# Should dogs that show weakness/bad nerve, still earn the title?



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

Like the title says, should dogs that show a lot of weakness still earn the title? Weather or not they technically made it through everything or didn't get completely ran. I understand that titles are an accumulation of points earned, but what about the big picture? The overall picture? Should dogs that pass, show the picture of what the title was about? Or should it just be strictly about the hard numbers?


----------



## wolfstraum (May 2, 2003)

This is the biggest problem in the SV system.....I have seen so many poor nerved dogs who just lucked out on the day or were slid through by club members/decoys or even judges...

Once that dog has the title, all too often, the owner's memory just seems to do a vanishing act and the dog gets bred....thus perpetuating the negatives


Lee


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

You'd be asking the judges to be way more subjective than they should be. Especially as today the whole goal is for the judges to be as objective as possible and we constantly hear issues when a judge isn't objective and scores are questionable.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

I see no problem if a weak nerved dog becomes titled...regardless of the method of point accumulation. I do see a problem if someone decides to breed the dog and doesn't try to compensate for the lacking.


SuperG


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

wolfstraum said:


> This is the biggest problem in the SV system.....I have seen so many poor nerved dogs who just lucked out on the day or were slid through by club members/decoys or even judges...
> 
> Once that dog has the title, all too often, the owner's memory just seems to do a vanishing act and the dog gets bred....thus perpetuating the negatives
> 
> ...



Of course this is not exclusive to the SV........but if the idea is that they should show more of a prejudice regarding nervy dogs....I agree.


SuperG


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

IMO a dog that shows weakness, shouldn't earn the title. There is an overall picture that the creator's of the sport(I'm talking all protection sports) had in mind when they came up with it. Does the dog fit that picture or not? Just because the dog didn't run off the field does that mean the same as the dog who stood it's ground and brought the fight? If all you have to do to get a title is condition a dog to hang on in a drive for 15 steps, then does the title actually mean anything?


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

martemchik said:


> You'd be asking the judges to be way more subjective than they should be. Especially as today the whole goal is for the judges to be as objective as possible and we constantly hear issues when a judge isn't objective and scores are questionable.



But aren't they already? Isn't that there job? I'm going to use IPO in this example. In obedience aren't they looking for that happy dog now? That doesn't show any signs of stress or "harsh" training techniques? This is just as subjective, and every year more and more rules like this come out.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

how many dogs do you see in trial bringing the fight? Not too many are allowed to show true power because that may compromise the control...out of control. 
Still it is obedience based and the weak ones do the pattern to stay in the comfort zone, the strong ones do it reluctantly. 
Helpers will 'help' to keep the weaker ones engaged...so if it is club level with the club helper, there is yet another issue.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

onyx'girl said:


> how many dogs do you see in trial bringing the fight? Not too many are allowed to show true power because that may compromise the control...out of control.
> Still it is obedience based and the weak ones do the pattern to stay in the comfort zone, the strong ones do it reluctantly.
> Helpers will 'help' to keep the weaker ones engaged...so if it is club level with the club helper, there is yet another issue.



Depends on what sports you're talking about. Some still like that strong dog, but even in those I've seen week dogs earn a titles. I play in PSA, SDA, and IPO, and I can honestly say I've seen too many dogs earn titles that IMO shouldn't have in every one of them. I also see some sports that claim "control based" really just want the illusion of control. 

Club trials, club helpers and home field bring in a whole other issue.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

Is there any other sport where you can reach a high level title entirely on your own home court, being judged by home judges? 

Training in martial arts, we had to take our belt tests in front of instructors that were brought in from other areas and do tournaments against other schools at neutral locations; you couldn't earn a black belt, or even a green belt, sparring with your friends at your home school in front of your own instructor. 

I think having similar rules might clear up a lot of issues.


----------



## gsdsar (May 21, 2002)

No. Yes. Sometimes. It sucks. 

No, in a perfect world only the best would title. They would be fearless, perfect grips, happy prance obedience, nose to the ground tracking, and scare every helper. 

Yes, because, at least in IPO, it is no longer a breed worthiness test. It's a sport. It's for fun. To get new people, you get lesser dogs to start. They continue on, with better suited dogs as they progress in the sport. Aside from gross issues(blowing anals and running off the field, refusing to engage, tail tucked and hackling the whole time), if they get the points they should get the title. 

Sometimes, it's about exposure. We all learn. All dogs have off days. Maybe the dog that has a weak grip or hesitates got hurt in training. Maybe the field is wet and the dog can't get good purchase. Maybe the person is just trying to learn and the dog is new. 

While I know what I would like to see and own and train. I am working with what I have. Is he podium material? Nope. Am I having a blast learning and trying, yes. Would I quit if I knew there was no wY I could even participate because he is not super hard, honestly, probably. 

Do I have realistic expectations of my dog. I do. I will take him as far as I can. I am lucky to work with people willing to help. My boy has made good strides. But he is what he is. And I would hate feel excluded because he is not perfect. So it sucks. 

But, at least in IPO, you can get only so far with a subpar dog. 

It's about people being honest with themselves and those they train with. There has to be trust at all levels. I do not go training or trials to tell someone else what to do. I go to support, give an honest opinion and help others get as far as possible with what they have.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

I learned many years ago and in doing so stayed clear ( mostly ) of any competition / sport which is subjective....a judge involved ..etc. I prefer a "start and finish line"...a sport where the results are undeniable...no judges involved. The lament I am hearing expressed is all too common in sports where an opinion is involved.....comes with the territory...whether one enjoys it or not.

SuperG


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Emoore said:


> Is there any other sport where you can reach a high level title entirely on your own home court, being judged by home judges?
> 
> Training in martial arts, we had to take our belt tests in front of instructors that were brought in from other areas and do tournaments against other schools at neutral locations; you couldn't earn a black belt, or even a green belt, sparring with your friends at your home school in front of your own instructor.
> 
> I think having similar rules might clear up a lot of issues.



My wife earned her third degree black belt so I am aware of the commercialized version of USA karate....in both form and sparring, judges were still employed....in my book it is still a subjective sport.


SuperG


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

I'm trying to find videos that show what I'm talking about. Again this disxcusion is not about any one sport or breed for that matter. Strictly about showing weakness in a protection sport and still earning a title. Does the dog fit the picture or not?


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Emoore said:


> Is there any other sport where you can reach a high level title entirely on your own home court, being judged by home judges?


Where do you get "home judges" when it comes to a Schutzhund trial?

Also, everyone that is involved in the sport knows that there is a huge difference between a club trial, a regional, and the nationals. The expectations get much higher. For those that know, IPO3 isn't the only thing they look at.


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

onyx'girl said:


> how many dogs do you see in trial bringing the fight? Not too many are allowed to show true power because that may compromise the control...out of control.
> Still it is obedience based and the weak ones do the pattern to stay in the comfort zone, the strong ones do it reluctantly.
> Helpers will 'help' to keep the weaker ones engaged...so if it is club level with the club helper, there is yet another issue.


I have to disagree with this. I don't think that a dog who "brings the fight" makes a reasonable excuse to be out of control. There are plenty of extremely well trained dogs who fight **** hard. If they're out of control, its based on a training issue. 



mycobraracr said:


> I'm trying to find videos that show what I'm talking about. Again this disxcusion is not about any one sport or breed for that matter. Strictly about showing weakness in a protection sport and still earning a title. Does the dog fit the picture or not?


I could post a video of my weak nerved dog getting an IPO3 title but I'd still back up the fact that he earned it. We put the time and the work in and our scores and TSB rating reflected the dogs underlying genetic/training issues, but that doesn't mean he still isn't capable of going through a clean routine that proves the commitment that we've made to the sport. If you try and run every single dog off the field and judge every club trial like a national, the sport will die.


----------



## Cschmidt88 (Nov 24, 2010)

I'm so conflicted on this topic. Because yes, I would like to think that the dogs who title earned it in more ways than one.

But I can also relate as the owner of a neutered mixed breed dog, that I would like to participate in these sports and hopefully title if I dedicate myself to it. Even though he's far from your ideal sport dog. We do it for fun and the experience.

I would like it if the judges were honest on these issues, could spy weak nerves, and that all the judge's notes, etc would be viewable to the public maybe? So you can research how a potential breeding dog has trialed in the past. 

I'm not sure, this is mostly rambling on my part. It's really hard to make it fair for both sides. This is why I really feel its best to go out and see the dogs in person before choosing a dog from a breeding. Versus just going off their titles.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

What about all the police dogs that shouldnt be? This topic never seems to go anywhere.
The only thing that would make sense is a seperate breed worthiness test. Make the KKL about the dog not the training. This will never happen ofcourse due to the show dogs with vested interest.


----------



## Cschmidt88 (Nov 24, 2010)

I like the idea of something separate... if only.


----------



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

No reason for the sport to die, just stop calling it a ( breed worthiness) test.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

Cschmidt88 said:


> I'm so conflicted on this topic. Because yes, I would like to think that the dogs who title earned it in more ways than one.
> 
> But I can also relate as the owner of a neutered mixed breed dog, that I would like to participate in these sports and hopefully title if I dedicate myself to it. Even though he's far from your ideal sport dog. We do it for fun and the experience.
> 
> ...



Honestly think about some of the dogs you saw yesterday. Think about the ones that didn't come forward or looked like they didn't want to be there. Most of those dogs still scored well into the 80's. Can you honestly say they were title worthy? I'm not trying to single anyone out. That's why I'm trying to find third party video's online and not use any video footage I have from various trials or clubs I've worked. Just if everyone gets a pass then what's the point? Again, I've seen this in IPO, SDA and PSA recently. 

I get the hard work. I work my tail off with my dogs as well as other peoples. But just because you work hard doesn't always mean you should earn a trophy. I would rather know I truly earned a title than have it handed to me on a technicalities. 

What I've never understood was the club, regional and national levels. Do the rules change for the level? Or is that subject to the judge as well?


----------



## Cschmidt88 (Nov 24, 2010)

I just have a hard time cutting it separate so easily. It would be neat if we could having something similar to how conformation works. There's the main, fully titled dogs (I'm not saying conformation only titles worthy dogs, just using it as a structure example), but there's also a side class for those with dogs that are altered/not intended for breeding. So they can title too, although the title is different and the implications are different.

As far as why it changes at regional/national... In Mondio anyway, it's the judges. Their critiques seem harsher and there is more pressure put on the dogs from the decoys to find holes in their training. They normally do this anyway, but it just seems amplified. I could be wrong though.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

martemchik said:


> You'd be asking the judges to be way more subjective than they should be. Especially as today the whole goal is for the judges to be as objective as possible and we constantly hear issues when a judge isn't objective and scores are questionable.


If we win, the judge is objective. If we fail, the judge is subjective.
In humans: a high scoring student has good brains. A low scoring student has a bad teacher.
It's all about egos.


----------



## Cschmidt88 (Nov 24, 2010)

mycobraracr said:


> Honestly think about some of the dogs you saw yesterday. Think about the ones that didn't come forward or looked like they didn't want to be there. Most of those dogs still scored well into the 80's. Can you honestly say they were title worthy? I'm not trying to single anyone out. That's why I'm trying to find third party video's online and not use any video footage I have from various trials or clubs I've worked. Just if everyone gets a pass then what's the point? Again, I've seen this in IPO, SDA and PSA recently.
> 
> I get the hard work. I work my tail off with my dogs as well as other peoples. But just because you work hard doesn't always mean you should earn a trophy. I would rather know I truly earned a title than have it handed to me on a technicalities.
> 
> What I've never understood was the club, regional and national levels. Do the rules change for the level? Or is that subject to the judge as well?


I forgot to add on what I saw yesterday sorry, long day at work has my brain a bit fried! 

I did feel that it seemed too easy.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

wolfy dog said:


> If we win, the judge is objective. If we fail, the judge is subjective.
> In humans: a high scoring student has good brains. A low scoring student has a bad teacher.
> It's all about egos.



Yes I believe you have it !, Which leads me to one of my more favorite sarcastic lines during competitions of different sorts..when someone is whining ...." one must remember, you are only as good as your next excuse"....


SuperG


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

GatorDog said:


> I have to disagree with this. I don't think that a dog who "brings the fight" makes a reasonable excuse to be out of control. There are plenty of extremely well trained dogs who fight **** hard. If they're out of control, its based on a training issue.
> 
> 
> 
> I could post a video of my weak nerved dog getting an IPO3 title but I'd still back up the fact that he earned it. We put the time and the work in and our scores and TSB rating reflected the dogs underlying genetic/training issues, but that doesn't mean he still isn't capable of going through a clean routine that proves the commitment that we've made to the sport. If you try and run every single dog off the field and judge every club trial like a national, the sport will die.


there are plenty, but not enough. Trials l've been to have about 30 percent showing true power, others go through the motions but aren't what l'd consider strong dogs and probably could be run off the field if pressured. 
Because it is a 'sport' many trainers don't want to have the dog powering up as much as the dog has the potential to do so. It isn't necessary for points when trialing. Photo's of dogs showing snarly teeth aren't what I'm posting about when it comes to power, it is controlling the helper with strength and courage. In IPO it is about deep grips and staying in the pocket, and outing when the helper locks up. So many dogs are auto outing now which is acceptable.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

mycobraracr said:


> What I've never understood was the club, regional and national levels. Do the rules change for the level? Or is that subject to the judge as well?


the pencil is sharper when trialing at higher levels.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

onyx'girl said:


> the pencil is sharper when trialing at higher levels.



I know that. I just don't understand why. The rules don't change. It seems that now days everyone has to be in the 90's. Why? 8 out of 10 is still a darn good percentage. If a dog scores a 90 at a club trial and that same routine is only a 75 and a national level, then why not just score the dog at a 75 at a national level. Then they would know what to work on. Yes I know judges critiques tell you, but if you just scored a 90 are you really going to take the critique as serious as you would if you got a 75? I'm not saying I'm the best trainer in the world. I'm far from it. I'm far from the best trialer in the world. I will post videos later from Sunday to show how much I suck. That's not the point I'm trying to make. 




onyx'girl said:


> So many dogs are auto outing now which is acceptable.



This is yet another pet peeve of mine.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

You’re not considering how important it is for people to keep going with the sport. There are a lot of people that do this sport and if they were to get in the 250s each time out, they’re likely to quit. Also, remember that in the United States, these sports are optional, you don’t need the title. So if you’re going to get as nit-picky as they are at nationals on the club level…there are a lot of dogs that would never get titled and then all you’ll get is people to not even train/trial/test and just breed their dogs anyways. Trust me...even someone like you, if your dog at a club trial was to be judged like they do at nationals, you'd be extremely disheartened and likely not learn a single thing. You'd just start to think that the standards are way too high and that its not something you can ever achieve.

I hate doing this, but after going to nationals this year, I saw a lot of great dogs get scores in the 70s across the board. If those were the standards at club level, you’d probably never see a titled show line. You’d definitely not see a titled show line by an amateur or someone just looking to title a dog and then see what happens. I’ll also say that even some of the breeders on this forum that we hold in high regard wouldn’t be able to get their dogs titled. Take a look at who scored in the 90s (especially in obedience) at nationals…those trainers (and dogs) are truly the cream of the crop.

So if you’re arguing, or saying that those dogs don’t deserve titles, and therefore shouldn’t be bred, that’s fine. But you’ll just see people not even try, not worry about even “going through the motions” or doing even a little bit of training to see what the dog has in order to breed it to something better.

I know this isn’t a discussion about breeding dogs…but let’s be serious, at the end of the day, MOST people are titling in order to breed at some point or prove that their animal should be bred. So the argument about “what should be titled?” does extend into “what should be bred?” And so all I see that would happen if you make the OPTIONAL standards higher, is more people not even worrying about those standards and just doing what they want anyways.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

MHO:
I don't care about titles. I am looking for sound mind and body. Titles do not always reflect these. You have to see the dogs in person or know the pedigrees really well. I like to see adult dogs from the breeder's lines and talk to their owners.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

wolfy dog said:


> MHO:
> I don't care about titles. I am looking for sound mind and body. Titles do not always reflect these. You have to see the dogs in person or know the pedigrees really well. I like to see adult dogs from the breeder's lines and talk to their owners.


And how do you get to see “sound mind and body” without the dog being actively trained towards or trialing towards a title? Do you just care about how the dog is at home? Because let’s be clear, the way a dog handles a “regular pet” environment doesn’t say much about its nerves. The dogs OP is talking about, I’m sure they’re just fine in the home, it’s just when there is pressure and an elevated stress environment that they break down and you truly get to see what kind of nerves they have.

Sorry...I've heard your line of thinking many times, and I'm always interested in what people then expect to see out of a dog that isn't doing anything more challenging than being a pet.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

I have observed the dogs at the breeder, talked about his philosophy, see how they respond to strangers when let out of their kennels, see the breeder work his dogs, go to gatherings of these dogs and their owners and then go by my gut feeling. I have Deja from these lines and am very happy with her. Granted, I don't do any of the protection training, Schutzhund etc. Seeing them off duty is just as important as on duty IMHO.
And by the way, there is a lot you can do in dog sports that is challenging enough besides protection work. Being a sports dogs and pet dog go well together. Nothing wrong with having a good pet life for an active dog.


----------



## Baillif (Jun 26, 2013)

You learn more about the breed worthiness of a dog in the training of that dog than you do the final score of a trial or the end product of the training itself. You can either spot a good dog or you can't. There are a lot of things that cloud the picture to a more casual observer. Weak handlers can make a dog look stronger. Overbearing or bad handlers and trainers can suppress a dog or leave it looking unsure. Good training can cover temperament issues in a lot of places and certain trials may not be able to reveal the cracks.

Trials are better than nothing. It isn't perfect but it's better than nothing. The trainers are on trial as much if not more than the dogs as things stand.


----------



## DutchKarin (Nov 23, 2013)

Are some of the bite sports better than others at ramping up the requirements for progressively higher titles so that at the top, it isn't about a completing a "routine" as much as about competence at protection work in all the important categories (e.g., nerves, bringing in the fight, etc)?

P.S. This coming from someone who does not train in bite sports and who has been to one IPO regional competition to watch the IPO III obedience and protection. Very very limited experience to none.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

wolfy dog said:


> I have observed the dogs at the breeder, talked about his philosophy, see how they respond to strangers when let out of their kennels, see the breeder work his dogs, go to gatherings of these dogs and their owners and then go by my gut feeling. I have Deja from these lines and am very happy with her. Granted, I don't do any of the protection training, Schutzhund etc. Seeing them off duty is just as important as on duty IMHO.
> And by the way, there is a lot you can do in dog sports that is challenging enough besides protection work. Being a sports dogs and pet dog go well together. Nothing wrong with having a good pet life for an active dog.


I didn't say protection work, but any sport. In either case, you're training the dog and showing what the dog is capable of that is more than just being a pet dog. Do I personally prefer it be protection work? Absolutely. No amount of agility trialing will match the pressure of a protection routine. But if that's what you want to do...go for it. I'm not going to be getting a dog from that type of breeder anyways.

I'm glad those things worked out for you, but how is a brand new person to a breed supposed to trust their own gut feeling? Especially when they're looking at a dog, they want to get a puppy, they've probably never seen anything above "pet obedience." You have to really place yourself in the shoes of a novice dog buyer and realize how amazed they get by any trained dog.

You should realize that no "smart" breeder is going to invite you over to see a crazy/hectic dog. Most dogs that they're willing to show you will more than likely be pretty obedient and well behaved. A good breeder isn't going to be showing off a sire and dam that are foaming at the mouth at the sight of a stranger. Sorry...but I've seen way too many breeders that are amazing people by having "well behaved pets" that in no way should be bred just because they're good pets. That's exactly how this breed loses it's working ability and temperament, when people care more about the way the dog acts in the house without wanting to see that the dog is also capable of something else.

It's like baliff said...you learn a lot about the dog during training. So if you're not training it towards something, you end up learning nothing.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

martemchik said:


> I didn't say protection work, but any sport. In either case, you're training the dog and showing what the dog is capable of that is more than just being a pet dog. Do I personally prefer it be protection work? Absolutely. No amount of agility trialing will match the pressure of a protection routine. But if that's what you want to do...go for it. I'm not going to be getting a dog from that type of breeder anyways.
> 
> I'm glad those things worked out for you, but how is a brand new person to a breed supposed to trust their own gut feeling? Especially when they're looking at a dog, they want to get a puppy, they've probably never seen anything above "pet obedience." You have to really place yourself in the shoes of a novice dog buyer and realize how amazed they get by any trained dog.
> 
> ...


OK....


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

This thread isn't about what's important for breeding. It's not about if a dog is behaved on or off a field. If you play in a PROTECTION sport shouldn't there be some form of protecting being done by the dog? Shouldn't there be an image to strive for and uphold? Should a dog cowering behind its handler but not running off the field so accumulating enough points to title get the title? I don't care what sport or what breed. Or is this just another example of everyone is a winner so everyone gets a participation trophy? I agree that in training is where dogs are truly tested. In training we put dogs through everything we can possibly imagine. That's not the point of this thread.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

mycobraracr said:


> Or is this just another example of everyone is a winner so everyone gets a participation trophy? .



Way too much of that happening these days...

"Step right up and give it a whirl...everyone's a winner"


SuperG


----------



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

mycobraracr said:


> This thread isn't about what's important for breeding. It's not about if a dog is behaved on or off a field. If you play in a PROTECTION sport shouldn't there be some form of protecting being done by the dog? Shouldn't there be an image to strive for and uphold? Should a dog cowering behind its handler but not running off the field so accumulating enough points to title get the title? I don't care what sport or what breed. Or is this just another example of everyone is a winner so everyone gets a participation trophy? I agree that in training is where dogs are truly tested. In training we put dogs through everything we can possibly imagine. That's not the point of this thread.


I've thought for a long time now that there should be a nerve test completely separate from any sport.

Something to show you what genetics have created not what training or politics can accomplish.

The GSD as well as other breeds are supposed to be protective but time and again we are told on this forum that you are supposed to jump in front of your dog if either you or the dog are threatened. In other words you protect your dog not the other way around. I'm not saying we shouldn't keep them from obvious dangerous situations but we ought to let them be what they were made for.

People don't seem to want the characteristics that breeds were created for anymore.

It's not going to happen in IPO because there are too many interests who like things the way they are.

For breeders titles help sell dogs, whether they are worthy or not.

Everyone should want dogs with strong nerves and a good nerve test would help us know what we have genetically.

Even if we wind up with a dog that doesn't have stellar nerves it's worthwhile to know what you are working with.

No I don't do IPO but I am interested in what the breed was and where it is headed.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

Pet dogs also need strong nerves and shouldn't be regarded as "just" pet dogs. What do you think a pet dog needs to be to live in a household with young kids and people who do not (care to) train? You need strong nerves as a dog (and as a parent). Training can hide this, as stated earlier.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

wolfy dog said:


> Pet dogs also need strong nerves and shouldn't be regarded as "just" pet dogs. What do you think a pet dog needs to be to live in a household with young kids and people who do not (care to) train? You need strong nerves as a dog (and as a parent). Training can hide this, as stated earlier.


Absolutely, which is why 99% of dogs are pets and are living perfectly fine in households all across America.

OP is talking about raising the standard of nerve, you're busy trying to convince us to lower it.

Get your dog into something and actually find out what kind of nerve it has, then let me know if the level of nerve to live in a house is the same as it is to actually protect someone.

"As someone said." Maybe you should figure it out for yourself and not just try to use other people's words to prove your own weak point.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

Jack's Dad said:


> I've thought for a long time now that there should be a nerve test completely separate from any sport.
> 
> Something to show you what genetics have created not what training or politics can accomplish.
> 
> ...


I think the temperament test if given correctly and judged accurately can give one an idea of what kind of nerves a dog has. It's at least a step in the direction of a separate test of nerves other then IPO. It's a mixture of different things and recovery time and really interesting to watch. There were quite a few dogs that did not pass it including IPO dogs. Early on in the test the evaluator was able to pinpoint dogs that had aggression issues or weren't stable. I was surprised how many didn't make it past overtures from a friendly stranger or a can full of pennies shaking out of nowhere. The gun test and the opening of the umbrella was something to see also. Lots of dogs weren't able to recover from noises or being scared out of the blue. It might not be considered that great of a test for some people or even considered a difficult test, but it's more of real life scenarios without any body equipment being used and the number of dogs that flunked was pretty high. It's something to see how a dog or your dog would react if someone jumped out of nowhere and is coming at you. It was really interesting to see IPO dogs fail miserably at that test. From watching those very dogs that failed at the very end were the ones that did ok with everything else but took longer to recover and needed more coaxing from the handlers to do so.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

llombardo said:


> I think the temperament test if given correctly and judged accurately can give one an idea of what kind of nerves a dog has. It's at least a step in the directikn of a separate test of nerves other then IPO. It's a mixture of different things and recovery time and really interesting to watch. There were quite a few dogs that did not pass it including IPO dogs. Early on in the test the evaluator was able to pinpoint dogs that had aggression issues or weren't stable. I was surprised how many didn't make it past overtures from a friendly stranger or a can full of pennies shaking out of nowhere. The gun test and the opening of the umbrella was something to see also. Lots of dogs weren't able to recover from noises or being scared out of the blue. It might not be considered that great of a test for some people or even considered a difficult test, but it's more of real life scenarios without any body equipment being used and the number of dogs that flunked was pretty high.


You're describing the GSDCA Temperament Test. Mostly taken by ASL lines. You'll get Schutzhund dogs there once in a while, I personally haven't seen a single IPO dog fail the test. My male passed the test right around one year old, not a single issue with anything, this was 2 years before he started any sort of protection training. Most dogs I saw failed on the simplest of things, like the walking over a tarp or grate. And of course that shows a lot about the dog's nerves, but many of the tests are like you said...real life scenarios that the dogs SHOULD be able to handle without any issue.

I think at there was a thread on here about the test once, where Carmen told of how a decade or so ago the Canadian or the American nationals tried to get the conformation dogs to take the test...the first year, most of the dogs failed...the second year, basically all the competitors refused to take it because they didn't want people thinking anything bad about their dogs.

Either way...if you do find the test and are able to take it...it's at least something above and beyond the dog at your home. It does show the dog can handle something above and beyond what its used to in its own back yard.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

llombardo said:


> I think the temperament test if given correctly and judged accurately can give one an idea of what kind of nerves a dog has. It's at least a step in the direction of a separate test of nerves other then IPO. It's a mixture of different things and recovery time and really interesting to watch. There were quite a few dogs that did not pass it including IPO dogs. Early on in the test the evaluator was able to pinpoint dogs that had aggression issues or weren't stable. I was surprised how many didn't make it past overtures from a friendly stranger or a can full of pennies shaking out of nowhere. The gun test and the opening of the umbrella was something to see also. Lots of dogs weren't able to recover from noises or being scared out of the blue. It might not be considered that great of a test for some people or even considered a difficult test, but it's more of real life scenarios without any body equipment being used and the number of dogs that flunked was pretty high. It's something to see how a dog or your dog would react if someone jumped out of nowhere and is coming at you. It was really interesting to see IPO dogs fail miserably at that test. From watching those very dogs that failed at the very end were the ones that did ok with everything else but took longer to recover and needed more coaxing from the handlers to do so.


Agreed. I did Schutzhund for a while while living in Europe and noticed that to dogs it seems to be just a conditioned game. Some didn't even want to bite when someone else was the agitator in the suit or couldn't preform in another location than the training site, where they looked confident and stable until some variable changed.
Temperament testing for obedience classes consisited in observations on: the reactivity towards the umbrella test, behavior in a crowd, bond with owner, noise sensitivity etc. Personally I think that shows a more realisitc picture than a Schutzhund title.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

So for some reason you're all assuming people can't train for those tests?

Guess we're replacing human threat with an umbrella now...and that's going to test how protective a GSD is. An open umbrella is somehow more threatening than a human just because the human might have a sleeve on.

A dog that can't perform at another field is clearly not as stable as what is preferred, and yet you all talk about as if that's what all Schutzhund people look for. It's kind of funny the assumptions being made. Just because you've seen 5 dogs that have acted that way, doesn't mean the rest of them do.

How many of your dogs have passed the temperament test offered by the GSDCA?


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

martemchik said:


> So for some reason you're all assuming people can't train for those tests?
> 
> Guess we're replacing human threat with an umbrella now...and that's going to test how protective a GSD is. An open umbrella is somehow more threatening than a human just because the human might have a sleeve on.
> 
> ...


Your missing the point its about recovery time. Opening a huge umbrella is a dogs face within a couple feet of it and its not expecting it can be and has been a huge fail for some dogs. A solid dog will recover, an unstable or dogs without good nerves probably won't, no matter if it's trained for it or not. A can being shook from behind a blind is going to scare them or its not. A gun shot will scare them or it wont. It isn't the training, it's the dog and what its made of.


I found the test with the stranger jumping out of nowhere yelling to be the truest test or the closest to what one would encounter in real life. In real life some scumbag isn't going to jump out of the bushes with a sleeve on and come at me. That person will be acting like an idiot most likely with a weapon. Do I want my dog to protect me? Yes and No. I want them to stand their ground so I can get away. I want us to be a team and work together.


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

Titles in dog sports, just like belts in martial arts do not show real world fight competency.

If you want a real protection dog, you will have better luck with a top trainer, training your dog, and him telling you what your dog can or cant do.

Titles have their uses. Definitely for breeding. Definitely for sport.
A real working dog however has no need to be titled...

You can replicate things a little.. You can train them up using those 'guidelines'...
But just like a professional/amateur boxer who has never been hit hard many times before his first pro fight, will not be 'proven' or fight trained... You cant hit pads, never spar.. And then compete, and expect good results.

I dont see how a dog could handle similar pressure, basing it just on a title.
I keep saying this.. The title means nothing to the dog.

It's performance will not increase after attaining a title.
Its just to show off your work to the people around you.. To prove you worked the dog for breeding... To prove your training methods... And to prove the dog has something more than the other dogs involved. I am sure temperament is tested... You just cant say this dog will for example cut it in the same way a police dog would for police work.

I think its nice there are 'easier' titles to attain, and harder ones...
If titling is your thing... you can compete in multiple dog sports.. Or just train for functionality...

Or you could do your one sport and achieve highly in it... But you will obviously lose out in the 'complete' working dog.. But thats ok... 
Some people are karate experts.. They achieve highly in that sport.. They are athletic, flexible, etc... And you can use those skills for further training, depending on how you approach it.. But you cant throw a ripe karate expert in an MMA ring and expect him to do well with no further training.

MMA is the perfect model for this...
Human discovery is always two decades ahead of any philosophical thinking in dogs.

This is exactly, but I mean EXACTLY... The type of discussions and critiques people would have of belted systems like Karate, TKD, Kung Fu...

Bruce Lee spoke about it a long time ago.. But the reality did not sink in to the world until the first couple of UFC's.


----------



## Mikelia (Aug 29, 2012)

I did the GSDCC temperament test with my male and he passed easily. Two IPO dogs failed, the umbrella stressed them out too much and when the bad guy came out they backed up past their handlers. 
My rescue male passed this test with his previous owner. I honestly don't know how he did, she must have done some serious training with him before hand. IMO a dog like him, although sweet as can be, should not pass a temperament test like that. Maybe a lot changed from when he was younger to when I got him, he went through a lot, but I still don't think he should have passed. 
I don't have much to say about testing dogs in bite sports as I have never gone that route with my dogs, but I can say the TEC (or TT) is not a true test of temperament. It is a step in the right direction, but you can totally condition a dog to that test. You can condition a dog to accept umbrellas opening in their faces, you can condition a dog that a guy wearing a poncho and waving a stick while yelling is nothing to worry about. In my test they shook a bucket with rocks instead of pennies in a can, much louder than pennies I may add, and my dog thought they were bringing him water.
My dog is a pet that I enjoy competing in obedience and scent work with. He passed his CGN, TEC and therapy dog evaluation. He is a pretty bomb proof dog but he would not be considered ideal temperament for those who believe in the true temperament of the breed.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

llombardo said:


> Your missing the point its about recovery time. Opening a huge umbrella is a dogs face within a couple feet of it and its not expecting it can be and has been a huge fail for some dogs. A solid dog will recover, an unstable or dogs without good nerves probably won't, no matter if it's trained for it or not. A can being shook from behind a blind is going to scare them or its not. A gun shot will scare them or it wont. It isn't the training, it's the dog and what its made of.
> 
> 
> I found the test with the stranger jumping out of nowhere yelling to be the truest test or the closest to what one would encounter in real life. In real life some scumbag isn't going to jump out of the bushes with a sleeve on and come at me. That person will be acting like an idiot most likely with a weapon. Do I want my dog to protect me? Yes and No. I want them to stand their ground so I can get away. I want us to be a team and work together.


Actually, I got the point. Jack's Dad said the point earlier...people don't want a real GSD anymore. They don't want the GSD for what its supposed to be...you said it right there...you want a dog that doesn't protect you, but works with you as a team (AKA you protect the dog because the dog doesn't actually know what to do).

Do I want my dog to protect me? YES. There is never a no when it comes to that question.

By the way...to a dog that hasn't been trained, a sleeve doesn't mean anything. So if the bad guy does jump out with a sleeve...it's not a genetically engrained signal for a GSD that they're allowed to bite. If your dog has never seen a sleeve...it will react to the guy the same way it would if the guy was just wearing a raincoat and carrying a stick. So your argument about a guy jumping out being different than a guy with a sleeve, makes no sense.

It's hard to argue with people that seem to forget that in Schutzhund, a dog does have to deal with gun shots, a dog does have to deal with a group (one that goes in on it during the BH, I know sometimes you have to remind people that there is a pretty extensive temperament test within Schutzhund called the BH). Sure, it doesn't have to deal with a big, scary, umbrella...but then again, I guess an umbrella is the one thing in the world that you can't train a dog to handle in order to pass a test. That was news to me...as people have trained dogs to deal with the pressure of biting, getting driven, barking in the blind...but an umbrella...that's just over the top and no matter how much training you put into the dog, it will always be scared of one.

Basically...the people arguing that the GSDCA temperament test is anywhere near the nerve test that IPO or other bite sport are those that want to believe their dogs are just as stable as others. They've proven they can be "normal pets" and that's just enough for those people. They don't want their GSDs to be the way they should be, they just want a pointy eared dog that looks like it might do something based on the reputation it has gotten from the dogs in the past that were actually capable of doing something. The temperament test is just something for people that don't want to put in any work in actually training their dog to do something more difficult, and still try to tell people that their dog has solid nerves.

Keep arguing for the dumbing down and watering down of our breed, it's definitely a noble cause.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

Lykoz said:


> Titles in dog sports, just like belts in martial arts do not show real world fight competency.
> 
> If you want a real protection dog, you will have better luck with a top trainer, training your dog, and him telling you what your dog can or cant do.
> 
> ...



Isn't MMA a sport? Why is it that you believe titles have no meaning? Is it because dogs that shouldn't have earned them still pass? Thus the topic of this thread? Titles do have meaning. Those that say they don't have never put forth the work to get one. But that's not what we are talking about. What I'm talking about isn't about good or bad training. It's about what's in the dog. You don't have to train special operations guys in the military to be intelligent alpha males. They already are. They are born that way. 

I'm not going to get into the other "temperament" tests. Any test where the same things happen over and over can be conditioned. Also the majority of serious GSD people that I know wouldn't waist their time with it. Therefore any pole sample of "IPO" dogs that failed but wild coyote/hyena mix passed with flying colors is irrelevant.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

I really do believe that the reason you can't "turn up" the difficulty on the titles is that they're already hard enough to achieve. I mean what? You're talking probably 1% of GSD that are titled in IPO? If not less. If you turn up the difficulty, get sharper with the pencil, you're just going to discourage people from doing anything in the first place.

I've trained long enough, and with enough people to know that:
a) majority of people don't have the ability to train a dog to a national level
b) majority of people don't want to put in the time to train a dog to a national level
c) majority of people don't have the ability to learn what it takes to get to a national level
d) majority of people don't understand the time commitment outside of "training sessions" that it takes to get a dog to a national level
e) majority of people do not have the trainers/helpers around them that can help them and push them to a national level

So if we start trialing club level trials the way nationals are judged...people will be running from the sport faster than you can imagine. There aren't that many people out there that will step up to the plate and take on that challenge, mostly because they truly are incapable of it due to the reasons I listed above. There's a reason the same 5 people compete for the national championship every year, and the WUSV teams are made up of the same people...


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

martemchik said:


> I really do believe that the reason you can't "turn up" the difficulty on the titles is that they're already hard enough to achieve. I mean what? You're talking probably 1% of GSD that are titled in IPO? If not less. If you turn up the difficulty, get sharper with the pencil, you're just going to discourage people from doing anything in the first place.
> 
> I've trained long enough, and with enough people to know that:
> a) majority of people don't have the ability to train a dog to a national level
> ...


This sounds right.
Route to progress.. And Route to achieve...

Their needs to be titles that are achievable by most.
People need to be incentivised to take part.

There are different levels.. Eg. IPO 1 2 3...
There can be different sports.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

martemchik said:


> I really do believe that the reason you can't "turn up" the difficulty on the titles is that they're already hard enough to achieve. I mean what? You're talking probably 1% of GSD that are titled in IPO? If not less. If you turn up the difficulty, get sharper with the pencil, you're just going to discourage people from doing anything in the first place.
> 
> I've trained long enough, and with enough people to know that:
> a) majority of people don't have the ability to train a dog to a national level
> ...



What I'm talking about isn't about the training though. It's about the dog. If in the protection phase, the dog is not showing confidence then should it pass? That's not a training issue, that's a dog issue. So I guess you were right, in some ways it comes back to breeding and breeding practices. But it's not all on breeders. I think it's a combination of things. What's going to motivate breeders that title dogs to stay honest and breed truly breed worthy dogs? Maybe titles not getting handed out to dogs that display weak nerves or lack of confidence?


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

mycobraracr said:


> What I'm talking about isn't about the training though. It's about the dog. If in the protection phase, the dog is not showing confidence then should it pass? That's not a training issue, that's a dog issue. So I guess you were right, in some ways it comes back to breeding and breeding practices. But it's not all on breeders. I think it's a combination of things. What's going to motivate breeders that title dogs to stay honest and breed truly breed worthy dogs? Maybe titles not getting handed out to dogs that display weak nerves or lack of confidence?


That's where you have to really know the breeder and understand why they do what they do. There are plenty that will just breed whatever, push the dog through even when it has weaker nerves, and then breed it because they’ve already invested thousands of dollars into the dog and they need to recoup some of that. Then there are those that won’t breed that dog once they realize that and will even stop working with it when they see those tendencies in training. I just don’t think that making the titles tougher to attain will do anything, especially when they’re optional titles and not necessary for breeding in this country. I think it will just lead to more of a fall out, and then we won’t get any testing and you’ll just have a bunch of people that will claim their dogs are good because they’ve done it for decades and they know what they’re doing rather than actually working their dogs.

Same with people...95% of the people in bite sport are still pet owners, they're not going to get rid of their dog when they figure out it doesn't have the perfect nerve for the sport. Especially if they know they can still get by. So if those people can't get rid of their dog, and aren't in a position to get another one. And the only option they have is to stop because their dog will never earn the title...then they leave the sport for a decade or more until they get another dog.

In protection…I think the line of “did the dog run?” is high enough…can’t really worry about how close the dog is to the blind, where the dog is biting on the sleeve, how the dog is pulling on the sleeve, ect. It’s just too subjective and the moment you start asking judges to look at more of those things, you’re just asking for more issues with judging and today, with everything being videotaped, you’ll get plenty of heat when a dog is DQ’d for doing the same thing as a dog that didn’t get DQ’d because the judge had to make a subjective decision at that time.


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

mycobraracr said:


> Isn't MMA a sport? Why is it that you believe titles have no meaning? Is it because dogs that shouldn't have earned them still pass? Thus the topic of this thread? Titles do have meaning. Those that say they don't have never put forth the work to get one. But that's not what we are talking about. What I'm talking about isn't about good or bad training. It's about what's in the dog. You don't have to train special operations guys in the military to be intelligent alpha males. They already are. They are born that way.
> 
> I'm not going to get into the other "temperament" tests. Any test where the same things happen over and over can be conditioned. Also the majority of serious GSD people that I know wouldn't waist their time with it. Therefore any pole sample of "IPO" dogs that failed but wild coyote/hyena mix passed with flying colors is irrelevant.



I didn't say it did not have meaning...
You just need to interpret what it means.
MMA is built around a concept of aliveness and restriction of rules to the point that the teqniques can be practised in real life against real resisting opponents and the athletes can come of those training sessions alive, well, vision intact etc.. Whilst having performed the techniques in real time.. Against resisting unpredictable opponents...

Lets look at Ninjitsu for example... The style has lost touch with reality... There are no ninjas around us.. They train based on theory and they could never actually accomplish any of those techniques against somebody who is fighting and hitting back... They show eye pokes, but never learn to control a resisting non-compliant opponent trying to stop them doing the technique... Then I ask.. How many people have they really blinded? They train it day in and day out.. But can never actually perform the technique.

Now lets look at RBSD... (Reality Based Self Defence styles) Like Krav Maga..
Israeli fighting system...
Strengths: It is modern. Some of the stuff could be more 'reality based' in dealing with weapons etc.. And your surroundings..
Military/police personnel are 100 times better at working as a group for example to disarm an individual safely.

However stick any of them in an unarmed ring with an MMA fighter, irrelevant of rules... 1 on 1... A good MMA practitioner will always win, over the best of other codes.
This is because this is the purpose he trains for...

Throw an MMA fighter in a boxing setting... He will do well.. Its part of his training... But he will never reach the top as long as his focus is MMA...
Similarly throw a boxer into an MMA fight.. And on the ground he will look like he has never trained a day in his life....
So the crux of the arguement is this... Why are we training? Why are we engaging in that particular sport...

An professional MMA fighter will pick up other things a lot faster because of all the cross training. But he can not achieve reliably before he is tested under pressure and taught new things in a different setting.
So now people are saying IPO needs to be harder... But for what purpose?
Are you trying to get a police dog out of it? Are you trying to get a sport dog?

What does a non-nervy dog even mean outside of your circle of training?
Some dogs will react differently to different stimuli...

You cant have a generic test and expect the dogs titled in those tests to be real protection or real something else...
People find ways to cheat the test... The test becomes predictable...
The opponents and the way the opponents react does not change...

In an MMA fight, your opponent is always different... Each fight is completely different to the next... This concept is called ALIVENESS... It means you are training against resisting, unpredictable opponents... It means you can train at close to full throttle safely... And survive to tell the tale... It means you can fight at absolute full throttle and win by KO or when other guys submits... (Basically begs to not die, get his arm broke..) It does not get much more real than that..

Judo is also based on alivenes... However the rules are very restricted..
BJJ similarly is based on aliveness.. But now we see BJJ splintering into the 'sport' guys, the MMA guys, The Self-defense guys...

You can not expect a predictable points based system to create aliveness.
It is naive to think it can. You take it for what it is.

I dont believe the best police dog trainers for example would even bother with titling their dogs... It would be a waste of time for them...
They know what the dogs need to achieve.. A standardised test will do nothing for them. By then they have enough experience to set their own criteria...

So what is IPO... It is a standardisation test. Its for breeding... Its for sport...
Its a base to get started.. It is skills the dog can use to go into Reality Based protection work..
But the top guys wont bother with a title when they already know what they need the dog to do..

Titles are to 'prove' something to others...
Its for the general public to be able to pick a breeder that makes some effort in working the dog, or which breeds with those type of dogs...
It shows a standard... Otherwise everyone can just lie and claim whatever they want..

But if you are training for yourself, and have nothing to prove... What is the point really, other than having fun and being rewarded for your hard work?
If you really know what you are doing, you don't need a standardised test to prove your dog can do it...

Then there is the world championships, where we see the best of the best..
Different level altogether...
An Olympic Judo blackbelt for example can throw 10 normal blackbelts back to back, no problem without breaking a sweat...

You need to take things in context...
You cant say, oh those people and dogs dont deserve a title... 
Make it harder for yourself if you think its too easy...
Get IPO3 instead of 1... Get a mondior title if you want to...
Go win the world championships...

What does is it bother you if other people are getting titles? As long as their is a set standard... And it is consistent... People can work themselves up...

Or they can train in their own thing, for their own purpose...

An IPO1, will never be an ultimate showing... It is to get more people involved... To work towards something.. To increase the breeding pools of somewhat appropriate dogs...

A lot of dogs maybe can achieve that... But if anything that is a good thing...

Not every breed can get titled in IPO... or at least its a lot harder for some breeds...
If you are something more.. Or want something more you can take it to the next level..
What do you care if somebody with a less capable dog, or less capable training can achieve a lower title?
If everyone can achieve those titles, it shows the breed is going in the right direction... And that you can work for higher, better titles to stand out...


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

Lykoz said:


> I didn't say it did not have meaning...
> You just need to interpret what it means.
> MMA is built around a concept of aliveness and restriction of rules to the point that the teqniques can be practised in real life against real resisting opponents and the athletes can come of those training sessions alive, well, vision intact etc.. Whilst having performed the techniques in real time.. Against resisting unpredictable opponents...
> 
> ...



You're only focusing on IPO. I've mentioned other sports in this thread. There are sports with surprise scenarios where it's not pattern based. Where there is a decoy not a helper. Where the decoy is trying to run the dog and show it's weakness. Should those dogs still pass? The whole picture still needs to be taken into account. These are supposed to be protection dogs. Sport or not, there has to be some aspect of protection happening. Also many police dogs do get titled. I know, I've decoyed these trials. And if we're talking about police GSD's, then most of the time they come from titled parents with titled backgrounds. So... 

I will also add, that this weakness is starting to show up in the police dog world as well. Is it because we are too afraid to say it's weak? We don't want to hurt peoples feelings? Is it because for many it's all about the money and how many dogs they can push out? When people start getting killed because there K9 partner didn't do it's job, is that when we will start looking at where it went wrong. Will it be too late? It all started somewhere. So where do we start to fix it?


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Can you give some actual scenarios or what you saw in a dog that you'd DQ a dog for. As a person that's seen some things, I have some idea of what you're talking about, but I still think that as long as the dog doesn't run (or if its on lead and it's not clearly trying to get off the field), it should pass given its done everything else that is expected.

So what are some things you'd DQ a dog for?


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

mycobraracr said:


> You're only focusing on IPO. I've mentioned other sports in this thread. There are sports with surprise scenarios where it's not pattern based. Where there is a decoy not a helper. Where the decoy is trying to run the dog and show it's weakness. Should those dogs still pass? The whole picture still needs to be taken into account. These are supposed to be protection dogs. Sport or not, there has to be some aspect of protection happening. Also many police dogs do get titled. I know, I've decoyed these trials. And if we're talking about police GSD's, then most of the time they come from titled parents with titled backgrounds. So...


I dont know... No idea...
You can answer that better.

I am just making a point that titles/belts/systems have different purposes...
There is nothing wrong with having titles everyone can achieve and others that are harder to achieve.

Its nice to get more people involved.
Its nice to be able to do something for fun.

If anything the dog world maybe could be more open to discussing what each title really means, instead of defending what their title is.
Acknowledging both strengths and limitations.

I think IPO is more of a breeding standard. Higher is better, whilst no title at all is more suspect. Also its fun for people to get involved. You cant make IPO too elitist. The breeding pool might get too small. Not everyone can afford or wants a world champion dog, also the breed pool will get too small. But they want some indications that the breeding parents have passed certain tests, to show the dogs still somewhat 'have it'.
We want to chose a dog 'more intelligently'...

That what it means to me.
Some of the other titles would not interest me as much to maybe get involved because they are more challenging.. I would like to start small if I got involved, and maybe move up to more things if the opportunity presents...
Also some countries dont do mondior for example at all.. How would you even begin training for such a sport.

IPO has its place. So do other sports. So do the different levels.
I dont think making harder is the answer. 
Maybe less predictable to not 'cheat' the test.

I am not involved to have an opinion of what exactly each test means.
All I know is that there is no ways for that point system to be an idication for real world working ability in every avenue.
Got to accept it for what it is.
That is a discussion I would like you guys to have so I can learn more.


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

What about an IPO 4 test? that changes all the rules and predictability?

What if all the people who are 'cheating the system' as some people say... Suddenly find that the rules have changed on them.. And situations are unpredictable? Maybe a lot more pressure on the dogs. Those dogs with maybe higher IPO3 score will fail and never achieve IPO4... With IPO4 being the sought out std.. Irrelevant of IPO3 score.
The lessons of IPO3 can carry through, but then add complete randomisation, etc.
Admission of entry? Pass IPO3...
Suddenly we have a more adaptable dog.. Because they have done 1 2 3... And now they get stumped at 4... And cant train specifically to pass 4..

Just an idea.

Lower level titles are nice... They dont need to get harder.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

You can't make it less predictable because that leads to an unfair test. You’re trying to compare dog to dog…just like with human sports you have to expect them to do the same thing.

In IPO…the helper is always in blind 6. You can’t move him because then either the dog has to run less, or if you still make the dog run 6 blinds, the dog ends up running more than another dog. Not very fair when you then expect the dog to bark for a minute and are going to be judging the type of barking it’s doing.

If you want to “surprise” a dog with an attack…it would still have to be at the same point. If a handler has to heel a dog for 10 paces and then gets attacked, and another one has to heel for 50 paces before the attack…that’s not fair because the second dog proves more control and yet the first dog would then get the same credit even though it didn’t have to do as hard of an exercise.

It’s all a balance of what you want to see out of the dogs and also what is fair in regards to comparing dog to dog. It is a competition at the end of the day. I’ve heard people say…make it pass/fail. Well then again, you run into the issue of the lowest dog to pass, still has the same title as the best dog that passes, and the only way to see the difference is to be at the trial and see the dog work.

The sports are constantly evolving, and new ideas are always welcome. I just love to hear them instead of people just complaining about the way things currently are. No one seems to ever have an answer to how to fix it, just complaints about how it needs to be fixed. Funny that on top of that…the people that have problems with bite sport and what it tells you about the dogs are the ones that have never actually done it themselves.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

IPO is already elitist. Sorry to say this, but many who do IPO think SDA and PSA is a '*******' sport(mostly because they know nothing about it). 
All these comparisons to martial arts is silly, dogs are not involved in martial arts so why compare them? 

USCA judges are, from what I've had experience with, very strict and won't pass a dog that shows weakness. Though there have been some inconsistencies that I've observed from points perspective.
Many clubs will try to get certain judges, it obviously is proof that those who are in demand either are more fair or not known for being extremely critical when they judge. Those judges are the ones out there trialing often too. 
One recent retiree was all over the place when he gave critiques and it was clear something was not right with him medically. What he said in the critiques, or stopping someone in the middle of doing retrieves to give a lesson on throwing the dumbbell...very strange behavior.


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

martemchik said:


> You can't make it less predictable because that leads to an unfair test. You’re trying to compare dog to dog…just like with human sports you have to expect them to do the same thing.
> 
> In IPO…the helper is always in blind 6. You can’t move him because then either the dog has to run less, or if you still make the dog run 6 blinds, the dog ends up running more than another dog. Not very fair when you then expect the dog to bark for a minute and are going to be judging the type of barking it’s doing.
> 
> ...


It averages eventually.
You can take the tests more than once.
You cant standardise everything for real world results...
Its just not possible.
We have world champions in MMA... Each fight is different, yet the guys at the top consistently outperform the lower tier guys...
Some champions may have a wrestling weakness... So they got a premature belt and got exposed later on because of a weakness in their game...
The guys at the top for long.. Are the guys that dont have holes...
There the guys that dont give up because they are tired, or because they took a big shot or blindsided by something the did not expect.

At the top level you cant be predictable with anything.
Either the dog can. Or it cant.
You could even get rid of points completely for such tests...
You could just see if the dog fails or not.. i.e. crumble under the pressure.

A right of passage for a 'real' protection dog.

IPO4 could be a reality based stamp.

World Championships could still work on IPO3 tests...
Maybe an elite division to showcase that the dogs have passed a pressure IPO4 test... Yet still get scored on IPO3 tests.

A real working dog stamp. Dog is pressed and pushed to the point that most dogs will give up, or get confused. 

No need to judge the intensity of the bark, or how tired the dog is...
Does the dog give up? Or does it keep going, irrelevant of the pressure...


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

So then what's the point of a handler going for an IPO4? You really think people will do that? HA!

There's no value to doing something extra if the highest level worldwide will still be IPO3. There's no value to taking the test over and over. It's money, it's time. It's more worth your time to title and compete with a second dog, or get your IPO3 routine as tight and correct as you possibly can in order to get higher scores and placing on a national/world level.

What do you mean don't judge the intensity of the bark? So a dog that barks with anger and aggression gets the same credit as a dog that sits and prey barks the whole time? Or a dog that silent guards? Nope. Doesn't make any sense.

Clearly the "real working dog" doesn't matter to people...you saw how many people posted about how its more important for their dog to not wet themselves when an umbrella is opened than if their dog would actually protect them in a real life threatening situation.

BTW...I'm just playing devil's advocate. That's not the worst idea I've ever heard or read.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

martemchik said:


> ...but an umbrella...that's just over the top and no matter how much training you put into the dog, it will always be scared of one.
> 
> The temperament test is just something for people that don't want to put in any work in actually training their dog to do something more difficult, and still try to tell people that their dog has solid nerves.


OK, here's another try to help you understand what LLombardo and I tried to explain earlier.

The umbrella test is not to train a dog. It has nothing to do with training but everything about with what kind of temperament you are working with.
This is an example on a test like this: a couple of minutes before the dog is brought out, a helper is hiding e.g. between parked cars with a closed umbrella. The handler and dog (dog closest to the parked cars) casually walks by and just before they pass the helper, the helper opens and throws the umbrella in front of the dog and let it lie there. The helper remains hidden. Every dog will have a reaction. Most jump back as it has startled them. But what we are looking for is the recovery behavior of the dog. A stable dog will come back and investigate what in the heck just happened; smelling and checking out the umbrella inside and out or just a brief glance and then ignore the umbrella. Unstable / fearful dogs will melt, cannot recover, avoid the umbrella, the entire area if they can or hide behind the handler.
An assertive dog will immediately jump onto the umbrella and attack it, and rip it up if given the chance. These dogs are rare.
The dogs that showed great recovery were often Pitbulls.
Hope that this helps you understand what the umbrella test shows you. 
You are making a lot of assumptions about "people","they" and "you".


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

why should a dog attack an umbrella? my dog is assertive, he also discerns a threat and an umbrella unexpectedly opening is not a threat.....


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

wolfy dog said:


> OK, here's another try to help you understand what LLombardo and I tried to explain earlier.
> 
> The umbrella test is not to train a dog. It has nothing to do with training but everything about with what kind of temperament you are working with.
> This is an example on a test like this: a couple of minutes before the dog is brought out, a helper is hiding e.g. between parked cars with a closed umbrella. The handler and dog (dog closest to the parked cars) casually walks by and just before they pass the helper, the helper opens and throws the umbrella in front of the dog and let it lie there. The helper remains hidden. Every dog will have a reaction. Most jump back as it has startled them. But what we are looking for is the recovery behavior of the dog. A stable dog will come back and investigate what in the heck just happened; smelling and checking out the umbrella inside and out or just a brief glance and then ignore the umbrella. Unstable / fearful dogs will melt, cannot recover, avoid the umbrella, the entire area if they can or hide behind the handler.
> ...


I know what the umbrella test shows you, I've passed the umbrella test with my dog, I've gotten my dog temperament certified. Unlike the people that are trying to convince me that this is the end all be all test of nerve strength...I've actually gone through the test.

What you don't get is, you CAN TRAIN A DOG to react however you want to that type of scenario. You're kidding yourself if you don't think people would train for that. You don't think that if I worked with my helper, or even my SO for a week on teaching my dog how to properly react to an umbrella, it won't react how I want it to?

IF you also truly believe that a dog that melts and can't recover from an umbrella test, can pass an IPO1 trial...there's really no hope for you in this conversation. I don't know what kind of experience you had with Schutzhund in Europe...but no, a dog that gets so bent out of shape over an umbrella opening, wouldn't come anywhere near a Schutzhund title.

OP is discussing on how to make the test harder, while you're trying to make it easier by telling us that an umbrella would test a dog the same way a helper driving a dog does. Kudos to you...


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

To add to that...if you think that a dog that can withstand and successfully complete the umbrella test is guaranteed to be able to get a Schutzhund title (or any other bite sport title), then you clearly don't understand the difference in pressure and how nerves can be tested at different levels.

I'm more than happy if your standard for "good nerve" is that your dog doesn't get scared of an umbrella...for the rest of us, that's not our standard, and when it comes to the future of the breed, I would hope that more people think like I do and want to make sure their breeding stock, and therefore their puppies will hopefully have a much higher threshold when it comes to threats.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

onyx'girl said:


> why should a dog attack an umbrella? my dog is assertive, he also discerns a threat and an umbrella unexpectedly opening is not a threat.....


I agree that "assertive" is not the correct term. On the other hand I am hesitant to use "aggressive" as well. Where we tested we called it "aggressive" but it was in a shelter so it was more casually used. We never considered these dogs to be stable.
I am sure that the tested dogs never had this test before.


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

martemchik said:


> So then what's the point of a handler going for an IPO4? You really think people will do that? HA!
> 
> There's no value to doing something extra if the highest level worldwide will still be IPO3. There's no value to taking the test over and over. It's money, it's time. It's more worth your time to title and compete with a second dog, or get your IPO3 routine as tight and correct as you possibly can in order to get higher scores and placing on a national/world level.
> 
> ...


Its could be a test only for the top guys. Not for everyone.
In fact it could be a prerequisite requirement to enter the world championships.

Anyone who believes his dog is doing real protection etc.. Above other dogs who are 'cheating the test' would defiantly go for it to prove the difference in his dog.

We are talking about elite level tests.
People in this post are talking about elevating stds so that other people never getting a title because their dogs are 'better'...

Well I don't see it that way. There should be titles more people can achieve... 
And higher titles that very few will ever be able to achieve.
How far you take it is up to you. Dont make other people lose interest and fail because you think its too easy... Those people can drive for higher standards.
Increasing std.s to titles people believe may be 'easy' (Not my opinion just rehashing opinion of others.).. Is not the solution.

How far the dog runs is also irrelvant to be honest... The dog should be fit enough to run double that if necessary.
Back to the fight model.. You may have what it takes to dominate in one round... What happens in the later rounds?

If you might possibly fight 5 rounds.. you train for 5-6. 
It could be 1 round 2 or 4... Thats irrelevant... At the highest level dogs must be fit.

The only real argument against what I am saying is could be termed borderline animal abuse if you put too much pressure on the dog and give it a real fight, especially to the point of failure. Not to mention repercussions to what people are achieving in training. Such a dog needs to be built up carefully.
But then again expecting a dog to act in a real situation without building up the pressure is even worse.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

onyx'girl said:


> why should a dog attack an umbrella? my dog is assertive, he also discerns a threat and an umbrella unexpectedly opening is not a threat.....


The dog should not attack the umbrella. It's about recovery time and being startled by something like this. If the dog attacks the umbrella, it's probably a fear response and therefore not a stable dog.

Umbrella Test

Reaction To Visual Stimuli: objective to measure the dog’s reaction to sudden visual stimuli, degree of investigative behavior and startle recovery.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

martemchik said:


> I know what the umbrella test shows you, I've passed the umbrella test with my dog, I've gotten my dog temperament certified. Unlike the people that are trying to convince me that this is the end all be all test of nerve strength...I've actually gone through the test.
> 
> What you don't get is, you CAN TRAIN A DOG to react however you want to that type of scenario. You're kidding yourself if you don't think people would train for that. You don't think that if I worked with my helper, or even my SO for a week on teaching my dog how to properly react to an umbrella, it won't react how I want it to?
> 
> ...


But there is the answer. Dogs that have IPO titles have failed the umbrella test, so how the heck do they get titles on the field? That is the question here. Are dogs with weak nerves getting titles on the field when they shouldn't be? The answer is yes and that hurts the breed more then other stuff IMO.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

llombardo said:


> The dog should not attack the umbrella. It's about recovery time and being startled by something like this. If the dog attacks the umbrella, it's probably a fear response and therefore not a stable dog.
> 
> Umbrella Test
> 
> Reaction To Visual Stimuli: objective to measure the dog’s reaction to sudden visual stimuli, degree of investigative behavior and startle recovery.


l am aware of the test.....l was referring to the post that wolfy suggested attacking an umbrella was being assertive.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

onyx'girl said:


> l am aware of the test.....l was referring to the post that wolfy suggested attacking an umbrella was being assertive.


Ok gotcha. I've never witnessed a dog attack the umbrella, they did the opposite and hid.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

The dogs are fit...but even if a dog is capable of running 12 blinds, when that dog is expected to run 6, and another dog only has to do 4, it's not fair because the dog that ran 4 will be fresher no matter what.

Lets assume the dogs are all capable of running 1 mile, if one dog has to run a quarter mile and another has to run a mile, no matter what, the dog that ran the quarter mile will be fresher and more able to bark than the one that ran half a mile, it's just that simple. So you're giving the dog that runs less an advantage, can't do that if you're comparing dog to dog. It's an unfair advantage to the dog that has to do less, and then when you hand out trophies or titles, you'll always hear complaints. This is why "random" rarely works in sport. There really isn't any sport or test out there that is random for human or K9. All competitors have to start on an even playing field.

The people at the top...making WUSV teams wouldn't do that. They're focused on making their dogs as good as possible at the IPO3 routine and there is no reason for them to focus on something else. Trust me, none of those people feel like they have anything to prove about themselves or their dogs to anyone else. It's a spectator issue if you believe the dogs at the highest level aren't "real" or great dogs. 

At the end of the day, very few people in sport care that there is a small group of people that like to cry about how the dogs aren't "real" dogs. It's even more funny when you realize that the majority of "real" dogs, are coming from sport/titled dogs. The way I've always seen it, is that a dog will do whatever the training dictates. A good dog, is a good dog. The dogs that are reaching regional/national level in sport, if they were handled by a person that focused on K9 work...would be K9s. There are slight differences in what is necessary, but the majority of dogs that are reaching national level events, wouldn't have any issues with being working K9s. And I really don't want to hear how someone knew one or two Schutzhund dogs at some point in their life that would never have become K9s...the truth is, the majority would likely do so especially if the training focus was different from day one. Same with police dogs, I can guarantee you that if their training was focused on bite sport instead of work, you'd see the majority of those dogs also be able to achieve high titles.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

llombardo said:


> But there is the answer. Dogs that have IPO titles have failed the umbrella test, so how the heck do they get titles on the field? That is the question here. Are dogs with weak nerves getting titles on the field when they shouldn't be? The answer is yes and that hurts the breed more then other stuff IMO.


Please name the dog and give proof and not just anecdotal evidence.

Even the person that said they saw an "IPO dog" hide behind the handler during the attack from the strange person. I'd love to know what "IPO dog" meant. I've met plenty of people that call their dogs "IPO dogs" when the dog can barely bite a rag on a flirt pole. Just because you train in IPO...doesn't mean you have an IPO dog.

On top of that...just because the dog has an IPO title, doesn't mean its bred. It just took someone I know, about 6 months to figure out and settle on a stud dog for her female. Many of the "big names" were considered, and yet a different dog was chosen. Those that are in the game...not just watching from the outside, understand that an IPO title doesn't mean the end all be all, and it doesn't mean the dog is bred. People that care, will watch videos of trials and training, they will try to get to know the dog as much as possible and not just base their decision on the fact that there are letters behind the dog's name. I really hope that "umbrella test" never becomes a breeding standard for the breed.


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

martemchik said:


> The dogs are fit...but even if a dog is capable of running 12 blinds, when that dog is expected to run 6, and another dog only has to do 4, it's not fair because the dog that ran 4 will be fresher no matter what.
> 
> Lets assume the dogs are all capable of running 1 mile, if one dog has to run a quarter mile and another has to run a mile, no matter what, the dog that ran the quarter mile will be fresher and more able to bark than the one that ran half a mile, it's just that simple. So you're giving the dog that runs less an advantage, can't do that if you're comparing dog to dog. It's an unfair advantage to the dog that has to do less, and then when you hand out trophies or titles, you'll always hear complaints. This is why "random" rarely works in sport. There really isn't any sport or test out there that is random for human or K9. All competitors have to start on an even playing field.
> 
> ...


Thats the thing... What I am saying is a simple pass/fail.

No comparison to other dogs... The dogs just need to deal with a predetermined amount of pressure. That pressure will never be completely standardised.. But the dog will need to fight.
There are already systems to compare dog to dog.

Anyways, you could work out similar distances and random blind runs that change from test to test but of similar distances. 
Running a bit more or a bit less is not going to break a real working dog.
There are solutions to everything.

Sometimes people/dogs fail.. Hard luck.. Try again..
The criminal on the street certainly is not going to be the same every time.
Yet dog is required to act reliably every time.
Failing there could mean life, injury or death.. Stakes are raised.
A luxury titled dogs have, is they may fail with no real consequence.

Its a way for the sport guys to say... Hey look.. My dog is more than just a sport dog..


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

If its not used as a comparison of "dog to dog" why do it?

What is the benefit of showing your dog, possibly having it fail, and then having to answer questions?

There is no need to prove a dog if it's not being compared to other dogs. There is no need to defend your dog to other people...the information is already out there. We have people on this forum that I've seen question handler/dog teams at levels those people could only dream of achieving...do you really think that handler/dog team cares? Do you think it matters that some K9 officer or random dog trainer in the middle of no where, USA questions how great a national level dog is?

The only reason to hold competition is to figure out what is the best...otherwise, there is nothing to gain, just everything to lose. You said it yourself, titles are for the people, not the dog. If someone wants to believe that a dog that reaches a high level, or even a low level, isn't good enough, and wants to question it...go out there and do it yourself. I will personally never disrespect a dog/handler team that has achieved more than I have. I can use the information I get from a trial to make a judgment about the dog...but to refute that the accomplishment is something major is just garbage. Anyone that questions what people have done, without doing it themselves, needs to take a long hard look in the mirror and ask themselves what's important in life.

I just have an issue with people telling me that something that is clearly fundamentally less pressure is just as good at showing what kind of nerve a dog has as a test which involves a lot more work, training, and a higher threshold of nerve.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

At the end of the day, OP is talking about when people can’t accept their dog for what it is, and when they get the title, they are basically being told that they were correct all along even though their dog really isn’t what they want to believe it is. This is probably the big divide between people that are focused solely on ONE dog and those that are thinking about the future of the breed. I have met with and spoken to plenty of breeders (some of them on this forum) that can look at their own dogs and be extremely objective about them. That is what is needed for the future of the breed. Title or no title, the breeder has a vision for their program, and the future of the breed, and will work towards that.

The people just dabbling in sport…what many would call “pet first” are the ones that tend to fall in love with the animal in front of them, and that animal can do no wrong. They have blinders on when it comes to nerve strength/drive intensity/ect, and the achievement of a title just confirms what they’ve thought all along about their beloved pet. This will only lead to issues if this person then breeds their dog and people without any understanding of the sport or what the dog showed in the trial…get the dog and the line continues. Most of these types of dogs don’t make a big enough impact on the breed as a whole to really make any difference in the overall picture of the breed.

The majority of people that own GSD or want one, don’t have any idea what they’re seeing on a trial field or even in training. Just a dog heeling with its head up, making snap turns, retrieving a dumbbell at full speed, ect…is enough to amaze those people. A dog barking in the blind, doing an escape bite, or any other protection exercise…will just set those people over the top because it is something most have never seen or understand how they got there anyways. There are dogs on this forum, that people borderline worship…without ever meeting them, or seeing them work. But they know there is a title behind them, they’ve heard the owner talk them up, and therefore believe the dog is much greater than it truly is.

But to me…at least the people that are doing something, are trying. They’re trying to show their dog is capable of being more than just a family dog. They’re getting out there, doing something the dog (hopefully) enjoys and are learning about the sport and the breed. If the standards get raised, to something that someone that is just a “weekend warrior” can’t achieve…then the sport will die, 90% of people in the sport are weekend warriors, we can’t just cut them out.


----------



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

The best of the best being tested.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

martemchik said:


> You can't make it less predictable because that leads to an unfair test. You’re trying to compare dog to dog…just like with human sports you have to expect them to do the same thing.



I haven't read everything, as I'm on a short break. I did want to address this though. 

You can make it unpredictable yet still be fair. Look at AKC obedience. There is no set pattern. The judge calls out what they want you to do. The judge tells you what object to retrieve or what jump to take first. The police trials I decoyed, the handlers didn't know the scenarios until it was time to do them. Yet they all did the same scenarios so you could compare dog to dog plus there is a picture of what it should have looked like. A "perfect world" idea of how it should have gone down that they were being graded against. In PSA 1,2,3 there are surprise scenarios. You don't know what they are until you draw your card that tells you. The retrieve is a random object, not the same dumbbell every time. In SDA PD3, there is no obedience pattern. There are things that you must do and show you can do, but no pattern. There is also building searches in the PD3 that can have who knows what in them. Again more unknown scenarios.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

mycobraracr said:


> I haven't read everything, as I'm on a short break. I did want to address this though.
> 
> You can make it unpredictable yet still be fair. Look at AKC obedience. There is no set pattern. The judge calls out what they want you to do. The judge tells you what object to retrieve or what jump to take first. The police trials I decoyed, the handlers didn't know the scenarios until it was time to do them. Yet they all did the same scenarios so you could compare dog to dog plus there is a picture of what it should have looked like. A "perfect world" idea of how it should have gone down that they were being graded against. In PSA 1,2,3 there are surprise scenarios. You don't know what they are until you draw your card that tells you. The retrieve is a random object, not the same dumbbell every time. In SDA PD3, there is no obedience pattern. There are things that you must do and show you can do, but no pattern. There is also building searches in the PD3 that can have who knows what in them. Again more unknown scenarios.


 In AKC...there isn't a set pattern but it stays the same for each and every competitor. Same with the article search, the judge puts it in the same place for each dog. The jumps are always in the same order for every competitor. The AKC stuff is so limited that you don't have much variation in it anyways. So high scores can easily be compared to other high scores at other trials even if there is some variability.

In regards to a bite sport routine...the more you change it up, even trial to trial, it leaves you less ability to judge a dog against other dogs that are competing in other trials. So if that's the sport you've signed up for, that's fine, you've agreed to the fact that you can't compare your dog's performance to others going on around the country. But with IPO...you use it to compare dogs that are trialing in different places all over the world. So it's much easier to do that when things are all the same.

Could say that for the retrieves too...if it's random/luck of the draw, is it truly fair if a 90lbs male gets to retrieve a lighter object than a 50lbs female and the female ends up losing points because she can't go as fast as the male did with that other object? You just start to bring in a lot of other variables when you start allowing randomness like that.

Unknown scenarios...lead to questionable results. Lead to excuses. One trial a dog had an easier building search than in the following trial. Handlers/owners/people with monetary interest in the dog get upset.

It's not that I don't agree that some randomness and unknown wouldn't be nice, it's just hard to do when the competition does matter for more than just bragging rights.

BTW...the theory that people pattern train...it's extremely outdated. If you want to get to a high level with your dog, you don't pattern train. Sure, you practice the pattern once in a while, but the highest level dogs, don't memorize the pattern.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

l did a protection challenge where the scenarios were not revealed before we went on the field. The host club of course had an advantage as they were probably showcasing what exercises they'd been training for several weeks.
There were a few that did the beginner level, and were able to do the advanced level the same day....which clearly gave them an advantage because the dog had seen the course and the handler knew what to expect(beginner was on leash/advanced off with a couple other exercises thrown in).
This challenge wasn't for titles, but trophies were handed out.
I think this type of 'trial' is fun, for both handler and dog and the judges were a retired k9 handler and an IPO competitor who has trialed in higher levels...though l never met or heard of her, lol.


> BTW...the theory that people pattern train...it's extremely outdated. If you want to get to a high level with your dog, you don't pattern train. Sure, you practice the pattern once in a while, but the highest level dogs, don't memorize the pattern.


you know this how? l was at a seminar last spring with a very high profile national level competitor and breeder and he pattern trains, he does the same routine to prepare his dog every time he hits the field for each phase so the dog is prepped and understanding what is coming. He also deprives food if the track sucked previously. 
How do you know how all the higher level teams train? 
My own trainer who competes nationally does the pattern often, he cues his dog with subtle body language during his routine. His dog is fine doing a pattern over and over, mine does best not doing it....and less is more when it comes to over training. All dogs are different, one size does not fit all.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

onyx'girl said:


> you know this how? l was at a seminar last spring with a very high profile national level competitor and breeder and he pattern trains, he does the same routine to prepare his dog every time he hits the field for each phase so the dog is prepped and understanding what is coming. He also deprives food if the track sucked previously.
> How do you know how all the higher level teams train?
> My own trainer who competes nationally does the pattern often, he cues his dog with subtle body language during his routine. His dog is fine doing a pattern over and over, mine does best not doing it....and less is more when it comes to over training. All dogs are different, one size does not fit all.


So you pointed out two dogs/trainers, and now everyone does pattern train? Hmmm...you just ruined your own point about "all dogs being different." If those two do it, everyone else must.

Doing the same routine to prepare your dog for a phase isn't pattern training. Pattern training is what people complain about when all that people do is the obedience pattern they will be doing in the trial, or when the only thing people do in protection is go through the routine in exactly the way it's going to happen during trial. Most people I know will give their dogs cues before the phase so that the dog is in the correct mindset. If you really think that police officers don't do this with dual purpose dogs...well then...but I guarantee you a police officer will cue their dog if they're doing apprehension work, and will cue their dog if they're doing a search. You give your dog any advantage you can, it would be stupid not to.

I know for a fact that higher level dogs don't get pattern trained because that's when they start anticipating and will break before they are told because they're going to think they're ahead of the game. But hey, you've met a whole two people that do, so I guess I'm wrong.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

l never said everyone is doing it or not doing it, you said it was outdated, and no one does it anymore. l ask how you know this...and yea, l know two people in the dog world that do it on a regular basis, maybe you should speak with them and ask how it goes, because each were in the top 10 in the '14 nationals.


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

martemchik said:


> So you pointed out two dogs/trainers, and now everyone does pattern train? Hmmm...you just ruined your own point about "all dogs being different." If those two do it, everyone else must.
> 
> Doing the same routine to prepare your dog for a phase isn't pattern training. Pattern training is what people complain about when all that people do is the obedience pattern they will be doing in the trial, or when the only thing people do in protection is go through the routine in exactly the way it's going to happen during trial. Most people I know will give their dogs cues before the phase so that the dog is in the correct mindset. If you really think that police officers don't do this with dual purpose dogs...well then...but I guarantee you a police officer will cue their dog if they're doing apprehension work, and will cue their dog if they're doing a search. You give your dog any advantage you can, it would be stupid not to.
> 
> I know for a fact that higher level dogs don't get pattern trained because that's when they start anticipating and will break before they are told because they're going to think they're ahead of the game. But hey, you've met a whole two people that do, so I guess I'm wrong.


At the highest level you train in a way to beat the system...

You train to the rules of the system.
Thats why the system has flaws.
If training patterns gets better results people will do it.
Because their only measurement is that trial.
The problem with IPO it is the most markatable and what many GSD buyers look for.
There needs to be something more.

If an athlete wants a gold medal in the olympics they are going to train specifically for that...


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

onyx'girl said:


> l never said everyone is doing it or not doing it, you said it was outdated, and no one does it anymore. l ask how you know this...and yea, l know two people in the dog world that do it on a regular basis, maybe you should speak with them and ask how it goes, because each were in the top 10 in the '14 nationals.


This is only logical...
If the test is pattern, why not take advantage of that?

They are not the problem.. The system is.
They are playing by the rules, and excelling.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

onyx'girl said:


> l never said everyone is doing it or not doing it, you said it was outdated, and no one does it anymore. l ask how you know this...and yea, l know two people in the dog world that do it on a regular basis, maybe you should speak with them and ask how it goes, because each were in the top 10 in the '14 nationals.


Were you one of them? Name dropping isn't going to impress anyone.


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

mycobraracr said:


> I haven't read everything, as I'm on a short break. I did want to address this though.
> 
> You can make it unpredictable yet still be fair. Look at AKC obedience. There is no set pattern. The judge calls out what they want you to do. The judge tells you what object to retrieve or what jump to take first. The police trials I decoyed, the handlers didn't know the scenarios until it was time to do them. Yet they all did the same scenarios so you could compare dog to dog plus there is a picture of what it should have looked like. A "perfect world" idea of how it should have gone down that they were being graded against. In PSA 1,2,3 there are surprise scenarios. You don't know what they are until you draw your card that tells you. The retrieve is a random object, not the same dumbbell every time. In SDA PD3, there is no obedience pattern. There are things that you must do and show you can do, but no pattern. There is also building searches in the PD3 that can have who knows what in them. Again more unknown scenarios.


Yep. makes perfect sense.


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

martemchik said:


> Were you one of them? Name dropping isn't going to impress anyone.


She did not name drop. She said she went to a seminar and thats what they showed her.
You made a statement that its outdated... Top competitors say they do it all the time. And they highlight it as a problem.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

martemchik said:


> Were you one of them? Name dropping isn't going to impress anyone.


why do you feel the need to argue with everyone? l mentioned no names whatsoever. l'll go work my weak dog now, and let you carry on.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Lykoz said:


> She did not name drop. She said she went to a seminar and thats what they showed her.


I didn't need to go to a seminar to know that people cue their dogs...most of the people I have worked with do that. Put on a special collar, say a certain phrase, do a certain routine before each phase. Like I said, if you don't think a police officer would cue their dog before apprehension or a search...you're quite mistaken. The moment the dog is brought out of anything, the handler will cue it to what the job at hand is.

OP himself had a thread that he started about just that...what do people do before each phase with their dogs. This is a common thing to do.

It is not what is commonly referred to as pattern training. Pattern training is when you try to engrain THE PATTERN into the dog by only doing the pattern and nothing else. That way, the dog basically learns exactly that and does it without any need for handler help. This has been shown to cause dogs to anticipate and fail exercises because they think they know what's going on before it is. Contrary to popular belief...a Schutzhund field/trial changes from trial to trial as well. Small timing issues, distances, ect depending on the judge, field, and level. A dog that anticipates, will not score as well as one that waits for commands.


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

martemchik said:


> I didn't need to go to a seminar to know that people cue their dogs...most of the people I have worked with do that. Put on a special collar, say a certain phrase, do a certain routine before each phase. Like I said, if you don't think a police officer would cue their dog before apprehension or a search...you're quite mistaken. The moment the dog is brought out of anything, the handler will cue it to what the job at hand is.
> 
> OP himself had a thread that he started about just that...what do people do before each phase with their dogs. This is a common thing to do.
> 
> It is not what is commonly referred to as pattern training. Pattern training is when you try to engrain THE PATTERN into the dog by only doing the pattern and nothing else.


If there was no pattern you would not need to engrain any pattern.
What is the working benefit of going through a predetermined pattern?


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

martemchick l know what pattern training is. Some of us have trialed a dog before. We all aren't clueless as you seem to believe with your lengthy posts.
Do you do your send out first when you hit the field for obedience? Do you do your retrieves after the send out??


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Lykoz said:


> If there was no pattern you would not need to engrain any pattern.
> What is the working benefit of going through a predetermined pattern?


Equality to be able to compare dogs.

You just going to ignore the fact that I told you no one good pattern trains?

Pattern training is a very old and outdated method, the most successful people do not pattern train. I'll help you guys out and "name drop." My SO, has extensively trained with two trainers that have come in the TOP 1 at the USCA Nationals this year and the FCI. Neither of them, nor their closest competitors pattern train their dogs.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

onyx'girl said:


> Do you do your send out first when you hit the field for obedience? Do you do your retrieves after the send out??


I work on whatever I need to work on. There are days I don't heel my dog on the field at all. It's rare that I'll work every single exercise on every single training day.

In protection, very rarely do I do the whole routine the way it will be done on the field. I've yet to do a call out when the dog is in the blind, probably won't do it until right up to trial day. Haven't done a set up to the escape the way it will be done on trial day. Haven't done a long bite the way it will be done on trial day. Many of the exercises can be broken down into pieces which are more effectively trained rather than doing the whole routine at once.


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

Lykoz said:


> If there was no pattern you would not need to engrain any pattern.
> What is the working benefit of going through a predetermined pattern?


There's an intent to the order of the exercises. Having the retrieves after so much heeling and the recall or recalls. The send out after the retrieves. It tests the dog in ways the judge can see. Its fun and challenging to see how these things hold up when the dog figures out there's no reward coming at 20 paces or after the about turn.


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

I have titled two dogs now and trained them entirely differently. I pattern trained the first and got mediocre scores. Went out and did most of the routine on the two or three days a week that we trained. For the second dog, I decided to train with the people who are winning and found that it's not about the pattern at all. It's pieces of the overall picture. So every day I train and do a little picture of the routine, testing the overall picture every so often, and I get high scores. I've done both and I saw the benefits of what's working for the winners, and that's all that I needed to know.


----------



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

No one wants to address the video I posted but (while those are German show dogs) the video displays the problem that I think Myco is addressing.

Shouldn't there be a minimun standard.

Maybe different classifications, especially as applies to breed worthiness. Who wants fearful dogs reproducing just because good training got them through.

Something like pro, amateur or class 1, class 2.

Nervy dogs should be weeded out somehow.


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

Jack's Dad said:


> No one wants to address the video I posted but (while those are German show dogs) the video displays the problem that I think Myco is addressing.
> 
> Shouldn't there be a minimun standard.
> 
> ...



I think that's where regional and national level titles come into play, for my standard at least. I hold higher standards for a dog's placement at those levels than at a club level, home field trial.


----------



## David Winners (Apr 30, 2012)

The way weak dogs are weeded out is that responsible breeders test breeding stock, they are familiar with the dogs in the pedigree behind their breeding stock, they test the offspring of their program, and they keep up with what they produce.

IMO, none of that has to do with titles.


----------



## David Winners (Apr 30, 2012)

GatorDog,

Did you breed Carma because of titles, or because you like what she is, what is behind her, and you hope to produce quality dogs because of a careful pairing?


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

David Winners said:


> GatorDog,
> 
> Did you breed Carma because of titles, or because you like what she is, what is behind her, and you hope to produce quality dogs because of a careful pairing?



All of the above. I like what she is and what the (hopeful) sire is and they have both been proven as best as they could be by the way of showing them at the events that they have trialed so far. And I have been careful planning and matching what is behind each dog in hopes that what will be produced is of quality standards. It's impossible to say one way or the other to just breed the dogs for what they are and not for their titles, because if they truly are so great, then IPO will be a breeze for them. And at the very least, I have multiple objective opinions based on what these people could evaluate of these dogs on those given trial dates to provide as reference to why I believe these dogs should be bred. It's not the end all be all, but it's a small piece that I consider pretty important. Objectivity.


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

In contrast, my male has higher titles than Carma right now and will not be bred. Lower scores at home field trials. It's not hard to see the difference as to why after observing him work. So no, I don't believe it's all about titles. But I think they prove at least a little capability, and deserve more credibility than breeders saying they're sure the dog could do it if they felt that titles would prove anything. To me, the only thing that proves a dog can do well in IPO is by actually doing well in IPO. Just saying that they could is not the same as actually doing it.


----------



## Renofan2 (Aug 27, 2010)

Wow a lot to read in this thread.

To the original post, a dog with a temperament/nerve flaw/issue should not pass. If a dog runs off, doesn’t engage it should fail. Anytime I have seen this in any level of IPO, the dog failed.

In no way is a German Shepherd Temp test in anyway a better measure of a test then IPO. My pet GSD who was a couch potato, zero drive passed in with flying colors and even barked at the aggressive strange. All the IPO dogs barked at the aggressive stranger and zero of the American Bred German shepherds did. The only test the IPO dogs scored less at was the Gunshot since we train our dogs to ignore the gunshot and the test judges based on the dog looking to see where the shot came from.

I think the Breed Survey should be used to determine a dogs suitability for breeding. A dog needs an IPO 1 to enter, however, the test has been watered down. Make it a bit tougher to pass, so that this can be used to segregate dogs that should be bred from pure Sport dogs.

I started IPO in 2007 with my Show line Molly. She had great prey drive, loved to work and loved to please. She had no nerve or temperament issues and we were able to achieve IPO1. Molly had severe HD, EPI and SIBO and by the time we completed her IPO1 she started to have some issues with jumping and her stamina was affected. I had one chance in December to try for her IPO2 since we had trained for it. We were able to get passing scores in tracking and ob. In protection she nailed the blinds and completed all the exercises, no issues with outs, no double commands and no handler errors. All seemed good by the way my club was cheering, but to my surprise the judge gave her a failing score. He didn’t think she was strong enough, fast enough and failed her for that. No other explanation. It was difficult to hear and was not the way I wanted to end my IPO career with Molly. I wanted so much to have that IPO2 in her scorebook, but it wasn’t to be. Would she have passed with a different judge – probably, but I will never know. I retired her that afternoon. I lost her suddenly in December to hemangiocarcoma. I recently looked at the video and after handling my new working line Finn, I see what the Judge meant. (More so then I did at the time).

Should club trials be judged as harsh as National Trials? I think it should be consistent, but maybe not as sharp of a pencil. It shouldn’t be that a dog that runs off the field takes a dip in a pond during a blind search and is called back to the field several times passes under one judge and one fails based on something subjective. Yes, score the dog lower if they are not as fast or strong, but if they complete the exercise, then they complete the exercise. 

We need local clubs to support our sport so we have to find a way for people like me to get involved with the dog they have. Let them learn, and grow and work that dog, title the dog and then be exposed to what we all want for our GSD’s. If they are educated properly, not offended so they leave and have no idea about our sport and what is missing from a lot of GSD’s today, how does that help. I am glad I began my IPO journey with my show line Molly. We received a lot of comments on how we worked as a team and how she wanted to please me. She taught me the this sport and I can now use all I learned for my WGWL – Finn. 
Cheryl


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I guess it depends on what is generally accepted as to what the title means. 

Pulling out of protection, what does a CGC mean? If it truly meant that housing or insurance would be open to dogs with the title, if this was a regular and accepted practice, the title would mean something, and there would then be controls placed on the judges (or testers in this example), so that if they award a title/certificate to a dog with no business having a title/certificate, and there was an incident with the dog, there would be some form of repercussion, and multiple incidents would get the license to run the test pulled. Who would be standing in line to meet the requirements to administer these tests? 

In every venue I have trained in, I watched dogs earn titles that I thought, had I been judging, would never have earned a leg. And I've gotten a leg or two that I thought was not earned. But it is true that if the test is too picky, it will not be enjoyable, and people would just drop out with their dogs, and the dogs would have less training. These are sports, not k9 training, service dog training, MWD training.

Police dogs have to qualify, they have to pass in their tests. If they don't, I am not sure what the protocol is, perhaps they have 90 days to retake the test, not sure, but that shtuff matters. If this question is coming concerning k9 trials, than I would be a lot more concerned about it. 

Which brings us to the last thing that the title means. Does an IPO title mean the dog is worthy to be bred? I think that to someone brand spanking new, getting a pup out of a top competitor in IPO, probably isn't going to be any better for him and may be worse than getting a dog out of a dog trained to earn the title in spite of his shortcomings. Someone looking for his next dog to be a top competitor is already going to know what you are talking about here. They are already going to be involved with the sport, and are already going to know what to look for regardless of titles and scores, they will look at dogs work, and look at the owners and the breeders of the dogs they like. 

If I started out with a Cannondale, I would have never built up to it. I would not appreciate it for its light and quick action. And I would not have been as strong of a cyclist overall. Dogs are different than bicycles, but I think we learn the most from dogs that give us a challenge. Of course we can often go to greater levels with our future dogs, that is called growth. Four years into working with a dog and training it, and having success, and one day realizing, gee, ya know what, this dog is only going to go so far -- well that can be disappointing. But at that point, you go out and get dog number two, and at that point, you know the people you need to talk to, and you know what to look for.

There are no short cuts. Importing a dog, or buying a dog from imported stock isn't going to ensure you with a dog that is the complete package. Nor is buying a dog from titled stock. You have to get out there and get to know the people and the dogs, you have to know what questions to ask. You have to know what to look for. Dogs being denied titles when they met the requirements for the title isn't going to change that. Increasing the difficulty of the title-earning process so that the purchasing process can be dumbed down, isn't going to do anyone any good.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

David Winners said:


> GatorDog,
> 
> Did you breed Carma because of titles, or because you like what she is, what is behind her, and you hope to produce quality dogs because of a careful pairing?


An even better question David, is why Aiden will never be bred...IPO3, FH...and not a breeding in his future.

The idea behind titling is that it gives the handler the opportunity to learn something about their dog, and then make the decision to breed or not breed. Like I stated...there are tons of people, that without any future plans, have blinders on when it comes to their own dog. Their dog can do no wrong. A title might give them the confirmation that what they thought about their dog is right, but other people that see their dog work will give them a better idea of what that dog's breeding potential is.

You can watch tons of videos, and if you know even a little bit about working or sport dogs, you'll very quickly see the dog's temperament faults in the videos. I'm sure we can all agree that not a single dog with nerve issues (at least one that OP is talking about) was at nationals this year.


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

Mind you, Aiden is the dog that everyone obsesses over when people meet him. He's amazingly calm in the house and very obedient and people ask me all the time for a dog just like him. Pet homes. And this is the dog who failed protection twice in trial. Had I listened to the popular opinion of my well controlled, handsome, calm dog, he could've been bred a hundred times by now. Had I not gone through IPO training and titling, I'd never know his weaknesses for myself. And just because people think a dog is "great" doesn't mean they should be bred.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

Jack's Dad said:


> No one wants to address the video I posted but (while those are German show dogs) the video displays the problem that I think Myco is addressing.
> 
> Shouldn't there be a minimun standard.
> 
> ...




Your video is more drastic than I was thinking, but yes, that's the idea. Did the dog run? No, but it didn't really want to engage either. 

When I started this thread, it was more about the integrity of the titles than breeding. It seems to keep moving towards breeding. To me a title should be difficult enough that weak dogs should not pass, weather or not they acquired enough points. To me, if I earn the title, I want to know that it meant that my dog and I had the right attitude and state of mind to achieve it. Not "oh well, my dog didn't run so we passed". I seem to leave more and more trials thinking, "man what's the point?"


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

onyx'girl said:


> l did a protection challenge where the scenarios were not revealed before we went on the field. The host club of course had an advantage as they were probably showcasing what exercises they'd been training for several weeks.
> There were a few that did the beginner level, and were able to do the advanced level the same day....which clearly gave them an advantage because the dog had seen the course and the handler knew what to expect(beginner was on leash/advanced off with a couple other exercises thrown in).
> This challenge wasn't for titles, but trophies were handed out.
> I think this type of 'trial' is fun, for both handler and dog and the judges were a retired k9 handler and an IPO competitor who has trialed in higher levels...though l never met or heard of her, lol.



I enjoyed hosting this last trial. So a few of us are talking about hosting a "Jackpot" competition. Same idea as your fun trial. All random scenarios, invite everyone from every background, and have fun with it. We were talking about only having one class, and the winner splits the entry fee's with the host(club) 50/50. So there will be only one winner. I think it could be a lot of fun!


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

David Winners said:


> The way weak dogs are weeded out is that responsible breeders test breeding stock, they are familiar with the dogs in the pedigree behind their breeding stock, they test the offspring of their program, and they keep up with what they produce.
> 
> IMO, none of that has to do with titles.


That is what l've seen personally with a couple of breeders, but it isn't the norm. Keeping up with what they've produced to make further breeding decisions is very important too. And not being afraid to wash a dog from the program after titles have been achieved because there may be other things in the big picture to say this dog isn't something worthy of reproducing, even though the breeder is the one that bred it. Says something for their integrity and loyalty to the breed(not talking strictly about the gsd here but the field hunt tests, working breeds that aren't doing protection)


----------

