Strength & Limitation of Schutzhund as a Test - Page 1

Even though the schutzhund was initially conceived as a test for breeding suitability, it's usage has evolved into a test for the workability of the GSD. I was interested in finding out the preceptions of this instrument's strength and limitations as a measure vis-vis for example other measures such as KPMV, ring sport etc. Objective and as non-judgemental as possible opinions would be ideal, though the average "my 2-cents worth" soliloquy's would also be tolerated.

Lonewulf Actually it depends on what you want the dog for. Schutzhund may well be a good indicator that the dog has what it takes to go on, for say police work but as it is a sleeve focused exercise it may not be that usefull for some work. The last thing you'de want is to loose your dog on a guy with a knife who has a big puffy jacket on... My own personal opinion is that the belgium ring is a better test for the dog for more real situations. I hate to say this as the ring sport people are a big headed lot who do their own boasting very well :-) Best Chris

Gooner: I get your point. However I am thinking along the lines of measurement of those qualities that make a GSD such a versatile canine. So to rephrase: What elements of the current Schutzhund test are strong measures of which abilities of the GSD. And similarly which elements of the current Schutzhund test are weaker measures as compared to other standard tests of work performance. This post is a take-off from a comment that was made in the earlier thread of "How would you improve the GSD breed", in which a statement was made (I beleive by KDW) about other measures of raw potential that was not influenced by the skill and training of the handler. This got me thinking about the whole approach to measurement of potential.

lonewolf- Schutzhund has become a victim of its own success. 10-15 yrs ago a dog that was very strong and high drive would place high at national events. The heeling that would have V'd 10 yrs ago would maybe sg today. When i 1st started schutzhund i thought a dog that was Sch3 was the best thing since sliced bread. but as i trained more and saw more dogs i began to realize that there is a difference beween a dog w/ a sch3 anda dog that displayed the charaterstics that schutzhund was meant test. I think for the novice person wanting to do the sport or wants a well bred dog, schuutzhund works very well. But if you are looking for dog to do police work or compete at a top level you really need to see the dog, or have the opinion of someone who knows what they are looking at. As for sch vs ring or kpmv, a good dog is a good dog, while we use a sleeve in schutzhund i believe the trained i can tell which dogs are strong enough to bite for real. unfortunatly i think alot of people judge the training more so than the dog just my 2 cents

I think it's a shame that only SchH & IPO are considered as criteria for breeding. Ring combined with a FH Prüfung would be quite something! I mean with the obedience and biting abilities of a Ring dog (be it Mondio, Belgian or French), you've really got something in the hand that works! But thats just wishfull thinking:-)

i think once Ring grows it will be looked at, but schtuzhund is where it all started. Im sure if you look at the pedigree of 98% of GSD lines that produce workign dogs, it will go back to schutzhund. its just a shame its being watered down

I think the biggest problem in the breed and the process of acquiring a schutzhund title is a lack of objectivity on the part of the owners!!! The process of training a dog in all three phases and knowing your own strengths and weakness along with those of the dog, and ACKNOWLEDGING that weaknesses exist is all too rare. Words like "power" are often bandied about without substance and become meaningless. The process of training to get a Schutzhund title gives the breeder the opportunity and components to evaluate the dogs character and ability as you go along. It is only by training and understanding the dog though day to day learning, training and performance that you can understand him thoroughly. To me, this is the strength of Schutzhund - when used as a learning tool, it is what it is supposed to be - a test of a breeding animal and a process to improve upon that animal in the next generation through the objective understanding gained in the training process. Purchasing and breeding titled animals without training them is somewhat ambiguous, as a breeder can learn more by working the dog where it needs to be in his breeding program. However, one can hope that the titles are fairly earned and test and possibly continue with some work with a puchased titled dog to gain further insight into the qualities of the dog. Training every single dog you own is sometimes not possible - but is truly the ideal IMO. The weakness of Schutzhund is two fold. One - the titles and the steps taken to get them are often diminished by politics, by disdain, by mickey mousing through them with a kind judge who admires the color, pedigree or connections of the dog before him on the field for the title. When this happens, weaknesses are ignored, bred upon and intensified in many cases. Thus the test is truly useless. If you do not respect the process and use it as a tool to learn about your breeding animals, why bother paying lip service to it??? Sending off animals to someone else to get titles in response to the fact that they are prerequistes for breeding and ignoring what and how the dog trains through the process. Two - the competition sports aspect is also secondary to breeding, and can be detrimental to the purpose of the title as a breeding tool on the individual. At the same time, seeing competition and studying pedigrees of the dogs in competition can be rewarding as you can see patterns in production of certain males [as females production is limited, also doable, but not to the same extent!] However, expert and professional handlers and trainers can get responses and performances which are truly not indictative of the true character and innate ability of the dog. Knowlegable people can hide and cover up problems and do well in competition. Only by repetitive observation will the breeder possibly learn what is under the training. Using the fact that an animal is trained and trained and resources are geared to keep a dog in front of the public to promote a goal of competition for the sake of commercial business is a weakness of the test as a competitive sport. At the same time, looking at many of the publically acknowledged "best producers" in the sport will show that their own competition records often do not indicate that the quality of progeny should be as sucessful. Again, this is where good training is possibly hiding or hindering the actual quality of the individual. Too many titled dogs being bought and sold and bred as business transactions by people who have not trained anything but their fingers to read, cut paste and preach. And this also diminishes the value of schutzhund as a breeding test and criteria.

Excellent responses so far!! Truly delights my soul to hear such kindred voices. So now comes the sequel! Given the varied and equally excellent views expressed in a related post on "What would you do to improve the GSD". How does any body put the ideas in these 2 threads together to truly put together a program that improves the GSD?

It is also very pertinent that compared to the volume of comments that I have seen in most threads, the overall number of posts on this thread and the earlier one I referenced have been far fewer. However the quality has been superb. Does go to seperate the wheat from the chaff.

I do not know if Schutzhund as a test of breeding siutability is a viable statement any longer. It is, how ever, the best that we have right now. I am in favor of a score limit for breeding, but I think that the score would have to be repeated under a different judge to be valid. Heck, even in AKC you have to qualify three times to get a CD on your dog. Dogs that are "trial trained" have simply learned how to act while on the field. I don't think that Schutzhund, in it's current watered down state, is the be all and end all. I do not have a better option though, and it is a standard of sorts. I think that to earn a SchH 3, you should have to qualify more than one time and under different judges, or earn the title and be restrained from breeding until that second trial judge agrees. I know that would be hard on some people in America, myself included, because trials are often far apart and far away but it might help weed out some of the " not for competition" dogs out there. I would like to see GSDCA require schutzhund for the top dogs in the ring as well. No VA select unless there is a SchH 3 by two judges. The strength of Schutzhund is that it does stress the dogs, and the perceptive breeder will use that information to make better breeding selections. If your intent is to make a quick buck by quickly getting the 1 on a dog so that you can breed, nothing that anybody says is going to change that. Sorry probably rambling here, we cannot even get hip certification as an AKC breeding requirement. Lorri