Hi,
I learnt that if the dog is trained for defence, it will use its front teeth to bike instead of a full calm grip. Please correct me if I am wrong on this.

The question is in order to get a good score in Schutzhund, is the judge looking for full mouth grip of the prey item or defensive drive that the dog demonstrating during the protection exercises ?

If it is full mouth grip, then is it necessary to train defence for Schutzhund - protection ?

Thanks

If the foundation work is good, and the dogs nerves are good, then transitioning from Prey to Defense won't affect grip. The grip slips with dogs that have weak nerves.

That said, people put too much focus on training in defense. Defense is something a dog should learn to deal with so he doesn't run away or go into avoidance when he finds himself in a situation that will put him in defense, but it shouldn't be the primary goal of the training. Many dogs will never go into defense because the threshold is above what any Sch helper will ever show them. Defense is a fear based response, the dog is defending himself. The line between defense and avoidance is a thin one. How the dog will be trained and what drives the dog is worked in depends on the dog itself and the competency of the trainer and decoy.

 Quote: Mike J Schoonbrood

That said, people put too much focus on training in defense. Defense is something a dog should learn to deal with so he doesn't run away or go into avoidance when he finds himself in a situation that will put him in defense

Where defense is an uncomfortable drive to be in verse prey. Could concentrating on training in defense eventually shut a dog down or put him into avoidance of the sport all together?

From everything I am reading and researching BALANCE seems to be the key in making a successful competitor......easier said than done, I think

 Quote:

Where defense is an uncomfortable drive to be in verse prey. Could concentrating on training in defense eventually shut a dog down or put him into avoidance of the sport all together?

I forgot who said it, but a while ago someone gave me this analogy. I liked it, so I use it too: Training a dog entirely in defense is like training someone to shoot with people shooting back at them.

If you take a very defensive dog, and do minimal prey work and focus on the dogs defense, yes, you can set the dog way back if you don't approach it the right way. I have seen dogs that seem to really like working in defense, but they aren't really dogs that I would want to own.

If you look at the dogs people are breeding for ringsports, the ring people care very little about defense, and more about prey and dominance. The dogs are going on to police and military very successfully. All this defense stuff seems to be most talked about among Schutzhund trainers, as well as this "the dog must be balanced in prey and defense" stuff. If my dog is going into defense every time the decoy raises the stick then I have the wrong dog.

 Quote: Mike J Schoonbrood

I forgot who said it, but a while ago If my dog is going into defense every time the decoy raises the stick then I have the wrong dog.

This would also to me point out that a dog like this is a powder keg waiting to turn into a fear biter. If it isn't already.

I do Ringsport and all my dog's bitework has been done in prey, her biting has not suffered a bit by never being put into defense.

Prey = the dog wants to ... Defense = the Dog has to ... To me for sport anyways I'd rather have a dog that wants to work it will do anything anytime for the team. Where the flip side you have a dog that mopes around the field and is always nervous wondering where the next whip across it's back may come from.

I've seen 2 young dogs where in their foundation bitework they were put into defense these dogs are next to useless. The lunge at the decoy try to bite him on the shoulder etc even when the sleeve or large tug is presented to them. Needless to say these dogs were ruined. They shouldn't even be allowed on the field IMHO.

The problem is that in Schutzhund they want to hear a deep angry bark and see a nice angry face on the bark & hold. Why a dog should be angry at a guy standing still with a prey item in front of him is beyond me. But, thats what they want, so thats what people train for. I'll curb my distaste for some common training methods in the spirit of staying on topic.

The thread was about defense and grips. The short answer is: If you have a good dog and a good decoy/trainer then you will not have to worry about grips slipping. The worse the dog, the better the decoy needs to be.

ref to Mike's reply. This is exactly my point. Because it is a sport & there are rules & guideline for the scoring. In short, back to what normally the judge is looking for in Sch sport ? Does defensive bark & hold gain high points compare to a dog bark in prey drive ?

I am new in this sport, so I am preparing myself for what's that standard expection from the judge. Can some experience trialer advice me on this ?

Thats an interesting question actually. While I would think that the pitch of the bark shouldn't affect score, since it is the action of barking and holding that should be judged... I too am curious whether someone would be penalized for it. I would think that in a club level trial that you shouldn't have any problems with it.

But if my dog didn't have the perfect bark in the blind, I would rather lose points (if there are any to lose) than put my dog through some of the crap people do to get the deeper bark.

Well,
Tone or a better discription intent of the Guard and Bark is important. In 99 while watching the Bundeseigerprufung it was quite apparent that the dog had to show a serious guard to achieve an over all rating of V. Anything less the entire routine was subject to intense scrutiny by the chief judge.
It is a GUARD and bark to indicate routine. It is not simply a bark like one might have in a urban S&R. The component is more genetic than trained although training can improve upon the underlying genetics. I have had the pleasure of working a few dogs that made the decoy pucker even though they were perfectly clean. This is a GUARD and bark, Stellen and Verbellon (forgive my spelling here).
This is a hallmark of the sport, a serious guard. Yes, in a club level trial many dogs receive decent scores for simply yapping at the decoy to move or even just barking to play. This may be training or temperment but often it is a bit of both.
In training the bark it begins in the foundation of sportwork. The dogs learns gripping first (a change from the "old days" where they learned to challenge the decoy first) then when the gripping is satisfactory we begin to teach the dog to bark, to bark not for the pursuit, not for the sleeve, but to fend off a challenge. Often in many club events there is no decoy versed in the difference between a challenge and a threat and they delve too frequently or too deeply in the the arena of threat where a dog feels fear. In a challenge they are not fearful....so you see I avoid the word defense here....because it does not correctly portray the feelings a dog has. From this feeling the dog with correct genetics will bark a challenge at the decoy. It will sound different than a bark to move, a bark to gain a sleeve, or a bark to play tug-o-war. Training that embodies the latter may be all that a dog enthusiast has to work with and it may be all the dog has to offer. But, it is not ideal. Nor is a push to the extreme where self-defense (and therefore fear is the trigger) to the behavior we are seeking. This pushes to the point where we may evoke responses where not desireable in the dog and where the prep for the bark in the blind is a kick in the chops by a the decoy or the dog doesn't bark, or leaves, or simply avoids and pisses on a the fence at the edge of the field. This leaves a narrow area to work the dog as well as a narrow number of dogs that can work at the ideal and a relatively few number of decoys who can work them there. But, this is where we should try to work.

Please see my above post. You are correct but incomplete in your observations. Ring being a quiet sport relies on keeping the dog just barely tweaking into what some people group as defense (I refuse to use the term and either use fight or combat instincts vs. self defense which is fear related) and prey. Self-defense and Ring as you point out are pretty incompatable these days.

 Quote: Geoff Empey

 Quote: Mike J Schoonbrood

I forgot who said it, but a while ago If my dog is going into defense every time the decoy raises the stick then I have the wrong dog.

This would also to me point out that a dog like this is a powder keg waiting to turn into a fear biter. If it isn't already.

I do Ringsport and all my dog's bitework has been done in prey, her biting has not suffered a bit by never being put into defense.

Prey = the dog wants to ... Defense = the Dog has to ... To me for sport anyways I'd rather have a dog that wants to work it will do anything anytime for the team. Where the flip side you have a dog that mopes around the field and is always nervous wondering where the next whip across it's back may come from.

I've seen 2 young dogs where in their foundation bitework they were put into defense these dogs are next to useless. The lunge at the decoy try to bite him on the shoulder etc even when the sleeve or large tug is presented to them. Needless to say these dogs were ruined. They shouldn't even be allowed on the field IMHO.