# Has defense training ruined the working dog



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

I dont like defense training because you are asking the dog to work in a way that it does not want to. If you work a dog in a aggresive manner and the dog runs away so be it...forcing the dog to fight is just a cover to what the dog is naturally. This dog in my opinion should not be bred.

Curious as to what others think..not looking to argue but a discussion would be good. If Lou is reading this lets keep it short...please;-)


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

I don't remember ever seeing it discussed like this Will. Usually it seems more like prey drive or training in too much prey is whats wrong. What I find a little confusing is that anyone trains in either one or the other only.


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

I have no problem with bringing the aggression out of a dog. For some it is easily accessable for others it may take a little bit of pressure. The dog that it must be dragged out of is useless. But the table discussion brings about how appearences can be manipulated for someone breeding and selling dogs. When dealing with people that feed their families on dog sales it causes a bit of conflict.

I have tried to correct quite a few dogs that have no business participating in a specific venue. Their owners, due to buying through a bid process, have no other recourse but use that dog. That dog is usually in the 8-11 thousand dollar range. It aggravates me to no end.

So I wonder how many crappy dogs, with make up on, have been bred. Makes me wonder that maybe its not the show person but the greedy one that is ruining any given breed.


----------



## Chris Michalek (Feb 13, 2008)

will fernandez said:


> I dont like defense training because you are asking the dog to work in a way that it does not want to.


I think of it more as teach the dog how to use what he naturally has. We've done quit a bit of defensive training with my two dogs and it appears they are stronger because of it. Of course you need a very experienced helper to help ensure the dogs are properly built.


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

As I stated in a previous post...this is where the selection process is key. Personally...I like more prey drive than defense for a PSD. Dogs with too high of a thresh hold concerning defense is not my kind of dog. If I had to put numbers on it, I would say about 65% prey and 35% defense is what I like...or thereabouts.

Those numbers don't mean squat in a fluid situation. Each may rise, or fall given the stimulous or situation. It's a tough thing to nail down, but I like what I like.

As far my training the PSD.....I would say maybe10-15% of it is defense work. A dog with a good balance of drives will naturally shift to what the situation requires. No sense in showcasing one or the other. I know some guys who love that snarling, snapping, teeth baring, saliva spewing PSD who never seems to be under control. They think its cool. The loss of hearing, accidental bites, and overall PITA is not so cool as the years go by.


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Interesting line of thought Will. Your going to put every one into defense you know. The answer is yes but it isn't greed. It is competition taking it's normal course. As the bar is raised, competators want and need more to win. Since this is what the competators want, the breeders breed for it. New pseudo ideals are created to raise the bar some more. A good, solid balanced dog is no longer able to compete, so less and less balanced dogs are the goal so that is what breeders breed for. 

It escalates like this in the show world. Many dogs there can't even raise there legs past 30 degrees from the floor. Look at the layback on the showline GSD's. It is horrific. 

Hunters do it. They consider a 12 o'clock tail of great importance because the position of the tail may mean winning or losing to some judges of bird competitipns. They breed for the tail as much as for the dog. The dogs bred for all age stakes, I believe, requires a horse to bird hunt. 

Heck, I am even guilty to some extent. I have altered the structure of my dales considerable, but what I wanted and was first attracted to the breed for was the toughness, temperament, loyalty and I really try to keep intact. I could change the conformation back in a few generations simply by breeding what looks good walking in a circle.

Competition doesn't always have such a negative effect. Race cars for instance, has probably been beneficial to all. I don't think race horses have suffered much because running is what horses do naturally. Big difference.


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

I agree with you Howard . Same here when I was training PSD's . What I have found as it relates to defense , and what I rarely have seen discussed , is a PSD's need to search out suspects . 

Most discussions like on this forum most of the time is the bitework , which through a good trainier can develope a good dog on equipment but when called on to search away from it's handler the dogs confidence evaporates . 

I've seen in very defensive dogs are they look very impressive to some say on a lead posted doing civil work . In our PSD K9 schools the new handlers see this defensiveness and think that's the toughest dog in the class . 

Later when we go into the search work the you can see the conflict in the dog while searching . Their search work takes a long time and when they get into scent you can see these dog going in and out of the scent . You can almost see the dog thinking 
" Should I or shouldn't I ?! " .

Some will eventually engage the hidden suspect but others will actual "walk" past the suspect taking the handler on a ghost hunt . 

I saw this at a training seminar I instructed at in another state several years ago . 99% of the dogs walked the hidden suspect . About a dozen "experianced" active PSD's , about 4 Bark and Hold K9's and 8 Bite and Hold K9's (rough guess from memory ).

Most of these dogs looked good in bitework at least they looked threating during the agitation and bit good . Most however also had issues with control off the bite . An issue I would guess whe dealt with would create many bite issues with some of these K9's . 

When we washout these types of dogs out of our new Patrol Dog Schools (new PSD candidates , not actual PSD's) most of the new handlers in the class , especially the specific dogs handler , are stunned and can't believe such a "tough" dog was getting replaced . 

For me I feel many folks fall for how intimidating a defensive dog looks during civil agitation and bitework and think it's a tough dog . They don't understand that many wouldn't even bite if the handler wasn't around , the equipment (sleeve , suit) wasn't there and they had an avenue of escape .


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

will fernandez said:


> I dont like defense training because you are asking the dog to work in a way that it does not want to. If you work a dog in a aggresive manner and the dog runs away so be it...forcing the dog to fight is just a cover to what the dog is naturally. This dog in my opinion should not be bred.
> 
> Curious as to what others think..not looking to argue but a discussion would be good. If Lou is reading this lets keep it short...please;-)


 Some good points here. If you ever took Karate, you practice defense as a tool to help you IF you can't avoid a conflict. The dog should be trained to be successful, this can be done in the prey and defense modes.

Defense is just part of the "balance" the dog needs and with good decoys can do it so as to limit unwanted extra stress in the beginning. A dog that has to be made to work in defense and isn't a willing player, you're just putting water in a wire basket!


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Jim Nash said:


> When we washout these types of dogs out of our new Patrol Dog Schools (new PSD candidates , not actual PSD's) most of the new handlers in the class , especially the specific dogs handler , are stunned and can't believe such a "tough" dog was getting replaced .
> 
> For me I feel many folks fall for how intimidating a defensive dog looks during civil agitation and bitework and think it's a tough dog . They don't understand that many wouldn't even bite if the handler wasn't around , the equipment (sleeve , suit) wasn't there and they had an avenue of escape .


We just washed the very same type of dog. Looked great on the tie back, good tracking, buildings and areas OK, but a correct test revealed the dog had no heart. He would hardly engage in the building, if he alerted at all. Someone failed to test him right in the first place....and it tweren't me.


----------



## Michelle Reusser (Mar 29, 2008)

Jim Nash said:


> I agree with you Howard . Same here when I was training PSD's . What I have found as it relates to defense , and what I rarely have seen discussed , is a PSD's need to search out suspects .
> 
> Most discussions like on this forum most of the time is the bitework , which through a good trainier can develope a good dog on equipment but when called on to search away from it's handler the dogs confidence evaporates .
> 
> ...


 
Good post Jim but what about a dog that doesn't look threatening at all? Not a weak or soft dog at all, just one that doesn't show big teeth, bark and make a threatening scene? My dog would just stand there, not bark but he sure as shit was allert, facign the decoy at the end of the line and he will bite. For sport we had to "teach" him to act threatening for points. Standing there with mouth agape waiting for the decoy to fall into his mouth or me to let him go, wasn't going to cut it. Sport type work doesn't make him feel threatened enough to put forth the big show, so we had to teach him, no show, no bite. He was very easy to bring out on the table, just stalk him and he goes nuts, no way you can touch him to even flank him. After a few times doing this, he never went back to stanging there like a dead fish.

For me and my dogs this is what we use the defense table for.

My other dog is just really social and in la la land. I didn't have as much time to take him everywhere and show him alot of things. He didn't get that he needed to show some aggression because everyone was his friend. After being staked out a few times while other dogs worked, the barks came and a time or 2 on the table made him more suspicious/aware of certain people.


----------



## Michelle Reusser (Mar 29, 2008)

Chris Michalek said:


> I think of it more as teach the dog how to use what he naturally has. We've done quit a bit of defensive training with my two dogs and it appears they are stronger because of it. Of course you need a very experienced helper to help ensure the dogs are properly built.


I gotta agree with this 100%. The defense isn't going to change what the dog is, just bring out what he had never tapped into before. Ya gotta push a dog to see what is in there. How else do you know what you have to work with?


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

HK . Unfortunately with the young dogs we have to work with nowadays , the Stake out test we use to perform just isn't useful anymore .

So with some dogs we are forced to find out their true self later on in training then we would like .


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Jim Nash said:


> HK . Unfortunately with the young dogs we have to work with nowadays , the Stake out test we use to perform just isn't useful anymore .
> 
> So with some dogs we are forced to find out their true self later on in training then we would like .


 I have to agree somewhat with you there, Jim.

Even so, this dog went into full avoidance in just a couple of minutes with absolutely no physical contact on the dog. I understand that young, green dogs are more prevalent, but I'd rather have one sit there and look at me like a retard while I did my thing than have one lick his balls and walk to the end of the lead in the other direction.


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

Unfortunately Michelle we have to speak in generalities on subjects . There are always exceptions to the rule and for me in training I(and the guys I trained with) looked at what each dogs individual combinations of behaviors ( traits , drives , whattever ) and see what we can get out of those dogs and we adapt our training to the specific dog . 

When I first started 13 years ago we had donated dogs . We would look at over 100 dogs just to get around 12 for a new Patrol dog class . We used the Stake out test for them because back then we could get more mentally mature dogs to work with . 

Unfortunately we were also working with dogs donated locally . They were alot different then the dogs we work with now which are generally young green imported high prey drive dogs to begin with .

The donated dogs we worked with back then , some were similar to your dog . Most took more to get aggression out of them . They weren't cowards . Wouldn't run but we had to put in way more work(usually defensive work) to get an aggressive response out of them . Even then though we had to watch that we didn't over develope that response (push them too far in defensive work) in some of the dogs once we got it .

When we started to work with green imports later we were initially getting dogs around 16 months old (that has changed alot now , more like 12 months). We had to change our way of training because it was much easier to over develope the aggression in those dogs early on . Caused problems with bite , control and search work later .

My point with all of this is I think many folks can over develope defense in a K9 through training or choice of dog because they misinterpret a dog they have pushed into or seen in defense , as being a "tough" or "strong" dog , just because it looks intimidating and because of this use too much defense in their overall training of the dog . 

To use Howard "Twinkle Toes" G's explanation , they don't have a balanced training approach and are using too much defense training or choose a K9 with too much natural defense to do the job they wanted it to do . Mostly because that dog looked intimidating while in defense .


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

HK , I agree just explaining why we tend to get more intitially making it into the class before we wash them .


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Jim Nash said:


> HK , I agree just explaining why we tend to get more intitially making it into the class before we wash them .



Do tell, Jim. This is why I oppose rotating handlers and trainers out of the unit based on time spent there. It takes so long to recognize what you are looking at that newbies are easily impressed and can make the wrong choices. The damn PD paid to train you guys to be the best you can be, then decide to let all that knowledge go to waste under the guise of fairness to other officers who feel they deserve a dog.


----------



## Timothy Stacy (Jan 29, 2009)

Just wondering when would be a good time to see what your dog would do when challenged / put in a uncomfortable situation/ defense? 

The one time you need him the most, is that when you'd like to see what his reaction would be?

A real fight is not portrayed in any of the dog sports and can be hard to replicate in training also. Take for example that A'Tim Korung video(conflict with prior training for the dog IMO). I think a lot of people underestimate how good of a dog it takes to stay in a fight like that. To add to that they have no clue if their own dog would hang around for that shit!!!! 

Not saying all the time, but a dog should be worked at some point in defense JMO.


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Very valid questions. This is one of the problems with young dogs. They aren't really mature enough to handle real pressure till at least 18 mos old IMO. Some can handle it sooner, some later.

One litmus test is working the dog in the muzzle. Take away his ability to bite and you will see which dogs are serious about things. It is very easy to break one though so extreme care must be taken. 

Situational training is a good way to get a feel for things as well. Take away the normal stimulous the dog has seen in prior defense training and do something enviromentally different.


----------



## Michelle Reusser (Mar 29, 2008)

Howard Knauf said:


> Very valid questions. This is one of the problems with young dogs. They aren't really mature enough to handle real pressure till at least 18 mos old IMO. Some can handle it sooner, some later.
> 
> One litmus test is working the dog in the muzzle. Take away his ability to bite and you will see which dogs are serious about things. It is very easy to break one though so extreme care must be taken.
> 
> Situational training is a good way to get a feel for things as well. Take away the normal stimulous the dog has seen in prior defense training and do something enviromentally different.


That is a really good point Howard, even my slower to react dog, if you put a muzzle on him, he gets pissed with just eye contact from the decoy. I was surprised at how much more fight he showed with the muzzle, even without much or any stimulation. 

Can you give a few examples of your last 2 sentences?


----------



## Chris Michalek (Feb 13, 2008)

Timothy Stacy said:


> Just wondering when would be a good time to see what your dog would do when challenged / put in a uncomfortable situation/ defense?
> 
> The one time you need him the most, is that when you'd like to see what his reaction would be?



I say NEVER because you could **** your dog in a flash if he got scared enough. You have to train slowly for that.

There was dude that came out to the club a year ago. He had a very nice Rottie that he wanted evaluated, we tested his basic drives, grip and nerve. Afterwards, he asked the TD to tie the dog in the corner and he wanted him to have go at him to see what the dog had.

The TD said "oh no...you can't test a dog like that. I man like me could literally scare the piss and shit out of him and you don't want a dog like that. That dog can't take me holding my hand over his head"

The dog owner bet us all drinks that his dog could stand up to anything.

The TD slowly walked up on the dog. Closer and closer beaming his ice cold glare into the wide open eyes of the bad ass Rottweiler. The Rottweiler glances to the left and barks and then he glaces again but this time turning his head. He looks back at the TD who is showing his teeth at the dog. The TD raises his hand... the badass rottweiler quickly glances to the right and then flinches as the TD's hand slowly creeps above the dog's head.

"Yep, I'm wrong, he wasn't afraid of my hand, he was afraid of me lookin' at him. I'll buy YOU a drink for being wrong about your dog."

My Mal is about 70% prey and 30% defense.I know exactly what he will do under pressure. My Rott is about 55% 45% Defense I know what he will do too. If you have any worries, don't let it be a guessing game.


----------



## Timothy Stacy (Jan 29, 2009)

Oh yes of coarse slowly in defense! And I don't have personal worries but asking merely for responses. Dogs like humans have a built in mechanism for self preservation so almost all dogs have there breaking point when enough is enough. But yes slow in defense and build them up


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Timothy Stacy said:


> Just wondering when would be a good time to see what your dog would do when challenged / put in a uncomfortable situation/ defense?
> 
> The one time you need him the most, is that when you'd like to see what his reaction would be?
> 
> ...


Excellent point. That pressure put on in that test with the flanks and the tail pull was pretty extreme, I don't see any dog seeing that kind of work in a normal sport situation, or in training for 99% of them.

For me, I "think" very few competing sport dogs are gonna ever see pressure like that or more extreme types of pressure in their life.

The question is not even about the thresholds for defense, because every dog has one. The opinion is that people don't want to see a defensive reaction in their dogs at all, and I can agree with this in a sport application. The problem will occur if the dog does get into a situation that goes beyond what it used to and is actually put into defense. Which will happen with any dog at some point. 

What matters is what happens when the dog's view changes to actually feeling the threat, and how he copes with the stress. 

A 2 ft foot piece of garden hose used in ways that are not appropriate to discuss can put one closer to finding the answer out, among other things like slamming into a wall or fence on the bite and pressing and other stuff. But you didn't hear that from me.


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Michelle Kehoe said:


> Can you give a few examples of your last 2 sentences?



Joby pretty much nailed it. Give the dog a different look, not your ordinary clatter stick or padded stick etc....

Chris also pointed out something I should have....take it slooooowly! It's like starting all over again. Each individua; dog will determine how the training progresses.

Thanks guys.


----------



## Chris Michalek (Feb 13, 2008)

Joby Becker;169470
What matters is what happens when the dog's view changes to actually feeling the threat said:


> They are generally taught to bite through pressure.
> 
> We've got my dog up to the point where we have to shoot him to bite. ;-)


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Chris Michalek said:


> They are generally taught to bite through pressure.
> 
> We've got my dog up to the point where we have to shoot him to bite. ;-)


LOL so he won't bite unless he is shot? Might need to rethink that one. LOL


----------



## Timothy Stacy (Jan 29, 2009)

Chris Michalek said:


> They are generally taught to bite through pressure.
> 
> We've got my dog up to the point where we have to shoot him to bite. ;-)


I don't think Joby is talking about cracking the whip, staring, and provocation, but the pressure once on the bite


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Michelle Kehoe said:


> . I was surprised at how much more fight he showed with the muzzle, even without much or any stimulation.



This is why I spoke about the balance of drives shifting. Your dog knows the drill. He knows he can't bite. His defense level ramps up. Does it make him weaker? I don't think so. As long as he displays forward aggression in that elevated state of defense I'm good with it. Is his reactions learned? Probably.

I train muzzle work to teach the dog that the harder he fights, the more chance of the muzzle "Accidentally" coming off. I'm looking for the end result, which is intensity. I do not however, allow the dog to go bonkers just because the muzzle is put on. He must remain calm, stable and biddable.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Slow buildup is good stuff. 

Night work is a great way to evaluate the progress on a dog you feel might be ready...in my opinion 

off lead in the dark in the woods. Send dog a good distance...duck behind some trees..jump out and charge the dog as he gets close...
does he hesitate? 
does he bite? 
if he bites, turn it up a notch, how does he hold up? 
If he holds up, turn it up some more. 
Then send him from outside of the woods, make him find you and try again. 
Not all at once of course, unless you have a great mature dog with good work on him.
Have to know what the hell you are doing so you can help the dog recuperate if he is not ready.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Timothy Stacy said:


> I don't think Joby is talking about cracking the whip, staring, and provocation, but the pressure once on the bite


I would bet most people on here probably don't know what I am talking about. That is not meant as an insult, and I am no dog genius either. 

I don't think most people will ever test their dogs to this degree. 

I am talking about when you have a mature dog that has had the slow buildup and you want to find out what's going to happen when you take it to that level that would make most people squirm. A dog that you feel is ready to be "tested"...

then take him out in the woods, or into the basemant and "test" him some more.. things that go bump in the night type of stuff....


----------



## Michelle Reusser (Mar 29, 2008)

Howard Knauf said:


> This is why I spoke about the balance of drives shifting. Your dog knows the drill. He knows he can't bite. His defense level ramps up. Does it make him weaker? I don't think so. As long as he displays forward aggression in that elevated state of defense I'm good with it. Is his reactions learned? Probably.
> 
> I train muzzle work to teach the dog that the harder he fights, the more chance of the muzzle "Accidentally" coming off. I'm looking for the end result, which is intensity. I do not however, allow the dog to go bonkers just because the muzzle is put on. He must remain calm, stable and biddable.


No I can't let my dog go bonkers either. In PSA we have to heel in muzzle a figure 8 of 4 people and the dog can't be going off on them as they are neutral. I've never sent my dog on anyone in muzzle but he sees decoys on and off the field and wants them nowhere near me when the muzzle is on, he's fine with the "crowd" we have to walk through.


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

very good. I didn't mean to insinuate that your dog was going bonkers. It's just an observation that some handlers feel the need to hype up their dog for the muzzle work and all control goes out the window.


----------



## Michelle Reusser (Mar 29, 2008)

Oh no, I knew you weren't talking about my dog or me. Just explaining more of what we have done in muzzle. Not much but enough to see he was elevated, like you said in your post. 

What is the difference between sending a dog in muzzle on a suited decoy or non? In the dogs head anyway. I'd be scared to death my dog would get out of the muzzle and really hurt someone. Can you get the same affect leaving the decoy suited?


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

It's kind of against the purpose using a suited decoy to do muzzle work . The suit is a que for the dog to aggress and basically the muzzle then becomes a que for the dog also . 

You want to avoid the muzzle becoming a que to fight . The muzzle can be a good indicator if you have an equipment fixated dog but if you use it wrong like using it with a suited decoy you just teach the dog the muzzle is another peice of equipment .


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Exactly....And if you slip the muzzle on a suited decoy it can enhance equipment fixation. I should have clarified...If we slip the muzzle it's done by the decoy who is wearing covert sleeves....otherwise, we have the dog drive the bad guy away who runs off out of sight to a hidden sleeve and the dog is sent to search and bite once the muzzle is removed.


----------



## Michelle Reusser (Mar 29, 2008)

Ok, that makes sense. Thanks guys.


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

I will add I'm a stickler for having the muzzles on tight and for me I generally test tightness by pulling the dog's front feet off the ground with the muzzle . I do safety checks religously . I don't want anyone especially myself (if I'm decoying) eaten up if that thing comes off . 

Even if we are going to take the muzzle off for a bite somewhere during the scenerio . I would caution against putting it on tight for one scenerio only involveing the muzzle fighting and driving off of the suspect , then loosening it for a scenerio where it's going to be removed at some point for a bite . (A) because it's unsafe and (B) because the dog can quickly pick up on the looser fit being a que it's eventually going to be able to use it's teeth to deal with the suspect . JMO.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Jim Nash said:


> I will add I'm a stickler for having the muzzles on tight and for me I generally test tightness by pulling the dog's front feet off the ground with the muzzle . I do safety checks religously . I don't want anyone especially myself (if I'm decoying) eaten up if that thing comes off .
> 
> Even if we are going to take the muzzle off for a bite somewhere during the scenerio . I would caution against putting it on tight for one scenerio only involveing the muzzle fighting and driving off of the suspect , then loosening it for a scenerio where it's going to be removed at some point for a bite . (A) because it's unsafe and (B) because the dog can quickly pick up on the looser fit being a que it's eventually going to be able to use it's teeth to deal with the suspect . JMO.


VERY SOUND ADVICE..

Jim...quick question...

Are you are against using suit for starting in muzzle in all cases?

I am not active in training police dogs, I have been involved some in training of PSD's, but not for years and years like some of you guys. some yes...


I guess I am asking about using the suit if the dog is not punching well, or targeting high enough...or does that not matter much...

I'm asking mostly about seasoned sport dogs...

And then take the suit out of the picture...

I guess you would correct all the other things in other ways before introducing the muzzle.

I've done it this way and seen it done, with decent results. And most of the dogs I've seen it done with are not going to be working police k9.

I totally see your point and am not disagreeing with you at all was just wondering if that was a 100% never for you...


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

Not set in stone but I can only think of 1 time I did it involving a suit . It was with a dog no matter what we tried would freak out when the muzzle was put on . We tried everything for a few months trying to acclimate him to the muzzle . Nothing worked . We would put it on and he would just roll around like hell trying to get the thing off . 

We tried with the suit present and he stopped and would focus on decoy and knock the stuffing out of him . So we at least accomplished something with the muzzle just not everything we would have liked to .

The muzzle does several things . Along with teaching a dog he can hit the guy hard , fight and drive him off without the ability to bite him , which builds confidence along the way . It also helps reduce the possiblity of equipment fixation . The dog learns the view of the badguy is not just someone wearing a suit or sleeve (I will add the hidden sleeve into this also , IMO it's only hidden to the dog maybe on the first use after that he can pickup on it) . 

With the muzzle his view of the badguy is now one with no visible equipment (just like what the K9 is going to see for real in PSD work) and he learns how to fight that guy and win . 

If you use the suit you lose some of those benefits . 

I try everything possible to not get the dog to que on the muzzle or anything in those situations .

I do alot of initial acclimation work . Just getting the dog to wear it calmly , to doing obediance , searches(no fight just find and alert) , agility , just long walks to just hanging out with the dog in muzzle . I do this before we do fight work and continue this throughout the dogs career . 

I don't want him expecting ANYTHING just because the muzzle was put on .


----------



## andreas broqvist (Jun 2, 2009)

We use Muzzel for more than half of ouer protection program and we never use a suit ore somthing like that to make tah dog work better.

You just nead to work the dog right, Agitate him, Make him win, Make him feel that he al that.
He drives the decoy away when he hits, He make the decoy flinsh when he lunges and stuff like that. In the end you will get nice hard clean hits 

Hit around 21 sec
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fk0XSVfsYyc

From the start
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9Z4igMdSsE&feature=related


Hit around 1 minute
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWrihBgsNMs&feature=related




Joby Becker said:


> VERY SOUND ADVICE..
> 
> Jim...quick question...
> 
> ...


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

Chris M, your story about the tying up the Rottweiler and the decoy approaching him:

This was the isolation test done over here by the Rottweiler and Dobermann Clubs. The dog was tied to a tree away from everyone, plus handler, and after a while was approached by the Temperament Judge and threatened with a large stick. If the dog tried to flee or even went backwards, he was failed. Only the ones who came forward and countered passed.

The judge wore normal civilian clothes.

The isolation test was eliminated a few years ago.


----------



## hillel schwartzman (Nov 9, 2008)

will fernandez said:


> I dont like defense training because you are asking the dog to work in a way that it does not want to. If you work a dog in a aggresive manner and the dog runs away so be it...forcing the dog to fight is just a cover to what the dog is naturally. This dog in my opinion should not be bred.
> 
> Curious as to what others think..not looking to argue but a discussion would be good. If Lou is reading this lets keep it short...please;-)


 I think you hit it on the head....I think we should teach our dogs to fight from an early age.. Fight drive., teaching a puppy to rough house with you first letting him always kick your butt . Just like a child who wants to become a boxer or fighter you always let him kick your butt and always kicking it up a notch..
Defense is Bullsh*t to me all it is you trying to beat the fight out of the dog that was not correctly developed..By doing this I see time and time again dogs being ruin because the trainers say ( I WANT DEFENSE )
Sh*t if you taught students, clients, club member and yourself to teach your dogs to fight, become boxers at an early age i think all this defense BS would not be a topic any more..


----------



## Michelle Reusser (Mar 29, 2008)

hillel schwartzman said:


> I think you hit it on the head....I think we should teach our dogs to fight from an early age.. Fight drive., teaching a puppy to rough house with you first letting him always kick your butt . Just like a child who wants to become a boxer or fighter you always let him kick your butt and always kicking it up a notch..
> Defense is Bullsh*t to me all it is you trying to beat the fight out of the dog that was not correctly developed..By doing this I see time and time again dogs being ruin because the trainers say ( I WANT DEFENSE )
> Sh*t if you taught students, clients, club member and yourself to teach your dogs to fight, become boxers at an early age i think all this defense BS would not be a topic any more..


 
I don't agree or maybe I don't understand what your saying here. I don't see how roughhousing with a a puppy is promoting fight drive. Doesn't any and everybody with a pup they want to do future bitework with, do this? And they don't all have pronounced fight. 

I also don't see defense as beating the fight out of a dog, I see it as escalating the pressure, until you SEE fighting from the dog.

My dog wont really "fight" a dead fish decoy, unless it's his first bite of the day and he's amped. Your typical SCH/IPO trial type pressure will not get much fight but a good decoy with some good pressure will. Look him dead in the eye, yell in his face, bring some real stick hits and for Gods sake, stand tall even with his 95lbs hanging off of you. He's slower to out but the fight is better when he actually feels challenged.


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

Michelle Kehoe said:


> I don't agree or maybe I don't understand what your saying here. I don't see how roughhousing with a a puppy is promoting fight drive. Doesn't any and everybody with a pup they want to do future bitework with, do this? And they don't all have pronounced fight.
> 
> I also don't see defense as beating the fight out of a dog, I see it as escalating the pressure, until you SEE fighting from the dog.
> 
> My dog wont really "fight" a dead fish decoy, unless it's his first bite of the day and he's amped. Your typical SCH/IPO trial type pressure will not get much fight but a good decoy with some good pressure will. Look him dead in the eye, yell in his face, bring some real stick hits and for Gods sake, stand tall even with his 95lbs hanging off of you. He's slower to out but the fight is better when he actually feels challenged.


 
But if you start with a young dog and teach him to bite with the least amount of stimulation from the decoy and have the decoy come alive when he fights, you will lower the thresholds on a dog. Same way you teach the dog to bite passive. A adult dog should be a able to fight without alot of yelling, whips and the rest of the stuff done.


----------



## Chris Michalek (Feb 13, 2008)

will fernandez said:


> A adult dog should be a able to fight without alot of yelling, whips and the rest of the stuff done.



with or without training?


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

maybe I sholud have said a trained, working, sport or protection dog. My opinion only.


----------



## Chris Michalek (Feb 13, 2008)

will fernandez said:


> maybe I sholud have said a trained, working, sport or protection dog. My opinion only.


I agree.


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

Hillel's video of his dog doing bitework was the perfect picture of training to me. Very similar techniques and dog.

From what I saw on the video.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Jim Nash said:


> Not set in stone but I can only think of 1 time I did it involving a suit . It was with a dog no matter what we tried would freak out when the muzzle was put on . We tried everything for a few months trying to acclimate him to the muzzle . Nothing worked . We would put it on and he would just roll around like hell trying to get the thing off .
> 
> We tried with the suit present and he stopped and would focus on decoy and knock the stuffing out of him . So we at least accomplished something with the muzzle just not everything we would have liked to .
> 
> ...


thank you for the response. I totally agree about the hidden stuff too. The first time is the best..
Good acting (acting like you are crippled) may keep the realism for a couple more sessions, but not for long.

I have always been of the opinion that one or two hidden bites in a session is the best. Otherwise how is the dog supposed to think he really hurt the guy bad? If he keeps coming back again?

From a PP perspective. you can always tell the intent of the dog on that first hidden sleeve bite. It is very disappointing to work a dog that you are pretty sure is going to nail it, and then it doesn't work out like you thought it would...happens more than people will admit.

Most of the dogs I end up doing this work with are not gonna be working K9's. So we don't work as much as we probably should with keeping the muzzle a neutral thing. Admittedly, most of the time the dog knows there is gonna be a fight when he has the muzzle on. 

thanks again


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Gillian Schuler said:


> Chris M, your story about the tying up the Rottweiler and the decoy approaching him:
> 
> This was the isolation test done over here by the Rottweiler and Dobermann Clubs. The dog was tied to a tree away from everyone, plus handler, and after a while was approached by the Temperament Judge and threatened with a large stick. If the dog tried to flee or even went backwards, he was failed. Only the ones who came forward and countered passed.
> 
> ...


How close did the judge get to the dogs?

Why was this test eliminated? Just curious..

I was a founding member of the PCCA now DCCA (presa club) Not a member anymore, went the show route..

For our BST we did this test. and took it one further. After the intial test a second approach was made and a BITE was required...I helped get the test in order on paper and was pretty happy with it. Most of these dogs did not have training. And a fair amount would bite, at least of the early dogs that arrived here, and the breedings done by the early american breeders.

Then we flew in the Spanish Judges to get some dogs into the studbooks that may have not been registered (there was a rush to close the studbooks) for less than ideal reasons. The breed needed a lot of work still...

As soon as the Spanish guys saw most of their newest crops of exported dogs failing this test, they demanded that the club remove the bite, and made our club keep the threatening decoy much farther away from the dog on the stake test. We had it so the guy got within a foot of the dog, to make sure (as much as possible) that the dog wasn't just bluffing.

They made changes that allowed dogs that fired up with the guy at a distance of 15 feet or something like that, can't remember..Of course the passing percentage was way higher..almost any dog should fire up at a distance..I left the club shortly after this and other changes were being made...


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

Chris Michalek said:


> with or without training?


What's training got to do with it? Either the dog's got it or it hasn't!


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

In reguards to Will's original question and statement .

" I dont like defense training because you are asking the dog to work in a way that it does not want to. If you work a dog in a aggresive manner and the dog runs away so be it...forcing the dog to fight is just a cover to what the dog is naturally. This dog in my opinion should not be bred.

Curious as to what others think..not looking to argue but a discussion would be good. If Lou is reading this lets keep it short...please "




I don't think defense training is ruining the working dog . From what I see there is more work being put into prey training then defense in the working dog world and that necessarily isn't a good thing either. JMO . 

I do feel there are too many people using K9's with too many defensive behaviors for a K9 they expect to work properly in certain fields (PSD's for example) . 

I also feel there are too many using too much defensive training with K9's they are attempting to train in certain working fields ( PSD , PPD , sport ) .


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Quote: I dont like defense training because you are asking the dog to work in a way that it does not want to. If you work a dog in a aggresive manner and the dog runs away so be it...forcing the dog to fight is just a cover to what the dog is naturally.

This is absolutely correct. Don posted a really good reply as far as how it happens.

There are a lot of dogs that are "made" out there. These dogs are then bred, and if ONE thing will pass more often than not, it is the higher thresholds.

One of my favorite things in the past was to take a dog that I was told couldn't do the work, and then "make" the dog.

Today, I took my extremely expensive Esko dog out to train. He bites hard, and wraps his legs and looks really good........ until as I have been saying all along, control is put on him.

A beginning point in control work is to teach the dog the out down. He has been doing this, and still looks good. So today, I thought we would work on him biting the pivot leg. He has not seen this before, so he spent a good deal of time chasing the moving leg, and ignoring the leg RIGHT in front of him.

Eventually, he figured it out, but not before almost completely dropping out of drive, and biting so weakly that the jambierre comes out of his mouth with any movement, so that you can't even work him when he gets it right.

If I wanted to get this dog to look better, I would have to use defense so that it was personal between him and the decoy. At that point, I am sure that he would look better. However, this will not fix his inability to maintain his drive.

People tell me that he is young, that he just doesn't understand, that he will get it eventually, and so on and so on. I think that most of this comes from the fact that they know he cost a ****load of money.

I am going to keep training him, as I am curious by nature. The funny thing is that I do not see him as a lessor dog than other GSD's for the most part. Most that look "better" have been put on the table, or had some form of defense put on them.

Other than the one video where he did well, and that part isn't on the video, I have not trained him like that since then. He has to bring his own drive. Granted, I am sure that if I would have kept the session today short, he would look a lot better, but since he was just chasing the moving leg, and not really getting the point of the exercise, I would have just been building frustration, and building drive. Not a bad thing, but I want to see what he can bring on his own for now.

This chasing and not getting it, along with his asshole side where he is told "out down" and his does this dick move where he turns sideways to the decoy and stares at me, made for a tough day for him.

I don't think he has it naturally, I DO think there is something in there, but with his thresholds, it is gonna have to be FORCED out of there. If he DOES have some sort of epiphany (not likely) and starts to bring his OWN drive, which I guess COULD be possible, when he is 2 or 3 (and ****ing useless, as he would be 12 before his stubborn dickhead ass could trial) Then he could possibly pass, and will be leaving a lot of scars on decoys for sure. He bites really hard. At least I have that at times : )

This is a good discussion, a REALLY good thing to think about when getting a puppy from parents that you do not know a thing about how they were trained.

When people pull their heads out of their asses, and actually stop breeding these **** flop shitters we see out there in Sch, maybe something can be done.

Until then, the high level "winning" dogs are still gonna be defense trained, still gonna be frustrated out of their minds before they get a bite, and one of the most important things a dog needs will be ignored, and that is the ability to maintain a high level of drive in a static exercise. I would love to see the GSD in ringsports here in the states. I figure he is just 8 months old, and at some point we will throw the defense in there, but I think I will wait, and see if he can figure out the job on his own. :roll:

If I have confused anyone, please understand that many of you are still at the stage where Esko is, and that is the beginning. I think if you start looking carefully at how you are training, you will start to see how dogs are "made".


----------



## hillel schwartzman (Nov 9, 2008)

will fernandez said:


> Hillel's video of his dog doing bitework was the perfect picture of training to me. Very similar techniques and dog.
> 
> From what I saw on the video.


 What video are we talking about?????

Make your dogs active not reactive..


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

hillel schwartzman said:


> What video are we talking about?????
> 
> Make your dogs active not reactive..


Sorry I must of made a mistake. 

I thought you put up a video of a very active dog on a pretty calm decoy.


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

Jeff or anyone.

Do you think it is impossible to lower a dogs defense threshold (IE get him from the point of some stimulation to bite, whip or stick or some yelling, down to a passive bite? Or is this just something you want to see naturally out of the womb?

Do you also think that through training dogs are able to raise their avoidance threshold by winning in situation after situation. Or is this also covering up something undesirable in a dog?


----------



## hillel schwartzman (Nov 9, 2008)

Dave Colborn said:


> Jeff or anyone.
> 
> Do you think it is impossible to lower a dogs defense threshold (IE get him from the point of some stimulation to bite, whip or stick or some yelling, down to a passive bite? Or is this just something you want to see naturally out of the womb?
> 
> Do you also think that through training dogs are able to raise their avoidance threshold by winning in situation after situation. Or is this also covering up something undesirable in a dog?


 For what it is worth we all want a dog coming out of the womb like that..
It is training training and training..If a young dog learns that through his actions he brings the fight a passive decoy is no big deal...But if you continue to run around cracking the whip and all that other none needed BS. the dog will not bite passive because he has learn to be stimulated through movement...Teach your dog to move you,not you moving the dog...
That is what works for me\\/\\/


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

I don't think it's training, but breeding for a market that says "I want a dog that I can live with for a sport dog" that is ruining the working breeds. It's what I've seen any way.

I think the biggest problem is some breeders' fears (many have expressed this to me over the years) that if the dogs are too high drive, too hard, too strong of character then who can handle them? 

I believe we/breeders should be trying to breed (create) those type of dogs and that should be the goal i.e. (extreme dogs) and see if there are homes or not. 

In another words, a lot of breeders express the fear of producing dogs "too much" for the market. I think they are mistaken as working dogs are a specific market and not "the pet/dog market".

I think the focus should be on breeding super working dogs and then there will be homes for the dogs. 

Of course these kind of dogs are not for the agility, pet market. Fear to breed to the very strong dogs due to a fear of not having qualified homes for the resulting puppies is the excuse I hear over and over. 

Many want to breed for the sport home and believe people want a "dog they can live with" and then go do a sport with. 

What exactly does this mean? Should breeders care that people want "Lassie" as a sport dog? I don't care personally if that's what people say they want. I know what I want and if my dog is too MUCH to have it in the house, so what he can live outside. If he gets in trouble loose on the property then put him in a roomy kennel. Problem solved this way instead of watering down the working dog to "fit" people's lifestyle and list of wants and needs for a couch potato during the week and a sport dog on the weekend... 

Maybe if there was such a thing I'd want a porshe that gets 60mpg and is super fast and can haul my horse trailer and hay bales too...but, it don't exist so I would need a car and a truck.

I do not agree with this fear based philosophy and believe breeders must breed the strongest, hardest dogs possible so we will have real working dogs in the next generations. Breeders need to support each other in the pursuit of breeding the very best, strongest working dogs. If we don't do it, we will lose it very soon.

BTW, so what if some come back for being too strong..sell them to the police or military then they won't have to import so many dogs from Europe. :grin:


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

will fernandez said:


> Sorry I must of made a mistake.
> 
> I thought you put up a video of a very active dog on a pretty calm decoy.


Hey Will. that is twice about the video clip, can you find the thread it was in? Would be cool to watch it now..


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Debbie Skinner said:


> I don't think it's training, but breeding for a market that says "I want a dog that I can live with for a sport dog" that is ruining the working breeds. It's what I've seen any way.
> 
> I think the biggest problem is some breeders' fears (many have expressed this to me over the years) that if the dogs are too high drive, too hard, too strong of character then who can handle them?
> 
> ...


Nice Opinion, Kinda what I was meaning to say but better...Things disappear quickly, hard enough to keep the traits strong, even if you are breeding for them, but breeding them out on purpose, things can go in a couple generations. It's not easy to get these traits back into a breed.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Joby Becker said:


> Nice Opinion, Kinda what I was meaning to say but better...Things disappear quickly, hard enough to keep the traits strong, even if you are breeding for them, but breeding them out on purpose, things can go in a couple generations. It's not easy to get these traits back into a breed.


I'm hopeful with such a forum as this it can be a support group to for working dog breeders..sort of like "build it and they will come" motto. Also, I know that Agility homes and Pet homes are many times more cozy, wonderful homes than working homes. But, we need to support each other that we are not breeding for dogs for "homes" per say, but to improve and continue the breed/working dogs. The life of working dogs can be harder than a pet, but so what..breeding and training working dogs is hard too imo and so it goes...life is hard so bite hard! The old saying! LOL We can support each other to do the right thing in selecting, breeding and training.


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

Joby Becker said:


> Hey Will. that is twice about the video clip, can you find the thread it was in? Would be cool to watch it now..


I thought I saw a video of a middle aged guy with a young intense dog on a decoy with a red bite jacket on. Decoy wasnt over active. I cant find it now I think maybe I dreamed it


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

will fernandez said:


> I thought I saw a video of a middle aged guy with a young intense dog on a decoy with a red bite jacket on. Decoy wasnt over active. I cant find it now I think maybe I dreamed it


ok..


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4OONZ8FneE

Here is one I found but not the one I mentioned earlier. The other one had a black decoy and there was less movement on the re-attacks.


----------



## hillel schwartzman (Nov 9, 2008)

will fernandez said:


> I thought I saw a video of a middle aged guy with a young intense dog on a decoy with a red bite jacket on. Decoy wasnt over active. I cant find it now I think maybe I dreamed it


 
THANKS I guess i am the middle aged guy I must be moving up in life lol..
yes the dog is good but i think the training is just as good..what i mean is the reason he bites a static decoy is because he was taught..his actions always made the decoy move... first his bark made the decoy move then the grip made the decoy move, he was taught to fight and bully people to make the game begin at an early age..now all he wantes to do is bite once i activate him...he is active not reactive....YOU don't need to run around like a mad man cracking the whip to make bite work or beat the dog into defense...I think calm work is better .. JMO... 
Food for thought how many dogs have you seen in a life time that comes down the field like an a**hole in defense ... I personally have only seen one , but he was a nerve bag..Teach your dogs how to bring the fight to the decoy or man.. 
PS. Jeff glad to see you back and be a good boy this go around lol[-X[-X


----------



## hillel schwartzman (Nov 9, 2008)

will fernandez said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4OONZ8FneE
> 
> Here is one I found but not the one I mentioned earlier. The other one had a black decoy and there was less movement on the re-attacks.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkSVF1vdz5Y

I think this is the one u are talking about the decoy is my brother Rick G. and Mo and Ron in the background first time working w/ these guys and this excercise but foundation kicks in...\\/


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

I am not to far behind you on the middle age. 

Teaching him to come back to you backwards while still watching the decoy will be very easy to teach this dog. I dont know if you need it for what you do but it will look very nice.

Nice work


----------



## hillel schwartzman (Nov 9, 2008)

will fernandez said:


> I am not to far behind you on the middle age.
> 
> Teaching him to come back to you backwards while still watching the decoy will be very easy to teach this dog. I dont know if you need it for what you do but it will look very nice.
> 
> Nice work


I am training for PSA I agree having him come back while watching the decoy looks real nice .. there will be other exercises where I will have to call him back at long distance and call back for attack on handler on the other side of the field.. Just having to say here and have him fly back to me makes it better for the dog to understand multiple tasks.

I guess :-k:-k:-k:-k:-k


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

removed material not pertaining to the discussion


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

More than defense training, how about poor training, overpowering training, and dogs that just can't take it...defense is just a small part of the total package.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

So they are just going to erase what I say. See you on the working dog board.


----------



## hillel schwartzman (Nov 9, 2008)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> So they are just going to erase what I say. See you on the working dog board.


 Ok what now???#-o#-o#-o#-o#-o
Please don't lock this thread


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

We aren't locking the thread because of some spammer. At any rate, this thread will stay open as long as the posters can continue to contribute. We'll take care of the rest. 

DFrost


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

David, good call and thanks.

I see some folks who want defense put on their dog just to see if it can take it. The mistake comes in doing it and the second in wanting it done IF the dog isn't strong enough to deal with it in a positive manner.

Balance in any form of training is a key to working dog success. Tracking, obedience, or bite work. The dog/puppy must have POWER placed within its development. JMO...back to cooking... Hey I can cook, just don't call me Betty Crocker! :mrgreen:


----------



## Candy Eggert (Oct 28, 2008)

Howard Gaines III said:


> ...back to cooking... Hey I can cook, just don't call me Betty Crocker! :mrgreen:


Betty Crocker goes K9?!?!?!? :lol: #-o :lol:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

belongs in a PM


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

So you read it then


----------



## Randy Allen (Apr 18, 2008)

Chill man. 
You did your time.
Snow is awesome, don't you think?


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

And back to "Has defense training ruined the working dog" ....


----------



## Molly Graf (Jul 20, 2006)

Very good and interesting thread, thanks to the mods for not allowing it to be ruined.


----------



## Molly Graf (Jul 20, 2006)

"I see some folks who want defense put on their dog just to see if it can take it. The mistake comes in doing it and the second in wanting it done IF the dog isn't strong enough to deal with it in a positive manner.

Balance in any form of training is a key to working dog success. Tracking, obedience, or bite work. The dog/puppy must have POWER placed within its development. "

Just wanted to say, this post was excellent and IMO right on the money. Thank you.


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Has the working dog really been ruined? I think there are still great working dogs out there. I see Malinois breeders like "Vom Alderauge" who are doing great things in terms to bringing "real" dogs back to IPO. I think we have a long way to go yet in dogs. But I think that there are good things happening in some breeds. 

The longer I stay on this board, The more exposure I am getting to other breeds, like the Dutch Shepherd...and other lines of Malinois which if I stayed in IPO circles I would not have the privelage to see. I have seen the DS evolving rapidly into a better dog. I think the Malinois is getting better...though I do see the Majority of quality breeding stock still being on the other side of the pond. 

The GSD I hope has a ressurection due to the hard work of current working GSD breeder. And not that it was a dead breed by any means. The GSD is still a great dog. But there is no doubt that the breeders of working GSD have some challenges from others breeding haphazardly in the past. And again, not bashing... And not that the other breeds are immune or without fault. But the point I am trying to make is I see the doom and gloom additude of our dogs are ruined....When I see breeders doing great things. Not that I am blind to the trash still making trash. but I think as the working dog world grows...which I hope at least we get more attention and more people get educated on what a good dog is, that the scruplous breeders find less and less people to prey on. driving thier buisnees down.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Quote: 
"I see some folks who want defense put on their dog just to see if it can take it. The mistake comes in doing it and the second in wanting it done IF the dog isn't strong enough to deal with it in a positive manner.

Balance in any form of training is a key to working dog success. Tracking, obedience, or bite work. The dog/puppy must have POWER placed within its development. "

I don't see this at all. Just take the superior sports, like ring sport. I don't see them doing much of anything in the way of "power" developement at all. These same ring dogs have come here and dominated sport, PP and police work.

Tracking is another form of training since you mentioned it, that means nothing in the way of "power" being placed in it's development. 

I hear the term balanced training from old Sch people, but what are you balancing ?? There is no way that you can explain that logically, and this whole thread was about how that "balancing" is ruining the working dog.


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote:
> "I see some folks who want defense put on their dog just to see if it can take it. The mistake comes in doing it and the second in wanting it done IF the dog isn't strong enough to deal with it in a positive manner.
> 
> Balance in any form of training is a key to working dog success. Tracking, obedience, or bite work. The dog/puppy must have POWER placed within its development. "
> ...


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> So you read it then


Yes sir, certainly did. If you'd like to discuss it, my PM's are always open, I always respond.

DFrost


----------



## hillel schwartzman (Nov 9, 2008)

James Downey said:


> I will take a stab at the balance thing. No doubt in my mind that what is done in one phase effects the other.
> 
> So the balance is....How do you get the dog to comply to what you wish in one phase, and still have enough dog left to get the dog to be compliant in the other phases? And sometimes this does not show up as a weak dog....Dogs are not without emotion. I also believe that even the best of dogs have some point at which they can no longer handle the pressure. And each phase has a different threshold within the dog...and yet we have to use many of the same tools, that carry thier own stigmas with the dog in every phase.
> 
> This does really answer the question of balance ,like a balloon you squeeze on one side the other side might burst..Yes i am an " old Schh guy" I will put power in all three phases to make the dog compliant. and yes you might loose something ,the trick is to bring it back..Jeff not to pick a fight but if you trained your dog w/ me for schh which i am not currently training for we will really get to see how strong your or any dog is to make compliance in all three phases..It ain't that easy


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Howard Gaines III said:


> David, good call and thanks.
> 
> I see some folks who want defense put on their dog just to see if it can take it. The mistake comes in doing it and the second in wanting it done IF the dog isn't strong enough to deal with it in a positive manner.


Depends on the job to me. If dog is truly for PP or PPD functions, has to be exposed to defense work, and HAS to be tested at some point. 

Of course the training has to be done right, so that it gives the dog the ability to cope with the stress of the work. 

Just my opinion not looking to argue, it will not change. I've worked enough dogs to see many that cannot handle more serious type stuff.

And yes I see PP trainers working entirely too much defense, or do it entirely wrong. Chicago is filled with them.

These dogs are easy to spot, they don't like the training, do it because they think its life or death everytime, some won't come up past the elbow on the inside, and most have bite issues. 

It sucks when you have to take a supposed maneater back to a tug to balance him out some...

It sucks almost as bad as when you make a decent dog miss a couple times and put some pressure on and watch him crumble....

For me you can lock a dog up in prey and he will be fine in training and trailing, but if and when he actually goes into defense, there is no predicting how he will respond.

I am no dog genius, and might not know a whole hell of a lot, but I stand by these beliefs. One thing I do know about is defense work.


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

"Depends on the job to me. If dog is truly for PP or PPD functions, has to be exposed to defense work, and HAS to be tested at some point."

I agree with dogs having to be tested at one point for civil type work, but, what about sport work? I wouldn't want to be out with a dog that hadn't been tested and I tend to like a dog that that shows little defense. I much prefer a dog that takes a ******* approach when someone gives it his best shot and the dog has the attitude to say" that was good ....but try this on for size!!". Getting away from testing a bit....I always liked the dogs that layed back in the dark and kept totally quiet for the person to get close enough to where there was no escape. Don't know how that type of dog would test, but, that is the kind of dog I like.


----------



## Matthew Grubb (Nov 16, 2007)

I’m not a big “defense” person in the classic sense where you are trying to elicit the dog’s survival drive. Too many trainers take things too fast and dump a whole lot of “defense” on a dog at too early an age.  
To me it is an every day occurrence from an early age by increasing the “pressure” that a dog can be comfortable with while working in prey. I have seen little puppys training in ring sports that are able to handle pressure that mature dogs can’t handle. Why? Because it was taught incrementally. The puppy was taught to handle pressure while working in prey. 

Skip forward in your training progression… you add pressure little by little until the dog adapts to that pressure….the dog learns over time that no matter what happens to him, he will win. I don’t need to go into survival… fight or flight…. Because I’m the toughest dog alive and can take it all. 

Nothing makes me happier as a trainer then when I can decoy a dog into a corner or into furniture and see the confidence oozing out of the dog…. Because he knows he will win.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Quote: Jeff not to pick a fight but if you trained your dog w/ me for schh which i am not currently training for we will really get to see how strong your or any dog is to make compliance in all three phases..It ain't that easy

The dog is on the field for what, 5 minutes in the c ?? I tell you what. You bring your dog and we will train for the three, which I am currently training for, and we will see how strong your dog is when we ask it to go out there for an hour straight, and maintain control without dropping out of drive. It ain't that easy, and if you have a Dutchie, it gets even more difficult, as many of them have the "off switch" If you spin them up like they do in Sch or in KNPV, what kind of control will you have ??

Difficult to say.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Quote: Skip forward in your training progression… you add pressure little by little until the dog adapts to that pressure….the dog learns over time that no matter what happens to him, he will win. I don’t need to go into survival… fight or flight…. Because I’m the toughest dog alive and can take it all. 

Nothing makes me happier as a trainer then when I can decoy a dog into a corner or into furniture and see the confidence oozing out of the dog…. Because he knows he will win.

I agree with adding pressure as you go. there are a lot of dogs that I have seen over the years that people just kept training, and after really looking like crap, just settled out after they figured it just wasn't that bad.

The last statement confuses the shit out of me. I have never understood the banking around of the dog and all that silly shit. Where are you when all this banking around is going on ?? If there is that much banking around going on, why not just use two dogs ?? One of favorite things about that hunting wolves with eagles video was when the wolf gets the eagle on his back, they just sent another eagle, and it was done.

Of course, I don't have a problem at all with Mr "I can't obey the police officer" getting dead or totally ****ed up. That might explain why I don't get it.


----------

