# SportBashing



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Lets talk about sports and how to properly bash them. Whenever I talk about the weakness of any sport, here and the real world, I always wonder what it is that others are looking for in a sport?

So when I say that a sport like PSA does not look for a dogs abilty to inhibit itself under pressure, what is it that you are actually hearing???

So that is question one, so I am going to leave it at that and see what I get from it. So don't be chicken, lets see if we can stay on topic for more than one page.


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen (Mar 29, 2006)

KNPV: all excercises can be trained on...ringsports are more unexpected :wink:


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

Drunk German Schutzhund judges at local club trials are blind


----------



## Woody Taylor (Mar 28, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Lets talk about sports and how to properly bash them.


This is the first problem. You're not going to get any constructive discussion going if the attitude is "bash it." People in those sports have invested way too much time in them to respond to some doof on the internet who starts out this way.

I would like to have a forum where we can actually talk about the weaknesses of sports (and their strengths). That would be interesting. But starting out (or coming into) a thread saying "sport x is crap, sport y is superior" doesn't get anyone very far.


----------



## ann schnerre (Aug 24, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> So when I say that a sport like PSA does not look for a dogs abilty to inhibit itself under pressure,


first, this part doesn't make sense to me, the "PSA does NOT look...". Huh? i must be missing something huge is all i can figure; jeff's transmitting but i'm not receiving  
at any rate, unless something makes sense, i certainly can't have an opinion.
and second, i have to be a follower and agree w/woody and connie: i didn't think the purpose of this forum was to bash anyone/thing. it's to learn.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Do you mean to say that the dog has no requirement to restrain drive to get his goal? Or maybe no requirement to control nerve? Or maybe no requirement to focus before obtaining his goal?

Is it possible to actually ask questions and get answers that do not contain bashing of others' sports or personal insults? 

If it isn't, then I will take the O.P. at his word, consider this a bashing thread, and end it.







Edit: This is the part where Jeff smiles and calls me N00B from the other end of the internet.

Or he SAYS he smiles. I have never heard corroboration.


----------



## Kim Gossmeyer (Feb 24, 2007)

You know, this is exactly what I was talking about in my post. IMMATURITY. This is not a topic that needs to be discussed... sport bashing... not everyone likes mondio ring, not everyone likes ASR, not everyone likes Sch.... so why put those people down when they have invested time and money into something. Why bash it just because YOU don't like it, that is YOUR opinion. I thought we were adults.. With a topic like that you are just asking to start a fight and see how far you can push people.

I don't see were this could have a constructive topic...


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen (Mar 29, 2006)

I (and I think Mike also) interperted the question differently...You can also read it as : What are the weaker points of your sport, what is said often?


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Selena van Leeuwen said:


> I (and I think Mike also) interperted the question differently...You can also read it as : What are the weaker points of your sport, what is said often?


I interpreted it that way, too, and thought maybe "bashing" was meant to be ironic. Amusing. 

Probably wrong, but willing (for a while) to withhold judgment.


----------



## Kim Gossmeyer (Feb 24, 2007)

then why not call the thread weaknesses... and not sport bashing.... I took it as someone starting to start an argument. But why only point out weaknesses... Every sport has to have positives as well right?


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Kim Gossmeyer said:


> then why not call the thread weaknesses... and not sport bashing.... I took it as someone starting to start an argument. But why only point out weaknesses... Every sport has to have positives as well right?


OK, we will use the term "weaknesses." :wink: 

Our forum has "weaknesses" in subject titling.

I am interested in seeing whether this is really a learning thread or a piece-of-junk rant.


----------



## Kim Gossmeyer (Feb 24, 2007)

I would hope to learn something, from people who have tried sports to find weakness. and not just people talking from inexperience in the sport in which they speak


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

"I would hope to learn something, from people who have tried sports"


And maybe we will!


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen (Mar 29, 2006)

@ Kim everybody will tell the positive things of his/her sport, but not everything could be great..every sport have (some) weaknesses...and who can better tell them than the ones who are practising them? 

As you see Mike and I both ansewered for our own sport :wink: I´m very curious of Jeff´s answer regarding MR


----------



## steve gossmeyer (Jan 9, 2007)

yeah i think what jeff was sayin is that he wanted to talk about the weakness of sports. i got ya this time. lol and i think he was just using psa as a start off topic and nothin personal.


----------



## Amber Scott Dyer (Oct 30, 2006)

There is no sport that is going to be perfect for everyone. They ALL have their weaknesses. 

The biggest weakness for me, in any and EVERY sport, is politics. :wink:


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

i think it's important to look at why a given handler is into the sport of their choice. if it's anything more than "i like working with and training my dog", then you set yourself up for failure. if you want a PPD, then train him to be one as no sport completely addresses all of the aspects of PP training. this is where people get into the huge debates about "SchH, PSA, FR, (insert your sport here) dogs aren't real".


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

If we accepted Tim's premise (and I do), then "weakness" loses a lot of the meaning it's usually given in sports threads, right?

If sport is NOT PP (not better; not worse; just NOT), then "reality" versus choreography is out the window.

So then what would be a weakness? Some sports reward some things and some reward others.

As Amber says, wouldn't the structure, the judging, the "politics" then be the only area where "weakness" is a valid judgment (as opposed to "difference")?

And the drunken SchH judges, of course. :lol:


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

Wow.... OK we all know this is Jeff starting the thread. We all know what he's like, he's the guy that wants to push everyones buttons. i actually think that if people get over his choice in wording that we can get some constructive conversation going here. So lets stop with the commentary on the "weaknesses" in this thread and concentrate on the weaknesses in our chosen sport. It'd be interesting what people think of and how realistic they are when it comes to criticizing their own sport rather than other peoples sports. Every sport has its problems, the more you understand about dog training the more obvious they become, but you have to train what is available to you with the people you can learn from and enjoy learning from. Afterall, sport is just teaching a dog a routine.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Besides drunken SchH judges, Mike, and supposing non-acceptance of Tim's argument, would choreography (or routine) be the biggest sport "weakness," in your opinion?


----------



## Lacey Vessell (Nov 18, 2006)

Okay I'll bite about the weaknesses of SchH/IPO, which is the sport that I am currently involved in, as I personally see them: Tracking portion is more obedience then tracking, especially for a malinois (who for the most part love to "Speed track"), once you get to the FH level then I believe you can see a *little* better what a dog has as far as tracking abilities go. Obedience - I think SchH has one of the most stringent/anal obedience requirements of all the sports - at least when it is judged correctly. Protection - in my opinion here is where SchH lacks considerably....not enough pressure on the dog or variations - to much of a "set pattern" although I have seen (on films) the AWMA Nationals this past year and was really impressed with the helpers - they did not try to make the dog "look good" which is what I have seen all to often at club level trials. In summation, I feel that SchH/IPO is more of a test of the handler/trainer then it is of the dog. I am also one of those people that are more then willing to tell you my dogs weaknesses as well as their strengths :wink:

I like doing SchH/IPO with my dogs.....because they like it. Because we have fun training for it together. If they did not want to do it...then I'd find something else that interests them. The politics suck.......but is not so bad if you trial in other states or areas of your own state....I've actually had more fun and less hassles that way


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

I don't think the choreography is really as bad as people make it out to be. If that was the case then why do some dogs still try to avoid being frontal with the helper during the drive, look at the body position of some weaker dogs when the helper is driving them with the stick, you can almost see the dogs body in relation to the helper acting like he doesn't want to be in front of the helper, but he is biting full and holding on. The judge doesn't score the dog based on body language but rather just the bite and the entry. That is a scoring problem not a sport problem. There are dogs who have been taught all their lives that waving a stick over their head doesn't hurt, yet when you drive the dog without a stick hit you can still see grips change and their mind become stressed even though they don't know any better than that the stick waves over their head and never touches them.

Reading a dog for yourself is far more important than scoring. But you need to know what you are looking for when watching the dog because some of the things that indicate a dog reacting poorly to stress are so subtle. That goes for every sport. I guarantee there are Mondio dogs who look great to the average spectator but someone who can truly understand the way a dog is reacting to pressure will be able to see the subtle ways in which the dog is showing avoidance. I get the impression that the folks in PSA and the reality sports want to see clearer signs of avoidance, whereas the folks that run Schutzhund are aiming for more participation. More people can participate in Schutzhund because club trials are scored pretty easy, if they make it tougher then most of the people who are titling now will fail miserably, lose their enthusiasm for the sport and quit.


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

i'll tell you the biggest weakness in my "sport". it's really the entire premise of handler selection. you sport people do your sports because you love to be out there training with your dog, competing. you do it for the sheer joy of it. in my line of work, handlers rarely train if they don't get paid. they get into the job, in MANY cases, knowing nothing about dogs, dog training, or even deployment of the dog. they usually know nothing about their dog's origin (sports in most cases) and usually show no interest in learning about it even after they get selected. they tend to take their trainer's word as gospel and do not look outside that comfort zone to seek out other training philosophies.

the above frustrates me to no end. in a lot of cases people put in for the assignment because the idea of sic'inig your dog on someone sounds cool. or "i just got out of detectives and i have to work patrol for a while, so it might as well be with a dog".

people like jeff who bash PSD's and their handlers are right in many, many cases for reasons stated above. i tend to agree...


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

And then there are PSD trainers who are terrific at what they do..... and whose infectious passion for their work can fire up even the lamest handler.

I am gathering that these individuals are rare.

I can imagine the frustration of someone who IS interested beyond the "cool siccing" or the "might as well be with a dog" segment.

What a difference between that and the people who are in a sport -- ANY sport -- just because they love dog training.


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen (Mar 29, 2006)

@ Tim: I guess that is a world round "problem" :wink: 

The ones who stick to a sport really enjoy training their dog, the ones who think that is cool when a dog bites, quit when they learn it takes months, years of training and dedication :wink:


----------



## steve gossmeyer (Jan 9, 2007)

i agree with everyone. i like schH ob but i dont like the bite work. i like trailing not tracking (which the dog need to know ground tracking before the can really trail). i like french ring but not the ob in it. and i like the leg bites but i like that in asr your dog can go anywere and not get deducted. i also like mondio for the distraction and and pressure. to each his own good luck to all in their sports.


----------



## Al Curbow (Mar 27, 2006)

All sports are just sports, a good dog can learn them all if the handler had access to each sport club and was motivated. I'm just starting Sch ( i like it) and i guess i'm setting myself up for failure because i'm doing it cause "i like working with and training my dog"   :lol: . Oh yeah, why would anyone give a crap if somebody bashes their sport? Bash away, personally i think all the sports are good cause that means people are training their mutts and hopefully enjoying it! I get a laugh out of somebody really bashing a sport. Jeff, if you're any kind of self respecting "basher" , you'll bash'em all except the one your doing at the moment, :lol: :lol:


----------



## steve gossmeyer (Jan 9, 2007)

Well Spoken


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

Selena van Leeuwen said:


> @ Tim: I guess that is a world round "problem" :wink:
> 
> The ones who stick to a sport really enjoy training their dog, the ones who think that is cool when a dog bites, quit when they learn it takes months, years of training and dedication :wink:


The sad thing is that the handlers that dont train still stay K9 handlers, they quickly spend a week brushing up before re-certification time n other than that they just wanna say pakken.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

I don't bash any sport, I really don't know all that much about them. I like the idea of people working with their dogs, regardless of what their intentions are. The one question I would have is; from the little I've seen, the dogs tend to be really equipment oriented. That well could be I've just not seen enough of it, but it is my current impression.

DFrost


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Al Curbow said:


> i think all the sports are good cause that means people are training their mutts


Great point!

And it IS kinda funny to bash a sport for being a sport, now that you mention it. :lol:


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

I don't consider this thread so much about bashing a sport as it is comparing the aspects of your own sport in terms of things you would like to be different. Lets say we were discussing baseball, personally if I played baseball I would want the bases closer together because I'm too lazy to run that big ass diamond  So what would you consider a downside to your chosen sport???


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

The aspects of my sport that I find most unatractive has to do with those who display poor sportsmanship, sour grapes and gossip.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

One issue that I've seen (not necessarily Schutzhund specific...true of any sport dog related or not) is that those that are in charge of training might be great at training their dogs...but not so great at training other people to train their own dogs. :? Or the too many cooks in the kitchen syndrome of several different people giving their opinions and methods to us newbies and novices. I just hate saying "Well, so and so told me to do it this way, that's why." :roll:


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I train for my dog and myself. I've seen both the good and the bad and most depends on the individual club, the individual trainer/decoy, the individual dog and handler. 
Easy, stock answer huh!
We could all sit here and shoot down our own and other's choice of training but it's what we ourselves get out of it. 
Hopefully we are all aware of the strengths and weakness of the venue we follow. 
Weak sport, crooked or poor judging! Don't care! For myself, I found what I enjoy doing and that's playing with my dogs. I'm old and I doubt I'll be here in another 50-60 yrs  so I'm going to enjoy myself. Don't really care what it's called if I'm enjoying it. Don't really care if others agree or disagree with what I'm doing.
When I head for home plate I intend to go in screaming, with my spikes high. :wink: 
Had a couple of beers tonight. Not used to that. :lol: :lol:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

This got way out of hand. I was curious if I used the word "bashing" if anyone would see what I was talking about.

Congradulations to Tim and Mike and Lacey for seeing past the word bashing.

I am talking about what I and hopefully you see as weaknesses in the sports. 

Mondio has weakness in my opinion with opposition on the entry.

I think that if the dog has a weak entry that the decoy should be able to keep the barrage closed and keep the dog out.

In being able to discuss openly what is crap and what is positive, people can make a difference. I see a lot of sports out there as an "easy title" so that they can have a semi clear concious when they breed.

This is of course just what I am seeing from a distance, and with only lots and lots of video to go on. I am biased, in a lot of ways of course, but by no means do I think that my sport of choice is the be all end all, but pretty close :wink:

That being said, most of the sports I find weak, tend to emulate Mondio for the most part. I really don't see what they are looking at. But then again I am just an azzhole right???


----------



## Erik Berg (Apr 11, 2006)

I think most, if not all sports can be trained with a dog that has some weakness in one or more areas, a good trainer can get such a dog into high levels, so in that sence all sports has some weakness if a sporttitle is the only thing you consider when breeding.

But if we look at some sports, this is my opinion,

Mondio: Fun and good with the unexpected scenarios/routines, like all ringsports it lacks nosework, and even if the scenarios are more unexpected compared to many other sports, I guess a dog knows by training that "weird" things happen on the field and therefore can somehow be conditined to unexpected scenarios, it´s a part of the game so to speak. 

SCH: Don´t like the artifical tracking and search for the helper that is always on the same place, bitework is always the same with no variation and feels a bit weak, even if a strong dog doing a nice SCH-routine is nice to see.

Swedish protection: Realistic search for people and articles, more practical tracking compared to SCH. Bitework with both muzzle and sleeve wich is good I think, therefore a wellrounded programm close to policework. Weakness, repetive exercizes, quite picky in the obedience parts, not much tolerance for a slow out or an extra bump with a muzzle(could be both goor or bad depending on how you look at it), would be fun with abit more pressure after the bite,like in ring, maybe also abit more consideration for the quality of the grip.


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

when i first was introduced to dog sports, i was shown SchH. i was in awe and thought it was the coolest. as time went on and i learned about other sports, i saw how BORING SchH was from a spectator's standpoint. i much prefer to watch the variety of mondio or the high flying, hard hitting bite suit hits of KNPV. from a spectator's standpoint, there is no comparison. SchH is BORING...


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Weakness in Schutzhund, IMO!
To structured and choreographed.
I HATE FST! Even basic SAR search work is way more fun for handler and dog.
Politics and giveaway titles.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> Weakness in Schutzhund, IMO!
> To structured and choreographed.
> I HATE FST! Even basic SAR search work is way more fun for handler and dog.
> Politics and giveaway titles.


Why do you hate FST? Just from boring-ness?


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Connie Sutherland said:


> Bob Scott said:
> 
> 
> > Weakness in Schutzhund, IMO!
> ...


To artificial, and with a dog that has his foundation on air scent and trailing, it's been a pita to convince him to keep his nose down. 
I get these looks like "Hey you old fart! I know the guy went thataway. Why should I go this way just cause his tracks do. Turn me loose and I'llfind him for you". 
I love watching a dog work a real scent. Just not one step at a time. BOOOORING!
This also leads to my being a lazy trainer for FST.


----------

