The question I have Does this dogs previous training conflict with what is expected for the B&H in Sch. My understanding is this was Glock's second or third training session for Sch. Here's a link to some of Glock and his littermate Gunslinger previous training.

http://shkola-orlova.ru/video/

Ed and Kevin, it appears in these videos above the dogs were trained more for police or security work rather than sport. If the dog only had a few training sessions for schutzhund is it possible the dog simply didn't know what was expected of him.

As someone with limited knowledge on bite training I ask why wasn't the handler keeping a closer eye. Why didn't the helper or TD demand better control for safety. Since, Alex bred the dog that bit him and surely knew the training background of Glock why would he use his fist to correct. In a couple of the videos found on the link above you'll see Glock bite a passive helper in waist and chest deep water. With a dog that is new to schutzhund from this type of training previously be expected to bite an unjust correction from helper. I saw the bite was not to the forearm but closer to the hand. Shouldn't Alex just slipped the sleeve, gone over to the handler and said put the dog back on the leash and let's work control, positioning and targeting. Until, he knows what is expected of him.

 Quote: Ed Frawley

... a very very aggressive dog can often be very very insecure dog.

Ed

Words to live by.

As in humans dominance is very difficult to quantify as *dominant* and *dominant aggressive* are two different behaviors, the former being a personality type and the latter an anxiety disorder

How is it Mike that all the threads become about you? Frankly it is really annoying when a poster subverts threads to always be about themselves. Here was a thread that was about a dog-inflicted injury and now it is not about dog character and training options as it is about what you do with dogs???

Now I might be off here but it seems that in light of the fact that other threads are about your PPD business, and the youtube videos are designed to bring in the viewers regardless of verbage that what we have here is self promotion.

That somewhat subverts the purpose of this board. So you are granted that break Mike.

"Ed and Kevin, it appears in these videos above the dogs were trained more for police or security work rather than sport. If the dog only had a few training sessions for schutzhund is it possible the dog simply didn't know what was expected of him. "

Well, it is possible a number of things came up. that the dog was allowed to move about on grips in the past giving the dog that solution to what it saw as a problem, it could have been that in the past a lot of pressure was put on thedog for biting when it should have been barking and didn't understand its mistake, it could have been veery new to the work of barking in the blind and felt it was odd that the bad guy wasn't meeting a bite with a fight, but all in all it seems better coordination between decoy and handler would be nice especially if the dog is such a serious dog.

i work a number of serious as a heart attack dogs that would not have behaved that way even if there was a whip or stick used to remind them to bark at the decoy with seriousness and but if that was the case the stick correction is never used to remove a dog from the grip, but is done to keep them from crossing a threshold into biting. like I have said, there can be some very important attributes in the B&G work that are enabled with a stick. It is not usually the way we maintain it anymore for the long run. I often do not use it at all with the sport dogs but frequently begin it or add it for many service dog, at least for a time period. But, this is a really bad example....or a good one to learn from...in regards to its application.

If the handler and decoy cannot get it together and the decoy is having to train the dog from the front only then I suggest that an e-collar be used. It is by far the easiest way to get the timing down. We can get into a lot of variations on the theme for teaching the B&G here. It could be a vast topic in and of itself. Goals in this arena change basedon the sport, the dog, the decoy, and handler, as well as the fel the group that trains is trying to acheive with its work.

 Quote: Kevin Sheldahl

The chase the weapon hand theory....not a good one. For years some police organizations promoted this approach and couldn't explain what really was happening on actual captures. It just didn't work. Now lets go back to K. Most, he had it right many moons ago. If you have to deal with a weapon, avoidance is best, most away from it not to it. Now lets look at Most's credentials, he is known as the father of the modern police dog,began many military and police dog programs, he also was involved in the largest study on tracking dogs ever conducted, he also set up the standards for hunting dogs in Germany. Today in police service we do not see this sort of training Most was doing, due to a variety of non-dog training issues that have come up. Maybe it is too bad as I still believe it would be a viable approach to most applications patrol dogs face.

I understand that some trainers believe this is never a good thing to teach and I respect that school of thought. I also understand that it is no longer a technique used in law enforcement K9 training. It's been 15 yrs since I retired from law enforcement and 10 yrs since I last trained it with a PPD, so it was some time ago that I was seeing it and doing it. With that said, many police K9 injuries and deaths that I'm aware of are from getting shot or stabbed with the suspect's free hand after the initial bite, which I think played a big role in the advent and proliferation of K9 body armor.

Phil,
Certainly we have seen an increase in the body armor for dogs. We have seen no study on the efficacy of the armor! I don't even have any anecdotal statistics on saves by the stuff. I do have one for my dog and frankly, I almost never use it as I can see more situations in regular deployment where it hinders and even renders the search unsafe for the dog.

As far as the weapon hand thing all that really happens is the dog learns to chase the hand that moves or the arm that moves, it is nothing more than another disguised transfer of bite approach to training dogs. Asking a dog to truly identify a weapon is not possible. It really goes against what we are trying to accomplish with a dog in the guise of PP or service work. Even the sport is reflective of practical work and not a single one appreciates a dog that releases and re-engages on its own. In fact you will hear a collective moan in the audience when it happens.

Looking at situations over the years it just doesn't work like one would think on first thought. In fact there is a strong argument that transferring looses control and what are we seeking to do but not afford an opportunity is for the bad guy to gain an edge. Long time trainers of combatives know that loosing contact with a bad guy is an opportunity for them to adjust and is ill advised unless you are getting out of there at that moment.

In the past the German customs (zoll) did training where the dog was to avoid any forward assault by a subject, they circled away from the threat indicating the presence of that threat by barking. Some believed these "stick shy" dogs to be inferior, but if you look at the application which was first and foremost to warn a lone handler of the presence of a human/s in the patrol area this made sense since bad guys just killed the ones that bit. With all the training in the world to grab a weapon hand no dog can see the blade or pistol rise from below them, they just ain't got eyes on their chest. So this technique of circling and indicating and frankly cheap shoting from behind worked for that specific deployment for customs handlers. The historic mission of the Zoll patrol dog handlers is all but gone from what I understand and so has this training. But, I think it is of historical significance and who knows, some day may come back into use.

 Quote: Kevin Sheldahl

Phil,
Looking at situations over the years it just doesn't work like one would think on first thought. In fact there is a strong argument that transferring looses control and what are we seeking to do but not afford an opportunity is for the bad guy to gain an edge. Long time trainers of combatives know that loosing contact with a bad guy is an opportunity for them to adjust and is ill advised unless you are getting out of there at that moment.

I agree (now). Training always evolves and hopefully we all learn and get smarter and better. As I'm jumping into Ringsport for the first time, I know that even a readjustment of a bite is an opportunity for the decoy to get away.

Back to the video, I think we can all agree that the helper's attempt at a correction was ill-advised and poorly executed. He may be a good helper (I don't know him) but he certainly made a mistake there. I think everyone would also probably agree that there was definitely poor communication between handler and helper.