Teejay wilendorf - Page 2

Dogs have good days, and dogs have bad days. I'd hate to think where we'd be WITHOUT a standardized test!

SS

I agree with you Shelley that standardization has its merits as well, I am not saying that sch trials should be completely diversify, what I mean that they should add a little more juice to the events, when they could test dogs true temperament, rather than make him do what he trained over and over for some time. Kind of don't walk the same line every time. During searching blinds, why always have helper in the last blind? Why have only one helper? Why not adding attack on the handler with multiply bad guys? Why not stress the dog little bit more just to see where his boundaries really are. Why have point system? Why not just Pass and fail, SCHIII is the advanced title, let make sure that the dog's that get it really deserve it. I had a pleasure of watching a dog at work last Sunday, at the training field that I go to work my new pup at, the dog belonged to my trainer’s friend, wow I was blown away, full control (3 year old), the dog was everything that I would ever want in a GSD, they stress him over and over and at all times the dog remained in full control, it was a pleasure to watch (and it was a female on top of that, trust me you would never expect it). The dog previous to that was not work in over a year, imagine still retaining everything he was taught, still showing high quality, there were two sch III there at the same time as well, it was like comparing apple and oranges, she made the SCHIII dogs look like a paper dogs.

My new female, I was planning on working her in SCH but when I saw Nicky, I decided to go PPD way, I am more interested in street dog than SCH. So standardization is fine, as long as it still is able to truly test the dog. That's my only point. Please SCH fun's I am not bashing SCH as I am still able to see every now and than true working dog in SCH trails, is just such a shame that those dog's are put in the same category as the one's that really don't show anything worth talking about, like Teejay.

Seems I am the one who needs to do my homework. I was thinking Preston was Preston HELLER. Still, I agree with most of what either of them write... I will adress snaiper's post later. Time to go out and train dogs all afternoon, sore back and all. I spend too much time on this freaking board lately!

SS

Shelley Strohl: Seems I am the one who needs to do my homework. I was thinking Preston was Preston HELLER.

Aha--I thought you may have been referring to Preston Heller! Wonder what Heller would think of Teejay?

Ummmm... Let me take a sec and pull my boot out of my mouth...  I think Heller, hard-core working guy that he has always been, would not be so, uh, "kind."

I heard that JOHN was unable to attend  the Germay show with TeeJay because of an injury to Johns back. 

I always liked to see raw courage tests done on GSDs 9-12 months old or so.  Dogs with nothing more than basic obediance training and no prior agitation training or bite work.  A raw courage test in "real time" having a stranger/helper in a padded suit "attack" either the dog or his owner on his own turf or in his own car with his owner present.  I have always believed that this is the best test of a dog's true natural courage, need for territorial dominance and innate willingness to stop an invader.  Now some GSDs that seem very easy going will immediately bite the intruder (some will deliver full body bites until the intruder stops moving and will increase the intensity proportionate to any increased aggressiveness of the intruder.  Some will bark and only bite when the intruder hits their owner or the dog (we used to use rolled up newspapers to hit with).  Some will do nothing (most american showlines are like this but there were exceptions of a few of the ones we tested).  When GSDs are tested this way "green" there are always some surprises.  Some are just naturally good home protectors.  These are usually the dogs that appear very sound, stable, and outgoing, appear to be unafraid of loud noises or fireworks, tend to have high prey drive as expressed with balls, bones and toys and tend to be alpha types, expecting and demanding complete territorial dominace over all other animals except their masters.  We found that occasionally the dogs that would go off first and hit the intruder very hard are those most would classify as spooks or fear biters.  If they sense there is no way out they can be very tough.  I always viewed spooks as a serious liability for that reason.  The GSDs we tested that were consistently the best and most reliable in defending their turf and masters were the seeing eye GSDs from Master Eye Foundation and LaSalle Kennels (very calm dogs, very correct working temperaments). We found quite a bit of variability in some of the litters where we tested several puppies suggesting that there can be substantial temperament differences in litters. We also found that mild agitation training could help most GSDs learn to defend their turf.  In principal I am against most PP for 24/7in home pets, because it is typically not a good idea to have a GSD which could be a "loose cannon" in a home situation with kids and their friends. My wife and I always had a very sound alpha type WL male (untrained except for obediance) around our kids, and these dogs provided good home protection without posing a liability.  We never had any adverse incidents with them either.  It is a false assertion that a sound GSD with correct working temperament cannot defend his family and turf without Sch or PP training.  But actual real time testing is a good idea. 

I have not personally witnessed this, but I have been told by knowledgeable folks who imported expensive GSDs from Germany in past years that they had known of certain bundessieger and profung GSDs that were very good at Sch and the associated bitework, but not good at defending their home or master from an all out frontal attack when tested.  One always needs to evaluate the individual dog itself and not just go by prior success earning titles and competing in Sch.