# What is acceptable training?



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

I'm interested in hearing other perspectives... I'll offer a parallel scenario to consider before answering. In WWII it was observed that the majority of combatants in a firefight did not actually return fire or engage in the fight. The fights were won or lost by a minority on either side. In order to increase these odds, the military began using pop-up man shaped targets to condition the response of firing at man shaped things. This dramatically increased the rate of engagement by Vietnam, however the rate of diagnosed PTSD or the presence of PTSD symptoms (whether you consider it valid or not) has dramatically increased. I personally believe this is a result of "tricking" or "conditioning" poorly nerved or unsound men into exacting violence on another. It is unjust to put them in this scenario... they should have been identified and removed before setting foot on a battlefield. Ironically, there are now studies conducted to explore ways to reduce the stress associated with exacting violence on another in combat to reduce the after effects presently experienced. I consider this to be a gravely dangerous path

In parallel, steadily the ability of drill instructors and leadership to truly test the "temperament" and "nerve" of their troops has been increasingly diminished over time in favor of political correctness and the complaints of a public & persons rejected from that system who do not understand the utility or nature of a practice thousands of years in the making (that we have written down), and arguably in existence since the origin of all species. In the case of the military I personally believe it is unjust to send someone into to harms way to fight for any cause and ask them to trade their life for yours without properly equipping them to the best of our ability. Equipping them includes providing equally sound and effective brothers in arms. Removing the traditions and measures to weed out poor soldiers & combatants is a failure to properly equip them. I believe this is why hazing does exist, is present in the military, and will always be present in any strong effective fighting force despite anyone's attempt to remove it. Simply, men must be tested and trialed by fire before they can be trusted and relied upon in extreme stress. They should not be "fooled" into performing their mission through conditioned response or any other measure. They should choose to act so. 

I often see similar threads of behavior within training protection (sport or "real") dogs. People who cringe at the dog getting anything beyond a "ceremonial" stick hit, or even seeing a dog work outside of prey drive. I think it should be critically important to the breed that we do test dogs to the greatest degree so that those dogs unable to deal with stress and adversity can be weeded out. Corrections = stress. Biting a man = more stress. Fighting back when someone hits you = even more stress. Fighting back when someone stabs you in an alley = extreme stress. I want my dogs, and my grunts in the last group

I'm reminded of screwing up in the military and being told "We can do the paperwork and give you a page 11 or we can go behind the building and sort this out". Anyone ever presented with the option that I know of has always gone with option B. Anyone who selected the prior option, I'd argue didn't belong in a fighting force to begin with. I'd expect public opinion to cringe at that, however if they are not ready to put themselves in harms way I'd respectfully ask them hold their opinion on matters they do not understand. It was a correction, and a deserved one... nothing more, nothing less. No hurt feelings, and taken with a modicum of pride in confidence that you can take more than they can be put upon you. I believe an ideal, sound dog should take a correction and training the same. I believe a dog that cannot, does not belong on the field. I believe if you looked at the training of a modern US fighting man under the same lens many measure the training of an IPO or protection dog, you'd find that most IPO dogs have a far easier time.

Thoughts?


----------



## jae (Jul 17, 2012)

Dogs are not humans. Humans can lie about anything they please, but a dog will show their emotions outright. I can't speak about evaluating a dog's temperament and soundness and the steps that go through it. I do know that however a dog is evaluated for this work should be done professionally and with years of experience, this is not something that I ever thought should be taken lightly, for both the dog and the handler is at risk if something is missed. If the dog can take it, great, they will be happy and trained. If the dog can't take it, then the dog will not be happy and will be a liability. You can't ever have a liability in the working field, and if you do, good luck to your department.

Elementary students are taught, and this carries through to the real adult world, "The laboratory is only as safe as the least safe person."

** Comment removed by ADMIN**


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

** Off topic commetns removed**

And what exactly is the point of selectively breeding these high drive dogs of great stamina, courage, heart, and nerve if not to provide a bases for MWD or PPD? There is a *reason* DDR dogs are held in such high regard...


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

hunterisgreat said:


> There is a *reason* DDR dogs are held in such high regard...


Why? Because they are pretty? 

Don't get me wrong. You can get some good things from bringing in the right dogs, but most breeders advertising about DDR are breeding nothing more than sable showlines.


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

Zahnburg said:


> Why? Because they are pretty?
> 
> Don't get me wrong. You can get some good things from bringing in the right dogs, but most breeders advertising about DDR are breeding nothing more than sable showlines.


I am referring to the original DDR dogs, which are as far as I understand it, lost to history having been diluted too much to mean anything at this point. I dunno that most even find them "pretty". 

As I understand it, at the fall of the wall, the dogs coming out of East Germany and other former soviet republics had a dramatically lower rate of HD and other maladies, and were much sounder nerve & harder dogs (and better working dogs in general) compared to non-state controlled breeding programs. I wasn't there, so I am only saying what I've been told and read. The same phenomenon is occurring now in Moscow with their bomb dogs at which are a strictly controlled breeding program.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

The question being asked in this topic is fine. Let's leave out the personal, political stuff and anything that has to do with human training in the military. 

THANK YOU,

ADMIN Lisa


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

Interesting post if I understood it correctly. I do agree that when a dogs intended purpose is to protect and defend, you have to test the dog and some of that won't be viewed as being humane to an outsider. Do it behind closed doors and don't post it on YouTube if it crosses some politically incorrect line. (not you personally) There are some things better left unsaid except to those who understand.


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

Whiteshepherds said:


> Interesting post if I understood it correctly. I do agree that when a dogs intended purpose is to protect and defend, you have to test the dog and some of that won't be viewed as being humane to an outsider. Do it behind closed doors and don't post it on YouTube if it crosses some politically incorrect line. (not you personally) There are some things better left unsaid except to those who understand.


On the one hand I agree that that is an effective short term approach, but I feel that it is a failure in the longterm. Ultimately people will out and destroy that. For the long term success, people must come to understand the nature of it and not look the other way or merely have it hidden from them.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

hunterisgreat said:


> As I understand it, at the fall of the wall....


This was in '89. Why do people still talk about DDR dogs in a current tense 23 years after there was a DDR?


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

Zahnburg said:


> This was in '89. Why do people still talk about DDR dogs in a current tense 23 years after there was a DDR?


Why do we talk about past Medal of Honor recipients, make a movie about the Spartans, the Trojans, read the Iliad, teach the Bible, or discuss the Holocaust? Because the past is an appropriate and quite possibly the best/only ruler with which to measure the present?


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Really Hunter? It is not about talking about things; it is about talking about things as current that are not. I have no problem talking about Leonidas, Agamemnon, Homer, Jesus or Hitler as historical figures that have affected history. However, they are not current figures.


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

Zahnburg said:


> Really Hunter? It is not about talking about things; it is about talking about things as current that are not. I have no problem talking about Leonidas, Agamemnon, Homer, Jesus or Hitler as historical figures that have affected history. However, they are not current figures.


They are not current. However that does not mean there is only value in comparing only living dogs. It's true that awesome dogs long past tend to become greater with time, but so do any living legends after their death. To dismiss the past is to dismiss an incredibly valuable tool to measure present success. To presume the past is irrelevant, I believe, is the to be at the height of arrogance.


----------



## Zeeva (Aug 10, 2010)

**off topice**

Am going to bypass the question as I do not know how to answer it.

Great post! Well written and I learned a lot.


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

hunterisgreat said:


> Everyone has a breaking point to which they will exhibit symptoms I'd wager.


How do you relate this to training dogs?


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

Whiteshepherds said:


> How do you relate this to training dogs?


Certainly dogs have wildly different breaking points with regards to coping with stress.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

The German Shepherd today has become a reflection of society and the training of them has also been impacted by this reality. Our society has become soft and specialized and so has the breed and the training. Not saying this is good or bad, before the sanctimonious get started, but it is the case. If you are breeding pet dogs you cannot expect the dog to be the type of dog to endure heavy training or stress. It is what it is!


----------



## holland (Jan 11, 2009)

I guess I have no idea what you are trying to say-there seem to be a lot of posts on here like that lately-


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

@Holland....me or Op?


----------



## holland (Jan 11, 2009)

the OP


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

holland said:


> the OP


In the original post?

Cliff notes version:
We accept purely compulsive and very harsh training in the military in order to produce the most hardened combat-ready troops possible. In order to get people not well suited to that level of stress to be a viable source of troops, we condition them to still perform the actions through various training methods which to a degree mask the less than ideal "temperament" as it relates to being violent, and history has shown that to have its consequences. In the dog training world most cringe at compulsion but believe they can still produce hardened combat-ready dogs while sheltering the dog from any form of stress. In a way, we are also conditioning dogs ill equipped for that level of stress to go through the motions and perform a nice facsimile of "combat", but when these dogs are actually exposed to real stress, I wager the result will be the same as with people. What is the line of thinking here?

(not defending compulsion, I'm merely proposing that the true test of the ability to deal with stress is a critical component of training a real combatant be they a dog or a man yet this increasingly not the practice)


----------



## Zeeva (Aug 10, 2010)

Aw someone deleted my comment? Was I really that off topic?  I thought it was relevant...sowy

I really shouldn't post on topics that as holland said are hard for me to decipher...lol


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

I get you hunter. You probably could have left all the stuff about the military out.

If you don't put stress on a dog you don't know what you have.

The dog may fall apart under real stress.

Which is why I hope some day schutzhund and the other protection sports will just be sports.

We need a strong nerve test that is not a sport but accesses the true nerve of a dog.


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

Jack's Dad said:


> I get you hunter. You probably could have left all the stuff about the military out.
> 
> If you don't put stress on a dog you don't know what you have.
> 
> ...


Thats what Schutzhund was *supposed* to be originally

The military part I felt was relevent because what is happening to Schutzhund is happening/happened to most of the armed forces and is now happening to my beloved Corps


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

hunterisgreat said:


> Thats what Schutzhund was *supposed* to be originally


Yep.


----------



## Ruthie (Aug 25, 2009)

My view of what is exceptible has changed quite a bit over the years. It changes with each dog. What was exceptible to my shy mutt that I first trained is VASTLY different than my current working line nuckle head.

What is acceptible should always be what is best for the dog. Sometimes what is best for the dog is what makes things absolutely clear to them. Sometimes what is best for the dog is preparing them for a situation they may encounter (such as the military). 

Before owning what *I* consider a truly tough dog, I was on the positive training bandwagon. I now think that trying to train purely positive with a dog that NEEDS corrections is cruel. A quick "harsh" (to quote an earlier post) correction that immediately makes clear to a dog what is expected is much better than months of them struggling to understand a postitive only method that leaves them confused and frustrated and damages the relationship with the handler.


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

In regards to Schutzhund, I have a "formula."

If viewed as a "sport," what gives you the right to ......?
If viewed as a breed test, why in the world would you......?
(insert whatever and answer honestly).

I hear people say things like, my dog isn't really motivated, so I have to use harsh compulsion. And I ask why? 
I hear people talk about the need for "strong" dogs.... but in my opinion, tools that are most often found in the garage, do not belong in your dog-training kit.

I am NOT advocating no compulsion, no correction. However there is a limit.


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

A year or two ago, the schutzhund community was worried about the appearance of an unprovoked dog bite in front of a sponsor at a big event.

I would say that we should be more concerned about some of the training methods used within our community being posted to you-tube, or sent to the local media. 
It will happen. Only a matter of time.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

The training method should be compatible with the dog so that the dog learns clearly, without conflict and confidently. Training methods that are too hard for a soft dog is wrong....just as training methods that require constant nagging and little progress or joy for the dog is wrong also. People, imo, make this too complicated and personal....if the dog fits the methods and shows confidence and joy and progress in a training method then its right for that dog. JMO


----------



## Ruthie (Aug 25, 2009)

cliffson1 said:


> The training method should be compatible with the dog so that the dog learns clearly, without conflict and confidently. Training methods that are too hard for a soft dog is wrong....just as training methods that require constant nagging and little progress or joy for the dog is wrong also. People, imo, make this too complicated and personal....if the dog fits the methods and shows confidence and joy and progress in a training method then its right for that dog. JMO


Exactly what I was TRYING to say. I thought physical corrections were not necessary because MY dog didnt need then, and in fact was too soft for them. Now that I have dogs that need them for clear communication, I think differently.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Having been a weekend warrior for a few years I get what your saying 100%, the military is definitley a good microcosm of whats going on in our society today. I truly believe the same extends to dog training. I blame the uninformed masses that want to hear and see things that sound good and feel good irregardless of the truth. Posative methods are exclusively the best way to train our doggies, that looks good and feels good hence it must be true. Drill Instructors are no longer allowed to single out recruits or yell/curse at them as this can be discriminitory and hurt the newbies feelings..and god forbid if he is a she. This also sounds good to the uniformed public, hence we are were we are.

I hear a lot of "but it looks bad". To me what looks bad are lack lustre dogs going through a routine that they have down pat, whose real ability to actually protect under stress is sub par. The public is largly uninformed about dogs and their training in general..we shouldnt be protecting them from what looks bad but educating them about why they see what they see. And when people question the methods show them the results, a dog more highly trained then 99.9% of their pets and probably happier as well.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

Wow:hug:


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> Having been a weekend warrior for a few years I get what your saying 100%, the military is definitley a good microcosm of whats going on in our society today. I truly believe the same extends to dog training. I blame the uninformed masses that want to hear and see things that sound good and feel good irregardless of the truth. Posative methods are exclusively the best way to train our doggies, that looks good and feels good hence it must be true. *Drill Instructors are no longer allowed to single out recruits or yell/curse at them as this can be discriminitory and hurt the newbies feelings..and god forbid if he is a she.* This also sounds good to the uniformed public, hence we are were we are.
> 
> I hear a lot of "but it looks bad". To me what looks bad are lack lustre dogs going through a routine that they have down pat, whose real ability to actually protect under stress is sub par. The public is largly uninformed about dogs and their training in general..we shouldnt be protecting them from what looks bad but educating them about why they see what they see. And when people question the methods show them the results, a dog more highly trained then 99.9% of their pets and probably happier as well.


 
JEE! Basic training wouldn't be the same as it used to be (Vietnam era vet). Would take all of the *"FUN"* out of it. HEH! HEH!


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Ruthie said:


> Exactly what I was TRYING to say. I thought physical corrections were not necessary because MY dog didnt need then, and in fact was too soft for them. Now that I have dogs that need them for clear communication, I think differently.


 
I try to correct my dog commensurate with the thing that went wrong - minor little thing with no risk - small correction or maybe just a positive approach. 

Big bad thing - I.E. lunge at another dog or people aggression that is clearly inapproprite and he knows better = a WHACK type of correction!

Got to get his attention before he even knows that he is being corrected!

Like a mother dog might correct her puppy!


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

This is how my driving instructor taught me the 'hand-over-hand' technique when making a turn: swatting my hands when I didn't do it. He did tell me how to do it, and he told me many times, but the only one that stuck was the swat, lol. I never did it again. My favorite boss (and the job where I learned the most and ended up in management) used to yell at me when I made a mistake. Not everyone is as hardheaded as I am, but this is how I learn the best. Go figure, lol.


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

I'm not just talking about corrections btw. When my dog is fighting the helper sometimes depending on what im trying to accomplish I want the helper to fight back as though the sleeve is not on and he is being bit for real. I want him to fight back, hit, pull, yell, scream, pull the dog into a jujitsu guard, whatever. Many people would find that unpleasant


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

hunterisgreat said:


> I'm not just talking about corrections btw. When my dog is fighting the helper sometimes depending on what im trying to accomplish I want the helper to fight back as though the sleeve is not on and he is being bit for real. I want him to fight back, hit, pull, yell, scream, pull the dog into a jujitsu guard, whatever. Many people would find that unpleasant


But is not the goal to have the dog win? Dog wins.... Onlookers impressed. 
I have found the average person thinks protection should be serious, and corrections/compulsion are OK.
It is the over the top training methods utilized by some... Whether schutzhund, gun dog or pet training... that cause problems.


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

gagsd said:


> But is not the goal to have the dog win? Dog wins.... Onlookers impressed.
> I have found the average person thinks protection should be serious, and corrections/compulsion are OK.
> It is the over the top training methods utilized by some... Whether schutzhund, gun dog or pet training... that cause problems.


Yes, the dog wins... What do you mean regarding onlookers?


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

hunterisgreat said:


> I'm not just talking about corrections btw. When my dog is fighting the helper sometimes depending on what im trying to accomplish I want the helper to fight back as though the sleeve is not on and he is being *bit for real*. I want him to fight back, hit, pull, yell, scream, pull the dog into a jujitsu guard, whatever. Many people would find that unpleasant


 
Kick? 

Sounds more like a PP or a K9 dog rather than ScH.

If you want realism, would you have the helper wear a complete bite suit and have the dog bite anywhere and not just concentrate on the sleeve?


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

It sounds like you know your dog and you know he likes a challenge, and will work harder when he's offered one. I'm not anywhere near your level, but this is something that I see in my own puppy with the flirt pole. If I'm moving it, he's chasing it. But if I give it a big flop from one end to the other, he'll stalk it up to 5' away and wait for it to move. I don't even know how long he'll stare at it, because I can't stand still long enough to find out. I think around 15 min. is the longest I've been able to, lol. But he won't just take advantage of the toy lying there, he wants to work for it.


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

hunterisgreat said:


> Yes, the dog wins... What do you mean regarding onlookers?


The average John Q.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

This is how it should be. Just because a dog is biting only the sleeve does not mean it should not be real. SchH is not about playing a rough tug game with the dog. It is supposed to be the dog fighting with what he perceives as an opponent. It is supposed to test the dog's desire to fight, its courage and its hardness and resilience to pressure. 

There are people that have problems with the stick hits. I train with some of them. They would freak if we still used the reed stick.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

lhczth said:


> This is how it should be. Just because a dog is biting only the sleeve does not mean it should not be real. SchH is not about playing a rough tug game with the dog. *It is supposed to be the dog fighting with what he perceives as an opponent.* It is supposed to test the dog's desire to fight, its courage and its hardness and resilience to pressure.
> 
> There are people that have problems with the stick hits. I train with some of them. They would freak if we still used the reed stick.


I would agree with you, but that isn't what i have seen, esp. in our local club. The helper, very well known and knowledgable, actually has petted my dog on the top of his head while he is chomping the sleeve. I have a great picture of this - very cute! They train in prey drive, not in defense drive.

And right after the work, Baron will go up to him and want to be petted!

Doesn't sound like he is thinking he is battling for his life to me!

So in this case, I do think that the protection work is a big game to my dog.

BTW, he is also a naturally protective courageous dog as he has demonstrated on a couple of occasions already.

BTW2, he is from a very well known US show kennel yet has a very good temperament for the IPO protection work as well.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

What we see now is not how it should be.


----------



## Ruthie (Aug 25, 2009)

codmaster said:


> I would agree with you, but that isn't what i have seen, esp. in our local club. The helper, very well known and knowledgable, actually has petted my dog on the top of his head while he is chomping the sleeve. I have a great picture of this - very cute! They train in prey drive, not in defense drive.
> 
> And right after the work, Baron will go up to him and want to be petted!
> 
> ...


*Added: Not commenting on the happy fun game or training primarily in prey. Just don't see your dog greeting the helper as a negative.*

I don't know the entire situation, but from what you describe that your dog did, I think is GREAT! I think a dog should be able to discern if a person is threatening or not. 

I have seen my dog go from a happy calm tail wag doggie smile to a snarling, I am going to kill you beast with the helper just changing his facial expression and posture. Then he went back to calm but cautious, just with the helper changing expression and body language back again. The helper didn't even advance or retreat a step. IMO a good helper should be able to do that. Turn it on, turn it off. A good dog should too.

If my dog were to approach the helper in a regular situation and want pets yet fight on the field, I would be thrilled.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Ruthie said:


> *Added: Not commenting on the happy fun game or training primarily in prey. Just don't see your dog greeting the helper as a negative.*
> 
> I don't know the entire situation, but from what you describe that your dog did, I think is GREAT! I think a dog should be able to discern if a person is threatening or not.
> 
> ...


*Absolutely agree* - that is what I want to! I was just saying that some folks will see that as a negative approach. I don't, as my guy is defensive enough with a low threshhold to what he thinks is a threat so we work on that with him a lot.

I actually brought in the pics of the helper in a bite suit and sleeve petting my dog on the top of his furry head to my local obedience club and the folks there includers a couple of instructors were astounded to see how friendly a ScH dog in training can be.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Well I personally don't want my dogs to be "friendly" (I like them to be neutral) but a GSD standing still and accepting interaction with a decoy, even suited, is part of ever SDA protection routine. In fact we have to do it twice. It is the first and the last exercise of each routine, so even after the dog has alerted, engaged, done various attacks and drives, it is required to sit still and accept the decoy touching/crowding him and his handler without any special commands or leash restraint. And unlike SchH where I see dogs taking bites at the sleeve during transports, the dog cannot bite or bye bye.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Some want a friendly dog and some don't. I am one of them that thinks a GSD should be friendly. Aloof but friendly.


----------



## Ruthie (Aug 25, 2009)

Liesje said:


> Well I personally don't want my dogs to be "friendly" (I like them to be neutral) but a GSD standing still and accepting interaction with a decoy, even suited, is part of ever SDA protection routine. In fact we have to do it twice. It is the first and the last exercise of each routine, so even after the dog has alerted, engaged, done various attacks and drives, it is required to sit still and accept the decoy touching/crowding him and his handler without any special commands or leash restraint. And unlike SchH where I see dogs taking bites at the sleeve during transports, the dog cannot bite or bye bye.


I guess it depends on your definition of "friendly". 

My definition of friendly is not showing aggression. As in "Is your dog friendly?" or the "Friendly greeting" test. I don't mean they have to turn into a ball of mush. Neither of my dogs are going to love on a stranger, but I would like them to have them stand politely and tollerate petting or otherwise interact in a friendly way.

Codmaster, I did misunderstand what you were saying. I thought that you were saying that because your dog interacts with the helper immediately after leaving the field that he didn't take the training seriously. 

I was just pointing out that though it might be true that he doesn't take it seriously, greeting the helper in a friendly way doesn't necessarily indicate that. 

I may be wrong, but it is my understanding that a dog with good aggression will actually be more likely to react differently to the helper in a different situation than a prey dog. To a primarily prey dog, the level of threat isn't that big of a factor, it is all about the object. A dog with some aggression (active or reactive) is going to act differently toward a helper that is presenting a threat than he/she would to one that is NOT presenting a threat. 

Please someone correct me if I am wrong, or explain better if I didn't use the right terminology.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Amy I will abide by your definition. I like that type of "friendly". I don't however want my dog running over to the helper and licking his face and try to get pet, and not because he's a helper but I don't expect my GSDs to show that sort of affection for anyone they don't know well in the context of truly being a friend. My GSD should only know the helper in terms of threat or no threat, so aggression or remaining neutral.


----------



## KristiM (Oct 18, 2011)

hunterisgreat said:


> I'm not just talking about corrections btw. When my dog is fighting the helper sometimes depending on what im trying to accomplish I want the helper to fight back as though the sleeve is not on and he is being bit for real. I want him to fight back, hit, pull, yell, scream, pull the dog into a jujitsu guard, whatever. Many people would find that unpleasant


Personally it bothered me watching someone hurt my dog. I had a lot of fun doing IPO with my dog that more or less thought it was a super intense game, then I got a dog that was very tough and took IPO very seriously. Since my dog was a "strong" dog my helper took the fight to him more than my other dog, my dog thought it was cool, I did not. I no longer do IPO because I am not cut out for the sport. I do understand that the "warrior" needs to be preserved in the breed but where do you draw the line?


----------



## Ruthie (Aug 25, 2009)

KristiM said:


> Personally it bothered me watching someone hurt my dog. I had a lot of fun doing IPO with my dog that more or less thought it was a super intense game, then I got a dog that was very tough and took IPO very seriously. Since my dog was a "strong" dog my helper took the fight to him more than my other dog, *my dog thought it was cool*, I did not. I no longer do IPO because I am not cut out for the sport. I do understand that the "warrior" needs to be preserved in the breed but where do you draw the line?


I have seen dogs in my club beg to be hit with the stick. (Kinda funny actually) My dogs think it is cool too. This is a lot of the reason that I am involved with Schutzhund/IPO to begin with. It is what my dogs WANT to do naturally. (all three phases, not just protection) It isn't really about the competition to me, as you can see, we don't have any titles and probably won't for a long time. It is a realationship building thing to me, and it is about allowing them to do what they were born to do and love to do. 

Because of this, I have no problem with someone hitting my dog with a stick, padded or otherwise. Both my boys are tough dogs. I don't think you COULD hurt them with a IPO style stick hit. 

On the other hand though, because I am not all about the competition or the points aspect, I won't be the person who is using more extreme training methods to MAKE my dog do something it doesn't want to do either (as was mentioned earlier in the thread). For example, my older dog is not crazy about tracking. I COULD probably withhold food for a couple days to make the track more appealing, but it doesn't matter that much to me. It isn't worth it to put him through that. (Plus I am retiring him for other reasons)

I would love to earn a title someday, but it isn't the end all/be all for me, having a wonderful companions to have fun with is.


----------



## KristiM (Oct 18, 2011)

I'm not talkin about stick hits... I'm talking more along the lines of whipping, pinch agitation etc etc. Stick hits never bugged me and my less serious dog liked them too, made the game more rough Hitting a dog on the legs, face etc with the hard stick at the end of the whip (not the padded stick) is a little different, and to me not cool!


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

KristiM said:


> Personally it bothered me watching someone hurt my dog. I had a lot of fun doing IPO with my dog that more or less thought it was a super intense game, then I got a dog that was very tough and took IPO very seriously. Since my dog was a "strong" dog my helper took the fight to him more than my other dog, my dog thought it was cool, I did not. I no longer do IPO because I am not cut out for the sport. I do understand that the "warrior" needs to be preserved in the breed but where do you draw the line?


A wise woman has told me, more than once..... "Remember, it is YOUR dog."
The handler can draw the line on what training to which her dog is subjected.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

A dog needs to be pressured to measure how it reacts under stress, if the dog is always cool... the the pressure is not enough. I expect my helper to face a conflict to the dog and I want my dog to expect a conflict when he goes to the blind. And if there is not... then to be a brat and ask for it barking on the helper's face.

I agree that while IPO is not for every dog, it's not for every owner either. The first time my harder male was put under "real" pressure, much more I ever saw with my female, I felt really bad and had to discuss my feelings with people I respect, because it was a true conflict for me: How was my dog supposed to handle the pressure if I could not? But to see your dog learn how to handle it and to grow from the experience... is priceless.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

Catu said:


> *A dog needs to be pressured to measure how it reacts under stress*, if the dog is always cool... the the pressure is not enough. I expect my helper to face a conflict to the dog and I want my dog to expect a conflict when he goes to the blind. And if there is not... then to be a brat and ask for it barking on the helper's face.
> 
> I agree that while IPO is not for every dog, it's not for every owner either. The first time my harder male was put under "real" pressure, much more I ever saw with my female, I felt really bad and had to discuss my feelings with people I respect, because it was a true conflict for me: How was my dog supposed to handle the pressure if I could not? *But to see your dog learn how to handle it and to grow from the experience... is priceless.*


I agree...and the dog that isn't ever 'challenged' won't know what power s/he has until it is tapped. Brings out courage which in turn adds to the confidence and power the dog will ultimately show(or not).


----------



## KristiM (Oct 18, 2011)

Very well said Catu! There were many reasons I quit IPO, too much pressure on my young dog was just one of them. If things had been different and if I could have worked through that then you are probably right, to watch him grow and work through tough situations would have likely been an amazing experience for us both. But where is the line between pressure and abuse though? I am asking this literally, is there a line? Or is it just different for every handler/helper/club?

And yes it is ultimately my dog and I decide what is going to happen to my dog. I do still think that it was just best that I left the sport.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

I wouldn't allow my young dog to have unfair pressure put on him. I think as a green handler you need to trust the TD/helper, yet gut feelings will tell you whether or not your dog is being rushed. And it never ends well if that is the case. I personally don't see the need to rush to trial....but there are people who set a timeline and adhere to it, regardless if the dog is mature enough to handle all the training~not just protection but everything else that goes with trialing!


----------



## Ruthie (Aug 25, 2009)

KristiM said:


> Very well said Catu! There were many reasons I quit IPO, too much pressure on my young dog was just one of them. If things had been different and if I could have worked through that then you are probably right, to watch him grow and work through tough situations would have likely been an amazing experience for us both. *But where is the line between pressure and abuse though?* I am asking this literally, is there a line? Or is it just different for every handler/helper/club?
> 
> And yes it is ultimately my dog and I decide what is going to happen to my dog. I do still think that it was just best that I left the sport.


Though I think there are things that most reasonable people consider abuse. In general, I think it is different for each dog. This goes back to my first two posts in this thread. I use some physical corrections with Grizzly that would have been abusive to Moose. I used some purely positive methods with Moose that would be abusive to Grizzly. 

The more I learn about dogs and dog behavior, the more open minded I am to different methods.

That being said, I think there are some trainers that have only worked with a certain type of dog and they feel that their methods should apply accross the board and end up misapplying them. Or maybe they see your dog only a few hours a week and misinterpret aspects of their temperament. Ultimately, you are responsible for our dog and you have to decide what is appropriate. If you were not comfortable with the situation that you were in, it is good that you left it. 

SchH/IPO is not for everyone.


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

> I'm not talkin about stick hits... I'm talking more along the lines of whipping, pinch agitation etc etc. Stick hits never bugged me and my less serious dog liked them too, made the game more rough Hitting a dog on the legs, face etc with the hard stick at the end of the whip (not the padded stick) is a little different, and to me not cool!


Besides the advice about the dog being yours, one thing I tell people who are interested in SchH is this. You have to ask yourself if you are the type of person who can say no when you need to. Most of the time, that will be when someone wants to do something with...or to....your dog that you don't like. Large numbers of people will sit silently when their dog needs their help. They are intimidated by the person who claims to be more knowledgeable but many times, is not.. They just have a more domineering type of personality is all. No one knows your dog better than you and if you don't know enough about protection work, and you turn it ALL over to the helper...well...your dog and your training will pay. 

Doesn't matter if you are a helper or not, you can learn about the principles of protection work and have a say in what goes on. Not enough people speak up and not enough helpers ask the handlers about their dogs. I can't recall the last time I worked a dog where I didn't first have a longer type conversation with the handler about their dog. Yep, even people brand new to SchH can offer some valuable information. Helpers who think they can train a dog in protection without the handler, ( and I don't mean the handler is not standing there), are rarely successful. It takes teamwork to work a dog right but that is something I don't see very often. Just helpers telling the handlers to get their dogs and doing as they see fit, without any seeming recognition of how important the handler is. It is for sure a 50/50 deal because what the helper brings up in the dog, the handler can wipe out immediately....and they usually do.

IMO, it is important that you consider your own personality traits along with your dog's temperament. I have listened to some very interesting "reasons" people offer for training that borders , or is, simply dog abuse. Most of the time, previous mistakes were made in the training that, in the mind of the "trainer", now requires harsh methods to fix. Clear indication of ignorance when the answer to a problem comes in the form of hits to the face, legs etc. For me, there is no reason, ever, to hit the dog on the legs or the head with the stick. There is no purpose that is serves, other than to make more problems for the dog. I watch people hitting the dogs in the legs to make them pull and that's all I need to know about them. Every dog will pull if you know what to do in the sleeve and hitting the legs says to me, what those people don't know . 

You don't make power with pain, you create avoidance. That kind of pain creates a spike in aggression that does not last. It makes the dogs reactive and as the training goes on, the helper will have to do more and more of it to keep the dog in "drive" and to get the desired reaction. The helper's job is to bring up the active aggression. The best helpers use presence and more subtle forms of threat and then reinforcement to bring up fight drive and to promote the desired behaviors in the dogs. The amateurs are there causing pain , using cattle prods etc. It is a clear indication of a lack of skill when you see this kind of behavior from the people.


It is not about SchH, it is about the trainer. SchH done right, does not look like that.


Ruthie is sounding a bit elitist nowadays. Not for everyone? Oh my!


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

I don't think it is elitist. It goes for everything in the world. Agility is not for everyone, dog-sledding is not for everyone, Karate-do is not for everyone and no matter how hard I study I'll never make a good Lawyer, and it doesn't makes me any less smart.

It's not about abilities, its about different personalities and what you enjoy the most and what not. Believe me, I've made a great effort to like agility and it's just not for me.


----------



## KristiM (Oct 18, 2011)

Can I come do IPO with you vandal!? (I think it might be a hit of a drive lol.) love this "you don't make power with pain" and "it's the helpers job to bring up active aggression." Training built around those concepts I can get behind. A lack of constructive communication between handler and helper I think is a huge problem in IPO. I do understand that it's my job to stick up for my dog, but things can happen on the field that you don't see coming and you can't stop before it's too late. Trust is so important in a sport where someone else is working your dog!


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

> I don't think it is elitist. It goes for everything in the world. Agility is not for everyone, dog-sledding is not for everyone, Karate-do is not for everyone and no matter how hard I study I'll never make a good Lawyer, and it doesn't makes me any less smart.


I guess I should have add one of these oke: ...since Ruthie and I have had previous discussions on the matter. I do NOT feel that SchH is for everyone and I think trying to make it that way, has caused a great deal of damage to SchH as a test and to the GSD.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

Now it makes sense, it was so weird coming from you


----------



## Ruthie (Aug 25, 2009)

Vandal said:


> I guess I should have add one of these oke: ...since Ruthie and I have had previous discussions on the matter. I do NOT feel that SchH is for everyone and I think trying to make it that way, has caused a great deal of damage to SchH as a test and to the GSD.


LOL! I just read this. I got the sarcasm. 

But, for the record...I have never thought that SchH is for everyone. I am just continuing to learn new reasons why.  

Anne, I love your comment about the helper needing the input from the handler. I am glad that my helper is open to that. There have been some things that he has suggested that I just said, "No, that isn't going to work for him." A handler spends a significantly more time with the dog than anyone they train with. They see then in all types of situations and anyone with even a little bit of ablity to read a dog is going to have some valuable input. 

There have been times I have taken Bison out on the field knowing that in his frame of mind there are certain activities that would be useless to work on. I know what influences he had in the week leading up to that training session. Of course, Bison is pretty much an open book, not many people have a hard time seeing what he is thinking. He'll also TELL you. He is a big talker and his tone is pretty easy to read.


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

Vandal said:


> I guess I should have add one of these oke: ...since Ruthie and I have had previous discussions on the matter. I do NOT feel that SchH is for everyone and I think trying to make it that way, has caused a great deal of damage to SchH as a test and to the GSD.


I feel the same way about the USMC


----------

