
This is a placeholder text
Group text

by Prager on 16 May 2016 - 23:05
Joanro: Per hans post at bottom of page 12 ---I believe a dog doesn't 'choose flight'. Rather I believe it is instinct reaction to what a dog perceives as overwhelming and the dog is unable to cope any way except to put distance between the 'danger' and himself.
OK little pedantic but true. When I said chooses I guess i should have said reacts instead. I stand behind the rest. The reaction is molded by training and if trained the way I describe it then the reaction does not involve flight. that is what all defense based training does. :)

by Prager on 16 May 2016 - 23:05
by Gee on 16 May 2016 - 23:05
@GSDFan.
Lets not forget, a capable civil dog, needs to take as good as he gives.
It is a two way street - with the bite only being one part.
Pressures / stresses are all incredibly important, and from a training perspective are subjective and vary ENORMOUSLY, with most trainers opting for the path of LEAST resistance.
For instance, if you were to spray a Bear with Bear mace, you would expect that to work - because that is a tried and tested Bear deterrent lol.
In the US for chris sake, you can buy small hand held canisters of CO2, perfume size that fit in the pocket, which are designed to abort a Pit Bill attack. No doubting it works, because police forces world wide use it on dangerous dogs, fucking up all there senses and scaring the shit out of them, you of course will know that.
All I am saying is - where do you draw the line, it could go from the sublime to the ridiculous, depends on two things
1,Your personal expectations.
2,Your personal training / proofing standards.
When it comes to my dogs, ALWAYS engaging the man - is the bottom line.
In a nut shell, if the shit hits the fan - a GOOD dog, in my books is the one who ALWAYS ENGAGES, he doesnt rely on equipment prompts, or association of previous training locations, or an unrealistically predicdably placed arm, he simply ENGAGES.
Hope that helps.
Regards
Gee
by Gee on 16 May 2016 - 23:05
@Hans
I never asked to see any civil street vids.
R
Gee

by Prager on 17 May 2016 - 00:05
I know . Just saying. :)

by Prager on 17 May 2016 - 00:05
Nowhere have I claimed that my way is the only way. there are myriad of other way to train protection . But here is my question to detractors of what I am saying. Please tell me where is the logic in training a civil dog
to bite sleeve and not a man
and then(!!!)
to bite man and not the the sleeve?! ( or any other equipment.)
That logic baffles crap out of me. There must be some triple axel paulsen cross bred with donkey reasoning made to defend that logic. Anyway I am still waiting for someone, anyone to explain it to me. I promise my mind is open. And no, please do not use argument that "everybody does it" at one time "everybody" believed that earth is flat too so such argument does not fly with me.
Prager Hans
by vk4gsd on 17 May 2016 - 00:05
by beetree on 17 May 2016 - 01:05
First off the defense bite is not a kill bite, as the prey bite is. Defense serves to repel a threat by the willingness to engage. The prey bite serves to make the kill. I believe you recently stated that differently and oppositely, and so you are wrong. Thanks to that link from K9-1.com. Those guys really explain the theory in a very understandable way.
Therefore, the dog who is in defense and bites, will not be as full grips as when in prey. The genetics set the default drives of reaction and the training will reinforce or discourage a response to those drives.
That sounds right to me because territorial aggression is related to the defense drive and such a shallow bite, is what I have witnessed.

by Gigante on 17 May 2016 - 01:05
by beetree on 17 May 2016 - 01:05
Lol, no. I told you! K9-1.com, part of their eleven step self help, Foundation training.
Maybe I got the name mixed, hold on.....I will find the link...Reillya found it first...
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top