Catherine,
I think that dogs can sense the difference between a real-life situation and a training situation. First off, people do behave differently when they are *really* trying to harm someone, or are truly being harmed. Secondly, people *smell* differently in those situations as well. I'm also trying to imagine how a violent person could play tug with my dog and rape/maim/murder me at the same time.....????

It just seems like you're creating hypothetical situations to suit your point of view, but what *everyone* here has urged you to do, is to get some experience under your belt first. Theory is one thing, and practice is another.

BTW, I don't think you give dogs very much credit for their intellingence, sensitivity, and loyalty. When you make statements like the one regarding a dog chasing a ball rather than defending her human, it seems like you're saying that dogs don't think.

I originally joined this board in hopes of learning something new, I have. I have also learned that there are a lot of ignorant individuals who need to have their ass torn up by a dog. Experience is the best teacher, for those who think a dog wouldn't defend it's handler for a ball needs to try it. Some may not, but let's try it on a finished dog and see.

Sorry Joy. I vote Norman as MVP.

Catherine wrote:

 Quote:

Is it really safer for a dog to latch onto a human and not let go rather than fighting?

Some might actually say that "latching on" is part of fighting. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> But, why not ask helpers that question. What would you (helpers) do without protective gear with a dog in full fight drive attached to your arm? Would you have a better chance winning that fight if the dog held fast, or if it didn't? Who would be in control of the fight -- the dog crushing your arm, or you -- or, the dog looking for a place to bite you, or you? When the dog releases its grip on you and is off contact, what are the dynamics? Isn't real fighting all about who gains control? I would think that if the dog has a good grip holding you, then the dog is in control; but, if you can get a good hold on the dog, then you are in control. IMO in "contact" fighting (hand to hand/hand to mouth) the one who gets the best hold/grip on the other has the advantage.

Catherine wrote:

 Quote:

So the dog can be beaten while hanging on? That doesn't make logical sense to me in a real life situation,

If a real fight is going on, the dog will get beaten whether it's holding on with a good grip or dancing around looking to get one. The only difference would be whether the man has 2 hands to beat the dog off with or only one.

Catherine wrote:

 Quote:

its that its not thinking if it bites, hangs on and allows itself to be beaten. That's thinking? You must be joking.

A man has two weapons -- hands. Does it make more sense to immobilize one and keep it immobilized than to have to fight against two hands? BTW the one hand is LESS than half as powerful as two together -- or, two hands are MORE than twice as powerful as only one. Also, BTW in a real dog fight the dog that gets the full neck grip on the other HOLDS that grip because it prevents the other dog from being able to bite him -- not Discovery Channel -- observation unfortunately. You've heard the old saying "possession is 99% of the law" I'm sure. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Bill wrote:

 Quote:

If you think about what she is saying, it basically comes down to keeping control over a stable dog. If necessary, then the dog retargets, or continously attacks. If not necessary and one bite was sufficient, then the handler calls the dog off.

That's fine. But how do you get the dog to that level of ability? A dog in a fight ("real" or simulated like in schH training) is fighting for its life in its mind and doesn't hear or feel a correction. How do you teach control or obedience in fight/defense mode? Or, how do you expect your dog to obey in full fight/defense mode even when it is "trained"? IMO ultimately "prey" is where the dog's advantage and the handler's control lie.

Is that a Catch-22 or just a high level of training, practice & experience? In the long run which has a better advantage, the dog who has been "taught" to handle its emotions fighting a man ("prey"), or a dog who hasn't?

Norman--
I have seen a "finished" dog not defend becuase of a ball.

Also, I think Catherine mentioned that she had personally tried this, and the dog chose the ball.

I'mmmmmm baaaaccckkkk......LOL....

Not defend because of a ball has nothing to do with using a ball as a reward in training, it has to do with poor selection of said dog, or poor training in bite work. It has nothing to do with a reward system. It could simply be the dog used the ball as a means to AVOID the conflict as it was unable to deal with it. this is a selection problem, not a "ball" problem.
As for whomever doesn't think a dog should stay on, well have fun in court! Does it happen that dogs come off bites or need to retarget because of what a suspect does, yep it does happen. HOWEVER it is pretty rare. I'm speaking of real bites, with real working patrol dogs, not guessing what would happen with a protection dog that will 99.9% never be used for real. In occasions where dogs have re-targeted it is normally because the suspect has fallen or during the impact, flipped the dog off. This is not an intentional move, merely physics. The dogs then have acquired new targets and stayed on the bite. Those others, well it seems most here have forgotten handlers in this situation. If the dog is on the suspect, the handler should be as well. You should not stand back and watch some guy punch the snot out of your dog....that simple. With that being said, there is no reason for the most part for the dog to re-target anything. If the suspect has a weapon in their hand that is that dangerous to the dog that the handler can not approach, then they should not have sent the dog in the first place.

Thank you Josh.

Great post Josh <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Kevin,

Catherine wasn't threatening the handler when she had the ball in her hand. Had she been attacking the handler and the dog went after a ball then I would agree with Josh, the dog was in avoidance and chose the ball as a way out.