Sport vs Breed worthiness Test

by RLHAR on 30 July 2009 - 18:07

Schutzhund as a sport to me, means that someone who is a good handler, an experienced handler who knows how to get the best out of a dog can go out on the field with a dog they have raised or bought and get good scores.

Schutzhund as a sport to me also means the dog who had a good day or a dog who had a bad day. Dogs are not machines, they might be working brilliantly up to the day of the trial and for some reason on that day, it just falls to pieces.

As a breed worthiness test, that's a little more complicated. I, personally, put more stock in the HOT dog as a breeding prospect than a top dog who has been imported from somewhere else, titled somewhere else and is just being used in a breeding program. From working with my own bitch I feel that it's in the day to day work that you learn the strengths and weaknesses of the dog.

Grips can be worked so that on the day of the trial they look good but only the person who put in the time and work can tell you if the dog had those grips naturally or if they really had to work with the dog to get a strong grip.

Dumbbell retrieving, again does speed and a calm grip in front of the handler come from the dog's genetic drive to please the handler, the dog's calm come from a clear head or has that dog been worked on and worked on for 'one' good performance out of how many?

Tracking, is the dog truly working the track on his/her own, does the dog have a strong work ethic that lends itself to wanting to work that track or has the dog been motivated or given compulsion up to the point where you get 'one' good effort on trial day but the rest of the time it's a struggle.

I believe answers of breed worthiness come from actually working and trialing your own breeding stock and I put more weight behind that HOT title, on being able to talk to a breeder about what it took to get those titles on that dog, than just seeing a bunch of sport titles after a dog's name.

by bullfrog on 30 July 2009 - 18:07

imho i think there is alot more to pick a dog for breeding than titles. I have seen some big dollar sch.3 dogs from germany that dont even have a clue what they are supossed to do on a field and people still breed them anyway. i think it comes down to the indivigual dog , not the titles. after all these are suposed to be a gsd and should be able to preform in real life, and if not i wouldnt own it let alone breed it! Some of the tests you mention are a good idea but to change schutzhund is a big thing and you would have all the big point people with there all prey dogs run out screeming lol

by Bob McKown on 30 July 2009 - 18:07

RLHAR:

I agree but the orginization I belong to has cut the guts out of the HOT qualification, I thik a HOT dog should be owned and trainned by the handler starting at no older then 6 months of age. I do believe a good helper can put presure on a dog to the point of showing his true temperment and gripping abalities I think a dog worked thru problems espically in bite work can be made to show it,s true strength only in a sport where the preformed routine is the only judging factor could that be hidden well.

bullfrog:

I believe that is true because a title has lost it,s value becuase of the watering down of the test and focused more on the sport. Dogs must be choosen for breeding on more then just titles you will get no argument there from most.

by OGBS on 30 July 2009 - 20:07

Bob,
This is a great topic and something that I think about often. It seems to me that Schutzhund, as it has evolved as a sport, has also evolved away from being a true test of a dog being breedworthy. Over the years, as you have mentioned, the routines have been changed (watered down to many people) and are easier. To me this is backwards. If we are "improving the breed" (wink, wink) shouldn't the dogs have gotten better over time, and, in turn, shouldn't the exercises have gotten tougher???
To me, I also feel that the levels aren't really different enough to make a whole lot of difference. If a dog, and its handler, are capable of doing a Sch1, is it really a stretch that they can acheve a Sch3? The exercises are just longer (tracking), a heavier dumbell, add in a back transport and now you're a Sch3. I am not belittling anyone with a Sch3 and I realize that all of this takes a lot of time, effort, and dedication, but, it is all really the same stuff from one level to the next.
Why not make the Sch1 more like the Sch2 and then build on it from there. Add in some real world stuff. Maybe a building search as opposed to doing a longer track. How about for the "new" Sch3 have the dogs actually go out and find someone that is "lost" or a "criminal" hiding in the woods and apprehend that person?
I do think that Chris is right on with adding in some agility work. This could be added to the obedience phase, but done properly, it would also be a part of the building search. You could still have three phases, but, maybe they could overlap a little more than they do now so that you are getting a better overall picture of the completeness of the dog as it handles the exercises. None of this should be scripted other than the "new" Sch1 where the exercises are the same as now. In the higher levels each and every routine would be new at each trial, but, must meet certain criteria. The rest would be up to the creativity of the event holders.
I also think that something along the lines of this might keep the dog owners interest in the sport longer.
Just some thoughts.

by habanaro on 30 July 2009 - 21:07

Look at the current AWD titles alot of the old stuff has been put back in....

by Bob McKown on 30 July 2009 - 21:07

OGBS:

Even if the test just maintained what it originally had we would be in a better place. I don,t know if building searchs would be viabale but it would be intresting.

Why not the verticle wall for the 3 ? or some differing obedience that truley shows the dog abality to think and be directed?

More in the protection phase that makes the dog show true drive and fighting abality.

I was sent some videos of a filmed late 30,s schutzhund trial and I was impressed. The one thing that got me was the bite work at one point while the dog is engaged on the helper the helper pulls a gun and fires it numours times while the dog is fighting the helper also while whatching i noticed how the dogs fought the helper not this grip and hang on that we see in many trials but actual fighting of the dog of the man and when the dog did out even in old film you could tell the dog was serious about his hold.

Jeff:

I plan on working all my dogs to the AWd titles you mentioned, I,ll be at the A.W.D.F Nationals in May with atleast 2 dogs(are multiple dogs allowed) AWDF has a good thing gpoing in my book.

by Bob McKown on 30 July 2009 - 21:07

OGBS:

Even if the test just maintained what it originally had we would be in a better place. I don,t know if building searchs would be viabale but it would be intresting.

Why not the verticle wall for the 3 ? or some differing obedience that truley shows the dog abality to think and be directed?

More in the protection phase that makes the dog show true drive and fighting abality.

I was sent some videos of a filmed late 30,s schutzhund trial and I was impressed. The one thing that got me was the bite work at one point while the dog is engaged on the helper the helper pulls a gun and fires it numours times while the dog is fighting the helper also while whatching i noticed how the dogs fought the helper not this grip and hang on that we see in many trials but actual fighting of the dog of the man and when the dog did out even in old film you could tell the dog was serious about his hold.

Jeff:

I plan on working all my dogs to the AWd titles you mentioned, I,ll be at the A.W.D.F Nationals in May with atleast 2 dogs(are multiple dogs allowed) AWDF has a good thing gpoing in my book.

by Uber Land on 30 July 2009 - 22:07

I may be off topic here, and people probably don't care to hear what I say being I am so stupid, but wouldn't having a panel of judges, instead of just 1, make some difference in the titles. a dog would receive an avg. of the 3 judges score. I feel it would make it more difficult for politics to be a factor if you had more than one person judging.

by habanaro on 30 July 2009 - 23:07

The problem with having 3 judges is it probably would be pretty cost prohibitive at smaller evenets (club trials may only have 5-6 dogs some times) At really large events I would think that it would slow things down a bit. I was'nt at the masters so i don't know how it worked there. At the last few events I hve been at most of the people That I was around pretty much agreed with the judges on at least several of the top placements. I realize at a large event 1 point can make a difference where you place.

I don't think the people who are getting titles that don't deserve them are doing them at a national type of venue.

JMO

jeff

by bullfrog on 31 July 2009 - 01:07

Yes Jeff you are correct about the AWD titles. At the Working Dogs of Central Illinois trial last weekend it was nice to see some of these titles being done at a trial. The AWD 1 was interesting and btw congrats on your STP that is something you don't normally see. It does add a level of practicality in evaluating a dog.

As far as having mutliple judges at a trial it would definitely take out some of the politics but as Jeff stated it would not be very cost effective. Most Schutzhund Clubs run on a shoestring budget. Unless of course you're involved with one of the "elite" clubs where you are paying 40+ dollars to have your dog worked and even then it doesn't go into the club fund it's usually pocketed by the trainer which is using it to finance their next trip to the Nationals.

Unfortunately, schutzhund has become a sport and a rather expesive one at that rather than the "test" of the GSD it was meant to be. It would be nice to see some changes made to test the dog in a more practical way rather than just seeing how many points you can keep.

Ribbitt

Sport vs Breed worthiness Test - Page 2

Pedigree Database