solid foundation of prey and defensive training from which to fall back on. That training was not based on avoidance work.
This paragraph is total Frawley nonsense. Anybody with an IQ of 14 or more knows that as training progresses, the dog becomes stronger at specific tasks. He's more capable, confident, experienced, and the training tasks can then become more difficult.
This is true in tracking, obedience, agility, fieldwork, guide dog work, drug and explosives training, bitework. This is true in ANY facet of ANY dog training - all breeds - ALL INCLUSIVE. It's not limited to bitework or anything else.
Is somebody gonna tell me that dogs START learning to track on FH tracks? Or START retrieving over 1 meter jumps and 7' walls? Dogs start out indicating drugs 8' over their heads, in microwave ovens, or in engine compartments? No - I don't think so. I KNOW they progress towards those more difficult tasks over time. One step at a time.
Sooner or later, either the dog reaches his limits, or the handler doesn't want/need to go any further. (Ed, you yipyap WAY too much.)
Trainers that are schooled in table training will justify the method by explaining that the dogs are moved into their prey drive while on the table and then worked in control work on the short table. This is all compared to working a dog on a tie out on the ground. The fact is that this is a poor comparison. A dog worked on a 6 foot tie out does not have the same mental image of it's predicament as a dog on a short chain up on a table. The dog on the 6 foot tie out on the ground sees some room for escape. The dog on the table quickly realizes that the option of escape has been removed.
During the first time on the table - typically within 1-5 minutes - the dog stabilizes to it, and the above paragraph is completely ridiculous. Within minutes, the dog has already discovered that fighting is acceptable - he's praised and encouraged for it. Fighting means winning, winning is fun, and he wants to fight. He WANTS to fight because he enjoys it.
This is consistent no matter WHERE the dog is .... on or off a table. Once he learns a fight response is an option, he understands that's what he can do, he's allowed to, he's encouraged, he wants to do it, and he enjoys it more every time.
This "predicament" bullshit exists only in "Expert" Ed's distorted mind - the dogs themselves happily jump right up on the tables to have some fun biting. They don't want to escape, they just want the helper to get up off his ass and get started. This is true with ALL dogs - from 6 weeks old to 15 years old - it makes no difference. Once dogs discover how much fun they can have on a table, they DRAG their handlers to the table.
Just for fun and laughs, I trained my attorney's dog - Pluto - a female, ~11 pound miniature poodle - to do bitework on the table when the dog was staying here while my attorney was on vacation. That was in 1992. The little poodle was biting and outing on the first day. I think the extra long chain connecting the dog to the spinner weighed more than the dog did. I had to put a cardboard box near the table so she could jump on and off without help. We laughed for years about this. We STILL laugh about it! When he came back 2 weeks later, little, tiny Pluto was busting my ass!
Actually, "Table Expert" Ed should know this - except he's never seen table training! So it follows that he doesn't have any idea how it's done.
The table trainers will counter with the statement that a dog on a tie out can be placed into the same "Fight or Flight" mentality as a dog on a table. I agree 100% with this statement.
"Expert" Ed has just agreed 100% that tables don't do anything - it's the "trainers" or "helpers" that do things. Or is the "expert" saying that the tie out put the dog into "Fight or Flight mentality"?
It's necessary to PIN THE "EXPERT" DOWN. WHO or WHAT causes this alleged "Fight or Flight mentality"? By now, we should all realize: it's the "helper" that puts the dog into ANY "mentality". If you think a TIE OUT did this, you're just as stupid as "Expert" Ed.
Why condemn table training? Just point your finger at the asshole "helper" and condemn HIM. Why is anybody allowing him to work dogs? This is as ridiculous as blaming the baseball that the kid next door tossed through your window. Or blaming Ford, because you smashed up your car.
If enough pressure is put on a dog on a tie out it will quickly realize that there is no where to run.
NOW HOLD ON!
Just above - "Expert" Ed says, (exact quote), "The dog on the 6 foot tie out on the ground sees some room for escape."
Then - not even ten seconds later - he says, (exact quote), "If enough pressure is put on a dog on a tie out it will quickly realize that there is no where to run." So which way is it?
SORRY, "EXPERT" ED - YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS
At this point it should be pretty obvious that "Expert" Ed hasn't even got a clue what he's talking about OR about tables.
(Hey Ed? You ain't gettin' no traction here.)
Old time dog trainers used to tie a dog out on a fence and beat it with a hose until it went so far into avoidance that it fought. These dogs learned that the only safe place for them to be way on the sleeve.
Some old time trainers and some new time trainers use methods that aren't acceptable. So what? Big deal.
Report those trainers to the authorities, and keep YOUR dog the hell away from them. Beating a dog is completely unacceptable - period. What else is there to say? Will these "trainers" magically stop beating dogs with hoses if we burn all the tables in the world?
By the way: "avoidance" is the wrong word. Again.
The fact is that bad training is bad training.
Now there's a profound remark that could only come from a remarkable dog training "expert"! (Ed, you really oughta be proud of yourself.)
So who exactly does the training? The tables, the trainer, the tie out, the "helper", Elvis Presley?
The point is that dogs that begin on a 6 foot tie out do not start out thinking that they have no where to run like the dog that starts on the table did.
Isn't that something? Just above "Expert" Ed states that dogs CAN think this on a 6 foot tie out, and now says they DON'T think it. At first, he was even smart enough to say "IF ENOUGH PRESSURE" ...... so even "Table Expert" Ed might be able to figure out that it's the PRESSURE, and not the LOCATION.
But what about the dogs that don't want to run?
Have you noticed yet that "Expert" Ed never seems to mention them? Here's a world "expert" on table training - and he doesn't even mention the dogs that do work on the tables, week after week after week, perfectly. Is this a biased, lopsided "article", or what?
Bite work training based on a foundation of AVOIDANCE has holes in it somewhere - you can take that to the bank.
"Expert" Ed doesn't know what word to use. Again. Avoidance is the wrong word. He really needs some B.F. Skinner. And if Frawley says it, I'm not taking it NEAR a bank. Am I an idiot?
In my opinion table work has no place in police dog training or sport training. The problems arise in search work. How can we expect a dog that has been trained with a foundation in avoidance to have the correct drive to search for a hiding suspect.
Once again, "Expert" Ed loses track of the fact that table training (or any training) relies on the decisions of the "trainer" or "helper". If the "helper" puts the dog into a "fight or flight", "survival" type of training situation, that's not caused by the table. It's caused by the "HELPER". Send the "helper" home with a broken arm, go find a different "helper", and stop the bullshit on the spot.
These dog's have little motivation to go out in a field and search for a suspect that he knows is going to add a lot of stress to it's life.
And how does the dog know that? Cause "Expert" Ed said so?
I bet this is exactly what the dog is thinking: "Yo, Bro'! If I go out there in all them weeds and shit, and find this suspect, he MIGHT have a table with him. That son of a bitch might force me to get ON the freakin' table. Sheeeeit, Bubba! That's just too much stress - I ain't goin' out in no damn field and searching! I'm stayin' right here! Stress FREE!"
The same thing goes for sport dogs doing a blind searchs.
Sure it does! That's because there's probably a TABLE hiding in one of the blinds, and it'll jump right out and STRESS the dog as he runs by. This is seen all the time ...... by people who take a LOT of LSD.
When a police dog is sent to apprehend a suspect, it's almost impossible to duplicate the survival atmosphere of the table training.
Since table training has nothing to do with survival - except in "Expert" Ed's chronically befuddled mind - it's ridiculous to try and connect them.
He is no longer tied to a table and at some point in his police work he is going to be faced with a situation where the pressure is so high that flight is now a viable option.
Well, if this is the case, then what about ALL dogs who have chosen flight instead of fight? By "Expert" Ed's goofy logic, they were ALL trained on tables, and - naturally - the tables CAUSED them to flight. Right?
Or we could consider only the dogs that HAVE trained on tables. According to "Table Expert" Ed, if they haven't flighted YET, they're going to, any second now. And it's all the TABLE'S fault. Naturally.
When that point comes he may choose to run. Police dogs need to have a foundation for their hunting drive. This is developed at a young age when they play the game of chasing down their prey item and capture it. This foundation is missing in the table work.
And THAT is an outright, blatant lie, too. Prey work on a round table is a lot of fun, it works great, and it's very easy to do. In fact, that's about 40% of what the round table is FOR: prey work. Especially with inexperienced, young dogs!
Have you noticed "Expert" Ed makes up a whole lot of bullshit when he has no idea what he's talking about?
Dogs will often slip back into their foundation drives as they go through training. It's not uncommon to see dogs that are trained from a foundation in prey drive slip back into prey during defense work. usually they are confused and so they go back to their bag of tricks to see what works. When a dog has been started from a foundation in avoidance (table training) they can slide back into avoidance and choose to run from the threat rather than stand and fight.
Any dog COULD choose to run, depending on the dog's nerves and how he perceives threat. It's got nothing to do with tables, though. "Expert" Ed repeatedly tries to LINK table training with avoidance - yet again, the wrong word - even though tables and avoidance have nothing to do with each other.
Apparently, the dogs that "Table Expert" Ed "trains" are just as befuddled as Ed. They "slip" and "slide" back and forth, and look into "their bag of tricks to see what works". My, my, that sounds pretty entertaining! Didn't I see a magician do that on TV? But it's not very predictable, is it?
Later today, I'm going out shopping for a "bag of tricks" - anybody need a few hundred?
To train a dog to develop fight drive we must change the dogs view of the helper. We need to make the dog see the helper as a fighting partner.
There's nothing to CHANGE if the "helper" is capable. Is "Expert" Ed saying the dog on a table can't "see the helper" as a "fighting partner"? He can only see the "helper" as a "fighting partner" if he's on the ground?
What if we leave the dog on the table, and lower or raise the "helper" until he can be seen? This is BIG TIME stupidity. It only illustrates - again - that tables aren't the issue - incompetent "helpers" are the issue.
And it illustrates - once again - that "Expert" Ed Frawley doesn't know what the hell he's writing about.
If his foundation work has been based in avoidance how can that dog develop the attitude that he cane beat every man in every circumstance and in every environment. The answer is simple - he can't.
The answer really IS simple - it has nothing at all to do with tables. This "article" is SUPPOSED to be all about TABLE TRAINING.
But it has EVERYTHING to do with what the "HELPER" does. A bad "helper" is going to wreck dogs - on the ground, under the ground, in the street, off a table, OR on a table. Go get (that means PAY) a decent, competent helper - he won't wreck dogs at all. OR, do what thousands of Americans do every week - go get your bite training done FOR FREE - at your local Schmutzhund club. And keep in mind, 98% of those "helpers" never DO bitework, except on the weekends.
The issue here is not if you can train a dog to bite and bite hard with table training. The answer is that you can.
Of course - with a capable helper. And the dog can be trained WITHOUT tables, too - with a capable helper.
Isn't this a big waste of time and typing? YES. "Expert" Ed just keeps going around in circles. Maybe he spent an hour spinning on the round table and went into flight - or was it avoidance? (Yo Ed! Were you on a table? Did you get dizzy?)
The problem is that you are working in the wrong drives and the wrong balance of drives.
Now "Expert" Ed tries to say that the tables choose and control the drives to train. And they ALSO choose the BALANCE! Gimme a break.
It amazes me that people think that they can get a balance of drives from fear motivated training. Remember the goal of balancing drives is "confidence". How can this happen from something based on "fear."
"Expert" Ed is absolutely RIGHT. I can not believe it.
F E A R W I L L N O T B R I N G C O N F I D E N C E
(It's about time, Ed - you deserve a medal. The rest of us deserve four medals and tranquilizers - for suffering through all your "expert" table shit.)
We've had to wade through all this mindless idiotic babbling about "avoidance", and Frawley the "expert" finally uses the right word. At long last, the word FEAR has surfaced, right from the "expert" himself, and it's even used correctly.
I'd buy Table "Expert" Ed a drink, but we all know he damn sure doesn't need another.
But "Expert" Ed is ABSOLUTELY DEAD WRONG when he tells you that TABLES bring fear. Fear comes exclusively from what a HUMAN chooses to do or not to do in training. Tables bring an ENVIRONMENT, a TOOL, and nothing more, to training.
Being the biased idiot that he is ......
Frawley fails to take into account the dozens or hundreds of skilled, capable helpers that use tables every day. These trainers wouldn't use fear any more than they'd use a submarine as a training tool.
Frawley fails to take into account that the TOP dog trainer in this country for over 20 years DEVELOPED tables, and is known around the world for his accomplishments.
Frawley fails to take into account that this same trainer is responsible for more people's success in the sport of Schutzhund than any trainer - living or dead.
That's why people have so many problems when they take their table trained dogs to a helper who is skilled in defense and fight training. When their dogs all of a sudden show insecurity their excuse is always the same "the dog was not totally finished with his table training." Yah Right !!!!!!!!
Yah Right ???????? SHOVE IT UP YOUR ASS, Frawley. The above "expert challenge" is insane, written by a raving idiot.
Any dog in the world can be run off
Just intimidate or injure him badly enough, and away he goes. (Except "Expert" Frawley's dogs. He's the greatest so naturally, they're the greatest.)
Since the "helper" is wearing protective equipment, he's able to apply damn near ANY amount of pressure and punishment to a biting dog. Sooner or later, even the strongest dogs in the world are going to bail out.
I've got a challenge for "TABLE Expert" FRAWLEY
You think I'm joking? TRY ME, and bring a LOT of CASH.
PUT UP or SHUT UP.
I'll do the helper work. I'll supply the sleeves, the pond, the blanks, and I'll even front the money to fly you and your awesome dog to Tampa, Florida, car rental, AND pay your hotel bill. If I lose, the vacation's entirely on me. If I win, you reimburse every penny - PLUS A 500% BONUS for your education, my time, and my trouble. If you REALLY know what you're talking about, you shouldn't even hesitate.
Due to your basic "Frawley honesty", ALL funds involved will be held by an attorney in escrow. I'll pay the attorney's fees myself, you don't have to pay a thing for this.
Only two important restrictions apply during these tests:
■ NO leashes and NO collars of any type. NONE.
■ Only ONE command per exercise - no repetitions.
Failure to restrict your BIG MOUTH to one command per exercise results in forfeiture of all your funds.
Go find the toughest "super biter" you own - ideally a dog that really likes the water. We'll go play tennis ball in the water for about 10 minutes to relax the dog and have some fun.
Then we'll do some bitework in the pond. We'll send the dog on a helper (that's me, Frawley) about waist deep in the water. Handler (that's you, Frawley) remains on dry ground, out of the water. We'll only do 10 repetitions of this exercise.
As soon as the dog contacts the sleeve for the bite, I'll grip the dog by the scruff of his neck, stuff his head underwater, on the bite, and HOLD him underwater - TIMED ON A STOPWATCH BY THE ATTORNEY - for exactly 15 seconds. The moment the attorney says "TIME", the sleeve and dog's head instantly come up out of the water. No tricks, no games, no jokes, no mistakes.
The dog won't drown, or suffer any damage. He might get a little water up his nose, but that's happened to everybody in the world. We're all still breathing.
Handler (that's you, Frawley) immediately enters the water, and gets the dog out of the water, onto dry ground. A TIMED 3 minute rest period begins as soon as you touch ground. After 3 minutes, the next repetition begins.
Now, "Expert" Ed - that's a GRAND TOTAL of only 150 seconds out of the dog's entire life.
TWO MINUTES and THIRTY SECONDS - absolute maximum - separated into TEN repetitions.
TWENTY SEVEN MINUTES for rest periods.
After 10 repetitions - at $1,000.00 per bite - (if he lasts that long) - $2,000.00 says he won't get in the water again, never mind actually make a bite. I don't give a damn HOW tough the dog was.
My financial risk: $12,000.00
Frawley's financial risk: $12,000.00 + 500% = $72,000.00
The dog might stand there barking - but he won't put those paws in the water. Then we'll give this "super biter" another bite on dry ground - (if he'll bite) - and the helper drives the dog right back into the water.
I say the dog comes off the bite - for $2,000.00.
My financial risk: $2,000.00
Frawley's financial risk: $2,000.00 + 500% = $12,000.00
Want to make a little educational test, "Expert" Ed? Put the dog's "safe place" (his airline crate) within close distance (say 3 yards away), door open, completely accessible. Another $2,000.00 says the dog won't willingly come out of the "safe place" on ONE, single, normally spoken (not yelling) command. Want to try it?
My financial risk: $2,000.00
Frawley's financial risk: $2,000.00 + 500% = $12,000.00
You gonna teach ME about avoidance OR flight, "Expert" Ed? No, you're not. I'll teach you. You're not a dog trainer - and never were.
You don't like that test, do you "Expert" Ed? Want to try a different one?
OK! We'll load up some blanks: some real blanks - .44 magnum, no bullets of course, but full of Hercules Bullseye powder (fastest burn) and CCI Magnum primers - right up to the top - right up to the cardboard and wax. You load the blanks - absolutely no tricks - I'll watch. If you don't know reloading, I'll assist you, or get an uninvolved person to help.
Go get your "super" biter, Ed, that world class TOUGH dog. Send the dog on the helper on a simple sleeve bite. I'll catch him in the elbow area. The helper lays the gun right on the barrel end of the sleeve, as far from the dog's muzzle as possible, and pointing completely away from the dog. (absolutely no possibility whatsoever of powder burn damage to the dog) Just a lot of noise, up close, and personal.
The helper fires the blanks - every shot is called a "round" - within approximately 20 inches of the dog's head, but pointed away - and timed slowly. Want to educate yourself at $500.00 per round? This test involves 10 bites - meaning 60 blank rounds altogether. Think he'll last that long? If you do, then PUT UP.
My financial risk: $30,000.00
Frawley's financial risk: $30,000.00 + 500% = $180,000.00
If you lose, asshole, this one's REALLY gonna cost you.
We can try this with some 12 gauge shotgun blanks, too - about 10x as much powder as a .44 magnum - for a little EXTRA CASH.
Just put up your CASH, idiot - and we can find out.
Care to video tape these tests, "Expert" Ed?
It would take less than one morning to wreck YOUR "super biter" into a "never again biter" ....
WHILE CAUSING NO PHYSICAL HARM TO THE DOG
I bet this challenge made you think, didn't it, "Table Expert"?
Now try reading it again. Maybe you'll get it by the sixteenth time around.
You're such a bright idiot, Frawley.
One day with you and your "tough dog" could put about $300,000.00 (or twice that) in my pocket.
As stupid as you are, I'm sure I could sucker you into more tests.
You just don't know when you're in over your head.
That still has nothing at all to do with table training, which is what this "expert" article was supposed to be all about.
My advise to new handlers is to stay away from table training. No one has re-invented a new bigger and better way to train protection work here. Sound training is still sound training and there are no short cuts to the final product.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. "Expert" Frawley's "advice" is absolutely worthless.
"TABLE Expert" Ed Frawley has illustrated how very little he knows about table training by writing this garbage and drivel. He's shown that he's not ignorant - he's just plain stupid. He has babbled on endlessly about what the "helper" does wrong, then he's tried to place the blame on the tables, when tables aren't the issue at all.
Frawley has a personal problem with tables, and refuses to take the time or responsibility to find out if he's right or wrong before writing his idiotic article.
By doing that, he's tried - BY INFERENCE AND ASSOCIATION - to condemn ALL table trainers as monsters.
Well, I ain't goin' for that.
As you've seen in this lengthy rebuttal, I'm one "table training monster" who will toss Frawley's lies and bullshit right back in his face, and laugh at him while I do it.
Am I laughing? You bet your ass I'm laughing. And so are the 110,000+ people who have read this rebuttal.
Since I've been using those immoral tables for more than 10 years,
with well over one thousand different dogs, only one of us actually IS a table expert.
And it damn sure ain't "Expert" Ed Frawley.
REAL popular table trainers, like Gene England, have EASILY trained 10 times that number of dogs on tables. Gene is probably the top sport and police trainer in the world, and has an incredible track record that began over TWENTY YEARS ago. ANYTIME an idiot like "Expert" Ed Frawley would like to compare his "expert knowledge" and "accomplishments" with Gene England, we're going to need to rent a stadium for this - and it's gonna take an entire week. Open your eyes - look at the two verbatim comments below."I have known Gene England since 1979. He is without doubt the best 'dog person' I have met in all my years involved with dog training. I learned more from Gene England about dogs and dog training than anyone else I have worked with. He reads dogs better than anyone and knows how dogs react to stimuli. Gene England uses that knowledge to bring out the best a dog has to offer. He is also as good as you will find in seeing the capabilities in people too. He matches training programs to the abilities of both dog and handler to create high performing teams that reach the top. I heartily recommend Gene England for your dog training needs."... George A. Shumaker, PhD, USA Working Dog Judge #5
"Having known Gene England for over 20 years, I have found him to be one of the more innovative trainers in the sport. Coupled with his teaching skills, he has meant "Success" for many of our sportsman."... Mark Przyblyski, Director of Judges, USA
If you've ever even HEARD of Schutzhund USA, these two names should jump right off the page at you.
What "Expert" Ed is REALLY trying to condemn in this "article" - even though he never bothered coming right out and saying it - are the brainless, unskilled, "helpers" who CREATE INSECURE, FEAR BITING DOGS, through their own stupidity and lack of ability. These are the "weekend warriors" who get their rocks off and jack up their egos wearing a sleeve or a bite suit. They strut around as if they're something special. All the ladies in the clubs are in awe of them. Wow! How impressive!
"Expert" Ed never mentioned that because these "helpers" buy his video tapes - he PROFITS and makes MONEY from 'em. Maybe he's just too stupid to realize he left that out. These "helpers" have no skill. No ability. No sense. They probably learned their "craft" and "technique" from some idiotic "Vidz Fer Kidz". They'll wreck dogs on a table, on the ground, at the Schmutzhund club (intentional misspelling), or in mid air. That's what they DO: they wreck dogs.
Some dogs take awhile to wreck, and some dogs wreck a whole lot sooner than others. Shouldn't YOU think twice before you let these Frawley-trained "weekend warrior helpers" wreck YOUR dog?
INSECURE FEAR BITERS
AREN'T GOOD FOR ANYTHING
Neither are "weekend warrior helpers"
Neither are the "table experts" like "Expert" Ed Frawley
My advice to new handlers (NO- to ANY handler) is to find a COMPETENT, SKILLED trainer to work with, certainly not the cheapest, the one with the biggest advertisement, the most "Vidz Fer Kidz" video tapes, or the one closest to your home. Ignore idiots with an obvious ax to grind, such as "table expert" Ed Frawley, and use some common sense. Spend some time (and spend some money) to learn, watch, and understand before you let a stranger work with your dog in protection, or any other facet of dog training. Very simple: LEARN and UNDERSTAND FIRST, ACT SECOND. Be SAFE, don't be SORRY.
If you're in such a big rush, and just can't wait to get your dog out there in front of a "helper", then it's YOUR fault when the "helper" wrecks him.
That's MY advice
Hopefully you're smart enough to comprehend that a table can't act on its own and isn't responsible for training decisions, even if "Table Expert" Ed Frawley can't figure that out yet.
THE "TABLE EXPERT'S" NEW REVISION: Apparently "Expert" Frawley re-wrote his "table article". I guess it was long overdue after MY rebuttal article (this page) has been read about 110,000 times, illustrating what an idiot Frawley is. It starts out with his brand new header, illustrating (again) his "expert" lack of ANY intelligence.
This is what I love the most about "Expert" Ed Frawley: First he makes an idiot out of himself. Then he charges ahead and makes more of an idiot of himself. Then he repeats it a few MORE times, for good measure.
Table Training In Protection Work
It's for FAT HELPERS
(Personally, I've never weighed over 128 in my life. But there are fat, average, and thin helpers everywhere.)
It's for Lazy Helpers
(I've worked dogs 12 hours a day for years - and watched dozens of other helpers do it, too.)
It's for Stupid Helpers
(Lots of us stupid people can spell, speak, and articulate beyond a fourth grade level.
And we're even smart enough to learn about tables first - before we decide what they're all about.)
Why I Don't Agree With It
It is 100% WRONG !!!
(Except for the people who can THINK - they know it is 100% RIGHT !!!)
Essentially the same stupidity, bullshit, garbage, lies, and drivel (above) are the content of his new article.
But the new one contains this amazing contribution:
(Congratulations Alex - another person who WON'T roll over for Frawley's bullshit fairy tales.)
We had already removed your name from the mailing list. Not sure why - maybe you had moved and a catalog came back. But with that said I will not send you anymore catalogs.
Obviously you have your opinions on table training and I have mine. Nothing wrong with that. I don't care to debate the issue. I feel as strongly as you do about my position.
But I will add your email to the article on my web site so people can see that there is a difference of opinion on table training.
I agree that the Mal in the nationals was an excellent dog (in my opinion.) Debbie's dog is not breed worthy. It's a good competition dog - but its not a dog that I would ever recommend anyone breed.
Suddenly, "Expert" Ed Frawley has become polite! Like a true gentleman, he generously offers to PUBLICLY "share a difference of opinion". [But then the idiot "forgot" to.] It only took three years. (Maybe a little help from the World Famous Frawley Castle Website added to it, who knows?)
BUT - while acknowledging that Debbie's dog was indeed excellent, "World Expert" Frawley
felt obligated and compelled to provide his unsolicited, worthless opinion on "breed worthy".
Did anybody ASK him? No.
Should somebody stuff his asshole "opinion" right back down his throat? Why yes, somebody should.
Excuse me, but what the hell has BREED WORTHY got to do with table training? If we're talking about table training, who GIVES a shit about "breed worthy"? Since when do tables, or a lack of tables, cause a dog to be "breed worthy"?
When the day comes that self-proclaimed "Table Expert" Frawley can stand up to Debbie Zappia as a dog handler, a trial competitor, OR a trainer, Earth will turn into a huge grapefruit. Water will be dry. Everyone will have 7 arms.
If I had a Mal bitch, I'd breed her to this dog JUST BECAUSE FRAWLEY "THE EXPERT" WOULDN'T EVER RECOMMEND IT. Who in the hell gives a shit what "Expert" Ed recommends, except his slobbering LEERKOPF™ puppets?
NOW HERE'S THE TRUTH: people like Gene England, who is personally responsible for more people's success on a trial field than ANY OTHER TRAINER, living OR dead, are laughing their (fat) ASSES off at "Expert" Ed Frawley and his "expert" fairy tale bullshit. This has only been going on for over TWENTY YEARS.
From 1983 through the 90's, I was going up to Kentucky constantly. "Fat, lazy, stupid" table training Gene would work dogs 14 hours straight, then stay up talking theory for another 4 hours. (After my first stay at his home, I started renting a room in a nearby motel - I couldn't keep up with his "fat, lazy, stupid" ass - I needed some damn SLEEP.) I'd get back to the motel about 4 am, he'd be pounding on the door at 6: "Get your skinny ass up, we're going tracking. Don't make me bust this door in!"
Fat? Lazy? Stupid? STUPID? Gene's mental capacity is so far beyond "Expert" Frawley, it's like comparing a hurricane to a drop of water.
Only an asshole "EXPERT" like Frawley would be dim-witted enough to write this trash.
MOUTH ST. FRAWLEY ERUPTS AGAIN
as I am concerned this type of training is morally wrong.
We have no right to stress a dog so badly that it looses control of its bowls."
- Ed Frawley © copyright 1998
Shown below: Table training "expert" Ed Frawley proves exactly what the table does to a dog. In this actual, unretouched photograph, Frawley points to the evidence, where the dog looses control of its bowls. When Federal indictments were filed against Mr. Round Table, and Mr. Square Table, Frawley supplied this photo to U.S. Justice Department. This indisputable evidence was the highlight of the entire trial.
the picture to go back
to the top)