I am not that sure there is a significant difference in the base training for a dog that is going to go for protection vs. sport. I do believe that the sport people figured out quicker that there are better and safer methods of getting the work done, but the PP people are catching up.

When I first started to learn about SchH dogs weren't started until they were 2 y/o and where started in heavy defense that was then converted for prey. If prey was used at all. That is what is still often seen by PP trainers now. With some dogs it will work, often very well, with some it won't and will ruin the dog. Over the last couple of years I have learned a much more efficient method. Much more like Sport training, and then the principles are applied to PP training. It works better, it is safer for getting a complete dog, it can still be adapted to less prey based breeds, and it is quicker.

You do have to make some adjustments based on breed, and the dog, but it is still much more efficient. Even with a defensive breed.

Another nice post, Richard.

It comes down to the best way to start young dogs in training, whatever the end goal is. All dogs should be started in prey work and tought the skills necessary for the work, as well as providing a place that you can relieve stress very easily in more serious work. The benefits are many, the downsides I have yet to see or hear of. With a solid dog and solid prey foundation if you want more "serious" work you can get there afterwards as the dog matures (or even much later), if you want to stay in sport and keep it all fun you can do that as well.

I think it also becomes an issue of humane training as well. Prey training isn't stressful, it isn't hard on the dog, but it builds them up to a point where they will be able to handle more.

Defensive work, or "fight" work, without good foundation is a nasty way to train dogs IMO.

Well this must be a first. All the gurus agreeing on something. -finally.now this is why i signed up at the burg, to get a better understanding of what works and what does not.

Every sector has one common understanding, solid pray foundation, building a dog up before going into serious work, do every thing in increments and that kicking and beating a dog just wont cut it. Good job – Mike excellent post, to Robbert and Richard and Kevin, glad to see good advice is not that hard to come by.

Don b Ackerson – did a similar post but it was closed, but I feel the debate should continue, because he made some very good observations while watching training.

I see the whole board is lighting up this week in comparing schutzhund, and pp or pad or patrol dog training pro and con, well to just start with a comparison that Robberts argued, where the question was could the schutzhund dog be a police dog- yes - but the police dog could it be a schutzhund dog – no, the same could be said for: a schutzhund trained dog that wont make it in a SAWDOS IPO police dog competition, so we are going in circles here.

The departing philosophy is mission specific for both types of training, and that’s why I stick with my argument, which is that schutzhund and pp training are two different animals, the one is aimed at scoring points, the other at scoring arrests – there is no comparison when I comes to its original goal.

When one trains cops and soldiers you do it under stress and with as much pressure, kicking screaming and some pain and defiantly a lot of sweat, now why do we want to slum dunk the pp boys because they train there dogs like wise this why, it’s in the speck, though some times largely exaggerated the – beating and kicking bit, but yes it’s in the spec once again.

The requirements are different, its like comparing – make up, the clown does his make up for a circus audience his way because that’s the spec, the actor does his make up for the part he is portraying in his way, the two could inter change but they would have to change the spec to fit the requirement.

Don you get full marks for observation skills, but every department has it’s own training program and trains to a different spec, and standard.

Where as most schutzhund training stays the same with a twist here and there I believe.

My point, it depends greatly on your background, and mindset, so ever owl on his own branch, neither the schutzhund nor the police dog programs turn out dogs that are not according to the requirements set, with a few exceptions here and there.

Richard, do you incorporate any scenarios whereas the dog takes some punishment? Incidentally, I don't use it as a "philosophy" either but I think at some point, hopefully the right point <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> , the dog is tested. I'm not suggesting one beat the shite out of the dog, but I do think it's good to know how the dog will react when it experiences some pain. Am I out of line here?

I start getting the dog used taking some resistance from almost day one. I cover the pups eyes and rub their heads. As they age I will also tap on their chin and tap them on their sides and back. As they age further I add in tapping them with a foot along the sides and pulling their front feet off the ground and knee them in the chest.

There have been some interesting effects and side effects of this program. The dog will take a bunch of abuse with out flinching. When the agitator starts dishing out some more serious resistance the dog just thinks they want to play rougher, and they like that. We did have a bit of a problem getting the BRT to stay on with the agitators. The problem was since they didn't hit her or knee her she thought they didn't really want to play. So she would just come back to me. Once I convinced the agitator to tap her on the chest she knew immeadiatly what to do and went in to full bore on the bites and fights. Some of that may have been the breed, but I think a lot had to do with the way she was brought up.

I would assume that there are several PSD dogs that compete in SchH. I believe both CJ and Itor are titled at SchH III.

I think the issue is more one of training for both rather than the dogs being incapable. It is going to take a lot of work to maintian a dog for both, and there are not many people that will put in the effort.

Dogs are often smarter than we give them credit for. They will identify what the expected behavior is based on the context. In addition most dogs will take the target that is offered. If you offer them a sleeve they will take it, if nothing is offered most will take the easiest target unless they have been taught to only take a sleeve.

As for Don's observations...
Simply put, he just saw some poor training by almost every measure. Every decent trainer I know of teaches dogs to make a good bite in the first place and maintain it unless they lose it in the struggle. If they lose the bite or get a poor bite intially, they will rebite. Many people don't know the difference in terms of training, and believe what they are told is good training. They have no frame of reference, nor do they seek one, leaving them with no clue as to what they are seeing.

I don't understand these posts, I have not done enough schutzhund yet, so it is new to me. Is the dog not trained that the decoy is a threat at some point? Maybe not physically, but in body posture and verbally? My dog has done very little schutzhund, but always seems to smell out the decoys within a short time. My dog has PP training.

RC
As for Don's observations...
Simply put, he just saw some poor training by almost every measure. Every decent trainer I know of teaches dogs to make a good bite in the first place and maintain it unless they lose it in the struggle. If they lose the bite or get a poor bite intially, they will rebite. Many people don't know the difference in terms of training, and believe what they are told is good training. They have no frame of reference, nor do they seek one, leaving them with no clue as to what they are seeing.

What I've seen is that though some camps stress clean biting for points and scores. Predigree and precsion and the whys, hows and wheres and why nots. The PP guy here are impressed with these precison and clean routines.

I beleive this is a solid and more humane building blocks, but it seems to stop right here, meaning working in prey is enough get the dog thur. So the question of will the dog really work in the real world is still a issue.

As Officer Geel has mentioned. The other camp offer more reality and I'll add seem to get it done quicker. (Though the drop out rate is higher) The dog either has it or he doesn't.

I agree with RC that these guys are not as knowledgeble or as refine as the ScHh/sport group or you guys. But just because there methods are outdated does not mean that its is not affective or efficient.

Their results speak for its self. I've seen some mutts that would chew a man a new ass, no doubt about it. The owner bought another one just like him, because of a real world defense.

I've also seen some beautiful full blooded dogs that there is no doubt would fight to the end. Not just one decoy buy several. In incidents like this rebiting seems to get the job done quicker.
This testing so much like real fighting that when calle dto do its job, there is no doubt. It would take a head shot to stop them.

It's like watching amatuer boxing and reality fighting/UFC, boxing is only part whats going on you need a full arsenal to win in a real fight not point and high scores. One emulates the street fight and skills needed to survive more.

I couldn't afford a SchH dog so this is mute.
But I'd take a street proven PP dog over a SchH any day. If real protection and not love of the sport and money making was the plan. Just my thought, I'm not a Pro. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Lisa

In begining in prey drive the decoy is just a training buddy, some one that he plays a tough game of tug with and builds from there.

This may not be the case since your dog is Personal protection trained, he may be looking for a fight. Ask your helper or trainer what does he think.