# The sport world can learn a lot from the K-9 world



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

All too often we talk about the handling ability of working k9 handlers, or their holes/lack in training. The truth is, things can equally be said going the opposite way. I thought about this recently. I'm hosting a "sport" trial at a local park. I have been amazed at the number of competitors who have told me that they have been taking their dogs to that park to train since they entered. A trial is a test. You eliminate one of the factors by working your dog in a known environment every time. 

When I worked Police/Military trials, it was at a closed location that the dogs had never been, or been very often, and all the scenarios where a secret until that phase started, even from the decoys. So the handlers truly had no idea what to train for or what to expect. The handler/dog teams had to truly be trained and ready for any situation. Just like being out on the street. I found this to be a true test of both handing ability as well as the dog. Yes, even some working K9's got ran. I was surprised to hear people still speak negatively about handlers or dogs. This was something that sport competitors never seem to allow themselves to be exposed to. It wasn't a choreographed dance just waiting to be executed. This was a test. 

I'm starting to find it difficult to say what a "breed suitability" test is when every dog out there is being trained to the test. The trends we see might be different if dogs were truly tested. Maybe the 95 pound, big boned, black sable wouldn't be what everyone wants if they have to pick it up and throw it over a fence or wall because the dog can't jump it itself. Or those "strong nerve" dogs that have never seen anything new. 

Sorry guys, rant over.


----------



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

mycobraracr said:


> All too often we talk about the handling ability of working k9 handlers, or their holes/lack in training. The truth is, things can equally be said going the opposite way. I thought about this recently. I'm hosting a "sport" trial at a local park. I have been amazed at the number of competitors who have told me that they have been taking their dogs to that park to train since they entered. A trial is a test. You eliminate one of the factors by working your dog in a known environment every time.
> 
> When I worked Police/Military trials, it was at a closed location that the dogs had never been, or been very often, and all the scenarios where a secret until that phase started, even from the decoys. So the handlers truly had no idea what to train for or what to expect. The handler/dog teams had to truly be trained and ready for any situation. Just like being out on the street. I found this to be a true test of both handing ability as well as the dog. Yes, even some working K9's got ran. I was surprised to hear people still speak negatively about handlers or dogs. This was something that sport competitors never seem to allow themselves to be exposed to. It wasn't a choreographed dance just waiting to be executed. This was a test.
> 
> ...


Yes, yes, yes.


----------



## Pax8 (Apr 8, 2014)

Completely agree. Which is why in my study of PSA and other bite sports, I am always talking to my local K9 officers to get their take on certain exercises or training methods. They give a lot of really great information for conditioning and training behavior and responses that won't be exclusive to a competition ring.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

It's the mindset of the people/training that really gets to me. Since we use sports as our breed standard and suitability test, then maybe they should be a test. Something that exposes potential weakness. After all, every dog has a weakness, it's just a matter of finding out what it is. 

Pax- I do think PSA has a lot to offer in this area. There is a surprise scenario, minimum of thee decoys so chances are good you're on a different one, retrieval of any random object the judge chooses, and so on.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

You have to take into account that most people do this for themselves. A dog doesn't understand the title. So the more random you throw in, the more you lose objectivity. The more you make the test unfair when you're trying to compare dog to dog. This also leads to "unfair" trials. Even if you take IPO and you put a helper in various blinds during the search. It won't be fair for one dog to run 6, the next one to run 4, the next one to run 3, ect. You're making some dogs do way more than others and the majority of our sports (even human) try to level the playing field as much as possible.

I think you need to take each dog/handler on a case by case basis. Like in your situation, some handlers will go out and train at the field, while others won't. There are people that want every point possible, and there are those that do want to test their dog and see what it has in it and how well it has been trained. 

It's also not fair to compare the majority of sport handlers with K9 handlers. Our day jobs don't involve training our dogs, so there isn't as much time to spend on getting a dog ready for every conceivable situation. It makes sense to focus on just one. The majority of people I've seen that do 3 different venues, do each one on a mediocre level, they don't shine at any single one, but they do alright at all 3 of them. They'll never wow you with a performance, but it's because their time and energy is spread out over a lot of things rather than focusing on just one.


----------



## pam (Apr 6, 2009)

You are an astute young man with a passion for what you do--that can be infectious, especially when combined with leadership capabilities. Competition titles are a world unto themselves now that training methods allow good handlers to refine pattern behavior to the ultimate degree. Perhaps an enthusiastic decoy who started to play with "real" scenarios with one or two other like-minded individuals at training sessions "just for fun" would capture the imagination of a few others.....Change within an organization is extremely difficult to achieve, especially when it might cost those with a vested interest a chance at a trophy--the reality is that many are there to win a sport--not to test/showcase their dog as breed worthy. It is the younger members with positions of influence (especially decoys), such as yourself, who can affect change, but it will come slowly. I love your passion and enthusiasm--now it is a matter of not allowing the frustration of the current system to dampen it. Perhaps seeing a few good, versatile dogs perform well within a club (and also observing how much their decoy loves working them) will cause others to want that type of dog, too. Peer pressure can be a wonderful thing sometimes  I applaud your efforts to work from within--you are a vital part of the future of the system!


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

pam said:


> You are an astute young man with a passion for what you do--that can be infectious, especially when combined with leadership capabilities. Competition titles are a world unto themselves now that training methods allow good handlers to refine pattern behavior to the ultimate degree. Perhaps an enthusiastic decoy who started to play with "real" scenarios with one or two other like-minded individuals at training sessions "just for fun" would capture the imagination of a few others.....Change within an organization is extremely difficult to achieve, especially when it might cost those with a vested interest a chance at a trophy--the reality is that many are there to win a sport--not to test/showcase their dog as breed worthy. It is the younger members with positions of influence (especially decoys), such as yourself, who can affect change, but it will come slowly. I love your passion and enthusiasm--now it is a matter of not allowing the frustration of the current system to dampen it. Perhaps seeing a few good, versatile dogs perform well within a club (and also observing how much their decoy loves working them) will cause others to want that type of dog, too. Peer pressure can be a wonderful thing sometimes  I applaud your efforts to work from within--you are a vital part of the future of the system!



Thank you for the kind words and encouragement. 



martemchik said:


> You have to take into account that most people do this for themselves. A dog doesn't understand the title. So the more random you throw in, the more you lose objectivity. The more you make the test unfair when you're trying to compare dog to dog. This also leads to "unfair" trials. Even if you take IPO and you put a helper in various blinds during the search. It won't be fair for one dog to run 6, the next one to run 4, the next one to run 3, ect. You're making some dogs do way more than others and the majority of our sports (even human) try to level the playing field as much as possible.
> 
> I think you need to take each dog/handler on a case by case basis. Like in your situation, some handlers will go out and train at the field, while others won't. There are people that want every point possible, and there are those that do want to test their dog and see what it has in it and how well it has been trained.
> 
> It's also not fair to compare the majority of sport handlers with K9 handlers. Our day jobs don't involve training our dogs, so there isn't as much time to spend on getting a dog ready for every conceivable situation. It makes sense to focus on just one. The majority of people I've seen that do 3 different venues, do each one on a mediocre level, they don't shine at any single one, but they do alright at all 3 of them. They'll never wow you with a performance, but it's because their time and energy is spread out over a lot of things rather than focusing on just one.


Max, this isn't directly related to your post. 
I understand the majority of people play in sport to win a trophy. Since this is the mentality, then why do we still put so much weight in sport titles? I travel around and train with lots of groups. I see what is really going on in training. Everyone is counting points. Not training, but rather trying to find short cuts that can get them the most points. Or training a pattern every day for the dog life. How does this help the breed? How does this show us who is a breed worthy dog or not? This is not just a trend with GSD's. I'm seeing a similar trend with other working breeds that have a big sport following as well. Everybody wants the stud who scored that perfect score. 

I've actually thought about hosting a fun competition this fall. Invite everybody from everywhere. All the different sports, law enforcement and so on. Have everything as a surprise, including obedience. Include scenarios that each sport specific person should excel at. Unfortunately, I feel that it wouldn't have a good outcome. Many people won't enter in fear of a poor showing. Those that enter would get feelings hurt. I do think that it would give an idea of what dogs truly have an understanding of whats being asked though.


----------



## Baillif (Jun 26, 2013)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-emBLEj9Ow8

Test em for real


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

I don’t know if “everybody wants the highest scoring stud.” The people I train with, the breeders I’ve been around, don’t invest that much in points. I know it happens, but it really doesn’t affect me. I’m not buying from those people anyways. People want to see highish scores, but they don’t have to be the top 5 national scoring dogs or the WUSV team members. Sure, proportionately those dogs get more studs than others, but at the end, it’s still not as much as many of us think.

The training…well that just depends on the club you go to. In my group, we do things that the dog needs which are based on what it will see on the Schutzhund field, but they are extremely far from what actually happens on the trialing field. My bitch for instance, hasn’t barked in a blind for about a month now. But she’s barked in dark corners, around other people, with the helper in a chair, helper on a couch, helper on a bowflex, ect. Many times from what I’ve seen…this also takes a very competent and willing helper, which from what I’ve seen isn’t very easy to find.

Don’t get me wrong, I love these discussions, but I always want an actual solution and not just a bitch session about the current system. Like you said about your idea, the randomness, it will keep away anyone that’s pretty serious and more than likely making some sort of money off of their dogs. I know that in my area, there is no way the police department would allow one of their dogs in such an event…the ramifications of the public seeing their dog possibly “fail” at something would be huge when each dog has at least $15,000 in public funds invested in it. It’s something that sounds super fun, and something that someone like me would definitely try, but sorry not spending hundreds to get out to California for a fun-match. I think for people in our position, who are just starting in the sport, these types of ideas are fun and fresh, but if we were further along in our dog careers, with more to lose, the thought process to go into one of these things would for sure be different.

To me, the biggest issue isn’t helping people that “know” figure out a good dog from a bad one. Most of us who have seriously done this sport for a year or two with proper guidance can easily pick a good dog from a bad one just by watching a single training session. But the biggest issue is how to help those that don’t know much figure out which dogs are good and which dogs have had the best marketing.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

Boils down to IPO is obedience based patterned trained trials.
It shows the dog but not the total dog. 
Points in trials is just a picture of that day, not really telling of what the dog is about. I see K9 handlers that I would not want helping me or working my dog. 
I enjoy doing SDA and IPO, I have done protection challenges with my dog(PSA type scenarios) It wasn't really fair to my dog to put him in a challenge that he'd never, ever trained for certain exercises. I decided I wouldn't put him in the advanced level because we don't train for what the challenge required. I'm sure he'd be fine and do well, but would it be fair to him? 
He does enjoy the 'surprise' type exercises, gets bored with the same ol' same ol' of IPO. 


> Most of us who have seriously done this sport for a year or two with proper guidance can easily pick a good dog from a bad one just by watching a single training session.


I don't agree, because if the dog is going thru something during that training session(working out a problem that the observer has no idea) you may see or interpret something that is really not who that dog is. 
I've seen this more than once during training where visitors are present and they question the dogs reaction or whatever. If they had been at the previous training sessions and knew the reason for what was being worked on presently, they'd be able to understand the dog more. 
Of course it is fairly easy to see a nerve-bag, but one view of a training session shouldn't make a judgement on the dogs character.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

I'm not saying that all K-9 handlers or trainers are the best handlers in the world either. I'm just trying to say that both worlds can learn a lot from each other. 

I don't think you can learn all you need to know about a dog from watching a training session or a trial. There are a lot of WUSV dogs that are afraid of slick floors or dark rooms. Heck do you know how many IPO3 dogs I've seen shut down just because of a clatter stick? Could some of these issues be lack of exposure? Sure, maybe some. But why are people not exposing them to this stuff? Because it's not needed for sport XY and Z? Then these are the genetics that we're supposed to pass on? How about the agility factors? How many GSD's now days can do a 6ft vertical wall? Yet look at the structural trends we see. 

My mind is going a million miles an hour, and I'm not really expressing what I'm trying to get across very well.


----------



## RZZNSTR (Jan 24, 2015)

mycobraracr said:


> I'm not saying that all K-9 handlers or trainers are the best handlers in the world either. I'm just trying to say that both worlds can learn a lot from each other.
> 
> I don't think you can learn all you need to know about a dog from watching a training session or a trial. There are a lot of WUSV dogs that are afraid of slick floors or dark rooms. Heck do you know how many IPO3 dogs I've seen shut down just because of a clatter stick? Could some of these issues be lack of exposure? Sure, maybe some. But why are people not exposing them to this stuff? Because it's not needed for sport XY and Z? Then these are the genetics that we're supposed to pass on? How about the agility factors? How many GSD's now days can do a 6ft vertical wall? Yet look at the structural trends we see.
> 
> My mind is going a million miles an hour, and I'm not really expressing what I'm trying to get across very well.


 
I completely understand what you're saying and I agree!


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

I understand too. How many dogs even hear gunshot on a regular basis? My own dog was reactive to it some, because it triggered the 'whip' noise. Until he heard it a few times during heeling, he would turn around and look. When I trialed for the IPO1, the judge even made them fire off several shots because Karlo turned around. It made the dog doing the down get up and run the field, and messed up my whole routine. Karlo looked but didn't react otherwise. We should have trained with more gunshot just to proof him.


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

Lovely Read. Amazing points brought up by OP and other users. 

Thank you.

Speaking as somebody who has owned and loved dogs for many years, who has pet dogs. For me it's more about communication and fun. 

This open mindedness transcends Police dog, real protection training/IPO etc. 

There is a lot of critical thought here, and can also be implemented and applied to average pet dog owners.

People need to re-assess why they are after that title, and why it means so much to them. Is it for the dog? Is it to achieve a std. with regards to breeding? Is it to measure yourself against others? Are you trying to be a world champion in something?

Or is it just a way to fuel ones egotistical human desire to feel they have a measurable bit of self worth, based on their dogs and what they do?

How are the lessons in the 'arena' or constrained environment transferable to the dogs daily life? And what it is expected to actually do?

How far will they push a dog for a few extra points? How does it impact the dogs daily life?

Weather it be the dogs actual work... Or his ability to just be a pet, and have maximum communication, interaction and fun with an owner?

People often associate success, and scoring high points in these sports with an ability to be a good balanced pet owner. 

I will admit. People who achieve highly in these type's of endeavours many times with multiple dogs have a good bit of knowledge. Titles can be objective proof. However what are they sacrificing to get better scores?

If you are not a professional of some sort...
Why is that title even of that much importance?

This is a personal question for each person. There is nothing wrong with any approach... But what are each and every individuals reasons for fighting for those extra points?
This is an important Question. And it needs severe self-reflection.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

I train because I love learning how the dog works. It has nothing to do with my ego, points or even trialing(though trialing is proof of the training) The connection with the dog, time spent with the dog and like minded friends...some call it an addiction.
I'm not competitive whatsoever, don't mind it in others but I think humbleness is part of a strong character. The dog tends to keep the humble end apparent.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

mycobraracr said:


> I don't think you can learn all you need to know about a dog from watching a training session or a trial. There are a lot of WUSV dogs that are afraid of slick floors or dark rooms. Heck do you know how many IPO3 dogs I've seen shut down just because of a clatter stick? Could some of these issues be lack of exposure? Sure, maybe some. But why are people not exposing them to this stuff? Because it's not needed for sport XY and Z? Then these are the genetics that we're supposed to pass on? How about the agility factors? How many GSD's now days can do a 6ft vertical wall? Yet look at the structural trends we see.


Simple answer...yes. You're not going to ever proof a dog for everything, mostly because by the time you do, the dog will be dead. Or you'll find something its sensitive to and then what? You don't breed the dog? I think overall environmental security or sensitivity isn't very hard to see in a training session. The nit picky stuff...of course you won't see it, but you can see if a dog is somewhat environmentally alert by it's reactions to changes or differences in the picture it's seeing while at training.

I'm also not sure if "reaction to clatter stick" rather than "reaction to padded stick" is a genetic thing. It just is an exposure thing. Sure, it's nice to have a dog that doesn't all of the sudden flip out because of a different stick, but it's also like equating a cap gun to real gun fire. Would a dog that's used to a cap gun react the same way to a rifle? I mean...I don't have access to an M16 to test my dog, so what more can I do?

I guess I see those people that are breeding/training dogs in protection sports as already going above and beyond the majority of dog breeders. So to try and set the standard even higher than the current one, when there are so many people that can't even achieve the current standard, is kind of pointless.

I think this has a lot to do with what many breeders will tell you...there isn't a perfect dog out there. You breed towards the perfect dog, and you can basically find a flaw in each and every sport or K9 dog.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

martemchik said:


> Simple answer...yes. You're not going to ever proof a dog for everything, mostly because by the time you do, the dog will be dead. Or you'll find something its sensitive to and then what? You don't breed the dog? I think overall environmental security or sensitivity isn't very hard to see in a training session. The nit picky stuff...of course you won't see it, but you can see if a dog is somewhat environmentally alert by it's reactions to changes or differences in the picture it's seeing while at training.
> 
> I'm also not sure if "reaction to clatter stick" rather than "reaction to padded stick" is a genetic thing. It just is an exposure thing. Sure, it's nice to have a dog that doesn't all of the sudden flip out because of a different stick, but it's also like equating a cap gun to real gun fire. Would a dog that's used to a cap gun react the same way to a rifle? I mean...I don't have access to an M16 to test my dog, so what more can I do?
> 
> ...



I agree you're never going to expose a dog to everything. The dog should however be exposed to as much as humanly possible. Also it's not always the reaction that is worrisome, but how the dog recovers from something it doesn't like. Have you ever given a stick hit to a dog with anything other than a padded stick? Clatter stick, whip, reed stick? That in itself can show you a lot. As for gun fire, I think the cap gun is pretty pointless. It sounds like a whip crack and that's about it. The majority of trials I worked, we've used a .38 with hollywood loads and even a 12 gauge shotgun with black powder rounds that shook the stadium we were in. 

I've got very weak dogs through titles by conditioning them to the pattern. One dog I have in mind, I couldn't even look at from 20ft away without him going into avoidance. A little over a year later the dog was titled. So what does this say? He could handle the pressure from a drive for five or so seconds, take two stick hits and so on. Make him hang on a couple steps further and who knows what would have happened. That's what I'm kinda getting at. If all we do is train to patterns and condition our dogs to what they will see on a trial field then...


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

Lykoz said:


> People need to re-assess why they are after that title, and why it means so much to them. Is it for the dog? Is it to achieve a std. with regards to breeding? Is it to measure yourself against others? Are you trying to be a world champion in something?
> 
> I do because in the future I want to breed. I am very competitive with everything I do, so some of it is about the competition however I don't have a desire to be a world champion. I play in multiple venues and as others said, it's hard to podium at high levels that way.
> 
> ...



Answers in red.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

I think from a breeding perspective after you have seen and worked a good cross section of dogs you have a clue or you never will.

You live with the dog, take it places, work it, pressure it and see how he responds. You should quickly get a handle on what he is and is not if you can be honest with yourself.

You dont need an organization to set up structured tests to determine what you already know.

Test the dog, video the results, title and health test the dog and decide whether you think its worth your while to reproduce said animal. 

Police Officers are end users. Most of the dogs that go to them fall into genetic black holes, I personally know of same **** good K9 handlers that are top trainers as well. In all cases they are also sport handlers.

I have seen some K9 handlers that are on the other end of the spectrum as I am sure you have as well. I think you can learn from those that are on top of their game on both sides of the fence.

We know crappers are earning working titles. Most serious people can identify these dogs.

However, if your after a certain kind of dog be that high aggression/fight , flashy sporty or whatever find dogs that exemplify those traits. Breed them and work their progeny. If they are good word will quickly get around.

Sport trials are an opportunity to show your skills as a trainer and in some cases the genetic quality of your dogs. The title in and of itself means nothing from a genetic quality perspective.


----------



## Baillif (Jun 26, 2013)

Lots of people out there that can't be honest with themselves.


----------



## Pax8 (Apr 8, 2014)

Baillif said:


> Lots of people out there that can't be honest with themselves.


Very true. When looking at a dog, I listen closely to the handler. They're very knowledgeable about their dog because they work it and live with it. But I also take that information with a grain of salt. Better to get a nuanced picture from multiple informed opinions than a snapshot of one biased opinion.


----------



## Lykoz (Dec 6, 2014)

I love these replies to my questions 

I did not actuall expect anyone to reply.
But they add so much value.

I think the people that replied are so very honest and doing it for all the right reasons.

(There was a bit misunderstanding with regards to my questions for some in that I was not questioning why you engage in training in formalised sports and try to achieve and engage the dog.. But more about the 'importance of earning those titles/points above other considerations) - The people however made it clear that this was not their main goal to begin with. 

So I think it was awesome to get these type of replies anyways.

My post was more of an affirmation post... Basically agreeing with what was already said by other users. And how I applied it to myself from the posts you made, from a non sport dog owner.

I was also trying to draw relevance to your thinking styles outside of the sport/Police dog world.

The fact is weather we engage in sport dog training/RBSD training or not... It would be naive not to be influenced by that world...
Collectively Competition breeds excellence. However a competitive mentality is not always healthy for a casual dog owner...
Does not mean we cant draw from that experience those professionals have established, and balance things out to our lifestyles.


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

Exposing a dog to everything is both impossible and counterproductive... you're just trying to warm him up to that particular challenge/stressor... a good dog need not be "exposed" as a good dog will not lose it b/c its a clatter stick vs a padded whip. Further, for any moderately skilled handler or trainer there isn't anything any judge can tell you from observing a dog doing *anything* for 3 minutes that you don't already know full well yourself whether you choose to accept it or not.

This past weekend I was trying to cut a notch out of a new trailer tongue for my dog trailer... 3/16" thick 2x3. With cutting tools loud enough to make me wear ear plugs and a spray of sparks and embers flying, my new pup kept trying to check it out till I had to put him up so I could work. I can tell you more about a dog from an experience like that than I could from watching him get driven and thrashed with stick hits he'd been exposed to for years and learned to take in stride. 

In the exact same way, I can tell you more about a dog and see his character more clearly on his very first day of protection work, than I can after a skilled or unskilled trainer has polished or ruined that some dog


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

ah. here it is. The world goes round and round. 

Max....

Have a nice day. 

:rose:


----------

