# From IPO to PP



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

I'm an IPO nut. I train for it every day with my Mal. He has not done anything outside IPO. However, I personally like a dog that can do the real deal too. As such I have begun dabbling in some PP scenarios. 
It's a lot to think about. Not just biting, but significant environmental challenges as well. 
What if the bad guy throws something at him? What if he tosses liquid at him? What if he doesn't have a whip and doesnt present his arm? 
If a dog has been seeing the same picture for his entire life (IPO field, blinds, sleeve, whip etc) and is used to biting and showing aggression only in that venue how will he transfer those behaviors to a different picture?
This is video of my male Mal. He was exposed to a suit once before 3 weeks prior in a different PP scenario. So this is his second time on a suit and first time dealing with these environmental stressors. 
All in all while I want to see more strength in certain areas it was a decent showing. I will be working more environmental stressors into future scenarios to build more confidence and strength.

Our main focus is still ipo but it's good to branch out .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsaW3QCN_ww


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Continuation of scenario 1. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ty50LLHKsU

I should also mention I tried to remove all cues that would lead the dog to expect any kind of bite work. No harness, e collar, no prep. 
Just a leash and flat collar.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Definitely noted a huge difference in a dog prepped for bite work via having his gear put on and hearing other dogs go first vs no cues whatsoever. My goal is to eliminate as much of that as possible from this dog. Social to aggression, obedience to aggression and so on.
This boy is a monster on the ipo field when I activate him but the lack of bite work off the field definitely led to some holes in his game. He is not as comfortable in his aggression off the field as I want to see. But im thinking time and experience should cure this. 
Plan on doing some work in rooms and darkness then hopefully graduate to passive decoys.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

If a dog has genetic fight drive and enjoys it, there should be no problem transitioning to personal protection. I know sending a dog on a passive decoy or turning them on when there is no reason to may be a bit confusing to an IPO trained dog. 
The 'protection' is not whatsoever the same because IPO is completely obedience based and the handler is always the one directing the dog, not the dog deciding when it is time to act/engage.
I haven't cue'd my dog to do protection in a long time, though he knows when he comes out after obedience it is usually for protection. Once they get to a certain level in the training, it is fun to make up scenario's and let them use their own discretion.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Why would sending a properly trained IPO dog onto a passive decoy be confusing?


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

because the decoy is not facing the dog, but walking away...no threat to the dog. If an IPO dog has never seen this, yet commanded to packen or politically correct 'go' it may not know what is asked and why it should 'go' because in IPO that exercise is never executed. 
edit to add; there is also no sleeve presented or present, it is usually done on a suit or hidden sleeve. Not many IPO trained dogs will engage without equipment to target.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

So the definition of "passive" is walking away, no sleeve, and all the other stuff you mentioned?

What do you call a helper in the blind not doing anything?


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Also, in regards to PP, why would you need your dog to go after a person walking away and not posing a threat?


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

the discussion is personal protection, and how it carries over, a helper who is passive in a blind is much different than someone who is not posing a threat, not facing the dog at all, not showing anything more than possibly slowly walking away, which in real life could be a reason to send a dog to stop that person, not so much to take that person down, but stop them.


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

> The 'protection' is not whatsoever the same because IPO is completely obedience based and the handler is always the one directing the dog, not the dog deciding when it is time to act/engage.


Re attacks by the helper. No command and he better engage.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

there is the threat against the dog, of course he better engage. Yet in transports I see in trials, the dog is still looking up to the handler and not always focused/keyed in or stalking the helper.


----------



## Colie CVT (Nov 10, 2013)

Poor lawnchair. It never stood a chance. He doesn't seem too bad to me, though it did seem like it took him a little by surprise when it happened at first lol. Even knowing it was coming, I would have likely fallen out of my chair instead of just sat there like you did knowing me.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Passive as in not doing anything or wearing anything. Maybe he is lying under something or just standing there. That's not easy for most dogs.

I don't cue my dog for IPO protection he just knows when it's happening. The cues are all environmental and unavoidable 
Imo when you take away all the precursors to protection like a harness, hearing another dog doing it or even walking into a field with some blinds you will see more.

I could have put the dog on a harness, back tied him and have the decoy agitate then give him a bite for his initial suit exposure.
Then work on his grips to build his confidence in that type of work. Im sure he would have transitioned seamlessly, but that wouldn't have given me the info I wanted. 

Have someone the dog has never met before just approach you while your walking the dog somewhere neutral, talk to you then attack you. The results can be interesting.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Colie CVT said:


> Poor lawnchair. It never stood a chance. He doesn't seem too bad to me, though it did seem like it took him a little by surprise when it happened at first lol. Even knowing it was coming, I would have likely fallen out of my chair instead of just sat there like you did knowing me.


I was actually surprised when he jumped me..lol. it took him 2 seconds after the attack commenced for my dog to engage. I want that cut down to 0. We did the same scenario a second time and he engaged in about 0.5 seconds. In the second vid when I'm heeling away he surprises me from behind and he engages almost immidiately.

In a few weeks I'm going to take him somewhere else and surprise him a different way without any prep and see how he does.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

the decoy is someone he's worked on before? Have you worked him on a complete stranger as well?


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

So we just ignore the fact the guy has a suit on? That's not a "cue?"

What does "fight drive" have to do with PP?

Do you guys know a lot of helpers that are willing to test your dogs without equipment?


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

He worked on that decoy once 3 weeks previously. At which point he was a complete stranger.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

martemchik said:


> So we just ignore the fact the guy has a suit on? That's not a "cue?"
> 
> What does "fight drive" have to do with PP?
> 
> Do you guys know a lot of helpers that are willing to test your dogs without equipment?


 I'll address the suit question. He was on a suit once 3 weeks ago so it was meaningless to him as a cue. I would say now after 2 occasions it is a cue. We will do some hidden sleeve work too. Ultimately you do run out of options..lol.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

martemchik said:


> So we just ignore the fact the guy has a suit on? That's not a "cue?"
> 
> What does "fight drive" have to do with PP?
> 
> *Do you guys know a lot of helpers that are willing to test your dogs without equipment?*


hardly, lol...not many will even want to do muzzle work. Bruises are a given even with wraps, why would anyone willingly take bites on exposed flesh?
Fight drive instinct should be a given with a dog doing personal protection, no?


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Why would a dog need fight drive to protect you? Or go after a passive threat? What does "fight drive" actually bring to the table in regards to engaging a threat?


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

martemchik said:


> Do you guys know a lot of helpers that are willing to test your dogs without equipment?


We do muzzle work, tactical suits (looks like blue jeans and a normal jacket), hidden sleeves, and even rolled news papers. Just enough to keep the dog from puncturing. We do a lot of work with no equipment, just have the dog on a table, back tied or held by the handler to keep us from getting bit. We still get bit fairly often. To truly push the envelope, you have to get close. Most of this stuff is the stuff you'll never see videos of. 

How's this for passive? A decoy laying on a couch completely under a blanket laying completely still. Send the dog in to find and bite.

A helper in a blind, is a scenario the dog has seen a thousand times. Heck a lot of dogs out there were taught a B&H in the blind. It's comfortable to them, it's what they are used to. They bark mostly out of frustration now days anyways. Dogs out working in the real world, have no idea what's around the corner, in the house or what the bad guy is going to do next. One of the reason I love surprise scenario sports and training. They tell you a lot about a dog. With surprise scenario's, your mind is the only thing that says what you can or can't do. It's all about what your dog really knows.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

And I'm sure there are tons of dogs that will bite a man hidden under a blanket that they've never met before that doesn't present any threat. Don't need to ever see that scenario. Seems like it proves a lot about the dog.

I've seen those dogs, they're all over the news when a police dog decides to rip into a handcuffed person, or just a guy sitting on a couch with his hands up. We should all be proud of those kinds of dogs and hope that one day we can own one just like it. Preferably without an out command either, and when the handler tries to choke the dog off the thing it's not supposed to be biting, the dog will hopefully redirect onto the next closest non threat.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

martemchik said:


> And I'm sure there are tons of dogs that will bite a man hidden under a blanket that they've never met before that doesn't present any threat. Don't need to ever see that scenario. Seems like it proves a lot about the dog.
> 
> I've seen those dogs, they're all over the news when a police dog decides to rip into a handcuffed person, or just a guy sitting on a couch with his hands up. We should all be proud of those kinds of dogs and hope that one day we can own one just like it. Preferably without an out command either, and when the handler tries to choke the dog off the thing it's not supposed to be biting, the dog will hopefully redirect onto the next closest non threat.






You're right. I guess I should just keep reading this forum so I can be told over and over how the GSD is better now than ever. The proof is in the over abundance of them in LE/Military, service, seeing eye, therapy, SAR and all the other types of work they were known for. Hey, plus check out that flashy obedience and perfect scores.


----------



## Blondi's Revenge (Jan 31, 2015)

martemchik said:


> And I'm sure there are tons of dogs that will bite a man hidden under a blanket that they've never met before that doesn't present any threat. Don't need to ever see that scenario. Seems like it proves a lot about the dog.
> 
> *I've seen those dogs, they're all over the news when a police dog decides to rip into a handcuffed person*, or just a guy sitting on a couch with his hands up. We should all be proud of those kinds of dogs and hope that one day we can own one just like it. Preferably without an out command either, and when the handler tries to choke the dog off the thing it's not supposed to be biting, the dog will hopefully redirect onto the next closest non threat.


those type of stories don't make the news :silly:


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

The reason why I think engaging passive threats is important to PP is that some bad guys aren't going to act like your typical decoy. Yelling, moving eratically or presenting a part of their body to get bit. You need the dog to be able to turn on on command whether the bad guy is doing those obvious things or you catch him standing in a corner of your house or hiding in a closet. Maybe you come back from a hike and there is a guy standing by your truck up to no good and he makes threats towards your property and person in a calm level voice if you don't comply. Lots of potential scenarios where a dog that can activate and if necessary bite a passive decoy are important.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

mycobraracr said:


> We do muzzle work, tactical suits (looks like blue jeans and a normal jacket), hidden sleeves, and even rolled news papers. Just enough to keep the dog from puncturing. We do a lot of work with no equipment, just have the dog on a table, back tied or held by the handler to keep us from getting bit. We still get bit fairly often. To truly push the envelope, you have to get close. Most of this stuff is the stuff you'll never see videos of.
> 
> How's this for passive? A decoy laying on a couch completely under a blanket laying completely still. Send the dog in to find and bite.
> 
> A helper in a blind, is a scenario the dog has seen a thousand times. Heck a lot of dogs out there were taught a B&H in the blind. It's comfortable to them, it's what they are used to. They bark mostly out of frustration now days anyways. Dogs out working in the real world, have no idea what's around the corner, in the house or what the bad guy is going to do next. One of the reason I love surprise scenario sports and training. They tell you a lot about a dog. With surprise scenario's, your mind is the only thing that says what you can or can't do. It's all about what your dog really knows.



That's cool, wish we had more decoys doing this stuff around here. I'm probably going to get a second dog for this stuff. Simply because I can only do so much with the competition dog before I start creating conflict with the IPO training.


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

Focus on being social and secure in all environments. Don't teach the dog that there is danger imminent everywhere.
Don't focus on bite work . Get control. Get a better out. Get a brake - where the dog is ready to engage whether commanded or self initiated and you are able to call him off.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> That's cool, wish we had more decoys doing this stuff around here. I'm probably going to get a second dog for this stuff. Simply because I can only do so much with the competition dog before I start creating conflict with the IPO training.


a clear headed dog should be able to do both....as long as the training is clear to the dog. 
As Carmen posted, a solid out is important and from those video's you posted,you had to command more than once and give collar corrections to get your dog to out. Though, first time on suit, dogs may want to hold on due to a bit of confusion on what they are actually biting.

I don't really know that putting a bunch of time into training for PP is necessary when you have a dog that will engage naturally when the time calls for it.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Turning on a guy…or barking…should be very clear to a properly trained IPO dog. Going in for an initial bite? That’s different. But that’s also two different types of training which is why I don’t get what you get to see out of a dog who is taught to bite first instead of bark first. Two different goals, two different training methods. You can easily see a dog get wigged out if it’s barking, and in the same sense (just clearer) if the dog is taught to bite first but avoids the bite, you’re getting the same information…the dog is unsure.

The training of police K9s is something I don’t care to get into. There are very questionable reasons why those dogs are taught the things they’re taught. General public tends to not care until they hear about how a dog ripped into a child or an innocent bystander. Eventually, that type of training will catch up to the dogs and to the departments.

In regards to PP, you’re basically allowed to do whatever you want or think you need to do. Do I think that “surprise” scenarios are fun and you can learn something about a dog from them? Sure. But it really doesn’t take countless scenarios to understand if the dog is strong nerved and the type of reaction one should expect out of a particular dog. Any, and I mean ANY, scenario that people want to talk about doing, is more than likely trained for. Even if the dog is only seeing that particular set up for the first time, the training prior to that has led up to it.

It’s been said before. With most types of training, if you know what you’re looking at, you can with 99% certainty know how a dog will react if the scenario changes or if something new is thrown at the dog. Once a dog has a solid foundation in whatever it is the handler is focused on, you can make pretty accurate assumptions on how the dog will react or do in a different but similar situation.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

You can't train to every scenario or situation. It's impossible! The people who argue this show their lack of understanding to this. You have to have a solid foundation in your training and have ran enough situations to be confident that no matter what, you can get through. This isn't pattern now. We are talking real life. Where death can be the result of a mistake. The ones that sit here and say it can all be trained to, show there lack of experience and understanding in these types of situations. 

Here is a real passive scenario. Many of you may have seen it as it got a bunch of crap on social media. I guy was armed sitting in a recliner, in the middle of his living room. Police told him to come out several times, words were exchanged. Dog was sent in to find and engage the guy so police could get in and detain the guy. 

Do mistakes happen? Yes, do other officers get bit? Yes, but this doesn't happen as often as many make it seem like it does, and when it does, it's usually the fault of a human not the dog. I've taken live bites in an IPO field too. Does that mean these dogs were fed babies for breakfast? No. The dogs are in a high state of drive and things happen. That is why we need more clear headed dogs out there. Maybe something like a GSD? Unfortunately the majority of them don't have what it takes to make it through the rest. We're too focused on balls and prey drive.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

mycobraracr said:


> You can't train to every scenario or situation. It's impossible! The people who argue this show their lack of understanding to this. You have to have a solid foundation in your training and have ran enough situations to be confident that no matter what, you can get through. This isn't pattern now. We are talking real life. Where death can be the result of a mistake. The ones that sit here and say it can all be trained to, show there lack of experience and understanding in these types of situations.
> 
> Here is a real passive scenario. Many of you may have seen it as it got a bunch of crap on social media. I guy was armed sitting in a recliner, in the middle of his living room. Police told him to come out several times, words were exchanged. Dog was sent in to find and engage the guy so police could get in and detain the guy.
> 
> Do mistakes happen? Yes, do other officers get bit? Yes, but this doesn't happen as often as many make it seem like it does, and when it does, it's usually the fault of a human not the dog. I've taken live bites in an IPO field too. Does that mean these dogs were fed babies for breakfast? No. The dogs are in a high state of drive and things happen. That is why we need more clear headed dogs out there. Maybe something like a GSD? Unfortunately the majority of them don't have what it takes to make it through the rest. We're too focused on balls and prey drive.


amen :thumbup:


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

carmspack said:


> Focus on being social and secure in all environments. Don't teach the dog that there is danger imminent everywhere.
> Don't focus on bite work . Get control. Get a better out. Get a brake - where the dog is ready to engage whether commanded or self initiated and you are able to call him off.


The dog is secure in any environment and appropriately social. I do not encourage it, for me it's unnecessary. You can walk up to him and pet him any time if he is with me..which again for my purposes is unnecessary. If he was a nerve bag I wouldn't be feeding him.

My control is excellent the initial out was crap because the scenario kicked his adrenaline levels up and shocked him. Plus the decoy was still showing a threat. As was already mentioned the dog is new to this work and the stress makes him less clear in the initial phases.
I can out him up close and from a distance. His secondary control in phase C is just about at IPO 3 level. 

Control is not the focus in this work. Teaching the dog to transition from being off to turning on without the usual cues, and engaging under varied circumstances is the focus right now. 
Once he becomes more confident and experienced in this work which come with biting and dominating the decoy the control will be better.
The second vid shows a call off and some minimal heeling..if that makes some people feel better.

I'm definitely not going to try to add to much control at this point that would be the wrong thing to do.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

With proper genetics, and proper underlying foundation, a solid dog will react properly in any situation. The training is what you allow the dog to do and what you don’t allow them to do. You have to guide the dog’s natural ability/drive to what you want it to do. I’ve yet to see a dog that “naturally” or from birth, will bark at a helper in a blind, that is something that is taught. I also doubt that a completely novice dog would go into a room, find a hidden helper, and bite him without some sort of training. If you take a solid dog that isn’t nervy/has the right drives/ect, and teach it that it can bite first and not need to bark, it will do that just as easily, and actually probably faster than teaching a dog that it needs to bark first and is only allowed to bite at the movement of the helper. The training, is showing the dog what it is EXPECTED to do. None of the scenarios that have been described, are natural to the dog…the dogs need training and foundation to understand what they need to do when a certain situation presents itself.

What needs to be considered when speaking about “most” IPO/sport dogs is that the level of training is not on the same level as K9s. K9s have much more time invested in them than your average IPO dog. The majority of dogs you see, are trained by people just dabbling in the sport, enjoying their dog, and enjoying a HOBBY. The training is therefore geared towards what the handler is capable of, and also the understanding that the dog still needs to function as a pet Monday through Friday. There are different rules. There are also different tools and methods used in order to reach a completely different goal. If each and every IPO dog had the same amount of time invested in them as an average K9 does, you’d have a completely different picture of what those dogs are capable of. The way it stands, most handlers have a hard time teaching their dog a proper heel, retrieve, and even hold and bark…but when you have only a few hours a week to work on it, and also extremely limited resources in most cases to get you the right information, you’re not going to get very far.

We all have different goals, if someone wants to see how “versatile” their dog is, they have those options available to them. Other people focus on achieving a different picture and a higher score. There’s nothing wrong with either one. But it’s too late for that in this thread. The evils of a ball and prey drive have been mentioned, and all those that “don’t care about scores” will not chime in with how hard it is to get those scores since the expectation is just unrealistic and they just can’t stand to work with a ball and use all the “gimmicks” of today.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

I agree with you in the aspect of focus Max. If you are training for serious competition you can only go so far in this type of work before you run into trouble. Numerous decoys and trainers including the French Ring decoy getting bit in the vids have said this.
If you want to win that is...


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

"Yet in transports I see in trials, the dog is still looking up to the handler and not always focused/keyed in or stalking the helper. "

That right there is one of the big differences - all you need to do is check out videos of Enno Antrefftal, Lewis Malatesta, Mink Wittfeld , even an "unknown" Ibro Maineiche - more "saft" .


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

carmspack said:


> "Yet in transports I see in trials, the dog is still looking up to the handler and not always focused/keyed in or stalking the helper. "
> 
> That right there is one of the big differences - all you need to do is check out videos of Enno Antrefftal, Lewis Malatesta, Mink Wittfeld , even an "unknown" Ibro Maineiche - more "saft" .





> The 'protection' is not whatsoever the same because IPO is completely obedience based and the handler is always the one directing the dog, not the dog deciding when it is time to act/engage.





> Re attacks by the helper. No command and he better engage.


The point was there are exercises in IPO where the dog is expected to act/engage without direction from the handler. Even the ones that are heeling in the transport, still have to decide the helper is a threat and act on it.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Not sure what trials you’re going to…pretty much every dog I’ve seen over the past year has no problem looking at the helper during a transport. None of the dogs I’ve trained with have an issue doing that either. But maybe I’m just too close to the action and can’t tell when a dog is staring at me. I’m sure YouTube would give me a better idea of how dogs are doing back transports than actually being on the field with them. The majority of handlers and trainers that I know, do not have anywhere near the amount of control necessary to be able to teach a focused heel to their dog when there is a helper on the field. Most don’t even attempt it and are just happy when their dog is anywhere near them during a transport.

Also, pointing out 3 dogs, from 30 years ago, as if they’re a good representation of what dogs were like 30 years ago is a joke. I can easily post 100 videos off of YouTube of dogs that trialed this year that watch a helper during a transport. Maybe videos of the working dog or any other high level trial would help? Or should I just name off the WUSV qualifiers of this year so that people can look at their videos and understand that those dogs have no issue watching a helper during a transport?

I like the method of picking out the “bad dogs” of today and pointing out their deficiencies while at the same time only talking about the “good dogs” of yesterday to prove a point. Makes a lot of sense, if you don’t show the bad videos that disprove your own point, but point out the 3 dogs you’ve seen that did a poor job in a club trial this past weekend, your point sounds a lot more respectable. Let’s compare the WORLD level dogs of yesterday to the CLUB level dogs of today. Seems like a fair comparison. Top level training against weekend warrior type stuff…seems equal. It’s almost as good as saying negative things about a certain training style and dog of a forum member and then posting a video of a different dog that does the same type of training and talking about how great that dog and training is.

Maybe there is just a lack of understanding with some people on this forum about how training plays into IPO? I hear about the magical dogs that are born ready for an IPO3, yet I still haven’t seen one. I think we have some of those dogs on this forum don’t we? Why aren’t those people just entering their dogs and getting their titles? Why mess around and waste time training if their dog is already ready to do all the exercises out of the womb?


----------



## Sabis mom (Mar 20, 2014)

I'm not sure what the argument is. But none of the dogs that watched my back over the course of 15 or so years would have done well in a trial. 
There is no way that you could prepare a dog, any dog, for every situation. Some of the things my dogs faced were down right weird, like the homeless man who broke into the truck and curled up in Sabs blanket in the box, or the other homeless guy who tried to bite Billy, or the drunk cleaner who was sword fighting Asta with a mop.
None of these people were not a threat, but may have appeared so. The dogs we used needed to be able to discern a real threat, as opposed to stupidity.
Put them in a field with blinds, stick a sleeve in their faces, they would have been lost. But these were the partners that brought me home safe every day. One of them dragged me away from an angry mob and held them off until help arrived, one of them stood over me in a parking lot after chasing off my assailants and then sat quietly while paramedics attended me. 
These dogs are taught only the basics of what to do/not do then have to be trusted to walk a busy sidewalk and pick out the real threat. A sport dog can be accomplished with a skilled trainer and an experienced helper. A working PP dog has to be born with it, and then have it nurtured and guided. 

Police K9 are a different thing altogether. 

I know Carmen sells to security companies who use PP/patrol dogs and I can tell you that she may have better words then I do but these dogs have to be a breed apart to be really any good.


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

I have sold PP dogs to recording artists, celebrities , business executives who travel internationally with the dog , olde money Toronto families, jewellers, shop keepers , two large competitive security companies, supreme court judges, American hotels in the Turcs and Caicos , in addition to the police depts. in Canada and USA , from municipal, provincial/state to federal - and prisons systems.
One dog in Ontario worked Kingston Prison and was "the" dog called on when there was an important dignitary in town. He was Kissinger's favourite.
Many were scouted and then trained by law enforcement , retired heads of k9 units.

The dog does not have to be exposed to every possible situation . He either has it or he does not. 

I found this interesting "All in all while I want to see more strength in certain areas it was a decent showing. I will be working more environmental stressors into future scenarios to build more confidence and strength." and 

this "
This boy is a monster on the ipo field when I activate him but the lack of bite work off the field definitely led to some holes in his game. He is not as comfortable in his aggression off the field as I want to see. But im thinking time and experience should cure this"

a monster on the field -- routine, pattern, reward trained , directed by handler - not making decisions -- quote onyx "The 'protection' is not whatsoever the same because IPO is completely obedience based and the handler is always the one directing the dog, not the dog deciding when it is time to act/engage."

Is there finally a realization that the sport field gives a partial picture. So much for the arrogant police dogs are failed schutzhund dogs so often said . Or so much for the any sport dog can do police work just nicely. 

Without question the dog needs more NERVE than drive , a bit of a reversal from the needs for sport . 

more drive than nerve ? "the initial out was crap because the scenario kicked his adrenaline levels up and shocked him."

that is one thing malinois are known for , which I think Bailiff may have mentioned in a post a while ago . The initial response may be to exit , but then come back through drive . 

The dog needs fight drive . 

double Amen to "
Quote:
Originally Posted by *mycobraracr*  
_You can't train to every scenario or situation. It's impossible! The people who argue this show their lack of understanding to this. You have to have a solid foundation in your training and have ran enough situations to be confident that no matter what, you can get through. This isn't pattern now. We are talking real life. Where death can be the result of a mistake. The ones that sit here and say it can all be trained to, show there lack of experience and understanding in these types of situations. 

Here is a real passive scenario. Many of you may have seen it as it got a bunch of crap on social media. I guy was armed sitting in a recliner, in the middle of his living room. Police told him to come out several times, words were exchanged. Dog was sent in to find and engage the guy so police could get in and detain the guy. 

Do mistakes happen? Yes, do other officers get bit? Yes, but this doesn't happen as often as many make it seem like it does, and when it does, it's usually the fault of a human not the dog. I've taken live bites in an IPO field too. Does that mean these dogs were fed babies for breakfast? No. The dogs are in a high state of drive and things happen. That is why we need more clear headed dogs out there. Maybe something like a GSD? Unfortunately the majority of them don't have what it takes to make it through the rest. We're too focused on balls and prey drive._

amen :thumbup: "


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

I think some people are missing the point. Yes there is training involved. You have to build a solid foundation. The dog must learn to think for itself. Sorry Steve, I don't agree that the back transport shows us this in IPO. To say the dogs work a passive person because they bark in the blind isn't the same. Dogs are habitual creatures. Any of you feed your dogs at the same time every day? What happens when that time rolls around? They know exactly when and where their food is coming from. When training for real life or surprise scenario, you don't have that option. You are seeing can the dog work for itself? Can the dog transition itself into different drives in order to complete the task? Is the dog comfortable in different environments? Do you still have that control in environments that aren't as sanitary as an IPO field? Such as calling the dog off one attacker who's still fighting the dog to engage a second or third attacker who is now fighting you? Blitz just showed us how different the dog interpenetrates it. I'm sure on an IPO field the dog looks great. 

To say that police dogs get more training is inaccurate at least in my area. They train once, maybe twice a month and don't get a lot of one on one time. They are raised until about a year old now and sold, because hey, why keep train a dog until 2 when I can sell it at 1 for the same amount right?


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

If taught correctly…a hold and bark can easily be transferred to any passive “target.” It’s hard to understand when you haven’t seen it, and I have a very strong feeling you’ve probably not seen it done that way. This isn’t a negative comment, it’s just the truth. I didn’t see it done correctly until only a few months ago. 99% of dogs aren’t taught a hold and bark in that way, so many people can’t grasp the fact that a behavior can be taught and then transferred to other scenarios when necessary. When the training is clear, and the dog understands what that command means, the scenario happening around the dog doesn’t matter, the dog just does the requested behavior. This is counter intuitive to “normal” IPO training because a hold and bark is supposed to be taught and done in “defense” which assumes the dog needs to enter a higher level of aggression in order to do so and so it involves an active helper to get that response from the dog. This is where most people get confused because it’s tough for a dog to enter a heightened level of aggression without feeling threatened, yet it’s expected that the dog just brings the aggression itself. Many dogs have issues with this, and due to training not being clear, or a refusal to use differing methods, a dog stays confused and doesn’t understand a hold and bark without the scenario as it is generally presented on an IPO field.

If a dog has proper nerve strength and correct drives…testing in various environments wouldn’t be necessary. If a dog understands the command, understands what is expected, the environment can change without any issues. This is also hard to grasp because like I stated earlier, the majority of sport dogs that people see aren’t “top notch” and don’t have the correct nerves or drives so it’s hard to believe there are dogs out there which don’t need to be shown various environments. Many times, they also don’t have proper training which just adds to the issues seen in a dog’s performance on a training or trial field. If you know what you’re looking for, the lack of drive and nerve can easily be seen on a sport field. No matter how great the trainer, knowledgeable people can see through training. On top of that, most of the great trainers are just like police departments and brokers, they don’t work with dogs that don’t have “it.” They don’t have the time or resources to waste time working through genetic deficiencies in a dog. Again, this is only in regards to the highest levels of competition, which 95% or more of people in dog sport are not.

Also, each time you throw in more variables into the “scenario” you’re talking about new things to train, more unnatural exercises that the dog needs to learn and be shown. The last scenario of coming off an active attacker to engage another one…that is something that needs to be trained. You need to train an out, you need to train a dog to redirect a response. No way a dog would do that naturally, no matter what kind of genetics it has. It is also an extremely unfortunate scenario and if you believe that a dog can fight off 3 humans by itself, I feel bad for a dog that gets thrown into that type of situation in real life as it’s probably not coming out of it alive. We can sit here all day and come up with amazingly difficult scenarios a real K9 might handle…but at some point you’re pretty much sending a dog to its death, no matter how many times you’ve trained for it. At the end of the day, no matter how many scenarios you’ve been involved in while training, you’re never truly fighting the dog and trying to kill it. In real life, a dog might run into a person who will fight the dog to the death, and that is something that no one can replicate.


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

"easily be transferred to any passive “target.” It’s hard to understand when you haven’t seen it, and I have a very strong feeling you’ve probably not seen it done that way. "

I've seen it --- barking for a toy, give me the ball , give me the ball, give me the ball - and then dog leaves decoy to get the ball. Once again a routine .

not every behaviour has to be taught . 
not every behaviour has to be , as you say requested behaviour .

quote "and if you believe that a dog can fight off 3 humans by itself, I feel bad for a dog that gets thrown into that type of situation in real life as it’s probably not coming out of it alive"

police k9 Carmspack Keno -- the joke was if it wasn't a multiple arrest it isn't for Keno -- his first arrest when he was maybe 16 months tops was to pursue a band of bad guys that had robbed a pharmacy in the Broadview - Gerrard. . Puruit in laneways behind residential and business , mixed use, lots of food litter - cats , dogs , kids in the lane way . Finds and holds the 3 , who are cornered and hunker down under a raised porch . Armed with machete , knife and gun . And he got them. Police dog of the Year award. This multiple arrest seemed to follow him for his 10 year career.
I can have Gus's owner come and take a picture of some of his front page newspaper coverage . He and his older half brother helped sell Toronto on the usefulness of a k9 unit.

Rkiv "Clive" Oklahoma max prison -- when retired from the RCMP he went on to the prison system where he was written about in in-house magazine "All Points Bulletin" . Got an award for helping regain order when prisoners become an unruly mob - worked under tear gas . Another award for finding smuggled drugs in vending machines .

classic reactive response " the scenario kicked his adrenaline levels up and shocked him. "

so how would the dog behaviour on Spadina Ave's hectic , frenetic pedestrian activity with people darting and passing and bumping with bags and just being really physically close , lots of use of hands in talking . Took two candidates for an experience to this area travelling of public transit including subway , exit at St George , go down through U of T campus into the market area . At one stop light , dog sitting , a young girl, maybe 4 years , runs from hands of mother and does a full body drop on Simon while encircling his neck with her arms. Discernment , judgement , not reactive nerve adrenal. Same dog tested by officer while dog tied out on stallion bungee. Dog stretched that bungee out so much in his fight to get to the man that the man ran backwards to get out of reach and landed on his rear . Same dog close gunfire while searching for coin sized object . Did not deter .


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

> Sorry Steve, I don't agree that the back transport shows us this in IPO.


I tend to look at most everything as training to one degree or another anyway Jeremy. I just meant there's no command or direction from the handler on those re attack exercises.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

the hold and bark to a passive person transfer is about the easiest thing to teach once they learn the H&B....the dog will do that on command to a dang tree. 
These repetitive posts are getting boring. 

FWIW, my dog did have a genetic hold and bark at 7 months of age. Every helper that has worked him has been impressed and want to show that off to others because for some reason my dog was powerful in that guarding phase without it being trained or taught. 


> I’ve yet to see a dog that “naturally” or from birth, will bark at a helper in a blind, that is something that is taught.


He also had a very strong helper we were training with at that time who showed major pressure in his presence alone....as a young dog, it powered him up. 
I've never taken credit for it, it is in the dogs heart/who he is.
That said, knowing what i know now, I wouldn't have sent my dog in the blind at that age. At least he is of good nerve to have dealt with it.


> Quote:
> Sorry Steve, I don't agree that the back transport shows us this in IPO.





> I tend to look at most everything as training to one degree or another anyway Jeremy. I just meant there's no command or direction from the handler on those re attack exercises.


The dog knows the routine, knows it is coming, there is no need for the handler to trigger the dog to move.


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

> The dog knows the routine, knows it is coming, there is no need for the handler to trigger the dog to move.


And they know the minute you walk them onto a field or even drive to a location where you're setting up scenarios. Everything cues them.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

*ENOUGH!! Anymore "personal" comments and some people will be gone.* 

*BTW, when you post a video of your dog on a public board you open yourself up to not only positive comments, but also critiques. If this is a problem for you, then best to not post videos. *

*ADMIN Lisa*


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

I have no problem with a dog being taught to bark at a ball if in the long run that dog will bite what's presented, whatever it might be, and can still beat out the out of control ones. I don't see the issue at all.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

The big problem is that prey drive is exhaustible. At some point it isn't enough and the barking will weaken and diminish.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

locking in prey isn't a problem when the challenge is presented?


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

carmspack said:


> I have sold PP dogs to recording artists, celebrities , business executives who travel internationally with the dog , olde money Toronto families, jewellers, shop keepers , two large competitive security companies, supreme court judges, American hotels in the Turcs and Caicos , in addition to the police depts. in Canada and USA , from municipal, provincial/state to federal - and prisons systems.
> One dog in Ontario worked Kingston Prison and was "the" dog called on when there was an important dignitary in town. He was Kissinger's favourite.
> Many were scouted and then trained by law enforcement , retired heads of k9 units.
> 
> ...


I guess the difference here is I'm not posting about my magical awesome dog. The fact is I am my dogs biggest critic. Nor will I just post vids of the completed product. 
I can post his super guarding on a neutral helper with or without equipment. I can post his courage test or long bite. I can post his heeling in phase B or C or his DB retrieves without a ball in sight or a collar on... 
Instead I posted vids of his second time on a suit and first time dealing with flying environmental stressors. 
I then said I want to see some improvements because to me not everything was ideal and Carmen felt the need to run with that and take the usual shot at IPO and made some other implications about whatever else.

I like to think of myself as fair, I am sure someone on here has a vid of a dog getting cold cocked like I did mine. I am sure they will do super awesome and be perfect in their obedience all at the same time... *Not being sarcastic here I won't be surprised if Max or Jeremy does have a similar vid* I will be if anyone else does...

It's amusing to me the implication that the dog won't do anything on the field unless I tell him to...all I can say is come train with me or watch him trial this fall then talk.

I have seen vids from a few of you. The process and finished product. I can see the proof of your work and what you do. I enjoy commentary and critique from those that actually get out there test their dogs and do. I have even seen a few of the dogs and training in person.
It's really not hard in this day and age to get video. For those that don't post any....well I notice that too .

As to the police dog comments...really do we want to go there again?. Last time I was around the K9 guys they were talking about how one their dogs ran the first time he heard gunfire. The guy doing the shooting was wearing a bite suit..

Ironically this Mal I am currently working has less ball drive then my last two GSD. .his reward is playing with me with the ball or whatever else. On its own it holds little to no value for him.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

mycobraracr said:


> I think some people are missing the point. Yes there is training involved. You have to build a solid foundation. The dog must learn to think for itself. Sorry Steve, I don't agree that the back transport shows us this in IPO. To say the dogs work a passive person because they bark in the blind isn't the same. Dogs are habitual creatures. Any of you feed your dogs at the same time every day? What happens when that time rolls around? They know exactly when and where their food is coming from. When training for real life or surprise scenario, you don't have that option. You are seeing can the dog work for itself? Can the dog transition itself into different drives in order to complete the task? Is the dog comfortable in different environments? Do you still have that control in environments that aren't as sanitary as an IPO field? Such as calling the dog off one attacker who's still fighting the dog to engage a second or third attacker who is now fighting you? Blitz just showed us how different the dog interpenetrates it. I'm sure on an IPO field the dog looks great.
> 
> To say that police dogs get more training is inaccurate at least in my area. They train once, maybe twice a month and don't get a lot of one on one time. They are raised until about a year old now and sold, because hey, why keep train a dog until 2 when I can sell it at 1 for the same amount right?


and the LEO's do the weekly search in the same place...I see my local state police post train every Thurs. at the local fire dept for tracking or they converge on the nearby amtracks for probably tracking. Seldom are they called out for actual search....the local city K9's are the ones that are dispersed. The state police dogs are used for I-94 Traffic patrol, as it is the tunnel for drug movement. Not sure if they've ever had to hold a suspect during a stop...it has never been reported that they do so, just that they alerted to the vehicle.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Since B and H is being discussed here I'll post this. How do you think this was taught? 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&persist_app=1&v=NItK1Ymia8E and for those wondering he can do that at that intensity for a minute or two.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Defense drive is quickly exhausted when the dog doesn't feel the threat any longer.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

with a bite as reward for a clean H&B? escape bite/run out of the blind 
still need that 50 barks after running blinds to get points.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

On the table. Was never given a bite in the blind until last month.. 
Woops forgot the blinds...hope he can still manage it after all that running. Maybe I'll post another video.


----------



## Colie CVT (Nov 10, 2013)

That is a lot of barks lol. 

I don't know much about IPO, but coming from the other side of it, I kinda see where some people could be curious how the dog would react in "untrained" circumstances. Most of the general public doesn't understand the difference between an IPO dog and a police K9. They are convinced that any dog who is trained in a type of bitework sport will bite. I'd much rather deal with someone's IPO dog than a K9. Like this coming friday. x.x The biggest jerk of the local PD is coming in for a laparoscopic gastropexy. I see many muzzle bruises in my future.

Using my really not traditional girl as an example, Leia gets bored without some kind of fight involved once she's on the sleeve. She LOVES getting to yell and threaten people. I can call her off and I can get her to stop barking. I would honestly love it if some of you lived closer because I would like a chance to see her with other decoys and in situations where she doesn't have her usual cues. Because I'm not sure how she would react. While I don't want her to necessarily bite someone, since I do often go off hiking on my own in places away from others, it would be nice for her to intimidate potential threats. 

Strange wildlife I know she will charge and light up at barking. Still have no idea what it was one time when she simply went off toward the opposite side of a canyon, but I know another instance where she chased off either a coyote or cougar (only caught a glimpse of tan flying over the opposite hill). 

I figure we all likely have stories about our dogs doing something, but I dunno, I guess I can see where many dogs I've seen in the sport around here would probably be useless in some kind of non-taught scenario. Probably really depends on the dog and the handler too in some ways.

Wish me luck on friday. >> Here's hoping I don't land on that dog's case...


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

People get stuck on one way of training, they can't think outside the box. Mediocre is good enough.

How can you tell they know their method isn't as good? They can't prove it with results, they can only bad mouth and speak negatively about the other method.

This is on par for most dog training though. Hard to evolve when you can't think critically.


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

Is it really thought that dogs barking in prey get exhausted of barking after running blinds? Because if thats the case, wouldn't that mean that the "prey dogs" that are "ruining" the sport at top level really wouldn't have a chance at all?


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

They made us run 6 blinds at the last helper seminar. If your dog can't do that and bark for a minute with intensity you need to get him off the couch or get another dog.


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> They made us run 6 blinds at the last helper seminar. If your dog can't do that and bark for a minute with intensity you need to get him off the couch or get another dog.


Right. And I would think that a lot of exhausted barking is based on the overall condition of the dog. I can tell you that the people who win aren't doing bitework once a week...


----------



## Castlemaid (Jun 29, 2006)

This is a recent pic of our regulation size IPO field with permanent blinds - really makes you appreciate what running the six blinds and doing a hold and bark (with intensity) really requires from a dog.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

Some dogs will lock in prey and stop the barking, it isn't due to exhaustion, or they start bumping or getting dirty to create some movement from the helper.... that is one reason the judges want to see the dog guarding for a period of time before calling the handler in. Other times judges will signal the handler long before the many barks because the judge can see the dog is showing true guarding power. I've seen dogs in trial stop barking and look for the handler because they haven't trained with extended barking in the blind before getting a bite or being called out.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Lol is that what they told you? The judges call the person in before 50 because they see the "true power" after just a few barks? That's definitely not how it works. Judges have a certain time frame in mind, they'll use that for all competitors that day on that trial. This is usually very short on a club level, longer at regionals, and even longer at nationals. Trial has to be uniform, judge will signal at the same time for each competitor/team. Normally the only thing that varies is the speed with which the handler walks back towards the blind, the judge though will always signal to the handler at about the same time, not the amount of barks as some dogs bark faster than others.

50 barks...that's probably what the dogs are expected to do at nationals, possibly some regional trials.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

Who is they? This is what we train for, we train for endurance in powerful barking, mostly to keep the dog clean and teach the dog that there is no reason to get dirty if the helper is staying passive for an extended length of time. 
How many trials have you attended (or entered)to know the length of time required? There is not a stop watch on the judge...they use their own discretion according to the dogs behavior and the power the dog is showing or not showing, they may have the dog bark longer to see the behavior that may occur. I never said after a few barks.


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

I just think there are a whole lot of reasons why a dog might not bark well in the blind and though that could include locking in prey or prey exhaustion or whatever you want to call it, there are plenty of other reasons why as well. Can't just blame everything on prey.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Your whole last sentence is completely incorrect and would shift any competitive balance there might be. You cannot bring a handler in early if you're going to make a different one go longer. If a judge is looking to "see what behavior may occur" they can't just cut one dog short and make another one go longer. A judge doesn't use their own discretion based on the dog. The judges tend to be extremely consistent with how long they wait to call the handler in depending on the trial conditions that day. Making one dog bark more than another is just giving the other dog more opportunity to lose points, unfair advantage.

I've been to enough trials, seen enough videos to know that at a club level the handler is waved in after just a few barks in the blind. Dog of course continues to bark but depending on the speed of the handler it could be less or more. There is a huge disparity in the time depending on the level of the trial.


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> Since B and H is being discussed here I'll post this. How do you think this was taught?
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&persist_app=1&v=NItK1Ymia8E and for those wondering he can do that at that intensity for a minute or two.


I don't know how it was taught, but I like when they have that little scream coming in then settle into the nice barking. You imported him?


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

martemchik said:


> Your whole last sentence is completely incorrect and would shift any competitive balance there might be. You cannot bring a handler in early if you're going to make a different one go longer. If a judge is looking to "see what behavior may occur" they can't just cut one dog short and make another one go longer. A judge doesn't use their own discretion based on the dog. The judges tend to be extremely consistent with how long they wait to call the handler in depending on the trial conditions that day. Making one dog bark more than another is just giving the other dog more opportunity to lose points, unfair advantage.
> 
> I've been to enough trials, seen enough videos to know that at a club level the handler is waved in after just a few barks in the blind. Dog of course continues to bark but depending on the speed of the handler it could be less or more. There is a huge disparity in the time depending on the level of the trial.


rules state 'approximately' 20 seconds...so really there is nothing to say the judge can or can not extend it. Sometimes they'll give the dog a chance to set up if they come in a bit weak. The judge wants the dog to pass, not fail. Especially if the handler is going for the IPO1, the pencil sharpens at the higher title level.
sorry to get this off topic, and will be my last post on the H&B. carry on....


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

So Blitz, what's next on your training plan?


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

Sorry, my comment wasn't clear and went over some heads. I don't mean that a dog will get tired during a trial just because they bark in prey/play. I am talking over the career of the dog, over the years. These dogs are much harder to keep the strong guarding unless they are nutty crazy dogs with short fuses which our GSD should not be. 

Max, you are correct, a dog in defense probably won't bark well over time either. I want dogs working out of social aggression/fight drive, not prey/play and not defense (reactive aggression). Not saying prey isn't needed. Obviously it is and even a defensive dog can have their drive channeled into the sleeve (prey object/booty) when working with a helper that knows his stuff. For me, though, I really don't care how others want to train except in how it influences the direction and genetics of the breed. 

Sorry Blitz. The thread did go way off track. I can't watch videos easily that are posted on the board so can't comment on the training you showed. I do enjoy training my dogs in non trial/IPO scenarios. Have done a lot of suit work, hidden sleeve work, building searches, etc. Once I move I want to start doing some muzzle work with Deja (she will be easy because her fight drive is so high). Vala and Nike loved this stuff and it helped keep the training fresh for me.

BTW, I would like to know the judges that only ask for a few barks in a club trial. I sure haven't trialed under them.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Over the years most dogs get bored with the routine and will lose strong barking and I’m sure at this point someone will post a video of a dog at 10 barking strong but I’m talking national level barking and most dogs lose that anyways. It has nothing to do with how it was taught or what kind of drive they’re channeling to bark, most older dogs lose the intensity. Once a dog is seven or eight it’s just not going to compete with younger dogs in regards to drive and power. They can get it done, but it won’t be at as high of a level. It’s why you see high level competitors retiring dogs at right around six years of age. And yeah, plenty of older dogs at nationals, but when you saw their performances, while really solid and good, they’re just not going to outgun the younger dogs. Father time is undefeated.

I’ve worked a few very good IPO3 dogs who like to fight with a helper and it does bring them up a level when they get to do that and “get a little beat up on.” But those dogs, at an older age, either need a lot of helper help to really get up there, or they will just bark until they get a bite. It’s less to do with drive and more to do with age and boredom, they know what the game is and it’s not that interesting anymore.

In regards to trials…the dogs end up barking but the difference between club and national level is pretty huge. A judge at a national event waits a good 30 seconds if not longer to motion to the handler to come towards the blind, at a club, the dog is barely settled in the blind before they’re signaled. Either way, the length of time the judge waits is consistent, they do not vary the time as it would cause an unfair advantage to those dogs that are asked to bark less. Not just that there is more time for them to possibly stop or get dirty, but the fact that they expend more energy during the barking which means they’ll have less in the tank for the later exercises.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Steve Strom said:


> I don't know how it was taught, but I like when they have that little scream coming in then settle into the nice barking. You imported him?


Yes brought him over from Czech. I like his guard too .

@Myco
I still have fall trials to prep for so mainly going to be doing IPO stuff. I'll be doing some more environmental work with the decoy tossing objects at him or over him while he is biting.
Also, you gave me some good ideas for building the dog. I'm going to do some back ties on a short line and leave him to fight on his own against a bad guy.

@Ichz
No worries the thread is good. This is the kind of stuff we should talk about more on here, doesn't have to be about my vids.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> @Myco
> I still have fall trials to prep for so mainly going to be doing IPO stuff. I'll be doing some more environmental work with the decoy tossing objects at him or over him while he is biting.
> Also, you gave me some good ideas for building the dog. I'm going to do some back ties on a short line and leave him to fight on his own against a bad guy


Nice, I see a lot of dogs that chase the objects the decoy throws as it comes in for the bite. Then they prance away without biting the decoy. 

Too many dogs rely on there handlers for confidence and commands. Once you remove the handler from the equation, you'll see a different dog. Tie outs in random locations, table work and so on with out the handler present, can bring out confidence and social aggression in a dog. It allows the dog to rely on its own instincts. It shows the dog that it can take on anything and win.

Last Thursday we ran Kimber in a fun scenario. Going into it, I had no idea what we were doing. A bunch of obstacles, blinds, barrels, tunnels and so on were set up in a pile. There was a decoy in the pile with nothing but a hidden sleeve on. I was to post up behind a wall, make my announcement and send my dog in to find and bite the decoy. I sent her in, and as she found the decoy, he tried to feed her a tug. She didn't take it, came over it and bit the hidden sleeve. At this point, I didn't know he was wearing a hidden or really what he was doing as I couldn't see him through all the stuff. Once she was on the bite, he brought her through the pile of stuff out into the open. She did really well. We ran a very similar scenario after that one, but instead of a tug, the decoy presented a bite sleeve. Kimber did the same thing, came over the sleeve onto a bite on the hidden sleeve.

Today we did some more control work. I heeled her around off leash with decoys taunting her, shaking stuff in her face and so on. Then I downed her on a tarp and worked her remote positions. While I was doing this, the decoy's where covering her with the tarp and then picking the tarp up with Kimber still on it. I think the control work is my favorite part. It's fun frustrating the decoys and watching them try to come up with more and more stuff to mess with her. All in the while she takes it in stride.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

I don’t believe that the going after the ball/tug instead of the helper is an innate/genetic trait of most dogs. The training is the issue in those situations. When done incorrectly, or possibly correctly if that’s the end goal of the handler, you’ll see dog’s that chase tugs/balls. When done correctly, and for certain reasons, a dog will still go for the sleeve over a tug. It’s just about teaching a dog what you want from it. Are there dogs that are innately so prey driven that they will divert to a faster moving object? Probably. But I think those are few and far in between because to those same dogs the sleeve is looked at as a prey object and they would engage that just as happily as chasing a toy.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

Perhaps it's a training issue, perhaps it's about the dog. All I know is what I've seen. Ever seen a dog sent for a bite with a bunch of other sleeves and what not on the ground? Then watch dogs just run and bite a sleeve on the ground and not the helper? Or watch a dog bark for 15 minutes at a sleeve on the ground with no one near it? To many training programs focusing on prey objects and working for a toy.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

What you are describing isn’t attributed to the correct way to do the training method, it’s just incorrect training. Prey *OR *defense can be done wrong. A dog trained the wrong way through prey, shows the behaviors you’ve described and only because the training isn’t clear and the dog doesn’t understand what it’s really doing. A dog trained the wrong way through defense, is probably harder to see if it actually does perform the exercises, but those that “know” will notice weak grips and a dog exhibiting other behaviors like backing out of the blind, barking at the side of the helper, pealing out of the pocket on a drive, ect. A dog trained the wrong way through defense to the extreme…will be run by any helper that isn’t their training helper, and you tend to see that a lot more than you do dogs that randomly bark at sleeves on the ground (most people don’t train with random sleeves on the ground).

“Training through prey” usually goes wrong because you don’t have a helper to train on in the first place and are trying to train for a sport by yourself. “Training through defense” usually goes wrong because you have an overzealous helper that gets results through defense without balancing the dog or being able to read when the dog has had too much. Fortunately, incorrect training through prey usually doesn’t create issues in the dog outside of the constraints of the training, yet incorrect training through defense has been known to create fearful dogs in day to day life…something most people doing bite sport can’t risk as the dog has to be a family pet the other 6 days of the week. 

We can go back and forth pointing out examples of bad training and blaming it on the method we don’t agree with/understand, but at the end of the day, most issues are due to the training itself being bad and nothing to do with the method used. When used properly (usually by the people that developed that method, or just people that 100% understand how to apply the method) most methods are very successful at training a dog to accomplish the stated goals. 

The issue isn’t how many training programs are based on one way or another. The issue is that too many training programs aren’t that good and most people don’t want to learn new methods that might work with more dogs. Even in my short time in the sport I’ve worked with enough people to know that most are much more willing to bad mouth someone’s methods rather than learn it, understand it, and then see if they want to incorporate it in some way into their training. There’s not enough questioning and too much blindly following. On top of that, the lack of options sometimes doesn’t allow people to learn other ways or methods, most trainers have a fairly good monopoly on vast areas of land due to lack of competition, and yet you see a lot of high level trainers and competitors traveling much further than just the nearest helper or trainer because they understand what they need. Most people just dabbling in the sport will go to the nearest trainer they can find and likely stay there forever, repeating exactly what that one trainer or helper has been telling them, and never questioning the information they’re receiving (this forum tends to prove that time and time again).

BTW...most training I see today is still highly defense based. Why? Mentors/training helpers are older (makes sense), they train younger helpers in the way they know how...defense based. Nothing wrong with it, but I'm not seeing that much prey based work. Sure, most starts out as prey with a flirt pole, moves to a pillow, but it's truly amazing how quickly the lines between prey and defense are blurred and defense is just covered up as prey by a little bit of movement. Still defense in my book though. And I think there is a place for defense in training, no matter what it's fairly hard to avoid...most dogs don't have enough prey to do the required exercises without pressure. I do see a lot of Europeans doing more prey work, some Americans are incorporating it into their training, but it's not at a very high rate IMO.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

mycobraracr said:


> Nice, I see a lot of dogs that chase the objects the decoy throws as it comes in for the bite. Then they prance away without biting the decoy.
> 
> Too many dogs rely on there handlers for confidence and commands.* Once you remove the handler from the equation, you'll see a different dog.* Tie outs in random locations, table work and so on with out the handler present, can bring out confidence and social aggression in a dog.* It allows the dog to rely on its own instincts.* It shows the dog that it can take on anything and win.
> 
> ...


I agree about the control work, the dog still is showing power and it is under their own brain, not a handler with a remote or a line. THIS is what proves who the dog is, what is in the heart of the dog. We try to come up with different stuff too...just to watch the dog figure it out on their own, using the brain they've been given! GSD's are known for their intelligence, we should all remember this when working with them!


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

mycobraracr said:


> Nice, I see a lot of dogs that chase the objects the decoy throws as it comes in for the bite. Then they prance away without biting the decoy.
> 
> Too many dogs rely on there handlers for confidence and commands. Once you remove the handler from the equation, you'll see a different dog. Tie outs in random locations, table work and so on with out the handler present, can bring out confidence and social aggression in a dog. It allows the dog to rely on its own instincts. It shows the dog that it can take on anything and win.
> 
> ...


 
Sounds like fun. We did some preliminary work that day with the dog on the bite having large pieces of plastic tossed over his head. 
For my guy balls and tugs wont be a problem, he isnt big into the toys unless Im playing with them. Biting the man is of the highest value for him. Now if the bad guy fed him a tug, let go and reattacked that might be interesting...


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

.......most training I see TODAY is ..........defense???, as opposed to most training you SAW when???? You can't make a comparative analysis between training viewed now with videos( usually not even of training but finished products) from the past. It's apples and oranges. 
Some of the accts of LE dogs I read, and of the training I am reading, is nothing like the dogs I see going through the academy, and this is over decades to now,nor is the training. Doesn't mean they are wrong or the people are distorting what they see, just means that here on east coast, in particularly NJ.PA, NY, VA, Del, etc, the training is much different as is the finished product on the streets.


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

entering the fray --- most training now is prey drive , which is why that ball is so important

the reliance on prey drive for training has shifted the genetics of the breed , for sport , for the flash , for the speed , for the reaction , for the guidance into behaviours rather than tapping instincts . Now there are splits which are sport and work.

this is why you have dogs which prance happily beside their handlers looking up to them, instead of keeping an eye on the decoy in the side transport.

the rules say they should keep and eye on the decoy , keep him in control , but if you had a dog that did this you would be dinged for inattentive to handler


----------



## G-burg (Nov 10, 2002)

> this is why you have dogs which prance happily beside their handlers looking up to them, instead of keeping an eye on the decoy in the side transport.
> 
> the rules say they should keep and eye on the decoy , keep him in control , but if you had a dog that did this you would be dinged for inattentive to handle


From what I've been hearing from some over seas, is that this is going to shift.. To where the dog will get dinged for not keeping an eye on the helper.. Set up to the escape, back and side transport..


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

carmspack said:


> entering the fray --- most training now is prey drive , which is why that ball is so important
> 
> the reliance on prey drive for training has shifted the genetics of the breed , for sport , for the flash , for the speed , for the reaction , for the guidance into behaviours rather than tapping instincts . Now there are splits which are sport and work.
> 
> ...


That's just incorrect. Per the rules the dog is to attentively watch the helper in all of the transport exercises and I've literally never seen or heard of a judge taking points for preferring the dog to watch the handler instead.

http://youtu.be/E_YqGdPE1tQ?t=3m


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

> this is why you have dogs which prance happily beside their handlers looking up to them, instead of keeping an eye on the decoy in the side transport.
> 
> *the rules say they should keep and eye on the decoy , keep him in control , but if you had a dog that did this you would be dinged for inattentive to handler*


That's not true Carmen. Not accurate at all.


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

oh but it is --- happened at a trial recently

Anne Kent "Vandal" has mentioned it more than once

have gone to trials where there were some awesome, spectacular routines --- overall beautiful performance - but just that a choreographed performance ---


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

** rude comment removed. The rest is pertinent to the discussion. **


As per the rule book under the "back transport section"

Incorrect conduct includes: "dog is inattentive to the helper."

Page 60 for those of you that would like to check.

On the following page, you have the side transport rules.

Incorrect conduct includes: "the dog appears oriented to the handler and/or is inattentive"

Page 59 describes the prevention of the escape. Where once again, Incorrect conduct includes: "the dog is inattentive."

It also includes (in the description of the exercise)..."The dog must *immediately *prevent the escape without *hesitation *by means of an energetic and strong grip." IMO...that would be extremely difficult if the dog wasn't watching the helper at all times.


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

carmspack said:


> oh but it is --- happened at a trial recently
> 
> Anne Kent "Vandal" has mentioned it more than once
> 
> have gone to trials where there were some awesome, spectacular routines --- overall beautiful performance - but just that a choreographed performance ---


Just because you saw a judge let something slide in a, probably, small trial, that doesnt mean anything. Not only can I not remember a dog doing that in any trials, I can't even find video of one. Could it happen? Sure. But its no where near the absolute you put it out there as.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Steve Strom said:


> Just because you saw a judge let something slide in a, probably, small trial, that doesnt mean anything. Not only can I not remember a dog doing that in any trials, I can't even find video of one. Could it happen? Sure. But its no where near the absolute you put it out there as.


I talked about it earlier in this thread...the control necessary to heel a dog at attention when a helper is on the field, or in the case of a transport just 5 yards in front, is extremely hard to get. I have met very few handlers/trainers that are able to get this kind of attention with or without a reward on them. The majority of handler teams I see are lucky if their dog stays with them at all or has something that looks close enough to a "heel" during the secondary obedience exercises in the IPO protection routine.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

martemchik said:


> I talked about it earlier in this thread...the control necessary to heel a dog at attention when a helper is on the field, or in the case of a transport just 5 yards in front, is extremely hard to get. I have met very few handlers/trainers that are able to get this kind of attention with or without a reward on them. The majority of handler teams I see are lucky if their dog stays with them at all or has something that looks close enough to a "heel" during the secondary obedience exercises in the IPO protection routine.



This is the highest point of control for you? As I've said before, IPO wants the illusion of control. They don't want real control. After all, a dog shows a lot more powerful when it's left wild. 

I love how this thread is in the personal protection section yet the whole conversation is about IPO. The two are not even close.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

carmspack said:


> the rules say they should keep and eye on the decoy , keep him in control , but if you had a dog that did this you would be dinged for inattentive to handler


Wrong Carmen. The dog must keep its eye on the decoy in all transports or will be dinged. They are not to look to their handlers. Only time some want their dogs to look at them is when heeling to the spot for the escape and, of course, when going down field for the courage test (long bite).


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

mycobraracr said:


> This is the highest point of control for you? As I've said before, IPO wants the illusion of control. They don't want real control. After all, a dog shows a lot more powerful when it's left wild.
> 
> I love how this thread is in the personal protection section yet the whole conversation is about IPO. The two are not even close.


I don't need to train outside of IPO to know my dog can heel around multiple helpers making a ton of noise and throwing stuff around. Control is control. Its black and white in my training. Just this past weekend we had 5 helpers on the field with whips cracking dogs barking and sleeves everywhere. And it was my dogs first day back at that club since April. So just because I have a specific goal in mind and train for that in particular doesn't mean my dogs don't measure up to yours.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

mycobraracr said:


> I love how this thread is in the personal protection section yet the whole conversation is about IPO. The two are not even close.


With the right type of dog, IPO is as close as any other of the protection sports.  

Unfortunately we can not really control which direction a discussion takes especially when people with no experience outside their field jump in. It is just the nature of message boards and, really, all discussions. It does make life interesting for the mods and admin.


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

lhczth said:


> Wrong Carmen. The dog must keep its eye on the decoy in all transports or will be dinged. They are not to look to their handlers. Only time some want their dogs to look at them is when heeling to the spot for the escape and, of course, when going down field for the courage test (long bite).


lol -- actually Lisa we are agreeing . That was my point exactly -- the dog was dinged for keeping an eye on the decoy yet was in perfect heel position .

martemchik ""the dog appears oriented to the handler" --- yes that is part of attentive to handler 

this is what I am seeing dogs oriented to handler - side transports as if they are looking at a ball that is supposed to be under the chin or in a pop out vest 

protection going through the motions


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMFKe1ZLLHM

that is a dog and team that I think was outstanding -- 
this is 2010 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMFKe1ZLLHM

this is 2011 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__wxm9-oEDg

BSP -- they were a beautiful team --- obedience perfection and that is a compliment , and a very poised handler to boot --- 

the overall impression however was a dog doing obedience and not operating out of knowing what his job was with the decoy as a bad-guy -- instead he was a helper man .

Lord Gleisdreieck had fight power https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pj_-s-eLm4I

I've provided youtubes of Enno Antrefftal before who demonstrates fight and will to control the decoy ---

since it is about taking IPO to PP -- you want a dog that has fight and will to control a bad guy, control a situation , and still be very controllable by the handler --


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

What you saw at one trial, Carmen, isn't the norm at least not with the teams I train with here or the ones I trained with in Germany.


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

lhczth said:


> With the right type of dog, IPO is as close as any other of the protection sports.
> 
> Unfortunately we can not really control which direction a discussion takes _especially when people with no experience outside their field jump in._ It is just the nature of message boards and, really, all discussions. It does make life interesting for the mods and admin.


What to do you mean by this? Experience outside IPO or PP?


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

carmspack said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMFKe1ZLLHM
> 
> that is a dog and team that I think was outstanding --
> this is 2010 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMFKe1ZLLHM
> ...


Here's the outstanding team doing tricks for a ball:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OewQP2Z9F0E


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

as you , and I said, an outstanding trainer , an outstanding team , and performance


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

Steve Strom said:


> Here's the outstanding team doing tricks for a ball:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OewQP2Z9F0E


Ball work is ok depending on who we're talking about


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

I just don't think you can say for sure how any of the other dogs would respond to different training though Carmen. Some probably wouldn't, but some would. You can't say for sure because it wasn't done.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

GatorDog said:


> What to do you mean by this? Experience outside IPO or PP?


I was generalizing about boards in general. Sorry I wasn't clear.


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

carmspack said:


> as you , and I said, an outstanding trainer , an outstanding team , and performance


My comment was a little off. When I clicked on your 3rd link, I was watching the wrong dog. Somehow I was watching a different video that had started on autoplay:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vB7J_PYENS0


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Why are transports even being discussed? The only reason you see the dog inattentive to the decoy during a transport is incorrect training. I can train a ****ter to contact heel and watch the decoy as well as I can train a good dog the same exercise. It's not hard. To many people don't take the time to train the exercise properly. 
Then they get nervous in trial and say Foose during the transports because they don't want to risk losing the dog and are willing to take the point loss for a dog inattentive tk the decoy during transports.


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

GatorDog said:


> Ball work is ok depending on who we're talking about


 
we went through all this on the ball drive vs work ethic topic

it isn't that it is ball work which is fun and gives opportunities to bond and exercise and even form behaviours 

the problem is when the sleeve becomes a reward that is slipped , instead of protecting the man's arm , when all of the routines , including protection , become displays of highly sophisticated training and obedience 

potential big winners are chosen not for being biddable , but for having high attraction to toys and prey 

standing from the sidelines you can see good full grips -- taught? , that is okay , but rarely will the decoy comment on the power of the bite , or a crusher bite . 

compare Ginoginelli side transport with this dog with side transport done properly https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KbvQZaEm6o

I like this dog . I like his active fight drive.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

I see a lot of these comments that criticize ipo as sour grapes. Sour grapes that dogs are not up to standard to be successful beyond club level. Sour grapes that the handler lacks the ability to train for and aspire to high levels.
Easier instead to talk about training and decoy work you don't fully understand.
Bottom line achieving success in IPO, Ring or PSA is hard. All the people who do it are excellent trainers that put in the time and effort. Some have decent dogs others have great dogs. All the dogs know it's a routine regardless of the venue. They know what a sleeve or suit is whatever we want to tell ourselves.

If you don't like IPO at least go pursue excellence in another sport then talk smack. Show your dog's and your training or be silent.

Go tell guys like Wallace about how dogs and training of yesteryear were better..lol.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> I see a lot of these comments that criticize ipo as sour grapes. Sour grapes that dogs are not up to standard to be successful beyond club level. Sour grapes that the handler lacks the ability to train for and aspire to high levels.
> Easier instead to talk about training and decoy work you don't fully understand.
> Bottom line achieving success in IPO, Ring or PSA is hard. All the people who do it are excellent trainers that put in the time and effort. Some have decent dogs others have great dogs. All the dogs know it's a routine regardless of the venue. They know what a sleeve or suit is whatever we want to tell ourselves.
> 
> ...


 this is a discussion and people give their opinions, so far there are only a couple posters here that seem take every post personal as if they are the ones being posted about. 
'show your dogs training or be silent' really, is that what makes someone who posts worthy of their opinion?
Why bring Wallace's name into this discussion, he doesn't participate on this board.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

onyx'girl said:


> this is a discussion and people give their opinions, so far there are only a couple posters here that seem take every post personal as if they are the ones being posted about.
> 'show your dogs training or be silent' really, is that what makes someone who posts worthy of their opinion?
> 
> *Yes*
> ...


He was around in the 80s and is still successful now, enough of the make belief stories, ask him about the dogs 20 years ago he is very approachable. Same with Zappia and a few others.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

so putting up vids is what it is all about? otherwise anyone that posts is just make believe...ok, then.


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

I have sour IPO grapes. Sour because I rarely have a decoy, have to decoy and thus not trial at club trials, don't have the time/resources to travel about. Also don't like some rules. And some other things. Anyone's welcome to come personally witness my dogs. At the moment I've got two more or less retired and two young puppies so not much to see right now lol


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

The goals, training, judging, requirements, and subsequently the picture were different in the eighties than today. You CANT take today's performance picture and apply it to judging the value of eighties dogs, does that make sense to most people. 
Anyway, I don't understand why the OP was surprised at the decrease in performance of IPO dog when presented with new, environmental, and distract full obstacles, , this has been asserted many times by some of us. There are three reasons this occurs, sometimes it's training, sometimes it's handler, and SOMETIMES its the dog. But IPO is very stylized today with training, handling, and dogs chosen for this.....as opposed to Sch in the past that had goals, and training that better prepared a dog for transition into PP type of work.


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

> The goals, training, judging, requirements, and subsequently the picture were different in the eighties than today. You CANT take today's performance picture and apply it to judging the value of eighties dogs, does that make sense to most people.


Yeah, perfect sense. Just like you can't say a lot of those dogs wouldn't have given the picture you see today had they been trained the same.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

hunterisgreat said:


> I have sour IPO grapes. Sour because I rarely have a decoy, have to decoy and thus not trial at club trials, don't have the time/resources to travel about. Also don't like some rules. And some other things. Anyone's welcome to come personally witness my dogs. At the moment I've got two more or less retired and two young puppies so not much to see right now lol


I have seen your dogs and some of your training. Criticize away.  At least you train and aspire to certain goals if not the podium.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

cliffson1 said:


> The goals, training, judging, requirements, and subsequently the picture were different in the eighties than today. You CANT take today's performance picture and apply it to judging the value of eighties dogs, does that make sense to most people.
> Anyway, I don't understand why the OP was surprised at the decrease in performance of IPO dog when presented with new, environmental, and distract full obstacles, , this has been asserted many times by some of us. There are three reasons this occurs, sometimes it's training, sometimes it's handler, and SOMETIMES its the dog. But IPO is very stylized today with training, handling, and dogs chosen for this.....as opposed to Sch in the past that had goals, and training that better prepared a dog for transition into PP type of work.


It wasn't a huge surprise. This is a topic that crops up here all the time and gets argued about. I thought it would make for an interesting discussion...which it did.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

You are right Steve, but most of the dogs of the eighties would NOT be able to give same picture as dogs of today in the sport. They had no where near enough prey drive. In the seventies at Army dog training base of over 250 dogs, non had the over the top drive you see today, nor were there ANY Malinois! I'm not criticizing the dogs today that do sport, it's just different from dogs of past.
If you look at top show (VA) dogs of seventies, and top VA dogs of now and you will see big structural and size difference. Still, VA represents that these dogs today are the best structured GS in the world today and thus they must have superior structure to the seventies dogs following the logic that newer is better. Yet these dogs are not transferring to anywhere outside of show ring on consistent basis, maybe too much drive inadvertently leads to loss in other areas like suspicion and fight( not play fight), or cancels out hunt and defense in some cases, or decreases discernment and confidence out of drive. I don't have the answers, I do know I have owned and trained dogs in both eras. The dogs were different, ( as a whole) the training was definitely different, and the judging was very different. Tracking was not graded on ftf, obedience was judged on correct as opposed to fast and perfect, highlights of bitework was hardness of grip and assertive fight, as opposed to full grips and launch which will maximize PTS. If you were to look at written assessment of dogs in protection in seventies full grip wouldn't be mentioned once much less three or four times, but hardness, fight, would be key words. Also, the use of remotes have had a large impact on the training and thus development of GS today. 
I like the older dogs better, because they fit my idea of a GS, which is balanced and versatile, and aloof. But I thoroughly understand the proliferation of prey and advanced training techniques in this mode as being very much needed for the GS to keep up with the Mali in IPO these days. I just don't think it lends itself to the transfer to PP or LE dogs as easily as the past. Yet, I could be very wrong on this, it's just one opinion.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

cliffson1 said:


> You are right Steve, but most of the dogs of the eighties would NOT be able to give same picture as dogs of today in the sport. They had no where near enough prey drive. In the seventies at Army dog training base of over 250 dogs, non had the over the top drive you see today, nor were there ANY Malinois! I'm not criticizing the dogs today that do sport, it's just different from dogs of past.
> If you look at top show (VA) dogs of seventies, and top VA dogs of now and you will see big structural and size difference. Still, VA represents that these dogs today are the best structured GS in the world today and thus they must have superior structure to the seventies dogs following the logic that newer is better. Yet these dogs are not transferring to anywhere outside of show ring on consistent basis, maybe too much drive inadvertently leads to loss in other areas like suspicion and fight( not play fight), or cancels out hunt and defense in some cases, or decreases discernment and confidence out of drive. I don't have the answers, I do know I have owned and trained dogs in both eras. The dogs were different, ( as a whole) the training was definitely different, and the judging was very different. Tracking was not graded on ftf, obedience was judged on correct as opposed to fast and perfect, highlights of bitework was hardness of grip and assertive fight, as opposed to full grips and launch which will maximize PTS. If you were to look at written assessment of dogs in protection in seventies full grip wouldn't be mentioned once much less three or four times, but hardness, fight, would be key words. Also, the use of remotes have had a large impact on the training and thus development of GS today.
> I like the older dogs better, because they fit my idea of a GS, which is balanced and versatile, and aloof. But I thoroughly understand the proliferation of prey and advanced training techniques in this mode as being very much needed for the GS to keep up with the Mali in IPO these days. I just don't think it lends itself to the transfer to PP or LE dogs as easily as the past. Yet, I could be very wrong on this, it's just one opinion.



:thumbup: Funny thing is, even the majority of the mals I see in LE/PP work aren't the over the top drivey ones either. My wife and I often joke that we need to tell them that they are mals.


----------

