by heidii on 18 January 2018 - 02:01
I as her handler have been developing her grips in protection, this has transferred over to the helper well, her grips are great but her intensity is really lacking. Now the problem is the helper is my husband...
I assume intensity will get better with time and as she gets older however I am having trouble teaching her intensity using my husband as the helper. I dont really have access to another helper at the moment so I have to figure out a way to make this work.
Her barking could be better, its deep but its not over the top like a Malinois. She seems to 'get over' protection work easily and im wondering maybe because its only done in prey with my husband - I have a feeling that because its 'dad', this isnt serious and it doesnt really matter. Her brother works with my husband too (owned by someone else) and his intensity levels have really risen in the last couple of weeks, he gets abit of a "f*c* you" attitude with the helper.
How can I get this using my husband? Is there something else I can do other than use a different helper?
Do I need to worry about intensity? Should she just go through the motions and eventually intensity will come.
by Centurian on 18 January 2018 - 17:01
Hard to say for certain and specificity . One truthfully needs to see the dog to discuss this with you and your husband.... A knowledgable person knows how to 'ask' the dog ..... and knows how to listen for the dog's answer [ in animal language that is ].
In general , your dog has the true answer . Sometimes we can get a clue by understanding by comprehending the dog's temperament. That is the key . ' who and what is your dog * . Realize that not all puppies from a working line breeding and not all puppies from the same litter exhibit and have the same traits . Also realize that I have seen dogs at 6, 7 months were in other people's eyes worthless for working , but at 1.5 years somewhere a light went off in these dog's heads and they went on to get french ring and Sch titles . So... " Que Sera Sera " . [ translated from French : " whatever will be , will be " ]
Also your goal .. I see IPO you write , but I share this with you as I have with other people : Intensity is to a degree subjective and I see intensity as a component to performing the act. So motivation and intensity are not necessarily synonymous . Motivation and intensity are related to each other but they are different words with different meanings . What is it that you exactly want from your dog ? .. To take out a man in protection gear , or a dog that is for sport and the dog keys on the sleeve and performs for sport IPO ? Because intensity aside , if you want a dog for sport , all that one needs is the dog to simply perform and execute . Now if you have a problem with the dog performing that is more involved !...
If by intensity , you are trying to describe the dog with low fire or pizzaz , that is genetically based . Realize that Intensity and Motivation are not entirely the same. They are related but not the same. We can to a certain point increase the dog's motivation or desire to perform and with that you may see more intensity or you may not. We can only do this to a degree because we can only enhance a dog's character so much. At a certain point we will max out how much the motivation can be increased and , in essence, when we go beyond a certain point , we then begin to try to change the dog itself . That is , we assume and treat the dog as if it had predisposed innate genetics. We cannot make the dog genetically what it is not. Same with a boxer .. we can increase the person's motivation and skill , but we can to do what we want it to do and also how we want it to do . We can never make a person like Mike Tyson if that person does not have the make up or genetic base/bent. We can teach him to enjoy more and to want to partake more to do a little boxing , but if he does not have , the innate hard wired passion to fight , then we can never put that into him . So otivation we can increase but not so , always the apssion /intensity.
Motivation : a good knowledgable skillful teacher .. this is more than 'helper' in my scheme of the dog world , but for conversation sake , with interacting with a good helper .. yes the dog can be brought to have increased desire and motivation. And pending the dog perhaps with that a little more intensity. How much more and that is subjective, depends on the genetics of the dog . Personally , for me this is more time consumer and a task , because I spend to much time motivating and teaching these kind of dogs rather than progressing with the dog like lightening speed. Then again , for sport , what matters to you ? If you want a dog for sport , all the dog has to do is simply perform , unless you are looking to be the champ .... Good luck .........
by ValK on 18 January 2018 - 18:01
"furiosity", more precisely lack of it?
by Hundmutter on 18 January 2018 - 20:01
Generally not in favour of people a dog lives with playing decoy for them; there is always the chance a dog will discriminate enough to realise he might not really want to bite his alpha's partner ! And in any case, unless they do this at Training Club level all the time, most 'helping husbands' just don't aquire the skills to make a good helper. Hope you find somebody else, before you decide one way or the other on whether this dog comes up to scratch for you.
by susie on 18 January 2018 - 21:01
Most dogs are neither "prey oriented only" nor "civil oriented only", but are the sum of both.
As long as your dog does not have way "over the top" prey drive intensity will lack as long as your husband agitates her.
He could force her defense behavior, but this could (and most probably would) cause conflict between dog and husband - not worth the effort.
Try to find a good helper-afterwards you will know if she really lacks intensity or if she was in conflict only.
by heidii on 18 January 2018 - 23:01
but as centurian says, Que Sera Sera and i think i actually said this at the time too!
by Q Man on 19 January 2018 - 00:01
by beetree on 19 January 2018 - 00:01
“Que Sera, Sera”, made famous as sung by Doris Day in the movie, “The Man Who Knew Too Much” is actually Spanish, and not French.
Oh, such irony!
by Centurian on 19 January 2018 - 17:01
Bee true , the expression was used for Slfed's Hitchock's movie as you wrote .. yet ...
While «quoi» does mean "what", the use of «que» in «que sera, sera» would be correct, were it French. I do not believe «quoi sera, sera» would make sense. AFAICS, were it not for the pronunciation, the line would be perfectly acceptable French.
Edited post :
by beetree on 19 January 2018 - 18:01
Nice reasoning, but the etymology isn't supporting your stance. The meaning however, that the dog in question has a future that is impossible to know, remains as a constant.
The popularity of the song has led to curiosity about the origins of the saying and the identity of its language. Both the Spanish-like spelling used by Livingston and Evans and an Italian-like form ("che sarà sarà") are first documented in the 16th century as an English heraldic motto. The "Spanish" form appears on a brass plaque in the Church of St. Nicholas, Thames Ditton, Surrey, dated 1559. The "Italian" form was first adopted as a family motto by either John Russell, 1st Earl of Bedford, or his son, Francis Russell, 2nd Earl of Bedford. It is said by some sources to have been adopted by the elder Russell after his experience at the Battle of Pavia (1525), and to be engraved on his tomb (1555 N.S.). The 2nd Earl's adoption of the motto is commemorated in a manuscript dated 1582. Their successors—Earls and, later, Dukes of Bedford ("Sixth Creation"), as well as other aristocratic families—continued to use the motto. Soon after its adoption as a heraldic motto, it appeared in Christopher Marlowe's play Doctor Faustus(written ca. 1590; published 1604), whose text (Act 1, Scene 1) contains a line with the archaic Italian spelling "Che sera, sera / What will be, shall be". Early in the 17th century the saying begins to appear in the speech and thoughts of fictional characters as a spontaneous expression of a fatalistic attitude.
The saying is always in an English-speaking context, and has no history in Spain, Italy, or France, and in fact is ungrammatical in all three Romance languages. It is composed of Spanish or Italian words superimposed on English syntax. It was evidently formed by a word-for-word mistranslation of English "What will be will be", merging the free relative pronoun what (= "that which") with the interrogative what?
Livingston and Evans had some knowledge of Spanish, and early in their career they worked together as musicians on cruise ships to the Caribbean and South America. Composer Jay Livingston had seen the 1954 Hollywood film The Barefoot Contessa, in which a fictional Italian family has the motto "Che sarà sarà" carved in stone at their ancestral mansion. He immediately wrote it down as a possible song title, and he and lyricist Ray Evans later gave it a Spanish spelling "because there are so many Spanish-speaking people in the world".
You must be logged in to reply to posts