So I'll ignore some of the patronizing tone (i.e. "you're new here") because I'm sure it wasn't on purpose and just address the issue.

Dogs don't act like "brats" thats anthropomorphizing dogs and I tend to stay away from that. So I'd break down the reasoning behind the bite.

Was it because it hurt an old injury and thus he was biting out of pain?

Was it because he's had an experience in the past where a leash pop has led to an injury or was followed by boot to the side (not by Carol, maybe in the old program)?

Hasn't it been noted in more places than one that even if this was a dominance issue that a submission inducing dominance roll could make a dog begin to physically challenge by biting etc.?

What if the dogs neck was injured previous by play and hurt by the correction and then worsened by the wrestling him to the ground.

I'm not trying cause trouble just want to provoke dialogue. And I have been bit by large dogs more than once and have the hospital bills and scars to prove it.

 Quote: benjamin colbert

So I'll ignore some of the patronizing tone (i.e. "you're new here") because I'm sure it wasn't on purpose and just address the issue.

Dogs don't act like "brats" thats anthropomorphizing dogs and I tend to stay away from that. So I'd break down the reasoning behind the bite.

Well, actually, my tone WAS on purpose...as I was trying to point out that you don't know Carol, her dogs, or what she does with them, and your suggestion was not in line with the offense. Simply looking at her website would give you the idea that she just might know what she's doing, and can handle her dog properly, which includes judging their behavior and dishing out a proper/appropriate correction.

As far as being a "brat", geeeezzzz, I think it was obvious I was over-simplifying to make a point! We were discussing whether it was dominance at that point. Sorry if that wasn't clear. Would I advise anyone to roll a dog? NO. Would I do it myself, with MY dog, in a situation like Carol described? Hell yes. I am not trying to argue either, but your post came off as presumptuous, and I felt obliged to come to her defense.

Benjamin,

I stated what happened in my first post, I stated that I corrected him using a flat collar and I stated what happened when he came up the line.

The dog is in excellent condition and health, save for the root canals he had before I got him.

I know my dogs, I know what they are like and when they are off.
This dog did not and does not act "off" in any way other than the root canal looking different. I am not sure if they pull out completely or if they can work themselves out, causing a toothache from food getting into the tooth and rotting.....we will see tomorrow.

Palpation of his body, no muscle tremors, no gaurding, temp, heart rate and cap refills were all within his normal ranges.

The dog was in drive and had issues with being corrected because he broke a down stay when I clearly put him in one.

As far as anthropomorphizing dogs, people tend to say things in order for others to understand what we are talking about, so it was a use of a word for people who do not understand.
That is totally acceptable, especially with some of the people I work with, if I were to explain it in "dog language" then they would have questions on what I am trying to explain.

I have heard more "geez he's being a d**k" at training than I care to count. Does this mean some of the top trainers I work with or have worked with are wrong? Absolutely not, they are making a comment which allows them to vent before they go and deal with a dog that will not out, platz ect......

And, no one was patronizing you. You are new here, and do not know me. Others know me, and have helped me, and they know that I do not put up with crap from a dog....especially a biting dog.

I welcome your questions and your discussion, it is nice to see new people. But please do not expect me to explain a situation over and over......my post was pretty clear in the explanation.

If you'd rather not explain then don't. I have no issue with that. I saw something done much, much differently than I would have and so I posed a question.

Do I think you don't know you're dogs? No. Do I think what you did was abusive? No. I just feel that though I am comfortable enough rolling my own dog there is never a situation other than an emergency that I'd do it anymore. Certainly not as a punitive measure or to retain dominance. I'm not criticizing your style, I'm just trying to understand where it comes from.

What else would you like me to explain? My reasons for taking him down, were due to the fact that he came up the line and bit me. Not a snap or a warning, but a bite.

What else should I have done? I am interested, since all the dogs I have ever seen come up the line on a handler have been either taken down or a DD collar was used.

Just to add... Benjamin - Carol HAS explained the situation.

You consider a dog that bites the handler as something that is not serious? I am curious as to what you consider serious, if a dog coming up leash to bite the handler, is not.

If a dog IS in pain, caused from a correction, or perhaps a previous injury, does that pave the way for a bite to be an acceptable part of dog handling? If I accidentally step on a dog's tail in pitch black at midnight I would hope that dog would not attack me. Yes, it was my fault for stepping on the dog's tail and causing it pain, but that does not mean the dog has a right to take a chunk out of my leg.

A dog that plays with another dog, and gets hurt from the other dog being too rough, does not simply and automatically "retaliate" and attack the other dog, it will warn off with a vocalization and body posture if dominant, or will vocalize and show submission BEFORE any serious physical altercation takes place. A dog that does lash out, and nip to show disapproval or discomfort is acting in a dominant fashion. A dog that reacts in that manner, whether I stepped on its tail or not, should be corrected. The correction depends on the dog and the situation.

A dog that is in drive often has less reaction to pain (depending, of course, upon the dog, and the situation). If this dog had an injury to the neck that made a correction from a flat collar painful enough to escalate, become defensive, and bite, that dog would likely have been showing signs of pain prior to the correction, and would have been 'off.'

Where do we draw the line between correction and letting a dog do what it wants "because it might be hurt" ? Yes, knowing your dog is very important, understands the signs of pain, discomfort and a dog not being itself is very very important, but if you are bitten by your own dog, do you stop and wait and think for 10 minutes about "could my dog be in pain?" or do you take care of the issue?

Not knowing Carol or her dogs etc I can see where you would bring up the subject of pain/injuries to the dog being a starting point, a reason for the issue aside from dominance. BUT, many people have tried to explain the situation, and Carol herself said what happened quite well herself in the very beginning.

Why all the defense from everyone? I'm asking questions to see why the situation warranted the action. At no point in the post has anyone explained to me why taking the dog down was necessary except in basic "he was dominant" or "she knows what she's doing" or "thats how its been done". I'm fairly knowledgeable about learning theory, k9 ethology, etc and I'd like to see a real answer on why this was the best course of action. While we all (me included) have our bias's I always want to know how and why some else "does it".

What I would have done is immediately correct the dog, put him in a long down and then when I felt in control I'd take him through some obedience.

And are you really telling me that biting out of extreme pain (i.e. stepped on) is dominance? Do you think the subordinate wolf wouldn't respond with teeth when seriously bit by the alpha for no reason?

Benjamin....did you even read my original post on page 1?

I certainly did and while you explained why you did I like to see the theory/reasoning behind it.

I don't post really anything here but the way I see it is she made a spur of the moment decision on how to handle a potentially serious situation.

I don't think when you are in situations like that you can analyze theories. You just have to react. I know I've been in that situatio with my own dogs and horses. Sometimes I question what I did afterwards but I have to look at the outcome of my actions. Did it fix the problem? If Yes then it was the correct decision at that point.

Just my 2 cents.