# Prey bites, defensive bites, IPO, and KNPV



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

I was wondering. A dogs natural inclination is to bite softer and full mouth out of prey drive, but harder and less full in high defensive drive... SchH/IPO requires a full grip, but KNPV doesn't care so long as the dog stays on from what I understand. I'm sure a less full grip when in defensive drve has some evolutionary basis, so what do you think the reason is? More space in the grip plus thrashing leading to more serious damage? Thrashing with a full mouth grip wouldn't seem to tear tissue as effectively it would seem, where the full grip would better prevent the escape of prey. In defense you probably would prefer your opponent tuck tail and run so an inescapable grip might not be as important. What do you think?


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

I think you have to look at the total picture. I've taken plenty of full mouth grips that are crushing, because they don't tear flesh, doesn't mean it can't break bones. There have been dogs i like that had less than full grips, but loads of everything else I like, and dogs with full mouth calm grips that I find to be pretty weak. But generally speaking, if a dog is being tested and throttles me and drives in for full bites, is a dog I think is oozing confidence and one I like. 

I think a lot of strong dogs that don't have full grips, either don't have one because the opportunity to take one wasn't presented, or thru training it has moved away from wanting it, to just take what they can get and keeping it.

By the time a dog is trialing, no matter the sport, a lot of the "natural" stuff has been modified. They only way to really know is for those that have trained it up to be honest in what they did. It's why I love breeders that work their own dogs, know their dogs and breed for good ones. They know what they have.


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

crackem said:


> I think you have to look at the total picture. I've taken plenty of full mouth grips that are crushing, because they don't tear flesh, doesn't mean it can't break bones. There have been dogs i like that had less than full grips, but loads of everything else I like, and dogs with full mouth calm grips that I find to be pretty weak. But generally speaking, if a dog is being tested and throttles me and drives in for full bites, is a dog I think is oozing confidence and one I like.
> 
> I think a lot of strong dogs that don't have full grips, either don't have one because the opportunity to take one wasn't presented, or thru training it has moved away from wanting it, to just take what they can get and keeping it.
> 
> By the time a dog is trialing, no matter the sport, a lot of the "natural" stuff has been modified. They only way to really know is for those that have trained it up to be honest in what they did. It's why I love breeders that work their own dogs, know their dogs and breed for good ones. They know what they have.


I agree but didn't want tocompare one dog to another as one dogs full prey bite might be harder than another's gve-it-my-all defensive bite. Throw in varied levels of training and we really can't drawn much from a comparison. What I was curious about though is with no training, a natuarlly full biting dog will get a more shallow bite when primarily in defense... If this is natural, then why?


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

I think you first have to have an understanding of the foundation of our breed to really understand the importance of a full, HARD and calm grip. 

A full grip may come from prey (and genetics), but the power and hardness come from fight and the dog's desire to control, dominate and over power the helper (also very much genetic). This falls inline with schutzhund's foundation as a breed test and not just a bite sport (ring) or police/sport test (KNPV).


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

Guess I misunderstood your question. A dog biting out of defense's goal is to drive off what is causing its fear. How it bites will not matter as much as its final goal of driving away the threat. That is why most fear biters come from behind and nip or, when cornered, bite quickly and let go, bite again and let go. The defensive dogs does a tremendous amount of damage and, paying attention to the foundation of our breed and what we wanted in our breed would be VERY undesirable.


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

lhczth said:


> Guess I misunderstood your question. A dog biting out of defense's goal is to drive off what is causing its fear. How it bites will not matter as much as its final goal of driving away the threat. That is why most fear biters come from behind and nip or, when cornered, bite quickly and let go, bite again and let go. The defensive dogs does a tremendous amount of damage and, paying attention to the foundation of our breed and what we wanted in our breed would be VERY undesirable.


Right, I'm not taking about what's good for the breed or sport or anything, just the nature of bites from an evolutionary perspective. I'd guess that even the finest biting GSD could switch to a shallower undesirable (from SchH perspective) bite if you put enough pressure on him.


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

In comparison, I know Pitts thrash heavily when biting to maximize damage. Is their bite less full by SchH standards as well? To Pitt folks also work towards breeding and training a full bite?


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

hunterisgreat said:


> Right, I'm not taking about what's good for the breed or sport or anything, just the nature of bites from an evolutionary perspective. I'd guess that even the finest biting GSD could switch to a shallower undesirable (from SchH perspective) bite if you put enough pressure on him.


 
Think about the mindset that the dog is in, and really the reason why a defensive bite is more frontal naturally flows from that understanding. 

A frontal bite is quicker to deliver, and retreat from, than a full bite. The fact that more tearing damage may occur from a frontal bite with the canines is just a by-product and has nothing to do with why the dog bites that way. A dog in defense is protecting himself from a threat and will strive to drive the threat away while minimizing the chances of getting harmed himself. A dog in defense with rush in, tag quickly, and then back off out of reach, hoping that tag drove whatever is threatening him away. 

Considering *why* the dog in defense is biting in the first place, makes that lack of committment, lack of desire to hold on and unwillingness to stay in close contact with the threat that leads to those quick, chewy frontal bites quite understandable. This is far safer than staying in close and hanging on. The dog who stays close and holds on is putting himself in more danger, which is why this sort of biting behavior comes from a very different drive and place within the dog's head.


----------



## ayoitzrimz (Apr 14, 2010)

I think a frontal bite just gives the dog more flexibility to run / bite somewhere else etc while a full bite gives the dog a higher chance of holding on to the item.

I mean, if I'm chasing something I might stretch my arms out and wrap that something up and hold on, but if I'm being cornered or assaulted by somebody I'll be more likely to send a couple of quick hits to disorient him enough to make my escape. 

Dont know if that makes sense, just my ideas


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

ayoitzrimz said:


> I think a frontal bite just gives the dog more flexibility to run / bite somewhere else etc while a full bite gives the dog a higher chance of holding on to the item.
> 
> I mean, if I'm chasing something I might stretch my arms out and wrap that something up and hold on, but if I'm being cornered or assaulted by somebody I'll be more likely to send a couple of quick hits to disorient him enough to make my escape.
> 
> Dont know if that makes sense, just my ideas


Actually, that's it exactly.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

Yup, exactly.


----------



## Gretchen (Jan 20, 2011)

hunterisgreat -love the expression of your dog in the Avatar, sorry I cannot contribute to the original post.


----------



## Ace952 (Aug 5, 2010)

so are we saying that defensive dogs don't have the courage to stay in a fight or don't have full bites?


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

It would depend a lot on the dog. Obviously there are dogs in service and working in sports that don't bite full and are not as balanced in their drives (more defense). These dogs have the nerve and training to work through their unsureness though I think many of these dogs labeled as defensive are working more out of fight/aggression. Anyhow, a good helper/decoy can channel defense into a prey object. When I first started in SchH there was a dog that was far from being a prey dog and he definitely was not working out of defense (fear/unsureness) even if his handler said he was a defensive dog. He was working more out of fight and is the first time I saw an example of an independent drive called fight drive (not fighting drive). This dog's goal; whether working on the sleeve, on the suit or hidden sleeves; was to over power, control and defeat his opponent. This dog got great pleasure out of doing so. He had some very good training, but it was also in the dog. On the suit and on the sleeve he bit full and extremely hard. 

Sorry, I sort of got going down memory lane.


----------



## Wildtim (Dec 13, 2001)

Ace952 said:


> so are we saying that defensive dogs don't have the courage to stay in a fight or don't have full bites?


No, not at all.

When I or most people I talk to say "defensive dog" or "prey dog" they aren't talking about what drive the dog uses to accomplish anything. What they are talking about is the dogs default drive, his stronger drive, the one at the core of his being.

The finished product should show as much balance as the dog is capable of. T wo dogs who, when fully trained, are well balanced and look very similar in their work might, at their core, really be quite different and on opposite ends of the spectrum.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I agree with Tim. Nikon is a "defense dog" being that that is his default so to speak, and Pan is prey. Pan's bites are hard and crushing, and Nikon doesn't bite frontal nor does he ever, ever shift his grip (his biggest strength in bitework). The simplification of defense vs. prey makes sense but I agree with what several of the others have said, there are other drives that come into play. I feel like Nikon would be a lot worse if he didn't enjoy the fight so much, the fight is what keeps him there and has him wanting to be in there, to be in the fight. Stylistically, Pan strikes and bites better overall but hasn't developed that desired to fight and overpower (he's still a baby, to me!).


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

lhczth said:


> .... When I first started in SchH there was a dog that was far from being a prey dog and he definitely was not working out of defense (fear/unsureness) even if his handler said he was a defensive dog. He was working more out of fight and is the first time I saw an example of an independent drive called fight drive (not fighting drive). This dog's goal; whether working on the sleeve, on the suit or hidden sleeves; was to over power, control and defeat his opponent. This dog got great pleasure out of doing so. He had some very good training, but it was also in the dog. On the suit and on the sleeve he bit full and extremely hard.
> Sorry, I sort of got going down memory lane.


Who was the dog or what was the Pedigree?


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

This fight drive that Lisa described is the thing that was seen much more often than in the past. For a lot of reasons from breeding to training. Nevertheless, these dogs tend to be dominant and trying to control and hurt in the fight. These are the kind of dogs you can look at and tell if you do the wrong thing they retaliate in a heartbeat. Now both prey and defense driven dogs can have this trait, but the difference is the fight drive is predominant over the other drives. We have a Bouvier in our club with this temperament. Sound, steady, but oh he loves the fight and is itchin for the fight, yet unless you cross the threshold he's reliable. Once the engagement starts its like MMA with him....good strong grip but he is trying to destroy you. Truly an exhilirating dog to decoy on. Kinda like a roller coaster, you kinda dread taking him on, but the ride in the fight actually becomes stimulating. The harder the stick hits the tougher he gets. Our TD, John, has done a masterful job in getting this dog into an awesome fighting machine with good off leash obedience in protection phase.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

gagsd said:


> Who was the dog or what was the Pedigree?


I will have to see if I can add him to the PDB. Might take awhile.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

Smudge von Brumbly - German Shepherd Dog

I had to add quite a few of the females and I still don't have a complete pedgree all the way back. Thought I did, but can't find it and even my WinSIS isn't complete.


----------



## lcht2 (Jan 8, 2008)

hunterisgreat said:


> I was wondering. A dogs natural inclination is to bite softer and full mouth out of prey drive, but harder and less full in high defensive drive... SchH/IPO requires a full grip, but KNPV doesn't care so long as the dog stays on from what I understand. I'm sure a less full grip when in defensive drve has some evolutionary basis, so what do you think the reason is? More space in the grip plus thrashing leading to more serious damage? Thrashing with a full mouth grip wouldn't seem to tear tissue as effectively it would seem, where the full grip would better prevent the escape of prey. In defense you probably would prefer your opponent tuck tail and run so an inescapable grip might not be as important. What do you think?


 
as far as im concerned about grip, if the dog is confident he's going to bite hard and full. KNPV trains to use a full grip but do not judge the grip so do not missinterpret shallow grips for a lack of care for grip. i've seen dogs bite full in defense and in prey. ive seen dogs with ZERO prey drive and all defense who bite very hard and full and dogs with ALL prey drive bite shallow and soft. its all in the dog/genetics/training with genetics being the main.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

:thumbup:


----------

