Based on what she said earlier in this thread, I believe Mrs K is relaying information she read on another board. In so doing, she is simply repeating what she read but has no real knowledge of what really happened with this man and his club. Might be be the case but could be wildly different than reported. I have been around dog trainers and clubs enough to know about the politics and vendettas that can take place. That's not to mention the people who report what they have heard with a great deal of glee, even though it doesn't have a heck of a lot to do with reality.
The fact that some people posting here want to look right past the editing, I find somewhat telling. Is the guy a good dog trainer? hmm...maybe not.. but convicting someone on a dog board based on a VERY edited video, tells me something about the people doing that.
Everyone has their agendas and while I think this is certainly not a really good example of dog training, the fact remains that the reactions of the people, and the dog, and the sound, just don't match. Once those facts became obvious, I personally could not go a step further in condemning this man. I have been on juries with people who wanted to convict someone based on their prejudices, what they heard someone say in the elevator, because the police are never wrong, and so on. It is frightening to me what people think is acceptable "proof".
Thank You - Thank You - Thank You!
I just read the whole thread. Ignored it initially for a few reasons, not the least of which, an idiot like me had no idea what 'IPO' was & didn't want to look it up. (not a fan of acronyms) After looking it up, came back to watch the video & read.
I've been to a few Sch displays & learned quickly that it is not a sport for everyone. I'm very interested in the sport, just don't have the dog for it @ this time. I've also been around many trainers. I've seen harsh training before that had nothing to do with the sport. But I agree 1000% that an obviously, poorly edited YouTube video should have no place in the ruling of a sanctioning body - for anything.
Done perhaps by a competitor? Quite likely, actually. There are cheaters in all the dog sports. (Years ago, the winningest Irish Setter in AKC conformation was being fed arsenic to get long, beautiful feathering. By the breeder/handler. And everyone knew it. The dog died at the age of 2. Deadly cheaters.) Should the video be taken seriously? Shouldn't. Isn't - by me at least.
BTW - I find it funny that, in Europe, one can legally buy / own a certain collar type - but you can't use it. So what's the point - wall decoration?