http://users.rcn.com/reiher/ad.html

Try this

Cool that one worked fine... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

I typed in the http letters when I made the post. How do you put it up (in red) so it can be clicked on to? I can't find where to put the red ribbon in this new fangled typewriter.

UBB code is enabled. Again, as Schnazuergils said, "Just look up". again Duh! I'll get this thing figured out yet.

Nobody take this as frank disagreement. I'm just gonna throw out some food-for-thought based on general principles of human training, and try to see how well that peg fits into dog training. As a matter of fact, one woman I trained applied these principles to her horses (she was into dressage) and from what I heard, she found great success. So anyway...

Beyond fatigue lies compensatory hypertrophy. Simply means to get stronger you have to get tired.

Agreed.

In police working dogs, conditioning is essential. Usually there is not warm-up period, and a dog goes from dead stop to full speed, exerting an enourmous amount of energy....Train like you expect to work. The last thing the handler can worry about, at that particular time, is the dog coming up lame.

I have to disagree with this. Where I do agree (and it's pretty self evident) that training should prepare for work, training should not BE like work. There are inherent, unforeseen risks to engaging in sport or work which should be AVOIDED during conditioning. After all, a primary criterion of any good fitness regiment is safety and injury prevention. Now, going into a full sprint from a dead stop without warm-up produces enormous amounts of FORCE on the tissues. (Force=Mass x Acceleration). But it does NOT neccesarily mean more metabolic work (energy expenditure) has taken place. Force is the exclusive culprit in work/exercise related injuries. It may be cummulative, or it may be sudden. But all injuries have to do with movement. All movement, in the real world, involves force because all such movement neccesarily has to involve acceleration. However, force can be minimized while still incurring excercise benefit. Herein lies the invalidity of comparing physics and biology. Metabolic work at the cellular level is that which produces physiological changes... NOT mechanical work (moving a given mass, a given distance in a given time). This is because muscles are not conscious. They do not care what is going on outside of themselves, nor do they care the intent of the contraction. One can, in fact, produce ZERO force, produce ZERO amount of mechanical work, yet still experience an extremely high degree of metabolic activity. Such a thing would be trying to lift the back end of a car. No newtons of force, no watts of work, no change outside of the muscles trying to lift it. But there would, in fact, be massive changes on the physiological level.

So, ideally, the safest, most productive mode of exercise would neccesarily mean low mechanical forces but high degrees of metabolic work (though having said that, low force does NOT mean low resistance). Metabolic work builds muscle. If our bodies are logical, and we have to assume they are, then metabolic work at the muscular level will neccesarily mean we'll see improvements in our muscle attachments, and the bones to which our muscles attach, and ultimatly the ligaments which bind bone. All can be strenghtened and prepared for real-life forces without actually experiencing such forces during conditioning.

We shouldn't condtion in an effort to purly build muscle, but train with a sense of increasing stamina.

Building muscle does neccesarily mean one is increasing stamina. Progressive overload training means that any given task short of training intensity will be easier. And since intensity is always increasing incrementally, one can expect that given task to become increasingly easier...less intense.

So, in terms of practical application, if one expects a dog to perform his mechanical duties primarily on flat ground, it would seem to make sense that training him against high resistance (say, against gravity up steep hills, or perhaps pulling weight) while still being able to minimize dangerous forces (quick starts without warm-ups) whilst still SAFELY preparing for them, would be the best way to go.

Another reason for this is to avoid chronic forces with cummulativly chip away one's joints. Of course, they can't be avoided. The dog's gotta walk and play regularly, but I don't see the sense in contributing to the problem in a venue which is supposed to good for the dog's body. Short bouts of intense metabolic work, followed by sufficient rest, is DEFINITLY a joint saver.

What I am very glad to see is the recognition of the importance of REST. For some reason this is beyond most humans as it applies to themselves.

Thoughts?

muscles harden within a matter of week but tendons and bone take months to strengthen fully.

Muscles only "harden" insofar as the fat surrounding them diminishes and or the muscle increases in size. There also might be a degree of fat marbling in the muscle which dissappears, but now we're talking about cow-like sloth if that's the case.

If tendons and bone were out of step with muscular development, we'd see weight-lifters snapping like twigs every time they add weight to the bar, and runners experiencing stress fractures upon adding duration. While I agree that not as much metabolic work occurs in such tissues, I do not agree that there has to be. Otherwise the implication is that exercise in excess of once per month(s) will result in a long-term atrophy of the bones. That's not the case.

L Swantson,

I read the article you posted. Thank you. Though it's criminal that they actually suggest jumping as part of a conditioning routine. For recreation and sport, that's one thing... as long as you understand the risks. But for general well-being? Oy. Micheal Jorden doesn't ice his knees after every game because it looks cool. He's well on his way to osteoarthritis. And from what little I know about dogs, I can only assume canine athletes suffer the same kinds of things. I shudder to think of a dog repeatedly coming down on his 2 elbows because someone thinks it's beneficial. Can't be good.

Whoa Kurz - that was one technical post!
Good info though. When I said harden I didn't know there would be a scientist on the other end I should have use "condition" or something <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> - go easy on me I are only a dumb blonde dog musher! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> I was mainly trying to stress the importance of a run/rest cycle. Remember in comparing dog to human conditioning that dogs are
engineered to run more than humans. You might be interested in this site http://www.sportsvet.com
Alot of info on conditioning and training on the sleddog sites that you might enjoy also so check out http://www.sleddogcentral.com - you might find something to interest you on it.

Thanks Tig. I'll definitly get to those articles after work. I'm off! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Kurzhaare,

I certainly do not disagree with you, I do however feel you missed my point. I'm not involved in sport. What my dogs do, is often on the spur of the moment, and the dog has to be ready to go. Most times, there is not an opportunity for the dog to warm up, or otherwise be prepared physically for whatever encounter is about to ensue. When I say you have to train like you work, I'm not going to fire live rounds at the dog, however I will make at times make him work to his physical limits. We have an old saying in law enforcement work, that applies equally to the dogs, "We sweat in training so we don't bleed on the streets." I'm sure you will find most law enforcement handlers will do anything they can to ensure thier dogs health and safety, however when the time comes to perform, the only concern is, the dog performs until it is no longer able.

DFrost