# Shouldn't the decoy be the bad guy?



## Ted White (May 2, 2006)

We all know I'm as green as the hills. However, even so I have at least been aware that this is an often debated topic amongst those who have been around this an awful lot longer than me.

In my quest to find a trainer / club, I have talked with many people and come across this interesting and fundamental difference in philosophies firsthand. In some circles, the decoy / helper is not a bad guy... he's some dude wearing a prey item. Care is taken to keep the dog within a comfort zone so he performs in a trial. In far fewer circles, I have found, the decoy is actually despised by the dog. If this despicable fellow drops the sleeve the dog spits it out and wants that guy bad. The standard prey vs. defense drives.

I have also found several clubs that won't allow (defensive) dogs back because they bite areas other than a sleeve. They are training for a sport with rules of engagement, and that's fine, too. But I am haunted by the age old question, "what if the perp has no sleeve?" And it seems most trainers will only deal with sport work. Maybe there's a liability issue here? Or an unpopularity to really train in defensive mode? I have gathered that defense work is a touchy area for many. 

If I tell the dog to take a guy down, I hope he's efficient and bite's whatever is offered. And I hope there's no tail wagging and he treats it as serious as it should be. I'll be in the corner crapping my pants so someone has to step up and deal with this guy.

It seems this is what the origin of the whole passion was supposed to be. I imagine things are a lot more tame now compared to when ol' Max Von Stephanitz was around.

Don't get me wrong, the sports are fantastic and I love the tradition that comes here from Europe. I really do. But the one thing I wonder is how effective most Police dogs really are when it comes down to it. Is a titled sports dog necessarily a dog that can be counted on? We've all seen the embarassing videos of dogs running along side the perp. Or barking at the dog next to them while the perp runs between them. That's got to be more the exception than the rule, right?

I guess my question is, with apparently so little real civil defense work going on, how are these dogs accountable when the crap hits the fan?


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Simple answer is it depends on the dog and the training. The title means squat as far as being a "real" dog. 
I train for sport. Will my dog bite for real? I can say "I believe so" all day long but until it happens I'll never know. Will he stay engaged IF he bites? Doubtful because he's not had the training for that. and may or may not have the proper genetics to do so. Don't know and really don't care.
What I do know is my dog has a great looking threat display. Anyone willing to ignore that means I need to shoot straight. I can and Missouri has great CC laws and the right to defend my house and family with deadly force. 
If all else fails I have a JRT that will eat some serious a$$. :lol: 
Anyone that truely needs a "real" PPD needs to select for that from the start. Taking a dog that you (anyone) owns and hoping to train it as a "real" PPD is less then a crap shoot.


----------



## Ted White (May 2, 2006)

What the heck is a JRT?

Good point about the threat display, and that's likely all **I'll** ever need for sure. I should clarify that my ultimate question revolves around Police and their dependence on that Police dog.


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

JRT = Jack Russel Terrier.


----------



## Ian Forbes (Oct 13, 2006)

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> JRT = Jack Russel Terrier.


JRTs scare me - nasty dogs :lol:


----------



## Pauline Michels (Sep 1, 2006)

One will never know how many "bad guys" went the other way because a dog was present. There are security systems that are recordings of a dog barking. That being said...if a the bad guy really wants you in spite of your dog being present, he'll probably shoot your dog and then you're on your own.

I feel really safe...I have a Doberman and a nasty little JRT for back up.


----------



## Ted White (May 2, 2006)

what is with all of the JRTs?


----------



## Dave Curtis (Oct 23, 2006)

Ted White said:


> what is with all of the JRTs?


http://youtube.com/watch?v=rTN5kTkdvME


----------



## Ted White (May 2, 2006)

That is a GREAT video!!!! Gotta get me one of them


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

And Boston Terriers. JRTs and BTs are like little sticks of dynamite.

JMO : All bite work starts the same. Decoy that isn't scarey. As dog matures you start to put more and more pressure on him and the decoy starts wearing a bite suit, safety for decoy. When he can handle this pressure he will go to a table but not always. Some dogs are harder to get PISSED OFF. We know there is prey drive, defence drive but fight drive is something people don't agree is out there. I believe there is a fight drive and it's the drive that the dog will go into and go toe to toe with the decoy no matter what the decoy does to him.


----------



## Ted White (May 2, 2006)

Thanks Jerry,

Agree that all of the training essentially starts the same (from what I've read and heard). It seems that many don't venture to the defensive fight drive much (in reality).

I think maybe the handlers don't like it, actually. Too much perceived stress on a loved one, maybe. Just a working theory on my part. I'm far too much of a novice to have a credible opinion at this time. Just a layman's opinion is all.

And like Bob said, what's the real point for a civilian? The dog asleep is a deterrent, much less lunging and bearing teeth.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Ian Forbes said:


> JRTs scare me - nasty dogs :lol:


You are correct to be afraid. Border Terriers, too, which I have in the family.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Ted White said:


> That is a GREAT video!!!! Gotta get me one of them



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3A2ZV_C0BRM

With a bow to Tim Martens. :>)


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Great music, too!


----------



## Lyn Chen (Jun 19, 2006)

With repeated training, wouldn't a stable dog stop considering a decoy a 'bad guy' if he is the same one being used over and over again? 

My dog tends to view the decoy as a sparring partner, or maybe an opponent in a sports match, that he will hurt within the context of the rules. He's not afraid to dig in and dig in harder when he is 'winning', and he will only drop the sleeve if he sees that the decoy may want to steal his sleeve from him. He's shown signs of biting for real, but like Bob said, unless it's happened already, I can't say for sure (he doesn't put up a display and one of these times his mouth was open and an inch away from the guy's leg). But these have always been different people. The decoy? My dog loves him.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Jerry Lyda said:


> And Boston Terriers. JRTs and BTs are like little sticks of dynamite.
> 
> And the psyco little bassids carry their own Bic lighters. :lol:


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

In my younger days, long long ago, I used to think people who called them psycho lil bastids were exaggerating.

But so far I have met only one "normal" JRT, Boston, or Border Terrier.

I mean one single one of the whole group of three breeds.


----------



## Lisa Geller (Mar 29, 2007)

Great Video Dave!
That one went straight into the favorites.

take care
lg


----------



## Cadence Nakashima (Oct 6, 2007)

I find this thread very interesting 

I had always read that the dog should HATE the decoy, unless given some kind of release command. That working with the decoy isn't fun, or a game rather serious business.

Is this just dependent on the training style as a whole? Or is training the dog to "dislike" the decoy looked down upon?


----------



## Justin Eimer (Oct 17, 2006)

Cadence Nakashima said:


> I find this thread very interesting
> 
> I had always read that the dog should HATE the decoy, unless given some kind of release command. That working with the decoy isn't fun, or a game rather serious business.
> 
> Is this just dependent on the training style as a whole? Or is training the dog to "dislike" the decoy looked down upon?


Cadence~
You are right this is an interesting thread. In sport, the decoy is the dogs buddy and training/sparring partner, but in personal protection training where the dog is expected to actually defend its perimeter (inside or out), its handler, or its family, things need to change. That being said, a clear headed dog should still be expected to behave when there is no perceived threat or danger. A dog that is trained for personal protection either has it or doesn't. Some dogs exhibit it with out training and others need to be shown through training that they have it. Either dog needs proper training in order to mold and shape their agression properly and to keep it under control. In personal protection the dog does not neccessarily "Hate" the decoy, but unlike sport where the dog is playing rough and working primarily in prey, the personal protection dog should really want to hurt his adversary and will primarily be working in defense. There are many schools of thought when it comes to personal protection and they range from different ends of the spectrum. What we do in sport mimicks what a working dog was intended to do in the real world, i.e., Police, Military, Private Security, and personal protection. However, in sport there are do overs and second chances, nobody dies or gets hurt, and every one goes home at the end of the day win or lose. Often times I am perplexed when some individuals balk at personal protection training. Those of whom I would think would be "personal protection" dog's biggest fans often times are not. In regards to your question about dogs disliking the decoy and whether it is looked down upon, I think that in most cases in sport it complicates issues when the dog views the decoy as a threat and not as a dancing partner, because "higher points" are desired. Unfortunately, "points" are becoming more and more the measure of a good working dog rather than other genetic traits. There are dogs that are involved in sport that possess what is needed to be a personal protection dog and there are those that do not. Just as there are dogs that are personal protection dogs that possess what is needed to be a sport dog and there are those that do not. Both have there place and I can appreciate them. The training style as it pertains to personal protection is very similar to sport, but also quite different at the same time. ~Justin;-)


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Well said Justin! 
As a sport person I guess a big reason for NOT training in PPD is two fold. #1, The liability oughtweighs the need (for me) but probably a bigger reason, #2, is finding qualified trainers in the maze of wannabes.


----------



## Justin Eimer (Oct 17, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> Well said Justin!
> As a sport person I guess a big reason for NOT training in PPD is two fold. #1, The liability oughtweighs the need (for me) but probably a bigger reason, #2, is finding qualified trainers in the maze of wannabes.


Thank you Bob! I was really expecting resistance... So when I saw that you had responded, I took a deep breath before reading.:lol:

Both are extremely valid reasons. I think that the 2nd is probably the biggest reason as well. I hate to be grouped as a "cowboy" or a "macho" whatever. I do it because I enjoy it, believe in it, and I love "working dogs." If it were not for the real thing, who would have ever came up with "sport" or "competition" personal protection dog stuff? I get frustrated when some people berate personal protection dog training, because I believe there is an actual need. Like all things, it is not fool proof, but it can make a world of difference when the proverbial $hit hits the fan. I grew up in a city and when I first moved there at a very young age, our first home (located in a very bad neighborhood)was broken into. We found it when we returned home late at night. The door had been smashed in with bricks and the house was in disarray. We had to wait until the next day to have the door replaced and since we did not know anyone, we had to sleep in a house, in a bad neighborhood, with no door. That stuck with me. A few years later I was home alone (latch key kid) and someone (a rather large man) came into our yard (same city different neighborhood) and started to try and pry open the side door to the house. Unbeknownst to him, our overweight, pissed off at the world, male, golden retriever was loose on the back porch. If he had not been so overweight, he would have caught him.:lol: Most recently, my cousin was murdered in a home invasion. He did not have a gun, nor did he have a dog. I think either one could have given him a fighting chance at living. Those are just a few examples from my own personal experience that help to define why I feel the need for such dogs exsists. Now that I am older with a family of my own, I feel that much more passionate in my beliefs. ~Justin


----------



## Cadence Nakashima (Oct 6, 2007)

Wow! A lot to take in but I think I got it! Thanks for the lengthy explanation Justin, it IS appreciated 

So in my own words, to make sure I have it right, in dog sports, like SchH (right?) the dog is working in prey drive. Soooo, it's more of a game and fun, rather than I'm on the street, getting mugged and I need my dog to buckle down and take my attacker down, so defense mode.. Do I have that? If a dog is in prey drive, [I don't know the technical term] does that limit their ability to withstand distraction/deterrants, like I know there are shaker sticks, whips and chains used in training. Or would that be defense mode?

I noticed in your post you mentioned a few times that a dog just has it. [Sorry if I'm hi-jacking], generally what would that entail, having it?

I've been wary to start working with Roxy extensively in PP because I've been warned with her edge, it could create a dog with more issues, but on the other hand, I have a man involved with ring sport, that says that edge is exactly what they look for.

I have also lived in a shady neighborhood, back when Roxy WAS a little off the handle, we've since worked through that. And I must say I was thankful for having a dog that would scare someone off if they even looked at me too long. The 7-11 down the block was open 24 hours, and I felt comfortable enough to walk by myself, late at night with my dog. The man who ran the shop at night actually let me bring her in with me! lol

I've also had my car stolen and neighbors poking around my house when I'm not home. Roxy first and foremost is my friend, but I think we'd enjoy training in PP together, nevermind the benefits and peace of mind having a "loaded gun" at your side.

Sorry I've gone way off track, but PP is more than intriguing to me.  It's unfortunate that the clubs around only take GSD's.


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

Any smart dog will eventually figure out the decoy isn't the bad guy. Early training is simply teaching a dog technique, and a young dog or a dog early in their training shouldn't be pressured in such a way that they hate the decoy. Thats like teaching someone to shoot with live fire coming back at them, eventually the stress will break the dog down unless you have a very special kind of dog. Eventually the dog will reach a point in life where it is no longer a fun game, and at that point you start with different exercises in different situations with different equipment, because going out into a big grassy field with 10 other people watching while the decoy runs out into the field and does the same shit he's done with the dog for the past year, well... do you really think the dog is thinking "OMG!! This guy is gonna attack me, like the other 372 times he's done this and I've kicked his ass!". Dogs can look really nasty and intense barking at the guy wearing a sleeve jumping around like a jack rabbit, but that doesn't always translate to every other situation. There is alot of training from start to end, and this training should be maintained till you retire the dog as a protection dog.

The idea behind training is to show the dog as many situations similar to the ones he might encounter in real life as possible, and hope that the first time the dog has to bite that he remembers that he was in that situation before and kicked the bad guys ass. Hopefully if you show the dog enough, he can improvise when he encounters something he hasn't seen before. Stronger dogs will have less trouble with different locations, different "bad guys" and different materials/raw flesh etc than a weaker dog. Some dogs are just bite happy and don't care who what when where or why, they just want to bite the guy you point at. A weaker or lower confidence overly defensive dog may stand there and bark, or try and wait for a low threat moment where he can bite, but may just nip the guy and back off again, or hold onto the guys clothing with his canines. Most people will never use their PPD, and a big barking dog is all they need. Many cops will tell you their dog didn't bite on the first try, but they have the luxury of training some more and doing better next time. If a civilian gets into that situation, it is likely the only time in their life they will be in that situation, if their dog doesn't bite then you're not gonna get to try again next week :lol:


----------



## Ted White (May 2, 2006)

But there's no denying that a defense drive can get tapped into, right? So this is done with strange decoys?


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

A familiar decoy can work a dog in defense, but defense is the same as prey in that it doesnt automatically transfer to another decoy or bad guy. A dog doesn't constantly work in one particular drive, the dog simply reacts to what the decoys body language is telling him. A familiar decoy can still make a dog feel threatened with the right body language, but at the same time, the dog may be more comfortable receiving this threat from a decoy he's bitten 10000000 times vs. a decoy he's never seen before in a strange place. It also hugely depends on the dog, some dogs are really defensive and some dogs are really difficult to switch from prey to defense when they are so used to seeing a guy dancing around with a sleeve in a big grassy field. My Lyka is like that, but if I take her to a new location, suddenly she is more on edge because of the new surroundings and will get more defensive with a familiar decoy.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> A familiar decoy can work a dog in defense, but defense is the same as prey in that it doesnt automatically transfer to another decoy or bad guy. A dog doesn't constantly work in one particular drive, the dog simply reacts to what the decoys body language is telling him. A familiar decoy can still make a dog feel threatened with the right body language, but at the same time, the dog may be more comfortable receiving this threat from a decoy he's bitten 10000000 times vs. a decoy he's never seen before in a strange place. It also hugely depends on the dog, some dogs are really defensive and some dogs are really difficult to switch from prey to defense when they are so used to seeing a guy dancing around with a sleeve in a big grassy field. My Lyka is like that, but if I take her to a new location, suddenly she is more on edge because of the new surroundings and will get more defensive with a familiar decoy.


I have brought foreward Mikes' post because I think it bears repeating. In sport you do work a dog primarily in prey, as Justin said, but also a little in defense, and it's done by a helper the dog is familiar with. This is why only decoys who really know their stuff should ever work a young sport dog in defense- it's too easy to screw it up. However; if you take a look at top sport dogs you will see they do not work only in prey.


----------



## Justin Eimer (Oct 17, 2006)

Cadence Nakashima said:


> Wow! A lot to take in but I think I got it! Thanks for the lengthy explanation Justin, it IS appreciated
> 
> Q: So in my own words, to make sure I have it right, in dog sports, like SchH (right?) the dog is working in prey drive?
> 
> ...


----------



## Justin Eimer (Oct 17, 2006)

susan tuck said:


> I have brought foreward Mikes' post because I think it bears repeating. In sport you do work a dog primarily in prey, as Justin said, but also a little in defense, and it's done by a helper the dog is familiar with. This is why only decoys who really know their stuff should ever work a young sport dog in defense- it's too easy to screw it up. However; if you take a look at top sport dogs you will see they do not work only in prey.


Susan~
I agree 100%. There has to be a balance in a good dog (Top Sport). Like I said, there are sport dogs that can do PP and vice versa. As for the young dog in training, if you know what you are doing, I think that you can flirt with defense without ever really training in defense... if that makes sense. And that of course also depends soley on the individual dog. Prey is still very important (one of the most important) in real world applications and is needed in almost every one, just as it is in sport. As you can probably attest to, there are some dogs in sport that are complete prey monsters that get to the highest levels of sport and then those that have a nice balance that do the same. Some have a little more defense drive than many might want to deal with, but I am sure that there are some sport trainers out there that prefer that as well.:smile:


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Well said, Justin.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

A good helper should be able take a good dog and switch it back and forth between prey and defence at the blink of and eye. Being able to see that is key to both sport and PPD. Without that ability your creating junkyard dogs in sport OR ppd. Not many can really do it properly and fewer can see it when it happens. That's the bigGest issue with finding a GOOD training club/trainer.


----------



## Justin Eimer (Oct 17, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> A good helper should be able take a good dog and switch it back and forth between prey and defence at the blink of and eye. Being able to see that is key to both sport and PPD. Without that ability your creating junkyard dogs in sport OR ppd. Not many can really do it properly and fewer can see it when it happens. That's the bigGest issue with finding a GOOD training club/trainer.


Bob~
You are absolutely right. Reading the dog is paramount and knowing when and how, and to do what, to solicit the response that you are looking for. Whenever I try to explain the difference between putting/switching the dog from prey to defense, I speak of "tonation". I realize that movement is not verbal, but it is just the best way I have found to explain it. Like if I say "bang" or "BANG". It is "tonation". Essentially I have said the same thing, but not really. Same word, different "tonation" and therefore different meaning. -If I jump and turn into the dog and throw my left hand up quickly, I could solicit a prey response. But... If I make the same move but change my facial expression and the intensity of the movement, I have essentially said the same thing , but not really. My point is that when the "tonation" of the movement changes, so too does the meaning. Therefore, what previously solicited a prey response with less intensity and "tonation", has now solicited a defensive response instead. I realize it seems foolish reading this, but I can assure you that it is true:lol: . I am not Confusious, but it just seems to make sense to me. If I showed you what I mean in person, you would probably get a better idea of what I am trying to say. I hope I did not confuse you. It seems that so many people seem to think that yelling, using a whip, and acting like a bafoon is all that is needed. It's just not so. Sometimes it's just a look in the decoy's eyes. Very few people actually get it. Anyway, once again... I agree with you. ~Justin


----------



## Cadence Nakashima (Oct 6, 2007)

Yano, I'm surprised but I think I actually understood your "tonation" description! lol

What is the difference in the DOG between prey and defense drives?

Please correct me if I'm getting this wrong, I have to dumb it down here.. ROFL!

In prey, (the decoy) is more or less allowing the dog, or giving the dog a chance at a bite, "inviting" them more or less? In defense, the decoy with something as simple as a look of "intensity" or a more confident move of the arm could provoke a defense drive.

If that's right, may I ask, what is the change in the DOG with both of those examples? Like, in prey, the dog would lunge at the chance, in defense the dog may lower to the ground and become more intense itself. I know that's not anywhere near right, I'm just trying to give you a hint at the answer I'm looking for 

Thank you guys so much for answering my uber-noob questions


----------



## Justin Eimer (Oct 17, 2006)

[*quote=Cadence Nakashima;45792]Yano, I'm surprised but I think I actually understood your "tonation" description! lol*

*What is the difference in the DOG between prey and defense drives?*

*Please correct me if I'm getting this wrong, I have to dumb it down here.. ROFL!*

*In prey, (the decoy) is more or less allowing the dog, or giving the dog a chance at a bite, "inviting" them more or less? In defense, the decoy with something as simple as a look of "intensity" or a more confident move of the arm could provoke a defense drive.*

*If that's right, may I ask, what is the change in the DOG with both of those examples? Like, in prey, the dog would lunge at the chance, in defense the dog may lower to the ground and become more intense itself. I know that's not anywhere near right, I'm just trying to give you a hint at the answer I'm looking for *

*Thank you guys so much for answering my uber-noob questions [/quote]*

*Okay- First let me make a statement or two. All the proper "tonation" in the world will amount to absolutely nothing if the decoy is not reading or can not read the dog. I have watched decoys push a dog way too hard, way too fast and practically ruin an otherwise good dog. Although the style may be similar in front of all dogs worked, no one dog is absolutely the same and each dog may need something totally different from the decoy.*

*That being said, all prey drive is in a nut shell, is the dogs desire to chase and capture. Defense drive in a nut shell, is the dog drawing off its own ability to defend itself. In PPD terms, if a dog can not defend itself it can't be expected to defend others. So, in a sense the game is not one of chasing and capturing, but one of surviving and protecting one's self. The two drives help to balance each other out. It is important to be able to jump back and forth when the dog needs it. The dog must be conditioned properly. Proper conditioning comes in time. There is not, nor should there be an exact time table for when the dog should be "finished". *

*"If that's right, may I ask, what is the change in the DOG with both of those examples? Like, in prey, the dog would lunge at the chance, in defense the dog may lower to the ground and become more intense itself. I know that's not anywhere near right, I'm just trying to give you a hint at the answer I'm looking for "*

*When a dog is being worked in prey, the dog is usually very fluid, with a happy or higher pitched bark (not always though), the tail is generally held high and wagging. The dog is following/chasing/playing with his prey item (sleeve/suit). In defense, the posture changes, the bark is more gutteral/deeper, the dog is a bit more rigid and less fluid (although the tail is often also wagging, it too is more rigid and may or may not be held as high). Often times the dog will bare teeth, but this is not always the case in all dogs. The positioning of the ears may change and the dogs eyes may glaze over. There are some dogs that will never show teeth, who are very clearly in defense. Yes, the dog may hunker down more, but this is not always exhibited. In defense the dog is not playing at all and seriously meeting a perceived threat. Now remember, we are talking about a dog that is sound and clear, not a dog that is weak and a poor candidate. -This is really just a short explanation of the difference between the two drives. A whole book could be written describing them and I am pretty sure that one already has been.:lol: *

*"In prey, (the decoy) is more or less allowing the dog, or giving the dog a chance at a bite, "inviting" them more or less? In defense, the decoy with something as simple as a look of "intensity" or a more confident move of the arm could provoke a defense drive."*

*You are on the right track here and you have the basic premise. =D>*

*;-)~Justin*


----------



## Ted White (May 2, 2006)

What great stuff here!!


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Ted White said:


> What great stuff here!!


Exactly why this is my hands down favorite message board. Lots of good information and good people. Our moderators do a good job of keeping our "defense drive" capped too. When the hackles get too raised or the growling gets too loud they come in and bitch slap us back into "play nicely drive".


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Justin Eimer said:


> Bob~
> You are absolutely right. Reading the dog is paramount and knowing when and how, and to do what, to solicit the response that you are looking for. Whenever I try to explain the difference between putting/switching the dog from prey to defense, I speak of "tonation". I realize that movement is not verbal, but it is just the best way I have found to explain it. Like if I say "bang" or "BANG". It is "tonation". Essentially I have said the same thing, but not really. Same word, different "tonation" and therefore different meaning. -If I jump and turn into the dog and throw my left hand up quickly, I could solicit a prey response. But... If I make the same move but change my facial expression and the intensity of the movement, I have essentially said the same thing , but not really. My point is that when the "tonation" of the movement changes, so too does the meaning. Therefore, what previously solicited a prey response with less intensity and "tonation", has now solicited a defensive response instead. I realize it seems foolish reading this, but I can assure you that it is true:lol: . I am not Confusious, but it just seems to make sense to me. If I showed you what I mean in person, you would probably get a better idea of what I am trying to say. I hope I did not confuse you. It seems that so many people seem to think that yelling, using a whip, and acting like a bafoon is all that is needed. It's just not so. Sometimes it's just a look in the decoy's eyes. Very few people actually get it. Anyway, once again... I agree with you. ~Justin


I completely understand what your saying! This is where all the mistakes are made. Without reading the dog, helpers can create monsters with simple, incorrect body language. Turning into a dog at the wrong time, driving a dog that isn't ready to be driven, full frontal approach to a dog. Just a very few body language moves that can make or break a dog. Most will turn a poor dog into crap. This "tonation" is the #1 reason, IMO, that beginners should absolutely NEVER work their own dog with a sleeve. They just don't understand the implications of the simplest moves. Something as simple as eye contact can create defence on many dogs. Then the dog looses trust in it's own handler.


----------



## Pauline Michels (Sep 1, 2006)

Susan...."play nicely drive..." That's a good one.


----------



## Justin Eimer (Oct 17, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> I completely understand what your saying! This is where all the mistakes are made. Without reading the dog, helpers can create monsters with simple, incorrect body language. Turning into a dog at the wrong time, driving a dog that isn't ready to be driven, full frontal approach to a dog. Just a very few body language moves that can make or break a dog. Most will turn a poor dog into crap. This "tonation" is the #1 reason, IMO, that beginners should absolutely NEVER work their own dog with a sleeve. They just don't understand the implications of the simplest moves. Something as simple as eye contact can create defence on many dogs. Then the dog looses trust in it's own handler.


 
"This "tonation" is the #1 reason, IMO, that beginners should absolutely NEVER work their own dog with a sleeve. They just don't understand the implications of the simplest moves. Something as simple as eye contact can create defence on many dogs. Then the dog looses trust in it's own handler."

You know... I always just said if you don't know what you're doing don't do it 'cause you'll "F%#@" it up.  But the way you said it is much nicer.:lol: I always get uptight when someone wants to decoy their own dog. It's not that it can't be done correctly, it's just that it shouldn't be done if you can help it. The dog will very seldom act the same with his handler decoying than with someone else. This is especially important with issues that need fixed. This has really turned out to be a really good topic. I don't know about you, but I am having fun. ;-) ~Justin


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Because of my own "personality"    my adult GSD doesn't even acknowledge a sleeve when I'm wearing it. Of course he has no use for them when they are hanging in the garage either. That's nice to see because without a body in there, they are just another bit of nothing to him.
The pup, on the other hand! :lol: :lol: I still wont work him in it! ;-)


----------



## ann schnerre (Aug 24, 2006)

something that i found to be extremely helpful as a newbie to the sport was watching a trial with experienced people; they would point out a behavior to me that i noticed, but when they pointed it out in the context of the sport OR DOG, it became so much more clear. i still don't "catch" nearly what i could, but having a mentor is invaluable.

i could put a name to what i was seeing, which helps me learn, and started learning what i was seeing. hope that makes sense


----------



## Cadence Nakashima (Oct 6, 2007)

Wow, you guys have got me even MORE interested in the sport than before! LOL

It's the same in all dog sports, you never really realize how much goes into training until you start digging. And then HEAPS of new terminology and methods are brought about! I feel like I'm completely new to dogs, let alone the sport! ROFL!

Ring sport and SchH seems to be a tight knit community around here and it's hard to even speak to anyone who's in a club to see what their about because there's no advertisement, and none of the circles I travel in, obedience and agility, have any idea.

There is a man and woman nearby who have numerous SchHIII titles for their Rotts, but they don't give lessons.  I just e-mailed the Beauceron breeder I've been speaking with who does FR and SchH and I'm waiting to hear back from him. 

Does anyone here know of any good PP trainers in Ontario Canada that may be able to hook me up with someone in my area?

I think I'm kind of on the right track with my own wording when it came to the decoy and prey vs defense, because I'm awful for playing rough with my dogs! LOL. It's not structured, nor do I wear a sleeve or anything, but I see the change in my dogs, with something as simple as a more confident raise of the hand or knee. (I don't them hard, and they really enjoy it, even though it sounds awful I know! LMAO) They hunker down, and they seem to be a bit more reserved, rather than just coming at me kamikaze style!  Ha ha! More or less it seems like their planning their attack a little better when I get "serious" with them.

Wow, I've got find me and good PP trainer, this stuff sounds like to much fun!


----------



## Justin Eimer (Oct 17, 2006)

Cadence~
You may want to get in contact with Brigita the owner of Fontaine D'or Malinois Kennel. She should be able to point you in the right direction. If I am not mistaken, she is located in Ontario. Hope this helps you in your quest. ~Justin


----------



## Justin Eimer (Oct 17, 2006)

Justin Eimer said:


> Cadence~
> You may want to get in contact with Brigita the owner of Fontaine D'or Malinois Kennel. She should be able to point you in the right direction. If I am not mistaken, she is located in Ontario. Hope this helps you in your quest. ~Justin


http://www.fd-malinois.com/


----------



## Cadence Nakashima (Oct 6, 2007)

Fantastic! I'm having a look at the website now!

Thanks


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Cadence Nakashima said:


> Wow, you guys have got me even MORE interested in the sport than before! LOL
> 
> It's the same in all dog sports, you never really realize how much goes into training until you start digging. And then HEAPS of new terminology and methods are brought about! I feel like I'm completely new to dogs, let alone the sport! ROFL!
> 
> ...


Be VERY careful about how you play rough with your own dogs. Your comment about "They hunker down, and seem more reserved" tells me you could very well be putting defence (stress) on the dogs. This is a sure fire way to lose your dogs trust.


----------



## Cadence Nakashima (Oct 6, 2007)

Well, it's Roxy specifically that I see this type of play with. Hades, if you can get him going, just comes at you incessantly. It's the terrier in him I suppose.

By hunker down and seem more reserved, the hunkering down is almost like a half play-bow usually accompanied with a sharp bark, and a gleam in her eye that shows a plan of attack. "Reserved" meaning, it seems like she takes a step back to really think about how she's going to "get me". Sometimes she does this if she's been trying to get at me, but she can't because I block her with my leg, or spin around etc. So sometimes, I imagine she's getting frusterated, so she's really thinking about what's going on! lol

I guess it's like human vs dog wrestling, with taps the side to see if I can distract her than push her around. This usually involves pillow fighting, tugging with the pillows and stand offs.

Roxy especially really likes to play rough. If it was stressful for her, wouldn't she dislike it?

Most of the time she bugs US to play rough with her, it's definitely not the other way around! LOL


----------



## Pauline Michels (Sep 1, 2006)

Ontario...you could contact Longwoods group - Tracey Hughes, Secretary - [email protected]


----------



## Justin Eimer (Oct 17, 2006)

Cadence Nakashima said:


> Well, it's Roxy specifically that I see this type of play with. Hades, if you can get him going, just comes at you incessantly. It's the terrier in him I suppose.
> 
> By hunker down and seem more reserved, the hunkering down is almost like a half play-bow usually accompanied with a sharp bark, and a gleam in her eye that shows a plan of attack. "Reserved" meaning, it seems like she takes a step back to really think about how she's going to "get me". Sometimes she does this if she's been trying to get at me, but she can't because I block her with my leg, or spin around etc. So sometimes, I imagine she's getting frusterated, so she's really thinking about what's going on! lol
> 
> ...


Cadence~
After hearing your description of what you meant and what your dog was exhibiting, I would be more inclined to believe that she was in prey/play drive. Both drives if put into different context are essentially the same thing. Take care.~Justin


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Justin Eimer said:


> Cadence~
> After hearing your description of what you meant and what your dog was exhibiting, I would be more inclined to believe that she was in prey/play drive. Both drives if put into different context are essentially the same thing. Take care.~Justin


I agree........now!;-) 
Initial description sounded like a bit of hesitation on the dog's part.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

What was the question again??? JRT ????? 

Most "qualified" PP trainers start realizing that there is not a lot of money and a lot of liability in training someone elses dog the way you want. With my experience, too many of these people want to see if their dog will bite someone, and will, at some point in training, drop the leash, or something they can say was not on purpose to see if their dog will bite you.

Also, a very high percentage of PP clients know exactly what they want, and are determined to get it, no matter what dog they have. They also like to tell you how the dog should be trained, and want a "set" amount of time to train their dog, regardless of age.

These pinheads have pissed me off enough in the past with their bullshit, that I have actually went after them. I am really not that sort of person either. (welllllllllll..........)

Soooooooo, long story short, most "qualified" PP trainers will sell you the end product, or take and train yours, but the individual once or twice a week training, combined with the "general" PP dog type individuals is too much. Especially since most of them got "fluffy" out of the newspaper for 100 dollars. Not worth the hassle.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

And, for the record I read the rest of the thread as well, and other than the blatant misuse of the word "intonation" LOL It was interesting to see how people look at things. Definately weird how the original question was not really answered. : )


----------



## Justin Eimer (Oct 17, 2006)

Jeff~
I actually got into the thread late in the game (like someone else I know...ehem). I thought that Teds questions were answered early on. Which question were you referring? I'd be glad to take a shot at it. Was it the word "tonation" or "intonation" that was misused? I have rewritten the English language for my own personal gain from time to time...much like the President. LOL.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

This topic is a good one for everyone I think. There is a big difference in PP training which seems to have remained the same from the "good ol days" and sport training.

I have been going over my old notes, and trying to come up with a way to incorporate some of the old with the new, but in a "fresh" way.......well fresh for me.

Some of the old stuff goes against my philosophy of training nowadays, but I am thinking that it is still good for the dog to see it. Really haven't done enough thinking on it to be able to put anything down here, I DO try and think before I discuss things........no matter what it seems like. 

I often wonder if this is why people get a way to train and just do it that way. This ****ing evolving thing puts a strain on my brain.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> This topic is a good one for everyone I think. There is a big difference in PP training which seems to have remained the same from the "good ol days" and sport training.
> 
> I have been going over my old notes, and trying to come up with a way to incorporate some of the old with the new, but in a "fresh" way.......well fresh for me.
> 
> ...


I think lots of people train the way they do simply because that's they way they were shown. Over the years I've worked with many people in many areas of dog training. I've always hated the standard response for the simple question "Why are you doing that"? "Cause that's they way I was trained to do it"! or "Cause it works"!


----------



## Howard Young (Nov 24, 2007)

Wow, great post with many good questions and well thought out answers. I have to admit that I did have to go back and read the original question. Nothing of significance to add. However, decoying is really such an art. I deal with many young officers that want to decoy. Wellll, what they really want to do is take a bite. That is what they are doing taking a bite. Learning how to work a dog in prey and defense isn't something you can do when the extent of your understanding is to keep the sleeve moving when the dog bites it. 

For me this thread is a reminder of the amount time that should be spent helping new decoys learn the art of being a decoy. He/she needs to know the sublties of triggering a dog in defense and how not to put too much pressure on a dog too soon. 

We have had dogs at our PD that were more "sporty" when they started their training. Some got a lot better and some left you questioning if they really would bite in a real situation. That was in the past. It has changed for many reasons some it has to do with the selection of dogs and some has to do with the training. As far as training the answer hasn't been gimmicks. A lot of trainers used to say do a lot of hidden sleeve work. When you are dealing with masters of association the hidden sleeve is typically good for one bite in a well set up scenario. After that the dog knows the game he has been there before. 

Thanks for a good read.


----------



## Matthew Grubb (Nov 16, 2007)

Bob Scott said:


> I think lots of people train the way they do simply because that's they way they were shown. Over the years I've worked with many people in many areas of dog training. I've always hated the standard response for the simple question "Why are you doing that"? "Cause that's they way I was trained to do it"! or "Cause it works"!


When you hear that, run for the hills…A good decoy/trainer realizes that each dog is different and that not all techniques will work on all dogs.. I think you truly have to tailor your training towards your goal of an end product. 
I love training theory discussions!
As far as decoys as fighting partners go.. I don’t think you see this until the final stages of PPD and PSD training. In 99% of exposed sleeve and bite suit encounters you are only acting as a prey item. Even poorly done muzzle and civil work ends up as a prey exercise.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

There is an interesting discussion on the GSD pedigree database on dogs that spin. There is the contention that it is a nerve problem, as the dog isn't facing the helper.

It is all I can do not to bash the Sch mentality, but they are a bit nutso over there. Still not a bad discussion.


----------



## Matthew Grubb (Nov 16, 2007)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> There is the contention that it is a nerve problem, as the dog isn't facing the helper..


I’d say it is not a nerve issue. You can’t correct a nerve issue but a savvy decoy can correct spinning.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

I said that a good decoy wouldn't let a dog get that habit.


----------



## Matthew Grubb (Nov 16, 2007)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I said that a good decoy wouldn't let a dog get that habit.


That’s the rub… you don’t want a crappy decoy working your dog, but to be a good decoy you gotta get out there and work dogs. And you make mistakes while you are learning.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Yes, but unless you are by yourself, they do not compound themselves. Or, if you just pay attention to what the dog is doing in response. LOL


----------

