Breeding to Scores!! - Page 1

I am seeing more and more people that use Schutzhund scores as their determining factor for breeding!!!!
At what point do you ask yourself "what are the true qualities of the dog in question??".

Should you not take the time to evaluate the dog off of the Schutzhund field,another words do you check the dog away from the Sch. field, out in its natural state??

Would you breed to a dog with a great pedigree yet might at have Sch.3 score of 81-79-89?How do you know if these scores are not due to lack of training?

How do you know if the dog with a Sch.3 score of 96-95-98 is not a bag of screwed up nerves or fearful with great training??

I am only asking this in hopes of having a knowledge filled conversation!!!!

Firstly, what are you evaluating off of the Schutzhund field?

Secondly,  if a dog has passed the test, even at the lowest marks, it has PASSED.  The reason for low marks can be a number of things e.g. novice trainer/handler, dog not really ready for test, poor training throughout, the dog may have reached it's level of incompetance at that moment.  These can all be rectified.

Thirdly, in regard to breeding then everyone would breed from that score.   The dog has passed.

Fourthly, the Sch 3 dog that you quote needs to be assessed while it is not working.   What you have to realise is the pressure that is put on the dogs to achieve.   Many dogs are broken by this, especially when the trainer is trying to train the dog up too quickly.  Like you, me and everyone else, it can only be trained as quickly as it'scapabilities will allow.  Ask any top trainer "how many dogs they go through" in trying to get that extra special top dog.  It does not happen with every dog they touch.

Training takes time, patience, consistency and an understanding of your dog.

regards

Mackenzie

I do not use scores for determining a dog for breeding. I have learned this over many years of breeding. I look at each individual away from the field as much as on the field. I look for fight drive , spirit, ability to play by itself and amuse itself without being destructive. I look for eagerness to please, to how they work for their owner, that they have correct structure and drive that is extreme and yet they can turn it off if instructed. This has led me to a much better quality of pups over the past years.

Dogs with high scores have demonstrated that they are capable of high scores.

A dog with low scores MIGHT be capable. Perhaps it's training was less than ideal. But the fact remains that it hasn't demonstrated that it is capable of high scores. All rationalization is conjecture.

If one considers Schutzhund a good venue for evaluating worthiness then by implication one is accepting the validity of the scoring system.

It seems to me that if one doesn't value high scores - then one doesn't value Schutzhund as an accurate way to asess a dog's abilities.

Personally, "passing" scores hold very little meaning for me.

Only superlative scores clearly say something.
What they PROBABLY say is that the training was good and the dog is capable of very high scores with good training.

It's not only the scores, but what level were those scores earned at and how often?  A dog with one time scores in the 90's at a club trial is a heck of a lot different then a dog in the 80's and 90's at multiple National and/or Regional events.  You bet I would look at scores as one determining factor based on that criteria. 

Other factors have to be was the willingness and toughness there also.  Some dogs are trained to perfection but may not have that extra spark.

Trafalgar, That is precisely why the German Shepherd has the issues it does today. Schutzhund is no longer the most accurate method of assessing breedworthiness. Look at how protection has changed over the years, prior to 1983 they used a ten point system for judging courage, when they lumped 9 and 10's together it diluted the breeding pool. Prior to 1983 few people bred to 9's or less and the strength of the dog was much greater. They have changed the courage test to allow lesser dogs, they want little fight drive on the field today. These are all factors that have affected us and why many people have switched to Mal's and other breeds. Many of the strong dogs of the 60's and 70's that won the National trila in europe and here would no longer score well today as they have changed so many of the rules and in turn has led to breeding more and more medium strength dogs. I've been breeding for 31 years and have personally experienced the changes. My wife placed third in the Europameisterschaft in Denmark in 1986 and I gaurantee Pele vom Arolser Holz would not be able to place nearly that high into todays sport due to his extreme fight drive. He took the fight to the decoy and truly made it personal yet he received 96 points typically in those years. Today he would be likely to score 88 to 90 points due to rule changes. These are the problems why more and more police agencies are looking Mals because it is more and more difficulkt to fing GSD's capable of police work at a high level and still be sound enough to do demos for elderly and children. Today, Schutzhund is the starting point in a proper breeding program for working lines but much more has to be looked at than their scores. A truly hard dog is not going to be getting 100 points in protection, you are lucky to attain 96 or 97 points with truly strong dog due to his not being able to instantly shut off his fight drive

Larry,

Hi.

I think you make my point, in this way. One may conclude from your post that you DON'T value Schutzhund as a venue to asesss breed worhiness. You seem to value your own personal discernment more. Which is fine and fitting.

The thing is - I - don't know you - and don't place as much stock in your personal asessment abilities as you do.

My point was narrow: 
If one values Schutzhund (which has scores) one - BY DEFINIITON - values high scores.

To say "I value the way Schutzhund USED to be" simply begs the question, "If others agree with you, then why don't you change it back?"

Using other methods of evaluation is, of course fine.
But to say -  LOW scores are a sign of a BETTER dog than high scores......sounds a tad, shall i say.........  counterintuitive.

I know of no knowledgable breeders from I would even consider getting a dog who uses scores as a criteria. There are simply too many excellent dogs with excellent pedigrees who are in the hands or handlers who cannot really handle and/or properly train the dog. A dog's quality is apparent on the field, even if the scores don't reflect that quality, due to handling and/or training. I would absolutley need to see/evaluate the dog's temperament off the field, or rely on the observation of someone whose opinion I absolutely trust. Again, the breeders I know would evaluate the dog off the field, including in the type of social situations a family dog encounters: shopping malls, shows, parks, etc. Why? Because some puppies in every litter is likely to go to a pet home. There are high-level competition dogs with temperament issues (e.g. dog aggression) covered up by training and handling ON THE FIELD. Dogs can learn "place and time," as well as humans. What temperament is displayed in social settings? For example, I am familiar with one top-level competition dog that is much touted, even on this forum, as a stud. However, I repeatedly saw this dog's temperament in the hotel during the national championship one year and was horrified at the level of dog aggression and toward people just walking in the hall.