# Stick hits in the bark and hold



## Oluwatobi Odunuga

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzYlhU6zpeg

Around the 2:10 minute mark, dog goes in for second revir and gets smacked on the forehead repeatedly for being dirty. btw looks like a really nice female .
I know its generally acceptable for the decoy to help in modifying some behaviors but should the dog view the decoy as another master of sorts?
Would anyone try this with a dog being trained for police work? Forgive my ignorance but i'm all for making the dog feel like he rules the world. I'll appreciate any inputs


----------



## Christopher Jones

Oluwatobi Odunuga said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzYlhU6zpeg
> 
> Around the 2:10 minute mark, dog goes in for second revir and gets smacked on the forehead repeatedly for being dirty. btw looks like a really nice female .
> I know its generally acceptable for the decoy to help in modifying some behaviors but should the dog view the decoy as another master of sorts?
> Would anyone try this with a dog being trained for police work? Forgive my ignorance but i'm all for making the dog feel like he rules the world. I'll appreciate any inputs


Alot of people, especially in French Ring, will have the decoy correct their dogs. Personally my dogs will not get corrected by a decoy where he will punish them and they submit to him and do as he asks. Its a personal thing and others on the other hand dont have an issue. Whatever floats your boat. A decoy with a remote for an ecollar isnt such a big deal but physical punishment is.


----------



## Matt Vandart

That's dumb, especially as there are other ways to stop a dog being dirty in a blind.


----------



## Matt Vandart

It worked though eh, lol


----------



## Marcel Winter

If the decoy do that to my dog , I will beat him too

I don,t like it.


----------



## Stefan Schaub

smart people do smart things, i wonder if they still travel with a horse cart or if they have already cars.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

I bet the already have cars but they probably dont let a person behind the wheel without a license....

Any decoy laying hands on my dog without asking in advance or talking it through with me first will get yelled at. No taking matters into your own hands unless you were asked to do so.


----------



## Brian Anderson

any decoy that did that shit to my dog Rocco would be in for a shock ... the dog would light his ass up and not on the equipment. But the dog would have to beat me to him...


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Matt Vandart said:


> That's dumb, especially as there are other ways to stop a dog being dirty in a blind.


How?


----------



## Gillian Schuler

You send your dog to the hide in IPO. He's dirty but you are about 20-30 m away.

We had a terrific helper who used his bare hands to settle the "dirty dog". Result: dog clean in the hide but not intimidated.

There are good helpers around - one has to trust them.


----------



## Keith Jenkins

No corrections to my dog either. As for the helper being able to do it without some sort of fall-out is the extreme exception not the rule.


----------



## Hunter Allred

Practical use is more important to me than points or trials or titles. For that reason I never previously allowed it. Recently I allowed it once... got it on video lol. He bumped with his chin coming around the blind, decoy told him "NO! PFUI! REVERE!" and open handed him on the head. This actually triggered a bite, then another pop, and then he just hugged his leg and barked in his face lol. Probably won't go that route again unless I'm actually showing him if the bad guy hits you, light his ass up. It worked for the most part. From now on only corrections will come from me though.


----------



## Brian Anderson

Hunter Allred said:


> Practical use is more important to me than points or trials or titles. For that reason I never previously allowed it. Recently I allowed it once... got it on video lol. He bumped with his chin coming around the blind, decoy told him "NO! PFUI! REVERE!" and open handed him on the head. This actually triggered a bite, then another pop, and then he just hugged his leg and barked in his face lol. Probably won't go that route again unless I'm actually showing him if the bad guy hits you, light his ass up. It worked for the most part. From now on only corrections will come from me though.


I NEVER allow a decoy to punk my dog EVER ... especially in the beginning ... its stupid to do that when the goal is to teach your dog he is invincible. That kinda shit is what happens when its all about the decoy and not the dog.


----------



## Brian Anderson

Gillian Schuler said:


> You send your dog to the hide in IPO. He's dirty but you are about 20-30 m away.
> 
> We had a terrific helper who used his bare hands to settle the "dirty dog". Result: dog clean in the hide but not intimidated.
> 
> There are good helpers around - one has to trust them.


that can go really really bad depending on the dog ,,,, and no I dont trust them until I see they can actually read a dog (most cannot)


----------



## Gillian Schuler

We have very good helpers in Europe


----------



## Keith Jenkins

Of course we forgot that European's shit doesn't stink.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

What's that supposed to mean ?


----------



## Keith Jenkins

#-o Hate wasting good sarcasm....sorta takes away the effect when you need to explain it.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

I see you have problems with literacy - you are excused.


----------



## Anthony Taylor

I am confused, can someone please explain. How is the "training helper" doing his job, punking the dog. Is he just an "arm boy or girl" to take a bite. If you belong to a club and you do not trust the helper to do his or her job, find another helper. 

If the dog comes in dirty, the helper is the to fix these issues. I see so many say, "if helper does this or that" i'll kick his ass and this and that.

If not, what do you view the role of the "training helper" as???


----------



## Gillian Schuler

I am completely in your corner!


----------



## Brian Anderson

Gillian Schuler said:


> We have very good helpers in Europe



hell I never knew that! Interesting


----------



## Brian Anderson

Anthony Taylor said:


> I am confused, can someone please explain. How is the "training helper" doing his job, punking the dog. Is he just an "arm boy or girl" to take a bite. If you belong to a club and you do not trust the helper to do his or her job, find another helper.
> 
> If the dog comes in dirty, the helper is the to fix these issues. I see so many say, "if helper does this or that" i'll kick his ass and this and that.
> 
> If not, what do you view the role of the "training helper" as???


in my instance the decoy is going to do what I ask him to do nothing more nothing less. I am the trainer not him .... its simple. Sport club people who need someone to show them the ropes and help them learn how to do this or that REALLY need an experienced helper that can train AND catch the dog AND train the person. Thats when the stories of "the decoy did this or that" start to fly. If my dog is going to get screwed up in training I will do that not a guy in a suit. That doesnt mean I am against a decoy making suggestions or pointing out my faults in the training. Especially if they have a lot of experience


----------



## Keith Jenkins

Gillian Schuler said:


> I see you have problems with literacy - you are excused.


Actually you don't understand colorful American metaphors. I can link you to an online dictionary to help with the big words if you need it.


----------



## Keith Jenkins

Brian Anderson said:


> If my dog is going to get screwed up in training I will do that not a guy in a suit.


Give the man a cigar!


----------



## Anthony Taylor

Brian Anderson said:


> in my instance the decoy is going to do what I ask him to do nothing more nothing less. I am the trainer not him .... its simple. Sport club people who need someone to show them the ropes and help them learn how to do this or that REALLY need an experienced helper that can train AND catch the dog AND train the person. Thats when the stories of "the decoy did this or that" start to fly. If my dog is going to get screwed up in training I will do that not a guy in a suit. That doesnt mean I am against a decoy making suggestions or pointing out my faults in the training. Especially if they have a lot of experience


In my instance, yes i do IPO so I do belong to a club. This has nothing to do with my view. How can you better know what to do than the experienced helper........unless you are a experienced helper yourself??

The advantage for me to a club is shared knowledge and bouncing ideas, theories and techniques off others. Some more experienced. I am fairly new to "sport" so i needed to find a club and/or helper i vibed with and trusted to work my dog and give different pictures. 

I do know of some clubs that just have the helper do just what the handler asks for and nothing extra but this to me is not taking full advantage of the helper. and to me the handler/trainer and helper roles are vastly different. Some can do both but unless you are very experienced on that end of the sleeve, i believe you (not you personally but in general) are making a mistake. 
The critical adjustments, fixes and quick/split second reactions a helper can make are invaluable and the difference sometimes between the dog understanding and still coming with power (with the right helper of course) or setting your training back by having to deal with an issue that could have been immediately addressed.


----------



## Brian Anderson

Keith Jenkins said:


> Give the man a cigar!


Keith I just wish I could have a do over on all the dogs I have messed up through the years LOL ... BUT the saving grace is I did learn and still do ALL THE TIME lol


----------



## Brian Anderson

Anthony Taylor said:


> In my instance, yes i do IPO so I do belong to a club. This has nothing to do with my view. How can you better know what to do than the experienced helper........unless you are a experienced helper yourself??
> 
> The advantage for me to a club is shared knowledge and bouncing ideas, theories and techniques off others. Some more experienced. I am fairly new to "sport" so i needed to find a club and/or helper i vibed with and trusted to work my dog and give different pictures.
> 
> I do know of some clubs that just have the helper do just what the handler asks for and nothing extra but this to me is not taking full advantage of the helper. and to me the handler/trainer and helper roles are vastly different. Some can do both but unless you are very experienced on that end of the sleeve, i believe you (not you personally but in general) are making a mistake.
> The critical adjustments, fixes and quick/split second reactions a helper can make are invaluable and the difference sometimes between the dog understanding and still coming with power (with the right helper of course) or setting your training back by having to deal with an issue that could have been immediately addressed.


making mistakes is my middle name brother... thats how I know what NOT to do ... which is more important than knowing what to do in lots of cases.


----------



## Oluwatobi Odunuga

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MumAK3eHJwI

This mali decided the sleeve was just not fun enough :lol:


----------



## Gregory Doud

I don't know the history of the dog but to me it looked like the beginning of teaching a hold and guard on a young dog in the blind. If you're looking for the dog to actually see a person behind the sleeve and view them as a fighting partner then this is a not a bad way to start this if this piece was missing in their education up to this point and/or you want to intensify the confrontation. It's been used for years and its intention is to develop a combative attitude towards the decoy. To do this repeatedly obviously is wrong as it's design is just to view the helper as a somewhat equal opponent - it's not to make them feel subordinate or inferior towards the decoy. But, if used in the initial teaching for the purpose of seeing the helper as a true rival it is not a bad way for dogs that can handle it and/or didn't get the appropriate foundation IMO. Of course, the decoy has to use the right dosage for each particular dog. Then incorporate a long line or other training methods to teach the proper distance and now you have a true hold and guard - the attitude was brought out with doing something like this. Just to clarify, it doesn't matter to me what the dog does after he is struck; he can bark more aggressively or power through and actually engage/bite the helper. It's the attitude I think that is developed with something like this that is important. I think it's important to mention that in fighting there is nothing wrong with losing a round or gettting a split decision once in awhile - it's losing a fight that is detrimental. And, this attitude is what is missing in a lot of dogs nowadays as there are some dogs who have no real feelings doing protection or are only working at 60%. The lead and other methods can be used to create proper distance after the dog now sees a confrontation and wants to be combative. This is just one way of teaching this. - Greg


----------



## Bob Scott

I would agree if it's used to build fight with the helper. If done wrong I've seen dogs come off a helper because of the "hit".
Similar to a dog that has never had a shock collar on and suddenly it's blasted with a high level zap.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Anthony Taylor said:


> I am confused, can someone please explain. How is the "training helper" doing his job, punking the dog. Is he just an "arm boy or girl" to take a bite. If you belong to a club and you do not trust the helper to do his or her job, find another helper.
> 
> If the dog comes in dirty, the helper is the to fix these issues. I see so many say, "if helper does this or that" i'll kick his ass and this and that.
> 
> If not, what do you view the role of the "training helper" as???


The role of a training decoy/helper is to HELP the dog, not to correct it. It has nothing to do with trusting a decoy, it has to do with a decoy knowing what he should and should not do with your dog. Everything should be disgused in advance, the decoy/helper might have input that helps or ideas that might work. The decoy/helper might even correct your dog for you if he is asked to do so or if this is agreed upon in advance. He does not however have a mind of his own that he uses to do what he likes with YOUR dog. There are plenty of dogs out there that do not accept helper/decoy corrections. One group will simply take a runner and sit their nervy ass in the car and will give the owner one hell of a time getting him near the decoy/helper again and chances are the dog might always stay a runner. The other group will simply engage the helper/decoy and give the owner a shitload of problems to work with in keeping him clean at arrival near the decoy in any situation.

Trust me... there is no fun in having a dog play fetch with a decoy and actually having him drag the idiot out of the forest to drop him at your damn feet simply because the decoy felt it was in his right to correct a dog without asking. And YES... I have been there and had that happen....


----------



## Brian Anderson

Alice Bezemer said:


> The role of a training decoy/helper is to HELP the dog, not to correct it. It has nothing to do with trusting a decoy, it has to do with a decoy knowing what he should and should not do with your dog. Everything should be disgused in advance, the decoy/helper might have input that helps or ideas that might work. The decoy/helper might even correct your dog for you if he is asked to do so or if this is agreed upon in advance. He does not however have a mind of his own that he uses to do what he likes with YOUR dog. There are plenty of dogs out there that do not accept helper/decoy corrections. One group will simply take a runner and sit their nervy ass in the car and will give the owner one hell of a time getting him near the decoy/helper again and chances are the dog might always stay a runner. The other group will simply engage the helper/decoy and give the owner a shitload of problems to work with in keeping him clean at arrival near the decoy in any situation.
> 
> Trust me... there is no fun in having a dog play fetch with a decoy and actually having him drag the idiot out of the forest to drop him at your damn feet simply because the decoy felt it was in his right to correct a dog without asking. And YES... I have been there and had that happen....


thank you


----------



## Joby Becker

the comments to me are funny

I am pretty sure that this is not a rogue helper that is just doing shit to someones dog without a game plan or permission.

I have requested for agitators to do this to several of my dogs before, and also have done this type of thing to several dogs before. For the reasons mentioned by Greg and also for the fact that it is als a good way to teach a dog to keep his distance and not get too close during a guarding situation.


----------



## Brian Anderson

Joby Becker said:


> the comments to me are funny
> 
> I am pretty sure that this is not a rogue helper that is just doing shit to someones dog without a game plan or permission.
> 
> I have requested for agitators to do this to several of my dogs before, and also have done this type of thing to several dogs before. For the reasons mentioned by Greg and also for the fact that it is als a good way to teach a dog to keep his distance and not get too close during a guarding situation.


rogue is a pretty cool word for it LOL ,,, unfortunately them doing things without a plan or permission is the whole ball of wax of the convo lol I have actually had it happen to me ... going into strange areas working with people you dont know ... Joby Im sure you have seen your share of hack "decoys"


----------



## Christopher Smith

Gillian Schuler said:


> You send your dog to the hide in IPO. He's dirty but you are about 20-30 m away.
> 
> We had a terrific helper who used his bare hands to settle the "dirty dog". Result: dog clean in the hide but not intimidated.
> 
> There are good helpers around - one has to trust them.


I agree 100percent!


----------



## Christopher Smith

That helper didn't correct or punk the dog. What he did was change the mood/drive/emotion of the dog. 

When I was a kid I had a friend that was kind of soft. When he would get into conflict or fight he would start to cry at some point. But once the tears came this dude was a hurricane of kickass and I never saw him loose a fight. His nickname was Wet Hulk. Now you might have thought you were punking that kid when he started crying, but when you woke up with the school nurse kneeling over you with smelling salts you started to rethink some choices. 

That helper is putting the dog in the Wet Hulk zone.


----------



## Joby Becker

Brian Anderson said:


> rogue is a pretty cool word for it LOL ,,, unfortunately them doing things without a plan or permission is the whole ball of wax of the convo lol I have actually had it happen to me ... going into strange areas working with people you dont know ... Joby Im sure you have seen your share of hack "decoys"


alot of people think I'm a hack decoy


----------



## Matt Vandart

Anthony Taylor said:


> In my instance, yes i do IPO so I do belong to a club. This has nothing to do with my view. How can you better know what to do than the experienced helper........unless you are a experienced helper yourself??
> 
> The advantage for me to a club is shared knowledge and bouncing ideas, theories and techniques off others. Some more experienced. I am fairly new to "sport" so i needed to find a club and/or helper i vibed with and trusted to work my dog and give different pictures.
> 
> I do know of some clubs that just have the helper do just what the handler asks for and nothing extra but this to me is not taking full advantage of the helper. and to me the handler/trainer and helper roles are vastly different. Some can do both but unless you are very experienced on that end of the sleeve, i believe you (not you personally but in general) are making a mistake.
> The critical adjustments, fixes and quick/split second reactions a helper can make are invaluable and the difference sometimes between the dog understanding and still coming with power (with the right helper of course) or setting your training back by having to deal with an issue that could have been immediately addressed.


There is a difference between this and the decoy twatting your dog in the head with a stick because he is pissed off with an unruly dog.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Anthony Taylor said:


> In my instance, yes i do IPO so I do belong to a club. This has nothing to do with my view. How can you better know what to do than the experienced helper........unless you are a experienced helper yourself??
> 
> The advantage for me to a club is shared knowledge and bouncing ideas, theories and techniques off others. Some more experienced. I am fairly new to "sport" so i needed to find a club and/or helper i vibed with and trusted to work my dog and give different pictures.
> 
> I do know of some clubs that just have the helper do just what the handler asks for and nothing extra but this to me is not taking full advantage of the helper. and to me the handler/trainer and helper roles are vastly different. Some can do both but unless you are very experienced on that end of the sleeve, i believe you (not you personally but in general) are making a mistake.
> The critical adjustments, fixes and quick/split second reactions a helper can make are invaluable and the difference sometimes between the dog understanding and still coming with power (with the right helper of course) or setting your training back by having to deal with an issue that could have been immediately addressed.


We are not talking about how the decoy helps a dog or builds him up. Every decoy should help and build up the dog to the best of his ability. The decoy is the one in the suit who can feel the pressure of the dogs bite and the lack there off... 

The thing that is not allowed however is the decoy taking matters into his own hands when it comes to correcting the dog in any manner that is physical. It is only allowed if such a thing is agreed upon in advance. it is not something that should come out of the blue for dog and handler just because the decoy had a moment of insight that makes him feel he knows best. Sure, he might have known better then the trainer but still its a no no situation. 

The handler knows its own dog and mostly always has a plan in mind for a particular dog. The helper is there to HELP and not to correct the dog unless expressly asked to do so in advance. 

People should remember that one small mistake from either side is not the end of the world a and it can be easily fixed with restarting the exercise and finishing it as it should be finished. There is no exercise out there that can not be discused in advance of starting it a and most important of all, there is no need to work off leash constantly or working at a distance often. Why would you work off leash or at a distance often if you can be there to control your dog and to ensure all goes well which in turn prevents the helper of putting hands on your dog and also ensures you can build up and reward the dog often?

Long work, distance and off leash is fine to do. With our dogs we worked off leash and at a distance maybe once a week, the other trainings were on leash and close up.... I realise its great to see your dog go the distance each and every time but where is your control? Stick with short work... it prevents issues arising, it builds the dog up, it lets you correct and reward quickly.... 

"Just because the dog can work long dunnae mean you always should." If he does well in long work then be happy about it, do it every so often but other from that, stick to working short and on a leash or very thin line... There is nothing better then being able to control your dog and rewarding it knowing that you are also cutting out a risk factor. 

JMO


----------



## Anthony Taylor

Matt Vandart said:


> There is a difference between this and the decoy twatting your dog in the head with a stick because he is pissed off with an unruly dog.


Not what i saw, i saw a "helper" doing his job. And as the video continues the next time the dog comes even with more power but not dirty. I didn't see him get pissed but saw him show the dog what was agreeable. But like many things, we can look at this exact same and have multiple reasons why and how and this and that. 

You don't however know the background and know what the helper was asked to do. You see the handler was very ok with it and had no issue.


----------



## Anthony Taylor

Alice Bezemer said:


> We are not talking about how the decoy helps a dog or builds him up. Every decoy should help and build up the dog to the best of his ability. The decoy is the one in the suit who can feel the pressure of the dogs bite and the lack there off...
> 
> The thing that is not allowed however is the decoy taking matters into his own hands when it comes to correcting the dog in any manner that is physical. It is only allowed if such a thing is agreed upon in advance. it is not something that should come out of the blue for dog and handler just because the decoy had a moment of insight that makes him feel he knows best. Sure, he might have known better then the trainer but still its a no no situation.
> 
> The handler knows its own dog and mostly always has a plan in mind for a particular dog. The helper is there to HELP and not to correct the dog unless expressly asked to do so in advance.
> 
> People should remember that one small mistake from either side is not the end of the world a and it can be easily fixed with restarting the exercise and finishing it as it should be finished. There is no exercise out there that can not be discused in advance of starting it a and most important of all, there is no need to work off leash constantly or working at a distance often. Why would you work off leash or at a distance often if you can be there to control your dog and to ensure all goes well which in turn prevents the helper of putting hands on your dog and also ensures you can build up and reward the dog often?
> 
> Long work, distance and off leash is fine to do. With our dogs we worked off leash and at a distance maybe once a week, the other trainings were on leash and close up.... I realise its great to see your dog go the distance each and every time but where is your control? Stick with short work... it prevents issues arising, it builds the dog up, it lets you correct and reward quickly....
> 
> "Just because the dog can work long dunnae mean you always should." If he does well in long work then be happy about it, do it every so often but other from that, stick to working short and on a leash or very thin line... There is nothing better then being able to control your dog and rewarding it knowing that you are also cutting out a risk factor.
> 
> JMO


But the thing is, no one knows what the helper and the person in the video discussed or needed to discuss. How do you know this not the normal helper for this dog. It looked to me like the hits were not crazy and over the top but put the dog who could have been blocked into a different state. It looked to me like the dog got eve more powerful and more speed. 
Of course we don't want a helper correcting our dogs but i do what a helper dog his/her job. And this is part of it to me. If my dog cant shake a hit on the head off, then that dog doesn't deserve to be on the field and we'll do agility or something. 
Again, you need a good and experienced helper......JMO


----------



## susan tuck

Disclaimer: I recognize what I'm saying is only based on this one video, so without being able to understand what he's saying (wish someone would translate) and without knowing the history I make the following observations:

Some young helpers are really into the whip, they need to learn to work a dog without a stick first. This may be the case with this guy.

I would have liked to see what led to this problem, as I think the helper has bad timing in that he's not always correct in the blind when the dog comes around. He should already be passive, as he is the first time the dog is sent when she's dirty. 

First time she's sent, helper is correct and dog is dirty.

Watch when the dog is sent at 3.40 helper is correct and passive, dog is not dirty. 

BUT the 2nd time and at 5:07 and at 7:55 the helper is not correct. I understand making attraction, but the helper needs to be in position and passive by the time the dog comes around the blind. Does he think that just because he is in the blind when the dog comes around the blind the dog is not supposed to grip? Attraction is attraction, no matter whether in the blind or the open field. So if the helper is not passive in the blind by the time the dog comes around, if he's still backing up wiggling around and waving his whip, he's making attraction, the dog is going to grip, that's what the dog is supposed to do, so then she's being corrected by the helper for nothing.

So that's why I wonder what has led up to this problem with this dog.


----------



## susan tuck

Same helper different dog different handler.

http://youtu.be/oIEo73mWEWw

First time sent into the blind dog is dirty...after seeing the previous video, it doesn't really surprise me. Next time sent into the blind dog is not dirty but if the helper so much as leans forward the dog backs up, I think this helper is teaching dogs that no matter what he does, only come for the grip if he raises the sleeve, which I think is wrong, but to each his own. 

Also both in the blind and out, when the helper gives the dog grips, he does not freeze up, but has the handler out the dog???? I cannot figure out why he would do this, seems contrary to everything I've learned, but that doesn't mean it's wrong, because for sure I haven't seen everything, just that I am not familiar with why he would do this.

7:47 he knees the dog....why?

Finally the way the handlers in both videos's out the dogs is weird. Out command then jerk the shit out of the dog instead of lift up and out? Another technique I'm not familiar with.


----------



## susan tuck

Maybe this explains it? Perhaps this guy is a trainer for police dogs and the training is different from that of sport training?:

http://youtu.be/v-c6G5nr-_U


----------



## Joby Becker

susan tuck said:


> Maybe this explains it? Perhaps this guy is a trainer for police dogs and the training is different from that of sport training?:
> 
> http://youtu.be/v-c6G5nr-_U


I assumed that from the start personally. But of course not sure about it.


----------



## Brian Anderson

I for some reason was under the impression it was sch training? ,,,


----------



## Joby Becker

very well could be Brian...

If someone could PM me and tell me how to message someone on this newer version of Youtube, I would ask the guy the whats and whys....](*,)


----------



## Mike Di Rago

Poor training,poor decoy work,only confusion for the dog.
Corrections should come from the handler not the decoy.
Whetther sport or police training,this is not proper decoy work as it opens the door for uncertainty on the dogs part.In training all should be done so it is clear to the dog.Shortcuts are not a sign of good training.
Points and points dogs should not be the goal of protection training.
But, I could be wrong,but I doubt it!
Mike


----------



## Marcel Winter

Mike Di Rago said:


> Poor training,poor decoy work,only confusion for the dog.
> Corrections should come from the handler not the decoy.
> Whetther sport or police training,this is not proper decoy work as it opens the door for uncertainty on the dogs part.In training all should be done so it is clear to the dog.Shortcuts are not a sign of good training.
> Points and points dogs should not be the goal of protection training.
> But, I could be wrong,but I doubt it!
> Mike


Totally agree .......#-o very poor training


----------



## Gregory Doud

susan tuck said:


> So if the helper is not passive in the blind by the time the dog comes around, if he's still backing up wiggling around and waving his whip, he's making attraction, the dog is going to grip, that's what the dog is supposed to do, so then she's being corrected by the helper for nothing.
> 
> Not true. In guarding minor movement HAS to be allowed in both police and sport work. For example, it's how people surrender without being bitten. If an officer says, "Slowly put your hands up where I can see them" then the dog shouldn't engage because the person is now giving up and complying with the officer. There has to be allowance for minor movement with a dog trained for a guarding situation. Same in sport. This is why a bite on command on a passive person must be taught. If the handler gives a command to bite then it ALWAYS overrules the picture of not engaging a passive person or not biting on minor movement. Only three instances should a dog bite in sport or police work:
> 
> 1. Handler bite on command
> 2. A clear picture of fleeing
> 3. A clear picture of fighting (assertively raising an item in their hand to threaten, physically attacking dog and/or handler, aggressively raising an item in their hand and physically attacking dog and/or handler). In sport the raising item is the stick.
> 
> Of course if the police dog is a handler control dog then all of this does not apply. - Greg


----------



## Stefan Schaub

Poor and no clear learn experience for the dog. 

i give you one example:
I call you and say come to my house and you get a $1000, you arrive ,open my door and i hit you with my stick in your face. pretty sure you would like it and pretty sure you would open the door again, maybe next time you stay 3 feets away from door and scream at me to give you the money,smart how i am i would convince you again to open the door and beat you again. with luck i am the stronger one maybe not, but learn experience looks different.

but that make the difference in live , the smarter people have success and the dumb one dream of it.
in germany we would say: i drive Porsche and you bus


----------



## Bob Scott

Well said Stefan!


----------



## Oluwatobi Odunuga

It's a good thing they have very strong dogs, most of the 'mutts' in my club would leave the field lol.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGXwvugVf5A

Handler punches and kicks dog at the 3:16 mark....Saw the video on their page. They seem to have some really strong dogs from Jucan von peroh and wannaer hohen lines though


----------



## Christopher Smith

They are not "lucky they have strong dogs", they are making strong dogs.


----------



## Christopher Smith

Stefan Schaub said:


> Poor and no clear learn experience for the dog.
> 
> i give you one example:
> I call you and say come to my house and you get a $1000, you arrive ,open my door and i hit you with my stick in your face. pretty sure you would like it and pretty sure you would open the door again, maybe next time you stay 3 feets away from door and scream at me to give you the money,smart how i am i would convince you again to open the door and beat you again. with luck i am the stronger one maybe not, but learn experience looks different.
> 
> but that make the difference in live , the smarter people have success and the dumb one dream of it.
> in germany we would say: i drive Porsche and you bus


Your example is poor. You fail to take into account prior training. Do you honestly think this is the first time the dog has ever been worked in protection?


----------



## Bob Scott

Christopher, in Stefan's example wouldn't that be a loss for whom ever opens the door and wouldn't NOT letting the person win be poor training? 
I would understand if those were hits were creating fight and the person at the door had the opportunity to return the fight but I didn't see that in this instance. 
Just thinking out loud.


----------



## susan tuck

Oluwatobi Odunuga posted:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGXwvugVf5A

Handler punches and kicks dog at the 3:16 mark....Saw the video on their page. They seem to have some really strong dogs from Jucan von peroh and wannaer hohen lines though


Christopher I think punching and kicking the dog was the handler having a temper tantrum, and it taught the dog nothing save for maybe next time it should stay further out of reach.


----------



## susan tuck

Gregory Doud said:


> susan tuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> So if the helper is not passive in the blind by the time the dog comes around, if he's still backing up wiggling around and waving his whip, he's making attraction, the dog is going to grip, that's what the dog is supposed to do, so then she's being corrected by the helper for nothing.
> 
> Not true. In guarding minor movement HAS to be allowed in both police and sport work. For example, it's how people surrender without being bitten. If an officer says, "Slowly put your hands up where I can see them" then the dog shouldn't engage because the person is now giving up and complying with the officer. There has to be allowance for minor movement with a dog trained for a guarding situation. Same in sport. This is why a bite on command on a passive person must be taught. If the handler gives a command to bite then it ALWAYS overrules the picture of not engaging a passive person or not biting on minor movement. Only three instances should a dog bite in sport or police work:
> 
> 1. Handler bite on command
> 2. A clear picture of fleeing
> 3. A clear picture of fighting (assertively raising an item in their hand to threaten, physically attacking dog and/or handler, aggressively raising an item in their hand and physically attacking dog and/or handler). In sport the raising item is the stick.
> 
> Of course if the police dog is a handler control dog then all of this does not apply. - Greg
> 
> 
> 
> There are many paths up the mountain, and I know nothing of police work. That said, I believe that when a helper makes a lot of attraction outside the blind, he must take care to be back in place and passive when the dog comes around the blind, which was not the case in the videos, the helper just continued the stimulation, then corrected the dog for gripping, which is unfair. Sure, if these dogs actually understood H&B, a little movement in the blind is one thing, but that's not what it looked like to me.
Click to expand...


----------



## Brian Anderson

Christopher Smith said:


> They are not "lucky they have strong dogs", they are making strong dogs.


strong dogs are born my brother! you cant make em any stronger then their genetics provide for.


----------



## Christopher Smith

Brian Anderson said:


> strong dogs are born my brother! you cant make em any stronger then their genetics provide for.


POTENTIALLY strong dogs are born. How the dog is trained makes the difference. We are also talking about dogs remaining strong AFTER the training.


----------



## Christopher Smith

susan tuck said:


> Christopher I think punching and kicking the dog was the handler having a temper tantrum, and it taught the dog nothing save for maybe next time it should stay further out of reach.


So the dog did learn something. Right?


----------



## Christopher Smith

Bob Scott said:


> Christopher, in Stefan's example wouldn't that be a loss for whom ever opens the door and wouldn't NOT letting the person win be poor training?
> I would understand if those were hits were creating fight and the person at the door had the opportunity to return the fight but I didn't see that in this instance.
> Just thinking out loud.


Engagement with the helper is a reward.


----------



## susan tuck

Christopher Smith said:


> So the dog did learn something. Right?


probably not the goal. I think when people start punching and kicking their dogs like this guy did, they are acting out of frustration and are no longer in control of their emotions.


----------



## Christopher Smith

susan tuck said:


> probably not the goal. I think when people start punching and kicking their dogs like this guy did, they are acting out of frustration and are no longer in control of their emotions.


I think that was the goal because it changed the dog's mood. And I won't delve into the perceived emotions of the helper too deeply, but one of the most important aspects of helper work is acting. Might it be an act put on to illicit the proper mood in the dog?


----------



## susan tuck

I think the helper was fine with this dog. 

I don't think what the handler did had any positive effect on the dog, since the dog was still not returning all the way to him at the 4:00 or 4:15 mark. Also I don't have an issue just because the handler kicked the dog, I'm physical with my dogs, I use my arms and hands and legs and feet, but NEVER in anger, I don't punch my dogs with a closed fist, and NEVER would I haul off and kick my dog with the point of my foot hard in the hip or anywhere else like this guy did at the 5:00 mark. It's flat out wrong, and really stupid, you can do some serious damage to the dog doing that. I sincerely hope the jackass breaks his own foot doing that one day, then maybe he will learn something too.


----------



## Christopher Smith

susan tuck said:


> I think the helper was fine with this dog.
> 
> I don't think what the handler did had any positive effect on the dog, since the dog was still not returning all the way to him at the 4:00 or 4:15 mark. Also I don't have an issue just because the handler kicked the dog, I'm physical with my dogs, I use my arms and hands and legs and feet, but NEVER in anger, I don't punch my dogs with a closed fist, and NEVER would I haul off and kick my dog with the point of my foot hard in the hip or anywhere else like this guy did at the 5:00 mark. It's flat out wrong, and really stupid, you can do some serious damage to the dog doing that. I sincerely hope the jackass breaks his own foot doing that one day, then maybe he will learn something too.


Sorry I missed the jump fromtalking about helper work. That handler is problematic in many ways.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Christopher Smith said:


> POTENTIALLY strong dogs are born. How the dog is trained makes the difference. We are also talking about dogs remaining strong AFTER the training.


Never thought that this day would come but....

I agree!


----------



## susan tuck

Christopher Smith said:


> Sorry I missed the jump fromtalking about helper work. That handler is problematic in many ways.


Now that's funny...We were arguing about 2 different things!	:lol:

BUT the reason I came back to this thread is I was thinking about how each of us who posted to this thread, our perceptions and experiences affect not only how we interpret what we see in the video but also influences the back story we each inevitably fill in because we have to in order to make sense and draw conclusions, so it's not surprising that we have different opinions about what's going on.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

I read though this topic and I wonder if anyone can answer me this?

Why is the dog dirty to begin with? Once you answer that you know how to fix the problem. 

Poor training? Lack of training? To many steps in to little time? Could it be that the dog is not far enough in training but to much is expected of it? Could it be the dog has learnt this behaviour due to poor handling? Could it be lazy behaviour on the handler side or glory seeking? Why is the dog dirty to begin with?

My experiance tells me that all dogs that are dirty in their work are so for a clear reason and once you can see that reason you can fix the problem. Dirty dogs do not grow like that, they are made dirty due to circumstance...


----------



## brad robert

Alice Bezemer said:


> I read though this topic and I wonder if anyone can answer me this?
> 
> Why is the dog dirty to begin with? Once you answer that you know how to fix the problem.
> 
> Poor training? Lack of training? To many steps in to little time? Could it be that the dog is not far enough in training but to much is expected of it? Could it be the dog has learnt this behaviour due to poor handling? Could it be lazy behaviour on the handler side or glory seeking? Why is the dog dirty to begin with?
> 
> My experiance tells me that all dogs that are dirty in their work are so for a clear reason and once you can see that reason you can fix the problem. Dirty dogs do not grow like that, they are made dirty due to circumstance...


Due to circumstance? Being allowed to be? Or incorrect teaching?


----------



## Brian Anderson

Christopher Smith said:


> POTENTIALLY strong dogs are born. How the dog is trained makes the difference. We are also talking about dogs remaining strong AFTER the training.


^5


----------



## Brian Anderson

Alice Bezemer said:


> Never thought that this day would come but....
> 
> I agree!


holy biting dogs batman ... and Alice and Chris are agreeing!!


----------



## Stefan Schaub

Christopher Smith said:


> Your example is poor. You fail to take into account prior training. Do you honestly think this is the first time the dog has ever been worked in protection?


why should i care about prior training?the action talks for it self. what is the reason to care about prior training.if it was good the dog would come around ,clean barking!! i can tell you what happen in future,the dog is clean with this helper, than they go some where else for training or trailing and the dog starts to test if the new helper is also the one who keeps the dog clean or not.first some nipping and than with every bite a little more and more.
it is like kids in school,they know the straight teachers and they know the weak ones who have not the authority.
if you think that it teaches the dog something ok.maybe your experience have show that you are right.my experience have show that this does not work out for the big thing.some people are happy with less.

take the time and watch some videos from the 80's, when it was normal to beat the dog on the blind for the bark and hold. does not look real pretty


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Christopher Smith said:


> I agree 100percent!


Wow - we are on the same page for once.

I'm talking about a helper that I have watched over months and seen how he handles dogs. He is the breeder of our dogs and knows what each dog Needs.


----------



## Christopher Smith

Alice...now we have to disagree again 

I believe the dog is "dirty" because the helper wants him to be. Do you really think that he is so stupid that he doesn't know how to put a line on the dog and keep him clean? Once again, he is not correcting the dog he is putting the dog in a different state of mind and conditioning a certain response when the dog enters the blind. I know this is something that many of you are not familiar with but many top trainers do this type of training. 

It's been fascinating to hear people that have never titled an IPO dog insist that they know better than people that do.


----------



## Marcel Winter

I don,t understand the decoy first he let the dog bite and @ 2 min 10
he punish the dog same exercise, or do I see something wrong? ( guarding?

The handler can,t see the exercise and what happening with the dog and decoy she is behind ?


----------



## Joby Becker

Stefan's hypothetical example:




> I call you and say come to my house and you get a $1000, you arrive ,open my door and i hit you with my stick in your face. pretty sure you would like it and pretty sure you would open the door again, maybe next time you stay 3 feets away from door and scream at me to give you the money,smart how i am i would convince you again to open the door and beat you again. with luck i am the stronger one maybe not, but learn experience looks different.


If this was me, here is how I would view it.

I would learn quickly that Stefan was not to be fully trusted. But $1000.00 is a decent enough payday to risk a second attempt..

The second time around I would be in the mindset that he may try to hit me, and I should prepare for that.

The second time around I probably would not open the door myself, but knock on the door, and be ready to act if he came out and tried to hit me.

If I saw the money in his hand and he was still trying to hit me, I would pull out a PR24 collapsible baton from my Dutyman holder and clobber him, and take my money....

I never once viewed this as an actual correction for being dirty.

I did view it as both Greg and Chris did, to change the mindset of the dog. I also think it is possible that the dog can learn be mindful of the distance he positions himself in with this type of training.

disclaimer: never titled a dog as a handler.


----------



## Brian Anderson

Christopher Smith said:


> Alice...now we have to disagree again
> 
> I believe the dog is "dirty" because the helper wants him to be. Do you really think that he is so stupid that he doesn't know how to put a line on the dog and keep him clean? Once again, he is not correcting the dog he is putting the dog in a different state of mind and conditioning a certain response when the dog enters the blind. I know this is something that many of you are not familiar with but many top trainers do this type of training.
> 
> It's been fascinating to hear people that have never titled an IPO dog insist that they know better than people that do.


It is amazing. I get calls constantly regarding training problems. issues that need corrected etc. If it something I am familiar with and have had experience with I try to help. The biggest percentage of those people will then go and NOT do what you suggest and keep defining insanity (doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result)... I've gotten kinda jaded I guess over time.


----------



## Bob Scott

Christopher Smith said:


> Engagement with the helper is a reward.




Agreed! 
I was also confusing the statement with the situation being with the handler. 
The handler called the dog and then had to call it again to get it closer. From that the handler started kicking on the dog. 
What did the dog learn? This handler will beat me if I go to him when he calls. No wonder the dog stopped short on his recall.


----------



## Gregory Doud

Joby Becker said:


> I also think it is possible that the dog can learn be mindful of the distance he positions himself in with this type of training.
> 
> 
> For sure you can train the dog to keep a safe distance with this method but the danger in that is when you repeatedly strike the dog over time for being too close the good dog will power through and you will have a much bigger problem keeping the dog at a proper distance because their fighting instincts are way too high for learning to happen and the rest will have too much respect for the decoy. In the end both aren't the desired outcome and you will have to do repair work in training to make up for the damage caused because there were holes created in the application. If you're talking about a dog that is fairly green and impressionable then maybe doing it one or a couple of times will be enough of a message and work. But, that would be rare as you would have to have the right kind of dog at the proper age and experience with the right dosage. That's why I believe it's better to use a lead, a barrier, or some other method to teach proper distance without poisoning the fighting attitude that was brought out using this kind of method. - Greg


----------



## jack van strien

Ok, i read it all and here is my view.The dog and decoy know eachother well.
The handler did some training else where or with another decoy and messed up big.
Maybe she even tried to get a title and the dog was not ready at all.
I do not speak the language but the helper probably said,i told you he would come in dirty!
Mistakes made by both handler and helper ,this dog should not have been off lead and the handler is not able to do anything.
The dog does not see the handler as being the boss.
We do not know what went on before but it went on too long.
How to fix it?
First we need to know what we see is really all there is.
Tobi,you came up with a nice video but i do not think your question and the video match.
This is not a decoy cleaning up a dog,this dog need some work but going back to basics should fix it.
Put this dog in the hands of a better handler and you will see a different picture.
Anyone noticed the sound the dog makes? Tells a lot.


----------



## Marcel Winter

What I can see @ the bodylanguage of the dog ,the dog is frustrated.


----------



## Oluwatobi Odunuga

jack van strien said:


> Ok, i read it all and here is my view.The dog and decoy know eachother well.
> The handler did some training else where or with another decoy and messed up big.
> Maybe she even tried to get a title and the dog was not ready at all.
> I do not speak the language but the helper probably said,i told you he would come in dirty!
> Mistakes made by both handler and helper ,this dog should not have been off lead and the handler is not able to do anything.
> The dog does not see the handler as being the boss.
> We do not know what went on before but it went on too long.
> How to fix it?
> First we need to know what we see is really all there is.
> Tobi,you came up with a nice video but i do not think your question and the video match.
> This is not a decoy cleaning up a dog,this dog need some work but going back to basics should fix it.
> Put this dog in the hands of a better handler and you will see a different picture.
> Anyone noticed the sound the dog makes? Tells a lot.



I think most will agree that was a pretty strong dog considering she was a female and there was barely any reduction in drive. I've seen him do it in other videos and assumed the goal was to stop the dog from being dirty. 
Actually not criticizing him as from what i've seen they have a really good breeding program but for me i think this method might be limited to strong dogs. Most dogs in my club would give shallow bites following usch treatment, others would just stop biting.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

brad robert said:


> Due to circumstance? Being allowed to be? Or incorrect teaching?


Being allowed to be and or incorrect teaching.


----------



## Joby Becker

Gregory Doud said:


> Joby Becker said:
> 
> 
> 
> I also think it is possible that the dog can learn be mindful of the distance he positions himself in with this type of training.
> 
> 
> For sure you can train the dog to keep a safe distance with this method but the danger in that is when you repeatedly strike the dog over time for being too close the good dog will power through and you will have a much bigger problem keeping the dog at a proper distance because their fighting instincts are way too high for learning to happen and the rest will have too much respect for the decoy. In the end both aren't the desired outcome and you will have to do repair work in training to make up for the damage caused because there were holes created in the application. If you're talking about a dog that is fairly green and impressionable then maybe doing it one or a couple of times will be enough of a message and work. But, that would be rare as you would have to have the right kind of dog at the proper age and experience with the right dosage. That's why I believe it's better to use a lead, a barrier, or some other method to teach proper distance without poisoning the fighting attitude that was brought out using this kind of method. - Greg
> 
> 
> 
> greg,
> 
> When I have done this and seen it done it was an observed cause and effect that did have an impact on several dogs, simplified in a finite period of time, It also put the dogs in a different mindset as was being discussed here by Chris and yourself. This was not used as a main method to teach the distance, but did contribute I think...The dogs I am thinking of were converted IPO dogs, on a truncated cross-training schedule that was less than ideal for sure...
> 
> I cannot remember doing this more than 3 times with any one dog, over the life of the dogs...for my own personal dogs...and when done with others dogs it was almost always only done 1-2 time by me,, I do not know if others were doing it or not, as I was just a hired hand.
> 
> what you say makes perfect sense, I have seen dogs learn from this though as well, must have been the stars all lining up correctly for those couple of dogs.
Click to expand...


----------



## Daniel Lybbert

The thread has changed. First should a decoy beat your dog. I have a good team. I am the decoy for 4 different people and 8 dogs. I know all these dogs very well. We train regularly. They are my invested interest as well as the handlers. There for we are a team. If at some point I need to deal with something as a decoy I will. I am a training partner. I am a teacher as is the handler. I wont stop and ask excuse me is it ok to correct your dog your highness? Ill get it done and carry on.

That being said I have seen dogs mine included be set back in training because I tried to train with other decoys. So now I don't train with others unless I truly know them. I would trial under any decoy because there are rules and the dog can see other decoys. But the rules dont change. Unlike training where I can change some rules easily.

As for the dog in the video I would say buddy had a reason for wacking the dog. Most people dont start off hitting the dog with a shovel but sometimes eventually it will come. I have beat a dog on the head with a stick for being a ********** in the blind. If it is for a sport then it has to be by the rules or you get a big fat 0. I wouldnt beat a chicken dog in the blind. That would be counter productive. 

I get really tired of the Decoy bashing and Im the boss bullshit. The decoy is there to help the HANDLER train the dog. If I was just there for the dog I would only train my dogs and my wifes dog. Handlers bitch always and it is about something they are not competent of doing themselves.


----------



## Hunter Allred

I'll throw the video up of mine I described earlier in the thread. There were only 2 B&H's in that session, only 2 bites. Both in the vid. Open for discussion & comments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n71htHsmyoQ


----------



## Phil Dodson

It's amazing what one well placed correction can do to quickly fix a fault.!


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Daniel Lybbert said:


> The thread has changed. First should a decoy beat your dog. I have a good team. I am the decoy for 4 different people and 8 dogs. I know all these dogs very well. We train regularly. They are my invested interest as well as the handlers. There for we are a team. If at some point I need to deal with something as a decoy I will. I am a training partner. I am a teacher as is the handler. I wont stop and ask excuse me is it ok to correct your dog your highness? Ill get it done and carry on.
> 
> That being said I have seen dogs mine included be set back in training because I tried to train with other decoys. So now I don't train with others unless I truly know them. I would trial under any decoy because there are rules and the dog can see other decoys. But the rules dont change. Unlike training where I can change some rules easily.
> 
> As for the dog in the video I would say buddy had a reason for wacking the dog. Most people dont start off hitting the dog with a shovel but sometimes eventually it will come. I have beat a dog on the head with a stick for being a ********** in the blind. If it is for a sport then it has to be by the rules or you get a big fat 0. I wouldnt beat a chicken dog in the blind. That would be counter productive.
> 
> I get really tired of the Decoy bashing and Im the boss bullshit. The decoy is there to help the HANDLER train the dog. If I was just there for the dog I would only train my dogs and my wifes dog. Handlers bitch always and it is about something they are not competent of doing themselves.


Its funny how you get angry about something as simple as not allowing a decoy to correct your dog when not agreed upon beforehand.

You stated yourself that you would correct a dog as a decoy if you felt the need to do so and that would be that. Thats not a very good attitude to have in any sports or venue. Sure, it could be that you have a running agreement with your clubmembers that means they know the limits of what they can do when decoying but when you go off field? When you train at another club? What then? What if you train at another club and another decoy decides to take a page out of your book and "Just deal with it" when its your dog and he ****s up beyond limits and you are left there to pick up the pieces? What then? Will you still be as gullible as you are now and say "Ah, forget it mate! Its okay, thanks for decoying." 

A decoy is there to HELP and ADVISE, not to act without discussing it in advance. As for handlers not knowing what they are talking about because they have never decoyed before? Pffft! One thing I have noticed on this forum is that everyone helps out with decoying and in the netherlands its even so at most clubs that if you want to join you shall decoy! No matter if you are a boy or girl. I've decoyed for years until I was physically unable to do so but I know the intricasies of the game from both side and I think many on this forum know them as well. Your comment is below par....


----------



## susan tuck

Hunter Allred said:


> I'll throw the video up of mine I described earlier in the thread. There were only 2 B&H's in that session, only 2 bites. Both in the vid. Open for discussion & comments
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n71htHsmyoQ





Phil Dodson said:


> It's amazing what one well placed correction can do to quickly fix a fault.!


Yep, nicely done.


----------



## Joby Becker

Alice Bezemer said:


> Its funny how you get angry about something as simple as not allowing a decoy to correct your dog when not agreed upon beforehand.
> 
> You stated yourself that you would correct a dog as a decoy if you felt the need to do so and that would be that. Thats not a very good attitude to have in any sports or venue. Sure, it could be that you have a running agreement with your clubmembers that means they know the limits of what they can do when decoying but when you go off field? When you train at another club? What then? What if you train at another club and another decoy decides to take a page out of your book and "Just deal with it" when its your dog and he ****s up beyond limits and you are left there to pick up the pieces? What then? Will you still be as gullible as you are now and say "Ah, forget it mate! Its okay, thanks for decoying."
> 
> A decoy is there to HELP and ADVISE, not to act without discussing it in advance. As for handlers not knowing what they are talking about because they have never decoyed before? Pffft! One thing I have noticed on this forum is that everyone helps out with decoying and in the netherlands its even so at most clubs that if you want to join you shall decoy! No matter if you are a boy or girl. I've decoyed for years until I was physically unable to do so but I know the intricasies of the game from both side and I think many on this forum know them as well. Your comment is below par....


I am not disagreeing but I have worked a lot of dogs whos owners have very little knowledge of what should be done, or shouldnt be done by a decoy.

I often made judgement calls on what to do, granted not quite like what was in the video.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Being a decoy isn't always a thankful job. First one out on the field in the evening - last one to enter the club house. In the last few years members have had to contribute a very small sum. Before the helpers were given a free meal and we would often pay for his beer afterwards.

I have only worked a dog once or twice not because I was experienced but because I can run fast and the dog was nervous of big men!!

In choosing a helper, I go to watch how he works the dogs and also to watch what he expects from the handler. Each helper has his way of working and watching saves a lot of discussion time. After each dog, there was a short commentary about why he did this or that to the dog.

I noticed that the dog in the video didn't crumple after the stick hits but I did notice that the dog didn't concentrate and missed the arm a few times when the helper "tricked" him. 

Some handlers who criticize or try to tell the helper how to work their dog may be surprised come trial day. 

It is true that a lot of handlers have little or no experience in protection work. The helpers I knew and know were always lenient with them and taught them what they should do. And watching experienced handlers is very beneficial. Those who went straight to the club house after their turn didn't learn much, became frustrated and often left.

One of my helpers came with each one of us to our first trial and advised us when to bring the dog out for each discipline and in general how to conduct ourselves. I will never forget his advice. It has stood me in good stead ever since.

The worst helper was a very nice guy experienced theoretically but "weak". I had much trouble to Keep my dog under control after his always working with a dominant helper who would make dirty dogs in the hide "clean". Their bitework didn't suffer, in fact it became even better.

As ever, a dog needs clear rules.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

BTW, the helper praised him from time to time "Ja wohl" which must mean the same as in German, ie. "good dog". He also 
held contact with the woman who held the lead at one point and she seemed to be nodding her approval.

After trials, especially international ones, the forums are full of people criticising the helper or the judge. Even spectators cannot see what the helper feels and the judge sees.


----------

