This question comes from someone who had past experience with Schutzhund training and now is looking at PP training for his next dog. Which body area would you prefer that your PPD target, and why? Would your reasons include tactics, safety, ease of training, legal, other?

Quite a few prefer the left forearm, and that turns out to have a lot to do with a particular sport requirement, or ease of training, or, sometimes, minimizing unnecessary damage to bad guy. But it seems a poor tactical choice in some ways.

Would the bicep be preferable? Some say yes, but I have never seen a dog trained to do bicep hits, and have no idea what the finished product is like, and what the pros and cons are.

Thanks for any information.

Wayne,

I think that the idea with a PP dog is that targets are based on opportunity. In SchH you are dealing with a consistant presentation for the bite. What we do in training is teach the dog multiple targets and the dog ends up taking what is easiest to get. Most develop a favorite, but if it isn't available then they will take what ever is easiest.

In real life no one makes a nice clean presentation for your dog to bite them. So the dog has to have the confidence to take what it can get. I have watched in PP trials and seen dogs zero out because they couldn't figure out, or couldn't get to, the bite they were trained for.

The other change in my thoughts is that at one point in time I believed that it was good to try and teach the dog to go for the arm that was holding a weapon. I now agree that it isn't practical. If the dog is trying to zero in on a specific target and it is denied I would rather the dog make any bite than chase one it can't get to. Plus it slows the dogs momentum when going to make the bite that it loses some of the effectiveness.

I train the way Richard explained, give the dog a number of practiced options in training so he'll have a toolbox of experience to use in any given situation

I train these spots individually; arms, upper arms/armpit, legs, back, and chest.

I start with arms and legs (using sleeves) then upper arms/armpits, then chest, then back.


I do find that some dogs take a liking to one type of bite for whatever reason. My last dog liked thigh bites or knees. He just seemed to learn that he could get a reaction out of the decoy no matter what equipment he was wearing.


Wasn't very fun in trial. On some bites he would sometimes take a deep leg bite instead of the boring old sleeve. I mean who can blame him?!?

You can take a sleeve bite on the helper, he'll hit you with a stick in your ribs and grimace while eyeballing you. . .or he can hit the ground crying like a baby while you counter as deep as possible into the soft part of his thigh.

Which would you choose?

I wish I could find the source I got the information from, but as I recall, the majority of bites in police work, under actual circumstances were to the hand/forearm, from trying to fend off the dog, and the back of the calf/thigh area. I agree with the philosopy of train them for all areas and let the dog take the path of least resistance.

DFrost

Thanks much for these replies. You folk are very helpful, and it's much appreciated.

Would you mind expanding a bit on the matter of back and chest bites? How useful are such bites in discouraging the bad guy? Easy or difficult to train? Additional safety issues/ legal issues with handlers and bad guys because of possibility of a neck, head, or face shot? (These are a big thing with me. I know of a lawsuit when a PSD bit a guy's head, and would be worried about handler safety too.)

I train the dogs to favor the armpits for several reasons:

1)it is a target that can be accessed from multiple angles.

2)one arm/weapon are instantly disabled

3)the other arm/weapon is difficult to use because of the proximity of the dog to weapon (can't get a good swing with bat)

4)difficult to esquive

Also teach legs and forearm bites. Chest and backs never seemed that useful, not much meat to hang onto there.

I would suspect that a bite to the manboob, or girlboob for that matter, would be very effective indeed. LOL


Training them is no more difficult than other places.


The time when you really have to be careful of getting bit in the face or head is on the ground. Safe handling and proper grip development should eliminate that hazard in most cases.

If the bad guy gets hit there. . .well he probably had it coming, but it is something to try to discourage in training.

You need to have an effective OUT, even on an aggressive subject, and you need to use it if that is going to happen. I've never seen or heard of a dog taking a face or head bite on the fly right off the bat. I would think there are slim chances of that happening in a dog who has had good grip development and targeting.


On the ground though would be a concern if the dog rebites for whatever reason.

My Malinois has been given a consistent target during recent training sessions, the arm, though it is always changing left to right. One thing I have noticed as she has developed in her bite and in her confidence, is that she is targeting where she feels most comfortable, given the sleeve is most accessible. The bite is not always on the forearm. Depending on the scenario she may bite the wrist, the hand, or even the bicep or tricep. She has even gone for the shoulder and armpit.

On run downs my dog would always hit the sleeve as it was presented until recently. One night she ignored the sleeve all together, and it was a good presentation. Instead she got the helper on the tricep of the arm without the sleeve and knocked him down in the process. Simply put she felt most comfortable with that bite. Needless to say there are no more chases until I get a suit. What is happening is my dog is becoming more confident in her ability and is letting her inhibitions go. Now is the time for me to start working on additional target opportunities because she has shown me she is ready.

Though I have only skimmed through what others have said, I would agree that it is more the opportunity than anything. The training will kick in, but as someone said, the bad guy is not going to present a target for the dog, so at that point in time it becomes a nature and confidence issue. The dog, if trained properly is going to have the confidence to naturally bite where it feels the most secure, a target of opportunity typically.

I would agree that if the dog is only trained to go for the arm then it is likely the dog will be less effective. If the dog is confident and has been trained to bite various areas then more power to him. More opportunity all the way around, then let nature kick in.

I have even heard of a dog that had a thing for biting the groin area.........now tell me, how do you train that one? I sure as hell am not letting a dog come at me there!

It would seem to me that it would be natural for many dogs to go for mass.......i.e. the chest or back. My dog included, if there is no obvious target presented.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems perhaps second nature to many dogs to get the mass, regardless of meat. Mass equates a greater bite surface.......

Could it be a genetics issue that some dogs are simply more apt to go for mass bites as opposed to others?

I know when my dog does not have a clear target she will go to mass as though it was a predetermined second choice.......

VC,
My current partner on his second street bite got a guy right where the shirt collar is, it was an awesome,scary sight. When using the bite suit in training the decoy has to wear a helmet because he always hits high no matter the distance. I guess he loves to fly. It is also a very fast takedown. As far as the soft meat goes, we had a dog that almost always targeted the groin. This was sweet revenge when a perp acosted one of our female under covers then fled into the woods and wouldnt give up. Like others have previously stated...Dont limit the dog to one specific area to target. Make him multi faceted and you can just about guarantee he will do the job he was trained to do.