# Repairing the Sport



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

If you could repair the sport of Schutzhund, what would be your first order of business? I'm thinking SCH, but after checking how some of the tests have been removed, my guess to allow weaker dogs to tilte, I'm starting to ask, "WHY?"


----------



## maggie fraser (May 30, 2008)

Howard Gaines III said:


> If you could repair the sport of Schutzhund, what would be your first order of business? I'm thinking SCH, but after checking how some of the tests have been removed, my guess to allow weaker dogs to tilte, I'm starting to ask, "WHY?"


 
Seeing as you are so opinionated Howard, how would you repair it? I diidn't think you did schitzhound?


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Because this is the age of the weak dog that is perceived to be easier to handle for the majority of people. It is no longer used to find the breed worthy dogs. Your not going to fix what others don't want fixed Howard. Besides, the clubs would go broke if only the top dogs could pass once again.....and that may be a large part of the problem.


----------



## Oluwatobi Odunuga (Apr 7, 2010)

I think one of the problems is emphasis on drive over general temperant. Things like environmental soundness,natural aggression are ignored and speed and extreme prey drive are over-emphasized, those things are important but do not make a complete protection dog which is what a shutzhund dog should be.
The solution lies with breeders and trainers, there's a limit to how much judges will see on the trial field. The breeders and trainers are the ones that should be identifying the 'complete' dogs and promoting them. Train dogs in prey, defense, with environmental stress, different bite equipment, muzzle work etc and also the dog's temperament off the field, reactions to new stuff etc.
The sport IMO is unlikely to become tougher, its up to breeders to promote the really strong dogs.


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

Promote DPO program


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Bottom line is that the show folks have the money and numbers to dictate what goes on in both the USA and the WDA. 
Individual clubs can do their own thing but they are still controlled by the money folks (show line) when it comes to policy. 
When I was a WDA member we sent club reps to the "big" meetings. That's when we realized that a club made up of working line dogs was nothing more then the redheaded step child from the standpoint of having a voice.
The SV sets the pattern for both USA and WDA. Guess who they are?!! #-o
They can't tell the individual clubs how to train or what exercises they can or can't train for though. That's up to you and your club!


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Howard Gaines III said:


> If you could repair the sport of Schutzhund, what would be your first order of business? I'm thinking SCH, but after checking how some of the tests have been removed, my guess to allow weaker dogs to tilte, I'm starting to ask, "WHY?"




Bring and promote the IPO-V program. It's like a sch-lite title. This is a way to let people come out and play the game at lower level. If they can do that they don't have to lower the standards of sch in order to compete.
Remove the sch requirements for dogs to be bred or shown.
Get the European influence out of the clubs in the US.
If we do those two things you will see a huge change in the sport. 

Here are some minor things that people can do to help the sport on their own:

 

For every minute people spend on the interwebs bitching and complaining they spend one helping their sport or breed club.
Stop bitching about how easy the sport is until YOU get have an overall V score, from a national, in your scorebook.
Start a local club.
Make sure that your club trials are run correctly (good judges and strong helpers).
Go to National event and support them with your pocketbook.
If you see some bullshit going on at a trial document it and be man/woman enough to rat on the bad guys.
vote


----------



## Bart Karmich (Jul 16, 2010)

It's not a sport. To repair it you would have to get everyone involved to agree what it is before you were able to really improve it. It's a test for German Shepherd dogs. As long as it is that, it will always be at odds with people trying to use it for a competitive sport. I guess you could try to look at bass ackwards and say it's a sport and these breeding people are screwing it up with their candy ass show dogs but the fact is it was the breeders game to begin with. If you want to talk about solving the breeding problem, well, that involves a lot more than just fixing Schutzhund.

For sports, for myself, a person has to decide what kind of dog they like and then get into the sport where that kind of dog is going to succeed. Of course if you have a dog that is not quite up to your "ideal" you have to decide if you're going to seek out a more ideal dog or just be content and have fun. My ideal dog is not as flashy or drivey as a Schutzhund dog, but very civil without being hard or sharp. He can work in a muzzle and is capable in the object guard and very good at all defense and guard exercises, defense of handler, back transport etc. To me the long bite is not so important but it is vital to a police dog so there you have another division - personal protection dogs versus police dogs. Schutzhund is for neither type and if it is used for either it will result in compromises. Seriously, how many patrol dogs "out" in the real world. Or how about the value of that calm grip on the street? Personally, my goal is not to fix Schutzhund or anything about the dog world. I just want to train my dog and have fun and the main reason I like the sports is to train with discipline and avoid ppd people banging on my doggy.


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Bart Karmich said:


> It's a test for German Shepherd dogs. As long as it is that, it will always be at odds with people trying to use it for a competitive sport.


Why was schutzhund developed when they already had a bred test?

Years ago I was watching one of those prison shows and the prisoners were racing mice. They were breeding, boasting and bullshitting just like we do in our sports. That's when i came to the realization that if you put two guys in a room together they will find a way to compete. If schutzhund were designed to be part of a breed evaluation, they wouldn't have made a point structure. They would have never called it a sport. They would never have trophies. But they have from the very beginning of the sport. That's because it always has been a sport. I think that people said, "Let's use this sport as an evaluation tool". They didn't say "Let's use this evaluation tool as a sport".

Maybe all the GSD folk are so retarded that they can't use the tool, that they developed, and have sole control of, to evaluate the GSD anymore? Is that true?


----------



## sam wilks (May 3, 2009)

I think you can chose whether or not you want to participate in any of the dog sports. If you don't like something about a particular sport and you feel strongly enough, then it is simple, don't participate. If you are looking for a dog with certain traits, or really in general, you should be looking at breeding programs and not sports. If you like a dog for whatever reason, does it matter if they are titled in schutzhund or any other sport, absolutely not.


----------



## Mike Scheiber (Feb 17, 2008)

Ive been pretty impresses with several of the judges as of recent particularly 2 years ago at the USA Nationals _Gunther Diegel did not give out 1 V score in protection over 100 dogs. JMO Might have been a couple of dogs deserving but the statement he made in doing so sent a clear message. Also the judging I've seen at club and regional levels has gotten tougher in bite work and I'm not talking about precision but about hardness,fight and overall demeanor/ character.
So I'm seeing some welcome changes. I'm sure you can still do some judge shopping at club level . Out club has never done it nor has any reason to fact is we like the tough ones and value there opinions in our critiques and scores written down in our score books.


_


----------



## Oluwatobi Odunuga (Apr 7, 2010)

sam wilks said:


> I think you can chose whether or not you want to participate in any of the dog sports. If you don't like something about a particular sport and you feel strongly enough, then it is simple, don't participate. If you are looking for a dog with certain traits, or really in general, you should be looking at breeding programs and not sports. If you like a dog for whatever reason, does it matter if they are titled in schutzhund or any other sport, absolutely not.


Exactly,
Shutzhund scores should not determine whether or not a dog is bred. The fact is it is a sport and not the best way to evaluate temperament, its during personal training that you do that.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

maggie fraser said:


> Seeing as you are so opinionated Howard, how would you repair it? I diidn't think you did schitzhound?


 Right on both...:razz:


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Don and Bob I understand these points. I guess the old saying that there's always a piece of scrub brush for a scrub pony works here! Chris' points are also good. The AKC tried to bring in their spin to the protection sport, but I never hear of anyone doing it or anything being said about it...why? In looking at some current vids, just the simple tests of gunfire in the BH or the attack out of the blind in the SCH protection being removed to add STRENGTH to the weaker dogs and for the pleasure of the money crowd.

Then you look at some of the upstart sports of SDA and PSA. I can't real warm over some of these tests. A buddy and I talked about that yesterday. Real world testing with streamers, pool noodles, folksdoing the fast walk to you...not real world. The BH test I see as haing some true application, however, I would NEVER leave my dog with someone I didn't know.

It begs to question, "When is there going to be a real 'sport' that pulls all the best together?


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Howard Gaines III said:


> Then you look at some of the upstart sports of SDA and PSA. I can't real warm over some of these tests. A buddy and I talked about that yesterday. Real world testing with streamers, pool noodles, folksdoing the fast walk to you...not real world. The BH test I see as haing some true application, however, I would NEVER leave my dog with someone I didn't know.


Don't know much about SDA, but Mondio uses those objects too along with PSA. The environmental distraction and accessories is just a test for that...environmental distractions, unlike a sterile Schutzhund field. You dump a bucket of tennis balls, have the streamers, or use a plastic shield to test the dog's commitment to the bite. Someone trying to rob your house while you walked in on them may indeed try to throw all sorts of crazy stuff at you, which the dog would need to ignore. Would you like the decoy to be beating on the dog with a real baseball bat or something instead?







It's just not practical. 

When I hear that kind of thing that stuff like PSA or Mondio isn't realistic because of the environmental distractions or accessories can be kind of goofy, well, neither is a full bite suit, amiright? Not too many assailants trying to mug you are going to have huge puffy coats and pants on either...it's all a sport and really, that's okay! Just know the limitations of your sport and if you want to train beyond that into personal protection, it's a free country and you can do so.


----------



## jeff govednik (Jul 31, 2009)

Attack out of the blind is included in AWDF titles. With any sport there are application and limitations. Christopher mad some very good points. If you really want to improve something get involved. I have volunteered for a large number of events and it is amazing how many people's idea of helping is actually just complaining.

Ask somebody to help and see how fast those people hide.


Train you dog for what you need it to do and accept the limitations


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Jeff, any relation to Marcia Govednik?


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

jeff govednik said:


> Attack out of the blind is included in AWDF titles. With any sport there are application and limitations. Christopher mad some very good points. If you really want to improve something get involved. I have volunteered for a large number of events and it is amazing how many people's idea of helping is actually just complaining.
> 
> Ask somebody to help and see how fast those people hide.
> 
> ...


Sounds like a typical club Jeff. A few do all the work, the rest just complain about what was done.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Yeah but....unless you're going to pay people BIG bucks, for anything, they just don't come out! Try and get people to coach youth sports or donate time for a noble cause...ain't happening


----------



## jeff govednik (Jul 31, 2009)

I don't know about that Howard, I volunteer for the Organ bank, The Eye Bank, as well as the dog clubs... just wish some folks would spend time doing stuff instead of just talking about it...not really slammin anyone..just sayin


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Howard said
"The BH test I see as haing some true application, however, I would NEVER leave my dog with someone I didn't know".

The BH was also a part of the dumbing down of Schutzhund. 
Many good dogs in the past wouldn't tolerate being handled by someone else. They weren't "social" enough. ](*,)](*,)](*,)
I't a nice OB exercise but, IMHO, it has nothing to do with a working dog. More a temperment test like the CGC or TT. 
Both of those are "supposed to be" a look at the dog's natural beahviours/temperment but most seeem to feel the need to practice for them.


----------



## Mike Scheiber (Feb 17, 2008)

Bob Scott said:


> Howard said
> "The BH test I see as haing some true application, however, I would NEVER leave my dog with someone I didn't know".
> 
> The BH was also a part of the dumbing down of Schutzhund.
> ...


BH not a title just a look see if dog has some guide ability and temperament


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Mike Scheiber said:


> BH not a title just a look see if dog has some guide ability and temperament



Agreed but it's still required and that might eliminate some serious dogs that may do a good job.


----------



## Mike Scheiber (Feb 17, 2008)

Bob Scott said:


> Agreed but it's still required and that might eliminate some serious dogs that may do a good job.


Like I said before there's Judges I want in my dogs book and some I don't :mrgreen: there's 2 ways to play Schutzhund


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Mike Scheiber said:


> Like I said before there's Judges I want in my dogs book and some I don't :mrgreen: there's 2 ways to play Schutzhund



2x agreement now! ::grin: :wink:


----------



## Tracey Hughes (Jul 13, 2007)

Where in the BH do you ever leave your dog with some one else? In 12+ years I have never once left my dog with some one.

I have put Bs on some very serious, aggressive dogs. With training, that shouldn’t be an issue. That is what I like about Schutzhund, you can still compete with a dog that isn’t out there just playing a game…


The sport itself isn’t as much of an issue to me as the way the training is. You don’t have to water your training down.


----------



## Keith Jenkins (Jun 6, 2007)

While maybe not actually leaving your dog with someone an out of sight tie out is part of the BH. The rules state to have someone with a dog walk by and the judge will usually drop something close to the dog and pick it up.


----------



## Tracey Hughes (Jul 13, 2007)

Thanks Keith..I was just thinking, the sport has really changed since last time I put a BH on a dog a year ago


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Mike Scheiber said:


> BH not a title just a look see if dog has some guide ability and temperament



The BH for me is only 1/2 correct for the evaluation of trainability and temperament. What's useful is the tie out, and the traffic test. Heeling through the group downs and or sits plus the recalls are all something that works in the real world. Where the BH fails though is the long segment of heeling that doesn't test a dogs temperament it only tests the train-ability and memory of the handler. To me that has nothing to do with the dog it's all about the people at that point. 

I've seen beautiful heeling segments where the pretty ponies and handlers just rawked. But then in the traffic test where the crowd converges in on the dog in a group the dogs ears go back and it starts to shake and then is in full flight or flight mode. Those dogs should've been pulled right there as later on in their career they are popping of the sleeve under mental pressure from the decoy and popping off during stick hits. 

The mold was predicted in the traffic test but the dogs went ahead. That I don't understand. 

As well I've seen judging where they are racist against any breed that is not a GSD. Some of the comments that come from these judges critiques about why they come up with these decisions leave me shaking my head. 

Like a Malinois I saw last year I've seen this dog in training and it is an amazing dog.

Trial scenario .. Long bite + committed scary fast dog + young decoy in his 1st or 2nd trial = the trifecta of disaster. Decoy's timing is off he doesn't have the sleeve presented correctly everyone sees it and he faces the dog hoping for the best . The dog goes flying ass over tea kettle gets back up and BOOM back on to the sleeve. Yet the dog was penalized for what was a 'decoy issue' in the critique. Quote "Unfortunately the dog doesn't close his mouth when he is presented the sleeve" :-\" I wanted to stand up and laugh and yell BULLSHIT! It's stuff like that, that makes me go crazy. 

It was so obvious that the decoy was 'off'. The dog was more than committed to the bite before and after the initial contact with the tumble of the dog, the dog still reengaged freakin' hard. This tells me a lot more about the character of that dog than a judges opinion of what was wrong in the exercise through no fault of the dog but the decoy. 

What was interesting in this trial that out of 12+ dogs only 5 were caught correctly on the long bite. That tells me something right there, it is as obvious as the big nose on my face. But the judge didn't see that or he did and erred on the side of the green decoy as to not ruffle any people's feathers? 

So to repair the sport for me .. less emphasis on people and more on the dogs. Test for true working character i.e. not to penalize the minor aesthetic OB pictures of the program. It should be about the dog doing it's job not how pretty the picture of the program it is.


----------



## Dave Martin (Aug 11, 2010)

Howard Gaines III said:


> If you could repair the sport of Schutzhund, what would be your first order of business? I'm thinking SCH, but after checking how some of the tests have been removed, my guess to allow weaker dogs to tilte, I'm starting to ask, "WHY?"


To me the sport revolves heavily around ones' ability to train their dog (hard or soft) to perform all exercises in all 3 phases with precision and control.

I would agree that a weak dog that has been trained phenomenally to go through all the motions but shows a lack of overall strength or courage should not receive a high score and should be graded accordingly. That being said, I also don't believe a very hard and powerful dog that barely makes it through the exercises in a precise and correct fashion should receive high scores either. 

I see no benefit to the sport at large if the routines only allowed the strongest of the strongest dogs to compete. If you have a powerful dog but can't trial him as well as someone else's 'soft' dog, you should be putting a lot more time into your training before attending a trial, IMO. Put the time in and when you trial don't worry, it will be clear how much more serious your dog is in the work than that other dud.. Folks like Bernhard Flinks and his peers have no issue competing with and beating the soft dogs with their hard as nails Police K9s that would live bite in a hearbeat if told to do so.. that's training and control..

I think if you have such a concern you should be aiming to take your dog to the highest of levels of competition (perhaps in German National or World championships) and there you will clearly see that the soft dogs have no shot at the podium no matter how much training they've had.

To me, the answer to the "WHY?" you asked, is because I ultimately want to compete against, and beat, everyone from the local club trials up to the master trainers at the nationals and everyone in between.. I don't care how hard or soft their dogs are, I want MY dog to be more precise and correct in his work. If I lose to a dog that I consider soft, I know I have more work to do.


----------



## Dave Martin (Aug 11, 2010)

Geoff Empey said:


> So to repair the sport for me .. less emphasis on people and more on the dogs. Test for true working character i.e. not to penalize the minor aesthetic OB pictures of the program. It should be about the dog doing it's job not how pretty the picture of the program it is.


This doesn't make sense to me.. Why place less emphasis on one member of the trialing TEAM? You believe an excellent dog with a good handler should beat the great dog with the great handler? To me that's not Schutzhund.. 

If there are some excellent trainers out there fully capable of training their dogs to the highest points of precision under the rulebook, and they are performing these excercises with the strongest of dogs, why should anyone serious about the sport aim to achieve anything less? You either train in the sport to title your dog (which to me is a waste but hey who am I to care?) or to compete and aim for the podium. Those weak dogs aren't taking YOUR points away so if you don't score as well as them stop whining and put the blame where the blame is due.

In the trial example you mentioned, Geoff, that just sounds like a royal crock of an event.. I couldn't agree more that those types of judges/decoys are harmful to the sport but noone makes anyone trial at anytime so that's just doing your homework IMO. I have personally not seen judging/decoying like that at a major event (not to say it doesn't happen, but any sport has it's "_What!? Get the f*ck outta here!_" moments)


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

jeff govednik said:


> I don't know about that Howard, I volunteer for the Organ bank, The Eye Bank, as well as the dog clubs... just wish some folks would spend time doing stuff instead of just talking about it...not really slammin anyone..just sayin


I agree 100% Jeff. And what I have found over the years is that those that complain the loudest and most frequently are those that do nothing once they are put in a position to do something.


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Bob Scott said:


> Howard said
> "The BH test I see as haing some true application, however, I would NEVER leave my dog with someone I didn't know".
> 
> The BH was also a part of the dumbing down of Schutzhund.
> Many good dogs in the past wouldn't tolerate being handled by someone else. They weren't "social" enough.


A dog does not have to be social to pass a BH. They must be under control in a social situation. Do you understand the difference? It's not a temperament test like a TT or CGC. A large part of what the judge is evaluating is the handler's ability to control the dog off of the trial field in the "real world". That is the reason there is a written test for the handler that must be passed before a handler can trial a dog for a BH. 


And as you have been corrected, no one has to handle the dog. So do you still think that it has "dumbed down" the sport? If so, in what way?


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

> The BH for me is only 1/2 correct for the evaluation of trainability and temperament. What's useful is the tie out, and the traffic test. Heeling through the group downs and or sits plus the recalls are all something that works in the real world. Where the BH fails though is the long segment of heeling that doesn't test a dogs temperament it only tests the train-ability and memory of the handler. To me that has nothing to do with the dog it's all about the people at that point.


 It's called the obedience portion for a reason. 



> I've seen beautiful heeling segments where the pretty ponies and handlers just rawked. But then in the traffic test where the crowd converges in on the dog in a group the dogs ears go back and it starts to shake and then is in full flight or flight mode. Those dogs should've been pulled right there as later on in their career they are popping of the sleeve under mental pressure from the decoy and popping off during stick hits.





> The mold was predicted in the traffic test but the dogs went ahead. That I don't understand


 
The BH is a general test for all dogs. Not just the protection breeds. It's also not a judges job to play soothsayer and fail a dog for what it might do in the future. But a judge has the discretion to dismiss a dog for the behavior that you describe. 
. 



> As well I've seen judging where they are racist against any breed that is not a GSD. Some of the comments that come from these judges critiques about why they come up with these decisions leave me shaking my head./quote]





> A bad judge is different than a bad test.
> 
> Like a Malinois I saw last year I've seen this dog in training and it is an amazing dog.
> 
> ...


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

[FONT=&quot]I'm starting to pick up on a generalized theme from this thread and other post on this forum. I'm starting to think that a lot of the criticism about schutzhund is due to ignorance and a lack of exposure. How can a person have an opinion on a sport when they don't have a clue about its entry level test? How can one say that something is broken when they don't know how it works in the first place? [/FONT]


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Christopher Smith said:


> A dog does not have to be social to pass a BH. They must be under control in a social situation. Do you understand the difference? It's not a temperament test like a TT or CGC. A large part of what the judge is evaluating is the handler's ability to control the dog off of the trial field in the "real world". That is the reason there is a written test for the handler that must be passed before a handler can trial a dog for a BH. And as you have been corrected, no one has to handle the dog. So do you still think that it has "dumbed down" the sport? If so, in what way?


OK Chris you lost me!!!
When I did my BH in 2000, the German judge put more on me with a GSN and another guy with a BdF than the GSD folks. His reason was" you have tough breeds and I want to be sure they are stable." THAT has stuck with me...

The standards are for all breeds and done the same. There must be some level of social being in the dog or it can't pass the heeling in and out of a group or the close traffic work!!!

I still agree with Bob, when you water down a program and make it easy for all... even a hamster can pass it. Maybe the reason the CGC is easy to pass, but not for $hitters! I disagree that it's about the handler being able to control the dog. Too many areas were the DOG must be in control of its emotions and wild side!

I see many chain store pet trainers trying to do great things with the dogs that come in there. These dogs couldn't be any more than a fair family pet. The problem as I see it, handlers. Either you lead or the dog does. Too often the dogs are winning at 6 months of age, look at the SPCA books for adoptions. Many are in there due to a lack of training and a lack of social/environmental awareness.


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Howard Gaines III said:


> OK Chris you lost me!!!
> 
> 
> The standards are for all breeds and done the same. There must be some level of social being in the dog or it can't pass the heeling in and out of a group or the close traffic work!!!


Howard, if heeling through a group is the something that takes sociability, then the titled dogs of the past must have *ALL BEEN SOCIAL* because heeling through a group has ALWAYS been a part of the schutzhund test at all levels. 

Looks like you have negated your argument.

BTW, have you ever done a BH or any other schutzhund title?


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

I see reading for understanding isn't your strongest point Chris, try it again sunshine!!!
...sounds like you like you just want to pi$$ on shins. ](*,)

I hear keys rattling...


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Have good day Howard.:-D


----------



## Dave Martin (Aug 11, 2010)

Christopher Smith said:


> [FONT=&quot]I'm starting to pick up on a generalized theme from this thread and other post on this forum. I'm starting to think that a lot of the criticism about schutzhund is due to ignorance and a lack of exposure. How can a person have an opinion on a sport when they don't have a clue about its entry level test? How can one say that something is broken when they don't know how it works in the first place? [/FONT]


I think you're on the money, Chris. To me schutzhund is an extremely demanding sport to train in, not saying more so than others, but very demanding nonetheless.. Anyone who can complain about the tests involved has to be concerned that they're not capable of training a dog to perform in that scenario. 

Sorry you had a bad experience with a poor judge, Howard, and even sorrier if that pushed you out of the sport, but there are shitty schutzhund judges just as much as there are shitty refeeres and umpires. I can't see the logic in saying there has to be some social being to a dog that heels through a group when that is undeniably a training exercise no matter what type of dog.

If you're saying that the real hard dogs out there can't compete in the sport as the rules are outlined than clearly you have never watched (or at least seen video of) any schutzhund competitors trialing dogs that would love nothing more than to be allowed to live bite the decoy and forget their training of targeting the sleeve. 

Unless of course your complaint is just that softer dogs can also compete in the sport, in which case it would seem like you think little league baseball and middle school basketball are dumb because the rules are virtually the same as the MLB and NBA.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Dave Martin said:


> This doesn't make sense to me.. Why place less emphasis on one member of the trialing TEAM? You believe an excellent dog with a good handler should beat the great dog with the great handler? To me that's not Schutzhund..
> 
> If there are some excellent trainers out there fully capable of training their dogs to the highest points of precision under the rulebook, and they are performing these excercises with the strongest of dogs, why should anyone serious about the sport aim to achieve anything less? You either train in the sport to title your dog (which to me is a waste but hey who am I to care?) or to compete and aim for the podium. Those weak dogs aren't taking YOUR points away so if you don't score as well as them stop whining and put the blame where the blame is due.)


So it isn't about the dogs then? It's about the people or is it the points you are saying? I know people want to win and get on the podium and we all evolve as trainers to find better ways of doing things for the particular dog we are working but where is the stronger dog with a weaker trainer? Why do the weak dogs get ahead with the talented trainers in the first place? This is one of the things that need repair. It's unnatural selection of the weakest vs the fittest. 



Dave Martin said:


> In the trial example you mentioned, Geoff, that just sounds like a royal crock of an event.. I couldn't agree more that those types of judges/decoys are harmful to the sport but noone makes anyone trial at anytime so that's just doing your homework IMO. I have personally not seen *judging/decoying like that at a major event *(not to say it doesn't happen, but any sport has it's "_What!? Get the f*ck outta here!_" moments


So why wouldn't competitors want a club trial to *NOT* be a true test of the dog? At least on par with a championship event as per the rules stated in the rule book? To many things are created equally but are not applied equally, that needs repair too. A little bit more consistency would be nice to see across the board. =D> At least people would then have some sort of goal and benchmark to attain instead wanting and waiting to trial under judge 'So and So' as (s)he is a softer judge and likes Dobermans vs the hard ass judge who hates everything except Malinois. (am using the breeds as an example not dissing the breeds) I want to test my dogs and test my team's training too when I trial, and it shouldn't be a cake walk just because it is a club trial.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Christopher Smith said:


> [FONT=&quot]Obviously it didn't drive you crazy enough to stop sitting on the sidelines bitching and complaining and become a judge. Did you run for a spot on the judges committee? [/FONT]


Nope but enough to confirm my thoughts to walk away and not want to compete or train in the sport ..


----------



## Dave Martin (Aug 11, 2010)

Geoff Empey said:


> So it isn't about the dogs then? It's about the people or is it the points you are saying?


No, I don't believe it is about just the dog.. I believe it is about the dog AND handler and their ability to work together as a team to achieve the highest points. 

Believe me Geoff, I have nothing against hard dogs. Like you, I would pick a hard dog over a weak dog every day of the week. But if I have a hard dog and I'm losing to an equal or even lesser handler with a weaker dog, that doesn't tell me there's something wrong with my sport; there's something wrong with my training and I probably should have trained longer and better before deciding to compete. 

If I can start to see that the weaker dogs are beating the stronger dogs on average, all that tells me is that mediocre dog trainers are finding it cute to buy tougher dogs than they are capable of training. 

To me schutzhund is only a test for a dog when you are at a trial watching a particular dog's routines and can see where that dog may be weaker or stronger in his work for your breeding purposes, or whatever your reasons. The Bark & Hold, etc can still paint a picture of a dog's intensity but if the dog is nipping the sleeve, disregarding commands, etc, that handler must only be going for the title and not the podium.


----------



## Eric Shearer (Oct 30, 2008)

*"I think one of the problems is emphasis on drive over general temperant. Things like environmental soundness,natural aggression are ignored and speed and extreme prey drive are over-emphasized, those things are important but do not make a complete protection dog which is what a shutzhund dog should be.
The solution lies with breeders and trainers, there's a limit to how much judges will see on the trial field. The breeders and trainers are the ones that should be identifying the 'complete' dogs and promoting them. Train dogs in prey, defense, with environmental stress, different bite equipment, muzzle work etc and also the dog's temperament off the field, reactions to new stuff etc.
The sport IMO is unlikely to become tougher, its up to breeders to promote the really strong dogs."*

I totally agree with this...
I would also add that this should no longer be a "BREED TEST" as it is used in some circles and to put higher prices on pups / dogs for sale... but call it what it is... A SPORT and nothing more. Like the above states... it is up to the breeders and trainers to educate themselves on what a real working dog is and test and breed accordingly. I have yet to read all of the posts so I may be reiterating things but this is my opinion...
e
JMO
E


----------



## Eric Shearer (Oct 30, 2008)

Christopher Smith said:


> Bring and promote the IPO-V program. It's like a sch-lite title. This is a way to let people come out and play the game at lower level. If they can do that they don't have to lower the standards of sch in order to compete.
> Remove the sch requirements for dogs to be bred or shown.
> Get the European influence out of the clubs in the US.
> If we do those two things you will see a huge change in the sport.
> ...


What he said!!!

Good post Chris!!!
E


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Dave Martin said:


> No, I don't believe it is about just the dog.. I believe it is about the dog AND handler and their ability to work together as a team to achieve the highest points.
> 
> Believe me Geoff, I have nothing against hard dogs. Like you, I would pick a hard dog over a weak dog every day of the week. But if I have a hard dog and I'm losing to an equal or even lesser handler with a weaker dog, that doesn't tell me there's something wrong with my sport; there's something wrong with my training and I probably should have trained longer and better before deciding to compete.


That I can relate too, me I don't have a lot of experience competing in the sport (BH) but have lots of good friends that I train with that do. So I am exposed to it quite a bit by assisting at training days and supporting them at trials. To me it's not so much about hardness or softness but eliminating weak nerved dogs and promote the dogs with the balanced working drives prey vs defense tempered by biddablity that is supposedly what the test/sport was originally about. 

There seems to be a lot of training longer these days any ways even with the teams like you describe. Like it shouldn't take 4 years to put a BH on a dog. But stuff like that happens more often than you think. Not that as you say points to anything wrong with the sport but more so the dog and handler team. It's still somewhat humorous to witness though.


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Geoff Empey said:


> To me it's not so much about hardness or softness but ....


Geoff, with all due respect, who are YOU? And why should anyone in the sport care about your opinion?


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Christopher Smith said:


> Geoff, with all due respect, who are YOU?


Really nobody but a fan of the sport. 



Christopher Smith said:


> And why should anyone in the sport care about your opinion?





Geoff Empey said:


> Nope but enough to confirm my thoughts to walk away and not want to compete or train in the sport ..


Maybe you should think about that statement .. as I'm sure there is lots more not just myself who just walk away, in the bigger picture of things pertaining to the sport. Not that I expect anyone to care any ways.


----------



## jeff govednik (Jul 31, 2009)

Geoff with all due respect you self admittedly have little experience in the sport. Is that not like asking an Amish carpenter about an electrical problem?

All of the sports have their limitations as well as their benefits.

There is more to schutzhund than just points and as you gain experience you learn to read what a good dog is and isnt.

The biggest problem in breeding is breeding points without knowledge of the actual working dogs.

We can choose to learn from each other and become better in our respective diciplines by sharing of knowledge....

Knowledge is power and you can chose to be a flashlight or a lighthouse....

Peace


----------



## Shade Whitesel (Aug 18, 2010)

1) bring back some more challenging jumps. The lack of athleticism of most gsds drives me crazy
2) hold judges accountable when they are inconsistant in judging
3) If you haven't trialed and gotten V scores at Nationals, and maintained that dog, then stop bitching about how easy Sch is and how soft the dogs are. You have no idea what you are talking about.


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Shade Whitesel said:


> 2) hold judges accountable when they are inconsistant in judging


How?


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

For you guys who are defenders of Schutzhund, have you all tried French Ring, Mondioring, PSA, KNPV? This isn't coming from a Schutzhund hater either, cause that was my start into protection sport and with a good dog, the fundamentals of Schutzhund are a fine foundation even for other sports. I'm just curious...


----------



## Dave Martin (Aug 11, 2010)

I have not. I hope to get to a FR club and some trials this season. I'd like to concentrate on Schutzhund at least for the immediate future and maybe cross train with my next dog (or start with my gf's Boxer).


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Maren Bell Jones said:


> For you guys who are defenders of Schutzhund, have you all tried French Ring, Mondioring, PSA, KNPV? This isn't coming from a Schutzhund hater either, cause that was my start into protection sport and with a good dog, the fundamentals of Schutzhund are a fine foundation even for other sports. I'm just curious...



Maren I'm not defending schutzhund; no need for that. Nor do I think anyone on this thread hates schutzhund. How can you hate what you don't know? ;-)

But I've done some French ring and PSA decoy work. I've also done other types of protection tournaments as both a decoy and handler. I've also done AKC obedience and conformation. I've played around with herding. I'm a CGC evaluator. Do you need to know more? And you still won't find me spouting off on the interwebs about those other sports and their "problems". 


What was the point of asking that question?


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Was just wondering what everybody's background was beyond Schutzhund. Cause otherwise people who really like Schutzhund may find they love the suit sports even more. Or not. And that's okay too cause everyone is allowed to have their preferences if they give all a fair shot. Like I prefer PSA over Schutzhund and I've done both for about a year each now (Schutzhund about 5 years ago, PSA currently), but a BH and AD are on my short term goal list for my dog too. I also acknowledge Schutzhund is by far the most widely available bite sport out there and may be all that's available to people.


----------



## Guest (Dec 1, 2008)

Dave Martin said:


> *To me the sport revolves heavily around ones' ability to train their dog (hard or soft) to perform all exercises in all 3 phases with precision and control.*
> 
> I would agree that a weak dog that has been trained phenomenally to go through all the motions but shows a lack of overall strength or courage should not receive a high score and should be graded accordingly. That being said, I also don't believe a very hard and powerful dog that barely makes it through the exercises in a precise and correct fashion should receive high scores either.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mike Scheiber (Feb 17, 2008)

Shade Whitesel said:


> hold judges accountable





Christopher Smith said:


> How?


Don't invite the shitter to judge our triles and send video and bitch to the organization who knows?
Fuking ring people ought to shut the fuk up and worry about themselves and quit kidding themselves that the same things that have gone wrong in our sport cant happen in there's seems like any one of you fuks that has walked on a field or watched ring has puppies shooting out of every direction imaginable. 
Tell me Geoff since you seem to be dog sport Moses how many people "give me a percentage guess if you have to" of the people doing ring are making puppies.
By the way one of the nicest MONSTER French Ring Mals Ive ever had the pleasure to watch work is sitting here in Minnesota never had a breeding go figure


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

Why not have 3 judges per event and average the scores? (know its not cost effective but my work for the larger trials)

On another note...I think the the most satisfying thing in dog training is training the dog to do the opposite of what it really wants to do and look like it really wants to do it. Making the very weak or the very strong dog be competive in any venue is almost as satisfying as winning the event.


----------



## Gerry Grimwood (Apr 2, 2007)

Mike Scheiber said:


> Don't invite the shitter to judge our triles and send video and bitch to the organization who knows?
> Fuking ring people ought to shut the fuk up and worry about themselves and quit kidding themselves that the same things that have gone wrong in our sport cant happen in there's seems like any one of you fuks that has walked on a field or watched ring has puppies shooting out of every direction imaginable.
> Tell me Geoff since you seem to be dog sport Moses how many people "give me a percentage guess if you have to" of the people doing ring are making puppies.
> By the way one of the nicest MONSTER French Ring Mals Ive ever had the pleasure to watch work is sitting here in Minnesota never had a breeding go figure


Calm down big fella...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keP77EXcAcE&feature=fvsr


----------



## Shade Whitesel (Aug 18, 2010)

I've played in french ring sport for about a year. Reik has his Ring 1 as well as Sch 3 and just recently failed his first leg of ring 2. (broke the line on the last exercise.) I love ring and I love Sch for completely different reasons. They are completely different.
I don't know how to make the judges accountable. Maybe if we did have 3 judges judging, that would help. Maybe if we have less dogs to judge in one trial, that would help. I don't know. But one judge may love a dog's guard, another may hate it. Some judges like silent guards, some don't and won't point them the same. Some judges like the way that a gsd tracks, and may not judge a mal's style the same. I don't know how to make it consistant...


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

will fernandez said:


> Why not have 3 judges per event and average the scores? (know its not cost effective but my work for the larger trials)


That's been looked into a lot but it's cost prohibitive. It cost about $500+ to have a native judge and about $1200+ to bring one in. It would cost the club a minimum of $1500 to hold a club trial. That's more than the entire years income for a lot of clubs.


----------



## Jennifer Coulter (Sep 18, 2007)

Jody Butler said:


> Dave Martin said:
> 
> 
> > *To me the sport revolves heavily around ones' ability to train their dog (hard or soft) to perform all exercises in all 3 phases with precision and control.*
> ...


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Shade Whitesel said:


> I don't know. But one judge may love a dog's guard, another may hate it. Some judges like silent guards, some don't and won't point them the same. Some judges like the way that a gsd tracks, and may not judge a mal's style the same. I don't know how to make it consistant...


You have to remember, schutzhund is rated first then points are given from within that rating. So this means that you can have a dog that is technically perfect get a lower rating than a dog that makes a minor mistake in that same exercise. So for instance a dog can come in the blind sit, never touches the helper, and gives nice rhythmic barking. It a very good barking and the dog gets a a rating of Very Good. The next dog comes into the blind at breakneck speed, starts barking before he is in the blind, barks like a hound from hell and touches the helper with his paw once. The judge sees that this dog dog is really doing something special and gives the dog a rating of Excellent. The Very Good (SG) rating gets .5 points deducted. The Excellent (V) rating has 0 points deducted. Do you see how a dog that is technically correct and never makes a mistake can lose to a dog that makes mistakes throughout the trial? Do you see how power and drive are evaluated?


On top of that you have the fact that no two judges see things the same. And believe me when I tell you that what a judges sees on the field can be very different than what is seen from the stands. Also what is V to one judge is a low SG to another. 


We also need to look at the organization the judge is licensed with. Each club has some latitude in judges and each put emphasis on the things that they feel are need in their breeds. I like this. 


I judge a judge not by the scores he gives but by how the dogs are placed at the end of the day. The best dog should be in first place the worst dog in last. I'm cool with any judge that can do that.

And then we have to say that some people just suck at their jobs.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Mike Scheiber said:


> Don't invite the shitter to judge our triles and send video and bitch to the organization who knows?
> Fuking ring people ought to shut the fuk up and worry about themselves and quit kidding themselves that the same things that have gone wrong in our sport cant happen in there's seems like any one of you fuks that has walked on a field or watched ring has puppies shooting out of every direction imaginable.
> Tell me Geoff since you seem to be dog sport Moses how many people "give me a percentage guess if you have to" of the people doing ring are making puppies.
> By the way one of the nicest MONSTER French Ring Mals Ive ever had the pleasure to watch work is sitting here in Minnesota never had a breeding go figure


I don't have puppies shooting out of every direction imaginable. That sounds rather painful.  :lol:

Plus there's plenty of people breeding their good but not great club level dogs in Schutzhund too...if you added up the percentages of people that do ring or ring-like sports like PSA, the percentage of people breeding MIGHT be higher than the percentage of people doing Schutzhund, but...dare I say it...there seems to be less really serious people in your average Schutzhund club than in your average ring/PSA club and they tend to be smaller clubs too. *Most* total newbies that have sporty pets that are probably not interested in breeding tend to start in Schutzhund, not ring/PSA. That's not necessarily saying Schutzhund's "easier," it's just what's more available. .Most people don't form a French or Mondio or PSA club out of the blue as Schutzhund's cheaper in start up (much of the equipment is similar, but $150 for a sleeve vs $1500 for a suit...). That's totally my subjective opinion though in my state (central Missouri and St. Louis area). *YMMV in your area/club.*


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

Fuking Mike Scheiber said:


> Fuking ring people ought to shut the fuk up and worry about themselves and quit kidding themselves that the same things that have gone wrong in our sport cant happen in there's seems like any one of you fuks that has walked on a field or watched ring has puppies shooting out of every direction imaginable.
> Tell me Geoff since you seem to be dog sport Moses how many people "give me a percentage guess if you have to" of the people doing ring are making puppies.
> By the way one of the nicest MONSTER French Ring Mals Ive ever had the pleasure to watch work is sitting here in Minnesota never had a breeding go figure


What are talking about? You are being incoherent, this makes no sense Mike. Who cares if my sport is Ringsport really, there is a reason for that. I said it earlier in the thread, to bad you can't see that. But instead just go on a like an elitist flap mouth telling people to shut the **** up. Very helpful. =D>

Good luck with your repair job, have a nice day.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

will fernandez said:


> Why not have 3 judges per event and average the scores? (know its not cost effective but my work for the larger trials)
> 
> On another note...I think the the most satisfying thing in dog training is training the dog to do the opposite of what it really wants to do and look like it really wants to do it. Making the very weak or the very strong dog be competive in any venue is almost as satisfying as winning the event.


Will, we do that in waterfowl decoy carving comps.
3 judges, hidden score card, best working decoy which is simple in design beats out the show stuff!


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Geoff Empey said:


> Maybe you should think about that statement .. as I'm sure there is lots more not just myself who just walk away, in the bigger picture of things pertaining to the sport. Not that I expect anyone to care any ways.


Why should someone care? You're happy in your sport. I'm happy in mine. No big deal. Everybody is happy.

Listen Jeff, this is not a religion. No one is going to bang on your door Saturday morning try to convince you that you are going to go to heaven if you play the sport that they play. If you want to play then you are more than welcome to come play. If you don't that's cool too.


----------



## maggie fraser (May 30, 2008)

Folks really ought to exhibit a little more humour here and there you know, it would help. All this bitch slapping talk could give the sport a bad name like gay for instance \\/.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

I have mellowed in old age and I don't know that it necessarily needs "repairing". 

On an individual basis, you get out what you put into it, right?


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

susan tuck said:


> On an individual basis, you get out what you put into it, right?


Right! That's one of the great things about schutzhund. It is what you make of it.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

maggie fraser said:


> Folks really ought to exhibit a little more humour here and there you know, it would help. All this bitch slapping talk could give the sport a bad name like gay for instance \\/.


I am actually gay only once or twice a week, the rest is just OB :-o


----------



## Eric Shearer (Oct 30, 2008)

Nothing needs repairing in the sport of Schutzhund when it is done like this!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6w_o5OTvQQ


----------

