Training ERROR or just a good dog - Page 11

sound   ... such a small word, able to make the difference, but you forgot:

"Type 2 dogs = sound dogs which are not automatically civil by inheritance. But thay have capability to be trained to be civil. That is at least 90% of the dogs today. "

 

"I will say that at least 80-90% of working and herding dogs  are in category type 1 or type 2."

You have to stay to this statement, because I copied/pasted it.

OK Susie. One more try. "Type 2 dogs = sound dogs which are not automatically civil by inheritance. But they have capability to be trained to be civil. That is at least 90% of the dogs today. "

Explanation: OK perhaps instead of saying "90% of the dogs today." I guess I should have spell it out as: 90% of sound working and herding dogs capable of doing protection today. However I have not seen it as necessary since the post was SPECIFICALLY preampted with words: "I divide sound dogs into 2 types:...." I was talking about sound dogs thus I did not see it nesessary to   keep repeating it since I thought from context it was obvious.  I guess perhaps I should have repeat it and  if it makes you happy I'll give you your gotcham on this one. 

So now I will reformulate it for you so you understand what I was trying to say. I am talking about sound dogs of type 1 and 2 here and not type 3 ( 3 being not sound dog not able to be trained protection).  From that group of dogs type 1 and 2 only - 90% or so are type 2. and 10% or so  are type 1. OK?

 Then we have this one: 

"I will say that at least 80-90% of working and herding dogs are in category type 1 or type 2."

Explanation. From all dogs type 1,2,3 in herding and working group at least 80%-90% type 1 or 2 the rest are type 3 .

 I hope that will help you to comprehand  meaning of my post. :) 

I actually think Han's description of the inheritance of civil drive vs. trainability is consistent with what most of us are saying.

There are some dogs who genetically present with it at a level that is obvious.

There are dogs who I called "low" civil drive that Hans described as "not automatically civil by inheritance"...who can be trained.

And others Hans calls "type 3" who just don't want to bite a person for real and you can't train them to...at least without the type of training I would call abuse. I have one pet dog I train, who I have made it clear to the owner what his dogs limitations are but the owner loves his dog and wants to train for fun anyway. I have gotten the dog to bite a suit type sleeve, but even if his first bite is deep he will back out his grip until he doesn't feel me inside anymore and just has a hold of material. The dog plays the game, he could do sport, but he does not want to bite someone for real.

I think the biggest disagreement is Hans believes if you condition a civil dog to carry equipment (even if they are in the training process) he loses his civil drive.

But Hans my question to that, why... as you said, if you can train a dog to be more civil would a dog with inherent civil drive who is conditioned to carry equipment, after he gains what he is lacking in terms of confidence or environmental stability could you not go back to "training civility" after their confidence/environmental training was complete. Don't you think if a dog is genetically civil going back to that would be easy?

Koos:
"I believe that a dog is genetically predisposed to civil aggression, and whether through training it is brought out and controlled (managed) or suppressed, it will still be there. The dog is what it is - like eye colour, civil aggression will be present or not genetically, and if present then expressed or not, depending on upbringing or training."

Hans : Dog can not be trained civil way if he does not have genetics for it. That is self evident and it goes without saying.
My point is different. My point is that there is type of dogs and I call it type 1 dog which does not need to be trained to bite for real . Such dog needs to be trained to be for example LE dog but the biting a man comes to it naturally same ways as to type 2 dogs come naturally barking. However type 2 dog = forgive my expression is more nice and does not want to bite the man, but it has genetically predisposed ability to be trained to do target and bite a man. 90% of dogs from type 1 and 2 are type 2 dogs. We see these type 2 dogs in service as family protectors, security protection dogs, area protection dogs and LE dogs same as we can see type 1 dogs in these functions. IMO type 2 dogs are more desirable for today society's needs since they are more legally safe and are more user friendly to non experts in dog field. Where type 1 dogs, even though is perfectly capable of being friendly and social same way as type 2 dog, will during natural protection ( not based on training) not just bark, but due top his genetics s/he will go that one step further and will bite and for that does not need to be trained to perform as civil dog who bites man and is not just barking as type 2 dog would do.

@ Hans: I understand, with your style of training you may not feel the need to or don't understand the benefits to conditioning a dog to do so...but set that aside while answering the question if you can.

koots you put it right

dog is civil by nature, or not
dog that is not cannot be trained to be something he is not, but can be trained to make it look like he is, or make some people believe he is , but trained(fake) civil dog will be at risk of failure when coming in untrained situation, because he is only trained to see bodyparts as prey

in sport, some big european trainers ran into same problem with their dogs, no civil, all prey gave them problems so they started to train dogs to see body as prey, we are talking Sherk and Zank level trainers here

Itwas hilarious to see a seminair where Jurgen showed this new technique in holland at a dog that was really civil by nature and almost got chewed up

the main problem IMO is not that trainers try to repair genetic flaws with smart training, but that these smart trained dogs are the most used dogs in breeding

therefore would agree with hans when he says about 90 % of dogs have minimal or no civil, but IMO they CANNOT be trained to be civil

GSDfan:"I think the biggest disagreement is Hans believes if you condition a civil dog to carry equipment (even if they are in the training process) he loses his civil drive.

But Hans my question to that, why... as you said, if you can train a dog to be more civil would a dog with inherent civil drive who is conditioned to carry equipment, after he gains what he is lacking in terms of confidence or environmental stability could you not go back to "training civility" after their confidence/environmental training was complete. Don't you think if a dog is genetically civil going back to that would be easy?"

 

Hans: Even though I have discussed this before it is fair question and since my syntax has a lot to be desired I understand the confusions it may cause and thus , for clarity reasons, I will go there one more time. First allow me to discuss this gsdfan's sentence:"I think the biggest disagreement is Hans believes if you condition a civil dog to carry equipment (even if they are in the training process) he loses his civil drive. "

 Hans: Well that is not really exactly what I believe.  What I believe  is this :

1/ dog who is trained linearly from toy, to sleeve to suit to man will establish default on equipment which will be hard to get rid off if we are using linear way of training.  Linear being "from toy, to sleeve, ...to man" . I am firmly convinced that such dog will not be able to achieve 100% civility ( civil bite ability). The   dog with such type of training however can be trained to be civil too and  be working as a  LE dog but will have more or less of residual affinity to targeting equipment which in my opinion may be bad and dangerous proposition. Such dog will be 1% - 99% civil and in the situations where the percentage  is showing that he is not civil will be such dog's  Achilles'  heel.   Such dog may never encounter situation  where the  Achilles' heel will come into play but if it does, then the dog will fail. 

2/ I also believe that even dog trained in linear fashion fashion can be made 100% civil . But that can not be achieved in linear fashion( toy, sleeve,..man).  The only way it can be achieved is through parallel training. 

 example : If I get ( as I quite often do) dog trained in linear way from toy, to sleeve,.. to man I will attempt to make him 100% civil by using parallel training.  Parallel training is training which is not using benefits of the former linear training but I start ALL OVER  again from square one where I train the dog to from get go target only the man. For that I am using defense and prey. This training must not have anything in common with the former linear training and there must not be any bridges or associations between former training  and current RE-training.  Thus I train the dog at different location with different decoy and  of course different training system  and  I may also use different commands . Thus training is - parallel and same as 2 parallel lines do not touch each other the same way the former  training does not touch or have anything in common with RE-training .  That way I am teaching the dog that l  former toy - sleeve training -let say  sport training, is  completely different  exercise then  training for civil pp which  I am training him now.  Thus I stil  am able to establish civil default   That way if all is done correctly I may still get out of such dog 100% civil work. 

 

 Gsdfan:"But Hans my question to that, why... as you said, if you can train a dog to be more civil would a dog with inherent civil drive who is conditioned to carry equipment, after he gains what he is lacking in terms of confidence or environmental stability could you not go back to "training civility" after their confidence/environmental training was complete. Don't you think if a dog is genetically civil going back to that would be easy?""

 

 Hans :  First of all dogs with inherited civil drive - type 1 dogs - are in serious minority, about 5%-10% by my estimate.  And  thus most dogs we work with are type 2 dogs which have ability to be trained civil but are not civil naturally. Such type 2 dog if trained linearly from toy to man is going to be stuck in equipment default  as I explained it above because of highlighted adage below. . 

 But Type 1 dog too will develop default on equipment if that is what he is trained to do in default stage of the training.  

 What the dog learns first he likes the most, does best, and reverts to under stress.  That is hard clad rule which can only be beaten by genetic make up of the dog - unless no other default is established.     Now type 1 dog is always going to have NATURAL  ( genetic) civil bite ability ,   that can not be trained out. But remember this is about targeting and I can teach  even type 1 dog target anything including equipment. I can teach him that he is hurting the man when he is biting sleeve. Thus teaching targeting of equipment even to type 1 dog can build equipment default .   Such type 1 dog will be able to be civil in higher percentage numbers then same way trained type 2 dog , nevertheless it will not be 100% .  I will restate this. Genetically civil dog can be trained  that he is biting and hurting man ( which is what type 1 dog wants to do)  by biting  equipment which the decoy  is wearing. If we are going to try really hard to screw the dog up this way then the dog will develop default to look for equipment and bite the equipment because s/he is trained to think that biting the equipment  is what is hurting the man.  This is the answer to your question if genetically based type 1 dog can be make less then 100% civil with training.  

 

 To people who want to build "confidence or environmental stability"   before the serious civil work I would advice to use parallel training and build such confidence and mental stability in separate venue not related to the civil work. 

However personally - being iconoclast and all - I socialize pp/le prospect dogs thoroughly in early age  while building a default where the dog is taught to target the man.  Before he learns to target a man the dog sees no equipment what so ever. and that is done in prey and in defense., You see, this is all about building targeting default which is triggered by first experiences often as early as 6 - 8 weeks of age, but there is no age limit   and we/I can start green dog at 5 +/- years same way as puppy.  OK then once the default to target a man  is established and the dog when commanded targets the man I  do all the  bite work building in prey and defense with equipment.   You may ask how I can do that and not violate my system?  The answer is because now the dog when he or she is biting into equipment the dog perceives it as biting and targeting  the man  who has sleeve or suit same way as men wears sweater and shirt or coat.   It is really not that difficult. Same way as we are not trying to teach the dog default to target  sweater or trench coat or shirt  but we want the dog  to target the man the same way we/I do not want the dog by default to target the sleeve or  bite suit.  So we quickly build default  of the dog on man and then you can do all the environmental work  and grip building later and then even though you will use sleeve the dog will see it as biting the man with sleeve and not as biting the sleeve worn by the man. 

@gsdfan let me disspell your misunderstanding of what I am trying to do. As I explained to you above I absolutely see importance of building bite and benefits of conditioning a dog. The trick is to do it:
1/ after the dog developed default to target the man
or
2/ or parallel with training which develops default to target the man.
Remember we can teach the dog civil default really quickly often in one session and rarely in more then 3 sessions.

" Hans : Dog can not be trained civil way if he does not have genetics for it."

"...genetically predisposed ability..."

"And  thus most dogs we work with are type 2 dogs which have ability to be trained civil but are not civil naturally."

"But Type 1 dog too will develop default on equipment if that is what he is trained to do in default stage of the training."

 

My words for months...  "Genetically civil" versus "civil trained" - now you got it.

@ Hans, thank you for the reply. Although we have previously agreed to disagree with much of your training philosophy I appreciate your explanation. And you did say " Now type 1 dog is always going to have NATURAL ( genetic) civil bite ability , that can not be trained out."  Which was what I was getting at.

 

Of course confidence and enviornmentals is ideally established as a pup away from bite training however you and I both know in terms of clients raising their own pups and purchasing adult dogs, started dogs etc, the trainer is often left to work the dog before them, fix and tweak things as needed.