# Confidence



## Don Turnipseed

I thought of starting this subject, regarding confidence in working dogs, after a post I put on the bite work forum. In regard to a full mouth bite, Andes said, and several others subsequently agreed, that a full mouth bite was genetic from his observation. I will approach this from a breeding and hunting standpoint and the majority will be looking at it from a training and, hands on, protection dog stand point. Dogs are dogs and I think, outside of the classes of dogs differing(guardian dog as opposed to big game dogs), there are many similarities. I have purposely excluded bird dogs and varmint dogs because we are dealing with dogs willing to stand their ground facing far superior odds much bigger than themselves.

Andres used and example of breeding two dogs with full mouth bites together, resulting in pups with full mouth bites. This would be in opposition to two front bite dogs being bred resulting in front bite pups. If it is based on the assumption that it is genetic, the first pair would almost have to be homozygous to produce a whole litter with a full mouth bite. That would tell me it may indeed be a genetically controlled trait. A heterozygous pair would prove nothing even if they both had a FMB. These are just my thoughts on it as a breeder. I put a lot of weight on the individual dogs confidence. As a matter of fact, I put everything on it with my own dogs. My dogs are bred extremely tight and are all related in multiple ways. I don't even give a thought to, "will this dog hunt". I leave them alone till they are walking and "everything" is based on individual confidence. That is the one thing I have never been able to control, and short of cloning, I don't think it can be done. While a whole litter may be pretty confident, there will still be those more so than the others. The dogs in my yard, I can't tell 95% of them apart unless they are standing right in front of me together so I can look and see if the head on one is wider than the other and other very minor details. I think that may be why they have different colored collars. Dogs from one litter have blue, dogs from another have orange. Here is a picture of a male and female loping together, totally different crosses, and I can't tell which is which myself. Body style is the same, leg movement is almost identical. I could almost superimpose the pictures on top of each other to look like one dog.










The one thing I can do is get the same confidence level across the board. A dog with great confidence, from a hunting standpoint can whip the world. I think a solid confident dog can walk into a field trial with 500 people milling around and 200 dogs barking and walk the walk anywhere. I see this as being very similar to a spot dog event or even police work. Many dogs have to be tested on their home field or with a known decoy to look good. How much of this is innate confidence? In hunting situations, when the confident dogs move around for the timing, but when they make their move, they aren't coming out till the fat lady sings... or until they are badly hurt. In hunting, just as sport work, their are dogs that are just to hard. They won't ever back up and they usually don't live long unless they are darn lucky. There are a lot of similarities that I can see. The super hard dogs are too hard for dangerous game unless it is tree game and little contact is made....but they are not the best hog dogs unless you don't mind losing them....but I do. Personal protection dogs are like that. It isn't a game. They are there to win regardless of the cost to them. The difference being, they may be saving a life so they are more expendable. 

Is the type of bite do to more or less confidence. I am not talking about fearful dogs at all. Out in the open, those dogs won't ever get close enough to get hurt whether it is people or hogs. Maybe it isn't confidence at all but smarts.


----------



## Bob Scott

Interesting compairison! In the sport of Schutzhund a full, calm grip is sought after. A less then perfect grip can be helped/developed to a point but under real stress, the dog will loose that grip.
The guys here that decoy on a regular basis will give a better answer then me, but with the little sleeve work I've done, the confident, full mouth dogs will actually grip harder under pressure.
At the same time, a dog with a good, natural grip as a pup can be screwed up in training and loose the desire to keep the full grip. 
As far as varmit dogs not being willing to stand their ground facing far superior odd much bigger then themselves, I've seen more then one 12-14 lb terrier get the short end of a stick because it refused to leave a brush pile where they cornered a coyote. Same with ****. My first Border terrier would absolutely NOT try and get out of a fight with one. Even above ground where the **** has a huge advantage. 
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog".


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Bob Scott said:


> ... As far as varmit dogs not being willing to stand their ground facing far superior odd much bigger then themselves, I've seen more then one 12-14 lb terrier get the short end of a stick because it refused to leave a brush pile where they cornered a coyote. Same with ****. My first Border terrier would absolutely NOT try and get out of a fight with one. ...


Like my Border Terrier granddog who refused to come out of a dead log where he had a porcupine, despite a face full of quills. Pulled out by his tail, he ran back in the second his tail was released.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Is that confidence, or insanity?


----------



## Bob Scott

THAT'S a terrier! :wink: 
I might add that all the dogs I've seen with this confidence/heart/gameness have had a full mouthful of critter when they dove in. 
A lot of the little guys that are in and out when they worry a varmit, seem to be using their front teeth and canines but when they make up their mind to go in for a kill, the bite is full.


----------



## Bob Scott

I don't think all the bite suit sports put as much weight on the full mouth grip as they do in Schutzhund. If that's the case, how do you guys/gals doing the suit sports view the compairison of confidence and grip?


----------



## Don Turnipseed

LOL I just knew you would look at it in that light Bob. I think the hole dogs and small terriers are a B*lls to the wall class of dogs. I should have said an 80 lb varmint dog. Better? :lol: :lol: Going to a dark hole is similar to testing some really hard dogs when going into a totally blacked out room after someone. It takes a special type of dog for that also.

I use my dogs as examples a lot, just because I know them better than any others, they are extremely tight bred, and they are really close to being homozygous. This makes it a different ball game as far as many conversations and topics go because I have spent years watching the different little quirks and such as well as what makes them tick. Even the most unconfident dogs will hunt and look like the most confident dogs in the world in the field because it is all natural ability. When you take them out of that setting is when they turn spooky. The confident dogs seem to go with the flow. In this respect, training a sport dog on the same field with the same handler all the time, less confidence may be alright. I am talking about the top dogs. Have you ever seen an unconfident National champion at anything where aggression plays a big roll? Once the right dog is found, the only thing that can really screw it up from there is his environment, handling training and such.....but, it takes a heck of a lot more to screw him up. IMHO


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

In Belgian Ring, the bite is judged and there are 25 points that can be lost.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I just read your post about the porcupine Connie. It reminded me of a very unhappy owner of one of my dogs. He called me an told me how much it cost to get all the quills taken out of the dog. That wasn't what bothered him so much as the fact the dog picked the porky up and tried to put it in his hand because he uses the dog as a retriever. Only with a terrier. :lol:


----------



## Bob Scott

:lol: Understood! :wink: 
The varmit dogs you talk about such as the Mountain Curs, etc are mostly baying dogs aren't they? 
The confidence that makes a good catch dog is also it's downfall in many cases. That's why I switched to JRTs from the Borders. As crazy as the JRTs are, they still are a better baying dog underground.
That's also why I put the question to the suit guys. 
Jeff! Anyone? Be nice Jeff! :lol:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

F nice.   Until you get one of your dogs doing suit or bitework with something other than an animal, these discussions are pointless.

However, it would be a very good test of wether or not your theorys in breeding and raising are correct. I would be very curious to find that out.

I have seen dogs without confidence that had a fmb but very weak at best. It is definately a genetic trait, but can be overridden by other factors.

I have yet to see a ring dog that did not fill it's mouth with a sleeve. Could they possibly make it fit a dogs mouth more perfectly? This is why the sleeve is a really crappy way of judging this.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Bob, actually I am not talking about bay dog per se. That is their job, to bay. I am talking about Airedales and other breeds that built a reputatioin on being really hard on game. Dogs have been bred down so much in the last few decades it is hard to find a good hard dog. Most airedales anymore are no better than bay dogs....people want them to be sweet. There is really about only one breed left in the US. That is the golden retriever... they just look like Airedales and Wolfhounds.....and poodles.


----------



## Bob Scott

Jeff, with the mals, generally being higher strung (nervier) then the GSD, does that make any difference in teaching their grip work? 
With a nervy GSD they seem more apt to chatter on their bite. 
That in itself tells me that confidence is a good part of a good grip.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

You don't have to be nice on my account Jeff. :lol: :lol: I can take it....but there are a lot of correlations between the dogs you talk about and the ones I talk about.....the big difference is, the ones I am talking about are getting hooked in the stomach, the chest, the ribs the neck. and will cry to go with me the next day regardless of how many stitches they have or how much hide is super glued back in place. They are playing for keeps, no games. Winchester was retired after getting hooked in the stomach(he had to be opened up that day to make sure his intestines were no torn) and after that happened, he pulled both canines out on the right side hanging on to that boar. No one is shaking a can of marbles at them. :lol: This is their life and they love doing it. 

Besides that dogs are dogs and the same things make them tick. I excluded the light weights as in large varmint dogs now we are talking dogs that do as compared to dogs that don't. We are just looking at what type of dogs it takes to be really good as opposed to not so good. For bite-work, Jeff, these are 75lb to 90 lb Airedales, not the standard 45 and 50 lbers. The males have about 1 1/8" to 1 1/4" canines top and bottom. They have extremely long muzzles(kind of reminds you of a crocodile when they yawn), and are right behind rotties in jaw strength at according to one report I read, 1700 to 1800 lbs. Rotties were put at 2000. And they are terrier quick. Brisco, a 60lb airedale outpointed all the malinois and other dogs at bite work when he was titled for SCH I and was way up there when he made Sch II. it may have been at the II that he outpointed the others. He is in St. Louis. Bob should look him up sometime. Anyway, it isn't a matter of 'If" they can do it....it is a matter of what dogs would be best at it regardless of breed. :idea: :idea:


----------



## Bob Scott

I've see Brisco in trials. He's one of the few dogs in this area that really seem to enjoy the game as opposed to doing it "Cause I said so". 
I wish folks would look at Airedales more seriously....although I think the terrier temperment would frustrate most bite sport folks. Doubtful if you could beat one into doing what their told.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote:Jeff, with the mals, generally being higher strung (nervier) then the GSD, does that make any difference in teaching their grip work? 
With a nervy GSD they seem more apt to chatter on their bite. 
That in itself tells me that confidence is a good part of a good grip.

So when a dog chatters that means he is not confidant? I cry BS on that one. Maybe the Mals you have seen are junk. We have a lot that do not chatter.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Bob, One of the things that is probably a big factor in Airedales doing bitework is the trainer has to understand what he is working with. As you know, you have to understand them to get them to do what you want.....but you won't push them very far. They are not GSD or Malinois.

Anyway, back to the confidence part of all this.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

> it isn't a matter of 'If" they can do it....


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Great picture Daryl. Do you know who that dog is?


----------



## Bob Scott

Chatter on the bite! Piano bite! The dogs I've seen (GSD AND Mals) that do this seem like the're about to self destruct the're so wound up. 
That's what I was asking you! Is that piano bite related to confidence?


----------



## Daryl Ehret

No idea... somehow I thought this breed was bigger :wink:


----------



## Bob Scott

Daryl Ehret said:


> No idea... somehow I thought this breed was bigger :wink:


Only if it has Orang (sp) in it's name!


----------



## Lynn Cheffins

Why is that - is it a different line?


----------



## Bob Scott

Old time breeder (pre WWII) that had huge, 100lb + dogs and his claim to fame was selling hundreds of them through mail order. Don could give you a more accurate answer.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Walter Lingo had the Oorang kennel back in the teens and 20's. He also the the footbal team that Caused Jin Thorpe to lose his medals because he played for them. One year Lingo sold, if memory serves, 2 miilion dollars in dogs at $35 bucks apiece. They had Airedale shows during half time. He also had them down to 35lbs but the name Oorang became synonomous with the big Airedales.....the last of the line was registered in the early 60's. I would guess the one pictured may be a German dog and maybe 50lbs ...or less. Here is an 85lb airedale(Geronimo). Be a tad different with him hanging on you.










Bob, is that chatter bite you are talking about the same as the dogs do when one of the girls is in heat. Clicking their teeth together with that stupid look on their face?


----------



## Andy Andrews

I can't speak for the terriers but you're not going to see too many catch dogs going after a boar with a full mouth. They tend to grip the ear/snout just like the would a springpole...with their front teeth. I hope no one thinks these dogs lack confidence.  

Springpole

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3970723288087124822&q=springpole


Tug rope

http://www.southernbulldogs.com/files/MOV00245.MPG





Andy


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Andy, it would take me all day to download the videos unforntunately. but the bulldogs I have seen launch themselves from quite aways out like scud missles, mouth wide open and front legs back. I am not sure how they could avoid getting a full mouth of whatever they hit except that an ear isn't much of a full bite. I have a picture where the dogs got into multiple hogs and one 200lb hog has no ears left to hold and another had 1/2 and ear. When the dogs get really stupid sometime like when they get hurt, they get pissed and start grabbing the hog across the front of the face and eyes. It is a real rodeo then because the hog can't see where it is going. I had one run off a 20 ft ledge with one of my dogs doing this and they landed in a stream where two other dog where there immmediately to control the situation. When they start that face grabbing it is always as much as the can get in. A pit doesn't have much to work with mouth wise but the way they launch themselves I would say they get whatever they can in. Here is a 6 1/2 to 7 mo old pup playing in the water. He ended up at 97lbs This is Odin. 










Nopw that everyone has a better idea what Airedales are about. What is it about some dogs that make them willing to step up to the plate. Can a dog have real nerve without confidence? I don't see how. I have found that the hoigher the confidence level, the better the dog handles most situations and that results in a dog that is better equipped for any job. It is even difficult to traina low confidence dog because they can't take any pressure. They are also the worst fear biters.


----------



## Andy Andrews

Don, the catch dogs(APBT/AB/Dogo) that I know don't usually launch themselves(as in getting airborne) into the boars. Usually, regardless of whether they're hunting alone or in a group, they just run up beside the boar and take a hold. If, for some reason they grip too deeply they'll adjust it until it becomes shallower. Don't ask me why they do it, I'm just a newb!  



Since you cannot watch the videos, here are a few photographs:


Springpole

http://www.ig-apbt.org/img/springpole_da.jpg

http://ourworld.cs.com/dreadlives609/06da51a0.jpg

http://www.ironcrosskennels.net/photos/IRON-TYSON-NEW-SPRING-POLE.gif





Andy


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I have never seen dogs actually on a springpole Andy but I have to ask, in the first and last pictures, the dogs have something that isn't wide enough tp even use their molars it would just go down their throat. I am guessing that first, what ever they are biting has to be big enough to get a good full mouth bite on. A hogs ear for instnce is never going to look the same as a sleeve pushed into a dogs mouth. There is only so much ear to hang onto unless most dogs are holding onto part of the head. Question. Were the two dogs in the first picture full blooded pitts?


----------



## Andy Andrews

Don, I probably cannot describe it correctly, but with the springpole, when the dog grabs the rope, a lot of times it doesn't grab the very end of the rope...it'll have some slack hanging off to the side, so I guess, it *could* bite more deeply if it wanted to. Sort of like how a dog carries a stick with its back teeth. Make sense?


Are you asking about the hunt photos? If I'm not mistaken, those photos are from Australia, so knowing how crazy the Aussies are about their outcrosses, I'd have to say the dogs are probably something like APBT/Bull Terrier x Deerhound, Staghound, Boxer, or Great Dane.






Andy.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

My observations with the frontal bite on *****, coyotes, bobcats and various animals that "are small enough to use it", is that the dog grabs, starts shaking and gets the tar whipped out of him because all he has is skin and fur on most of this type of game. He is getting eaten up so bad, he is forced to release and retreat to safety. Aggressive dogs with no backup and a full bite can easily kill any of the above animals. Pigs and hogs leave a lot to be desired as far as most dogs being able to acquire a full bite because much of the overall size makes it real tough. A hogs neck, from looking at a couple I have mounted, is easily 12" + from top to bottom. The hide is also very tight as opposed to the loose fur on many animals. The dog with the full mouth is usually going to get much more aggressive on game, while the fur puller will get weaker. Does the kill make the FMBer more confident while fur puller get weaker because he got his but kicked get less confident. Of course. But there were different confidence levels to start with. A confident, aggressive hunter can be backed off if he is badly hurt and the animal gets a pass and escapes. In a dogs mind....he took a severe beating and lost. Because of this, whenever a dog is badly hurt, the hog can never be allowed to escape. As long as the hog, bear or whatever that hurt the dog is dead, the dog will see it as a win. Very similar to training where the dog "always" has to win. As long as a dog has some wins under his belt, he can withstand a loss on occasion and that loss will usually make him stronger and more determined from what I have seen in the field. Most everything I have observed with good dogs is confidence and retaining that confidence against the environment....or losing that confidence......but they have to have it in spades to be in the top contenders.


----------



## Andy Andrews

> My observations with the frontal bite on *****, coyotes, bobcats and various animals that "are small enough to use it", is that the dog grabs, starts shaking and gets the tar whipped out of him because all he has is skin and fur on most of this type of game. He is getting eaten up so bad, he is forced to release and retreat to safety. Aggressive dogs with no backup and a full bite can easily kill any of the above animals



I don't know much about small game hunting so I'll submit to your experiences in that department. I will say this however, from what I know of using APBT/AB against coyotes, the dogs use the same grips they use on a boar. And I've seldom seen/heard of them curring out either, usually its the coyotes which are finished in a matter of minutes.




> The dog with the full mouth is usually going to get much more aggressive on game, while the fur puller will get weaker.



Not in my experience. I've seen dogs at rodeos with extremely shallow holds having to have break sticks used to seperate them from their quarry.




> Does the kill make the FMBer more confident while fur puller get weaker because he got his but kicked get less confident. Of course.[But there were different confidence levels to start with. A confident, aggressive hunter can be backed off if he is badly hurt and the animal gets a pass and escapes. In a dogs mind....he took a severe beating and lost. Because of this, whenever a dog is badly hurt, the hog can never be allowed to escape. As long as the hog, bear or whatever that hurt the dog is dead, the dog will see it as a win.



I disagree. I think in this context the term "confidence" is essentially what bulldog people refer to as gameness. Gameness is basically the willingness to continue no matter what the odds...It's something to dog has or doesn't have, from birth, and it cannot be shaken no matter how much damage the dog endures while doing battle, either against a boar, cow, coyote, or even against another dog. In my opinion, it's got nothing to do with the depth of a dogs grip or whether or not they switch from hold to hold. 

In all honesty, I've seen dogs suffer injuries that hurt me at my very core, everything from broken legs and muzzles to severe neck/body lacerations, and I've yet to see a "game" dog display any loss of confidence/aggressiveness whether it wins or loses during a hunt. It's because the dog knows it can win as long as it keeps trying.





> As long as a dog has some wins under his belt, he can withstand a loss on occasion and that loss will usually make him stronger and more determined from what I have seen in the field. Most everything I have observed with good dogs is confidence and retaining that confidence against the environment....or losing that confidence......but they have to have it in spades to be in the top contenders.



Granted, I'm coming from a different perspective here, but again I think that the dogs win/loss record and environmental factors have little to do with the dog retaining its confidence/aggressiveness...so long as it's been prepared properly in terms of fatigue, frustration, and pain. In the bulldog world, there are dogs with losses on their records that are still considered "game" because, despite losing they had exhibited their willingness to continue. An example would be Don Mayfield and the way he conditioned his dogs. Many people, when facing Mayfield, would pick up there dogs after a specific amount of time had passed, not because their dogs weren't confident, but because they knew their dogs could not go the distance and they didn't want to risk losing them to injury.




Yes!!! I *finally* got the quote button to work...hooray for me! *happy dance* :lol: :wink: :lol: 


Andy.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Andy, you are a bull dog person it is evident, but, I have seen a number of bulldogs cur. Any dog can and will do it. I will say from personal observation, the only dogs I worry about challenging my dogs are the bull dogs. They have been bred with a single focus and that is is to fight, win or lose. They are simply not bred to submit without a good wippin put on them. It would be difficult to say a bulldog has or has not any merit concerning confidence and how it may affect them. They are bred to be what they are. I have seen a number of breeds take a pit down. They can be like airedales some are just not worth a crap... some are. The difference with pits in the breeding...they are really oinly expected to do one thing well. When a pit curs, it is the breeding and I don't think it has anything to do with confidence. Pits are best suited to bring you a tire if needed and it is difficult to compare them to other dogs. I have had several encounters with pits and it is never pretty and the owners are never happy when it is done but this is not the place for it.


----------



## ann schnerre

all right, here's your chance to help out a newbie:

why do you call "piano bite" on this dog? it looks to me like he has a mouthful of sleeve, the pic may've just been snapped JUST before he really (or was in the process of) clamped down.

what am i missing here? should i even wonder? should i even ASK?


----------



## Kristen Cabe

Bob wasn't talking about the dog in the picture, Ann (I don't think!). He was just talking to Jeff.


----------



## Andy Andrews

Don, yep, I'm a bulldog guy at heart...but I am trying hard to learn about and love the shepherds, honest! :wink: 


And I wasn't trying to imply that a bulldog won't cur, they sure can and do, and you're right, it has everything to do with the breeding. I just thought we were assuming the use of good, quality dogs in this discussion. As for their purpose and or the variety of work they're used for, it really depends on who you talk to...For me, I know and understand them as having a historical base in hunting and farmwork that, while not as popular as other venues, is still very much apart of them.


Oh btw, I checked out your website this afternoon. All I can say is you've got some GREAT photographs! I especially liked the boar hunts. You might want to get to know the Dogoman from Argentina, I have a feeling ya'll will hit it off nicely.  




Andy.


----------



## Woody Taylor

Hey...not to take anything away from the discussion or anything...but we want to hold off on explicit discussion of boar dogs, catch sport, etc. Not the right forum for that type of thing. Please do not link to sites with that kind of info.

Again, nothing personal and no personal judgements intended by this post.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Isn't censorship personal? I don't see the point of using a dog either, thats why God made us smart enough to invent guns, but Hogs get killed everyday to make delicious bacon and porkchops and sausage.......MMMMMMMMMMMMM. 

So who gives a crap how they die. Lets preserve our first amendment rights and leave that be. I have scars to prove that I believe in this crap, and was willing to get shot at for it.

So if you don't mind, and for Gods sake, nobodys children are reading this. Don't censor things like this.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

Ditto that. Sometimes helps to look "outside the box", as long as it stays on topic and helps get to the heart of the matter, I think it's intresting.


----------



## Woody Taylor

:-({|= 

We don't have an issue with discussion around bite types, why certain bites are the way they are, etc. It's just not a site that's intended for discussion/links/photos about pigs and dogs getting torn up. There's a difference. You all are smart enough to talk about dogs and histories without linking to a flippin' pig getting ripped up by a few pits, so be smart.

Seriously, the discussion in this thread is good, save the whining for PMs to me. Don't derail it.


----------



## Tim Martens

i thought those links were interesting...


----------



## Bob Scott

Don the chatter bite, or piano bite I was referring to is when a dog isn't confident on the sleeve and goes up and down it like he's playing the piano.
The chatter your referring to always makes me laugh. Big, tough, male dogs turning to jello right in front of you.
It was explaned to me that the bull breeds have a natrually shallow bit in order for them to breath better on a long, drawn out bite. 
I want to say here that, although I'm a big fan of hunting with dogs, I also realize it's not everyone's cup of tea and the really heavy duty pics may be a bit much for a forum open to the public. 

Dog fighting belongs in the category of "My winkie is bigger then your winkie"! Plain and simple! :evil:


----------



## Bob Scott

Ok, I'm as guilty as the rest on this one! Lets get back to Dons original question about confidence and a full bite. I think they have a big connection.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Just got back in from a few holiday honey doos and shouldn't have rushed the last post as I worded things poorly, which I apologize for  . I have been around a lot of pits, a lot of the game bred types that you don't find in the average home. I have also seen more poorly bred pits than well bred as is evident in most breeds today. I should have excluded them with the varmint dogs in the beginning because confidence has little to do with pits. fighting animals is as naturally bred to them as pointing is to an English pointer so, with that in mind, it is impossible to compare other dogs to pits. They are the undisputed kings of the catch dogs there is no disputing that....but confidence nor lack of confidence has little to do with pits, it is breeding for a single purpose that has put the pit in a class of it's own. 

The old style pits, structure was different that what is seen today. The nose was angled back so they could breath with their mouths full.


----------



## Andres Martin

> t's just not a site that's intended for discussion/links/photos about pigs and dogs getting torn up.


 There's a section in the forum for hunting dogs. There's usually something torn up at/near the business end of any hunting dog... 

...there's less space in my heart for wild pigs than there is for ducks...

Andres...looking towards the future, you should downright FORBID pictures or links to pictures with labs with ducks in their mouth. When I see terrible stuff like that, it makes me want to cry...

Confidence, full mouth bite (or half mouth), I think are genetic. The more confident the dog, the more likely the bite will be more committed, whether with a full mouth or a half mouth.

Getting back on topic, I think you can have dogs that bite with a full mouth - genetically - but are not confident. I think both traits are genetic, but I have no idea if they are related.

One tries to breed dogs that are tough, aggressive, confident, healthy (mentally and physically) and workable, to other like dogs. The mental traits are more difficult to "pin down" genetically, I guess. I have never tried to breed for type, only for "mental" traits. Curiously type has been "fairly" stable. For instance, if the litter's "dad" is very tough...and has a white spot on the chest, and there's a male pup in the litter with the same spot, my totally unscientific view has been that it's often the little pup develops the same type of character as the dad.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I like ducks and pheasants. It depresses me to see them in the mouths of those nasty labs.

As for the white spot, those are the tell tale signs that you are breeding "somewhat" true. I don't want to use "homozygous" because Maren desn't approve of it being used loosly, but saying breeding true isn't right either because it isn't completely. I am not sure what to say know. The other word was genetic. Got to watch that one also. I am not sure how some of these subjects are to be broached with the loss of all the good words for lack of total accuracy. And then the pictures of the ducks and dogs.


----------



## Woody Taylor

Folks are free to PM me if they would like a rationale for why those particular pictures and clips were not suitable for this particular forum.

Edited to say, to hell with it, here's a short rationale:

My interpretation of some of the shots posted were of hogs in pens being jumped by dogs . That is animal fighting, which is illegal in a few places (and should be illegal in a lot more). It's a blood sport. So is dog fighting, so is bear baiting, etc. These activities--apart from whatever feelings you have for boars or bears--are highly dangerous for the dogs involved, and this site does not support sports that are highly dangerous or fatal for the dogs involved. Period. My own personal feeling is that hog catching was derived (as a sport) to replace dog fighting as "socially acceptable" way to test APBTs and bully breeds for gameness. Regardless, it is universally recognized as an activity that is life-threatening for the dogs _done for the purposes of entertainment_.

This site obviously tolerates and encourages discussion of PSD, MWD, and PPD training and scenarios. Those are different-purposed dogs, trained to do dangerous things to individuals who themselves pose a threat to people.

It's fun to play the logic "dozens" on your totalitarian, close-minded, weak and chicken$hit moderators, but the analogy to hunt/retreive animals is a bad one. There is a vast difference in the two activities. If you cannot recognize that, you are not thinking hard enough. If you accept that hog catching is fine and good, I think it's a very quick jump to accept dog fighting. Which will never be tolerated here, btw.

And most of all, there's plenty of discussion forums for hog catching out there. Visit them and be educated, if that is your deal. Google "hog baiting," "hog catching," "hog pig rodeos," or whatever else.

I know some of you all will respond to this with great zest, I'd encourage you to do so via PM, and I'll be happy to go deeper with you there. Or start another thread. Or start another forum site.

What about hunting feral pigs? Yes, dogs are providing a potential working service there. If there is a legitimate forum member who would like to discuss catch dogs on feral pigs in "hunting" (not sport) scenarios, send it up to Mike for consideration. It's his call. My personal take is that it's a sick joke (specifically, catch dogs, not baying dogs), but then again, that's my personal take.

And if you think my philosophy here is weak, I could really give a rip. And I will delete the ad hominem attacks in response to this post the second I see them.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Why Woody? Are they gone? They mist have been the ones I didn't have all day to open. If it was hogs and dogs put to video. There wouls be no way to make it user friendly for a general audience....unless there were really crap dogs that stayed away. 

Actually, the only reason I hunt is to test the dogs..... and hogs is the ultimate test. They are a lot stronger than man, a lot faster than man, a lot meaner than man, and they aren't playing. The only thing they haven't got is a gun.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

I'd like to add that this was discussed fully among all the mods. So it won't change anything to PM Woody. :wink: 

Back to the topic: Confidence.

Andres posted this:

QUOTE: Confidence, full mouth bite (or half mouth), I think are genetic. The more confident the dog, the more likely the bite will be more committed, whether with a full mouth or a half mouth. 

Getting back on topic, I think you can have dogs that bite with a full mouth - genetically - but are not confident. I think both traits are genetic, but I have no idea if they are related. END QUOTE


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Woody said,
"It's fun to play the logic "dozens" on your totalitarian, close-minded, weak and chicken$hit moderators, but the analogy to hunt/retreive animals is a bad one."

I totally agree Woody, bad analogy. It is much better one would be that bad guy bludgeoning the dog with a steel pipe or the dog taking a few rounds in the chest. It is irrelevant because vids of hogs and dogs will never come out looking like a Bros' Grimm fairy tail. Animals in enclosures is unacceptable especially to hunters.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Thanks for understanding my point, Don. Sometimes I wish I could take off my biology hat every once in a while and just go with it, but sometimes I can't.  I'll explain in further detail for anyone who is interested. It is very difficult to study the effects of genetics on behavior, especially as something as complex as mammalian social aggression. There is very rarely a gene that we can point to and say "oh! There it is, that's the one for aggression!" It just doesn't really work that way, though I wish it did! There are some exceptions, but there's a reason most neuroethologists study invertebrates and not mammals. 

That's why I wanted to add that qualifier about whether something is homozygous or true breeding. So to say something is true breeding, that means it would have to be homozygous for all the alleles for the genes of interest. That means that if both parents were homozygous dominant for a single monohybrid trait, all their kids would have it. Fair enough, we see that often in coat color genetics. But if something like 7 genes control eye color and 12 genes control height in humans (if I recall...), it is going to end up being a pretty complex mismash of genes involved in something more complicated like behaviors. It is very hard to get all your ducks in a row for that and that's not even counting things like co-dominance, incomplete dominance, etc. If you wanted to say both parents were homozygous or true breeding for a behavior, ALL of their pups would have to exhibit that trait without exception. That very very rarely happens for the kinds of things you all are talking about (confidence, etc) where you get maybe some of them have it really profoundly, some that do, but not as strongly, but you'll probably have some that do not. 

So you can certainly say having good nerves or confidence is at least partially genetic. I don't think that's necessarily invalid and certainly we would like to breed for what we really like. But saying that every behavior, good or bad, that a dog exhibits is solely genetic just not true. Environment always acts on genetics. If you've got genes predisposing you for alcoholism, that doesn't make you an alcoholic...unless you start drinking heavily. 

In our inbred mouse strains, the mice are practically clones of each other genetically and should be in theory as about true breeding as you can get, but they certainly don't all act the same even within a litter. Every population, be it humans, mice, wolves (and thus dogs), whatever, probably needs a good assortment of worriers and warriors for natural selection's sake. That's certainly true in dog litters of even the most "beautiful" show champions or outstanding working dogs. Not all the puppies are going to be "it," even if the parents are the top of the top of the top. Until we start cloning dogs (that Afghan was really hard to clone apparently), that's just going to be a reality with breeders. And even identical twins (which is what cloning really is in most cases) aren't identical in behavior. So I think with most complicated behaviors, you can breed for type, but that doesn't mean you're going to get it. Nature doesn't like behavior being homozygous after all, as it is counter productive to natural selection. Heterozygousness (if that's a word) is healthy for Nature, though it might not be what we think we want in terms of artificial selection.


----------



## Andy Andrews

To my knowledge ALL of the photos/videos were from actual hunts. Regardless, since the moderators deemed what was shared as being inappropriate for the forum then so be it, the last thing I wanted was to stir the pot.  




Andy.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

What was the subject again Connie? I forgot! :lol: 

Ok, It has been my experience, whether with people, dogs, or whatever, a high degree of confidence will give you a far better chance of achieving more, than someone or something that has not got the confidence to try with conviction. A confident dog/person approaches things with gusto, the less the confidence the less the gusto. Every level in the dog world can be equally associated to specific levels or personalities in people. Unconfident people get used to a specific work environment and end up appearing confident to the unknowing9and they are in that specific setting)......but take that person from that specific work environment and he is a nervous wreck. We have all seen it. Do bite work on a specific field with a specific decoy, session after session and you have a dog that appears to be strong because he 
appears to be confident and looks the real deal". This is where, the owner, who is really attached to the dog, convinces himself that the dog is the real deal and, .........it goes on. IMHO, you will not make a dog something it inherently is not, but, you can make it appear that you have. Andres and others are of the opinion that a FMB is probably genetic, it may be. My dogs are bred very true to type across the board. Let's say the FMB is genetic and these dogs all have it. We are assuming it is an inherited trait now. Which pups will utilize their inherited traits to the fullest advantage if placed in the proper environment? All things, dogs, temperaments, FMB, being the same, the most confident dog will almost always have the capacity to make the most out of what he has been given.....they may even look like equals on the home field but take them out of the familiar environment, they will still be miles apart. The thread title was confidence and was not solely meant to be just about the bite even though that is what started it. There are of course other factors to consider when the dogs are bred loosley. but that is another thing altogether.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Excellent post Maren. It also raised some points. First off, would it be more accurate to say, "close to homozygous", rather than, 'homozygous"?



Maren Bell Jones said:


> That very very rarely happens for the kinds of things you all are talking about (confidence, etc) where you get maybe some of them have it really profoundly, some that do, but not as strongly, but you'll probably have some that do not.


This is the conclusion I finally came to, thus the real need to figure out how to separate them. The best I could do was through the total lack of conditioning till they were mobile and to do the observing prior to environmental influences outside of what little they are exposed to with mom. 




Maren Bell Jones said:


> In our inbred mouse strains, the mice are practically clones of each other genetically and should be in theory as about true breeding as you can get, but they certainly don't all act the same even within a litter. Every population, be it humans, mice, wolves (and thus dogs), whatever, probably needs a good assortment of worriers and warriors for natural selection's sake. That's certainly true in dog litters of even the most "beautiful" show champions or outstanding working dogs. Not all the puppies are going to be "it," even if the parents are the top of the top of the top.


This may raise some eyebrows among a few but, my theory concerning the worriers and the warriors after observing many litters is.....simply put.... the worriers make the warriors stronger from the outset. My personal preference is not the worriers not the warrior but the one's that are very self assured. They don't pick on the worriers and the warriors won't screw with them. Those will be what I call the "ultimate" dogs. They will be superior to every dog in the litter and many litters don't have one like that, some have a couple. When there are two in a litter, they appear to be warriors but if you watch them for a while, the actual warrior pick on the worriers or each other....but never those two unless several gang up on one of them. While they appear to be warriors, what makes the two different is that they only fight with each other....they are equals and that just doesn't work in the dog world. Each one wants to be the only one. They have the ultimate confidence. Those are the breed stock with exceptions of course. 



Maren Bell Jones said:


> So I think with most complicated behaviors, you can breed for type, but that doesn't mean you're going to get it. Nature doesn't like behavior being homozygous after all, as it is counter productive to natural selection. Heterozygousness (if that's a word) is healthy for Nature, though it might not be what we think we want in terms of artificial selection.


The lions in the Nworogondo(something like that) volcanic crater have been an isolated pride for who know how long. The are the largest, strongest lions in the world. They can't escape the crater but, on occasion an outsider will get in....and is promptly killed. One of their main food sources is water buffalo. They are totally inbred.

Cheetah is another. Two distinct genetic groups in the world and they are so close you can graft the hide from one to any.

Elk hears have a top bull. He rounds up his harem and defends them all....and breeds them all. Since he started young and was superior in every way, he will reign supreme for a few years....so he is breeding his daughters also for maybe several generations. Natures way. The odds that one of his offspring are is going to be the one to finally defeat him is great because it will take those same superior genetics to bring him down.

What I am saying is that animals in the wild are, very often, highly inbred. If the weak always die, eventually the ones from the matings with the most resilient genes will be all that is left.....the biggest and the strongest. Irregardless the worries never have the top spot. The less confident will never have the top spot because they take on all challengers.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Oops, double post!


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

I'm mostly going to address the very interesting examples you mention from nature as I don't want to write a book.  Unfortunately for the cheetah, they have undergone two large population bottlenecks (one several thousand years ago and another about a hundred years ago from over hunting) and some biologist predict that they will be extinct within 500 years or less, even if their lands are preserved and poaching stops as they find it very hard to reproduce. The same thing will happen to the Florida panther, but much sooner.   The Eurasian cave lion was nearly twice as big as the modern day African lion, but they also went extinct several thousand years ago when their big prey died out. In the case of elk and other lek species, the megaloceros (also known as the Irish elk) was a case where runaway sexual selection lead to its downfall. Those guys had enormous 12 foot palmate antlers that arose from sexual selection, but it ended up taking a serious toll on those males. Another lek species is the elephant seal. Due to over hunting in the early 1900s, there were only several dozen left. Add that to their "beach master" style of reproduction (one top male dubbed the beach master usually gets a hugely disproportional number of matings) and their numbers are over 100,000, but they are all very inbred. Though their numbers are doing okay, scientists worry that because of lack of genetic variability, disease or a change in environment is going to wipe them back out. So unfortunately, bigger is not always better and neither is inbreeding. It all matters to what is currently being selected for either in terms of sexual or natural selection _at that exact point in time_. 

Not mention that species that you and I mentioned (elk, lions, and elephant seals) where there is a fierce competition for female choice, there are also less dominant males who try sneak matings. It is very very energetically costly to maintain your harem of female elk or female seals, so males that might otherwise not have been head of the herd or the beach master can and do get away with sneak matings. That can maintain some genetic variation. To give you another example from the mice I work with, they have a non-linear dominance hierarchy so the male in charge (often a 2M as it turns out) is the most dominant and aggressive, but it is actually the 2F males that, given the chance, will breed the most with a sexually receptive female! Maybe the 2Ms just take getting some lovin' for granted, I dunno, but the most socially dominant animals in a social setting aren't the only ones contributing genes. Another example are wolves. For years, biologists had assumed that the dominant alpha pair do all the breeding and must have been genetically predisposed to assuming their roles from the start, right? Well, wolf researchers now have found that not only are there occasional sneak matings, but if a subordinate wolf, even an omega, who used to grovel and be very submissive to the leaders can leave the pack, start their own with another lone wolf or whatever, and then they are now the leaders and will be highly dominant over any others who choose to join them. It's highly highly situational as EVERYONE wants to eventually breed, not just the socially dominant ones. So in terms of natural selection, sexual selection, and wild populations, inbreeding is not good for a species, especially long term. Genetic variation must be present or something will come along and take you out. Then again, this is all about natural selection and not about artificial selection, though they aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

So yeah, I think you can talk about wanting to breed with the _goal_ to maintain true to type because type to me at least says you are looking for an overall picture that can be somewhat flexible as far as both working ability and appearance, not that their specific genotype has to yield the exact phenotype. Just as long as folks realize that trying to "breeding true" for a behavior is going to be difficult to impossible since even with cloning the dogs (and even then, identical twins do not behave identically), you're not going to get the exact same dog.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

Few characteristics are purely mendelian, purely polygenic or purely environmental. Most depend on some mix of major and minor genetic determinants, together with environmental influences.

Behavior is a response to some environmental stimulus.
To some extent ALL behavior has a Genetic Basis.

1. some is completely genetic, and therefore heritable
2. some is learned but relies ENTIRELY on genetically based mechanisms

The only way to examine a genetic behavior (that I'm aware of) is through it's environmental manifestations.

The only way to assess "true" prey drive... probably should inolve "real" prey.
To train for real defense, perhaps the dog should (at some point) be trained under the stress of "real-perceived" dangerous conditions.


----------



## Tim Martens

i don't like generalizations. ones like "shallow bite=less confident", "barking during bite=less confidence", "high pitch bark=prey bark", etc. that's all garbage. i guess like all generalizations, it can be _mostly_ true, but certainly not ALWAYS true. a dog that gregg tawney trains is very vocal on the bite and that dog lacks nothing be it confidence, nerves, etc. i would agree that full/shallow is genetic by and large, but that it doesn't necessarily dictate level of confidence. i just don't buy that. i have come to see several shallow mouth biters (including my own dog who is pretty deep on a sleeve, not so deep on a suit) that do not lack confidence to buy into this as a RULE.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Tim, I came to the conclusion, years ago, that there are few absolutes when discussing such things. Even fewer when people start looking at their own dogs. Most I have found out are gifted, much like they perceive their kids. I, myself have been accused of this my dogs are the best syndrome. I point out at that juncture, the perfect dogs I have had are all deceased and were not perfect until they passed. As far as the living ones, I ask that the people name some of my personal dogs that I talk about a lot. They can usually muster up about three names....out of twenty-three. They just never heard of the other twenty. Besides, I have found it is much safer to talk about ones own dogs than it is to talk about someone else's. :lol: 

Daryl said,
"The only way to assess "true" prey drive... probably should inolve "real" prey. 
To train for real defense, perhaps the dog should (at some point) be trained under the stress of "real-perceived" dangerous conditions."

Interesting thought Daryl. I fellow that is really wanting to get into some protection work called me the other night. He has two males of mine and he wanted to tell me how his first meeting with a protection trainer went. It may fit in here ans neither dog is a puppy. One is 5 and the other about 2 1/2. Anyway. the trainer wanted to see how strong the dogs were in prey drive. He had Dan and the two dog stand there while he went to his toy box and got a few things out. He had the dummy on a rope and some toss toys. He parades up and down the place throwing and waving these things and....well both dogs sat there. One on each side of Dan and just looked at the trainer, the toy and up at Dan like, what the heck is this. It was kind of funny because the trainer told Dan that first he had to get some dogs with some prey drive. Dan told him to start with, as I understand, that the dogs wouldn't chase the toys. They were weaned on things like opossums, ***** and groundhogs. The trainer, could not relate to why the dogs would not react to the stimuli. Dan told him it isn't real, live, and he told the guy, the dogs know those toys don't fight back.


----------



## Tim Martens

Don Turnipseed said:


> Tim, I came to the conclusion, years ago, that there are few absolutes when discussing such things. Even fewer when people start looking at their own dogs. Most I have found out are gifted, much like they perceive their kids. I, myself have been accused of this my dogs are the best syndrome. I point out at that juncture, the perfect dogs I have had are all deceased and were not perfect until they passed. As far as the living ones, I ask that the people name some of my personal dogs that I talk about a lot. They can usually muster up about three names....out of twenty-three. They just never heard of the other twenty. Besides, I have found it is much safer to talk about ones own dogs than it is to talk about someone else's. :lol:


you're right. my dog is crap. thanks for showing me the light...


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: including my own dog who is pretty deep on a sleeve, not so deep on a suit


Amazing. These Sch people are so insistant our dogs are crap because of the bite. Heck, their stinking target never even moves. Of course our dogs bite the snark out of it.


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: including my own dog who is pretty deep on a sleeve, not so deep on a suit
> 
> 
> Amazing. These Sch people are so insistant our dogs are crap because of the bite. Heck, their stinking target never even moves. Of course our dogs bite the snark out of it.


ah well, if we start like this :roll: :roll: :

Your dogs don´t ever have a confrontation with the decoy, he always moves away.

These are all DIFFERENT sports, you can´t compare them. Not schh/IPO with ringsports or KNPV with ringsports. I like all 3 :wink: would like to train a ringdog, maybe 1 day...


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Tim Martens said:


> Don Turnipseed said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tim, I came to the conclusion, years ago, that there are few absolutes when discussing such things. Even fewer when people start looking at their own dogs. Most I have found out are gifted, much like they perceive their kids. I, myself have been accused of this my dogs are the best syndrome. I point out at that juncture, the perfect dogs I have had are all deceased and were not perfect until they passed. As far as the living ones, I ask that the people name some of my personal dogs that I talk about a lot. They can usually muster up about three names....out of twenty-three. They just never heard of the other twenty. Besides, I have found it is much safer to talk about ones own dogs than it is to talk about someone else's. :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> you're right. my dog is crap. thanks for showing me the light...
Click to expand...


Yep, that is precisely why it is safer to talk about dogs in general and never any specific dogs. The one thing I have seen that is pretty consistent though, people usually end up with the dog they deserve.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

> the dogs wouldn't chase the toys. They were weaned on things like opossums, ***** and groundhogs. The trainer, could not relate to why the dogs would not react to the stimuli. Dan told him it isn't real, live, and he told the guy, the dogs know those toys don't fight back.


So do the ones that chase toys have some level of imagination, or just an urge to please the handler and receive praise, or something else? I know that's a bit off the topic of confidence, but some correlation might be made (such as, between natural or built confidence).


----------



## Tim Martens

Don Turnipseed said:


> people usually end up with the dog they deserve.


perhaps this explains why out of 23 dogs, you've only had 3 decent ones...

interesting to note that yesterday, the badguy who tried unsuccessfully to fend my dog off with a closet door, didn't think my dog lacked confidence while his arm was being chewed...

more on this later. off to work....


----------



## David Frost

The discussion started as one on confidence. To that end, I thought I'd post what SWGDOG's definition of "confidence is;

""Confidence is what a dog obtains when he or she is conditioned to act on his/her abilities. It's an evnironmentally conditioned, learned response, regardless of safety. The dog is conditioned in such a way that the dog anticipates the he/she can accomplish the behavior repeatedly."""

While the discussion has involved genetics, the type of bite etc., among various other subjects, I thought adding their definition would be interesting.

DFrost


----------



## Daryl Ehret

Familiarity with a routine can give a sense of sureness in a situation, but what about confidence under stress of uncertain conditions? Is it natural, coming from within, and maybe a little partly from the reassurance of felt emotions received from the handler, who's confident or panicked his or herself?


----------



## David Frost

<<<Is it natural, coming from within, and maybe a little partly from the reassurance of felt emotions received from the handler, who's confident or panicked his or herself?>>>

I subscribe to the definition as posted. I don't believe it's natural, I believe it's a learned trait. The handler doesn't have to be a part of the learning process. As we all know however, they certainly can help or hinder the learning.

DFrost


----------



## David Frost

I should have posted SWGDOG's definition of "courage" along with the confidence. It certainly plays into the equation and differs considerably.

"Courage is the ability to work through percieved or real fearful situations. A dog that lacks courage cannot be trained to have it -- it's an innate quality.


DFrost


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote:Your dogs don´t ever have a confrontation with the decoy, he always moves away.

Apparently you need a bit more work on this one.

Sch dogs run down the field to pick up their toy.

Define confrontation, and then tell me how well knpv dogs do on the french decoys. I have seen them get run off by these "NON" confrontational decoys as they target only one area as well.

I am not sure you want to go into this one.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Also, confidant or not, animal aggression is completely separate from what we are looking for in the bitework. the two do not correlate.


----------



## David Frost

I was a bit confused about the confrontation statement as well. I've admitted in the past I'm not all that knowlegdable about sport, although I do enjoy watching it, but we use considerable confrontation in training. With the real possibility of serious confrontation, (in actual utilization) to the point of hitting with objects, fists, feet and choke holds. Most training programs I've been associated with have a great deal of confrontation during training. To include, multiple charging decoys, physical assaults etc. The time to find out if the dog is going to run is on the training field. I think we do everything we can, short of injuring the dog, to demonstrate that.

DFrost


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Selena van Leeuwen said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your dogs don´t ever have a confrontation with the decoy, he always moves away.
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently you need a bit more work on this one.
> 
> Sch dogs run down the field to pick up their toy.
> 
> Define confrontation, and then tell me how well knpv dogs do on the french decoys. I have seen them get run off by these "NON" confrontational decoys as they target only one area as well.
> 
> I am not sure you want to go into this one.
Click to expand...

That wasn´t my point, my point was that the sports are all different, with different goals and excercises. And if I want to bash your sport I could find a point, just like you will find a point in my sport (ob is less e.g.)

But I like your agitation, finally stirred you up:

Don´t worry ´bout our dogs, I know they will do it. 

We also train on that, trying to avoid the dog by the decoy. Dog will land on backs, belly etc. Gives nasty injuries :wink: 

confrontation: both decoy as dog are moving forwards into eachother, without the decoy moves away but runs into the dog. 

example: stick attack
www.vanleeuwen-dutchshepherds.nl/filmpje/spike_stok.mpg
or 
www.vanleeuwen-dutchshepherds.nl/filmpje/robbie_stok_stefroest.mpg

another example: backatack. Decoy is walking in a straight line after the 2 gun shots.

www.vanleeuwen-dutchshepherds.nl/filmpje/robbie_werp_stefroest.mpg


----------



## Don Turnipseed

David, it to bad people writing all this stuff have to give new meaning to everything. The standard definition is self assuredness. It has nothing to do with what was nurtured or anything. As a matter of fact, it is most discernible at 4 1/2 week because the pups have never been handled. They show extreme confidence in a totally new environment at least that is what I want to see but, unfortunately, many obviously cope poorly. After that, confidence can be ruined or enforced. What I am looking at in pups more or less determined what is possible to do with them.

Tim said,
"perhaps this explains why out of 23 dogs, you've only had 3 decent ones..."

No Tim, I said people could only remember about 3 names. 8 of the 23 are females, 9 are 6 mo old pups. That leaves the 6 males, one of which is 13. None of them would be here if the didn't show me a lot of confidence. Still, some have an edge over another. I don't make excuses for them. The first pups sold are the ones that sit outside then door waiting for me to come out. I hate dependent dogs


----------



## Andres Martin

I had a post on here and some petty dictator deleted it???? Why?


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Andres Martin said:


> I had a post on here and some petty dictator deleted it???? Why?


??

The one on page 3?


----------



## Woody Taylor

Andres Martin said:


> I had a post on here and some petty dictator deleted it???? Why?


Does your wife have access to your computer?


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Don't forget to tip your mods........


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen

Andres Martin said:


> I had a post on here and some petty dictator deleted it???? Why?


????


----------



## Andres Martin

> Does your wife have access to your computer?


 :lol: ...no.

I had a post right before Daryl's first - on page three - for a total of two on that page.

Why is it gone?


----------



## Woody Taylor

Andres Martin said:


> Does your wife have access to your computer?
> 
> 
> 
> :lol: ...no.
> 
> I had a post right before Daryl's first - on page three - for a total of two on that page.
> 
> Why is it gone?
Click to expand...

No idea. Could be a BTKATC problem.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Andres Martin said:


> Does your wife have access to your computer?
> 
> 
> 
> :lol: ...no.
> 
> I had a post right before Daryl's first - on page three - for a total of two on that page.
> 
> Why is it gone?
Click to expand...

I absolutely no kidding do not remember ever seeing it, and I've been following this thread.

No mod deleted any post.


----------



## Woody Taylor

Andres Martin said:


> I had a post on here and some petty dictator deleted it???? Why?


But thanks anyway for the kind words. =D>


----------



## David Frost

<<<The standard definition is self assuredness.>>>

That's the problem Don, standard to whom? They SWGDOG are merely trying to come up with a standardized vocabulary. As is often seen in many threads terminology causes as many problems as disagreements. Having said that, your concern about puppies is valid to a breeder perhaps. As an end user trainer, it means nothing to me. I evaluate a dog based on the characteristics of a specific dog. I don't deal in puppies. I don't care what his breeding is, don't care what country he came from, don't care if he's registered with any organization or what titles his parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles have. I have two concerns; health and job specific behaviors.

DFrost


----------



## Andres Martin

> BTKATC


????

By accepting the "petty dictator" description so proudly, are you also indirectly accepting you deleted my post? Or do you really mean, "no idea"?

The post that got lost was about culling, spaying and neutering, bite quality, strong breed specific behaviors, bite mechanics, health and some other stuff.

BTW, as always...I think David is right:


> I have two concerns; health and job specific behaviors.


If I may, I would like to add that job specific behaviors stem from proper breed specific behaviors, and those are primarily genetic; subsequently developed, reinforced, proofed.

A dog can be a confident monster, but he must have a consistent mostly victorious record, so when he's faced with hardship, he can resort to it.

The ultimate issues for dogs are "most probable outcome" and "most desirable outcome", IMO.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Andres Martin said:


> BTKATC
> 
> 
> 
> ????
> 
> By accepting the "petty dictator" description so proudly, are you also indirectly accepting you deleted my post? Or do you really mean, "no idea"?
> 
> The post that got lost was about culling, spaying and neutering, bite quality, strong breed specific behaviors, bite mechanics, health and some other stuff....
Click to expand...

Did you think I was kidding? No mod deleted any post here.

I never saw that post.


----------



## Woody Taylor

> BTKATC????


 A problem *B*etween *T*he *K*eyboard *A*nd *T*he *C*hair.



> By accepting the "petty dictator" description so proudly, are you also indirectly accepting you deleted my post? Or do you really mean, "no idea"?


No idea. And there's no pride there, I don't like that word thrown around as loosely as you do. I'd tell you if I'd deleted it. Was it condescending, trivial, insulting to mods, attempting to mod, threatening, mean, belittling, an argument you pulled in from a another thread, the usual stuff? I don't think anything you posted here was deleted, per what everybody's saying.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

I appreciate the fact that Woody reacted with humor to the mods being called petty dictators. He could've reacted the way many others here do: with a hissy fit and junior high school personal attacks.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Andres Martin said:


> ..... A dog can be a confident monster, but he must have a consistent mostly victorious record, so when he's faced with hardship, he can resort to it. .... .


So he starts confident, but must have it reinforced through training?


----------



## Dan Reiter

> I evaluate a dog based on the characteristics of a specific dog. I don't deal in puppies. I don't care what his breeding is, don't care what country he came from, don't care if he's registered with any organization or what titles his parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles have. I have two concerns; health and job specific behaviors.
> 
> DFrost
> 
> Amen!!!!!!!!
> 
> "desired behavior" they either got it or they dont!
> 
> Dan


----------



## David Frost

<<<So he starts confident, but must have it reinforced through training>>>

Connie, in my world, that is the only way to have it done. I'm not anit-breeder, lord knows we need breeders to keep a check on what's available. I'm only speaking as an end user. The lineage for me is absolutely unimportant. While a breeder would certainly stand a better chance at good stock, breeding proven stock, I would think, is beneficial to them. Maybe it's important for show folks, I don't know if it's important in sport. I do know the only thing I'm concerned with is the job specific behaviors and health. I don't intend to breed them, in fact Troopers are prohibited from breeding their dogs, because they are state property. Besides everyone know state employees get screwed enough. ha .

DFrost


----------



## Don Turnipseed

David Frost said:


> <<<The>>>
> 
> That's the problem Don, standard to whom? They SWGDOG are merely trying to come up with a standardized vocabulary. As is often seen in many threads terminology causes as many problems as disagreements. Having said that, your concern about puppies is valid to a breeder perhaps. As an end user trainer, it means nothing to me. I evaluate a dog based on the characteristics of a specific dog. I don't deal in puppies. I don't care what his breeding is, don't care what country he came from, don't care if he's registered with any organization or what titles his parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles have. I have two concerns; health and job specific behaviors.
> 
> DFrost


Terminology always seems to be somewhat of a barrier to many discussions. Every venue seems to have it own unique definitions. David, the two concerns you mentioned are paramount, I agree. Using your definition doesn't work for what I am looking at in a puppy. I don't want to see what a dog may or may not be conditioned to be. The point is, I want to see what he "really" is. Maybe what I am looking at is a predictor of what the threshold an individual pup will have as an adult...as in...the less self assuredness as a pup, the lower the threshold he will be able to tolerate. Maybe it is difficult to relate to what I see because I never look at a dog as just a dog. I see a pack interacting, all closely related, 24/7. You, and everyone else has to deal with dogs as individuals because they are all different so there is a high margin of chance involved. Because of the dogs being so much alike in most every respect, it may be possible that I can make comparisons that are not possible to the rest. A litter of puppies is predictable here because they react similarly to different stimuli, they move the same when running or walking. Possibly the discussion really has no value because you have no choice but to deal with randomly bred dogs on an individual basis, one by one. I watch how dogs behave in a pack situation and take close notice of what makes them different. Because they are close to being carbon copies, it is an excellent study group for understanding the underlying differences in each of these carbon copies. I have a very good understanding on the aggression of different levels of the hierarchy. Physical attributes, such as size, is part of what becomes apparent. After that, it is the "self assuredness" of the individual, unconditioned, that seems to determine which dogs have the best potential. I got tired of wasting my time with dogs that never had a chance to be top dogs regardless of what they "appeared" to be. I can hunt the top males together very carefully. They have the drive to hunt rather than fight, but, when they get back to the truck and the hunt is over, it can be an explosive situation. They are not hunting anymore, they are eyeballing each other and they have to be picked up in a certain order. I avoid any contact with any dog not in that order because the reaction is instantaneous and it takes a hot shot to break them up....if they don't grab it and snap the wand. This may be straying a bit from the topic but it is why I came to the conclusions I have. There would be little validity in it for anyone else because first, all puppies you will ever see are conditioned to where you can't tell which is which. Secondly, they will all have very individual reactions to everything. Possibly the self assuredness only works when there is a close similarity of every individual.


----------



## Andy Andrews

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Also, confidant or not, animal aggression is completely separate from what we are looking for in the bitework. the two do not correlate.




That's interesting, Jeff. While being just a newb and having never done it before, I can't really say(or know) what is being sought after in bitework. But, I can say this from at least a bulldog perspective, animal aggression does not equate to gameness(ie confidence/willingness to continue). It's a trait inherent to the dog, therefore in my strictly newb opinion, it can/does translate into a variety of work to include such things as protection and SAR. It gives the dog the ability to stay in the "fight", whatever it might be at that time, well after other less confident dogs have curred out under the same conditions.


Now with bulldogs, I *think* it would still require a hard dog, one from a line not pre-disposed to submissiveness to humans, in order to perform the job at any real level. 




Andy.


----------



## David Frost

<<<Possibly the discussion really has no value because you have no choice but to deal with randomly bred dogs on an individual basis, one by one.>>>

That's not true. I have as many choices as my budget will withstand. You missed my point; as an end user, what they were like as puppies doesn't concern me.

I can understand someone, such as yourself, that deals in puppies having a different perspective. 

DFrost


----------



## Guest

Just had to say that I enjoy hearing people like David Frost post, they are able to get a point across with one or two paragraphs and not insult or belittle anyones opinion or ideas.

If I ever grow up I want to be like that.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Gerry Grimwood said:


> Just had to say that I enjoy hearing people like David Frost post, they are able to get a point across with one or two paragraphs and not insult or belittle anyones opinion or ideas.


Isn't it amazing? :lol:


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I understand your point David. That is where I kind of realized that my situation is not the same as most. Being and end user and not having control of the puppies environment, is a whole different ball game. I can take the most self assured pup in the world and put it in bad enough situation that it will never be the dog it could have been. The environment plays a tremendous role between puppy hood and the finished product. I figure the environment to be about 65% where genetic is about 35%. You've heard the statement, " genetics determines what a dog can be....the environment determines what it will be." That is about the size of it. Here is an example that "ruined a pup the wrong way". Great pup named Hunter. Had all the promise in the world. He was yard-ed with a six year old non dog aggressive male that had been on big hogs from 9 mo old. Well, he was non aggressive with dogs that could defend themselves but, as I would later notice, the young and the weak he was the opposite. He whipped Hunter pretty good one day so I moved the older dog to an adjoining yard. Hunter spent the next 5 mo sitting at that fence watching the older dog. Well, I heard a heck of a commotion out in the yards one day and Hunter had got through the fence into the yard with the older dog and put a severe whipping on that dog. He was 11 mo at the time and to this day, I have never been able to put Hunter with another male. He has his own yard with a female. His electric fence is backed two feet away from the yard fence to keep him from grabbing dogs through the fence. Just for some side info, Hunter is the first dog picked up after a hunt. Don't even tough another dog till he is in the box....but he is great in the field. I honestly don't think he would have been that way had he not been whipped when a pup. He possibly might not have been that way had he lost that fight at 11mo either but I don't think it would have mattered at that point.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Yes, I get the feeling David may have the pleasure of writing a report on occassion. Detailed reports. I think it is one of those behaviors that has been reinforced possibly. :lol:


----------



## David Frost

<<< may have the pleasure of writing a report on occassion. Detailed reports.>>>

Unfortunately, it comes with the territory. I sometimes envy my two assistant dog trainers. While I'm fighting the budget, activity reports, tracking dog age, health, proficiency, projected replacements etc, etc, they are out training dogs. I really liked this business much better when I was just the "dog trainer". On another off topic comment, someone complained about having a post removed, yet none of the mods know anything about it, wellllllll, it happened to me as well. So either we have a rogue mod somewhere, hiding and messing with our minds or where the ding dong did that post go. I guess in the nether regions of electronic gremlins.

Now back to your regularly scheduled program.

DFrost


----------



## Daryl Ehret

"genetics determines what a dog can be....the environment determines what it will be."

My intrest is from a breeding perspective, and I believe that starting with the best "aptitude" is more significant for the conditioning phase than the importance that David implies. If "confidence" is the realm of the trainer, then perhaps a thread should be started on "courage".


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I suspect we are more on the same page Daryl. I want some measure of the pup in it's "raw" state. If it is true that the confidence can be built up ot decreased by environmental influences, it just seems natural to want to start with the pup with the most potential. I know for a fact that it can be decreased so the opposite is very likely true also. I have kept enough pups over the years to know that that self assuredness I see as a pup always produces a stronger, more stable dog as an adult provided the environmental factors are the same. While you or myself have a direct interest in producing and recognizing a particular pup or pups with that potential, it is our creation. We have a very real interest in that pup achieving. We can only produce a limited number of pups so we are very aware of each and every one of them. From a trainers standpoint, they can look at 100 dogs and, pick a few out of that that may fit their needs. As David said, they are the end user and he wants to see the final copy. We have to ascertain which pup has the best potential of achieving what the new owner wants it for but we don't have the luxury of waiting for that final product. A thread on courage may be of interest, but, I think it will boil down to the same thing.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote:We also train on that, trying to avoid the dog by the decoy. Dog will land on backs, belly etc. Gives nasty injuries 

Are you saying that you DO train the esquive? Just trying to get what you are saying. It is really easy to esquive flyers, like I see with your dogs. 

OK, point # two. Many dogs have the drive to go down the field to get a bite on an essentially still decoy, How many have it after the dog has been esquived and is now having to confront a decoy. I see this is where a lot of the dogs fail. Before the reward was always given, now it has to be earned.

Also, another point, the farther a dog bites down the arm, the less it wants to confront the decoy. Seeing that you have to have some giant mat thing to keep your dogs from biting lower than the bicep................. :roll: 

So there miss smarty pants. Maybe you don't know what confrontation from a dogs standpoint really is. :twisted:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Andy. Pitbulls are terriers plain and simple. There is very little "bulldog" in them and they act like a terrier always. It is the terrier that gives them the ability to work, as the bulldog has always been fairly useless no matter what the "historians" have said.


----------



## Bob Scott

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote:We also train on that, trying to avoid the dog by the decoy. Dog will land on backs, belly etc. Gives nasty injuries
> 
> Are you saying that you DO train the esquive? Just trying to get what you are saying. It is really easy to esquive flyers, like I see with your dogs.
> 
> OK, point # two. Many dogs have the drive to go down the field to get a bite on an essentially still decoy, How many have it after the dog has been esquived and is now having to confront a decoy. I see this is where a lot of the dogs fail. Before the reward was always given, now it has to be earned.
> 
> Also, another point, the farther a dog bites down the arm, the less it wants to confront the decoy. Seeing that you have to have some giant mat thing to keep your dogs from biting lower than the bicep................. :roll:
> 
> So there miss smarty pants. Maybe you don't know what confrontation from a dogs standpoint really is. :twisted:


"Reward was always given, not earned". Wouldn't a good (confident) dog learn to adjust to the esquived by learning it can't get what it wants with the flyin? 
An honest question! Honest!


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

There are dogs that seem to be really hard to esquive. But it really isn't the point. Many people watch the videos and see the pretty decoys.....so fast! But never see the decoy that doesn't esquive, and has really fast stickwork.

I have seen decoys headbut the dogs, mash their faces into the ground on the object guard, crack the dog with the butt of the stick in the eye, as well as many other really dirty tricks. To say that there is no confrontation is.......well........amatuer.


----------



## Bob Scott

http://www.workingdogforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=1871
OK, I moved this over here. What jeff wants to show is the pic of his dog going in on Woody. 
OK, OK! I'm old! I couldn't move just one pic.  :roll:


----------



## Tim Martens

> http://www.workingdogforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=1871
> OK, I moved this over here. What jeff wants to show is the pic of his dog going in on Woody.
> OK, OK! I'm old! I couldn't move just one pic.  :roll:


--

n00b....


----------



## Tim Martens

now compare that to my crap dog who "flys" because he isn't esquieved or whatever...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7v_Bbc0VsI

oh yeah, he has no confidence too...


----------



## Bob Scott

Easier to move a pic of what Jeff is describing from my album.

Late entry! 
http://www.rwdc.org/images/Feb06Thunder12.jpg


----------



## Bob Scott

Thanks Tim!..........I think. :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Tim, off topic, but awesome music choice for the clip. Love that Requiem For a Dream soundtrack. 8)


----------



## Tim Martens

Maren Bell Jones said:


> Tim, off topic, but awesome music choice for the clip. Love that Requiem For a Dream soundtrack. 8)


yeah, i love that song. someday i will make a full length video with the whole song, but it's so awesome i HAD to do something with it straight away, so i just made this small clip...


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

First I would like to say that in no way am I responsible for this dog waiting this long to do his entry, (that I know of) but this is what I like to see. He also centers you as he comes in, which I had nothing to do with. (that I know of) It all gets blamed on Micheal Ellis. Thanks Mike!

Much more confrontational than going to the bicep.    

Tim, your dog doesn't fly in non training scenarios, or does he?


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

And secondly when he does, can I have his frequent flier miles? :lol:


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote:We also train on that, trying to avoid the dog by the decoy. Dog will land on backs, belly etc. Gives nasty injuries
> 
> Are you saying that you DO train the esquive? Just trying to get what you are saying. It is really easy to esquive flyers, like I see with your dogs.
> 
> OK, point # two. Many dogs have the drive to go down the field to get a bite on an essentially still decoy, How many have it after the dog has been esquived and is now having to confront a decoy. I see this is where a lot of the dogs fail. Before the reward was always given, now it has to be earned.
> 
> Also, another point, the farther a dog bites down the arm, the less it wants to confront the decoy. Seeing that you have to have some giant mat thing to keep your dogs from biting lower than the bicep................. :roll:
> 
> So there miss smarty pants. Maybe you don't know what confrontation from a dogs standpoint really is. :twisted:


Your arguments gets less to the point if you know you´re not right, eh Jeff?

The "kappen" is for safety reasons in learning stage, dog can better be on biceps. If there is not, the decoy ends up with a broken arm because of the speed of the attack. We want a dog high up the bicep, not under..that´s why the kappen are used...not because there very low on the under arm :roll: 

The moving is to learn a dog to target mid chest with head to bicep. And have you ever seen a suspect who stand still? Our dogs are trained to do more than only the programme, 3 of them are working policedogs. 
In the end all of them are able to be a working policedog, not just have their certificate.

In their attack they will be hit with the stick, _before_ they´re biting.

But if you´re want to feel free to try esquive 1 or 2 of our dogs when you´re in the neighbourhood :mrgreen:



Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I have seen decoys headbut the dogs, mash their faces into the ground on the object guard, crack the dog with the butt of the stick in the eye, as well as many other really dirty tricks. To say that there is no confrontation is.......well........amatuer.


No, not in my world. Confrontation is the hit between decoy and dog, like I already said in my other post.
If you call confrontation: hitting a dog when he is already biting, well I call that distraction and trying to get the the dog off.


----------



## Kristen Cabe

Hi, um, excuse me just for a second, but what the heck does "esquive" mean?? :-k According to www.dictionary.com, it isn't a word.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

So Tim, that's your flyer. I am not into the finer points of manwork buit, what the heck is wrong with that? The dog is commited and he isn't planning on backing out from what I see. I think they may put the "flyers" down because they make the other dogs just look average. Is flying a learned trait where the dog knows he isn't really going to be hurt and subsequently appears more commited or has he always been that way?


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood

Kristen Cabe said:


> Hi, um, excuse me just for a second, but what the heck does "esquive" mean?? :-k According to www.dictionary.com, it isn't a word.


esquive - dodging, evading, etc. to make the dog miss its bite, slow the dog down on the entry, or force the dog to get only a partial bite (shallow bite).

I do it with sleeve dogs too, some of them do horribly at first, you have to train for it or have the right dog.


----------



## Lacey Vessell

Very interesting thread. I'm learning alot. 

My two cents: Almost all of the fliers that I have seen - are "natural" fliers, not something that was intentionally trained. Before I had the pleasure of seeing a ring decoy work, I had no clue what an esquive was even though we were using them, just calling them something different in police dog training. Even fliers learn to adjust to the situation at hand - IF the dog has the confidence, drives and courage to confront a decoy to begin with. Esquieves just seemed to piss my dog off more - granted the bites at times were more frontal, but he would just push into the bite every opportunity he got.


----------



## Tim Martens

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> First I would like to say that in no way am I responsible for this dog waiting this long to do his entry, (that I know of) but this is what I like to see. He also centers you as he comes in, which I had nothing to do with. (that I know of) It all gets blamed on Micheal Ellis. Thanks Mike!
> 
> Much more confrontational than going to the bicep.
> 
> Tim, your dog doesn't fly in non training scenarios, or does he?


he hasn't had an opportunity to get a running start when biting someone for real so i don't know. i assume he would do it on a straight send away. i like fliers. in the real world, i very much doubt anyone is going to esquieve a dog. even if they do, the dog just comes back and bites the guy. no harm...

much like jeff's part in his dogs entry, i had nothing to do with his "flying". he came that way...


----------



## Bob Scott

Ever see a flying Presa? Noche is 7 months old. 
http://www.rwdc.org/images/Noche7.5monBW4.jpg


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Bob Scott said:


> Ever see a flying Presa? Noche is 7 months old.
> http://www.rwdc.org/images/Noche7.5monBW4.jpg


Wow!


----------



## Greg Long

Im not seeing the point to this whole thread but Im just a dumb country boy.There was a couple of researchers that lived with a wolf pack for several years.One of the things they witnessed was an omega female become the alpha female in the same pack.I dont think confidence had anything to do with it.I know I know we are talking dogs not wolves.I just think it is futile to focus in on one thing like "confidence" when dogs are dynamic creatures not static.They think dynamically and interact with there environment that way.

The dog can either do the work or he cant.If you breed 2 dogs that can do the work then your headed in the right direction for work.

The handlers attitude can affect the dog more than anything environmental or genetic IMO.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Kristen Cabe said:


> Hi, um, excuse me just for a second, but what the heck does "esquive" mean?? :-k According to www.dictionary.com, it isn't a word.


If you Google the word DOGS, comma, and then the training word, you'll have better luck, even if the words are not English. :wink:


----------



## Bob Scott

Greg Long said:


> Im not seeing the point to this whole thread but Im just a dumb country boy.There was a couple of researchers that lived with a wolf pack for several years.One of the things they witnessed was an omega female become the alpha female in the same pack.I dont think confidence had anything to do with it.I know I know we are talking dogs not wolves.I just think it is futile to focus in on one thing like "confidence" when dogs are dynamic creatures not static.They think dynamically and interact with there environment that way.
> 
> The dog can either do the work or he cant.If you breed 2 dogs that can do the work then your headed in the right direction for work.
> 
> The handlers attitude can affect the dog more than anything environmental or genetic IMO.


Hard to disagree with that Greg. I think most discussions among dog folks are more about giving opinions then agreeing with another's views. Nothing wrong with that! 
Dogs are definatley dynamic and confidence is often situational. 
As you commented about the wolf pack, dogs can be similar. A given situation will bring different dogs to the top. 
Breeding two dogs that can do the work is obviously the right start but any breeder will agree that it's not a guarantee. Nice to see verification.


----------



## Erik Berg

Back to the original question, they way a dog naturally bites is genetic I think we can agree on, but judging the dog only on the fullness of his bite is not a good idea, thats just a small part of the dog, if the dog bites hard but only with a halfmouth bite and still are a very confident dog, why bother? Especially when a more fuller bite can be trained if someone wants that for SCH where the fullness of the bite is judged more than in many other sports. 

I don´t now if you all agree, but a dog that bites the sleeve very full without training, is in general to high in prey and therefore also harder to teach a natural bark in the guardiang exercize, because the high preydrive blocks the dogs mind, a dog that is the more "chewy" type is less focused on his "preyitem" and easier to bark naturally. At least a SCH guru said that, if I understood him correctly  So dogs that are a bit less preydriven and more naturally serious/defencive would probably genetically be less "sleevesuckers", and for a practical point of view I guess thats not an issue.

The old "my sport is better than yours" debate seems to never end, but as selena said, why compare apple with oranges, even if it could be funny  Some would probaly say mondio/french ring is for preydogs only, and no emphasis on nosework either :wink:


----------



## Tim Martens

Erik Berg said:


> Back to the original question, they way a dog naturally bites is genetic I think we can agree on, but judging the dog only on the fullness of his bite is not a good idea, thats just a small part of the dog, if the dog bites hard but only with a halfmouth bite and still are a very confident dog, why bother? Especially when a more fuller bite can be trained if someone wants that for SCH where the fullness of the bite is judged more than in many other sports.


 =D>


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen

Erik Berg said:


> Back to the original question, they way a dog naturally bites is genetic I think we can agree on, but judging the dog only on the fullness of his bite is not a good idea, thats just a small part of the dog, if the dog bites hard but only with a halfmouth bite and still are a very confident dog, why bother? Especially when a more fuller bite can be trained if someone wants that for SCH where the fullness of the bite is judged more than in many other sports.
> 
> I don´t now if you all agree, but a dog that bites the sleeve very full without training, is in general to high in prey and therefore also harder to teach a natural bark in the guardiang exercize, because the high preydrive blocks the dogs mind, a dog that is the more "chewy" type is less focused on his "preyitem" and easier to bark naturally. At least a SCH guru said that, if I understood him correctly  So dogs that are a bit less preydriven and more naturally serious/defencive would probably genetically be less "sleevesuckers", and for a practical point of view I guess thats not an issue.
> 
> The old "my sport is better than yours" debate seems to never end, but as selena said, why compare apple with oranges, even if it could be funny  Some would probaly say mondio/french ring is for preydogs only, and no emphasis on nosework either :wink:


=D> =D> =D>


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

My original reply went into the ethersphere, so here is the short version.


Quote:Some would probaly say mondio/french ring is for preydogs only, and no emphasis on nosework either 

Then why are they dominating the Sch world? How is it that these prey dogs are smoking the crap out of this sport? ESPECIALLY SINCE THEY DON'T DO "NOSEWORK?" Maybe now you can see that the tracking is a joke in Sch.

Seleena, a dog that tries to bite below the elbow is avoiding the decoy. Plain and simple, and you must have dogs that do this, because you have to put stuff on your suit to keep them from doing so.

I will be more than glad to catch ANY of your dogs. Send them from as far as you want. I will catch whatever you got all day long. I will esquive them as well. It is not difficult. And if you want, I can hit them either before or after the bite, whatever you like.


----------



## Woody Taylor

Lacey Vessell said:


> Almost all of the fliers that I have seen - are "natural" fliers, not something that was intentionally trained. .


Slightly off-topic...are they natural or learned "fliers" if they are ringsport dogs and start off with leg bites? Just wondering.


----------



## Jerry Lyda

These are great posts. I've been reading and not saying anything but I do have a question. What do you all think about the Volhard Aptitute Tests for young puppies? I know that these test are for the regular dog but I can see where they may be a good indicator for what a working dog can be. Learned behavior starts at birth but with a puppy around six to eight weeks old couldn't these test show more of the genetics that the pup has? I like the Volhard test but it's not the only means I use to pick a pup. Now if a pup shows that it has the genetics that we desire and we train it properly and not mess it up with the enviroment wouldn't that become the perfect dog. 

*Jerry, you may want to start this up in a separate thread, not sure if you meant to discuss Volhard stuff in general or relative to this topic...your call {/Woody}*


----------



## Dick van Leeuwen

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> a dog that tries to bite below the elbow is avoiding the decoy. Plain and simple, and you must have dogs that do this, because you have to put stuff on your suit to keep them from doing so.
> 
> Only someone who EDIT [does not] EDIT know anything about training (police)dogs can write this down. :?
> (By the way what are your credentials for training dogs. Not the amount of dogs but the result/titels/championships ect as a handler and a trainer)
> I have seen/heard a lot of handlers with a big mouth destroy even so much dogs because of that, but they finish and achieve nothing. :twisted: :roll:
> 
> I will be more than glad to catch ANY of your dogs. Send them from as far as you want. I will catch whatever you got all day long. I will esquive them as well. It is not difficult. And if you want, I can hit them either before or after the bite, whatever you like.
> 
> Oh Yeah, I forgot, superman is an American invention.  :mrgreen:



By the way, the last time I looked on our mariage papers my wife´s name is *Selena*......... 8) 8)


----------



## Connie Sutherland

*** MOD NOTE ***

Posts that include personal insults will be edited.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Connie, let the insults fly. I am OK with that.

Ah, the secretive world of the Police dog, how magical. Too bad we were talking knpv.

Superman? I guess your standards are a bit higher, we just have regular human decoys. :twisted: 

Quote:Only someone who EDIT [does not] EDIT know anything about training (police)dogs can write this down.

Actually anyone can write it down. A strong dog would want to confront the decoy, and a weak one would want to avoid the decoy. It is fairly simple. Are you saying that a dog that targets further down the arm is just as strong?

So now that I have stirred you up, would you say that your ego is tied to the performance of your dogs? :twisted: I am saying ego, not pride. :twisted: 

As far as misspelling your wifes name it was a simple typo, no insult intended. 

However, pointing out that you have to use devices to get a dog to bite in an area that it is not comfortable for him/her could be.


Quote:Your arguments gets less to the point if you know you´re not right, eh Jeff? 

Are you sure you want them to the point? Could get embarrassing. See my ego is not tied to a dog. I know and am more than willing to point out Buko's and my own faults. 

So there.


----------



## Andres Martin

Jeff...

Who is the most prominent trainer in Mondioring - or FR? Do you respect that person's knowledge? Are you going to question his methods assuming YOU KNOW MORE? Or are you going to ask so YOU CAN LEARN?

Dick van Leeuwen IS THAT TOP PERSON in KNPV. From MY PERSPECTIVE...I would like to see a bunch more RESPECT, because from MY PERSPECTIVE I don't want to lose him as a poster just because of your wiseass remarks.

Anticipating someone may say BS like, "blah! blah! Mr. van Leeuwen can defend himself", I wish to say that for someone like him it's FAR, FAR easier to just say, "#&ck this", and not participate anymore. I hope I open the way for this stupidity you're promoting TO STOP. If you don't know why a dog is taught to target a SPECIFIC area...and you simply assume that the barrier is placed so the dog DOES NOT CHOOSE the end of the arm...I STRONGLY SUGGEST YOU ASK...

YOU MAY LEARN SOMETHING.


----------



## Andy Andrews

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Andy. Pitbulls are terriers plain and simple. There is very little "bulldog" in them and they act like a terrier always. It is the terrier that gives them the ability to work, as the bulldog has always been fairly useless no matter what the "historians" have said.



Jeff, you've clearly been reading the works of Carl Semenic, haven't you? :wink: Rather than waste space on this thread with an unrelated topic, we'll have to go ahead and agree to disagree on this issue. However, I would suggest you broaden your frame of reference a little by perhaps reading the works of people like Richard Stratton and Diane Jessup.




Andy.


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen

> Jeff...
> 
> Who is the most prominent trainer in Mondioring - or FR? Do you respect that person's knowledge? Are you going to question his methods assuming YOU KNOW MORE? Or are you going to ask so YOU CAN LEARN?
> 
> Dick van Leeuwen IS THAT TOP PERSON in KNPV. From MY PERSPECTIVE...I would like to see a bunch more RESPECT, because from MY PERSPECTIVE I don't want to lose him as a poster just because of your wiseass remarks.
> 
> Anticipating someone may say BS like, "blah! blah! Mr. van Leeuwen can defend himself", I wish to say that for someone like him it's FAR, FAR easier to just say, "#&ck this", and not participate anymore. I hope I open the way for this stupidity you're promoting TO STOP. If you don't know why a dog is taught to target a SPECIFIC area...and you simply assume that the barrier is placed so the dog DOES NOT CHOOSE the end of the arm...I STRONGLY SUGGEST YOU ASK...
> 
> YOU MAY LEARN SOMETHING.




You´re right in 1 part, Andres...Dick has said "f%&$ck you" to one board..the one he was moderator on: KNPV forum... :wink: 

The other parts, well I know that parts and still learning everyday. If I sit down in discussion with dad and Dick I´m really a n00b Embarassed It´s like a 8-grader watch the proffesors dicuss... And oh boy...you can learn a lot (and hear the females doesn´t belong in KNPV :twisted: :roll: ) :mrgreen:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote:. If you don't know why a dog is taught to target a SPECIFIC area...and you simply assume that the barrier is placed so the dog DOES NOT CHOOSE the end of the arm...I STRONGLY SUGGEST YOU ASK...

Andres, I don't need to ask. If you notice, I point out that dogs that target the lower end of the arm are farther away from the confrontation point, the decoys face. It is not like I have trained 1 dog.     

Of course I think that Dick should post more. God knows I know where to poke to get the guy to show up.     

I see many points that are being missed here, one of which is that the confidence described by Don is based from what I have read on animal aggression. 

Animal aggression is useless for the bitework.

I am not saying his dogs are useless for bitework, just that animal aggression is.

The curious point to me is if one were to use the methods that he uses in raising puppies, would YOU think that this confidence is usefull for the bitework.

I am looking for what YOU think, not a discussion of what I think, as I already know what I think.

I think there were many interesting points discussed here. I am going to dig out my favorites later tonight and post them.


----------



## Guest

quote "I hope I open the way for this stupidity you're promoting TO STOP."
unquote.

Well that's a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black,if I've ever heard one.

What's wrong with a semi heated debate, I was enjoying it and trying to learn from it from both sides.


----------



## Tim Martens

i too would REALLY like to keep dick as a poster here.

jeff, wasn't it you that said weaker dogs are upper body dogs and the stronger dogs are leg dogs? how does this theory jibe with the further down on the body the dog goes, the less confrontation he wants?


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Tim I know you don't want to contribute, but do you think that is true?


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen

@ jeff...did you see the movies? is that "not willing to confronte". As explained before, there not lower arm biters from nature but it is a safety thing and a learning tool. 
We use the "kap" on the chest & back more :wink: Somehow you don´t want to hear or understand this, okay fine by me. But if that is your only argument..why should I bother to react.

This will be the last time.


ps: Im the only one who can "poke" up the good way :wink: :mrgreen:


----------



## Tim Martens

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Tim I know you don't want to contribute, but do you think that is true?


d'oh. thanks for the reminder.

one last...do i think what is true? that you said that or that leg dogs are in fact "stronger". yes, i think you said that. no, i don't believe it to be true...


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Now is that because many dogs are placed on the upper body and never put on the legs at all?


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen

Tim Martens said:


> Jeff Oehlsen said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tim I know you don't want to contribute, but do you think that is true?
> 
> 
> 
> d'oh. thanks for the reminder.
> 
> one last...do i think what is true? that you said that or that leg dogs are in fact "stronger". yes, i think you said that. no, i don't believe it to be true...
Click to expand...

How I hate it to agree with Jeff...but legbites gives harder confrontations (at least in KNPV). Here they wear hard leather protection at the underleg & jute, and the decoy is running into the dog. An upperbody absorps the confrontation more than the lower leg.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Why would "hate" to agree ever come into play?    

And stop answering the easy questions.........what about the other things I was asking? 8) 8) 8) 8) 

Tim, the further out the arm a dog goes naturally, you will start to see the "other" behaviors that go with the weak stuff.

Your dog was probably never put on the leg, so the "Leg vs Upperbody"
stuff doesn't apply. I think that a lot of people see what I am saying there as if your dog is on the upper body it is weak.


----------



## Tim Martens

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Now is that because many dogs are placed on the upper body and never put on the legs at all?


yes, that is my belief. if a dog is brought up primarily biting upper body and is introduced to leg bites further on in the training, then of course the dog will be more comfortable going up top if given a choice. that to me, does show weakness in character in the dog. just that they prefer up top, but will not hesitate to bite a leg if need be.

again, i hate to comment on my own dog (there are some terrier breeders here that incidently don't know poop about bite work, who will say you can't comment on your own dog)...my dog was an IPO 1 when i bought him. not much suit work and certainly minimal to no leg bites. we introduced him to leg bites and did some work on them, but given the choice he will always go up top. the times when he has bitten legs: in the dark. two training scenarios where the decoy was in a pitch black room, he bit the decoys leg and then transferred up; his first street bite was a leg bite on a guy laying down (i kept him on leash so only thing to bite was a leg). so again, he will bite was is available, but given a choice, will always go upstairs. i don't think its' because he's weak, i just think it's what he knows best and is most comfortable with...


jeff, now stop sucking me into contributing...


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> And stop answering the easy questions.........what about the other things I was asking? 8) 8) 8) 8)


As far as I know I answered all you questions, but help remind me which I haven´t?

Ohhhh you have forgot to answer the ones from Dick, will you like to answer them to?


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

I also see that as a conditioned response. 

I see dogs that almost refuse to bite the leg. I would say that I do not like the character in a dog like this, because he tries to choose the upper body, exclusive of all else.

I prefer one that looks to where he like to bite, then says "F" it and bites with commitment wherever. 

There are of course degrees to this, and I am talking about what I really want to see, and I am talking about dogs in general, not any ONE dog.


----------



## Simon Mellick

My dog's had about even foundation on upper and lower body. He seems to naturally target legs, but his avoidance threshold creeps up WAY sooner when he's on the leg as opposed to an upper body bite.

Simon


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote:Ohhhh you have forgot to answer the ones from Dick, will you like to answer them to?

There were questions? :lol: 

I have titled dogs in Sch, as well as trained police dogs for a few depts. I have trained a lot of PP dogs, and am working on the ring thing.

I am struggling with the ring thing because I rarely actually get to train. It is also fairly new to me. I am working on fixing this problem because the club that I belong to know is truely the worst club I have ever belonged to. We have a matriarchy and a bunch of accolytes. The best trainers we have rarely show up, the decoys are sick of the repression, and all of them eventually stop showing up. So I get the short end of the stick. I am not training with them anymore, and will start training elsewhere. If I can get people to show up, the results should be quite different. Discussion for another day for sure.

We have schools here in the states, but I am a bit old to go to them for "credentials". Honestly, I look at some of the schools and would be going to get a piece of paper. I have been training dogs longer than most of these people.

I like my obscurity, so anytime that you have a question of wether or not I can train a dog it is perfect.

However, if you ever stop by Colorado, you can find out how well I really can train. Bring a dog. Might learn something. :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: 

What are you trying to cook now????


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen

I have already cooked, it is 00:17 am here..it is officially my 30th birthday today( 20th december) :roll: 

One day Jeff, one day, you will eat dust :mrgreen: 

G´night already passed my bedtime.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Erik Berg said:


> Back to the original question, they way a dog naturally bites is genetic I think we can agree on, but judging the dog only on the fullness of his bite is not a good idea, thats just a small part of the dog, if the dog bites hard but only with a halfmouth bite and still are a very confident dog, why bother? Especially when a more fuller bite can be trained if someone wants that for SCH where the fullness of the bite is judged more than in many other sports.
> 
> I don´t now if you all agree, but a dog that bites the sleeve very full without training, is in general to high in prey and therefore also harder to teach a natural bark in the guardiang exercize, because the high preydrive blocks the dogs mind, a dog that is the more "chewy" type is less focused on his "preyitem" and easier to bark naturally. At least a SCH guru said that, if I understood him correctly  So dogs that are a bit less preydriven and more naturally serious/defencive would probably genetically be less "sleevesuckers", and for a practical point of view I guess thats not an issue.
> 
> The old "my sport is better than yours" debate seems to never end, but as selena said, why compare apple with oranges, even if it could be funny  Some would probaly say mondio/french ring is for preydogs only, and no emphasis on nosework either :wink:


Excellent thoughts Eric, "a dog that is full mouth with no training os to high in prey". This opens pandora's box. Maybe the most "self assured" dog is not the best choice for an ideal sport dog. Theoretically, I could take the one that was secondary in being "self assured" and make a better sport dog out of it. Maybe the most "self assured" is better suited to real life, live or die situatiions, whether it be a drugged up crazy or a 300lb hog. This may be a case where the most may not be the best.

Now, if biting below the bicep indicates a weak dog in as much as the dog is avoiding the decoy, a weak partial bite below the bicep means what....good dog?

Tim, I said from the get go I have never even seen bitework games. So the purpose to your comment was what....your going to quit whining and contribute? I said your dog looked good to me..... that is all you get son.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Selena van Leeuwen said:


> I have already cooked, it is 00:17 am here..it is officially my 30th birthday today( 20th december) :roll:
> 
> One day Jeff, one day, you will eat dust :mrgreen:
> 
> G´night already passed my bedtime.


HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!! \/


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote:One day Jeff, one day, you will eat dust 

Not likely. The whole point of the esquive is to take the speed away from the dog. After that? Your dogs are too little.

Happy Birthday, you are now officially old.


----------



## Andres Martin

Gelukkige verjaardag! =D>

...I can say from experience with some friends, you'll be thirty for the next few years. Congratulations!


----------



## Al Curbow

Well, that's twice dick took stupid shots at America, if it were up to me he wouldn't be allowed to post, forget about wanting him to post more.


----------



## Woody Taylor

Al Curbow said:


> Well, that's twice dick took stupid shots at America, if it were up to me he wouldn't be allowed to post, forget about wanting him to post more.


Eh, that's pretty lightweight stuff. Try traveling in Europe.


----------



## Tim Martens

Don Turnipseed said:


> Tim, I said from the get go I have never even seen bitework games. So the purpose to your comment was what....your going to quit whining and contribute? I said your dog looked good to me..... that is all you get son.


i really couldn't care less what a terrier breeder who knows nothing about manwork thinks of my dog. i took exception to you saying i can't be objective about my own dog. you know nothing about me. that's just you jumping to conclusions and making generalizations again...


----------



## Woody Taylor




----------



## Al Curbow

Woody, who's the bald guy in the pic? he looks like trouble, LOL. 

Lightweight or not, i don't like it.


----------



## Woody Taylor

Al Curbow said:


> Woody, who's the bald guy in the pic? he looks like trouble, LOL.
> 
> Lightweight or not, i don't like it.


He was a pain in the ass, all these notions of peace and being calm and remembering to relax a little bit...

You know Mike's Dutch, right? Enemies are EVERYWHERE.


----------



## Al Curbow

Nothing against the Dutch, i just don't like anyone or anything anti-American.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Tim, do I have to go look it up for you? seem to recall saying many people aren't objective. I never said anything about you or your dog. Now I gotta wonder why your so "sensative". You said your dog was a flyer when you got him. Did you train him or someone else? As I said he looked good in that vid.


----------



## Tim Martens

Don Turnipseed said:


> Tim, do I have to go look it up for you? seem to recall saying many people aren't objective. I never said anything about you or your dog. Now I gotta wonder why your so "sensative". You said your dog was a flyer when you got him. Did you train him or someone else? As I said he looked good in that vid.


lol. never said anything about me or my dog? YOU TYPED MY NAME TO START THAT PARAGRAPH OF CRAP. maybe i wrongly came to the conclusion that you were talking to me when you said my name. what was i thinking? :roll: 

to your question. as i said, he was an IPO 1 titled dog imported from NL. we put him through our training course (4 week school) and he has been a police dog since.

here's a vid of another nice flyer. this is a tommy son..
http://home.tiscali.nl/luykensdogsite/arrass.mpg


----------



## Jerry Lyda

Woody, sorry man. I asked those questions in this topic because it started out talking about confidence. I just asked because there's alot of knowledgable dog people on this forum. I think that the Volhard atitude Test are a good indicator for confidence. Nothing is absolute but an indicator all the same. If you think it should be moved then please do so. I would really like to hear what everyone else thinks about it. Thanks


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Honestly, I think tht if you need a test to figure out what is going on in a litter......................


----------



## Don Turnipseed

The first video was more impressive and, after watching them both I have to ask, do all the dogs wag their tails when doing this? Gives me the impression they are playing a game. I know the dogsa sense the difference between a workout and the real deal, so do they wag their tail when taking a "real" bad guy down"


----------



## David Frost

<<<so do they wag their tail when taking a "real" bad guy down">>>

You betcha, some of them really, really like that game. ha ha. I've seen them with pieces of clothing in their mouth, when called out, coming back the heel looking at the handler like, look what I brought ya, want some more. The good ones do enjoy a good fight.

DFrost


----------



## Woody Taylor

Quit docking your airedales, don, yours will too. :lol:


----------



## Don Turnipseed

David

" The good ones do enjoy a good fight. "

Now that tells me alot right there about the type of dog it takes to do well.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Airedales look like crap with a full tail, but, they are outlawing taildocking in certain municipalities here in Ca as we speak. Just to stay on topic, whatever it is at the moment, it would ruin their confidence I think. :lol:


----------



## Jerry Lyda

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Honestly, I think tht if you need a test to figure out what is going on in a litter......................


OK Jeff can you tell me what you do,if you start with puppies, to determine which pup you will spend time training. If you don't start with puppies then maybe this is not a topic for you. Honestly I'm looking for opinions about the Volhard Aptitude Test and if people think it is benifical as a test for young pups. One part of the test is on confidence, retrieve drive and prey drive etc..Can you or anyone else elaborate on the test.
Thanks


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Like any test, it is only as good as the person that administers it. Unfortunately on tests, they can describe whatever they want, but it is still your perception of what you are seeing in the litter.

I have some tests that I do, but it is impossible for me to accurately describe what I am looking for. I can show what I am looking for, but you kind of have to be there to see the variables in person.

I also think that the test should be observed by several people and they give an evaluation of what they are seeing.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Is the Volhard Personality Profile what you are talking about Jerry or is there a test specifically for puppies? I have looked at the Personality profile before and many of the answers could easily vary as to the answer. I would say that it may give one a rough idea which is better than no idea by far. It would be interesting to look at the validity of the test by haveing several people, that are equally familiar with the dog, fill out the questions and then compare answers. If they are close. it may have some validity. If there is a lot of variance....well ...

Jeff is right as far as what people see. Five "untrained" people watching the same thing will form several different opinions of what they saw.


----------



## Jerry Lyda

That sounds good. I know what you're saying and I also try to look at the big picture. With more than one looking at a pup more and different things are seen. What I am asking though is what do you and others think about the Volhard test its self. If I were looking for a dog from some litter and was only using this test to decide on a pup, I wouldn't allow myself to cheat on this test if I was getting one of these pups. I would be looking for the pup that I thought would be the best at what I wanted. I would rely on what I honestly saw in the pups.


----------



## Jerry Lyda

Don, I'm not talking about the Personality Profile, and yes you are right there. I'm talking about the Puppy Aptitude Test from Volhard. Thanks for responding.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Jerry, I just read through the puppy aptitude test and, first off since most puppies are preconmditioned to handling and people from day one, I would have to say that the would first have to be put into an unfamiliar setting, otherwise they will all come to you and for most of the test mostly appear pretty close. The one where the pup is put on his back and helt down would strss the pup some and possibly be more telling of what you are looking for.

I found it interesting that they specifically say to put the pup on your left side and stroke it until it shows some defieable behavior. The left side. Have you ever noticed when teaching a dog to heel, that most of them want to walk on the right side naturally. Being right handed, I am more comfortable if people stand to my left. I believe that most dogs want to be on the right because they are mostly right footed. They lead with the right foot. That is why, when you are behind them, they look like they are walking crooked. Since the dog is more comfortable on the right, most training requires they be on the left. I think it is a control thing that starts a dog off doing what he has to do and not what he preferrs to do. I think that is why they specify the puppy be on the left side also. He is less comfortable.


----------



## Bob Scott

I think all the different puppy test can be of some benifit IF they are done on neutral ground and one pup at a time. I've used vaiations of these tests when I'm helping somone pick a pup. For the most part though, it's for the benifit of the person I'm picking it for. They can more understand what I'm doing.
For the more expierienced, picking a pup is more about liking what you see based on instincts and gut feelings.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Don, we pretty much heel on the left side here in the states


----------



## Don Turnipseed

That's what I am saying Jeff, most everything is done with the dog on the left like the test but most dogs are more comfortable naturally on the right. How many green dogs have you taught to heel left that didn't keep moving to the right at first?


----------



## Lyn Chen

Never had that happen. I know I'm right handed and I prefer to be where my right side is covered, not exposed, so if I was a dog I'd walk on the left.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

I have had a few in the past, but it was back when I used compulsion, and the dogs were avoiding the side that caused discomfort.


----------



## Erik Berg

Well Jeff, I think the top dogs in most protectiondisciplines could do well in ringsport also, if they trained for it, just as the good ringdogs can do well in KNPV and other disciplines. I´m not surprised if a ringdecoy can make a KNPV-dog hesitate as you said, what would happen to a mondiodog if you expect it to do a stickattack and never trained that before :wink: 

Ringsport is a fun sport I think, but why would the dancing around and clatterstick/objects they use after the bite be harder than disciplines where the threat/pressure is more before the bite and not so much after, I would guess the difference would be quite marginal between these two styles, and again it´s hard to compare different sports when they are so different.
Ringsport seems fun, but I think it lacks the practical tracking/search-routines you will see in the Swedish programm for example, wich I´m more familiar with. I think this type of confrontation is just as hard as the commitment a ringdogs need as you spoke about,
http://hem.passagen.se/wdsa/images/ture fast korg.wmv


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

You still haven't explained how dogs that compete in ringsport with no tracking whatsoever can still do the tracking no problem.

I have seen the swedish program and it has it's merits. I have aslo seen your temperament test that pushes dogs into avoidance several times during the test. What is up with that? Also, in your muzzle attack, what are you looking for. Finally, in a "real" life confrontation with a dog, are you going to hold still and let the dog bite you? Could you back a dog off?

Also please explain why your test (sport)can predict a dogs ability to use it's nose better than ringsport. I am interested in your answer.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Totally off topic but may be relative to a couple of prior posts.....is the board malfunctioning? I had a message that there was a PM but there isn't one.

Lyn, I would assume that most people want their strong side open. When boxers box, they circle to the opponents right if the opponent is right handed, left on a lefty. The opponent then has to keep circling to his right trying to move the other to the left where he can use the right hand. If there is someone I don't know, such as in a bar, I prefer to have them on my left side that puts me on the right where I can use it.....for some reason. 8) 8) Maybe women go through life unaware of these things but, I have noticed when heeling green dogs, I have to keep pulling them, from my right side back to the left where I want them. Even the girls I am sure but I will check to see if the girls prefer the left next time. :lol: Then again, maybe it is just airedales but I don't think so.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Don Turnipseed said:


> Totally off topic but may be relative to a couple of prior posts.....is the board malfunctioning? I had a message that there was a PM but there isn't one..


Most likely, the person decided not to send it after all, and deleted it from their outbox. This has happened twice to me, and when I asked the next sender if he had changed his mind about a previous message, one did say yes. It could've been the case with the other one, too, but I asked the wrong sender.


----------



## Erik Berg

I´m not surprised mals track good in IPO, but isn´t IPO-tracking more about obedience than really testing naturall track/hunt-drive? It´s a bit different to track on a green field a few hundred meters compared to practical search/trackin where the dogs must work for hours sometimes, like the policedogs/military-dogs are supposed to do.

I´m aware that many mals tracks very good, and many times it´s the training that makes the difference, not the breed. The general opinion I heard about the mal is that it tends to use it´s legs/eyes more than the brain, not surprisingly when breed for ringsport, so when tired or losses it´s track it could be a bit harder for them to focus/concentrate and calm down so to speak, compare to the GSD, if this is due to breeding for ringsport for long time or some lack in the training is hard to tell I guess.

I also now that in belgium/france/holland they have more specialized dogs, and not combidogs that many policedogs are in Sweden, so a good policedog in belgium could be useless here, if it lacks in the trackingability.
Even if the the nosework in the swedish program still didn´t produce so much better "nosedogs" compared to ringsport, it´s still good to have it, especially when many dogs training in the programm are police/military-dogs, that must be able to track/search in their job anyway :wink: 

The temperament test you are speaking about is going to be a bit different next year, but if the dogs are to afraid/nervous they can abort the test, and the dogs are given so much time and support the need to calm down if something frightens them what I´m aware of, so I don´t think they will get hurt from this  The muzzlework is just there to make it more realistic and not letting the dogs become to sleeve/suit happy. I think they actually had suits in the old days but realized that many dogs just took it as a big game then, and was more intressted to play with the man in the suit, just like many ringsporters today say themelves, the decoy are the dogs sparringpartners and not enemies, so naturally a very high preydrive/fightingdrive is more valued, than a dog that is more pissed of at the decoy, like they tend to be in the muzzle when there is no suit/sleeves to grab just for the fun of it.

And no, you probably couldn´t back a dog of in real life, but no sport I´m aware of is exactly like real life with no rules, not many people in real life will dance around in a suit with a clatterstick either :wink: 
Some films from a competition,
http://hem.passagen.se/wdsa/images/ture fast skott.wmv
All protectionroutines in the highest level,
http://user.tninet.se/~khf963v/
The temperament test you mentioned, as it was before the new one in 2007,
http://www.skyddshund.se/Korning_judas.wmv


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Eric, I don't know how intertwined things are in Sweden but would you happen to know Helena Ardholm?


----------



## Erik Berg

No, I don´t.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote:so naturally a very high preydrive/fightingdrive is more valued, than a dog that is more pissed of at the decoy,

More pissed? What you are seeing is frustration, I am not a big fan of muzzle work, because it is usually doesn't show me what I am looking for.

Especially what I saw in your last film. The guy is running away and the dog hits him. My response is, so what? I wouls expect a dog with decent drives that is used to the muzzle to do this. What are you guys looking for on this??

Dancing around with a clatter stick is closer to what someone with a head on their shoulders would be doing to avoid your dog. A sleeve doesn't really cut it.

A year or so ago, at the Mal worlds, the decoys totally screwed a few dogs by presenting the sleeve late on the attack on handler.

Ring is obviously not perfect, but to say that it is less realistic when you are sending a dog down field with a muzzle on.................

Quote: It´s a bit different to track on a green field a few hundred meters compared to practical search/trackin where the dogs must work for hours sometimes, like the policedogs/military-dogs are supposed to do.

Again, the basics are there, so this is a training matter not an issue proven or disproven on the trial field.

The other thing is that if you are having a dog track for hours, then the basic response is a bit late. I see a lot of police dogs that are not able to find the bad guy, but from the information that I have been given, it is a lack of training on hard surfaces, and not enough training. In either case, I don't put the blame on the handler and dog, but the department for not recognizing the need.

Quote: but if the dogs are to afraid/nervous they can abort the test, and the dogs are given so much time and support the need to calm down if something frightens them what I´m aware of, so I don´t think they will get hurt from this 

Any time you hit avoidance, you lower the threshold. There is no real reason that I can think of to push a dog to that point. Maybe you have a reason you could tell me.

Quote:All protectionroutines in the highest level,

I see a lot of sleeve work as well. Dogs figure out that the sleeve comes off fairly early, and with the situation being that obvious, the dog is not under as much pressure.

Just some observations, the muzzle work is easily trained to look good, and like most sports the pattern is easily trained.

I also do not see the skill of the decoy being brought into play. Too much like a variation of Sch.


----------



## Lyn Chen

> Maybe women go through life unaware of these things but, I have noticed when heeling green dogs, I have to keep pulling them, from my right side back to the left where I want them.


Excuse me, but what does being a woman have to do with anything?

I never pull to teach the heel. It will lead to opposition with a strong dog. Maybe if you teach the dog on the right he'll go left, then you won't have that problem anymore.


----------



## Jerry Lyda

This is just an observation but have you ever watched a dog on the retrieve? Right or left handed dogs (pawed dogs :lol: ) When they pick up the retrieve item they will return from the right or left. Being that they are creatures of habit they will usually go the same direction every time. So you have right or left pawed dogs. 

I also like to keep my right side open, just in case. :wink:


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Probably Lyn. :lol: I was thinking about this. :idea: Just as a test of course and not guaranteeing the outcome. Have a friend stand straight in front of you so you are facing each other. Then have that person keep the same distance and move 1 1/2' to the right but dont you shift to face them, look straight ahead. Next, have them move 1 1/2 ' past the frontal position to the left....don't shift to face them. Which position is most comfortable to you? Remember this is just what I think but there may be more to it.....like the dominate eye might have something to do with it also and I have no idea how to tell a dogs dominate eye.


----------



## Lyn Chen

I am not saying it's not possible to have a left or right handed dog, I'm just saying it's never happened to me when teaching the heel. Maybe it's the way the heel is trained, I don't know.


----------



## Jerry Lyda

Back to the Volhard Puppy Aptitued Test. It must be done by someone the pup has never seen and it must be done in a strange place the pup has never been. I see alot of merit in this type test. I also think I read where it must be done around the 49th day of their life. It must be done without bias. A working dog must be picked for his additude and not his looks. That's the way I pick my girlfriends, just kidding. :lol: :lol: 
Then of course you have that gut feeling and it must not be overlooked either.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Lyn, from personal observation, I would guess that it is quite impossible to have a right or left "handed" dog. :wink: Alright, I know what you mean! :lol:


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Jerry, the page I saw just said I should have their book for the details. Be that as it may, I think it was Ken Wolters, a bird dog trainer that popularized that 49th day mumbo jumbo. I wouldn't put a lot of stock in it. The sooner the test is given the better. Every puppy develops at a slightly different rate in a litter. An abnormally small pup is slower as is an abnormally large pup in my experience. The in betweens are pretty consistent but there is still some variance. This is my personal opinion but that 49th day stuff sold a lot of books.

Also, I have never watched enough retrievers to see this but I believe it would be true. Maybe it has to do with an innate survival instinct but, being right handed, I can move much quicker to the left than I can to the right also....if I really have to but I prefer not to have to move that quick any more as it may affect any movement at all for a few days. :lol:


----------



## Jerry Lyda

Don, I'm with you with the quick moves. I need to save all of those for when I really need them :lol: :lol:


----------



## David Frost

I work with a lot of retrievers, mostly Labs, but also some goldens, and chessies. I have to say, I've never noticed, not that it wasn't there, but never noticed a preference for right or left when retrieving. Since most retrievers are taught to deliver "to hand", they approach from dead center. Interesting concept, I'll have to pay more attention. An excellant book on retrieving by the way is "Retriving, back to basics, by Robert Milner. Maybe not world famous, but from a region many consider the basket of retrieving dogs. As for heeling, (with patrol dogs) I've always taught left side, never really noticed a preference for either side, I always figured it was part of training. I don't allow the dog to make too many choices, so I guess they never had an opportunity to express a favored position.


DFrost


----------



## Bob Scott

Dogs that don't do a straight in retrieve will often have a preferrence of going around the article to either the right or left. Heeling also. I've only had two dogs that naturally preferred my right side. Present dog included. When I go up or down a set of stairs I always crowd the right side cause he dumped me on my a$$ going down some steps when he was about 7-8 months old. He trained me well!  :lol:


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I don't know what the ratio might be between left and right footed dogs. I have to force mine to the left side till they get used to it.
Remember the two dogs loping at the beginning of this thread that I said I couldnt' tell apart? I cant tell them apart in this shot either. :wink: And since we are talking full mouth bites vs a partial....The thing I have to wonder about is the recall. How hard is it to train a recall in a high prey dog?


----------



## Bob Scott

Don, a high prey dog will willingly work for something that you can provide. That may be a toy, a tug, a bite. 
Some here don't like to use the leadership word because they don't think it pertains to the connection between dogs and people. For those folks I'll just call it respect of the handler/owner/trainer.
That's all any training is about. 
As we've discussed in another post, you don't want to call your dogs off of quarry. I understand that perfectly but I want that option/control. Probably just me being a control freak :lol:  .
I know you don't doubt the strong prey in my terriers, yet they WILL come anytime I call. Same with my high prey GSD. I've recalled him when he was balls to the wall and six inches off the tail of a running alley cat. 
I don't think it's a matter of them paying less attention to the distraction. It's just that a recall is imprinted (note I didn't say trained) from day one.
This is where getting a pup at (aprox) 8 wks is so imprtant to me. IMHO, there is more that a pup between 7-12 wk can be "imprinted" with then they can in the next year. 
Pavlov didn't use a hammer to get his dog to drool! :wink:


----------



## Erik Berg

Jeff,

The muzzlework still takes a dog with a bit more "heart" for the work and more than just a great preydrive, at least if you want it to be really good and doesn´t want to spend a lot of time training a dog that doesn´t have it in him naturally. Sending a dog after a fleeing man and expect it to deliver a good hit 30-40 meters away, and still be focused enough to guard the decoy immediatelly when he stops, without becomming dirty, is much harder than sending a dog a after a fleeing man with a suit or sleeve. It´s the dogs attitude the muzzlework is supposed to train, the right attitude in the muzzlework and you can be sure the dog will bite a man even if he´s just wearing a t-shirt.

It´s still a matter off comparing apples and oranges, ringsports like mondio works mostly with the dogs prey/fightingdrive, in the Swedish programm many prefers a bit more aggression for the muzzlework and guardian exercizes, and a good nosework is equally important for being succesfull. In KNPV you doesn´t see alot of "pressure" after the dog has bite either, but would these dogs have problem with mondio/french-ring if they have been exposed to all kinds of environmental stuff and clatterstick from early on, I don´t think so. 

An regarding the mentaltest, the more scary parts are not in the beginning of the test, and they don´t force the dog progress to the whole test if it becomes to afraid, if a dog is so afraid that it even won´t check the thing out that scared him, it´s not much of a dog, and I guess thats why they do these test, to check out the temperament of the dog.

Then I don´t now why a legbiting dog is better than an upperbody biting dog, especially when the dogs are learning to target the legs in ring from early on, why is this so hard to do? I agrre with you that a dog that bite very far out on a sleeve COULD be doing this out of insecurity. I don´t know, but many triners are of the opinion that insecure dogs, or dogs that are more defencive/angry naturally goes low because it´s the easiest target for a quick bite and easier to quickly let go and make some distance to the "enemey", and this would go well with you theroy that more insecure dogs want to be far away from the decoys face


:wink:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: Sending a dog after a fleeing man and expect it to deliver a good hit 30-40 meters away, and still be focused enough to guard the decoy immediatelly when he stops, without becomming dirty, is much harder than sending a dog a after a fleeing man with a suit or sleeve.

So you are testing a dogs ability to work while frustrated? That is the only thing I can see being tested.

Quote: An regarding the mentaltest, the more scary parts are not in the beginning of the test, and they don´t force the dog progress to the whole test if it becomes to afraid, if a dog is so afraid that it even won´t check the thing out that scared him, it´s not much of a dog, and I guess thats why they do these test, to check out the temperament of the dog. 

I watched one of these tests, and the dogs where pushed into avoidance everytime. It was obvious that the dog was going to do so. What is it that you are looking for? Does the test give more points to the dog that goes into avoidance from more pressure?


----------



## Erik Berg

Of course the dogs doesn´t get more points the more avoidance they show, it´s the opposite, like all temperamenttest I guess  I don´t now what test you have seen, but the dogs are free to take as much distance as they like if something scare them, the important thing is that they can recover from the fear and investigate what scared them. I don´t see how this would screw upp the dog for life, if they can´t handle that I think they may not be able to live a normal life anyway, and maybe are best put to sleep.

About the muzzlework, yes some dogs gets frustrated and therefore abit angry, or angry because of the pain a muzzlehit can cause them. BUT, the point is without some level of defence/aggression you don´t get a good muzzlework, you can get a impressive bitework on a suit/sleeve with a dog with great preydrive, but preydrive alone dosen´t give you a good muzzlework. It´s also require a dog than quickly can change between being angry and then quickly just guard the decoy, or change from being angry to obedience, wich require much from both dog but also trainingskills.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Can you show me some examples of dogs that this system is producing? I am not familiar with the kennels over there. I would like to see this.


----------



## Erik Berg

Well, the malinois is a fairly new breed here, starting to come in the early 90s, so the mals here are mainly a mix of dogs breed here now for a couple of generations in our programm and tests, and dogs from ring/KNPV/IPO-lines from rest of Europe. So it´s hard to know if our system have produced something different than sports/tests in other countries yet. In mondioring there are one dog I know of that have done well in the worldchampionships that have parents and grandparernts that are working in the Swedsih programm.

In the GSD there are more dogs with a many generatiosn breed here in our programms/tests, and they have been succesfull at the WUSV, so the GSD here seems capable even if it hasn´t been breed for SCH/IPO in such amount as in other parts of europe where SCH/IPO is an older sport.


----------

