I have no idea who the judge was. We got there late and I didn't hear any introductions. THe only thing I know about him was he spoke with a fairly thick German accent. I think that the dog got the highest score partialy based on the fact that it was an IPO III and the dog with the highest title that was there. Ther other thing that I found interesting was that even though it wasn't late they didn't work the Sch I dogs, I have no idea why.

The trials I am most familiar with are the NAPD trials. The structure is that there are 4 scenarios set up, each is worth 25 points. If the dog doesn't bite in the time allowed it gets a 0 for the excercise. If the dog is to do a call off or a bark and hold and bites it gets a 0 for the excercise. If the dog takes a 0 in any excercise, the trial can not be used as a leg for a title. In many cases the score wouldn't be qualifing any way. I have seen trials where not a single dog got a qualifying score. Either they bit when they shouldn't or didn't bite quickly enough, often because they were distracted by impediments placed there for the trial. Much different test than what I saw.

i have not seen a lot of schutzhund dogs, but i have seen a variety of types--breeds, drives, training methods.
all of them appeared to enjoy their work, and all of them either exhibited appropriate control for their level of training or they were being taught the control.
i have however seen a lot of dogs in akc obedience that appeared to not enjoy the work and that were out of control.
seeing unhappy, untrained dogs compete in akc doesn't make me want to disassociate with the sport. it makes me want to not look like them when i enter the ring.

Not surprising that it was a German judge. There are a handful of them that you see repetitively judging american trials becuz they have a rep for being Santa Claus. They enjoy coming to the US on a paid vacation, doing a little sightseeing, a little buying spree, and in return, they're happy to hand out big scores or pass dogs that have no business earning titles.

Since the dog that won was the only III there I watched fairly closely, and so I am sure I caught and noticed all the mistakes. I felt that 2 of the II's that competed did a better job in the protection. The III was also VERY mouthy with the dumb bell. As soon as the dog sat he started to mouth the dumb bell and didn't quit until it was taken (commented on by the judge). The judge also commented on the multiple commands for the dog to out, and then said he outed well. I didn't get it, but in fairness, I don't know the rules and the scoring system. As for the judging, my wife was standing next to a couple of men that seemed to know the sport. They made a guess at the score for the dog prior to it being given. The guess was 94-95 and the dog got a 96. So I don't really understand what they were looking at.

I do plan on getting a tape or two and looking at some better training and performances. From watching the dog after the trial and how it behaved off the field, I do think it was a training issue and not a dog issue. In many cases I think people get in a routine and confuse an over correction with an effective correction.

The other thing that was very obvious is that the dogs were very atuned to the routine. I think that most of the dogs could have done the trial without the hander, maybe better than with. It kind of left me with the feeling that I am not sure what the dogs would do off the field, even if threatened. But that was just a feeling and with out testing you wouldn't know. I also think that that would be a training issue, not a dog issue in all of the cases.

NAPD? Richard, if the club trial was worse than your average NAPD trial, they should burn that club to the ground, hang all the members and trialers from the bleachers by their toes, and let the dogs eat the TD, helper, club president, and judge.

Take BARF diet to the next level.


<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />


For all of those viewers who are offended by the dogs eating the people part of this post, go to http://www.dictionary.msn.com and look up the word J-O-K-E Apply its meaning to that statement. If you still are offended kiss my round, well formed, behind.

Richard, go to some more trials, I'd hate to think of you judging the rest of us that do Schutzhund on that pathetic showing. The real beauty of the sport is the spirit of the dogs harnessed by the handlers in tracking and obedience, and the controlled intense power and drive in the protection routine. You missed that beauty. I wish we all saw it at every trial.

Originally posted by Lee Baragona - Sch3FH2:
Not surprising that it was a German judge. There are a handful of them that you see repetitively judging american trials becuz they have a rep for being Santa Claus. They enjoy coming to the US on a paid vacation, doing a little sightseeing, a little buying spree, and in return, they're happy to hand out big scores or pass dogs that have no business earning titles. More truthfull words have never been spoken! I know of a trial, with a famous Santa from Germany, that this dog was trained by this Santa's good friend. The dog ran a 97 in portection. The judge announced the score, then the smaller crowd hummed and hawwed, and said what?????? It was better. Lookes like 100. He said to the crowd, everyone think so? They said yes, and he said ok 100?????

But on the flip side I have seen some sharp pencil's from Germans even in a club trial.

I have see dogs in NAPD that looked better to me, and dogs that looked much worse. I was also suprised at some of the dogs that backed off in the face of strong opposition from the agitator in NAPD. Dogs I knew well and they seemed much stronger in a familiar situation. It is a much different type of trial that the dogs can't be really prepared for in the way they can for a SchH trial. For starters you never know what will be thrown at them.

I am not totaly judging SchH on one trial at a club level. Just as I wouldn't judge an NAPD trial based on watching one trial, or 4 dogs (all I saw worked).

And not knowing the rules I may be taking a bigger hit on than the dogs, and judge, than they deserve. Like I said before, the scores that a couple of people that seemed to know the rules guessed were right in line with what the judge awarded. I wouldn't read too much in to the judges accent, there were many people there that obviously lived in town with German accents.

There were some pretty hits in the courage test, but those don't really impress me much. There is no effort for the helper to avoid the dog so it is just another routine for the dog. There was only one time that the dog was verbaly challenged by the helper in any of the bite work and no attempt to intimidate the dogs the way I am used to seeing. I was more impressed with the performance of 2 of the II's than the III. I would have graded them higher based on what I look for in a dogs performance. I am looking for something different in a dog than what seemed to be the goal based on what I have seen and heard. That doesn't make it a bad thing, just probably not for me. That is O.K., everybody doesn't have to like the same things.

A big part of my point for Doyle is that it is very easy to get an incomplete impression of what is happening based on very limited exposure, with minimal knowledge of what is being tested. It is more important to find a group that fits your needs and desires, than to fall in on a specific type of trial and then try and mold yourself to how it is done. You will just end up beating your head against a stone wall.

I first of all have to come to the defense of the TOM ROSE school. In response to "corgi power" you are wrong! Yanking on dogs and making them yelp is not"what they do at the TRS". If you were there you obviousily missed something. If your dog shut down after a year that doesnt go back to compulsion it goes back to terrible timing and no motivation. If you think akc focuses on drive and schutzhund doesnt your wrong again. If the pup has a sensitive neck flip the collar for awhile then you can go bsck to it. Its all about timing , praise and motivation. If you have a working dog and you decided to go purely motivational you have a long row to hoe. The pinch collar is not designed for pain or revenge but to get the dogs attention and make prfectly clear what you want. If its to much at first flip it and show the dog what you want then go back to it later.Im sorry you gave up so soon.Back to "corgi power" you shouldnt say things like that about TRS ,like you have that kinda authority

I think you're targeting the wrong audience - Corgipower didn't say anything about Tom Rose; that was Doyle, and the guy can say anything he wants to since he was the one who was there and took the lessons!

Richard
I also went to my first schutzhund(DVG) trial. I saw pretty much what I expected, and saw for years in AKC obd. There are teams who are good enough for national competition, and teams (Handlers mostly) who should go buy a turtle. I suppose that is the norm in any type of competition. I was lucky enough to se a Midwest Regional for my first trial, and although the top 2-3 were fantastic, there were a few who shouldn't own a dog. I'm looking forward to when I can start schutzhund training. I was very fortunate with the obd club I belonged to. The club had 6 of the first 10 OTCH titles in the state of Missouri. We still had people who were lucky to get a CD after 8-10 trys.