# Chimera's Tate (photos)...a civilian pp dog



## Lee Robinson

Chimera's Tate has a wicked strike, a natually very deep bite, and very high fight drive. I will be working on developing his off leash ob and PP work very soon. In the mean time, here are some photos of his from his last training session.


----------



## Jerry Lyda

The pleasure it must be to have shade to train in.

Good looking dog.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*Bob Scott*



Lee Robinson said:


> Chimera's Tate has a wicked strike, a natually very deep bite, and very high fight drive. I will be working on developing his off leash ob and PP work very soon. In the mean time, here are some photos of his from his last training session.



Hey Bob,

I hate to interupt one of Leetle Mans advertisements, but he posted on the Dononvan K9 list

"Mr. Scott sent me a message telling me were warned to drop your nonsense, and that I am welcome to continue posting there since my posts were about the dogs and professional in nature. So, choke on that. You better be careful there, or you might get banned from there too."

I informed him that you and I had served on the UDC BOD together and that I doubted that you has said any such thing to him. There is nothing in my PM queue and nothing in my regular email (do you still have my email address?)

Lee, 

In case you didn't notice. Bobs breed is Dobermanns and he knows my dogs. Why don't you tell him about mine being curs and how you edited and took out of sequence snippets of the video I posted to "prove" it


RE: Tate

Still pictures are easy to pick and choose the one out of 100 that makes your dog "look" good. A fierce display isn't real impressive when you notice that this strong looking pitbull mix is being "held back" by one scrawny arm LOL


----------



## Lee Robinson

*Re: Bob Scott*

Thomas, get over your nonsense. If you are going to bring that up, why don't you ALSO tell Bob WHY I said that? Why don't you tell let him know you were bringing trying to bring WDF nonsense up on other forums. HMMM? Get a life man. Post about the dogs or SHUT UP ALREADY. This forum is supposed to be about working dogs...not personal issues. As far as your videos go, why don't you mention that you denied the issues so I ASKED YOU if you wanted me to point them out to you on video?...and that you said, "OK."

Bob, let me know when you get that ignore list feature working so I can ignore the foolishness. He and I have issues that we need to work out the old fashion way.


----------



## Lee Robinson

Jerry Lyda said:


> The pleasure it must be to have shade to train in.
> 
> Good looking dog.


Thanks Jerry. Yes, Johnny tells me that pecan tree is about 200 years old or so according to his famiy. It is HUGE and very nice. I bet the circumference of that tree is over 20 feet around...as it is probably 7-8 feet wide at the trunk. It is one of the biggest trees I have seen in this country not including the giant redwoods.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*Re: Bob Scott*

I don't care why (and I doubt if Bob does either) you LIED. You claimed that Bob sent you an email about me. That was a lie. I stated on the Donovan K9 list that you had been lauged off this list. I guess I was premature.
I though when the first two topics you start get write locked and you make a fool of yourself arguing about PSD's with real cops that
you'd have sense enough to tuck tail. I guess your delusions of grandeur
overcame your embarrassment?


----------



## Lee Robinson

*Re: Bob Scott*



Thomas Barriano said:


> I don't care why (and I doubt if Bob does either) you LIED. You claimed that Bob sent you an email about me. That was a lie. I stated on the Donovan K9 list that you had been lauged off this list. I guess I was premature.
> I though when the first two topics you start get write locked and you make a fool of yourself arguing about PSD's with real cops that
> you'd have sense enough to tuck tail. I guess your delusions of grandeur
> overcame your embarrassment?


Thomas, again you come unprepared. I did not lie. What you say above though is not true. I never said anything about email. I said he sent me a MESSAGE...as in a private message...that you as well as others were warned to stop the nonsense. Now, if Bob wants to confirm that he sent me that message or not is up to him. For you to bring your personal issues with me onto these forums is just foolishness. Personally, I would hope Mr. Scott would simply delete this childish crap and send you another message to keep your posts about the dogs.

Isn't this supposed to be the PP portion of the WDF and not the Jerrry Springer forum?


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*Re: Bob Scott*

This is what you quoted on the Donovan list


"Mr. Scott sent me a message telling me were warned to drop your nonsense, and that I am welcome to continue posting there since my posts were about the dogs and professional in nature. So, choke on that. You better be careful there, or you might get banned from there too."

I don't care if it were email or PM. Bob Scott has yet to contact ME in any form about this forum. If this is what Bob actually sent to you then he can verify that fact. I seriously doubt it I was mentioned or that he would say that your post were "about the dogs and professional in nature." That actually sounds a lot like something that YOU posted on one of the closed threads?

I'm sure you'd like to "delete this childish crap", because it exposes another of your lies and Bob can't send "another message to keep your posts about the dogs." if he never sent the first.


----------



## maggie fraser

_Humpty Dumpty took the book and looked at it carefully. ...and that shows that there are three hundred and sixty-four days when you might get un-birthday presents ..._
_There's glory for you!'_

_`I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said._

_Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. `Of course you don't -- till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'_

_`But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected._

_*`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'*_

_`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'_

_`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master -- that's all. Impenetrability! That's what I say!'_

_`Oh!' said Alice. She was too much puzzled to make any other remark_


----------



## Lee Robinson

*Re: Bob Scott*



Thomas Barriano said:


> This is what you quoted on the Donovan list
> 
> 
> "Mr. Scott sent me a message telling me were warned to drop your nonsense, and that I am welcome to continue posting there since my posts were about the dogs and professional in nature. So, choke on that. You better be careful there, or you might get banned from there too."
> 
> I don't care if it were email or PM. Bob Scott has yet to contact ME in any form about this forum. If this is what Bob actually sent to you then he can verify that fact. I seriously doubt it I was mentioned or that he would say that your post were "about the dogs and professional in nature." That actually sounds a lot like something that YOU posted on one of the closed threads?
> 
> I'm sure you'd like to "delete this childish crap", because it exposes another of your lies and Bob can't send "another message to keep your posts about the dogs." if he never sent the first.


Instead of continuing with this off topic nonsense. I'll let Bob or the other moderators deal with you here. As, I am sure they will handle this when they get around to it. He can tell you want he sent me if he wishes to.


----------



## Kyle Sprag

I fail to see how this is a "civilian PP" dog if it doesn't have Obedience?? :-o


----------



## leslie cassian

where's the popcorn smilie when you need it?


----------



## Lee Robinson

Kyle,

Of course the dog has some obedience. He heels, sits, downs, and stays...but he needs MORE training of leash to be finished enough for me to consider him trained OFFLEASH ob. That's what I stated in my first post.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*Re: Bob Scott*

"I'll let Bob or the other moderators deal with you here"

Why would the moderators want to deal with ME
You're the one lying about them. Saying one of them sent me, any kind of email or PM. You're the one that has already had two topics you started write locked when You haven't been a member for even two months. I'd like to see the moderators deal with the proven liars and
trouble starters

Thomas Barriano

FYI Apparently there are more than one "Bob Scott" on this forum
NONE of them who have emailed or PM's me


----------



## Kyle Sprag

Lee Robinson said:


> Kyle,
> 
> Of course the dog has some obedience. He heels, sits, downs, and stays...but he needs MORE training of leash to be finished enough for me to consider him trained OFFLEASH ob. That's what I stated in my first post.


again I fail to see how it is a "civilian PP" dog if it doesn't have "OFFLEASH" ob?? 

Almost all you Pics show the same thing, a dog lunging at the end of a leash with someone agitation it, not hard to do.


----------



## Lee Robinson

Kyle,

The dog is a civilian PP dog because it has on leash ob, can be taken safely into society/social environments, display stability, and yet the dog will engage a passive or active threat should such a situation arise. Seems simple enough.


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

If I don't see a video of a PPD actually doing some protection soon, I'm gonna stop believing in possibility of them existing.

People doing sports do basically the same thing in competitions as in training, PPD's are trained like they're in sports but how are they proven ?? Barking at a sleeve isn't protection....is it ?


----------



## Lee Robinson

Gerry Grimwood said:


> If I don't see a video of a PPD actually doing some protection soon, I'm gonna stop believing in possibility of them existing.
> 
> People doing sports do basically the same thing in competitions as in training, PPD's are trained like they're in sports but how are they proven ?? Barking at a sleeve isn't protection....is it ?


Gerry,

If you don't mind me asking...what would you like to see in a PP video?


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Gerry,

Look at any video of a PSA or Mondio Ring trial. Both suit based protection
"sports" with changing scenarios (little pattern training possible) with ceritfied (safe) decoys and impartial neutral judges. Any staged PP videos wouldn't show anything but acting. Your other option is to get someone willing to take a live bite while you video tape it


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

I'd like to see someone losing a limb if possible, but I would settle for somebody getting the shit shook outa him, obviously in severe pain and obviously beaten.

That's what's supposed to happen right ?


----------



## Adam Rawlings

Thomas Barriano said:


> Your other option is to get someone willing to take a live bite while you video tape it


I always wondered what the neighborhood crack heads would be willing to do for $ 50.00. :-k


----------



## todd pavlus

*Re: Bob Scott*



Thomas Barriano said:


> In case you didn't notice. Bobs breed is Dobermanns and he knows my dogs.


. 

I thought Bob had GSD's and terriers. I'm confused???? LOL. Carry On!!!!!


----------



## Kyle Sprag

Lee Robinson said:


> Kyle,
> 
> The dog is a civilian PP dog because it has on leash ob, can be taken safely into society/social environments, display stability, and yet the dog will engage a passive or active threat should such a situation arise. Seems simple enough.


 
Sounds like a pretty low standard for a "civilian PP" dog to me. Most any sport dog will do what you describe and must have off leash OB to boot.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*Re: Bob Scott*

Hey Todd

Looks like there is more than one Bob Scott on the list


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Hey Adam

Ask Jeff O to tell you about the good old days in Denver at Wino Park


----------



## Bob Scott

Thomas, I have 2 GSDs and one old terrier. Don't know any other Bob Scott on any other forum.....cept Leerburg. That's me too. 
You do now have a PM from me!


----------



## Lee Robinson

Bob, 

Thanks for clarifying the nonsense. Hopefully this subject will now stay on topic.

Gerry, 

So, you're saying you would like to see a live bite on video. LOL. Believe it or not, I have one on video...but it is for select viewing only. :lol:


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

Lee Robinson said:


> So, you're saying you would like to see a live bite on video. LOL. Believe it or not, I have one on video...but it is for select viewing only. :lol:


So, in a nutshell, no pun intended..there is no proof available to the general public.

Sounds like religion.


----------



## Lee Robinson

Kyle Sprag said:


> Sounds like a pretty low standard for a "civilian PP" dog to me. Most any sport dog will do what you describe and must have off leash OB to boot.


Maybe. I am not going to disagree with you on that...as from what is written or seen doesn't display another component I like...and that is commitment to task in spite of pain or conflict. I have seen some very nice sport dogs with level I titles and up but I have also seen some that I wouldn't ever rely on, including one that was even a level III schH dog. There are good dogs and not so good dogs in both avenues...sport and PP.


----------



## Lee Robinson

Gerry Grimwood said:


> So, in a nutshell, no pun intended..there is no proof available to the general public.
> 
> Sounds like religion.


Yes, there is...all you have to do is come here and I will show you the video. LOL.](*,)


----------



## Kyle Sprag

Lee Robinson said:


> Maybe. I am not going to disagree with you on that...as from what is written or seen doesn't display another component I like...and that is commitment to task in spite of pain or conflict. I have seen some very nice sport dogs with level I titles and up but I have also seen some that I wouldn't ever rely on, including one that was even a level III schH dog. There are good dogs and not so good dogs in both avenues...sport and PP.


Thanks for stating the Obvious, that didn't answer my question. For the third time, what make this dog a "civilian PP" dog if it doesn't have off leash OB?


----------



## Lee Robinson

Kyle Sprag said:


> Thanks for stating the Obvious, that didn't answer my question. For the third time, what make this dog a "civilian PP" dog if it doesn't have off leash OB?


Because he lives with a civilian family and has been tested to protect those he lives with. ](*,)


----------



## Mike Scheiber

I had to look and yup kyle and lee still sound like 2 little bitches :lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

Lee Robinson said:


> Yes, there is...all you have to do is come here and I will show you the video. LOL.](*,)


You come up here and I'll show you a video of a moose humping a mailbox. 

See, that's what I mean,* some *people talk up their protection dogs and when you ask for proof they blow you off with some BS. There is a possibility your dogs will do what you say but without anything except your word and some less than convincing pictures..where's the beef ?


----------



## Lee Robinson

Gerry Grimwood said:


> You come up here and I'll show you a video of a moose humping a mailbox.
> 
> See, that's what I mean,* some *people talk up their protection dogs and when you ask for proof they blow you off with some BS. There is a possibility your dogs will do what you say but without anything except your word and some less than convincing pictures..where's the beef ?


The "beef" can only been shown in responsible ways. So, that being the case, I asked what you would like to see...and I assumed that you would reply with something both responsible and appropriate.


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

OK, can you post a picture of your dog or dogs trying to bite a sleeve ?


----------



## Lee Robinson

Gerry Grimwood said:


> OK, can you post a picture of your dog or dogs trying to bite a sleeve ?


OK, you baited me...I will ask...why would you ask me that when I have already done that about a dozens of times already?


----------



## Jim Nash

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerry Grimwood 
OK, can you post a picture of your dog or dogs trying to bite a sleeve ? 

OK, you baited me...I will ask...why would you ask me that when I have already done that about a dozens of times already?





sar·casm (sär'kāz'əm) 
n. 
A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.
A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.
The use of sarcasm. See Synonyms at wit1.


----------



## ann schnerre

leslie cassian said:


> where's the popcorn smilie when you need it?


 
INDEED  

"round and round the mulberry bush,
the monkey chased the weasel,

the monkey thought it all 'twas in fun ,
POP goes the weasel". 

hadn't thought of that ryhme in years.....


----------



## Lee Robinson

Gee, who would have thought of that. The idea never occurred to me to do something like that.


----------



## Julie Ann Alvarez

I can't believe I let myself be sucked into reading this :-\"

Better than Jerry Springer ](*,)


----------



## todd pavlus

This topic of "If a PP dog will bite for real" has been beaten to death on this forum...REPEATEDLY](*,) The only people that get to test this scenario are the police k9's... it is there job. Everyone likes the bitework part of training, it's fun...Let's see some video of these PP people doing some top level obediance. That takes more work and knowledge on the handler's part.:wink:


----------



## Lee Robinson

todd pavlus said:


> This topic of "If a PP dog will bite for real" has been beaten to death on this forum...REPEATEDLY](*,) The only people that get to test this scenario are the police k9's... it is there job. Everyone likes the bitework part of training, it's fun...Let's see some video of these PP people doing some top level obediance. That takes more work and knowledge on the handler's part.:wink:


An alert/engagement command in a strange and unexpected environment with a helper that has no equipment on will also answer that question. If a dog goes civil and forward and the helper doesn't have to "key up" the dog or have equipment on..then you can tell.


----------



## Edward Egan

maggie fraser said:


> _Humpty Dumpty took the book and looked at it carefully. ...and that shows that there are three hundred and sixty-four days when you might get un-birthday presents ..._
> _There's glory for you!'_
> 
> _`I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said._
> 
> _Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. `Of course you don't -- till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'_
> 
> _`But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected._
> 
> _*`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'*_
> 
> _`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'_
> 
> _`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master -- that's all. Impenetrability! That's what I say!'_
> 
> _`Oh!' said Alice. She was too much puzzled to make any other remark_


Nice one! LOL!!! Why people post their dirty laundry on forms is beyond me! IMHO you both look foolish! :mrgreen::roll:](*,)


----------



## michael carroll

I don't have an opinion as to whether he ia a civilian pp dog or not.I do know that his looks would be enough to discourage a lot of would be bad guys.As for the determined or crazed attackers,I don't think there is a dog out there that would stop them.I believe that if they are that determined,the dog wouldn't fare any better then the handler,people die at the hands of these hardcore types every day.I do think that as a deterent,you could'nt do much better.Very nice well built healthy dog in my opinion.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

The only thing that getting a dog to alert proves is that the dog will Alert.
The only way to "prove" that a dog will "bite for real" is for the dog to bite for real. That means NO equipment to cue the dog at all. No hidden sleeves or tactical suits etc and yes the dog knows when someone is
wearing equipment. Like the way they present the sleeved arm.
Like Todd said the only people that can test this theory are the Police.

Let's get back to obedience and control. You've posted multiple pictures and videos of your dogs biting but I've never seen any of off lead obedience or control during bite work. I'd like to see an off leash send with call off OR a clean out and guard OR a search with a H&B at the end. Simple basic control and obedience for bites that is expected from any entry level Scutzhund I and all Police K9's before they hit the street.

You've been breeding, "training" and selling PP dogs for 6, 7, 8? years
and you still can't produce ONE video of off leash controlled obedience during bite work?


----------



## michael carroll

I will throw this out there as food for thought.I like others,believe that this type of dog was originally bred to fight,not men but other dogs.Regardless of this,I don't see Lee as a breeder of fighting dogs,even though some of these dogs might end up doing exactly that when owned by the wrong person.I think that to train a dog to attack and fight a man,espescially if the dog is protection trained to do this would be a big step in the wrong direction for a pit dog.[ The idea is that the dog fights another dog,not attack people]. anyway,It's pretty well known that nothing beats the pit bull in these fights,so why breed anything else for this.I think a dog fighter is the lowest of the low,But if Lee chooses to breed and train these dogs for pp dogs,whats wrong with that? Is it his breed of choice are does someone know something about it that the rest of us don't know.I don't personally know Lee,but I don't see anything that he is doing,that others aren't doing,just with a different breed.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Hi Michael

I think you are correct about pit bulls (or pit crosses bred for size) being a bad choice for man work. I also agree that dog fighters are the scum of the earth. ON the other hand, when some one names their breed after a notorious and well known (in dog fighting circles) dog fighter,
has made frequent use of the word "game" (a code word amongst dog fighers) and posts little of their dogs except biting. It isn't to hard to figure who they are marketing their product (dog/puppies) to :-(


----------



## Kyle Sprag

michael carroll said:


> I will throw this out there as food for thought.I like others,believe that this type of dog was originally bred to fight,not men but other dogs.Regardless of this,I don't see Lee as a breeder of fighting dogs,even though some of these dogs might end up doing exactly that when owned by the wrong person.I think that to train a dog to attack and fight a man,espescially if the dog is protection trained to do this would be a big step in the wrong direction for a pit dog.[ The idea is that the dog fights another dog,not attack people]. anyway,It's pretty well known that nothing beats the pit bull in these fights,so why breed anything else for this.I think a dog fighter is the lowest of the low,But if Lee chooses to breed and train these dogs for pp dogs,whats wrong with that? Is it his breed of choice are does someone know something about it that the rest of us don't know.I don't personally know Lee,but I don't see anything that he is doing,that others aren't doing,just with a different breed.


I don't care what breed or Mixed breed anyone does bitework with but think it is Irresponsible at best to Teach a dog to Bite throught Civil agitation without having Reliable On/Off Leash Obedience. I call that a Liability.


----------



## Lee Robinson

Nothing fancy or formal...but here are some off leash videos of OB with both Swinfords and APBTs.

APBT around other dogs off leash... http://www.chimerakennels.com/PacMandemo11halfmonths.wmv 

Swinford off leash... http://www.chimerakennels.com/Bullettesuit021706.wmv 

http://www.chimerakennels.com/K9PSBullette040905.wmv


----------



## Kyle Sprag

Lee Robinson said:


> Off leash OB with both Swinfords and APBTs.
> 
> APBT around other dogs off leash... http://www.chimerakennels.com/PacMandemo11halfmonths.wmv
> 
> Swinford off leash... http://www.chimerakennels.com/Bullettesuit021706.wmv
> 
> http://www.chimerakennels.com/K9PSBullette040905.wmv


 
That is very basic but better than nothing, You should start with OB before Civil agitation IMO. A dog is not a "PP" dog until it has both Bitwork and On/Off leash OB.


I wonder why you edited the K9PS video, what that when she chased the ball and/or ate the Hot Dogs. LOL :-\"


----------



## michael carroll

Thomas,
I'm pretty sure that right now the pitt is the #1 dog in human attacks,that alone for me is reason enough not to train this breed for manwork,so we pretty much agree on that.That being said,I do think there are exceptions to this.As for gameness in the breed,it's there maybe not in one line as much as the other,but certainly there all the same[years of breeding for this trait].Just like any other dog bred for a specific job it inherits this in its genectic makeup.I saw this in a neighbors bitch,that I knew since puppyhood.Very sweet dog as a puppy and juvenile,a killer as an adult.I personally witnessed her kill three diffrent dogs,one was a mixed breed puppy about 10-12 weeks.Unfortunately,in all three instances my intervention was to late.Heard the dogs and arrived after the deed was pretty much done.As for Lee,like I said I don't know him or any of his clients,so I have no opinions as for as his puppy or dog sales.I just know that for a pit dog,you sure don't want one that attacks people.I have never been in the presence of a dogfight,but I have been to a game rooster fight,[ONCE] don't condone that either.If there are any similarities,and I would think there is.A personal protection dog would be a huge liability in this madhouse of confusion.


Kyle,
I couldn't agree with you more.However, I don't know Lee personally,or his training program so I don't have an opinion on this matter.At any rate,as with any dog owner the liability comes with the dog. Not directing this at anyone,so don't take offence.Everyone wants to see a ppd video of real life scenario,but nobody wants to Star in the video.Police and military train these dogs for this work and have for a lot of years,I see no reason other trainers wouldn't be able to do the same.A lot of people believe these dogs to be nothing more then a con job,to sell to unsuspecting clients for big bucks.I just think this is an unfounded belief.Like I said nobody that I know has the big ones,or the confidence in there opinion to prove this one way or another.I certainly don't want to be the star.This was not directed at you Kyle,so please don't think it was a hidden message,I don't have the gonads to challenge a ppd dog,but I will say whats on my mind.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Lee,

The APBT video was NOT Obedience during bite work. 
The two videos of Bullette are the bare minimum of what is acceptable obedience and control before you even start bite work. The Schutzhund BH requirement is the way bite training should should be done.
Obedience and control should be MANDITORY, before the dog sees a decoy


----------



## Kyle Sprag

Thomas Barriano said:


> Lee,
> 
> The APBT video was NOT Obedience during bite work.
> The two videos of Bullette are the bare minimum of what is acceptable obedience and control before you even start bite work. The Schutzhund BH requirement is the way bite training should should be done.
> Obedience and control should be MANDITORY, before the dog sees a decoy


Most of the Clubs and/or training groups I have visited over the years had a Rule:

NO OB, NO Bitework!!! 

and honestly don't consider On Leash OB anything a 6 month old puppy shouldn't do.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Kyle Sprag said:


> Most of the Clubs and/or training groups I have visited over the years had a Rule:
> 
> NO OB, NO Bitework!!!
> 
> and honestly don't consider On Leash OB anything a 6 month old puppy shouldn't do.


Kyle 

That's the rule in every club I've ever been in or trained at.
I start teaching an out with a tug, before the dog is three months old. To have a dog this old, without a solid out is inexcusable IMHO


----------



## Barrie Kirkland

Slow down people.... i need one question answered

WHY WOULD A MOOSE WANT TO HUMP A MAILBOX...?

it doesnt even look like a girly moose....

this is troubling...ok carry on ding ding


----------



## Barrie Kirkland

apart from that juat watched the videos, now im guessing your looking for feedback lee or else you wouldnt have posted the vids

the OB is very poor, im sorry to be blunt, that pit or whatever the dog is is dead sloppy cause of you. i would walk around with my head down bored if i was the dog

your the motivator .. make the drive in your dog, make it interesting, dont allow the dog to be loose ... teach focus .you are flat as a pancake as a handler

sorry its a pet hate of mine...


----------



## Lee Robinson

I am not offended by anyone's position...not at all. The ob isn't supposed to be a trial type smiling dog that skips along while not even looking where it is going...with its eyes constantly on me. I am not into that. Nothing wrong with such for those that want that type of ob...but to me it just isn't a priority. I simply want complience ob...for the dog to be safe...and for the dog to do what I ask. The video displays that. It also displays a game bred APBT that is safe around other dogs off leash because of the complience is understood. I am not going to constantly "motivate" the dog the entire time because in real life who does? I am not going to carry a biscuit all the time or a tug all the time. But, I will expect the dog to do what is needed. I use toys and treats to teach and guide...and if I was into competition I might would put more energy in developing more drive in the OB...but once a dog understands what I want...I have what I need. I can "proof" it with some compulsion. "Loose" or "sloppy" isn't important to me. What is important is the dog stays with me. If one wanted competitive ob, then you would be exactly right. That is why I said it is nothing special, just basic ob...ob for real life like when going to the mail box while I am on my my cell phone or whatever. Real life...and if I give an "OK" to release him, he can go take a piss on the bush while we are out. I don't carry a hot dog or a tug toy with me every where I go and I am not going to "briskly walk" down my 200 yard driveway every time I take a dog out to try to have the dog's energy feed off of mine. I don't consider them robots. I consider them pets. They have some freedom within MY limitations...and when we are off my property they are on a leash. Even on my property, they are usually on a leash...and I have 9 acres in the middle of nowhere. I believe in leash laws.

I'll tell you what though...if you would like to see more "formal" ob...I will gladly put something together for you. Give me a week or two and I will convert one of these "loose" casual basic ob into something a little more snappy. I don't mind. I am not interested in "reverse heels" or "backwards heeling" or whatever you call it...but having a dog with tighter ob for a demo dog wouldn't hurt...so I need to do it anyway, so...this conversation may just give me a little motivation. Let's see if I can get one to do a little better by next weekend (by about 10 days from now). :wink:


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

I don't like that goose stepping OB either, but lots do. Lee, I think you should just call your dogs "Deterrent Dogs" because that's what most PPD's are and there's nothing wrong with that.

When people say a PPD should have good OB on and offleash/be good with the public and kids etc..etc,
I think why ? are people actually being assaulted in school yards and malls across America where there are other people around ? would anyone care if their dog wasn't being snappy when some jamalka was trying to a** rape them ?

Would a PPD been any help to Vernon Forrest for example ? Is a PPD only effective as a warning in their homes then ? I think a PSD is mainly looking for someone and pursuing someone trying to escape, handler protection is a part of it as well but, these guys have guns and will shoot you to protect themselves and will just about always be within the law.

I don't get the PPD thing.


----------



## Adam Rawlings

When people say a PPD should have good OB on and offleash/be good with the public and kids etc..etc,
I think why ? are people actually being assaulted in school yards and malls across America where there are other people around ? would anyone care if their dog wasn't being snappy when some jamalka was trying to a** rape them ?

I understand what your saying here, but I think your simplifying a PPD's role too much. 

Your over looking the fact that many people enjoy outdoor activities such as jogging, walking and who knows what else. I see many of these people with dogs. If you walk up any street anywhere in North America you will see dogs in yards and in homes as part of the family. People and families like to own dogs. If a PPD is expected to fit into any of these situations obedience is pretty damn important.

Many people also have guns, pepper spray, alarm systems and they lock their doors and windows. We also wear seat belts, baby seats, helmets, life jackets and so on. Why? Because it offers us more protection than with out.

I'm not trying to be a smart ass here, but if your going to own a dog anyway whats wrong with training it as PPD? The dogs not going to make you bullet proof, it is just another saftey net. There are always going to be people out there that are detered by the sight of a dog, people that may test the waters to see if the dog will be a threat and people who don't give a damn. I think the latter is rare and most of us aren't going to encounter these people, but what if? If I ever run into this situation, the dog will not be fighting the person alone and that just increased the odds in my favour or it will at least give me a chance to escape. It is up to the potential buyer of a PPD to do their due diligence to ensure they are getting what they are paying for. There are enough legitimate vendors out there that supply dogs that are up to the task.


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

Buy a can of wasp & hornet spray.


----------



## Lee Robinson

Gerry Grimwood said:


> I don't like that goose stepping OB either, but lots do. Lee, I think you should just call your dogs "Deterrent Dogs" because that's what most PPD's are and there's nothing wrong with that.
> 
> When people say a PPD should have good OB on and offleash/be good with the public and kids etc..etc,
> I think why ? are people actually being assaulted in school yards and malls across America where there are other people around ? would anyone care if their dog wasn't being snappy when some jamalka was trying to a** rape them ?
> 
> Would a PPD been any help to Vernon Forrest for example ? Is a PPD only effective as a warning in their homes then ? I think a PSD is mainly looking for someone and pursuing someone trying to escape, handler protection is a part of it as well but, these guys have guns and will shoot you to protect themselves and will just about always be within the law.
> 
> I don't get the PPD thing.


Well, a PP dog should be able to live with his/her family. When you have company, do you want to have to put the dog up everytime? A PP dog is only good if it is accessable.


----------



## Lee Robinson

Adam Rawlings said:


> When people say a PPD should have good OB on and offleash/be good with the public and kids etc..etc,
> I think why ? are people actually being assaulted in school yards and malls across America where there are other people around ? would anyone care if their dog wasn't being snappy when some jamalka was trying to a** rape them ?
> 
> I understand what your saying here, but I think your simplifying a PPD's role too much.
> 
> Your over looking the fact that many people enjoy outdoor activities such as jogging, walking and who knows what else. I see many of these people with dogs. If you walk up any street anywhere in North America you will see dogs in yards and in homes as part of the family. People and families like to own dogs. If a PPD is expected to fit into any of these situations obedience is pretty damn important.
> 
> Many people also have guns, pepper spray, alarm systems and they lock their doors and windows. We also wear seat belts, baby seats, helmets, life jackets and so on. Why? Because it offers us more protection than with out.
> 
> I'm not trying to be a smart ass here, but if your going to own a dog anyway whats wrong with training it as PPD? The dogs not going to make you bullet proof, it is just another saftey net. There are always going to be people out there that are detered by the sight of a dog, people that may test the waters to see if the dog will be a threat and people who don't give a damn. I think the latter is rare and most of us aren't going to encounter these people, but what if? If I ever run into this situation, the dog will not be fighting the person alone and that just increased the odds in my favour or it will at least give me a chance to escape. It is up to the potential buyer of a PPD to do their due diligence to ensure they are getting what they are paying for. There are enough legitimate vendors out there that supply dogs that are up to the task.


Excellent post.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

"Your over looking the fact that many people enjoy outdoor activities such as jogging, walking and who knows what else. I see many of these people with dogs. If you walk up any street anywhere in North America you will see dogs in yards and in homes as part of the family. People and families like to own dogs. If a PPD is expected to fit into any of these situations obedience is pretty damn important."

Exactly Adam, This is MY idea of a PPD . A family dog that will protect
and then turn off when commanded. What you see way too often, as an
example of a PPD ,is some snarling mastiff on the end of a three foot leash with no control, no off switch, that is worked in defense (fight or flight and most would head for the hills if they weren't on leash. :-(


----------



## Lee Robinson

Thomas Barriano said:


> What you see way too often, as an example of a PPD, is some snarling mastiff on the end of a three foot leash with no control, no off switch, that is worked in defense (fight or flight and most would head for the hills if they weren't on leash. :-(


This is the longest 3 foot leash I have ever seen. I have never seen anyone do PP work with a 3 foot leash. Keep it real. I have however seen videos of both "PP" dogs and "sport" dogs both on and off leash that would drop their bite and head for the hills when they experienced conflict...something like a decoy stepping on a toe or something. Come to mention it, you once posted footage of your dog and I replied that I saw issues with him. You then said you didn't see what I was talking about so I asked you if I could download the video to cut out the portions that illustrated the issues...so I could make them easier for you to see. You said, "OK." I would never use footage of your dog without you first giving me permission. ( If anyone is interested in confirming that Thomas gave me permission to use this video, I can clarify that via a PM...where you can confirm this as true. ) Here is the video of your dog once again... http://www.chimerakennels.com/thomasdobie.wmv. Notice that your dog drops his bite when a decoy simply steps on his toe. Also notice that when the decoy blocks the dog with a tap of a padded stick the dog stops pursuing the decoy and actually backs up and sits down. And then, in the last segment when the decoy raises the stick, your dog actually drops his deep bite and lays down...that is until the decoy hides the stick by puting the padded stick back behind his back. The point is...you can find both good and bad in PP and sport. Another point here is this... *Now, I don't expect everyone or every dog to always be perfect, but don't have a double standard*. And, finally, there are videos of my dogs working off leash on my website taking far more pressure than what is shown in that video...including footage of some 8 week old pups. Click here to view these pups working off leash...although this is certainly nothing serious. http://www.chimerakennels.com/ChimerasRecess8wks.wmv I just wanted to clarify this information.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Lee Robinson said:


> This is the longest 3 foot leash I have ever seen. I have never seen anyone do PP work with a 3 foot leash. Keep it real. I have however seen videos of both "PP" dogs and "sport" dogs both on and off leash that would drop their bite and head for the hills when they experienced conflict...something like a decoy stepping on a toe or something. Come to mention it, you once posted footage of your dog and I replied that I saw issues with him. You then said you didn't see what I was talking about so I asked you if I could download the video to cut out the portions that illustrated the issues...so I could make them easier for you to see. You said, "OK." I would never use footage of your dog without you first giving me permission. ( If anyone is
> interested in confirming that Thomas gave me permission to use this video, I can clarify that via a PM...where you can confirm this as true. ) Here is the video of your dog once again... http://www.chimerakennels.com/thomasdobie.wmv. Notice that your dog drops his bite when a decoy simply steps on his toe. Also notice that when the decoy blocks the dog with a tap of a padded stick the dog stops pursuing the decoy and actually backs up and sits down. And then, in the last segment when the decoy raises the stick, your dog actually drops his deep bite and lays down...that is until the decoy hides the stick by puting the padded stick back behind his back. The point is...you can find both good and bad in PP and sport. Another point here is this... *Now, I don't expect everyone or every dog to always be perfect, but don't have a double standard*. And, finally, there are videos of my dogs working off leash on my website taking far more pressure than what is shown in that video...including footage of some 8 week old pups. Click here to view these pups working off leash...although this is certainly nothing serious. http://www.chimerakennels.com/ChimerasRecess8wks.wmv I just wanted to clarify this information.



NOW the real Lee Robinson starts to reveal himself.
Paranoid and when he thinks he is being "attacked" he
lies and tries to divert attention.

My original post didn't mention YOUR dogs, so quit being so paranoid. Look at the CCDL website if you want to see PP dogs working on 3 foot leashes. There are also plenty on You tube

The dog in the video is a 14 month old Dobermann
TRAINING in Schutzhund. Harold Lee Robinson was never
given permission to "download" or edit or distort this video.
I provide a You tube link and asked for everyones input. If he can produce any kind of implicit permission, then post it here. Don't play this PM BS.

I haven't clicked on the clips that he is posting in his message yet, to see if they are what I originally posted. The original
were three 3 minute clips working with two different decoys.
Lee takes ONE 5 second clip and tries to say that is what the dog is about. How pathetic.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Just like I suspected Lee posted his edited distorted video. I also noticed it is now titled ThomasDobie. When he first posted it in the Donvan K9 list it was titled ThomascurDobie. What a POS!

If any of the REAL dog trainers on this list are interested in providing their input on the complete, unedited, undistorted played in real time
(not slow motion) here is a pointer to the original video I posted
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q2GrPlqgEc


----------



## Lee Robinson

Thomas, the dogs on the CCDL were not part of the conversation. You were not "specific" only because you have been corrected by the moderators of this forum to drop your nonsense, just as you have been on other forums. Your public approval for me to cut out the relative portion of your video will be offered to those what wish to see it via a PM because the moderators on this forum do not like public links to other forums...and the moderators requested that we handle our disagreements via PM. It is time for you to get past your personal issues with me...do that and you will find I have no interest in you or your dogs.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*Nonsense*



Lee Robinson said:


> Thomas, the dogs on the CCDL were not part of the conversation. You were not "specific" only because you have been corrected by the moderators of this forum to drop your nonsense, just as you have been on other forums. Your public approval for me to cut out the relative portion of your video will be offered to those what wish to see it via a PM because the moderators on this forum do not like public links to other forums...and the moderators requested that we handle our disagreements via PM. It is time for you to get past your personal issues with me...do that and you will find I have no interest in you or your dogs.



Neither was my 14 month old SPORT Dobermann part of the conversation about PP dogs, but you choose to post a edited distorted video.

The only reason CCDL was mentioned is your paranoid assumption that i was referring to your dogs when I made the
comment "snarling mastiffs on three foot leashes". It is interesting that you responded to my general comment by
reposting a picture of YOUR snarling mastill on a 6 foot lead.
Oh yeah, I can really see the difference, now

You asked for permission in a round about way, but I NEVER
granted it. You wouldn't respond publicly (although you made the claim publicly) because I won't allow you to quote something out of context. Just like you took a 5 second clip out of a 300 second video.

"you have been corrected by the moderators of this forum to drop your nonsense"

That is another lie. You don't know what any of the moderators
said to me in any PRIVATE message. I had not received any message from any moderator of this list when you posted your 
original claim stating that I had and that they'd referred to you as being "professional" .

This is typical, you start a lot of nonsense in public and then 
you want to take it private.
You lie and post distorted edited videos and when you're called on it you want to hide behind the moderators and act like you want to play nice. LOL


----------



## Kyle Sprag

Typical Lee MO,

Kick sh!t everywhere to direct attention somewhere else.


Lee, maybe if you spent half the time Training some OB rather than spending it all on the WWW peddling pups and spamming mesage boards with your BS you MIGHT accomplish something some day.


----------



## Lee Robinson

*Re: Nonsense*

Thomas, you were part of the conversation. The CCDL, their dogs, and the people there were not.

When you join the conversation and offer your opinion on training...then your paradigm comes into play...and that is determined by your experiences and your knowledge...or lack there of.


----------



## Kyle Sprag

*Re: Nonsense*



Lee Robinson said:


> Thomas, you were part of the conversation. The CCDL, their dogs, and the people there were not.
> 
> When you join the conversation and offer your opinion on training...then your paradigm comes into play...and that is determined by your experiences and your knowledge...or lack there of.


 
Let's see,

Thomas has HOT female Sch III Dobe that has titles in other sports

Thomas has HOT Sch III Dobe that HE BRED! that has other working titles

Thomas has titled other dogs in other venues and has traveled extensively to trials and training for many many years all over the US and has trained/learned from some of the best people many times.


Experience???????????????


WTF have you ever done but Post BS and Peddle Pups?


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*Re: Nonsense*



Kyle Sprag said:


> Let's see,
> 
> Thomas has HOT female Sch III Dobe that has titles in other sports
> 
> Thomas has HOT Sch III Dobe that HE BRED! that has other working titles
> 
> Thomas has titled other dogs in other venues and has traveled extensively to trials and training for many many years all over the US and has trained/learned from some of the best people many times.
> 
> 
> Experience???????????????
> 
> 
> WTF have you ever done but Post BS and Peddle Pups?


Hey Kyle,

Thanks for the kind words.
You and I know Lee for what he is, I'm sure there are plenty of other list members who do too.
When the rest of the members (and list owners/moderators)
noticed that someone who joined the list last month has already posted > 150 times and has two of the topics he started
closed, because the same thing happens on every list he is on and every topic he is involved in. The rest of the list members see Lee for what he is, everyone does sooner or later.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*Re: Nonsense*



Lee Robinson said:


> Thomas, you were part of the conversation. The CCDL, their dogs, and the people there were not.
> 
> When you join the conversation and offer your opinion on training...then your paradigm comes into play...and that is determined by your experiences and your knowledge...or lack there of.


I was part of the discussion of "a civillan PP dog", my SPORT
Dobermann was NOT. Especially not via your distorted video.
The CCDL is a PP training organization, who works/trains their
dogs on short leashes. They were provided as an example of what I was referring to after you assumed I was talking about
your dogs and posted your vicious personal attack.
"then your paradigm comes into play.."
I have NO idea what you think my paradigm might be, and think you may be miss using the term. Kyle has already addressed my knowledge/experience


----------



## Lee Robinson

*Re: Nonsense*

Thomas does not decoy. He paid others to do the decoy work...at a club he was kicked out of. There is a reason for that. It is because Thomas does not know how to read a dog...which is why the video os his own dog had to be slowed down so he could see the issues that were there...issues that he denied. If he knew how to train a dog, then he would have seen these things without the A, B, C illustration. In fact, Thomas SHOULD THANK ME for making the video to illustrate two things...1. where the dog needs work (so he can adjust the training), and 2. That the decoy is actually breaking his dog and making the issues worse by not allowing the dog to work through thee issues SUCCESSFULLY (as the decoy SHOULD HAVE given his dog a bite after the toe stepping instead of denying the bite and pushing the dog back). He might want to find another decoy as a result...someone he can trust to help the training. The decoy may be good...but why would he deny the dog success after pushing the dog back? It makes no sense unless one wishes to teach the dog that failure/avoidance is a safe behavior. Also, lets not forget that Thomas's dog wouldn't bite in a PSA trial and the judge had to call a time out after driving the dog 20 feet.


----------



## maggie fraser

I thought I'd post something of interest here... just to help break the monotony a little....



For some time many of us have wondered, just who is Jack Schitt? We find 
ourselves at a loss when someone says, 'You don't know Jack Schitt!' 
Well, thanks to my genealogy efforts, you can now respond in an 
intellectual way. 

Jack Schitt is the only son of Awe Schitt. Awe Schitt, the fertilizer 
magnate, married O. Schitt, the owner of Needeep N. Schitt, Inc. They 
had one son, Jack. 

In turn, Jack Schitt married Noe Schitt. The deeply religious couple 
produced six children: Holie Schitt, Giva Schitt, Fulla Schitt, Bull 
Schitt, and the twins Deep Schitt and Dip Schitt. 

Against her parents' objections, Deep Schitt married Dumb Schitt, a 
high-school dropout. After being married 15 years, Jack and Noe Schitt 
divorced. Noe Schitt later married Ted Sherlock, and because her kids 
were living with them, she wanted to keep her previous name. She was 
then known as Noe Schitt Sherlock. 

Meanwhile, Dip Schitt married Loda Schitt, and they produced a son with 
a rather nervous disposition named Chicken Schitt. Two of the other six 
children, Fulla Schitt and Giva Schitt, were inseparable throughout 
childhood and subsequently married the Happens brothers in a dual 
ceremony. The wedding announcement in the newspaper announced the 
Schitt-Happens nuptials. The Schitt-Happens children were Dawg, Byrd, 
and Horse. 

Bull Schitt, the prodigal son, left home to tour the world. He recently 
returned from Italy with his new Italian bride, Pisa Schitt. 

NOW when someone says, 'You don't know Jack Schitt,' you can correct 
them. 

Sincerely, 
Crock O. Schitt


----------



## Kyle Sprag

*Re: Nonsense*



Lee Robinson said:


> Thomas does not decoy. He paid others to do the decoy work...at a club he was kicked out of. There is a reason for that. It is because Thomas does not know how to read a dog...which is why the video os his own dog had to be slowed down so he could see the issues that were there...issues that he denied. If he knew how to train a dog, then he would have seen these things without the A, B, C illustration. In fact, Thomas SHOULD THANK ME for making the video to illustrate two things...1. where the dog needs work (so he can adjust the training), and 2. That the decoy is actually breaking his dog and making the issues worse by not allowing the dog to work through thee issues SUCCESSFULLY (as the decoy SHOULD HAVE given his dog a bite after the toe stepping instead of denying the bite and pushing the dog back). He might want to find another decoy as a result...someone he can trust to help the training. The decoy may be good...but why would he deny the dog success after pushing the dog back? It makes no sense unless one wishes to teach the dog that failure/avoidance is a safe behavior. Also, lets not forget that Thomas's dog wouldn't bite in a PSA trial and the judge had to call a time out after driving the dog 20 feet.


 
You really should get the Help you Need Lee.

I know Thomas, I have trained with Thomas and have worked his dogs.

You are the Last Person anyone should be getting instruction from.

Again the Part about the PSA trial is a LIE! I WAS THERE it was MY TRIAL and it was 5 or 6 years ago!

Thomas has REAL accomplishments with his dogs, His dogs have worked with/on some of the most skilled trainers in the US.


YOU HAVE DONE NOTHING!


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*Re: Nonsense*

If nothing else Harold Lee Robinson is always good for a laugh.
A typical case of avoidance, throw a load of irrelevant BS against the wall and hope no one notices you avoided addressing the original question. LOL
Aren't all you guys gratefull that Mr "Never Titled Any dog in any sport and never bred a dog that anyone else has ever titled in any sport" has come down from Mt Olympus to grace us with his "expert" opinion? LOL

FYI: the decoy in the video that Lee presumes to criticise, is the previous DVG Western KG OFS


----------



## Lee Robinson

*Re: Nonsense*



Kyle Sprag said:


> You really should get the Help you Need Lee.
> 
> I know Thomas, I have trained with Thomas and have worked his dogs.
> 
> You are the Last Person anyone should be getting instruction from.
> 
> Again the Part about the PSA trial is a LIE! I WAS THERE it was MY TRIAL and it was 5 or 6 years ago!
> 
> Thomas has REAL accomplishments with his dogs, His dogs have worked with/on some of the most skilled trainers in the US.
> 
> 
> YOU HAVE DONE NOTHING!


Kyle,

Given you think I don't know what I am talking about...watch this video of Thomas's dog. http://www.chimerakennels.com/thomasdobie.wmv

Now, please answer these questions...

1. Did the decoy step on the dog's foot on purpose? Notice how he extends his leg forward in front of his balance to "step out" onto the dog's foot.

2.YES... If yes, why? To work through issues? If that was the case, why was the dog DENIED the bite and blocked with the stick and then driven back? After all, he has a sleeve on.

2.NO...If it was not on purpose, why would he deny the dog's bite after the issue given he has a SLEEVE ON?

3. Why would this dog back up and sit down?

4. When the decoy was down on the ground, why did the dog come off the bite when the decoy used his legs? If the decoy was trying to teach the dog to work through the issue, why did the decoy then sit up and again use the stick to push the dog back?

OR...does the decoy not know what he is doing? Or, does the decoy know what he is doing but is simply trying to ruin the dog? And, why would he possibly want to ruin Thomas's dog? Perhaps he doesn't like Thomas and Thomas will be kicked out of another club soon?

What is your take on it? Now...keep it about the dogs and avoid the personal nonsense. What is your take? I won't be surprised if you don't answer these questions...because...the fact is you would either agree with me...OR...you would have to say something stupid. Either way, I win. \\/ Not bad IMO, given the fact that YOU think I don't know what I am talking about.

Again, Thomas should actually THANK ME...so he can have a talk with his decoy.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*Re: Nonsense*



Lee Robinson said:


> Kyle,
> 
> Given you think I don't know what I am talking about...watch this video of Thomas's dog. http://www.chimerakennels.com/thomasdobie.wmv
> 
> Now, please answer these questions...
> 
> 1. Did the decoy step on the dog's foot on purpose? Notice how he extends his leg forward in front of his balance to "step out" onto the dog's foot.
> 
> 2.YES... If yes, why? To work through issues? If that was the case, why was the dog DENIED the bite and blocked with the stick and then driven back? After all, he has a sleeve on.
> 
> 2.NO...If it was not on purpose, why would he deny the dog's bite after the issue given he has a SLEEVE ON?
> 
> 3. Why would this dog back up and sit down?
> 
> 4. When the decoy was down on the ground, why did the dog come off the bite when the decoy used his legs? If the decoy was trying to teach the dog to work through the issue, why did the decoy then sit up and again use the stick to push the dog back?
> 
> OR...does the decoy not know what he is doing? Or, does the decoy know what he is doing but is simply trying to ruin the dog? And, why would he possibly want to ruin Thomas's dog? Perhaps he doesn't like Thomas and Thomas will be kicked out of another club soon?
> 
> What is your take on it? Now...keep it about the dogs and avoid the personal nonsense. What is your take? I won't be surprised if you don't answer these questions...because...the fact is you would either agree with me...OR...you would have to say something stupid. Either way, I win. \\/ Not bad IMO, given the fact that YOU think I don't know what I am talking about.
> 
> Again, Thomas should actually THANK ME...so he can have a talk with his decoy.


Do you really expect anyone to debate/discuss a five second video excerpt out of a 300 second video?

Do you really think ANYONE who really trains "sees" everything you do in this minute snippet?

Do you really think that any real trainer is going to agree with
your delusional "evaluation"

You have Delusions of Grandeur and are over analyzing one 5 second clip in an attempt to discredit my dog and me. My only conclusion is that you are jealous, since you've never accomplished anything. 

You REALLY need PROFESSIONAL help


----------



## Lee Robinson

*Re: Nonsense*

Actually, Thomas...I have gotten a number of messages that have stated my evaluation of the situation is 100% on. Some of the people I have talked to blaim the dog. Some blaim the decoy. And, a few have blaimed you. You should thank me for helping you. Also, you yourself even posted that your dog was driven 20 feet without biting at a PSA trial and that the judge had to call a time out. Do you need the link to where YOU yourself posted that?


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*Re: Nonsense*



Lee Robinson said:


> Actually, Thomas...I have gotten a number of messages that have stated my evaluation of the situation is 100% on. Some of the people I have talked to blaim(sic) the dog. Some blaim (sic) the decoy. And, a few have blaimed (sic)you. You should thank me for helping you. Also, you yourself even posted that your dog was driven 20 feet without biting at a PSA trial and that the judge had to call a time out. Do you need the link to where YOU yourself posted that?


Lee

Of course you've gotten tons of messages agreeing with you, did you have your special aluminum foil hat on when you received these messages?
I thought the moderators didn't like links to other lists?
Why would you offer to post a link to something I posted on another list, that you will take out of context ?

Kyle was at the PSA trial and already posted your version was
a LIE

Why do you continue to beat a dead horse (and on two different lists). I have NO interest in your evaluation of five seconds of a 300 second video, I doubt if anyone else does
either. Hopefully one of the real/ experienced trainers here
will view the complete video and give their opinion.

Jerry Lyda, Jeff O anybody?


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

Not an experienced trainer but, I think you 3 guys should duke it out and post it to youtube.

Don't forget to put the link here.


----------



## Lee Robinson

Thomas, here are YOUR words of what happened. You too were there. I also heard about this from others that were there. This is a direct quote. The link to your words will only be shared to those who ask for it in a PM.

_*"Dubheasa was five at the time. She reacted to the attack and spun around to engage the decoy. She missed the first grip and was being driven/ kneed by the decoy for the next 10-20 feet before the judge ended the exercise."* YOU also stated that the dog "*failed because" it "didn't get a bite." Thomas Barriano.*_


----------



## Kyle Sprag

Kyle,

Given you think I don't know what I am talking about...watch this video of Thomas's dog. http://www.chimerakennels.com/thomasdobie.wmv

Now, please answer these questions...

1. Did the decoy step on the dog's foot on purpose? Notice how he extends his leg forward in front of his balance to "step out" onto the dog's foot.

I have NO idea, I don't know anyone who purposely steps on young dogs feet. I DO KNOW I have stepped on dogs feet many times, sh!t happens

2.YES... If yes, why? To work through issues? If that was the case, why was the dog DENIED the bite and blocked with the stick and then driven back? After all, he has a sleeve on.

refer to the previous answer

2.NO...If it was not on purpose, why would he deny the dog's bite after the issue given he has a SLEEVE ON?

poor timing, suprised, didn't want to associate the foot step to Bitting and/or sleeve???? many reasons

3. Why would this dog back up and sit down?

again, I have no idea, what it DID look like to me knowing the handler, the sport he is being trained in, breed, age etc..... Maybe he was working on a B&H recently and was confused???

4. When the decoy was down on the ground, why did the dog come off the bite when the decoy used his legs? If the decoy was trying to teach the dog to work through the issue, why did the decoy then sit up and again use the stick to push the dog back?

again, I have no idea, that is why it is called TRAINING.

OR...does the decoy not know what he is doing? Or, does the decoy know what he is doing but is simply trying to ruin the dog? And, why would he possibly want to ruin Thomas's dog? Perhaps he doesn't like Thomas and Thomas will be kicked out of another club soon?

This is just silly

What is your take on it? Now...keep it about the dogs and avoid the personal nonsense. What is your take? I won't be surprised if you don't answer these questions...because...the fact is you would either agree with me...OR...you would have to say something stupid. Either way, I win.







Not bad IMO, given the fact that YOU think I don't know what I am talking about.

You are correct about one thing, I KNOW you don't know what you are WRITING about. The entire clip didn't look unusual to me having worked a variety of breeds, in different sports, of different ages, in suit and sleeve........

Again, Thomas should actually THANK ME...so he can have a talk with his decoy.

There was nothing you posted to thank you for.


Now, considering Thomas has trained two Dobies HOT at high levels of Schutzhund and titled these same Dobies in Other working venues, titled other dogs in working venues, Bred and HOT titled a Dobie at high levels, I would have to defer to Thomas and his judgement on WHO he works with and WHAT work is done with his dogs. He has HAD sucess on many levels over many years.

You have done what?


----------



## Kyle Sprag

Lee Robinson said:


> Thomas, here are YOUR words of what happened. You too were there. I also heard about this from others that were there. This is a direct quote. The link to your words will only be shared to those who ask for it in a PM.
> 
> _*"Dubheasa was five at the time. She reacted to the attack and spun around to engage the decoy. She missed the first grip and was being driven/ kneed by the decoy for the next 10-20 feet before the judge ended the exercise."* YOU also stated that the dog "*failed because" it "didn't get a bite." Thomas Barriano.*_


 

Not sure what you point is here? I posted before I WAS THERE. I SAW this! The dog didn't get a bite, I believe because of the dogs Schutzhund background, Thomas also wrote that he should have asked for a Fore Arm presentation and did not. I agree, he should have but this was one of the first seasons that offered a PDC and first time the Handler (Thomas) had seen a PSA trial.

Why do you keep spinning this? If you had any experience with training and trialing this would not be all that big a deal to you.


----------



## Lee Robinson

Kyle Sprag said:


> Kyle,
> 
> Given you think I don't know what I am talking about...watch this video of Thomas's dog. http://www.chimerakennels.com/thomasdobie.wmv
> 
> Now, please answer these questions...
> 
> 1. Did the decoy step on the dog's foot on purpose? Notice how he extends his leg forward in front of his balance to "step out" onto the dog's foot.
> 
> I have NO idea, I don't know anyone who purposely steps on young dogs feet. I DO KNOW I have stepped on dogs feet many times, sh!t happens
> 
> 2.YES... If yes, why? To work through issues? If that was the case, why was the dog DENIED the bite and blocked with the stick and then driven back? After all, he has a sleeve on.
> 
> refer to the previous answer
> 
> 2.NO...If it was not on purpose, why would he deny the dog's bite after the issue given he has a SLEEVE ON?
> 
> poor timing, suprised, didn't want to associate the foot step to Bitting and/or sleeve???? many reasons
> 
> 3. Why would this dog back up and sit down?
> 
> again, I have no idea, what it DID look like to me knowing the handler, the sport he is being trained in, breed, age etc..... Maybe he was working on a B&H recently and was confused???
> 
> 4. When the decoy was down on the ground, why did the dog come off the bite when the decoy used his legs? If the decoy was trying to teach the dog to work through the issue, why did the decoy then sit up and again use the stick to push the dog back?
> 
> again, I have no idea, that is why it is called TRAINING.


When training...a decoy is supposed to improve the dog. Not break the dog. Shit happens...but a good trainer knows when he has a sleeve on and when he does not. So...there is no acceptable reason as to why the decoy would not allow the dog to bite after a "sh!7 happens" (on purpose or not) event unless the decoy wanted to screw Thomas's dog up. Training isn't about breaking a dog. Trialing is a test. Training is supposed to be BUILDING UP or ESTABLISHING COMMUNICATION. Neither occurred in that clip. What you do see is a dog break the dog. Then, later in the original clip he repeats this when he is on the ground. One "sh!7 happens" is one thing...but it should not happen repeatedly so quickly. But of course..."I don't know what I am talking about." If that is acceptable to you...for a decoy to REPEAT THE SAME MISTAKE...to repeatedly screw up within just a few minutes of work...well that reflects on you.


----------



## Chris McDonald

Lee why do post the images you do? What are you trying to show in the images in this post? You sell dogs, right? Who is your main client type you’re shooting for? What must one of your dogs be capable of doing before you sell them to a family with young kids? Do you have video of dogs that you have sold to families with kids? What kind of training must the new owners receive before you let them take one of your dogs home? And what do you charge for your dogs? How much for a puppy? How much for a fully trained dog? I am not understanding your motives or your what type of person would want one of your dogs?


----------



## Kyle Sprag

Lee Robinson said:


> When training...a decoy is supposed to improve the dog. Not break the dog. Shit happens...but a good trainer knows when he has a sleeve on and when he does not. So...there is no acceptable reason as to why the decoy would not allow the dog to bite after a "sh!7 happens" (on purpose or not) event unless the decoy wanted to screw Thomas's dog up. Training isn't about breaking a dog. Trialing is a test. Training is supposed to be BUILDING UP or ESTABLISHING COMMUNICATION. Neither occurred in that clip. What you do see is a dog break the dog. Then, later in the original clip he repeats this when he is on the ground. One "sh!7 happens" is one thing...but it should not happen repeatedly so quickly. But of course..."I don't know what I am talking about." If that is acceptable to you...for a decoy to REPEAT THE SAME MISTAKE...to repeatedly screw up within just a few minutes of work...well that reflects on you.


 
Again you really don't know what you are writing about, you make a lot of silly ASSumptions on a very short clip.

Thomas HAS REAL accomplishments at HIGH levels with dogs he has HOT and BRED HOT! He HAS made correct choices and decisions as to what work is done and who he works whith. I will defer to his experienced decisions over your know-it-all Smoke screen based on a short clip.

Anyone who has ever handled, trained, worked a number of High level dogs knows that.

You are just trying to stir up sh!t where there is NONE!


Now your accomplishments are?:roll: Seems to me you have some OB to work on!


----------



## Howard Knauf

Is this school yard gripe still going on after 9 pages? 

Kyle, I'm still waiting for a list of Lee's accomplishments as well. I hope it's good after seeing all this garbage.

Before anyone tells me not to read the thread if I don't like it....the only thing keeping me interested is waiting for the big axe to fall au la Ed Fraw...! Hope I'm not disapointed.


----------



## Lee Robinson

Chris McDonald said:


> Lee why do post the images you do? What are you trying to show in the images in this post? You sell dogs, right? Who is your main client type you’re shooting for? What must one of your dogs be capable of doing before you sell them to a family with young kids? Do you have video of dogs that you have sold to families with kids? What kind of training must the new owners receive before you let them take one of your dogs home? And what do you charge for your dogs? How much for a puppy? How much for a fully trained dog? I am not understanding your motives or your what type of person would want one of your dogs?


I post to participate on the forum. The images are just that...images. The images show a dog I like. They show a dog we are working on for PP applications. Why does anyone post the images they post? I do sell dogs from time to time. Should the forum only allow pictures to be posted by people that never have a dog for sell? *Just so you know, the dog in the photos IS NOT for sale...and he has NEVER been bred, so we do NOT have any pups out of him for sale*. I also do not have any planned breedings with him at this time. Does that make my pictures any better or any worse? I don't think so. They are just pictures of a PP dog in training. We do our best to make sure every owner is well prepaired to own one of our dogs. We have never had a dog bite anyone within their family or their guests/friends. We have however had dogs that have had live bites in protective situations. And, not once has even a legal issue of any bite in question been a concern. Our dogs are excellent with their families and children. The price of my dogs depends upon the breeding, pup/dog, training, etc...and also the relationship I have with the client. Our dogs are bred to be family companion guardians. The type of client we strive to deal with are responsible people...who want a pet k9 that is an athlete with a purpose.

My motive...Just to participate in the PP portion of this forum...as I have an interest in PP dogs.


----------



## Chris McDonald

Chris McDonald said:


> Can you post a few minute video of a dog that you would consider trained and ready to be placed with a family showing its stuff?
> What the dollar range these dogs sell for?


----------



## Jim Nash

I'm amazed this guy has been allowed to go on and on in this forum . I've never seen anyone here repeatedly post and repost the same pictures and links to his website where he sells dogs . 

He also has posted dangerous comments for those with little knowledge of dogs . Like this in response to this statement by Todd Pavlus ;

" Originally Posted by todd pavlus 
This topic of "If a PP dog will bite for real" has been beaten to death on this forum...REPEATEDLY The only people that get to test this scenario are the police k9's... it is there job. Everyone likes the bitework part of training, it's fun...Let's see some video of these PP people doing some top level obediance. That takes more work and knowledge on the handler's part. "

Lee stated : 

" An alert/engagement command in a strange and unexpected environment with a helper that has no equipment on will also answer that question. If a dog goes civil and forward and the helper doesn't have to "key up" the dog or have equipment on..then you can tell. "

This is often part of a Selection test for Police K9's with the exception being there is noone around to give a command or be there to give the dog any support . We are looking for the dog to stand it's ground go forward and drive the person off . But we would never say this type of dog is going to engage for real . Only that it is showing some good characteristics that would be needed in PSD work .

This is a dangerous statement to be making and one that could lead a novice to be unprepared and hurt if the dog doesn't react as the trainer and/or breeder stated .

I've checked up on Lee and he has plagued many other forums and been banned because of what he brings to them .

Thomas and Kyle . Please drop it . You have argued with him over and over again and he has never backed down . You are only giving him reason to post and repost to his pictures , videos and website . 

IMO it's bringing the quality of this board down considerably .


----------



## Kyle Sprag

"Thomas and Kyle . Please drop it . You have argued with him over and over again and he has never backed down . You are only giving him reason to post and repost to his pictures , videos and website ."

Every board he visits he brings the quality down.

So what am I supose to do? Let him continue to post Lies and BS?

If you think that simply Ignoring him will stop the nonsense, well you are mistaken. :-\"


----------



## Bob Scott

Since nothing I've said has done anything I've sent a message to the rest of the mods. It will be discussed!


----------



## Chris McDonald

Bob Scott said:


> Since nothing I've said has done anything I've sent a message to the rest of the mods. It will be discussed!


 
Oh no a meeting of the mods. I think I got I figured out…. Lee is really Elmo


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*Multiple personalities*



Chris McDonald said:


> Oh no a meeting of the mods. I think I got I figured out…. Lee is really Elmo


Chris,

That is actually pretty funny if you knew the whole story.
Lee has been accusing me of being several other posters
Dog Fellow, Long Send, Deep Full Bites, etc. with ZERO proof.
He thinks that when I post at the EXACT same time as
Dog Fellow on two different threads that I must be using a split screen. When a moderator tells him that we're different people
he insists I must be using a proxy server or some kind of networking device. He gets a notice from his ISP saying that someone is using his IP address and he asks on a public list
if I know anything about it. When I tell him you can't duplicate an IP address he reveals that he is on a wireless service.
Turns out someone that lives nearby is piggybacking on his
signal. Lee needs help with his paranoia and obsessive behavior. I hope he gets it, but I see no reason that he should
be allowed to continue his nonsense here. Hopefully the mods will deal with the problem


----------



## Lee Robinson

*Re: Multiple personalities*

Thomas, speaking of nonsense...what does your post have to do with dogs?


----------



## maggie fraser

*Re: Multiple personalities*



Lee Robinson said:


> Thomas, speaking of nonsense...what does your post have to do with dogs?


Lee, do you not consider at all that you are abusing this forum?

I'm not really looking for an answer as I learned in my early interactions with you on this board, that you insist on having the last word no matter how ridiculous.

Give it a rest will ya! Better still, go practice some ob!


----------



## Chris McDonald

*Re: Multiple personalities*



maggie fraser said:


> Lee, do you not consider at all that you are abusing this forum?
> 
> I'm not really looking for an answer as I learned in my early interactions with you on this board, that you insist on having the last word no matter how ridiculous.
> 
> Give it a rest will ya! Better still, go practice some ob!


 
What’s next, this really aint Maggie Fraser? Then who the hell am I? What the F is going on around here? Who is the real Elmo?


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

If the mods give him the boot. My GF will have nothing to read, as he cracks her up. His posts are her version of a soap opera.

However, just the fact that he is here is kinda silly. I wonder how many names he will post under to try and get around the "boot" or if there will be a huge virus again, like after Emillio got the boot.

I think we are getting enough new people from the weird boards. I haven't seen Thomas talk this much in my entire life. : )


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Jim Nash said:


> You have argued with him over and over again and he has never backed down . You are only giving him reason to post and repost to his pictures , videos and website .
> 
> IMO it's bringing the quality of this board down considerably .


IMO you are right.


e.t.a. My opinion is a shared opinion, BTW. I just happen to be the one online at the moment.


----------

