Sportism - Page 10

Thinks its best I confer with the lady in question - if she so wishes, rather than your mis guided sexist take on things.

The  word LAME was directed at a specific vid which was LAME in the context of civil training.,  

Regards
Gee

Hans if you say so!

Do realize you already are making a case on an open and International board. I have no such misguided sexist inclinations as you state.

If GSDfan accepts LAME as correct, I certainly have no authority.

Yes I do believe using the term "lame" was an attempt to insult in some way, whether it be their impression of why I shared it, or the video itself, I do not believe the use of the word was very respectful but since I put myself out there by posting video's...I accept that I will receive criticism, whether I believe it's valid or not. It is easy to hide bind a keyboard, I get it.

The video shows the dog bite a decoy without visible equipment, then is given a sleeve, and then shows the dog re-direct aggression back onto the decoy. The dog takes the pressure well never loosens or comes off the grip. It is a PSA scenario which the dog will see in a PSA trial, in which this dog was titled in. PSA grades the dogs CIVIL RESPONSE (which means showing aggression and biting a decoy with no visible equipment).

Whether or not you believe it's a "lame" video with regards to "civil training" or not. It's a good training exercise, which in many variations teaches and conditions the dog for vehicle protection.

No it is not a "civil training" video in the context of the dog never seeing the scenario before, or how to test an untrained dogs civility by agitating the dog without a bite, pissing the dog off and pushing into defense with unnecessary stress. But again as I said I never said it was and that is not why I shared the video....which GEE accepted as "clarification".

But I accept GEE's appreciation for clarification I wasn't going to reply further, as far as I was concerned it was a non issue.

Interesting thread .. I enjoyed reading all the posts.
I never met Prager . However no matter our experiences or our opinion ., he does make a logistical point. A very very practical point.
Personally for me the default is within the genetics itself . That is to say a dog has a specific innate preprogramed predisposition for behavior. The dog like a computer is preprogramed. Either the dog has the potential or it doesn't and we cannot make the dog what it is not . All agree to this ?
Then why , if we see a dog overtly display that behavior the first time , i.e. bite a person , do we not reinforce that behavior if we wish to bring the dog down the path of PP/ LE ?
As I have written many times .. people cause problems not dogs.. and we have to stop thinking in human terms. If a young dog, puppy , bites someone.. it is not thinking prey , defense, civil , non civil , win /loose scenario !! The first time a dog presents a behavior , what is at issue is that the dog needs to know that it reached it's goal , that it was successful and that it is safe . On that note dogs create their mental pictures and desire predictable outcomes . All agree?
Most of the posters have had puppies. PP, LE , Sport people : what is the one thing that we all learned to not do when a puppy bites your leg ? For novices - the answer is to never ever ever pull that puppy off that leg bite. And most were taught to redirect the puppy bite using a rag , toy . WHY: because our goal was not to inhibit the puppy expressing this innate behavior !! As a matter of fact , 30 years ago ... when we interacted with puppies and we saw this behavior even at 7 weeks, , we encouraged this more so from the pups. We set the pups thereafter to desire to continue to leg bites !! We looked for this behavior !! We allowed and reinforced this behavior. As Prager stated the behavior became defaulted in his terminology. Yes , this is how things were done many years ago !!
So back to Prager's point : If our goal is to have a dog bite a person , then why do we not reinforce this in the dog the very first time we see the dog , who chooses on it's own accord to bite . Why would we not at that time and thereafter continually reinforce and promote that innate behavior ?
Now I am, not saying that we don't transition and use equipment later to protect the decoy/helper from getting seriously injured or killed. Or to aid in the dog in homing skill , such as a faster entry , a fuller bite, A stronger bite.. that is a different issue . that is apples verses the innate behavior already instilled in the dog to begin with. We cannot create courage, confidence yes , courage no !!
Now , of course there is no one way to teach a dog or a person .. But gee....give the man [Prager] a little bit of acknowledgement on his viewpoint. So let's not mix apples and oranges when discussing the topic.

Centurian. I agree civility is largely genetic.

However if a dog has very intense prey drive you can compensate within reason and teach the dog seeing equipment is not a condition of whether they can bite or not. When biting is their most desired behavior because of the intensity of the drive, equipment becomes almost entirely irrelevant when taught from an early age to target the man rather than equipment.

Whether one agrees with this or not, or believe it's best to wait until the dog is mature to begin training because you believe more in an old school style rather than sport foundation. I disagree with Hans that a functioning protection dog of any sort PPD, LE or Military should be deprived of proper grip work and confidence building.

GSD , yes you make a point.

Yes , dogs do have a great capacity to learn - i will acknowledge what you wrote. I have had gs that i could start with equipment and then transfer to a man . So no debate . Different avenues and teaching has it's time . place and application. Each dog is different-- that is why , personally I don't teach by methods.. the dogs dictates always how , where , when and why i teach it.

Whether there exists 100% pure genetics or not , I always interact with the dog in skill ., biting full , hard , fast . trajectory on entry , scenting , jumping. That is just me. IMO , Each child and dog needs proper guidance/ experience developing skills and their minds, through which that child/dog betters himself/hers. Successful application of what is taught & learned , increases the desire and motivation to advance onward. This is different than genetically a dog being confident , as a trait [ call this also confidence if you will] and , IMOp , it is integrally important to performance. i.e a person learning how to better make a fist and better align his arm and body , makes for a better fighter. In the end the better skilled and clear thinker is victor. So I can understand your philosophy about proper grip work etc.

Some dogs , I have seen have latency. In other words the expression of their genetic make up occurred later in their development. Again , I prefer to work with a pup... because the dog is always learning and I can affect / effect the learning. If they show me they are ready , willing and able .. then I don't lose time. I have had dogs by 10 months old ready for Sch1. A Fado Karthago son , 1 year old doing police demo. In contrast, I had friends with gs that wouldn't even chase a ball until 1 year old but then got Brevet and Ring 1. So- about this topic / thread.. one size does not fit all. Again , different ways can get the same result. My point different things work for different dogs and I wish never to be dogmatic or categorical when it comes to dogs or training/teaching. No equipment , use of equipment... IMOp with the right genetics in a dog , the right training.. not an issue to me.. i don't teach by so called methods. I never lock myself into doing things this way or that way.

Each child and dog needs proper guidance/ experience developing skills and their minds, through which that child/dog betters himself/hers. I imagine the ART to teaching children and dogs : know when to hold them and know when to fol' them . I enjoyed reading everybody's post .. and so IMOp . truth lies within all of them :-).

I disagree with Hans that a functioning protection dog of any sort PPD, LE or Military should be deprived of proper grip work and confidence building. 

Centurian, a ( young ) puppy, biting into your hand or leg, normally shows preydrive, and not necessarily any civil temperament. A pet owner will forbid it, trainers ( no matter IPO or PP ) will strengthen this behavior, but have to redirect the focus on some sort of equipment, otherwise the pup will learn " I am allowed to bite the hand/leg, but I am not allowed to harm people... that´s counterproductive, and needs retraining later on, too.

 

These are Hans´words: ( page 4 )

Hans : Switching between the drives ( prey or defense)  has nothing to do with concept of training a civil dog.  Civil dog is a dog which tagets man, in prey or defense. 

Hans: Again if the dog is civil or not has nothing to do with what drive he is in. 

In case these statements were honest, he should love GSD´s dogs ( I love their intensity ... ).

Once again: IF A DOG IS CIVIL OR NOT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT DRIVE HE IS IN !!!

So WHY reduce a dog to shallow bites and no structure in training?

In case he starts to train for PP immediately ( no imported former IPO dog ), by looking at his own statements there is no reason to make not use of the preydrive... ( there are a lot of drives in dogs, Helmut Raiser breaks them down to prey, defense and avoidance behavior, aggression, and fight ).

Every dog is different, temperament and drives are different, but a good handler will make use of all of them. The attempt to reduce a dog to the traits "he" wants to see ( because in his world this trait only interpretes the "real" dog ) is disadvantageous for the dog and for the further training...

hardly ANY dog that is sold to police at later age is trained to be a policedog from day one, most have a start in some sort of sport, worked in prey/sleeve,suit

all the good ones that will work good and bite for real will do that because of genetic balance of drives he has and are not bothered at all by any previous sport training

furthermore, most pups can be trained and rewarded by prey work from age of 8 weeks , hard to do with real civil/defence work

some of the best civildogs from my breeding dont pick up a bal or do any bitework till about ten months of age, and then start to work real good

also the other way around, what is a better dog, a KNPV trained, IPO trained or police dog trained,

makes no difference as it is about the individual dog

Susie, you made a very logical, unarguable post. I agree with all of it .

This: 'Every dog is different, temperament and drives are different, but a good handler will make use of all of them. The attempt to reduce a dog to the traits "he" wants to see ( because in his world this trait only interpretes the "real" dog ) is disadvantageous for the dog and for the further training...'
Is exactly why I say 'cookie cutter' training, 'assembly line' training is so ineffectual in bringing the best out of a dog...they make otherwise promising dogs look like crap.