# How would you improve your sport?



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

A combo of a PM and this thread http://www.WorkingDogForum.com/vBulletin/f17/question-about-score-books-25082/#post358241 makes me think about how we would improve our sport (or organization) if we could.

How would you?


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Connie Sutherland said:


> A combo of a PM and this thread http://www.WorkingDogForum.com/vBulletin/f17/question-about-score-books-25082/#post358241 makes me think about how we would improve our sport (or organization) if we could.
> 
> How would you?


This is a really good topic. I think the best thing anyone can do is to join your breed club and participate in the administration of that club.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Christopher Smith said:


> This is a really good topic. I think the best thing anyone can do is to join your breed club and participate in the administration of that club.


That's interesting, because the same PM thread had a kind of secondary topic along the lines of _"Who is responsible for maintaining a breed? The breeders, who produce the dogs, or the buyers, who buy the type of dog they want to own?"
_


----------



## Gregory Doud (Nov 10, 2008)

For IPO, random order of the obedience exercises at national and world championships. Have a draw of the order of the exercises at draw night by the obedience judge which lists the exercises in order for all competitors. 

For example, it could be in this order: 
sit in motion
meter jump
heelwork
down in motion
scaling wall
retrieve on flat
stand in motion 
go-out

Those 80 points would be in random order based on the list that was drawn. The go-out must always be last because of the other competitor's long down. I believe it would bring training to a whole different level. 

For protection, the old SchH I test and old style courage test I think would be nice to have back. Maybe even the reed stick.


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Gregory Doud said:


> For IPO, random order of the obedience exercises at national and world championships. Have a draw of the order of the exercises at draw night by the obedience judge which lists the exercises in order for all competitors.
> 
> For example, it could be in this order:
> sit in motion
> ...


Greg I agree completely. I sent a letter to the AWDF when I heard about them making the AWDF titles with most if the same stuff. Maybe a new AWDF administration would be interested in revisiting the program?


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Christopher Smith said:


> Greg I agree completely. I sent a letter to the AWDF when I heard about them making the AWDF titles with most if the same stuff. Maybe a new AWDF administration would be interested in revisiting the program?


Based on the recent AWDF election and all the stuff going on in the back ground. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a new
AWDF administration :-(


----------



## ann schnerre (Aug 24, 2006)

at the very least, in Sch--a call-off. also, i agree with christopher in joining the breed club + admin. i also like greg's idea--let's get out of "pattern" training and see if the dog really understands commands. like it!


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

ann schnerre said:


> .... i also like greg's idea--let's get out of "pattern" training and see if the dog really understands commands. like it!



Me too. It seems so obvious and so right (although I hadn't thought of it myself  ). I was wondering: What objection could there be to that change?

Is is just the tradition reason, or is there another reason that I can't figure out?


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Connie Sutherland said:


> That's interesting, because the same PM thread had a kind of secondary topic along the lines of _"Who is responsible for maintaining a breed? The breeders, who produce the dogs, or the buyers, who buy the type of dog they want to own?"
> _


I think it depends. A friend of mine breeds nice working Cane Corsos, and she shows as well because the breed just isn't really known for work. She and the core group of working Corso people are trying to start their own working breed club. But she always mentions how she has to show to keep the buyers interested, because the dog is really only known for being show ring champions so someone just wanting a pet Corso isn't going to look at a dog with IPO titles. And then she has to do her best to stay away from Joe Shmoe from Compton who just wants a big scary looking dog that bites.

Perhaps if you produce what you think is right for the breed then the buyers who share your sentiments will come to you?


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Connie Sutherland said:


> Me too. It seems so obvious and so right (although I hadn't thought of it myself  ). I was wondering: What objection could there be to that change?
> 
> Is is just the tradition reason, or is there another reason that I can't figure out?


Because so many people train the pattern and the pattern only. Do politics have a play in that (because a lot of the people who host the nationals might have dogs themselves or dogs of club members that are pattern trained)?


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I've always felt pattern training created a crutch for dog AND handler. YOU do something wrong and some dogs can't recover if they get thrown off their pattern. I'd rather the dog was taught to expect anything at any time.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Katie Finlay said:


> Because so many people train the pattern and the pattern only. Do politics have a play in that (because a lot of the people who host the nationals might have dogs themselves or dogs of club members that are pattern trained)?


Wouldn't it change the sport for the better so much that one of its biggest criticism-magnets would be gone?

To me, that post seemed like "DUH! Of course! Why isn't everyone clamoring for that change?"


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Connie Sutherland said:


> Wouldn't it change the sport for the better so much that one of its biggest criticism-magnets would be gone?
> 
> To me, that post seemed like "DUH! Of course! Why isn't everyone clamoring for that change?"


That's why I think politics could be involved. Or just dummies.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

What ever happened to SACCI (Society in America for Cane Corso Italiano)? They are still listed as a Guest member of AWDF but I don't think they've attended a meeting in months and months and months.
I did see a nice young black male CC at the trial on Sunday.




Katie Finlay said:


> I think it depends. A friend of mine breeds nice working Cane Corsos, and she shows as well because the breed just isn't really known for work. She and the core group of working Corso people are trying to start their own working breed club. But she always mentions how she has to show to keep the buyers interested, because the dog is really only known for being show ring champions so someone just wanting a pet Corso isn't going to look at a dog with IPO titles. And then she has to do her best to stay away from Joe Shmoe from Compton who just wants a big scary looking dog that bites.
> 
> Perhaps if you produce what you think is right for the breed then the buyers who share your sentiments will come to you?


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Thomas Barriano said:


> What ever happened to SACCI (Society in America for Cane Corso Italiano)? They are still listed as a Guest member of AWDF but I don't think they've attended a meeting in months and months and months.
> I did see a nice young black male CC at the trial on Sunday.


I'll have to ask her more about it. We were talking about it at our trial but I don't remember much before I actually went on with my dog, lol


----------



## Gregory Doud (Nov 10, 2008)

One other thing I think would be cool to add to the protection phase at national and world championships is the dog would have to do one of possibly three exercises after the report out after the completion of the back half exercise at the competition and would be drawn by the protection judge at draw night. After the second report out, have the dog heel back to the center line and have a third decoy perform the extra courage test portion. 

1. Dog is sent for old style courage test but decoy stands still and dog has to immediately perform a hold and bark. Then the dog is commanded down or recalled to heel. No biting portion.
2. Dog is sent for old style courage test and the handler calls the dog back to heel position from a designated call back area. No biting portion.
3. Dog is sent for old style courage test and is commanded down at a designated spot and then recalled back to heel position by the handler. No biting portion.

Basically, the first two are pretty much the same exercises as in KNPV. The handler would have to train and prepare his dog for three other possibilities. Again, I think it would bring training to a higher level and also be more public friendly because of the control being shown. Just food for thought.  - Greg


----------



## Edward Weiss (Sep 19, 2011)

Perhaps I'm jaded but the protection component of IPO doesnt hold a candle to what is available as a test for the the dog in comparison to PSA or the various Ring sports.
PSA with tracking would be an intersting and demanding sport.

On a small note the heeling in VPG/IPO protection particularly prior to the attack on handler(dog studying your navel with the bad guy marching 20 paces ahead) always seemed at best artificial and at worst absurd.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

I know it's a pipe dream, but get the politics out of the organizations  Run them as they should be run, as non-profit businesses who's purpose is to promote their sport, and serve their membership. Not as personal fiefdoms and tools to give friends favors, make money, and try to attack "the enemy". Clubs that follow their bylaws and policies, and poll for membership input before making major decisions that will effect the membership.

Make sure the playing field is level for all. Judges judge to the same standards, decoys/helpers work dogs to a consistent standard, etc.

Personally I'd like to see the money get out of the sports. It costs enough as it is, when people start wanting to make a living at it, it just drives the prices even higher, making it harder for people to participate. Numbers are down across the board in terms of participation, doesn't matter what sport it is. And the organizations need to address this.

In terms of specific sports, I would LOVE to see the flee removed from French Ring. IMO it's a useless exercise, if the dog will run down the field and bite a guy on a face attack, he's going to do it on the flee. And it's the most dangerous exercise in the sport, with the highest risk of decoy and dog injury. Replace it with a second face attack, with accessories. In the levels where there are two decoys, have one do each face attack so the dog sees both styles/techniques. Or a muzzle attack. 

In Mondio I would love to see stick hits and esquives added, but I know the stick hits will never happen due to the international status of the sport, and the rules in various countries. I'd also like to see a muzzle exercise.

In Schutzhund I would like to see the order of exercises randomized and maybe a few more skills added to the routine. An out/recall. A call off. A barrage, although I could see a danger factor for the helper if the sleeve isn't clearly accessible to the dog. Also a longer fight/drive with more stick hits.

I haven't played in PSA in a few years, but when I did, more consistency overall. The judging seemed to be all over the place in the trials I attended and/or competed in. Also more consistency in the exercises, 2 people could have the same title, and have done a very different routine from each other depending on which judge they trialed under, and at which trial.

In PSA and FR I'd like to see more of a search/scent component. I like the little wood in MR, maybe add that to FR and PSA.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Kadi

If you add stick hits and esquives to Mondio it would be French Ring ;-)


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

good topic !
- get the people who are responsible and eligible to modify rules on here to listen and participate so the discussion isn't wasted 
- easy to do since i would assume many are known personally by WDF members who compete at high levels
- all it takes is hard copy invites written professionally and cordially
- then shame them publicly if they are no-shows or provide lip service replies only

otherwise it's kinda like peeing into the wind or off a high bridge
.. either a waste of time or impressive, but still gets no better results

of course it's a lot of politics and to change them you have to be one or at least act like one when you are dealing with them; otherwise it's not much different than an AA meeting imo


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Kadi
> 
> If you add stick hits and esquives to Mondio it would be French Ring ;-)


Actually no, ducking and running for cover here :lol:, it would be harder than French Ring


----------



## Keith Jenkins (Jun 6, 2007)

Doesn't matter what you do or don't do to/in a particular sport...someone always wants to reinvent the wheel when it comes to exercises performed. It will always be something else once xyz is accomplished. 

I do agree with Kandi about the politics and money that always ends up being involved.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Oh, the other thing I forgot to mention, the membership HAS to get involved. The "powers that be" can't run roughshod over the membership if the membership doesn't let them. Know and use the bylaws/policies of the organization and demand the people in charge follow them. In cases where they are poorly written, and give all the power to the board, peer pressure can be a wonderful thing. But if the membership won't step up to make changes, they really can't be complaining about what is going on.


----------



## dewon fields (Apr 5, 2009)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Kadi
> 
> If you add stick hits and esquives to Mondio it would be French Ring ;-)


Damn right, a couple stick hits in MR won't hurt the dog. If the dog can't take a stick hit it should NOT do protection sports. Reminds me of flag football vs real football. 


PSA I would take out the judge saying " DECOY FREEZE UP -"Handler OUT YOUR DOG". A lot of dogs hear "out your dog" and immediately comply.


----------



## Brett Bowen (May 2, 2011)

dewon fields said:


> PSA I would take out the judge saying " DECOY FREEZE UP -"Handler OUT YOUR DOG". A lot of dogs hear "out your dog" and immediately comply.


+1


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Kadi Thingvall said:


> Actually no, ducking and running for cover here :lol:, it would be harder than French Ring


And I think that is one of the biggest hurdles. The pass/fail ratio is bad enough in mondio. How can the sport grow if people constantly fail?


----------



## Jason Davis (Oct 12, 2009)

Kadi Thingvall said:


> Actually no, ducking and running for cover here :lol:, it would be harder than French Ring


No need to duck and run. It's the truth.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

dewon fields said:


> Damn right, a couple stick hits in MR won't hurt the dog. If the dog can't take a stick hit it should NOT do protection sports. Reminds me of flag football vs real football.
> 
> 
> PSA I would take out the judge saying " DECOY FREEZE UP -"Handler OUT YOUR DOG". A lot of dogs hear "out your dog" and immediately comply.


"Taking a stick hit" is about pain tolerance it has zero to do with being an effective protection sport dog. If a dog can't do a defense of handler scenario without a "bonjour" cue and a totally pattern trained backwards heel and "attack" from behind.
It shouldn't be doing protection sports either.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Christopher Smith said:


> And I think that is one of the biggest hurdles. The pass/fail ratio is bad enough in mondio. How can the sport grow if people constantly fail?


Yeah that is a big hurdle. What would we think is the answer? We spruce it up and dumb it down but yet no one is satisfied. 

The difficulty of it is part of it I guess it's easy to say just train harder but that is not always possible. There was a FR Trial in Michigan earlier this year July 28 that 65-70% of the Brevets failed. We are talking 18 Brevets and 6 pass. That's disheartening for people trialing for the first time and probably disheartening for the judge and the decoy too to have to met out fail after fail just like dominoes. Competitors like these are the future of the sport. So where is the future in that? Clubs need to take more responsibility in helping beginners succeed as it reflects back on a club the failures and successes of it's members.


----------



## Jennifer Coulter (Sep 18, 2007)

Kadi Thingvall said:


> In PSA and FR I'd like to see more of a search/scent component. I like the little wood in MR, maybe add that to FR and PSA.


I don't see too much point in putting search stuff in the protections sports if they can just be trained as obedience. They are so far away from real life it tells you nothing about the dog's searching abilities. 

Think about the search and escort exercise, that could be a search...but how many people are too afraid to let the dog do it as a search, so teach a pattern to the dog?

How many people just teach the little wood by getting their dogs to find the wood with hot dog scent on it?

And so on.....


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Jennifer Coulter said:


> I don't see too much point in putting search stuff in the protections sports if they can just be trained as obedience. They are so far away from real life it tells you nothing about the dog's searching abilities.


I disagree, it doesn't tell you everything, but it's a starting point. And there is a time constraint, you can't have a 15-20 minute search during the course of a trial, not unless it's a totally seperate component like tracking in Sch. Within the time constraints, I think it's a decent test. And one a LOT of dogs fail in MR, they either don't find the objects to select from at all, or they find the objects but bring back the wrong one.



> Think about the search and escort exercise, that could be a search...but how many people are too afraid to let the dog do it as a search, so teach a pattern to the dog?


Once again, there is a time constraint. I know a few people who have taught this mainly as a free search, and their dogs were not reliable in terms of finding the hidden decoy in the time allowed. Had nothing to do with lack of hunt, but focusing on "clearing" one area when the decoy was at the other end of the field, and running out of time. You need some sort of search pattern, to make sure the dog covers as much ground as possible in the time alloted to it. Especially when the handler isn't going along with the dog to direct the search.



> How many people just teach the little wood by getting their dogs to find the wood with hot dog scent on it?


If they are doing this in trial, they are cheating. So I would hope nobody is doing this. The only scent that is supposed to be on the little wood is the handlers, and probably some scent from the trial organizers who may have handled the sticks during trial prep.


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

I'd like to see tracking in more protection sports.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Katie Finlay said:


> I'd like to see tracking in more protection sports.



The reason people switch to ring sports is they can't get up early in the AM to do tracking


----------



## Jennifer Coulter (Sep 18, 2007)

Kadi Thingvall said:


> I disagree, it doesn't tell you everything, but it's a starting point. And there is a time constraint, you can't have a 15-20 minute search during the course of a trial, not unless it's a totally seperate component like tracking in Sch. Within the time constraints, I think it's a decent test. And one a LOT of dogs fail in MR, they either don't find the objects to select from at all, or they find the objects but bring back the wrong one.


Do you consider the un-seen retrieve a search exercise?

It would be cool to have some police style tracking or searching in protection sports. I just wouldn't want it to be some stylized obedience routine.


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Jennifer Coulter said:


> Do you consider the un-seen retrieve a search exercise?
> 
> It would be cool to have some police style tracking or searching in protection sports. I just wouldn't want it to be some stylized obedience routine.


That's why I like IPO tracking. No obedience there. Just tracking.


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Thomas Barriano said:


> The reason people switch to ring sports is they can't get up early in the AM to do tracking


Oh I know  *ducks and runs*


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Jennifer Coulter said:


> I just wouldn't want it to be some stylized obedience routine.


This struck a nerve with me. The sport I have immediate access to is predominantly of that type of structure. I have found over time that aside from having something to do with the dog and eventual goals of trialing, the "routine" and discipline it takes to perform at a high level escapes me. I've got roughly 30 people who report to me within my department and the last thing I need or want to do is come home and work with my dogs in such a structured or controlled manner.

It also might be why I find myself creating activities/opportunities based upon what the dog is naturally inclined to do or work the within environments that I am naturally drawn to. For whatever that useless ramble was worth...


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Katie Finlay said:


> That's why I like IPO tracking. *No obedience there. Just tracking.*


 :-\"


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Geoff Empey said:


> :-\"


Being naughty I see. :wink:


----------



## Daniel Lybbert (Nov 23, 2010)

I agree with Thomas. I dont like mornings.


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Geoff Empey said:


> :-\"


Well, I don't know how you train your dog to track, but I don't use any obedience other than to teach the down at article indications.

So, I can't speak for everyone else. But you're more than welcome to track with me and see how I do it.


----------



## Laura Bollschweiler (Apr 25, 2008)

There may not be obedience as in a sit in motion, but there is a shitload of discipline, which is obedience. 

Have you ever watched AKC tracking? There is no point value. Either your dog finds the glove or articles, or doesn't. Pass or fail. That to me means it is a less stylized form of tracking. IPO tracking is very stylized in comparison, and to me has less to do with actual tracking. 

Laura


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Jennifer Coulter said:


> Do you consider the un-seen retrieve a search exercise?


The majority of the time, no. There is a scent discrimination aspect to it, but even that is circumvented by many people by using different colored or patterned socks so the dog can do it visually. And most times, the retrieve objects are visible to the dog, I've only trialed on a few fields where the grass was deep enough that the dog actually had to search to find the objects, before doing the scent discrimination part of it.

The Mondio little wood has more of a search component to it, even though the dog sees the handler go out and put it down, they usually have to search to find the location and it's not unusual for the dog to never find it, even though they search the entire alloted time.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Kadi, I found what you posted above rather enlightening. I had no idea about any of that. That stuff seems elementary to me so I can't imagine why anyone would purposely try to make it easier for the dog. I don't understand why it would even be necessary. I'm sure I am missing something. Maybe I need to go look for a few videos and check this out further.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Katie Finlay said:


> Well, I don't know how you train your dog to track, but I don't use any obedience other than to teach the down at article indications.
> 
> So, I can't speak for everyone else. But you're more than welcome to track with me and see how I do it.


Thanks for the offer to come to a foot step tracking tutorial with you Katie. But I'll think I'll pass at this time. 

Yes I agree that it takes a good trainer to teach/train IPO style tracking as well as a dog that can accept the training. I say that with respect for the trainers and the dogs that are good at doing it. But I wouldn't be calling IPO footstep tracking what it isn't, and it isn't anything else but a trained obedience exercise. 

My experience shows it to be an obedience exercise pure and simple, how can you call it any thing else when most train and lay foundation by putting kibble (on a scent pad) progressing to cut up hotdogs in footsteps. Then forcing dogs to lay on the articles, correcting dogs at corners and for not putting noses in every footstep. If you are a good trainer with patience you train your dog to IPO track by no other way except training it as any other OBEDIENCE exercise. There is no mystery in it for the dog and trainer, the dog is just a pawn to the training methodology. Saying that it is an all natural genetic thing I do not believe to be true. Even a dog that has natural 'hunt' drive, that natural 'hunt' has to be molded into a conformed shape to fit the 'picture' what a judge needs to see to score it by, as it is written in the rules. So it's obedience. 8)


----------



## Tracey Hughes (Jul 13, 2007)

Not being a morning person is a poor excuse for not tracking. At our club, we very rarely track in the morning. Mostly in the evenings. We only track in the morning a few times to let the dog “see” what they will at most trials, although if you compete at a Nationals there is a good chance you will track later on in the day so your dogs should be tracked at all different times. 


As for improving the sport.

I think it is ok the way it is, what really needs to change is the judging. It should be a lot more strict, even at club levels, and especially for the BHs, we should be weeding out weak dogs and poor training/lack of control early on. 

Training for protection should be less a game and more about the dog fighting the helper. If everyone trained like they do at the West Coast GS SchH Club in BC, Canada, the sport would be a lot better! They do the sport, the way it was meant to be and prove that you can have a high level of control and obedience without sacrificing power in the protection.


----------



## Daniel Lybbert (Nov 23, 2010)

Taking the flee out of French ring is not going to make it better. I personally love the flee. I hated it when it got pussified a couple of years ago. 
I think the sport of FR is great right now. I wouldnt mind seeing more clubs putting on more trials and more good decoys in Canada. 
Unfourtinatly FR has a problem here because it is Canada. I think everything here in this country is harder to do. We have a huge amount of geography to cover and not much population. And 6 months of winter.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Tracey Hughes said:


> .... what really needs to change is the judging. It should be a lot more strict, even at club levels ....


How do you help that to happen?


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Connie Sutherland said:


> How do you help that to happen?


By raising the standard in what is being presented to them in the first place. Raising standards often goes hand in hand with increasing expectations. Any time you genuinely want to make a change, the first thing you must do is to raise your standards.


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Nicole Stark said:


> By raising the standard in what is being presented to them in the first place. Raising standards often goes hand in hand with increasing expectations. Any time you genuinely want to make a change, the first thing you must do is to raise your standards.


Do standards really need to be raised? The way I see it, until we start to 300 point scores on a regular basis the standards are fine.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Christopher Smith said:


> Do standards really need to be raised? The way I see it, until we start to 300 point scores on a regular basis the standards are fine.


I won't debate that point, but I encourage you to consider what I stated by possibly looking at it from a different perspective.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Tracey Hughes said:


> .... As for improving the sport .... what really needs to change is the judging. It should be a lot more strict, even at club levels, and especially for the BHs ....





Christopher Smith said:


> Do standards really need to be raised? The way I see it, until we start to 300 point scores on a regular basis the standards are fine.



How about standards or rules for being allowed to judge, say at club level?


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Christopher Smith said:


> Do standards really need to be raised? The way I see it, until we start to 300 point scores on a regular basis the standards are fine.


I agree. The people that want stricter judging at club trials and for BH's? How many times have you trialed and how many dogs have you titled? A BH is a pass/fail temperament test. It's not a title and it's NOT supposed to be scored. A dog that stays near the handler for the ob and isn't totally freaked out by people or bicycles should pass.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> I agree. The people that want stricter judging at club trials and for BH's? How many times have you trialed and how many dogs have you titled? A BH is a pass/fail temperament test. It's not a title and it's NOT supposed to be scored. A dog that stays near the handler for the ob and isn't totally freaked out by people or bicycles should pass.


_
"A BH is a pass/fail temperament test. It's not a title and it's NOT supposed to be scored. A dog that stays near the handler for the ob and isn't totally freaked out by people or bicycles should pass."_

Oh .....  .... good point.


Do you feel that stricter judging for trials (not BH) at club level is desirable?


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Connie Sutherland said:


> _
> "A BH is a pass/fail temperament test. It's not a title and it's NOT supposed to be scored. A dog that stays near the handler for the ob and isn't totally freaked out by people or bicycles should pass."_
> 
> Oh .....  .... good point.
> ...


Not for a Bh or for a IPO I, maybe a little stricter for an IPO II and definitely more so for an IPO III even at club level


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Connie Sutherland said:


> Do you feel that stricter judging for trials (not BH) at club level is desirable?


I simply don't see where it would improve the sport. Let's face it, most of the people training for sport are hobbyist. They don't have the time or the desire to make a competition dog. All they want to do is come out to the club, hang out with other dog folks and train their dog. They don't care about going to big trials. But if we make the sports so hard that these people no longer want to come out and play, the whole sport will collapse. We would not have the membership base, and dues that come along with it, to support the big events where the real competition is, and the judging gets harder at the regional, national and international levels. 

IPO is the biggest bite sport in the world because everyone can come out and participate at the club level. You can be a mediocre trainer with a mediocre dog and still have success at the club or maybe even the regional level. But if you want to be on the podium at big events you have to have to be a brilliant trainer with a a great work ethic and have a really good dog.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Standards can be applied to just about anything that can be measured. It's a rhetorical question but I wonder why the responses that followed the comment I made about raising standards appear to focus primarily on scoring and/or points? 

What about having a higher standard for the quality of dog that is trained in the sport, or higher standards with respect to the structure within a club to better prepare teams for trial, what about lessening the tolerance for thin nerved dogs, etc?

The judging is loose or inconsistent because the current standard, if you will, is all over the place so they make allowances for that. Why? To ensure the sport continues to thrive through participation, even if that comes at a sacrifice to something else.

And Chris, thank you for giving credence to the point I was attempting to make. I didn't suggest that the judges needed to raise their standards but for the participants to do so at their own individual levels. More or less be the change you want to see in the world. Really nothing more or less needed to be extracted from that.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Nicole Stark said:


> What about having a higher standard for the quality of dog that is trained in the sport ...


How would that work?


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Christopher Smith said:


> I simply don't see where it would improve the sport. Let's face it, most of the people training for sport are hobbyist. They don't have the time or the desire to make a competition dog. All they want to do is come out to the club, hang out with other dog folks and train their dog. They don't care about going to big trials. But if we make the sports so hard that these people no longer want to come out and play, the whole sport will collapse. We would not have the membership base, and dues that come along with it, to support the big events where the real competition is, and the judging gets harder at the regional, national and international levels.
> 
> IPO is the biggest bite sport in the world because everyone can come out and participate at the club level. You can be a mediocre trainer with a mediocre dog and still have success at the club or maybe even the regional level. But if you want to be on the podium at big events you have to have to be a brilliant trainer with a a great work ethic and have a really good dog.



I totally get all this. The clubs support the sport, and the clubs need to be accessible to the folks who want to train as you describe. That makes sense.


----------



## Faisal Khan (Apr 16, 2009)

Say no to politics and useless talk. Train and title the dogs first.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

As with any sport, dog or otherwise, it's the average Joe that keeps things going. I don't know the numbers but I'd guess it's less the 5% that make it (or even want to) to upper levels of the sport. 
Obviously there are clubs out there that are purely for competition but chase away all the "Average Joe" for not having the right dog, not taking the sport seriously, not being capable to get what's needed to do ...whatever and everything will fold.
I would also say that there are "trainers" out there that nubees follow and never learn a thing. I've see that in any activity I've ever gotten involved in.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

No question about it Bob. It's the "backs" of others that the serious competitors are supported by, which comes primarily by way of financial support. Without it, there'd be no club level trials for them to compete in, no seminars, no equipment, no fields to rent, etc. Nevertheless, I still stand by what I said, for those who want to improve their sport, change starts with them.


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Nicole Stark said:


> And Chris, thank you for giving credence to the point I was attempting to make. I didn't suggest that the judges needed to raise their standards but for the participants to do so at their own individual levels.


What exactly do you mean by "raise their standards"? Why do they need to raise their standards?


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Christopher Smith said:


> What exactly do you mean by "raise their standards"? Why do they need to raise their standards?


Hi Chris, see my PM to you. Feel free to respond in kind if you are inclined to. If not, fine as well. This isn't a topic I am particularly vested in and certainly welcome disagreement but, it won't be something that I feel compelled to give further resource to.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Connie Sutherland said:


> How would that work?


I haven't any idea. But from personal experience, I do know how it *might* change the outlook. See post # 49.

_By raising the standard in what is being presented to them in the first place. Raising standards often goes hand in hand with increasing expectations. Any time you genuinely want to make a change, the first thing you must do is to raise your standards._


----------



## Daniel Lybbert (Nov 23, 2010)

> Obviously there are clubs out there that are purely for competition but chase away all the "Average Joe" for not having the right dog, not taking the sport seriously, not being capable to get what's needed to do ...whatever and everything will fold.


My club is this way. I personally dont have time to decoy and train dogs and people that arent in it for the long run. We have a very little club and our dogs are worked hard and so far are doing well in trials.

I was asked once about training a corso or something like that. I asked the lady if it could jump 4.5m long 2.3m palisade and 1.2m hurdle. The answer was no. My answer was the same NO. If the dog isnt able to compete at a sufficent level it has no place in my club.

I still go and help anyone that is at a seminar or trial. I still try and work all dogs equal. But just not on my home field in my club. I dont think that this limits the sport. I think it holds my team responsible for high scores and quality when trial time comes around.

Judges and decoys are expected to be strict when coming here. We dont train to have a pussified trial.


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Geoff Empey said:


> Thanks for the offer to come to a foot step tracking tutorial with you Katie. But I'll think I'll pass at this time.
> 
> Yes I agree that it takes a good trainer to teach/train IPO style tracking as well as a dog that can accept the training. I say that with respect for the trainers and the dogs that are good at doing it. But I wouldn't be calling IPO footstep tracking what it isn't, and it isn't anything else but a trained obedience exercise.
> 
> My experience shows it to be an obedience exercise pure and simple, how can you call it any thing else when most train and lay foundation by putting kibble (on a scent pad) progressing to cut up hotdogs in footsteps. Then forcing dogs to lay on the articles, correcting dogs at corners and for not putting noses in every footstep. If you are a good trainer with patience you train your dog to IPO track by no other way except training it as any other OBEDIENCE exercise. There is no mystery in it for the dog and trainer, the dog is just a pawn to the training methodology. Saying that it is an all natural genetic thing I do not believe to be true. Even a dog that has natural 'hunt' drive, that natural 'hunt' has to be molded into a conformed shape to fit the 'picture' what a judge needs to see to score it by, as it is written in the rules. So it's obedience. 8)


Hey Geoff, what exactly that we do with dogs either in sport or real world working like SAR, hunting for and finding what we want them to, PSDs finding drugs or chasing the bad guy, is not an obedience. Isnt everything but running loose technically an obedience?


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie (Jun 8, 2008)

I don't know, it all has an element of obedience if we are asking them to do something, even instinctual, when we want and how we want. Unless you are saying that a dog can get through the Sch and FH tracking without his nose, then its tracking. I train with an AKC tracking judge. I'm told AKC tracks are more complicated than Sch tracks. AKC doesn't require footstep. However, my friend says that with a dog trained in FST, there's less room for error. In herding, particularly AKC, the lower drive, less keen, obedient dog, is the point dog. The extreme version of this is that we have dogs that have reached the highest title levels [Herding Championships] that are obedience placement dogs. They could care less about interacting with the stock and go where you tell them to go. You simply trial them on feral type sheep that will run if the dog just moves and wallah. As people select for the dog that can "win" we get more dogs that don't resemble their breed's mental characteristics. There is a group in the ACDs that were advocating having cattle only at their national specialty. The motivation is that everyone wants national specialty bragging rights. So instead of watering down the breed for light/fright sheep which is what you typically get at facility trials, make it where to win, they must move cattle. The motion was defeated. You're getting more and more dogs who can't move tough stock because the standard is the BC and light fright stock and obedience. People have bought into that the measure of a dog is whether he will be obedient with light stock. This is what drives the sport and people only see the titles. To change it, you'd have to change the stock. Instead of sheep that will run with the dog a acre away, try the ones that the dog has to walk up on and make move. Instead of 3-5, how about 10-25. Since cows can be dangerous, add more goat trials. They tried this [10 head of sheep] in CA years ago and it was amazing how many dogs were knocked out of the game. I test dogs all the time that are strictly prey. As long as it will run from them [and this includes ducks] fine. The minute it stands still and looks at them, the dog is ran.

T


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Unless you are saying that a dog can get through the Sch and FH tracking without his nose, then its tracking.


My thoughts exactly.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

People get into trouble teaching tracking especially foot step, when they're under the delusion that they're teaching the dog to track and not teaching the dog to use it's natural ability in a choreographed exercise


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Thomas Barriano said:


> People get into trouble teaching tracking especially foot step, when they're under the delusion that they're teaching the dog to track and not teaching the dog to use it's natural ability in a choreographed exercise


I'll take the kind of trouble I had a few weeks ago anytime. :wink:


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Christopher Smith said:


> I'll take the kind of trouble I had a few weeks ago anytime. :wink:


Christopher,

I know you'll have a hard time understanding this, being from Cali and all BUT my post had nothing to do with you.
You did a really nice FH 2 a few weeks ago. Lets see you duplicate the results doing all three phases of an IPO routine. ;-)


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Christopher,
> 
> I know you'll have a hard time understanding this, being from Cali and all BUT my post had nothing to do with you.
> You did a really nice FH 2 a few weeks ago. Lets see you duplicate the results doing all three phases of an IPO routine. ;-)


Really nice? I believe that shit was perfect


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Katie Finlay said:


> Really nice? I believe that shit was perfect


Katie,

I"ve seen a few 100 point scores in all three phases. None of them were "perfect". However giving the devil his due, a 100 point FH 2 is damn impressive. The challenge with IPO is putting in strong performances in all three phases on the same day. Maybe I'll have the same high opinion of CS that he has of himself when I see that happen? ;-)


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Steve Strom said:


> Hey Geoff, what exactly that we do with dogs either in sport or real world working like SAR, hunting for and finding what we want them to, PSDs finding drugs or chasing the bad guy, is not an obedience. Isnt everything but running loose technically an obedience?


Yes you are right and that is what I was saying in regards to Kate's post. Saying it is just tracking and that there is no obedience is just misleading. I know how hard you IPO guys and gals work to get a nice score in this phase of your sport and to do a nice FH. It's not just a roll of the dice and hope for the best, there is a lot of imprinting, foundation and lots of repetitive intelligent training. It's not easy and it isn't just 'tracking'.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Bob Scott said:


> As with any sport, dog or otherwise, it's the average Joe that keeps things going. I don't know the numbers but I'd guess it's less the 5% that make it (or even want to) to upper levels of the sport. Obviously there are clubs out there that are purely for competition but chase away all the "Average Joe" for not having the right dog, not taking the sport seriously, not being capable to get what's needed to do ...whatever and everything will fold.





Daniel Lybbert said:


> My club is this way. I personally dont have time to decoy and train dogs and people that arent in it for the long run. We have a very little club and our dogs are worked hard and so far are doing well in trials.
> 
> I was asked once about training a corso or something like that. I asked the lady if it could jump 4.5m long 2.3m palisade and 1.2m hurdle. The answer was no. My answer was the same NO. If the dog isnt able to compete at a sufficent level it has no place in my club.


I agree that the newb coming up is the future of the sport without Brevets or BHs you will never have FR3 or IPO3 titles in the upcoming years. So Newbs and encouraging Newbs is very important. Even if they have a dog that may not be suitable they can catch the bug and always get another dog. If they are willing to learn, be on time, help and attend the training regularily. I do not care as much about the dog that they start with I am more concerned on where *they are going* than where they have been or where they are. 

I know a guy who was told that he had no future in protection sports and that he should pack it in while he was ahead. That guy was me! Now almost 6 years later I still am going forward. I was lucky that Kevin and John accepted me them and mentored me, so when ever I have a newb I try to treat them with the same type of respect that I'd like to be afforded if I was starting all over again. Knowing how I was treated in one way negatively and the other positively. So I know how it feels from both sides of the fence.

I've also seen others that had sub-par dogs show up on time every time and when they have learned as much as they can with the sub-par dog get a new pup. So I am of the opinion that even if someone has a alapaca old bandogge or Boerbel yes you tell them the truth that their dog doesn't have what it takes to do the sport. But I always tell them what they can do to be involved any ways. The rest is up to them. Like who am I to say that anyone can or cannot do anything? Even if you work that Boerbel on a sleeve once or twice a week what time is that going to take away from the club's high end dogs? 15-20 minutes? The way I look at it, the time lost is for the spirit and those 15-20 minutes are just not that important to me on a personal level as long as it is for the spirit of the sport. 




Nicole Stark said:


> Nevertheless, I still stand by what I said, for those who want to improve their sport, change starts with them.


Yes it does, the biggest thing in dog sports all dog sports are people that are involved but yet NOT involved. Many hands make light work.


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Geoff Empey said:


> Yes you are right and that is what I was saying in regards to Kate's post. Saying it is just tracking and that there is no obedience is just misleading. I know how hard you IPO guys and gals work to get a nice score in this phase of your sport and to do a nice FH. It's not just a roll of the dice and hope for the best, there is a lot of imprinting, foundation and lots of repetitive intelligent training. It's not easy and it isn't just 'tracking'.


If IPO tracking is obedience, will my dog track when I stuff her nose with Vicks? If it's got nothing to do with tracking, why can dogs do it blindfolded?


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Katie Finlay said:


> If IPO tracking is obedience, will my dog track when I stuff her nose with Vicks? If it's got nothing to do with tracking, why can dogs do it blindfolded?


Katie, I don't particularly disagree with those statements but I don't think that's the point he was attempting to make. Most would agree that FST type tracking isn't natural for a dog to do. I believe all he was getting at is that tracking involves an element of OB for it to present the picture desired by the judges. If it didn't then technically I should be able to put Willow on at the very least a low level track and with her exposure to following game tracks alone she should be able to score almost perfectly. 

Anyone who has put time into FST tracking knows that it's not possible to do such a thing. Since it's not, then one needs to ask why that might be. What makes what she does on her own different from what you might do with your own dog?


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Nicole Stark said:


> Katie, I don't particularly disagree with those statements but I don't think that's the point he was attempting to make. Most would agree that FST type tracking isn't natural for a dog to do. I believe all he was getting at is that tracking involves an element of OB for it to present the picture desired by the judges. If it didn't then technically I should be able to put Willow on at the very least a low level track and with her exposure to following game tracks alone she should be able to score almost perfectly.
> 
> Anyone who has put time into FST tracking knows that it's not possible to do such a thing. Since it's not, then one needs to ask why that might be. What makes what she does on her own different from what you might do with your own dog?


I think you'd be surprised at how many dogs will follow tracks closely having never done it before.

You can say that everything takes an element of obedience. That's how we made dogs into domestic creatures whose gifts we can use functionally, but to say FST is purely obedience is insane.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Katie Finlay said:


> I think you'd be surprised at how many dogs will follow tracks closely having never done it before.
> 
> You can say that everything takes an element of obedience. That's how we made dogs into domestic creatures whose gifts we can use functionally, but to say FST is purely obedience is insane.


Having seen it first hand, I woudn't be surprised at how many dogs will follow tracks closely having never done it before. That's more so the point was making, but probably didn't say so exactly - they most certainly will. Willow is an excellent example of that. I shouldn't be speaking for Geoff, but I'm pretty sure he didn't mean to suggest that FST was purely OB. I kinda got the impression that he was trying to make a separation that it was a combination of the two.


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Nicole Stark said:


> Katie, I don't particularly disagree with those statements but I don't think that's the point he was attempting to make. Most would agree that FST type tracking isn't natural for a dog to do.


What does anyone use a dog for that is "natural"? 

Tracking for IPO takes *TRAINING*, just like every other thing we use a dog for. And not all training is obedience is it? To say that it's simply obedience is nonsense.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Nicole Stark said:


> Having seen it first hand, I woudn't be surprised at how many dogs will follow tracks closely having never done it before. That's more so the point was making, but probably didn't say so exactly - they most certainly will. Willow is an excellent example of that. I shouldn't be speaking for Geoff, but I'm pretty sure he didn't mean to suggest that FST was purely OB. I kinda got the impression that he was trying to make a separation that it was a combination of the two.


Yes it was .. 



Katie Finlay said:


> You can say that everything takes an element of obedience. That's how we made dogs into domestic creatures whose gifts we can use functionally, but to say FST is purely obedience is *insane*. If IPO tracking is obedience, will my dog track when I stuff her nose with Vicks? If it's got nothing to do with tracking, why can dogs do it blindfolded?


Oh come on Katie, get over yourself you don't have to insult me over it. So how do blind people learn how to use a cane or learn to read braille? I know of a blind kid who learned how to use echolocation so that he could ride a bike. All learned taught behaviours just like a dog FS/tracking with a blindfold. Whoopee ding dong.


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Get over myself? I'm trying to read where I insulted you. I think you're the one taking things personally here.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Christopher Smith said:


> What does anyone use a dog for that is "natural"?
> 
> Tracking for IPO takes *TRAINING*, just like every other thing we use a dog for. And not all training is obedience is it? To say that it's simply obedience is nonsense.


Would you please go back and read what was written, this is not what he suggested or implied. Might I suggest that if anyone feels this topic deserves further conversation that you start a new thread? No offense intended but it''s this type of useless, cyclical banter that unnecessarily degrades the discussion that takes place here. We're all saying the exact same thing, just differently. ](*,)

I don't have to like it but I also don't have to waste my time reading or engaging in it either.


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Geoff Empey said:


> Thanks for the offer to come to a foot step tracking tutorial with you Katie. But I'll think I'll pass at this time.
> 
> Yes I agree that it takes a good trainer to teach/train IPO style tracking as well as a dog that can accept the training. I say that with respect for the trainers and the dogs that are good at doing it. But I wouldn't be calling IPO footstep tracking what it isn't, and it isn't anything else but a trained obedience exercise.
> 
> My experience shows it to be an obedience exercise pure and simple, how can you call it any thing else when most train and lay foundation by putting kibble (on a scent pad) progressing to cut up hotdogs in footsteps. Then forcing dogs to lay on the articles, correcting dogs at corners and for not putting noses in every footstep. If you are a good trainer with patience you train your dog to IPO track by no other way except training it as any other OBEDIENCE exercise. There is no mystery in it for the dog and trainer, the dog is just a pawn to the training methodology. Saying that it is an all natural genetic thing I do not believe to be true. Even a dog that has natural 'hunt' drive, that natural 'hunt' has to be molded into a conformed shape to fit the 'picture' what a judge needs to see to score it by, as it is written in the rules. So it's obedience. 8)


Nicole, he states clearly here that IPO tracking is nothing but an obedience exercise. We aren't ready anything else. If he was trying to make the point you are trying to make, he failed to do so.

Saying IPO tracking is purely obedience is insane, IMO. It doesn't mean I think people who feel that way are insane. I think sky diving is also insane, but I do it, and I don't think all people who do so are insane.


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Nicole Stark said:


> Would you please go back and read what was written, this is not what he suggested or implied. Might I suggest that if anyone feels this topic deserves further conversation that you start a new thread? No offense intended but it''s this type of useless, cyclical banter that unnecessarily degrades the discussion that takes place here. We're all saying the exact same thing, just differently. ](*,)
> 
> I don't have to like it but I also don't have to waste my time reading or engaging in it either.



I thought you were done with this the last time you made a post like this? Sorry you are so frustrated.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Katie Finlay said:


> Nicole, he states clearly here that IPO tracking is nothing but an obedience exercise. We aren't ready anything else.


Yes, he stated that and further clarified that point more recently. I think we can all reconcile the fact that once a statement has been made, that to clarify you may extend what you have stated to include additional details. It's part of the discussion process that is sometimes necessary when misunderstandings occur.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Christopher Smith said:


> I thought you were done with this the last time you made a post like this? Sorry you are so frustrated.


It's a sickness. Treatment is probably in order. \\/


----------



## Skip Morgart (Dec 19, 2008)

I would like to see more comradery in the sports and across the sports.


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Skip Morgart said:


> I would like to see more comradery in the sports and across the sports.


Totally. It's good to have rivalry but only when it's healthy. Our club is awesome about this. Definitely the best group I've trained with!


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Nicole Stark said:


> It's a sickness. Treatment is probably in order. \\/


:lol:


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

_"It's too easy to say the wrong thing [or] offend someone."_

I remember this from a PM.


And now Nicole says she has a sickness.

Nicole, you trying to label that a "syndrome"? :lol:


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Connie Sutherland said:


> _"It's too easy to say the wrong thing [or] offend someone."_
> 
> I remember this from a PM.
> 
> ...


Naw, it's generalized madness. :twisted: Actually, if you want to know the truth, I lost a friend of 22 years a few days ago - my tolerance for certain things is a bit lessened at the moment.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> As with any sport, dog or otherwise, it's the average Joe that keeps things going. I don't know the numbers but I'd guess it's less the 5% that make it (or even want to) to upper levels of the sport.
> Obviously there are clubs out there that are purely for competition but chase away all the "Average Joe" for not having the right dog, not taking the sport seriously, not being capable to get what's needed to do ...whatever and everything will fold.


Like Chris said:
_
"Let's face it, most of the people training for sport are hobbyist. They don't have the time or the desire to make a competition dog. All they want to do is come out to the club, hang out with other dog folks and train their dog. They don't care about going to big trials. But if we make the sports so hard that these people no longer want to come out and play, the whole sport will collapse."_

Stepping back to look at the big picture, I totally get this now. 

There is no reason even to have disdain for those "Average Joes" who are the crucial base.

Illuminating posts. JMO!


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Nicole Stark said:


> Actually, if you want to know the truth, I lost a friend of 22 years a few days ago ....


I'm sorry, Nicole.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I'd like to see obedience and bite work with some serious distractions such as you might see in Mondio or whatever you can think up. No consistency from trial to trial on what those distractions are so they can't be trained for specifically.
In AKC you need to show under 2-3 different judges at different OB trials in order to get a title. Obviously that's easy in AKC because of the gazillion trials they have in a years time but why not for bite sport?!


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Bob Scott said:


> I'd like to see obedience and bite work with some serious distractions such as you might see in Mondio or whatever you can think up. No consistency from trial to trial on what those distractions are so they can't be trained for specifically.
> In AKC you need to show under 2-3 different judges at different OB trials in order to get a title. Obviously that's easy in AKC because of the gazillion trials they have in a years time but why not for bite sport?!


Mondio and Belgian Ring is very cool for that as there is really no pattern of the distractions. In French Ring the exercises are never in the same order but there isn't a lot of outside distraction that can make or break a routine. In FR you need to show under 2 different judges to get a level. Outside of a Brevet Dog of defense certificate, which is only one judge. With the amount of judge's here in North America it can be a a tough thing. Every now and then you get the odd weekend where there could be 2 judges at a venue but you can run into other issues with the dog getting trial wise.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Connie Sutherland said:


> Like Chris said:
> _
> "Let's face it, most of the people training for sport are hobbyist. They don't have the time or the desire to make a competition dog. All they want to do is come out to the club, hang out with other dog folks and train their dog. They don't care about going to big trials. But if we make the sports so hard that these people no longer want to come out and play, the whole sport will collapse."_
> 
> ...


Yes IMO you can never have disdain for someone who is trying, no matter if there is a lack of knowledge, lack of a proper dog and or a lack of natural dog savvy skill. 

But as a "senior handler and competitor" I think it is my job to push the "Average Joes' to be better and reach for things that they may not do without that fire lit under their arses. 

That's the whole thing nobody that has been in the sport for a long time wants to see it dumbed down to 'improve the sport' and any talk of that is just counter productive to what the sport actually is. People are talking about the growth and or the decline of the bite sports. There is always food for talk of growth and why is this so hard, or that so easy . I always see that some growth happens and then some decline, it is just a natural evolution. I want to see growth to but I don't want to see the quality of the sports suffer because of growth. 

I've doing FR now for almost 6 years and I've only scratched the surface of learning, it took like 2 years to actually have a basic understanding of the bigger picture and soul of the sport. It's a process, It is a hard sport it is hard to teach the decoys, the dogs, let alone a green handler. So no wonder it is hard for the 'Average Joe' to find someone to train with. As well as senior competitor and trainers not as willing to spend a lot of time on someone who doesn't want to help themselves. 

Many of the people that are new to the sport just don't understand that it is more than just letting the dog bite, or that they can go to a 3 day seminar and be able to participate in French Ring or IPO or Mondio. It is so much more than that, it requires effort and commitment. 

I can only speak of French Ring. FR takes a lifetime to learn as it is constantly evolving. The knowledge of how to train Ring basically has been passed the past 100+ years from father to son or from a martial arts point of view master to apprentice. The knowledge is passed through participation in the sport by just doing it, not from the internet or video. 

Then the trainers have to step on to the trial field, the trial field takes nerves, confidence for both animal and human alike. Plus all those hours and months of preparation on the training field for both dog and handler to hone the blade of the knife to cut through that trial field's butter. 

I look at the way I train French Ring is akin to peeling back the layers of an onion, each layer reveals another layer where you learn its secrets before peeling back another layer with once again new secrets. 

This is why many consider it a passion. It will test your dog and it will test your ability as a trainer, there is nothing like it. But then I am insane apparently.  

I love when new people that start the sport and get excited when they see it, and take their first bites in the suit. Or that look on their face when their puppy is hanging off a rag for the first time. I get as much joy and satisfaction from that as watching a duel between a skilled decoy and FR3 dog over a basket. 

Ringsport and dog training in general for me is akin to having many Zen like moments all the while I am learning, watching and listening. But int he big picture I am just playing with my dog but we have a purpose to move forward. 

When we understand that and know that while a Brevet, BH and a FR/MR/IPO level 1 club level helper is an awesome accomplishment. The goal should always be for a level 3 and that is what we train, the "Average Joe" can only improve and want to reach higher. As those Brevets, BHs, Level 1s and club level helpers are tomorrows 3s and National level helpers!


----------



## Laura Briggs (Jan 11, 2011)

Bob Scott said:


> As with any sport, dog or otherwise, it's the average Joe that keeps things going. I don't know the numbers but I'd guess it's less the 5% that make it (or even want to) to upper levels of the sport.
> Obviously there are clubs out there that are purely for competition but chase away all the "Average Joe" for not having the right dog, not taking the sport seriously, not being capable to get what's needed to do ...whatever and everything will fold.


I would really like to see the attitude of clubs change to include new people. Where I live, I couldn't find a club willing to accept new members and we (my husband and I) were treated quite coldly when we went to a few trials to respectfully observe and support people we knew. Fortunately, we found a knowledgeable private trainer who we genuinely like and connected with a few very kind folks through forums so we've been having a blast working our dogs the past couple of years. My husband is someone who has a very strong commitment to training but it is very unlikely that he will ever trial in IPO due his club experience. Is he being a baby? Perhaps but he teaches a form of medieval martial arts so he is used to a very supportive international club system that actively encourages new member participation. The CKC tracking club in our area has been very welcoming so he'll probably choose to title with them next year. We're moving to rural Alberta next summer and I'm really hoping that the IPO community there (if there is one) will be welcoming to new folks.


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

I don't track for sport, but of course it's obedience. You find the start, tell the dog to do it, and he follows the stimulus to the end, smelly footstep to smelly footstep, indicates on articles. just like narcotics stimulus indicates to the dog that it's time to sit or scratch when he smells it...obedient to odor?... How you train the obedience exercise is up to you, your dog, and your ability to get points training it motivationally, compulsively, or both.

*I've missed you all SO MUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!HUGS AND KISSES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*


I think K9 Nosework would be a good title for a dog that needed to show some detection skills!!!


I kind of like PSA the way it is, barring personalities being left at the door, but I haven't shown above a PDC, yet.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

BACK ATCHA!
*
I've missed you SO MUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!HUGS AND KISSES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*


----------



## Annamarie Somich (Jan 7, 2009)

PSA - add an article search like MR or KNPV. May even want the dog to alert more like police service work and not mouth the object by returning it.

Why does PSA require a muzzle during Level 1 OB?


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Dave Colborn said:


> *I've missed you all SO MUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!HUGS AND KISSES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*


Hey Dave, how have you been? It's nice to see you again.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Dave Colborn said:


> *I've missed you all SO MUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!HUGS AND KISSES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*


Welcome back Dave good to see ya!! 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7gWB7IzxtU


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

Nicole Stark said:


> Hey Dave, how have you been? It's nice to see you again.


 
I am and have been doing well, thanks for asking!!! Did you ever get a copy of controlled aggression? I sent one, but owed two to two different people and now I can't remember...

How is your mutt progressing and improving for your sport (so we don't get off topic)...


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

Annamarie Somich said:


> PSA - add an article search like MR or KNPV. May even want the dog to alert more like police service work and not mouth the object by returning it.
> 
> Why does PSA require a muzzle during Level 1 OB?


 
I am not an authority, but I think they went to a muzzle to prevent any out of control cross-overs from biting anyone in the group...

Just kidding, but I do think it started for safety when there was still a group. Maybe someone else could clear that up better.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Dave Colborn said:


> I do think it started for safety when there was still a group. Maybe someone else could clear that up better.


I believe this is correct, I remember when it was implemented and there was talk about some incidences, or near incidences, during the heeling exercises and adding the muzzle for safety.

It makes sense even if it wasn't for safety, since PSA has muzzle attacks at the higher levels, why not test that a dog is neutral in the muzzle.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Dave Colborn said:


> I am and have been doing well, thanks for asking!!! Did you ever get a copy of controlled aggression? I sent one, but owed two to two different people and now I can't remember...
> 
> How is your mutt progressing and improving for your sport (so we don't get off topic)...


Hey Dave, I'll hit you up via PM.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

*!!!!!welcome back dave!!!! \\:d/\\:d/*


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie (Jun 8, 2008)

Bob Scott said:


> I'd like to see obedience and bite work with some serious distractions such as you might see in Mondio or whatever you can think up. No consistency from trial to trial on what those distractions are so they can't be trained for specifically.
> In AKC you need to show under 2-3 different judges at different OB trials in order to get a title. Obviously that's easy in AKC because of the gazillion trials they have in a years time but why not for bite sport?!


I've really enjoyed the PSA trials I've seen. One distraction exercise was an out of sight long down and two helpers in suits walk just past the dog's nose pushing and shoving each other. I also like the control at a distance I see at the higher levels.

T


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Bob Scott said:


> No consistency from trial to trial on what those distractions are so they can't be trained for specifically.


The only issue I see with this is then my DS1 (Dog Sport 1) title may have been completely different from your DS1. If a sport is going to give out titles, there has to be some level of consistency in the performance expected to earn those titles.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Kadi Thingvall said:


> The only issue I see with this is then my DS1 (Dog Sport 1) title may have been completely different from your DS1. If a sport is going to give out titles, there has to be some level of consistency in the performance expected to earn those titles.



All things should be consistent within one particular trial obviously.
That's where I see a problem with folks wanting more realistic nose work. I've done both Schutzhund and SAR work. IMO the difference is night and day. The dog does use it's nose in FST but still nothing like the real thing. That was some of the issue in the early days of K9 work back in the day where the dogs purchased were trained in sport tracking and then were expected to actually track in the real world.


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

Bob,

Footstep tracking, as you call it, is nosework with the dog's nose to the ground.

SAR is air-sniffing.

In my mind two completely separate disciplines?


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Gillian Schuler said:


> Bob,
> 
> Footstep tracking, as you call it, is nosework with the dog's nose to the ground.
> 
> ...



Very much so! I agree about FST as being a obedience exercise as much as the dog using it's nose. They are judged on moving from print to print with 90 degree corners. 
I did SAR before I was involved in Schutzhund and the FST was hard in the sense that my dog would initially leave the track if he was down wind from the article. He would even leave the leg he was on if he scented the article on another leg. 
Real world tracking/trailing was all about finding the victim by using air, ground, shrubbery, etc. that's a much more natural use of the dog's nose abilities. No obedience, no formal pattern, just find the victim or article.
I say no obedience but the dog should still be able to respond to the handler if necessary. That may be in direction to a particular area or a recall.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

This thread has veered off topic a bit but thank you for that bit of info Bob. It confirms something I have been wondering about in terms of transitioning the Dutch from the work I am currently doing with her to FST. It may be that I won't ever bother to make the transition. At the moment it's not important enough to me to give it much consideration.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Starting with FST and going to real world tracking isn't so much a problem as starting with real tracking/training and going to FST. Many of the early street K9s in the States came from schutzhund background and can still be a good foundation for the real stuff.


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

Bob Scott said:


> Starting with FST and going to real world tracking isn't so much a problem as starting with real tracking/training and going to FST. Many of the early street K9s in the States came from schutzhund background and can still be a good foundation for the real stuff.


 

I second this. I like training a dog for trailing when it already has a motivational start in footstep tracking. Makes life easy when they loose the trail. Most will go nose to ground and sort it out with their initial training.

Second to my seconding... PSA level three has elements and no patterns. Things that have to be included and scored. The particular judge can throw what they want within the guidelines. No two are the same.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

" Makes life easy when they loose the trail. Most will go nose to ground and sort it out with their initial training."


I had just the opposite problem with the direction I went (real world to FST)
When my dog would get to a corner and loose the track his first reaction was to raise his head and air scent. This was often the time he'd head for any article that would be up wind from him. Didn't even have to be on his track. ](*,)
Great nose but it took him a bit till he figured out the scent "game".


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

I took my semi retired Dutch Shepherd out of retirement to do
Protection and Tracking I. We'd been working MR little wood and STP (area search). They move tracking from a sod farm to the County fairgrounds that has a marathon run through the day before :-( 
Belatu found both articles but he was off track more then on
and 58 points isn't enough to pass ;-)
Then he couldn't go on to protection because their scanner couldn't read his chip and they wanted to actually read his ear tattoo cold (not see what was in the score book and compare it to the actual tattoo) VERY FRUSTRATING
The next weekend was better when I did BH's on Arya and Gwr




Bob Scott said:


> " Makes life easy when they loose the trail. Most will go nose to ground and sort it out with their initial training."
> 
> 
> I had just the opposite problem with the direction I went (real world to FST)
> ...


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

That sucks about the scanner. Most of the better ones will read just about any brand of chip.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> That sucks about the scanner. Most of the better ones will read just about any brand of chip.


I would have brought my own, but they said they had a "universal" scanner :-(
The dog is seven and I've never had a problem with his ear tattoo
being read it's BELA2 (his name) Once you know what the tattoo is supposed to be it's easy to read. The judge insisted I NOT tell the secretary what she was looking for???????????????????


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> I would have brought my own, but they said they had a "universal" scanner :-(
> The dog is seven and I've never had a problem with his ear tattoo
> being read it's BELA2 (his name) Once you know what the tattoo is supposed to be it's easy to read. The judge insisted I NOT tell the secretary what she was looking for???????????????????




I guess I understand it ..... but after THEIR scanner didn't work, it does seem a tad frustrating.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Connie Sutherland said:


> I guess I understand it ..... but after THEIR scanner didn't work, it does seem a tad frustrating.


They kept insisting my dog didn't have a chip and acted like I was trying to sneak in a ringer? Yeah cheating to get that elusive Protection and Tracking I title is what it's all about. Two other club members pulled their IPO II dogs after they saw the IPO I dogs try to track. Some clubs know how to run a trial and some don't Ces't la Vie


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Bob Scott said:


> That sucks about the scanner. Most of the better ones will read just about any brand of chip.



That's what I hate about microchips vs tattoos. We basically went through this in our organization and only in the past 2-3 years started to accept microchips. Though it is due diligence that the competitor has access to a scanner that reads their dogs brand. I don't get why the club that organized Thomas's Dutchie's trial were not interested in going the tattoo route, unless the tattoo didn't jive with what was in the score book.


----------



## Mario Fernandez (Jun 21, 2008)

It up to the competitor/handler/owner to have a scanner that reads the dogs microchip, not the club or organization. Had the same thing happen to me, had a dog that a foreign micro chip, damn universal scanner would not read the microchip. 10 min trying to scan the dog, with no avail...Luckily I borrowed one from a dog broker and was able to get the id number of the chip. I ended up biting the bullet and buying one with a club member.


----------



## Mario Fernandez (Jun 21, 2008)

Yeah if you had a tattoo, I don't under stand why they would not use that either. Then again you are right some clubs know how to run trials and some don't.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Mario Fernandez said:


> Yeah if you had a tattoo, I don't under stand why they would not use that either. Then again you are right some clubs know how to run trials and some don't.


They claimed they couldn't read the tattoo. It gets better, when I take the dog back to the car my TD comes over with his scanner and his reads the chip. He takes the reading to the trial secretary to verify it matches the score book. We have to wait for a break in the trial and when I approach the judge about the reading he replies "I was talking with X and "we" decided your dog was too aggressive" At this point I walk away shaking my head. The following week went much better.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Thomas Barriano said:


> They claimed they couldn't read the tattoo. It gets better, when I take the dog back to the car my TD comes over with his scanner and his reads the chip. He takes the reading to the trial secretary to verify it matches the score book. We have to wait for a break in the trial and when I approach the judge about the reading he replies "I was talking with X and "we" decided your dog was too aggressive" At this point I walk away shaking my head. The following week went much better.


Sounds like a gong show.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Geoff Empey said:


> Sounds like a gong show.


It does sound like something you'd walk away from, shaking your head.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Thunder has two chips. The first one migrated to his right front chest area. He also has a tat and that's high on the inside of his right thy. Now THAT was fun to watch the vet put it there. First touch and Thunder decided the vet was dinner. I put my hand on Thunder's side and told him to quit. He did but the vet seemed hesitant to finish the job. He did reluctantly. :twisted:


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Bob Scott said:


> Thunder has two chips. The first one migrated to his right front chest area. He also has a tat and that's high on the inside of his right thy. Now THAT was fun to watch the vet put it there. First touch and Thunder decided the vet was dinner. I put my hand on Thunder's side and told him to quit. He did but the vet seemed hesitant to finish the job. He did reluctantly. :twisted:


We used a Ketchum ear clamp made originally to ID piglets when I did my litter and the same machine was used on my older dog. When it was done the pups were 6 weeks old they would be hard pressed to remember any of it. The tattoo on both my dogs done this way are still very readable and very clear. Worked great! 
http://www.ketchum.ca/livestock/directions.html


----------

