# Sport or Breed test



## Fast (Oct 13, 2004)

Aamer Sachedina said:


> Schutzhund has become a sport although it was meant to be a breed test.


I know that this is the accepted "knowledge", but can anyone prove this? I read everything I can about GSDs and if it's published in English I probably have it in my library. And the mentions of it being a breed test come decades after schutzhund started. If it's a breed test why does it have points? If it's a breed test, why is there another thing called a breed test? Why do you need both?


----------



## Aamer Sachedina (Jun 30, 2010)

Interesting and profound questions. I sure as heck don't know the answer and have wondered about points thing and the breed survey myself. Anything that you give out points for is bound to become a sport. A breed test IMHO should have three scores: NOT SUITABLE for breeding, SUITABLE for breeding, EXCELLENT for breeding. Thats it.

I guess I have blindly accepted the conventional knowledge.

If it i was meant to be a sport then I'd say it is poorly designed as a it can be very subjective vs. the ringsports which seem more objective wrt. counting meters that the decoy gets away and so on. There is subjectivity to belgian ring in the grip evaluation too guess but far more subjectivity in all parts of Sch for it to be a well designed sport don't you think? I would think that if the Germans wanted to design it as a sport, it would have been very very objective.


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

I am going to screw up what I am trying to say here but oh well. The judging is done by category and you have to get so many points to be very good or sufficient etc. in each category. When the judge gives a crtique, they usually will say what rating your dog got in that category/exercise. 
A breed survey is similar in that it assigns ratings of very good , excellent etc. So, you could say the points are secondary and are only supposed to be counted to determine the V, SG, G , rating etc. Only thing is, spectators and handlers are so busy there listening to the critique and adding up what they think the points will be, they kind of miss the rest. The scores are also what is published vs the ratings but you get the idea.

Used to be we had the 1-10 rating for courage , hardness and fighting drive and that too was a point system but it was the same with the numbers indicating the rating of pronounced, etc. So,IMO, simply having points didn't make it just a sport.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

I will put this in general terms, so people can split hairs, but most I think will understand the CONCEPT.
The Sch test was created to maintain breed functionality as a working dog. The breed survey was instituted to identify suitable and recommended candidates for breeding. The two are not always mutually exclusive. There are many kickass Sch dogs that have major faults from a breeding perspective. Things such as testicles, coat, color, teeth missing, ears not standing,etc. So though these dogs themselves are great working examples of the breed, the Sch test would not measure the damage thay could do to the breed in terms advancing negative recessives. This reply is not an endorsement of either, just an explanation as to different intent of breed survey and Sch test.


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

Not one to quote the Max guy often because so many seem to use them to sell what they are doing. However, these quotes seem to somewhat fit the topic. Seems people were the same then as now and had to be warned not to lose their minds.
In all my old USA magazines, starting in 1976, the term "Sport" is used often to describe SchH but only recently did I notice that because the idea of a breed test was more prevalent then. So, that term did not jump out at me when I read it then but it does now.

Max:
"The breeding of Shepherd dogs must be the breeding of working dogs, this must always be the aim or we will cease to produce working dogs. In contradistinction to working and utility breeding is sport breeding which produces a temporary advance but is always followed by deterioration, for it is not done for the sake of the DOG, nor does it make him more useful, it is done for the vanity of the breeder and the subsequent purchaser."

"That word "SPORT" always means competition for the highest , that is true but this competition reaches it's high water mark in "exhibitions", which, just because they demand no real capabilities, lead people only too easily astray......"


----------



## Aamer Sachedina (Jun 30, 2010)

cliffson1 said:


> There are many kickass Sch dogs that have major faults from a breeding perspective. Things such as testicles, coat, color, teeth missing, ears not standing,etc. So though these dogs themselves are great working examples of the breed, the Sch test would not measure the damage thay could do to the breed in terms advancing negative recessives. This reply is not an endorsement of either, just an explanation as to different intent of breed survey and Sch test.


cliffson, I think I understand what you are trying to say but then one would only expect the breed survey to have show component and how the working component that they have.


----------



## Aamer Sachedina (Jun 30, 2010)

Vandal said:


> Max:
> "The breeding of Shepherd dogs must be the breeding of working dogs, this must always be the aim or we will cease to produce working dogs. In contradistinction to working and utility breeding is sport breeding which produces a temporary advance but is always followed by deterioration, for it is not done for the sake of the DOG, nor does it make him more useful, it is done for the vanity of the breeder and the subsequent purchaser."
> 
> "That word "SPORT" always means competition for the highest , that is true but this competition reaches it's high water mark in "exhibitions", which, just because they demand no real capabilities, lead people only too easily astray......"


Anne, from the quote it wasn't clear to me whether he was referring to Sch as a competition / sport / exhibitions or whether the intention is to refer to something else. It seems he is referring to competing for *anything* to get to the top of it. 

I can understand this. The guidance to the breeder then is to ignore the scores - which is what I think good breeders should do anyway. Having points out of 300 for Sch though encourages it to be competed at as a sport. Perhaps the competition has only gotten to the level of glorification that it has after his days. How far back was the first BSP held? Where they held in his day?


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

I don't know because I don't have his book but I think Fast does. Maybe he can clarify? However, he warned the show people not to get nutty also and there were shows held at the time. So, I am assuming he is talking about SchH . He refers to Ring and KNPV in some other quotes as well. There are videos on You Tube of SchH training from 1936...or at least it says it is. Far different from the SchH of today since there is gun fire during protection, suits, broad jumps, vertical walls etc.

As for the points stuff, other than what I already said above about the ratings...... consider protection. Years ago, the dogs viewed protection work in a different way. The training was not done in a fashion that encouraged the dog to view the helper as his friend or someone he could trust to "play fair". They were going on the field expecting to find a bad guy and were judged/scored on their courage , hardness and fighting drive. Yes, the dog had to out and he could not bite when the bad guy was neutral but if you saw a score of 99, you could be pretty certain that was a nice dog and possessed the traits a GSD was supposed to have. Today, that is not really the case anymore. You might be encouraged to try to find a video of the dog to see for yourself now but for me anyway, I have to see it now to believe it is all it is supposed to be to get that 99. Of course, they have also removed the 1-10 rating and pronounced is no longer pronounced in courage , hardness and fighting drive, it is pronounced ability to deal with stress or something like that. Also, consider this quote from the USA web site from Mark P's report on WUSV Judges Meeting in 2008:

"One of the problems that has developed over the past few years, is the rating of “excellent” is given far too often. This seems to be more common as it relates to dogs of less character and genetics. In statistics gathered through Europe, dogs are given an “excellent” rating about 40% of the time. As compared to 10 plus years ago the number was 4% to 10%. Part of this is judges are not following the guidelines, not understanding the rules, and not having a clear understanding of character, temperament and genetics. All dogs, no matter what the breed, no matter of breed versus show, must be evaluated the same."

So, 99 today ain't the same 99 it was some years ago because mostly of what they said in that meeting. Judges are less knowledgeable, others are ignoring what matters and the rest don't understand the rules. 
Can't be certain about the BSP but my WinSis program shows 1949 as the earliest but there are no participants listed. In 1950 it was held in Neumuenster/Holstein and the winner was Carlo von Bindersee with a score of 94 84 94=271. There were three judges , one for each phase. I believe Max VS died in 1936.

As for breeding, I think that is correct and that has also shifted over the years to where now many are breeding to the high scoring dogs in an attempt to produce dogs for the sport.


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

Forgot to add, the first SchH trial was held in 1901 according to online sources like Wikipedia and I have read that somewhere else but can't recall where at the moment.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

When you cut the semantics, the breed was made to be a working dog and not a sport dog or show dog. People who breed with those two things as primary motivation are leading,(and have led), the breed right into the mediocrity of today. Its been the principle I have lived under and continue to live under. FWIW


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

Can you imagine if all the GSD's alive today were actually working? 
They'd rule the world! Or it would be just a mess with the split of "type"...


----------



## Aamer Sachedina (Jun 30, 2010)

cliffson1 said:


> When you cut the semantics, the breed was made to be a working dog and not a sport dog or show dog. People who breed with those two things as primary motivation are leading,(and have led), the breed right into the mediocrity of today. Its been the principle I have lived under and continue to live under. FWIW


I'd like to examine the thesis that what are referred to the 'working lines' of today are mediocre as a result of having bred for 'sport'.

Are K9 departments, SAR teams really having a more difficult time finding working dogs today then they did 30 years ago, or 40 years ago? Are the police dogs of today not as good as police dogs of yesteryear? 

They seem to be going to the same places for their 'working dogs' that sportsmen like me are going for our 'sport dog'. Many a working line GSD and ... wait for it .... sporty Malinois of today finds itself gainfully occupied in police departments. 

Is there any empirical evidence that the dog of yesteryear was better at police work?

I'm trying to examine the question with as open a mind as possible and its not clear to me that the evidence is there. It is clear to me that all of us have certain preferences wrt. what the breed should ideally be. However if the dogs are capable of doing the work well then is there a basis for calling them mediocre because they work out of different motivation?

I spent some time recently with someone who does his fair share of police dog training as well as the sport stuff and he says that he finds the same characteristics make a good police dog as a sport dog. He looks for dogs that like to bite for the sake of biting - more so than anything else i.e out of defense or out of a prey drive. Why is a dog that gets its biting motivation out of defensive threat better than one that bites aggressively because he likes to bite (this is something that has been bred in over many generations of doing protection sports)?


----------



## Fast (Oct 13, 2004)

Vandal said:


> Max:
> "The breeding of Shepherd dogs must be the breeding of working dogs, this must always be the aim or we will cease to produce working dogs. In contradistinction to working and utility breeding is sport breeding which produces a temporary advance but is always followed by deterioration, for it is not done for the sake of the DOG, nor does it make him more useful, it is done for the vanity of the breeder and the subsequent purchaser."
> 
> "That word "SPORT" always means competition for the highest , that is true but this competition reaches it's high water mark in "exhibitions", which, just because they demand no real capabilities, lead people only too easily astray......"


When he talks about sport in Word and Picture, I believe, he is talking about the "sport" of dog shows. Change the word sport to show in the above quotes and see how much easier it is to understand. 

OK, I'm going completely from memory, and I'm getting old so please double check what I'm saying:crazy::



SV started 1899
shows started before the SV with the Phylax _Society_ and the first SV show was the same year the SV started
the first schutzhund trial was about 15 or so years later


as Anne said, the first BSP was in 1949, there were 25 dogs


----------



## Aamer Sachedina (Jun 30, 2010)

BTW I realize I am stirring the pot here with you GSD folks but it is all in the spirit of good discussion. The guy I am referring to above was pointing out to me that it is only Sch people that tend to obsess over why the dog is biting and biting well. He claims in the ringsports if the dog is biting, is aggressive, is biting well, is outting, no one obsesses about whether the dog is biting out of prey drive as a game or whether he is 'serious'.


----------



## Aamer Sachedina (Jun 30, 2010)

Vandal said:


> I don't know because I don't have his book but I think Fast does. Maybe he can clarify?


All these years even from the old GSD forums, I have always assumed Fast was female. Not sure why.


----------



## Fast (Oct 13, 2004)

cliffson1 said:


> When you cut the semantics, the breed was made to be a working dog....


What work is, is defined by what's in the dog's mind not ours. Sport can be just as much, if not more, work to the dog than than police, herding or anything else.


----------



## Fast (Oct 13, 2004)

Aamer Sachedina said:


> All these years even from the old GSD forums, I have always assumed Fast was female. Not sure why.


Maybe it's because of my feminine writing style.:laugh:


----------



## Fast (Oct 13, 2004)

Aamer Sachedina said:


> BTW I realize I am stirring the pot here with you GSD folks but it is all in the spirit of good discussion. The guy I am referring to above was pointing out to me that it is only Sch people that tend to obsess over why the dog is biting and biting well.


Oooohhh No, it's not a schutzhund thing it's a *GSD *thing.


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

Who are judges at SchH events? 

I would assume they knew more about the breed than a conformation judge but from some of these threads lately it seems that is not the case.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

I have an article from I think 2000, in which the Sturgartt(sp), Police Academy in Germany said they were procuring Malinois for policework because they were not finding the type of dog needed in the breed in Germany. I may be wrong but it seems to me that their are workingline breeders in Germany. And I am sure they are aware of them. Have been to Bernard Flinks seminar in which he says the German working lines are becoming too sporty for the police. In working with many many police depts. today, the overwhelming type of German Shepherd being used in the northeast is the Czech dogs. (The same Czech dogs that top sport people wouldn't touch ten years ago.)
Maybe there is this reservoir of sport dogs and breeders providing policedogs consistently, I am just not aware, except for the isolated examples. Keeping in mind that I don't classify the Czech dogs as sport as they have a foundation in breeding for policework until the last ten years. Hey, but I am ready to be enlightened.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

Work to me is vocation and real and failure or nonperformance comes with a consequence, whether it is herding, military, seeing-eye, or police. The realness is conveyed to the dogs and they are able to respond to it. Sport is an entirely different animal and I think the good Captain recognized that and emphasized that. He didnot classify show, trial, or sport as work....least in the book that I have.


----------



## Fast (Oct 13, 2004)

cliffson1 said:


> Work to me is vocation and real and failure or nonperformance comes with a consequence


Do you think that a bomb dog understands that he is looking for a device that blows up and kills people and thinks about the outcome if he fails?

Or is it more likely that he knows that when he finds a bomb he gets a reward?


----------



## Fast (Oct 13, 2004)

cliffson1 said:


> I think the good Captain recognized that and emphasized that. He didnot classify show, trial, or sport as work....least in the book that I have.


The Captain is dead.


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

Aamer wrote: 


> _BTW I realize I am stirring the pot here with you GSD folks but it is all in the spirit of good discussion. The guy I am referring to above was pointing out to me that it is only Sch people that tend to obsess over why the dog is biting and biting well._


Fast wrote:


> Oooohhh No, it's not a schutzhund thing it's a *GSD *thing.


...and apparently it's only the Malinois people who obsess over why GSD people obsess. 

AND...I have heard Mr Malinois , (Fast), obsess a bit himself over how GSDs bite or simply hang on the sleeve when they do etc. Perhaps he is a closet GSD person.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

I know for a fact as a person who trained scout and mine and tunnel dogs during Viet Nam, that the dog is able to understand the gravity of the mission they were on, partially as a result of the bond between the handler and the vibe of seriousness and gravity that the handler passed down the leash. BTW, the rewards that the mine dogs worked for in Viet Nam was the praise and bond of the handler, and not the toy,ball, food, types used in some training. I also handled a narcotic contraband dog that the reward was the finding of the narcotics. 
Nonetheless, if you feel that sport and work are the same....no problem. We all have our perspectives. Having titled a dog in Sch, AKC, SDA, and also having handled/trained military dogs and police dogs, my experience is there is a difference. Doesn't make me right for sure, just one perspective from a person who has done both.


----------



## Ruthie (Aug 25, 2009)

cliffson1 said:


> ...I also handled a narcotic contraband dog that the reward was the finding of the narcotics...


I know it is childish, but I really have to giggle about this statement.:smirk:


----------



## Fast (Oct 13, 2004)

cliffson1 said:


> the dog is able to understand the gravity of the mission they were on, partially as a result of the bond between the handler and the vibe of seriousness and gravity that the handler passed down the leash.


OK so now we are getting somewhere. It's not the dog, it's the handler that knows the gravity of the work and he queues the dog. The dog only knows that his handler is tense, frightened, upset, etc.



> Nonetheless, if you feel that sport and work are the same....no problem.


That's the complete opposite of what I said. I said that the human (me) knows the difference and the dogs think it's the same.


----------



## Sarah'sSita (Oct 27, 2001)

OK, interesting discussion that I have thought a lot about, but I thought I would add a different perspective: Public (read American, not European) John Q. Public knows very little about schutzhund. 
Person buys a GSD, no idea of its background, purpose, etc...hear's about schutzhund. Thinks, "hmmm, can my dog do this? Can I train my dog to do this?" Most don't GET into schutzhund to prove the breed-worthiness of their new pup. They are looking for an outlet for their dog. I, personally tried it as a challenge to myself and my dog. Should I have been discouraged because my sole intent was not to test its breed-worthiness and maybe breed my dog? 

There is value in seeing it as a "sport" as the gateway to seeing it as a test of the breed. How many people go out for the first time and try it and realize the dog is a wash-out and then decide on a different dog? The risk of being hardlined about breeding prospects could perhaps slow or stunt the momentum of people entering schutzhund. SHould it be watered down to serve the massess? NO!!! My point is when more people test their dogs, then realize the limitations that the current state of schutzhund is in can MAYBE help get schutzhund back on track to be a true test of those desireable traits for breeding. Does that make sense? It has taken me, a newcomer a couple years to see my evolution with schutzhund. 
My current position as I have learned about the many changes in SchH- is that SchH (and breed surveying for that matter) in its current form cannot be the sole determinant for breed-worthiness. I need to see the dog be trained. I need to see the dog getting worked. I need to see dog's temperament off the field. I need to see ALL the drives being challenged in different venues - herding, agility, etc. I need to see the WHOLE dog.
Please understand I am no expert in any shape or form, I too am evolving both as a trainer/handler and GSD enthusiast.


----------



## Uniballer (Mar 12, 2002)

It seems to me that while schutzhund is claimed to be a breed test, it really isn't (the bar isn't set high enough). But it does ensure that eligible dogs are able to be evaluated for breeding potential because they understand the common "language" of schutzhund. Go watch your favorite stud dog training with his home club. You can more or less understand what you are seeing because you know the sport. Put on the sleeve, fire him up, and see what he's got. You can do it because you can push the buttons he should understand for the sport. If there is little or no response where you think there should be, you can try pushing a little deeper, but it might mean that you just washed out your latest breeding prospect because he doesn't understand the "language" you're "speaking".


----------



## Fast (Oct 13, 2004)

Sarah'sSita said:


> OK, interesting discussion that I have thought a lot about, but I thought I would add a different perspective: Public (read American, not European) John Q. Public knows very little about schutzhund.


The general public in Europe is only slightly more aware of schutzhund than the general public in the US. They might know that there is a dog training club near by but they have no idea what's going on there.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

Valdivia is a German colony and the German culture is strong, the architecture, food, many people speaks German and their children go to the Deutsche Schule. I've had German born clients and German descendant clients who go to Germany at least once a year... and none had ever heard of Schutzhund before me.


----------



## ShawnM (Jan 28, 2007)

I use schutzhund as a sport. The people I buy my dogs from use it as a breed test. I personally don't breed (have whelped other folks litters) but I participate in breed surveys and trials just because I want to and I like the trophies I get sometimes. I know a few folks that breed but I don't know any that use their dogs to herd their flock down to the next mountain pass. Of course on most forums there's always the debate of the GSD as a working dog but how many actually utilize their GSD or even their Malinois or Pyrenees or Rottweiler or Kuvasz Or Siberian or Malamute in a working capacity? To each his own. Same thing with Ring sports is more hardcore than PSA is more hardcore than Schutzhund and then the e-jihad commences over the internet as far as who's dog is really biting harder than the dutch shepherd on youtube.


----------

