Pat……I don’t mind at all. I know Ed has bred some good dogs, in fact I used one to breed an imported bitch I had. I do think the bitches should be titled as well as the males. But if someone is going to be critical in an article to Germany, then I think you should expect some critical evaluations in return. Sorry you took this so personally, I hope you are successful with your dogs. I appreciate your civil approach and appropriate language, very professional.

 Quote:

Originally posted by Patrick Hennigan:
).
I don't understand that just because one wants to speak the truth for betterment of the breed and sport why it has to be classified as "unprofessional". I know you addressed this Ed but it pissed me off...I'm sorry I hope yopu don't mind.
Pat

You are missing the point. I do not see where most people are calling Ed "unprofessional" because he is speaking his mind. However people are upset for not knowing what is on his mind for saying the things he has said. An empty statement regarding the lack of integrity of the head judge is concearning to some members of USA. I do not doubt much there is some substance from Ed's point of view regarding Mr. P integrity from what has been printed the vast majority of us will remain clueless. If he is such a liar, then everyone should know what to expect from him. For this reason, many find that this whole thing is nothing more then a bunch of hot air. The professional thing to do in my view, would be to state the facts, no matter how unpleasant it may or may not be to Ed. Otherwise it should have never been brought up, let alone sent overseas.

 Quote:

Originally posted by Michael Talyor Rivers:
I do not see where most people are calling Ed "unprofessional" because he is speaking his mind. However people are upset for not knowing what is on his mind for saying the things he has said. An empty statement regarding the lack of integrity of the head judge is concearning to some members of USA.

couple of things I want to touch on here, just to bring everyone back down to Earth.

1. This is Ed's discussion board, he can say what ever he pleases. It is an open tablet for HIS opinions, theories, and methods.

2. NOONE ever HAS to back up what they say, ever. Everyone is caught up in this misconception of total self importance. If you would like to know reasons, choose better "tactics" for finding out, rather than challenging.

3. Integrity problems in a manner such as this are actions over words, therefore, why not do a little research and find out what Ed is talking about (there will be records of lower level dogs getting gifts...look at scores). If noone is eager to look for themselves and form their own opinions, why should Ed spoon feed you (generally speaking)?

Now, I do have some "issues" with USCA and the WDA and how they're run, their politics, etc. I don't know much about the DVG, but seeing as we have none of the above here, I have to take what I can get to trial my dogs. I've seen some evidence of judges with "questionable integrity", and could name names, BUT, I'm not spoon feeding anyone, people need to investigate for themselves and form their own opinions, rather than wanting someone to give them everything.

Long Sorry ...Wow my ears are full and my mind swimmimg with all the back and forth about the USA Nats ,i was there and had a great time looking at dogs marking my catolog ,visiting with people i have not seen for a while .
A lot of entries yes , there were ,good dogs yes there were,average dogs yes there were,poor dogs maybe .
I watched all the judges and felt that most were very fair and across the board on there judgeing ,the helpers did a really good job,having to read so many teams.
There is always something that might or could have been better about the venue,or the organization ,but most of us go with the flow at any event.
Tracking was very disapointing as i love to watch tracking and felt the tracks were short and felt maybe they could have done better for a Nat event.
Well back to the thread IMO i think attacking DVG
USA or any other organisaztion,or personnel attacks will not change a thing ,not saying talking about it does not help,but to do it in a constructive way, meaning we might be seeing a pattern in this area ,how might we be able to make it better,and use the correct channels to change it.
From one comment ! to have dogs out that you train,or have bred and that you have titled is a great way to judge the level of one's acheivements ,but its not the only way. I would rather not judge and try to help change,its a harder way to go ,but for me it works.
But i have enjoyed reading all the posts and everyone commemts. Thanks Peter

Peter - for years people were fed up with “Paul Meloy and clan.” Well-intentioned people tried to quietly bring about change and it did not work. Nothing happened and nothing changed. You know why? People like this enjoy using their power to stay in power.

What worked was when enough people got totally pissed off and said enough is enough – they banned together and got his but tossed out of the Org. I like to think I helped start it with the articles I wrote about Meloy.

This needs to happen with Mark Przybylski - he was part of Meloy’s crew and he is a big part of the problem with USA right now. He is the head judge and he lets a select few German Judges who give out titles like toilet paper come back to this country again and again. Some of these guys are here for one reason – it’s a paid vacation. They could give a rat about the sport. These guys come over here – give titles and high scores as favors.

People need to video tape these events and send the video to the President of USA and then stream the damn video on the INTERNET. This needs to be done until it becomes and embarrassment If Przybylski were not such an incompetent gutless joke he would take care of this. Do you honestly think he is not aware of this? How many times would the HEAD JUDGE of SCHUTZHUND USA have to write a letter to the head judge and president of the SV saying "YOUR GERMAN JUDGE Mr SO & SO will never be allowed to judge in America again because he is a crook" before someone would get embarrassed and kind of thing would stop. You know why this will not happen? Because the head judge for Schutzhund USA Mark Przybylski has no INTEGIRTY.

 Quote:

Originally posted by MikeRussell:

 Quote:

Originally posted by Michael Talyor Rivers:
I do not see where most people are calling Ed "unprofessional" because he is speaking his mind. However people are upset for not knowing what is on his mind for saying the things he has said. An empty statement regarding the lack of integrity of the head judge is concearning to some members of USA.

couple of things I want to touch on here, just to bring everyone back down to Earth.

1. This is Ed's discussion board, he can say what ever he pleases. It is an open tablet for HIS opinions, theories, and methods.

2. NOONE ever HAS to back up what they say, ever. Everyone is caught up in this misconception of total self importance. If you would like to know reasons, choose better "tactics" for finding out, rather than challenging.

3. Integrity problems in a manner such as this are actions over words, therefore, why not do a little research and find out what Ed is talking about (there will be records of lower level dogs getting gifts...look at scores). If noone is eager to look for themselves and form their own opinions, why should Ed spoon feed you (generally speaking)?

Now, I do have some "issues" with USCA and the WDA and how they're run, their politics, etc. I don't know much about the DVG, but seeing as we have none of the above here, I have to take what I can get to trial my dogs. I've seen some evidence of judges with "questionable integrity", and could name names, BUT, I'm not spoon feeding anyone, people need to investigate for themselves and form their own opinions, rather than wanting someone to give them everything.

First off, I agree that this is Ed's board, and I respect the fact that we have it to discuss certain things of importance to the dog training world.

A reality check is in order. Ed has every right to say and not say what he chooses, however when issueing a statment that reflects the whole membership and USA to some degree, I feel that the correct thing to do is to state your facts. Not just bias and rude comments about a person. Like it or not this is my feeling. I do not have to agree with everything he says or for that matter what anyone else says. The same apllies for him or anyone else. This debate over weather or not Ed can train, breed or title dogs is mute to me. I could careless. I also gain nothing for asking these questions. I do not really know Mark, and have only met him twice in my life for not very long periods of time, so we are not buddies. I have no real view of his character that is set in stone. So I have no self-intrest for asking these questions.

I am sorry to say but taking the time to see scores that were not earned really is a redundant task, and when that I will not waste anytime on. This practice goes on with other judges, SV and USA the like.

Spoonfeed, the only thing that has been spoonfed is a shovel of horse manure from yourself. The very fact that Ed Frawley says so, for no real reason does not hold water for me, to make a judgement on anyone. Sorry Ed.

While again I am not doubting the fact that there is some substance to this whole thing, it would have been nice to see the facts as there was with Paul Meloy. True or False you present a case, then it can be judged.

Noone has called into question my integrity, and if they did, I would hope they would state why? Not just because I am......

 Quote:

Originally posted by MikeRussell:
people need to investigate for themselves and form their own opinions, rather than wanting someone to give them everything

Exactly!!!!!

The point of the whole article (or at least my understanding of it) is that as long as everyone sits on their collective a**es and waits to be told how things are things will never ever change.

If you are around the dog sport world long enough you will begin to see things are not always as they appear. I personally don't give a rat for politics, and I should because it's the only way to make change in any organization.

Nothing will ever change unless someone rocks the boat.............. hence Ed's article!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I've yet to compete, and now I'm asking myself is it worth the time and expenses.

Only competition from another organization will make USA change if they need to change.

I'm too confussed to even try and understand anymore. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

We will continue to train as if we are going to the NATIONALS one day!!!! Maybe by then all these issues will be resolved. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> :rolleyes:

Some thoughts about SCH and training in general. In ED´s article he mentions a lack of powerfull dogs, is this because the training-methods are weak in the aggression-part, training is mostly preybased, or is it a lack of strong dogs because the dogs lacks the genetics for true and strong aggression?

Why do powerfull dogs who shows true aggression miss points in SCH, is it because they lack a full-mouth bite and do not show the same amount of precision in the bite work as the preydogs? When reading ED´s articles about fightdrive it says that dogs working in preydrive are harder to controll(don´t want to release the prey), than dogs working in fightdrive. But if preydogs are hard to controll in bitework how come that so many SCH and ringsport dogs who works in prey shows a lot of precision in the bitework? When talking about fightdrive we mean true agression, right? But is a fightdrive dog really easy to controll, K9-officers usually says that when a dog shows real aggression it´s not so easy to controll it, I remember Helmut Raiser also mentions this in book, when he talks about aggression.

In sweden SCH and IPO are quite new sports, been around for about 10 years now. There seems to be two camps here, people who prefer the traiditional swedish protection sport, which are more close to policedog-training in style, and the SCH/IPO people. Often these two camps differ in their opinion on what aggression/defence is. The SCH/IPO people often seems to think that a dog shows agression/defence during the bark and hold, where some dogs seems very intense and jump up close to the decoys face with a rythmic bark. A friend who train in the swedish-style was at the WUSV in belgium to look at the SCH-dogs, according to him there was only one dog who was "serious" and showed some kind of aggression, this dog also lost point for this.
When the people who train the swedish-protection sport talk about aggression/defence they mean a dog that without hesitation will bite a man in whatever bodypart it can reach regardless if the man has a sleeve or not. The goal for the dog is to drive the decoy away by using his aggression.
These people are skeptical when IPO people says that their dogs are working in aggression during the bark and hold, especially when those dogs often are much trained only on a sleeve and are high in preydrive. If the dogs looks intense in bark and hold this is probably because the dog wants his toy, the sleeve, and not really works in aggression. THe dog wants his sleeve or the decoy to move, it´s a game and not a dog working in real aggression.

To put and end on this, is it common that even in the big IPO/SCH trials, few dogs shows real aggression? And you people who wants to see more powerfull SCH-dogs compete, do you want a dog that show aggression only in the Bark and hold, or also in the bitework, except when the decoy is fleeing from the dog. THe info I read about SCH is that the dog are supposed to bite in prey and only work in defence/aggressiondrive during the bark and hold, was the bitework done differently in former times in SCH?

Regards