[W.Oliver]

What I take away from this as a Helper is the value in a dog that is balanced and has defense to draw from rather than simply working in prey drive. Where the Helper has to bring more to the field than simply moving like a rabbit, but also have presence, threaten the dog and drive a reason for aggression.

Just to be clear, I am not saying you just run around like a chicken when you work a Malinois .

Agreed, nor did I reference Mals....I was simply recognizing your point regarding "a dog" working only in prey drive vs. a balanced dog with aggression to draw from.

 

[W.Oliver]

Think about who people are going to for seminars and training videos. Mal trainers. They talk about teaching "the game" but in my opinion, that is training that is more geared to Mals than German Shepherds. The GSDs with stronger nerves and protective instincts don't usually respond as well to work like that.

As a guy who has watched those videos, and attended those seminars, that makes sense to me.

I have often asked myself why this well known trainer or that trainer works Mals, and didn't get to wrapped around the axle about it because I am a blissfully ignorant novice...this is why I need to stop talking to you, Lisa & Chris, all three of you screw-up my reality.

The German Shepherd breed has changed, SchH has changed, methods of training have changed, and all of this is expressed as the rise in popularity of the Belgian Malinois. Max is rolling over in his grave.

I remain a GSD man to the bone, and only hope the pockets of real GSDs persit into the future with breeders like the three of you.

Having said all that, I still plan to fly my real GSD named Itzakat to the West coast to study with one of those Mal guys to see what he knows....maybe I will take a trip to Saugus while I am out there!

 

[jmdjack]

Hi Anne, first I would like to thank you for your contributions to this forum. I always look forward to your posts. I understand what you are saying with respect to the difference between GSDs and Mals in protection and the need to approach this training differently. What I am unclear about is how the differences between the breeds affect (or should affect) obedience training. I find this very intriguing because, for those of us who (attempt to) train our GSDs for the most part on our own, most of what is currently out there for public consumption is from Mal trainers. To grossly generalize, the training seems heavily based upon markers, using toys and play as a reward. Understanding that every dog is different, generally what difference approaches do you suggest in training the GSD in obedience as opposed to a Mal? To throw out a few examples to help illustrate my question: More praise as a reward? The introduction of more physical placement, praise, and correction (read "compulsion" although I do not like using that word because people interpret it differently)? Or is it something as simple as not expecting the GSD to act in the same manner when presented with a reward? I don't mean to single Anne out; I would appreciate the comments of anyone who has some insight into this issue. Thanks.

 

[Ruthie]

...Most people now will never experience dogs like the ones I am talking about and many probably would not want to. They are that much different than what the norm is now. Like SchH used to be, they were not something for every Tom, **** and Harry. That is also the problem, the selling of SchH to the general public and the idea that everyone should be doing it. It simply is not a sport for just anyone and in making it that, the test it used to provide, is just about gone.

I am just curious about this statement. I don't understand what you are getting at. So, who should own this kind of dog? Who should be doing SchH?

 

[Vandal]

I should have said SchH WAS not a sport for everyone. Now anyone can do it.
I am saying that SchH is more like Agility now. It is much more about toys and playing games. Large numbers of dogs are no longer really doing protection, even though Schutzhund still translates to mean protection dog. I said some years back when they removed the Police trials from the BSP and replaced it with Agility, the mentality would start to shift and I was right. Used to be SchH dogs were quite suited for Police work, not anymore. Now SchH is explained as just a game where the dog wants to get his prize, he isn't really biting anyone. That is a far cry from what it was when I first started and no, it was not a sport for everyone. Now it is packaged in a way that is more appealing to people who might also be attracted to Agility. That's not an insult to agility trainers but it does say quite a bit about what SchH is now , compared to then. As for the dogs, they were not expected to be social butterflies as they are now. It was normal to see a dog who was not interested in interacting with strangers or who were protective of their handler. Now , often times, these types of dogs are considered unsuitable for SchH because they don't want to "play" with the helper or chase a rag on a "flirt pole" . The training was not quite as nice, not quite as stylized and no one was telling people the dogs wouldn't bite for real, because they would. LOL. I don't know many SchH people now who want a dog like that or could handle one.

 

[W.Oliver]

What you characterized about SchH today, is exactly why I have been interested in SDA and the suit work. I respect what the SDA folks are working to accomplish in the vein of "real dogs", I just wish they could get their organizational together. I am not suggesting SDA in place of SchH, but ideally for me, SDA would be in additon too SchH.

Funny thing is, there are alot of Dutchies, and Mals in the SDA crowd....so given the context of our discussion, and the SDA training philosophy, it leaves me scratching my head a bit???? None the less, they are focused on cultivating real dogs, not sport dogs, and I respect that.

 

[Jason L]

The training was not quite as nice, not quite as stylized and no one was telling people the dogs wouldn't bite for real, because they would. LOL. I don't know many SchH people now who want a dog like that or could handle one.

Anne, since these were really tough dogs, dogs that people may not want or could handle today, would you say training was also a lot rougher then? I was talking to someone at our club this weekend and he told me there was no such thing as clicker retrieve when he first got started. He just assumed everyone put a forced retrieve on the dog when the dog was old enough and the dogs that couldn't handle it wouldn't be dogs that would last long with in the training program anyway. It seemed like the two re-enforced each other. The training was tough, so only the strong dogs survived, thrived and were bred. And in order to train these dogs, training itself needs to be tough.

 

[Jason L]

What you characterized about SchH today, is exactly why I have been interested in SDA and the suit work. I respect what the SDA folks are working to accomplish in the vein of "real dogs", I just wish they could get their organizational together. I am not suggesting SDA in place of SchH, but ideally for me, SDA would be in additon too SchH.

Funny thing is, there are alot of Dutchies, and Mals in the SDA crowd....so given the context of our discussion, and the SDA training philosophy, it leaves me scratching my head a bit???? None the less, they are focused on cultivating real dogs, not sport dogs, and I respect that.

Wayne, I have been thinking about this topic of suit vs sleeve. My (newbie) hypothesis is the suit is only "telling" if the dog has not been trained to bite the suit. That is, you put a dog that is a suit-virgin on the suit and challenge him, then how he bites, where he bites, does he even bite at all - all of that will tell you something about the dog. But a dog that has been taught to bite on the suit from 6 months on (first the outside arm, then inside arm, then side of the leg, then back of the leg, then shoulder, then back, etc. etc.) - well, those dogs are no more real, no more "man aggressive" than a schutzhund dog biting a sleeve.

 

[Samba]

I was seeing some instruction on SchH one day and the point being made was that the protection part was a competition between the dog and the helper for the sleeve/toy. Toy play as a foundation for this was emphasized. The young dogs were seeped in this "play". It grew to be rougher play and competition along the way, but it was still based in this prey object primarily. It did seem to be all about a game. I guess points in the SchH routine could be gained fairly well with this approach!

I don't see as much pressure now on the dogs in obedience myself. Perhaps that is an issue? When testing dogs for breed-worthiness, wouldn't it be useful to know how that dog withstood pressure in that context? Wouldn't it be useful to know how willing that dog was to work for the handler rather than for food or prey drive satisfaction? When doing herding with my dogs they have to be able to withstand pressure from me in "obedience" and bounce right back. The sheep is not going to immediately reward that dog with something and neither am I going to be able to do much other than "good dog". The dog is going to have to withstand some pressure and also have a huge desire to work with the human part of the team.

Markers and reward seem really useful to teach complex behaviors, but it is not the whole of obedience surely. Dogs that I have really enjoyed worked for the handler in a very primary way and actually got better with pressure in obedience. They had a resiliency and a desire to please.

Perhaps others will speak to their take on it.

I am relatively new to SchH and not experienced. But, I can remember seeing really good dogs some years ago. No one wanted to "play" with those dogs on the field. In fact, looking back on it, it seems ludicrous to think about approaching those dogs that way! They were great dogs, could have done police work and were quite serious. I don't think they would get so many points now in competition. I do recall people starting to talk about "point" dogs then.

 

[W.Oliver]

Wayne, I have been thinking about this topic of suit vs sleeve. My (newbie) hypothesis is the suit is only "telling" if the dog has not been trained to bite the suit. That is, you put a dog that is a suit-virgin on the suit and challenge him, then how he bites, where he bites, does he even bite at all - all of that will tell you something about the dog. But a dog that has been taught to bite on the suit from 6 months on (first the outside arm, then inside arm, then side of the leg, then back of the leg, then shoulder, then back, etc. etc.) - well, those dogs are no more real, no more "man aggressive" than a schutzhund dog biting a sleeve.

Under that scenario, I agree, but that is not how I would employ the suit. I would utilize the suit much later in training after the dog has matured.

Key for me with Itzakat, is being congnisant of drive development, and avoiding the cultivation of a prey drive only dog. Raven, my puppy mama, is a dog like we are talking about. Calm, solid nerve, and a wonderful balance in her drives....I want that for my puppy.

 

[Jason L]

But for most bitesuit sports, that would be how they approach it, don't you think? People love to talk about the suit dogs on youtube doing high shoulder/back bites but it's a taught behavior just like anything else. The same applies to hidden sleeve, another place where lots of people like to woo and ahh about how real the dogs are. In PSA there is a carjack scenario with hidden sleeve - which looks nice until you realized how ritualized the whole thing is, how they go about training it, how they cue the dog to expect this and that and do x, y, z on command. To me, that is just as stylized as hold and bark in the blind ... maybe even more so.

 

[Vandal]

I am hiring Samba as my ghostwriter because, once again, she seems to know what I am talking about. In obedience now, there are traits in a GSD that are not being utilized by today's training methods. The good dogs deal with the pressure exceptionally well, not only from the helper but from the handler. In fact, it makes them better. That is what I meant when I was staying on topic and discussing working a GSD like a GSD and not like a Mal. I can't believe people are thinking their German Shepherd is just like a Malinois and I would hope he isn't. So, if he is a GSD, I am simply suggesting that people train him like one and the results would be better in a trial.
There is that natural willingness and intelligence that a GSD has that should play a part in his training. Some of these other methods simply ignore those qualities in order to utilize the prey instinct .Those other traits are what sets a German Shepherd apart from other breeds but like I said earlier, they are no longer valued or brought out through the training. Some think they are training the dog's natural obedience instincts when they just wave toys and cookies at the dog but I think there is so much more left untouched. Those things, for me anyway, are very important in a German Shepherd. That is because they are used in the many venues a GSD was supposed to be capable of working in and where training mainly with the prey instinct would not be appropriate. Think seeing eye dog for example. This is what I mean when I say some of these methods are "beneath" a GSD. The GSD is so much more than that.

 

[W.Oliver]

But for most bitesuit sports, that would be how they approach it, don't you think? People love to talk about the suit dogs on youtube doing high shoulder/back bites but it's a taught behavior just like anything else. The same applies to hidden sleeve, another place where lots of people like to woo and ahh about how real the dogs are. In PSA there is a carjack scenario with hidden sleeve - which looks nice until you realized how ritualized the whole thing is, how they go about training it, how they cue the dog to expect this and that and do x, y, z on command. To me, that is just as stylized as hold and bark in the blind ... maybe even more so.

I think your right with respect to learned behavior and a sport approach regardless if it is a sleeve or suit, (someone like Cliff could certainly jump in and help us out here). In my humble view, what is important to me, is behind the physical, a "real" dog is motivated by the fight, and a sport dog is motivated by prey.....and I believe that is basically what Anne is describing. There are "real" SchH dogs, and I think working them in a suit simply offers another tool to pressure a mature dog and cultivate fight or aggression...vis a' vis the "real" dog. That is where my head is at, does that make sense?

 

[Jason L]

Yes and I agree with that!

 

[W.Oliver]

I can't believe people are thinking their German Shepherd is just like a Malinois and I would hope he isn't.

Please help me connect the dots on obedience with very young dogs. Is it your point that the biddable GSD should receive verbal/physical praise for correct behaviors and therefore work to please the handler vs. working for a tangible reward like food or toy?

 

[Vandal]

There are things you can see when you work a dog on a suit. I prefer, as was already stated, that the dog goes high on the body. I don't think you can actually train that if the dog is not willing to go there. They would always revert to what their genetics tell them to do. It is interesting to note that the good herding dogs will go to a similar place on a sheep when they are trying to control them. They go high on the back of the neck and bite full and hard with power and will escalate based on what the sheep or an angry Ram is doing. That goes back to what I said in my other posts about how a GSD escalates based on the level of threat, or fight etc. These are genetic behaviors that are distinctly "German Shepherd" and you will see them even when the dogs are working in what may seem to be, very different situations.

 

[Vandal]

Please help me connect the dots on obedience with very young dogs. Is it your point that the biddable GSD should receive verbal/physical praise for correct behaviors and therefore work to please the handler vs. working for a tangible reward like food or toy?

I am saying that some work BETTER when you train that way. If they are that kind of dog and you are still there trying to work using the prey instinct, the response will not be as good. Which leads us back to the topic about doing better in trials. Mal people work their dogs like Mals and, it seems, GSD people try to work theirs like Mals.

As far as young dogs, you have to also understand what a dog is mature enough to deal with. I will work small pups with food and the clicker because there is nothing else I can do that would be appropriate for an 8 week old puppy. Edited to add: BUT, that 8 week old puppy has to show the apptitude for that training. If he doesn't, I will wait and work him another way.

 

[Samba]

Of course it is genetic. I feel like saying, "doh". So often I forget how much of a dogs behaviors are that, and then I get reminded! When my bitch would hit high, hold and power down a belligerent sheep, I had no problem recognizing that as genetic. The first time in such a situation the response was very automatic, instinctive.

In a "fight" , I fail to recognize it as that, though! Something about protection work destroys my brain! When my young dog first was "threatened" by someone, he responded immediately with a bit of a roar. When allowed to go, he hit the person high on the back and shoulder, took them down to the ground and held them there. Now in that situation, I didn't think about the "genetics" of the behavior though it was untrained and never performed before. It did not occur to me until Anne mentioned it and then its like...(head slap).

I tend to get so caught up in training dogs to perform or do certain things in a particular manner. I guess in reality, with a correct one, you mostly have to provide the correct "picture" to elicit what is inherently there. I guess a lot of work these days may not tap what is there or reveal what is not.

And darn that about the foody and the tuggy tug in obedience. If you don't have that sort of dog, you are stymied for a bit while others jump through hoops as youngsters for that stuff! But, it doesn't take that long to catch up once there is some maturity in the other type of dog.

 

[cliffson1]

I guess I will weigh in, Thanks for the invite W Oliver. First, let me say that I agree so much with Anne's statement that Sch isn't for everyone, though Sch should be something the German Shepherd is at home with. Today's Sch is no more than choreographed routines in most cases. The dog no longer thinks in protection work but merely does what it is trained.(Most people will miss that but there is a difference, IMO)
Just got back from SDA trial in Tennessee last week, and on the way back to NJ the three of us were talking about how we felt that SDA is closer to "old Sch" in testing a dog than the Sch of today. We had a very talented decoy from PSA training, and beleive me he could put dogs into avoidance with his approach on them with no contact. When he caught a dog on suit sleeve, he drove the dog for real!! Many routine Sch dogs would have had problems with this because it was intense, but it reminded me of the work we did before Sch changed. Some dogs reacted to this with strength and a will to "not" be dominated. Many didnot.
My point is this type of work really allowed you to see the type of dog to be used for breeding to maintain courage, character, and nerve. Of course when you have this type of decoy work, I focus on the dogs ability to "out" and remain strong. Some dogs "found comfort in the sleeve" and were very reluctant to out. All in all I think that Sch has changed and training methods have changed and scoring by judges have changed, and when you add these changed components up, then the result is that the German Shepherd has changed......and not for the better, JMHO.

 

[Vandal]

I guess in reality, with a correct one, you mostly have to provide the correct "picture" to elicit what is inherently there.

Not only have I hired Samba, now I have to give her a raise. lol. EXACTLY, that is what I am saying. More people now will keep trying to train a behavior into the dog even when the dog already offers the behavior naturally.