# aggression (moved from Dominance training thread)



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Erik Berg said:


> Regarding the BR malinois that was posted,
> (addition for referrence *http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5I9vgOx9xFM*
> I didn´t see any behaviour I would call aggression, intensity yes, but not aggression. This is more fightingdrive for me, a dog that enjoys to bite and struggle but without having a serious or aggresive intention, even if there may be a thin line when a more playfull behaviour escalates into a more serious behaviour. If we should talk about aggression I think there must be a more serious mindset in the dog, and then it´s also quite easy to see.
> 
> ...


Erik..this could be a good topic to explore for sure, as your repsonse to my posting of the video, is very similar to the ones I got from the Doberman IPO people that I showed it to...except they posted videos of dobermans "showing aggression" in IPO training.



> This is easy to see the dog are showing some aggression,
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7GzsgcKqbM


Yes it is very easy to see that the dog is "displaying" some aggression here, I can agree with that 100%.

I watched all of the videos that they have on their channel, of that dog. These are the 2 that show the biting/fighting behaviors.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMJlhjRGg4U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9xLvrs7mkI

I honestly can say that I saw nothing in the biting, that would lead me to believe that the dog is bringing much of that aggression into his biting behavior.



> Another clear example, the dog gets more serious as the "treath" comes closer,
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sI30UHWbtuE


I can also see the agression "display" very clearly here as well. The dog is taking this as a serious threat, and is seriously dispaying some aggression to try to scare off "the threat". I can also see that when the dog is cut loose and allowed to engage "the threat", he DOES NOT do so in any serious manner, he does not bring that aggression into play when allowed to engage. 

I think many people are only looking at "displays" of aggression, and assuming at times that the dogs are "serious", when in fact many of those dogs are merely using aggressive display tactics to attempt to drive of a threat, it is serious threat in dogs mind, and is taught to show aggressive behavior to drive off the threat., in itself I dont see anything negative about this, but that is not how EVERYONE trains dogs, some people train dogs to not feel threatened so much, and put the aggression into the dogs final behavior to dealing with an adversary, into the biting and fighting. Some people want the dog to dive in headfirst and bite with serious intent, not "show" aggression. Is that any less serious? or aggressive?, a dog does not have to feel really threatened and "display" much aggression, or be in defensive mindset to bring his aggression into play while working.

THere are literally tons and tons of police and military working dogs, and sport dogs that bring their aggression into the work, that do not really show "displays of aggression", they display the use of the aggression in the work, if that makes sense. Many dogs are not taught to "display" aggression while working, but still bring that aggression into the work..

here is video of police type dog biting guy in hidden pants or leg sleeve.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZ12WunSpS4
I see no aggressive "display" attempted by the dog to drive off a threat, I see a dog that is engaging a person, agressively in a serious manner, that the dog may or may not even view as as threat to him at all. Do I think that the dog would have bitten Tim's leg if he did not have hidden equipment on? yes I do.

What about that video I posted leads you to believe that the dog is not approaching that bite in a serious manner, or that it may be bordering on the line of playful behavior, just curious? 

What could possibly have gone differently in what the video shows (the set-up), that would display a more serious mindset?

I realize the dog is biting, and biting equipment, and the dog was trained in a dogsport. If the dog was biting hidden equipment, or even biting a person for real in the very same fashion, would that somehow then alter the perception of whether it was serious or not? Lets imagine that is a police dog, biting a real person without equipment in the same fashion for a moment, would the assessment still be that the dog is not using his aggression?

Is that the difference? that the dog is actually biting? instead of "displaying" his aggression?

aggression is one part of a package of the dog, a dog simply cannot do what that dog is doing without possessing aggression, in my opinion anyhow, I see it expressing itself in the fighting behavior. If someone sees that dog as not approaching that in about as serious of an aggressive fashion as possible, given what was shown, I will have to disagree, again keeping in mind the dog is not biting an unprotected man.

I think aggression is a mindset, serious in manner, as you do as well, from your wording, although I can also see it being put into action, that is often not visibly put on display with tons of energy put into trying to scare off a threat that is percieved... 

Aggression is tossed about as a term to mean many different things to many different people concerning dogs and the work they do. 

The American Heritage Dictionary defined aggression as “the initiation of *unprovoked* hostilities”. 

Armin Winkler defines it this way, which I agree with.

“Aggression is a state of emotional excitement that will lead an individual to perpetrate violence upon another”

I just dont see that as equating always to a dog responding with a "threat display.


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

That Wibo dog is passive biting in pure prey, IMO however it is a form of serious aggression as is the Mal vid you posted, prey behavior is very serious shit for the animal.


This is prey behavior:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMJlhjRGg4U

When the dog is on hold it is displaying low level non biting aggression (in fight/defense). 


This again is prey behaviour:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9xLvrs7mkI

This Vid is more what I see as 'serious directed aggression with intent'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76sMUoSGghw

This:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sI30UHWbtuE

is linked to this:

http://www.briardworld.com/working/swedTT.html

and is a correct response as far as I can tell, it's pure what is the dog going to do. It is however serious aggression and the dog is emitting 'high level non biting aggression'



> What could possibly have gone differently in what the video shows (the set-up), that would display a more serious mindset?
> 
> I realize the dog is biting, and biting equipment, and the dog was trained in a dogsport. If the dog was biting hidden equipment, or even biting a person for real in the very same fashion, would that somehow then alter the perception of whether it was serious or not? Lets imagine that is a police dog, biting a real person without equipment in the same fashion for a moment, would the assessment still be that the dog is not using his aggression?
> 
> Is that the difference? that the dog is actually biting? instead of "displaying" his aggression?


In my opinion this dog has been trained to 'shut up and bite' something I use in training. It is most certainly very serious in intent. 
Like I said before I don't know this dogs training but will say from that clip I would suggest this behavior has been trained USING the dogs prey drive and intensifying it, by for example lifting from a pup, putting up an ever increasing 'battle' for the tug/sleeve/win, (harder wins) giving it a "I'm gonna hold on and kill this sleeve/arm/human before it escapes" mindset, and it being very competitive in nature. 
I could be wrong but either way that dog is serious as fark and has very serious violent aggressive intentions .
Main problem with that clip is just that, it's only a clip, who knows what went on just before.

What could have been different in the set up?

Dude in the bite suit could have come out of nowhere and we could have seen the dogs natural reaction (or as natural as you can get with training)

Fact is you can only gauge a dogs 'real' aggressive nature by testing it when it is green, that will tell you what type of dog it is and is going to be.

Like Koehlers method and the method many PP/Military/PD trainers use to select a sub adult dog.
You have to set that dog up for a fall and see if it lands on it's feet.


----------



## Haz Othman (Mar 25, 2013)

Matt Vandart said:


> That Wibo dog is passive biting in pure prey, IMO however it is a form of serious aggression as is the Mal vid you posted, prey behavior is very serious shit for the animal.
> 
> 
> This is prey behavior:
> ...


 

Is there a link with a good description to the Keohler method your talking about? I can find stuff on training but not the test method.


----------



## Erik Berg (Apr 11, 2006)

Joby, even if a dog is not showing aggresion in the work in a given sport or trainingscenario it doesn´t mean he lacks it, maybe it´s just not something needed or developed in training. I suppose most train for a confident dog that shouldn´t feel he is under serious treath when the training is finsihed, have to differ between testing and training/competition also. There aren´t really much treath a dog needs respond too in a sportcompetition he has seen over and over again. The SCH GSD was just to show some obvious aggresion, he like most dogs are not entering a trial showing only aggresion, but that some dogs in competitions are more "playfull" than others I guess you agree on, a better video of him showing what some like in IPO but may be not important in other venues,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOvKzD6S44w&feature=youtu.be

But for me a dog that is happily anticipating a bite, and not showing much if any aggresion both before,on and after the bite is not in an "aggresive" or serious mindset. Even if he may also have those qualities. If such dogs is perfectly fine also for policework I guess would be the intressting question, or if the ideal dogs needs high prey and fightingdrive, but we can´t neglect defencedrive and aggression totally. Aggression for me is linked to defencedrive over what the dog feel is important to defend, the goal is for the "enemy" to go away or give up, if a dog defends something I guess he do it with a serious mindset and not do it in a more excited and anticipating mindset that is common for many sportdogs.

Intensity and shaking on the bite doesn´t mean a dog is in an aggresive mindset, this is more related to play for me, you see many dog does that but are lacking a more serious attitude overall. However, I´m not saying a high fightdriven dog is lacking aggression or will not escalate his aggression if needed, maybe more correct to say some dog on the bite are more playfull but intense others see it as a more serious "game". It´s the overall personality of the dog that matters, not aggresion/defence on one side and prey/fightingdrive on the other.

Quite many sportdogs look like this, likes to bite and shake, but I see no seriousness before and after the bite, and this dog obviously lacks something that makes it run on the end, was not the only dog in that trial that did. Not doubting other dog may look similar but will not run away. but if this dog hadn´t run would he still be a dog that look serious or aggressive for you joby?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMR2MwU5O6s


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen (Mar 29, 2006)

Matt Vandart said:


> That Wibo dog is passive biting in pure prey, .


No prey. Wibo have a way to look in your eyes to intimidate you, and keeps doing it while he chruses you. But only the one who met him personal or took a bite from him will know and recognize it.


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

Selena van Leeuwen said:


> No prey. Wibo have a way to look in your eyes to intimidate you, and keeps doing it while he chruses you. But only the one who met him personal or took a bite from him will know and recognize it.


Cool, like I said, problem with these vids is they are just clips of a moment in the dogs training. I'm willing to take your word for it.


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen (Mar 29, 2006)

Matt Vandart said:


> Cool, like I said, problem with these vids is they are just clips of a moment in the dogs training. I'm willing to take your word for it.


Thats right. With vids you can't see into the dogs eyes and his expression. 
Better if Tim was around to tell about what he experienced. ;-)

Dick


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Matt Vandart said:


> That Wibo dog is passive biting in pure prey, IMO however it is a form of serious aggression as is the Mal vid you posted, prey behavior is very serious shit for the animal.


Pure Prey? I think that I must be viewing these videos through a different lense than you are, or looking at the terms much differently. 

Matt, how much time have you spent being a training decoy? just curious..ever work with police dogs?



> In my opinion this dog has been trained to 'shut up and bite' something I use in training. It is most certainly very serious in intent.
> Like I said before I don't know this dogs training but will say from that clip I would suggest this behavior has been trained USING the dogs prey drive and intensifying it, by for example lifting from a pup, putting up an ever increasing 'battle' for the tug/sleeve/win, (harder wins) giving it a "I'm gonna hold on and kill this sleeve/arm/human before it escapes" mindset, and it being very competitive in nature.
> 
> I could be wrong but either way that dog is serious as fark and has very serious violent aggressive intentions .
> Main problem with that clip is just that, it's only a clip, who knows what went on just before.


What went on just before the mali video was an NVBK training session.

What went on before the Wibo video, I am have no clue, I assume what went on, is that Tim was told to sit in the chair, and the dog was brought out of the kennel to bite him.

Similar video with Spike, working police dog. The one that follows is also Spike. You tell me if after watching them, you still see pure prey.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czDY6LICKtM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTUwVWO8qO0

If you still see pure prey, we are just going to disagree I guess, and if you see something more than pure prey, what changed your interpretation?



> What could have been different in the set up?
> 
> Dude in the bite suit could have come out of nowhere and we could have seen the dogs natural reaction (or as natural as you can get with training)


that would of course be a different thing altogether, I agree.



> Fact is you can only gauge a dogs 'real' aggressive nature by testing it when it is green, that will tell you what type of dog it is and is going to be.
> Like Koehlers method and the method many PP/Military/PD trainers use to select a sub adult dog.
> You have to set that dog up for a fall and see if it lands on it's feet.


Are you saying you cant test a dog that is not a green dog and see what he is, and what he will be? That you can no set up a trained to see if he will fall and land on his feet? IF that is what you are saying, I will have to disagree here as well.. 

Performing or testing after training shows you what the dog will be, testing green dogs gives you an idea of what the dog should be like, but not what he will be when it is all said and done.

Those trainers that select dogs, wash dogs out all the time that passed initial testing as green dogs.



Erik Berg said:


> Joby, even if a dog is not showing aggresion in the work in a given sport or trainingscenario it doesn´t mean he lacks it, maybe it´s just not something needed or developed in training. I suppose most train for a confident dog that shouldn´t feel he is under serious treath when the training is finsihed, have to differ between testing and training/competition also. There aren´t really much treath a dog needs respond too in a sportcompetition he has seen over and over again. The SCH GSD was just to show some obvious aggresion, he like most dogs are not entering a trial showing only aggresion, but that some dogs in competitions are more "playfull" than others I guess you agree on, a better video of him showing what some like in IPO but may be not important in other venues,
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOvKzD6S44w&feature=youtu.be
> 
> ...


We will have to disagree on the theory that aggression is only linked to defense drive, aggression comes from many sources. 

We will also have to disagree on whether the dog in the video I posted is bringing any aggression into that work with him, or whether he is working in pure prey, and if he is being playful or not. 

and/or if dogs that are not showing outward signs of defense or aggression makes a good police dog.. Most all of the best police dogs I have seen and worked, have always approached the biting in an enthusiastic manner, showing very little overt signs of defensive stress, before during and after biting.

If you want to talk about figthing behavior/drive, you simply cannot get dogs to that mindset, without the dogs bringing aggression into the work, in my opinion. Good fighting behaviors are a mix of a bunch of things, that cannot be achieved through prey drive only, of course the dogs are taught to be very serious in the work, with defense drive tapped into and they still approach the work happily and enthusiastically.

The video you showed of the mondioring, I cant really say much in relation to what we are talking about. A bunch of dogs got ran off that day, whether they were serious or aggressive dogs I cannot really say. All I can say is that ANY dog can most likely be ran by the right guy, especially if he is not trained and exposed to certain things. A'tim failed his first Korung attempt.

What I can say is that in my experience and that of others that are far more experienced than me, dogs that do not approach the work in an enthusiatic manner, and once that show more outward signs of defense in apprehension or biting, or work primarily in or from defense, are almost always the weaker dogs.

Yes I think we agree that fightdrive/good fighting behaviors is what we are seeing, but I just dont think it is possible to get that level of that behavior without aggression,I think good fighting behaviors require showing good aggression.

Of course dogs will naturally "display" more aggression when defending something, or they feel threatened, especially while being restrained, and not biting anything. that is a given. and of course any good dog can also be trained to show some pretty impressive displays of aggression as well, if that is required or desired. whether or not those displays actually mean much or how real they actually are in certain regards, depends...


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Selena van Leeuwen said:


> Thats right. With vids you can't see into the dogs eyes and his expression.
> Better if Tim was around to tell about what he experienced. ;-)
> 
> Dick


Dick, while you are training your police dogs, what % of the training would you say is putting the dogs into a "defensive" state of mind?

Or anyone else that is training police apprehension or DP dogs of any kind?

I assume that developing the kind of fighting behaviors seen in the dogs, are developed using some forms of defense, but how much for the type of dogs that I am discussing here...


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

Sorry this post is so long, I tried to cut it down the best I could in order to retain its point.



Joby Becker said:


> Pure Prey? I think that I must be viewing these videos through a different lense than you are, or looking at the terms much differently.
> 
> Matt, how much time have you spent being a training decoy? just curious..ever work with police dogs?
> 
> ...


Ok I have worked as a decoy yes, and probably not on dogs as 'serious' in nature as we are talking here or requiring as serious a nature as a result of the application chosen for them.
Also I have no 'formal training' in a military, police or sporting sense, I learned form a family tradition for PPD's. which started generations back.
Now I am the first to admit there may be/are holes in my knowledge of both training and interpretation of events which is why I am here to learn from people who are more experienced than me, I wasn't the best listener when I was a kid, lol, and undoubtedly there were holes in the knowledge of my 'mentor'. I wish to know that I am doing things correctly and seeing things correctly which is why I am so open about willingness to be proven wrong by order of detailed explanation.
this is essential if I am to succeed in my new path of sport.

However I have helped train dogs and independently trained a number of my own dogs using this knowledge and those dogs (past tense) have been tested in real life with positive results (for me and the dog anyway, lol) whether through luck rather than judgement remains to be seen.
I have also continued to assimilate any and all information on the matter in hand from as many sources as possible and from my own learning processes with my dogs.
Most of my first hand knowledge has come from old school retired or dead PP and working trials trainers, so I could easily be 'behind the times' as I think chris was eluding to in the other thread.
In short I am 'Micheal Murphy' just a bit more progressed with a bit more experience.
A PP dog that defaults to bite is IMO a liability, yes the dog should be trained to default to bite in certain specific circumstances and stimuli but a dog that goes out looking for a bite 100%, i.e combative in nature, all of the time is not what I look for myself.
*That is not to say that a dog that defaults to bite and loves to initiate combat is not desirable for other applications or in fact other interpretations of what a PPD should be, which is my alternative view of what the spike, wibbo and NBVK dog are up to, if it is not out of prey.
again I don't know hat came before this, I don't mean just before but rather the dogs prior experiences.*

On the point of prey. People seem to react negatively to the idea their or someone else dog is biting out of prey.
Prey IMO as I have stated before is a very serious matter and drive. Great things can be achieved in training through harnessing and developing prey drive. Alot of people I talk to see prey drive as all barking and fast movements and not very serious, generally what admitedly low level 'fighting behaviors' are. If you look at prey behaviors in nature they are fluid, sometimes slow, also very rapid. generally silent, sometimes noisy but *always* very intensely aggressive and serious in intent.

I also don't believe a dog operates "purely in prey' or "purely in fight/defense" 


It will follow set rules which are fluidly emitted when in 'prey mode'.

Stalk/eye (hunt), chase, grab/hold, Kill, (eat) 

Eat being the end goal, the rest being necessary preliminary behaviors that drive the dog towards that goal.
Notice there is no 'bark, growl, snarl snap and bullshit' in this very much scientifically studied pattern of behaviors.

These are the behaviors the Wibbo and Spike dogs are emitting before the bite (IMO) but their goal is combative in motivation, rather than hunger motivated, using 'prey' behaviors to seek that combat (fight) and grab/hold and kill (shaking) to carry the goal out.

Going back to the fluidity of 'aggressive biting behaviors' in wild or untrained canids.
The animal doesn't think to itself 'oh i'm in prey mode I better stick to it'
If it gets hold of the prey (which could be much larger than it) a number of 'drives' will kick in, flipping through these drives fluidly. 
The prey may put up a fight (it too is in survival mode) and the dog will need to tap into fight/fight defense 'drives' or mode, but the kill will come out of prey drive, such behaviors are illustrated most clearly and intensely in the NBVK Mal video, forceful sustained hold to asphyxiate the prey (hence the snorting noise or breathing in the equipment) and shaking to brake bones/spinal cord, tear muscles etc and generally make the prey (opponent) give up the fight.


After writing all that I have started to think we should not be discussing the behaviors emitted but rather the motivation behind the behaviors, in which case I agree entirely that the WIbbo and Spike dogs are motivated out of a love of initiating combat and winning and quite probably the NBVK dog, but will not concede at this point that they are emitting purely prey behaviors in order to satisfy this motivation.

@ everyone- Feel free to flame, nullify or ridicule this post, but please do so in longer than one sentence post's like in the other thread and if you disagree please detail the reasons you do and explain the alternative, so I may Learn from this. I will not learn from more questions and references to vague sentences like 'I will tell you what such and such behavior is not' 
Please state what 'such and such behavior' .........IS


----------



## Erik Berg (Apr 11, 2006)

Joby, to make it easy I think we can differ between a dog that is biting/attacking from a more anticipating/happy mindset, and a dog that are biting because he has a more serious intention with doing so, based on the situation and the dog´s character and training. Confident dog is what we want, I´m not talkingt about dogs who lack confidence and prey/fightingdrive, but is entuastic biting thru prey/fightingdrive enough when the dog really feel a threath or is working outside the pattern of a sport with sleeves/suits and a known pattern?

If we take a dog like spike or wibo, if they would meet an aggresive person on the street, let´s say someone who smacks the dog hard or similar, or if someone threathen them hard. Would they then not show at least some display of aggresion before biting, a growl, bark, teeth or at least an angry serious look in their eyes? I guess dick knows how they are outside a more familiar and less treathening sport/trainingsituation.

Wouldn´t you agree that a ringdog like this one is not showing so much aggression and serious mind in his work, if you look at his overall attitude,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oC5w2oHlVNw

If we compare to these dogs I think they show more of a serious overall attitude, if we judge the dog only what we can see,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7eCahtU3l4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJr2VoF75nQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_bukMelpd8


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

Dog bites hurt. Prey, defensive, etc. as long as the dog gets there and does the job. They hurt. Training and genetics make it so. The rest of this discussion is for determining whether a dog will bite a man without equipment. A guess until you take it from sport to real. 

Prey=dead bunny or squirrel or whatever. No less dead because the dog chase catch kill, vs. defensive biting. The difference may keep the dog alive longer, but the bites hurt either way


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

Selena van Leeuwen said:


> No prey. Wibo have a way to look in your eyes to intimidate you, and keeps doing it while he chruses you. But only the one who met him personal or took a bite from him will know and recognize it.


Thanks Selina

I always contend you cannot 100% evaluate a dog from a video. The crush of the bite is not documented, the aggresive breathing, and, and, and.


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

Beaten to death...but I agree with you Matt


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

Lol, what?


----------



## Gregory Doud (Nov 10, 2008)

Here's my two cents. I think how dogs fight with a dominate offensive mindset is situational. And, for sure, both ways need to be taught if the dog is going to get a complete education in protection work. 

For example, let's take aggressive barking. IMO, there are two ways a dog can overpower a decoy with their barking: 

1. They can bark aggressively primarily with a prey mindset to get a flight or fight response. In sport, they want to bait the helper into moving so they can bite the suit or sleeve and grapple with him. 
2. They can bark aggressively to keep their adversarial opponent at a distance and to warn them of impending danger if they do come closer. Showing that they are prepared to fight that person if that's what it rises to. 

Both types of barking come from an active, dominant mind with the intent to overpower their foe. But, with different thinking on the dog's part. Both show a willingness to fight if that's what it amplifies to. 

If the dog wants something and feels dominant, then he will bark aggressively to get it. The purpose of their barking is to obtain and possess what they want. With this type of thinking they bark aggressively to flush out their prey or to stimulate their prey into movement. Basically, the barking is to make their opponent froggy because they are effected by it. This type of barking is very pushy and dominant if the dog is feeling confident and thinks like this. In IPO, I think the best kind of prey barking is for them to be telling the helper to "Give me the sleeve or I will flippin' bite you!" Sort of like a person with presence coming up to you and telling you in an aggressive tone to hand over your wallet or I will mug you. And, he will if you don't hand over your wallet. This attitude creates a flight or fight response from the decoy. Either way (fight or flight) the dog gets to bite and fight the decoy and gets their drive satisfaction. Meaning that the helper always gives a fight or flight response and gives them the sleeve because he is intimidated and doesn't want to get bit anywhere else - which was the drive goal of their barking. This is how I train my dogs and want them to think. Again, the purpose of this barking is to intimidate the person into giving them what they want (bite and fight). It does come from an aggressive and dominate mindset. 

Of course, if the dog is begging or asking for something then they are not feeling dominate but subordinate. And, this type of barking will be obvious to the trained eye. 

If the person is not wearing any protective gear or the dog doesn't want anything that person has then their barking will be to warn them of impending danger if they do come closer. Basically, civil training - it's all about fighting the person for real as they are not looking to bite equipment - even if the equipment is present. This comes with a dog having some sharpness or being trained in suspicion. It is not necessarily born of fear. It's a dog being prepared to fight a person without any equipment if that's what it escalates to. The purpose of this barking is also offensive and dominate. This type of barking is to intimidate the person to elect to not come any closer and to leave. Make the person submit.

Again, if the dog is barking because he wants to avoid the confrontation then their body posture and the way they bark will be much different than a dog who displays a confident attitude and is feeling dominate.

What is important to me is the mindset BEFORE the bite. If he bites with the intent to overpower and has an active dominate mind then he will bite with serious intentions. Otherwise, the dog will probably bite a helper the same way he bites a tug while playing with his handler. 

I believe good working dogs are situational and require verbal and/or physical signals to perform their tasks reliably without creating a dog that is danger to society (sport field, police car, bite suit, sound of sirens, turn on command, etc.). - Greg


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

aggression with a prey mind set...for me that is the ideal for police work....

For example ...through training..teaching the dog to know that the hunt will lead to bite....dog searches.. prey building as he searches...locates suspect...barking commences as aggression builds...suspect flees or fights... dog apprehends ...simple sequence that is magnified through aggression training..


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

will fernandez said:


> aggression with a prey mind set...for me that is the ideal for police work....


I think that is the ideal for IPO also.


----------



## Gregory Doud (Nov 10, 2008)

will fernandez said:


> aggression with a prey mind set...for me that is the ideal for police work....
> 
> For example ...through training..teaching the dog to know that the hunt will lead to bite....dog searches.. prey building as he searches...locates suspect...barking commences as aggression builds...suspect flees or fights... dog apprehends ...simple sequence that is magnified through aggression training..


Yep. If the dog is sent to hunt the bad guy the drive you want him working in is primarily prey. With that mindset, the dog will bark aggressively to make the person froggy and into a fight or flight response so he can reach his drive goal (apprehend him). - Greg


----------



## Gregory Doud (Nov 10, 2008)

Christopher Smith said:


> I think that is the ideal for IPO also.


 
I, myself, don't train this way and believe it's imperative to teach both ways. There are six confrontations between the helper and dog in an IPO III trial and only two make the decoy froggy (into a fight or flight response where the dog is allowed to bite). The other four I believe the dog must know that the helper electing not to fight means he is submitting and choosing not to combat him because he is afraid of mixing it up with him. With this thinking, the dog reaches his drive goal. IMO, if the dog is working primarily in prey drive, that's where control problems come in because the dog might not know that he defeated the decoy with his guarding as it didn't elicit a fight or flight response and wants to take a cheap shot to get drive satisfaction. In fact, not only may he not reach his drive goal with his guarding he may think that the handler is taking him away from what he wants in those situations which could possibly lead to relationship issues on the protection field. If the dog understands that the helper not fighting means he is submitting then his drive goal will be reached just by detaining him and control should be a lot easier. Basically, his guarding made the helper freeze and not move - the guarding served its purpose. Sort of like a deer standing still because of fear. Always the helper then retreats in a trial to confirm he is submitting. Every time if I tell the helper to step back (which I'm allowed to do). So, I use this in my training. The only way the dog will understand the purpose of guarding this way is by understanding how to defeat a person by making him submit or retreat with strong eye contact and barking aggressively (either one). And by guarding I mean both hunting and aggressive barking. Only in the blind must the dog bark aggressively at the helper. 

That's why I believe it's important that protection work must start with eye contact. If he looks into the helper's eyes, then he will see a person behind a sleeve or suit and will not just be a sleeve or suit sucker. And his guarding and biting will serve a much better purpose - defeat the man (not just win a sleeve or bite without seeing a human being behind the gear). 

With that said, I believe a dog wanting to hunt the man is the most important thing in any form of protection work (sport or police). I just don't believe it gives the dog a complete education. The other way must be taught too. 

Again, this is how I train. There are several great ways to train. I just want my dog to think like this when I train them in protection. - Greg


----------



## Doug Wright 2 (Jul 24, 2011)

Gregory Doud said:


> Here's my two cents. I think how dogs fight with a dominate offensive mindset is situational. And, for sure, both ways need to be taught if the dog is going to get a complete education in protection work.
> 
> For example, let's take aggressive barking. IMO, there are two ways a dog can overpower a decoy with their barking:
> 
> ...


Thanks for driving that home for me Greg. As unseasoned owners\handlers we can tell the difference between the behaviors but for some of us, its hard to define and put a label on them. 

I'm smarter now. :grin:


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

That was very interesting Greg.

A while back (shouldn't actually have any influence) we would say that the dog who barks aggressively in front of the helper is the one who would bite seriously and is dominant.

The "prey" dog very often sits to the side in the hide and fixes his gaze on the sleeve. 
One more question:

For me, a deep bark signalizes seriousness whereas a squeaky light bark in the hide could signalize "prey". This is the first notion we have of the dog's potential. What bearing does this have on the rest of the performance? Or is this from breed to breed different? For sport this is probably not relevant because the squeaky barker may offer up a perfect performance (technically) and win on points :sad:


----------



## Gregory Doud (Nov 10, 2008)

Gillian Schuler said:


> That was very interesting Greg.
> 
> A while back (shouldn't actually have any influence) we would say that the dog who barks aggressively in front of the helper is the one who would bite seriously and is dominant.
> 
> ...


To me, the pitch is only part of the picture when it comes to reading a dog while barking. It's about a dog feeling dominant and having the right attitude. Their body posture must display a pushy forward attitude and communicate strength. Eye contact is important too. 

Ideally, the bark should be of medium pitch and have cadence like barking that is rhythmic and constant. Arrhythmic broken barking often is a sign of high fighting instincts also. - Greg


----------



## jamie lind (Feb 19, 2009)

Gillian Schuler said:


> That was very interesting Greg.
> 
> A while back (shouldn't actually have any influence) we would say that the dog who barks aggressively in front of the helper is the one who would bite seriously and is dominant.
> 
> ...


What about the dog that doesn't want to bark?


----------



## Gregory Doud (Nov 10, 2008)

jamie lind said:


> What about the dog that doesn't want to bark?


Again, it's about a dog feeling dominant and having the right attitude. Their body posture must display a pushy forward attitude and communicate strength. 

For the silent guard, I want to see him hunting. Their body tense and appearing like they're stalking the decoy. The whole time they are burning wholes with their eyes at the helper ready to attack on a moment's notice. Their body must appear as if it's full of adrenaline. Hard to maintain - especially after a few trials. - Greg


----------

