Just another Sport Dog - Page 34

:) :) :)

Taking ego out of the equation, what have I wrote that is either offensive, wrong or not reality in today's world?

If folks can accept that IPO show dogs are different than IPO sport dogs( in most cases) then why can't folks understand that there are differences in most sport dogs compared to LE dogs  without getting offended? 

In an IPO show litter of eight you may well have one dog that could do COMPETITIVE IPO, but the norm in the litter can not; well in a IPO sport litter you may have one dog that can do LE work, but the norm in the litter can not. Why is this so hard to understand?

LE dogs come from everywhere, sport, KNPV, backyard breeding, untitled breeding, etc,  and this is because there are certain characteristics necessary that are no longer bred or tested for in many training modules of today. 

There is nothing in the above that demeans IPO dogs, unless you erroneously believe IPO prepares a dog for LE work, then you might have hurt feelings, but if you ask 90% of the LE trainers( maybe they might know a little more about this subject than others...ya think) they will tell you this.

Nothing offensive. It's just the same old, same old like in every other thread. It's like a broken record on repeat.

Gustav, sweat dreams and fairytales are allways better apreciated than reality

To me truth is never old....because there is always someone new that truth will benefit instead of fairy tales!

funny, I think BE wanted her post to be the final word when she wrote 

"And yet iPO Dogs are the ones that continue to produce Police Dogs "

but when someone responds to that it is a broken record

 

 

Gustav and Duke are again on point. Thanks for staying on and clarifying the growing differences between IPO type "point-dogs" and real working LE dogs, to folks who may be new to this.

 

Sport training is almost in every exercise about conditioning

LE you can,t conditoning every situation because you wll never know what would happening
hope some people here will realise this one day !!!

Best dogs and trainers I have seen are  people in Belgium and France  in ringsport this people train a lot new unexpected scenarios not all that same routine exercises but testing their dogs to the limit here you will see if your dog is real or not...also they have some very good real life competitions with interesting scenarios.

 

In KNPV  this also become more and more popular  training outside the routine with unexpected real life scenarios competitions

Last week I saw a very strong male everybody like him, but he failed

outside the routine  exercises, in unexpected not trained exercises this dog look much much weaker........so for a lot of people this was an eye opener....

 

 

 

 

Once again:

What do you want to see in a "real working dog" ?

The will to work?
Some prey drive?
Some civil drive?
Hardness?
Courage?
Fighting drive?
The will to please?
A good nose?
Good health?
An athletic body?

That´s the description of the perfect IPO dog, and I guess that´s the description of your "perfect real working dog" - no difference in the basics - everything else = training.

I forgot ...

The ability to stay focussed for a longer period of time
Environmental soundness

To believe a dog lacking one or two of the traits I mentioned is not able to title in IPO, is naive, but the more of those traits, the easier to train = top trainers will look for those traits ( only for the record: same for "real" working dogs - there are really good ones, there are average ones, and there are mediocre ones, no difference ).

You ( the real working dog fraction ) are complaining the lack of environmental soundness - sadly a lot of IPO prospects still are only able to see their kennel and their home club during their whole life - sad for the breed as a whole - but how much of it is genetics ( I know there are genetically freaks ), and how much of it is training?
When Duke ( and others ) breed and raise "green dogs" for police they know 100% what to train for, and they do it, because they are not stupid ( genetics/training ) ...when I was in the "dog business" the environmental stable dogs most often came out of "normal" households ( one dog, no kennel, the owners not able to deal with the dog any longer - those dogs were used to normal life like different surfaces, staircases, and so on ).

Your example: the different nose work ( air scenting versus deep nose scenting )... it´s different training, based on different goals. IPO handlers don´t try to "mimic" real life scenarios, but the trial is able to proof the ability ( and will ) of tracking as a whole, the technique doesn´t matter.

Why? IPO dogs are not trained for police work, plain and simple ...

When people talk about "real working dogs" it always sounds like talking about "holy cows" - that´s simply not true - there are good dogs, average dogs, and there are mediocre dogs on the streets, no difference to IPO dogs, and a lot of them are not breed worthy, like a lot of IPO dogs.

You question the high prey drive in IPO dogs, but what about all those ( very successful ) Malinois? The "real" prey monsters?

Yes, Hundmutter, most GSDs sold to German police still are IPO rejects. People in Germany don´t tend to breed "for police" ( never tended to ) . Almost all German GSDs sold to police do have IPO ancestors, formerly SchH ancestors, but owners realised it´s better to sell overseas ( more money, less/no tests ) than to German police.
The GSD breed was not created as a "police dog", it was created as a "universal" working dog, out of herding dogs, able to protect.
The "creators" pretty soon realised it´s not enough to just breed working dog x to working dog y, but that you need proof about the single dogs in question.
Because of that Germany decided for SchH / IPO, other European countries decided for ZVV or SVV, the name doesn´t matter, in it´s origin it´s about testing the genetic traits of a dog.

The "perversion" begins as soon as breeders are not willing to acknowledge that their just "titled" dog lacks one or more important traits ( listed above ), but was only able to title because of "modern" training methods. Good for the dog, not good for the breed ( in case the dog will be bred later on ).

Same with "real working dogs" - a lot of them are more than willing to bite out of over the top prey drive ( genetics + training ) but do those dogs really represent the original goal of the breed?

On the other hand the "civil", sometimes even fear biting dogs, very good for crowd work ( like demonstrations, the dog muzzled and trained ) - do you really think those dogs are the epitome of the breed?

It´s difficult - the GSD is asked to be "social", not over the top, but to the same time "ready for the task"...

Personally I believe in training and testing, not for police, but for the initial breed standard.

susie, we dont know what to train for, we know what to test for, and testing is done prior to training

keep on thinking its all in the training and that most dogs, if raised well can do it

the ideal sportdog needs definately different qualities than the ideal policedog, but you can keep on ignoring that fact

also, dont know how long ago you were in policedog business, but like IPO training, the policedog testing went up in quality quite a bit, dogs that would pass testing 10 to 15 years ago will not allways pass today, policetraining evolved and minimum standarts are way higher than they used to be

but nothing wrong with someone believing in an ideal world