Quote:

As a Postal worker I feel somewhat qualified to comment on biteing dogs <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> I've talk to quite a number of letter carriers and most of thier bites are back of the leg bites. Carriers usually have pepper spray and are instructed to feed the dog the mail pouch. Many of the bites acured with multiple dogs. Basicaly two in front yappin one gets your back side.

My mailman carries milkbone cookies with him, as does the UPS guy... hehe.

That works with the cooperatin of the owner. but when that pit/doby/rottie/shep mix tied to a tree with clothes line busts his petsmart collar, a milk bone ain't gonna cut it. And dispite our reputation, we are not allowed to take our .45s (sorry, I could never warm up to a Schlock) to work with us <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

"Am I on the right track when I believe that a 99 point SchH3 routine or the title "Bundessieger" doesn't mean that you've got a good protection dog. Further tests should prove the temperament and the real thing. Sport and reality are different ball games."

Exactly!
It would like be comparing a good NFL football player against a SAW gunnner from the 82nd Airborne. One's for sport ( and probably good at it ) and one will kill your a*s dead'er than dirt, end of story. Different temperaments for different jobs.

I believe that stuff that made Pat Tillman a great ball player also made him a hero. Could it not be said that Sch could show potential as a real PPD? It's only a matter of training? just a guess , my Sch dog is only 4 months old

I'd be careful of generalizing BSP competitors as "not real" protection dogs. I think that there are still a handful of trainers at the top who are looking for serious fight drive and power in the dogs they train. (I've met a few.)

As I type this I'm sitting in a cafe in Berlin. I've just spent the last few days looking at and working 4 different dogs who have all participated in the BSP and have all scored really well.

There isn't a doubt in my mind, all four dogs that I saw would bite the everliving heck out of you if given half a chance.

Without a doubt, there are BSP dogs that will hurt you really bad and enjoy doing so.

I have to say, I feel pretty good about the state of our working breed after having spent some time here in Europe seeing the high quality of dogs that people are training here. It's pretty amazing, really.

 Quote:

The real point of my book is to show people how rare a true dog protection event is...

So, true dog protection happens so rare, and trainings are so costly and time consuming. This really doesn't seem to be time effective thing to take on. I guess it's just we like it too much to need a reason...

I personally can't wait. Will is going to prove once and for all how unlikely it is that your dog is going to stand up and protect you. Think about how unreasonable we are asking our sport dogs to attack from the front, a totally unnatural thing. And they are willing to do that for us. I always think how cool it would be to get a half hour or so to talk to your dog and get his real perspective. Mine probably think I am this totally unreasonable dummy <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

There are quite a few things to remember when considering a conclusion based on voluntary submission of data:

1) Hundreds of thousands of significant incidents may have gone unreported and not submitted. Less litigious societies probably have more dog bite incidents.
2) Submission of information would have to consider a "universe" and breed(s) specificity, eg: there are hundreds of Lab owners whose dogs perhaps did not defend, but how many Malinois owners?
3) People that own dogs that would definitely bite, possibly are hard targets in the full sense of the word, and thus would be less likely to suffer an affront. This goes to significance of other factors.
4) Statistically, in order for a quantitative conclusion to be reached, it is necessary to know how many altercations there were in total where dogs were present, and out of those, how many where dogs reacted aggressively.

Besides, there are a large amount of dogs that would quite happily bite...not pinch the rear end...but bite the daylight out of a person...and that do so on a daily basis, protecting territory and perimeter. Admittedly, a large portion of these dogs then die...mostly poisoned.

My point is this...it's not about how unlikely it is that your dog will defend you...it's about choosing the right dog (if you can handle it!!!) , training it properly, keeping it fit, and having "depth" in your defense system.

Under those conditions, you will be less likely to suffer an attack, and if you are subject to an attack, your dog is more likely (significantly so) to be a major player in the conflict, and a determinant in the outcome.

Will, this might be a little of subject. What percent of BSP or WUSV participants with a change in training could actually do personal protection. As Robert said above, he thought the 4 dogs he worked could do protection for real.

Andres,
You could say things like that about a lot of data regarding a lot of different subjects.
But I've chosen only to report on events that were recorded and can be verified on multiple levels, i.e., a police report and then court proceedings. If I went by self-reporting, I'd get much worse data - and I am now of the mindset that if it wasn't documented, it didn't happen.

The undocumented reports I'd get would always have the dogs that magically knew to attack the perp when they pulled out a weapon ( the dog recognized a weapon? Amazing! ) and would *always* bite the bad guy on the arm that held the weapon. What an amazing coincidence...

Their are way too many myths about protection to begin with. I will not contribute to those by using data that I can't prove.