|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|07-04-2014 01:11 PM|
I agree with you Anne" I liked the courage test" the guarding of object" exc. Politics changing things that don't need changed. J.m.o. Bill
Stahl my boy!
|07-04-2014 12:54 PM|
There are 4 dogs lined up in each lane, with their handlers revving them up at the start. Dogs have to learn to stay in their lane while completely ignoring a dog running next to them 10 or 12 feet away. They have to be focused enough on their job to ignore other dogs being restrained just a few feet away and sometimes right next to them until it's their turn to go, most of which are barking their heads off. And running full speed towards another dog head on and passing it shoulder to shoulder with just inches between them is NOT a natural dog behavior! Desensitizing dogs to passing into another dog and being passed into is something we work on a lot, and some dogs simply won't do both. They either become start dogs or run anchor because they can't run in the pack. It's an extremely loud and chaotic environment, with a lot of people and a lot of dogs off leash in a relatively small area, which can be quite stressful. There's no way to cheat, and there's nothing subjective about it - either your dog can run clean heats on a team, or it can't.
Originally Posted by Liesje View Post
|07-04-2014 12:42 PM|
|blackshep||Ha ha! I know, not exactly the place you want to be if you have a headache!|
|07-04-2014 12:32 PM|
Originally Posted by blackshep View Post
|07-04-2014 12:27 PM|
If you have a dog who can hold it together at flyball (it's chaos!), you have a rock solid dog IMO.
|07-04-2014 11:57 AM|
I am still pretty new, so I won't say I've been around the block a few times, but... let's say I've been around the block once.
If I had to pick a GSD from a breeding program that only titled its dogs in one sport, I would pick IPO. Absolutely. Hands down. If you can only look at one sport, in my opinion, that's the one.
But the great thing is that there are breeders out there titling in multiple sports, and those are the ones that really impress me, for essentially the reasons that Liesje laid out. The more you do, the more it shows, and the more complete the overall picture becomes.
|07-04-2014 11:33 AM|
While I know there is a certain level of cheating going on....certainly more in one sector of SchH than the other, it is, ( in my opinion of course), more about the test. Years ago, the test would eliminate the dogs who could not do it. It was just accepted that the dogs had to do certain exercises and tolerate a certain level of stress/threat and if they didn't, well.....you would need to get another dog. The way people thought about it was different. Somewhere along the line, people started “helping” each other just a bit too much and of course, parts of the test have been removed. We also have the more “sophisticated” training methods now.
I’ve said it before , the attack on handler, ( meaning coming directly around the blind and straight at the dog and handler), really did test the dogs. While people with good strong dogs always seemed to take it for granted, there was a test there for them as well as the weaker dogs. The obedience required for those dogs added a level of stress to it and it was not simply about whether they would bite there. SchH 1 was all about pressure, not the release of it through escape bites. Then there was that pesky reed stick that some dogs could endure but would then not want to out. You’d have to consider the overall cumulative stress of the entire protection routine, (again, all pressure exercises), done in the same day, after the first two phases, where there was not the careful management of stress, (through the use of “sophisticated methods” ), as there is now. We really did track in the trial also. Meaning the tracks were long in different conditions etc, not the “we don’t have enough space” kind of tracks we see more often nowadays.
Add in the fact that the dogs viewed protection differently, (meaning usually more seriously), and maybe some people will be willing to consider that there was a rather significant difference. Not trying to rain on parades here, just trying to be real is all.
I think as far as balance in training goes. Yes, it matters. I see the flirt pole stuff too. I might test my dog with one and then I leave it alone. A good dog will bite the helper the first time on the field, they don’t need to be “taught” how to bite. My first SchH 3 dog was an experiment in the new “prey method” at the time. We did it wrong and a dog who was dead serious in real life, was more about the sleeve than I would have liked. Didn’t really stop him from doing very well but I felt that training hid who the real dog was and not in a good way. His son I trained differently, ( more balance and not started until he was over a year old), and he was a dog everyone stopped to watch in protection. Anyway, it does matter how much of one side of the dog you work. Also, when you find a helper who can tap into your dog’s fight drive, you will see an entirely different performance in protection. It is like a switch is flipped when that happens and you don’t get that from only working the dog in “defense”. It is prey work, pressure, and an attitude in the helper....meaning the helper is a very good actor. It is all the drives brought up at once, that brings out the fight drive.
Last, I’m not saying there are not dogs now who could have done well under those conditions, just that we won’t really know that. On a personal note, for me, it is much more fun when the conditions are difficult and the judge is a good one. I think SchH was much more exciting to watch when we asked the dogs to do more....even tracking was fun to watch vs the “watching paint dry” feeling I get when I watch it now.
Just take a look at how much the tougher judges are used vs the more easy ones. That says a lot about the way people operate and is why judges with the right degree of toughness are necessary more than how many members an organization has. If they would make it more difficult, I think we would see SchH become much more popular.
|07-04-2014 09:34 AM|
Didn't literally mean bought! Meant biased" unfair" friend of judge" ect. Should have been more clear sorry.
It would not surprise me though knowing people can be sneaky and unfair! Bull
Stahl my boy!
|07-04-2014 09:27 AM|
wasn't saying the titles were "bought" - club trials and judges bending rules a bit too much.....2 of those were same judge, different trials....others were judges who came to the club quite often and know the members, were hosted by the members, and apparently were writing, sneezing, rewarding handler in spite of some glitch, or had seen the dog in training and chose to overlook the rule infraction and reward the overall picture....don't agree with it as some people do not realize and will then argue to the death that it was justified....I can see some leeway on an exercise - and have seen it often but these 4 that popped into my mind were really dogs who should have failed. And I know the one dog WAS extensively bred at that club...so, so much for breedworthiness....he sired quite a few dogs that got titled in the club too..
|07-04-2014 09:12 AM|
Titles bought? Any sport can be crooked" one bad apple is all it takes" and you can find good and bad dogs in all lines" I also agree the fly ball crowded" noise! Event" dogs running back and forth" would be a test for nerve. Bill
Stahl my boy!
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|