"becuuse I DEMAND so much PERFECTION...That it has to be counter-acted through a LACK of repetition..."
Are there any other trainers out there that use "lack of repitition" to create a reliable and predictable canine? This is one of the dumbest things I think I've ever read. Does anyone know of a discipline where they "demand" perfection and do not use repitition to attain it?
I'm curious if any of you folks adhere to this philosophy.
too much repetition can often create problems in many areas, if not well thought out. especially with compound behaviors, this is why people often backchain the training, and work individual parts much more often than repeat full behaviors very often.
I was raised a classical pianist. When I was fifteen I could play "Moonlight Sonata" all eighteen pages and three movoments. Each movement a different and increasingly faster tempo. The third movement is "presto" and incredibly difficult.
To this day I compose music and learn difficult instrumental pieces from Classical to Ethnic.
Without repitition, quality is somewhat attainable in your comfort zone with minimal reps, but when you add the stressors of real life...it does not hold up.
Practice and repition does not make perfect. Perfect practice, and perfect repetition makes perfect.
All the best dog trainers I've learned from adhere to breaking any behavior down into pieces and perfecting each piece before ever putting them together. Then when the pieces are put together..the performance must be perfectly reinforced and perfectly practiced under stressful and unfamiliar settings. When the performance is consistent under different setting and stresses...then you have excellence/perfection.
Can you please explain why perfect repetition can create problems and exactly what some examples of those "many areas" are.
Anyone who is going to meld all the pieces together at once to train is halfassing each step. Therefore, it's not the repetition that should be disqualified...moreso the sub-par teaching of any behavior.
So, please...why is repititon specifically not a good thing?
I never said repetition specifically is not a good thing. re-read what I wrote.
nore was I saying that anything is wrong with perfect practice.
what I said was:
too much repetition can often create problems in many areas, if not well thought out.
under your application of word usage, and misinterpreting what I said, one could infer that once a dog knows a whole sport routine, that then one should if they want it to be reliable, go out and perfrom the whole routine every time they train.
do the people you learn from stop training the parts once they master the whole?
do they go out and train full send outs with the down everytime they train the send out? I highly doubt it.
Once a dog knows how to call off of a bite and return to the handler in a finish position for a stopped attack, do the people you know, go out and repeat doing stopped attack to finish drills, or call offs in general, 10 times in a row? no I doubt it, not if they still want the dog to perform the face attacks anyways.
another area would be defense work, too much repetive use of defense work, can cause a whole host of problems, especially if done in a repetious fashion.
Another area would be the outs, training outs repetitiously can affect different dogs in different ways, do the police dog trainers that you know go out and train using the out every time the dog gets a bite, I doubt it.
say I wanted to train my dog to try to kill you, or at least seriously mess you up. I put you in a hidden suit, and you break in the house, how many reps do you think we should do? 1-2-10-20? too many reps will confuse the dog..how many days in a row should we do that? everyday, is repetition the best approach in your mind?
another area would be when a dog has certain natural strengths and the training being worked on inhibits those strengths, or alters the expression of those traits.
muzzle work...hidden equipment, more reps is not always better..the lists goes on and on
repetition can cause boredom, complacency, anticipation, conflict,doubt, and a few other things I am sure I am forgetting to mention. once a behavior is at the pinnacle, where you want it, repeating it over and over, is not always a good thing.
I gave my answer, I am not looking to get into a compound discussion, where additional qualifiers are added in every exchange.
where is the source of the quote you pulled? I assume it was from Dominic Donovan, what thread was it from? I think it would possibly shed some light on the subject to see it in its context, to try to derive what he meant by that statment, instead of parcing out the use of one simple word.
well..someone please correct me if i am wrong...but when you want to get down to absolute basics..doesn't the whole 'big secret' to dog training boil down to repetition and consistency? that goes for scentwork..obedience and protection.. obviously one will vary many things once the dog knows the behavior we are asking..but...if you don't use repetition..how do you expect any kind of reliable result?
I just figured out where Mati was going with this topic, must have pulled a quote from Donovan, read more into it than was really there, added some spin to it, and twised it, in another tiresome attempt to point out his opinion that Dominic is a stupid man that does not know how to train dogs.
of course repetition is used for lots of things.
I can't speak for Dominic as to what he actually was trying to convey, and cant find the post where it was taken out of its context, so I wont even try to guess at it.
One thing I would bet money on is that Dominic could train a dog to be better and more reliable than Mati, and I dont know either of them.
Does anyone know if Mati has any videos avaialable for viewing of his training?
Mati is looking through the SPORT viewer of dog training. Repetition is required to perfect a SPORT routine such as SchH. What Donovan is saying and I agree w/to a DEGREE is; too much training teaches the dog that the work is not real.
IME, to prep for real protection work; exposure, testing and proofing are critical [none of which are done in SchH]and repetition is potentially counter productive. A shitty decoy can teach a dog almost instantly that the training is a game. There are very few decoys who can convey any realness to a dog.
There are some dogs though which will kill ur ass despite knowing that the training's just training but again... most of them don't do well in sleeve sport.
I can agree with this, I have bantered back and forth with Dom on this, we agree mostly, with a few exceptions to the rules, depending on the dogs, and the training.
I am fairly sure that my dog knows that there is a difference between training and real life. I highly doubt the fact that I do some sporty type work with the dog, in addition to the other stuff, that when it is time to sink some teeth into someone, that she will think it is a game.
But then again, I always try to get dogs that will fight someone pretty seriously with hardly any training at all to begin with.
So for me, it works, I have had to use my dogs for real, and they never let me down.
Police dog trainers do bitework all the time, and the dogs still engage and fight, and will protect the handler and the home or car as well..the good dogs anyhow..
for me the dog itself has a much higher % in the equation than the training. I would also say that the dog does not look at it like just playing a game, at training, most of the time though will concede that the dog knows it is not life or death.
I like to view it as comparable to MMA training, it is not a game, and it certainly doesnt hurt the guys chances if getting into a real fight on the street. In the ring, he knows the rules and follows them, outside the ring, all those extra skills he can also use if needed and he is not bound by the rules that he is in the ring.
I have yet to own a dog that I had to allow to attack a person for real, think it was a game. Or had a dog that would not bite a careless decoy for real, even in sporty type training.
seen lots of sport dogs that will mess someone up really good if needed, just a guess, but I have worked with quite a few.
I do a few additional things, and sporty type work. works for me and the dogs I have owned, but then again I am not looking for perfect sport performance either.
I think we pretty much agree, and yes I have seen plenty of dogs that are titled that I would not depend on to save my ass as well. there is something about a dog to respect though that looks at an agitator like he is a bunny rabbit, or is not threatened by him at all..
dog bites in prey/fight, defense, rage, whatever, as long as he engages aggressively,and stays in the fight, that is the bottom line, if called upon for real..
Dont take this to mean that I think what Dominic and Mark are saying is all BS, or that I dont mostly agree with them. The theory and methodology in what they are saying, I agree with for the most part. (about the training for real world protection)
I just dont like to see absolutes for the most part, put forth, generalizations made, and try to offer an honest and opposing viewpoint, not just trying to play devil's advocate either.
Just giving my personal views as it relates to me and my dogs. The type of dogs that I like to own, I would not recommend for most people, whichever breed it is, I try to get dogs that fit into the 1%'er club for sure, always looking very hard to find specific types of dogs that I like..Most of the dogs I have gotten in the last 15 yrs or so have been ready to put people in the hospital at 6-7-8-9 months of age, so my personal dogs are not a reflection of what most dogs out there are like.
I dont like seeing generalizations made on any subjects concerning sport, or PP, from either side.
The theories behind what Dominic and Mark are saying, I agree with for the most part. I see "PP" dogs all the time, that being trained in a more "sporty" way, that are really just more sporty type dogs, without the sport or the titles that go with it. I also see people working dogs at various clubs that in my opinion do not know how to read dogs very well, or use good techniques that will bring out what I think a dog should have if being used for real PP type stuff, that even with all of the training, the dogs are not prepared well. And have seen lots of dogs at training that I would also not count on, whether that is based on the genetics, or the raising, or the training..
so yes we should all be able to agree on the above post, but just dont take that to mean that I disagree with the other viewpoints, as I have seen lots of dogs and training that were far underpar, and when applied to certain types of dogs, that are not either just nasty enough dogs, or the 1% type super solid "for real" working bred dog, I agree with much of what Dominic and Mark are saying.
I dont agree with generized comments about sport work, dogs, or sport people, and also dont agree with generalized comments about PPD work, PPD dogs, or PPD people..
People and dogs are all different for sure, and I try to see it and talk about it from all sides, and do think that lots of people have pretty closed minds and strong opinions that are based on their experiences, which is fine with me, just as long as people are not making claims of absolution about various subjects.
Posted by MaTi on April 11, 2013, 14:59:42, in reply to "Mati,"
That is exactly my point. I don't play the sides game either and I could care less who you agree with. What interests me is reality not fantasy. Dom lives in a fantasy world where he fabricates what he calls truth. Mark is a jerk that will say some stupid shit just to oppose.
You on the other hand are very sensible. I could go copy and paste from your original response above I just will write instead I agree on enough of your perspective of how repitition executed poorly will ruin behavior, clarity, and consistency. I also respect your insight and agree that ultimatums and blanket statements are bullshit. Aloha
I don't look at it as a sport or game you idiot. It's fkn work. It's 100% enjoyable in the end but doesn't ever have to be fun. You have no idea what I ask of a dog nor Mark Chaffin, Anne Kent or Dave Kroyer.
You insult hundreds of men n women with your selfish blanket statements. You are truly sad.
Come with the stupid joke now. As usual.
Re: no im not
Posted by MarkB on April 9, 2013, 15:21:18, in reply to "no im not"
yes u are/do because u have no clue about anything but sport, sport.
Clarification for Mati
Posted by Alex M on April 9, 2013, 16:04:54, in reply to "Re: no im not"
Posted by DONOVAN on April 9, 2013, 9:18 am
ONR OF THE problems that face serious dog trainers, is that REPETITION is required to LEARN a particular behavior(repetition is the MOTHER of all learning "THOMAS EISON")....YET...too many repetitions creats "SIDE EFFECTS" where the dog either loses/weakens the "instinctive" part(such as in PROTECTION) or where the dog starts to "expect" a certain "series" of events which leads the animal to begin to "anticipate" his behaviors and starts to do things BEFORE we tell him in expectation. THIS is why TOO MUCH OUTTING "FOR EXAMPLE" will effect the BITE of the dog!..He "EXPECTS" to be called off!...so...as the decoys slows or stops fighting...the dog BEGINS to let go automatically.....or bites half hearted....ALSO...in dealing with CHANGE of position....if we change the position TOO OFTEN...The dog will begin to change the position WITHOUT a command!....similar problem I see in RECALL...as a matter of "lazyness" many trainers leave the dog in a "down" or other position....wait a sort of predictable ammount of time...and then CALL THE DOG!...This renders the "ABSTENTION" or "staying" part of the exercise "un-reliale"..because the dog "EXPECTS" to be called!...we need to often RETURN to the dog instead...ONCE the required "recall" is mastered.......many behaviors need to be practiced INFREQUENTLY...in order to avoid these UNDESIRABLE SIDE EFFECTS....of TOO many repetitions....
Anticipation. It exists in every step of trainin with a good dog and it resides with a proactive v.s reactive dog much more than the repetition itself. Repetition is crucial for any reliable and consistent performance.
Good dogs anticipate after two reps. Anything can become a habit(anticipation) with a proactive dog in two reps. There's much more involved in repetition than doing the exact same thing exactly over and over again. Tempo, location, changing from R to L back to front all are included. Repetition doesn't mean the setup is identical but the behavior is.
I can do five outs in an open fiels perfectly and you tell me the dog is going to anticipate the sixth...the sixth and seventh reps we do in the bushes with a little more pressure/different enviro but the actual rep of outting on commmand and the perfect out to guard will often be better(progressed) than the outs on field..from there you can explode escaping back onto the feild for another 8th out(rep) far beyond where you thought the dog would anticipate and watch the consistency unfold in the dogs behavior where the 8th rep will bring some of intensity from the previous two and on the field it looks better than the first five clean reps.
The repetition is the out on command..but the setup changes. Repetition is crucial for understanding your dogs thresholds, comprehension and commitment.
I get it, he read it here and tried to explain himself there and you brought it over as if it explained HOW YOU GET PERFECTION THROUGH LACK OF REPS. All it explains is ANTICIPATION which is an elementary concept most all us grasp already.
No insight there.
Re: Alex M?
Posted by joby1 on April 11, 2013, 23:55:20, in reply to "Alex M? "
that is post copy of Dominics board. too clarify what I was asking about on here..this is a crosspost to try to explain where he was coming from, since you chose to pull a quote out of context and NOT provide original context, even when requested.
Re: Alex M?
Posted by MaTi on April 12, 2013, 15:00:58, in reply to "Re: Alex M? "
I didn't pull anything out of context and you can save your drama for yourself. Joby, Alex or whomever you claim you are at the time I could really care less.
You're going to explain where he's coming from when you don't know where or when it came from. That's some talent.
Re: Alex M?
Posted by Alex M on April 12, 2013, 17:52:59, in reply to "Re: Alex M? "
Dude chill out. The cross post was made by me in order for everyone to be able to see the original text. You took what Dom said out of context and ran with it.Thats a very unsportsman-like behavior for a sports guy. By the way, what are doing lurking on Donovan's site if you no longer read anything he says?
Re: Alex M?
Posted by MaTi on April 12, 2013, 18:46:36, in reply to "Re: Alex M? "
Chill out? It's a beautiful day in Hawai`i Nei, I'm chill as it gets. I teach all week Friday is my day to chill. Hey drama queen, You didn't post the original text. I took nothing out of context.
The question was simple..how do you arrive at perfection without no repetition?
What are you doing lurking here? I've read his hype and con-act for years and continue to do so quite transparently. He's the lying fool that thinks anybody believes he doesn't read my posts. Really I question him not for his lies and duck and dodge action.. I ask for the sake of critical thinking.
Re: Alex M?
Posted by MarkB on April 13, 2013, 9:38:23, in reply to "Re: Alex M? "
Mati, you're a teacher? If so, that would explain why u whine like a liberal.
Re: Alex M?
Posted by MaTi on April 13, 2013, 22:51:33, in reply to "Re: Alex M? "
Mark are you a Dickhead? That would explain why you make such ignorant comments. I'm not liberal or conservative, there's more than one way to skin a kitten. I have third and fourth graders that act more adult than you.
Re: Alex M?
Posted by MarkB on April 13, 2013, 23:56:59, in reply to "Re: Alex M? "
Ah, my intuition was right again!
Re: no im not
Posted by bigdawgbigteeth on April 9, 2013, 18:55:19, in reply to "Re: no im not"
I don't believe that at all Mark... I am putting money on MaTi knowing more than a thing or two about turning out a dog that is not only balanced..but is active in aggression not reactive and dependant on a helper to light them up...
Of course..one must have the raw material to work with at the start...but you should try to keep an open mind..there are plenty of 'sport' people who don't aim for a pattern trained dog..they seek balance..they use schutzhund in the manner it was originally used..as a breed suitability test..but of course..it's just one tool in the bag to work with..sport work just enables the rest of us schmucks to have a format to train and measure our training against a set international standard..
A visit to a good schutzhund club might open quite a few of your eyes..there is a whole lot of muzzle, suit and hidden sleeve work that goes on in most serious working clubs across the country..
I am curious..why is it..the same people that will bash sport training are usually the same ones that turn around and rage about how 'great' all their dogs are and how many titles they earned?
knowing who MaTi has trained with..I can guarantee you that those people know how to finish a dog up nicely as well..and it will bite very much for real..and stay in the fight..and they would be handling 'sport dogs' at the time..
Re: no im not
Posted by MarkB on April 9, 2013, 19:29:49, in reply to "Re: no im not"
I've seen good sport dogs and good sport clubs including SchH. They are few and far between [including good suit sport dogs/clubs] but I agree they DO exist.
I just don't think Mati has a grasp of protection work and how it differs from SchH as a SPORT. Nor does he express any real knowledge of anything beyond sport. JMHO
same old stuff.....
Posted by Peter Cho on April 10, 2013, 14:19:58, in reply to "Re: no im not"
First, I have done PP, paid customers. sold PP dogs. I have done PSA and ring. Both suit work and sleeve. TRUST me on this. The suit is NOT more real, as many on here think. In ring, the suit is used all the time.....do you think this makes it more real???? This is not a guess....this is a fact...
hidden suit work is the ONLY way to proof your PP dog.
In schuzhund, we use the sleeve. But we do use the body suit on occasion to balance the dog. Now, a dog that always works on helper with sleeve is given a chance to bite the body. This is meaningful. Much more so than any PP or ring or mondio training that uses the suit all the time. YOU really know if it will engage. Granted, some dogs work great in prey. With all the attraction training and helper work.......what happens when the dog does go into defence............real defence. I can honestly tell you from experience that threshhold for a dog is crutial for real PP work. It is funny nobody talks about threshhold of a dog in PP forum. Pain, handler, stress, etc. Again, this concept of threshhold is what is TESTED in schutzhund. I guess that is why I love the sport. Done correctly, it is THE EASIEST TO TRANSFER TO PP APPLICATION.
Any paid client will tell you and if you are a consultant to your customers, CONTROL over your pp is vital. This is real world. I have personally lost 30 grand from a bite. And he did out perfectly.
I honestly feel a pp trainer must compete in sport at the highest level possible not because you want to do sport, but to validate your training theories and ideas. manipulation of drives and animal behavior theory is universal. Granted, making money sometimes takes time away from training for yourself. That is reality. And really schutzhund is a brutally hard sport if you want to do it right.
I can tell you that I have only met Mati once at a trial he was doing helper work for. I am sure he has a good grasp of protection work theory.
Making a dog crazy ape nuts is not hard. That is why I think it is comical to see dogs shown constantly on the post, or helpers doing rabbit work. Seeing a dog in FULL an absolute control WITH explosive power ON COMMAND.....now that is impressive, in PP or sport.
Poor suit work can produce an even LESS real dog than good sleeve work. At least w/ the sleeve the helper/decoy can slip it and have NO equipment remaining on their person.
My point is more w/the person than the venue... but still, there's little doubt in my mind that PSA for example has more members [% wise that is]working in real protection than SchH does.
Mati has admitted to NOT being familiar w/protection work not too long ago right here on this board so I don't know what you thought you saw..and listening to him here, he tends to reconfirm that frequently!
I admitted I've been assessed by five or more judges on my helper "trial" work and my helper training. I did 90% of the foundation work and definately fixed what the other helpers didn't help later in his career.. to get the first AB here in Hawaii to a Sch111. Helluva dog, really good handling.
Why don't you pull up that quote Mark? You are really pathetic..
Posted by MarkB on April 11, 2013, 16:11:41, in reply to "Pffffff!"
If the board was archived I would pull the quote. Others remember it too Mati, not just me.
Congrats on the helper work. That's great w/i the scope of sport but you're STILL confusing SPORT w/actual Protection otherwise you wouldn't have even mentioned that.
I know you play SchH. You had been playing in it for some time when u admitted not being well versed in the ways of protection.
Again...they are not the same. My having to tell you that tells us that u don't understand the difference!
Posted by MaTi on April 12, 2013, 14:56:19, in reply to "Re: Pffffff!"
Mark you don't need to tell me anything. You've proven what a fool you are right there.
manipulation of drives and animal behavior theory is universal.
Manipulating a dogs actions while the dogs(thinking) brain is essentially not even controlling its own body movements can be done. (the positive for Admin. E-dog)
But this practice is not in any way a universal application for training,nor is it needed by a human to train a dog. (often taken online as a negative/diss by some )
Animal Behavior Theory is a broad umbrella,and of course dogs fall under it.......but Domestic Dog is a whole different animal then the rest of them.Their motivation and communication to Man is on a whole 'nother level.......simple minded,but intelligent and straight forward,after thousands of years,they still try their best to get us to understand them (thee opinion))
Peter, although I do agree with almost all of this post, I have a couple thoughts to provoke here on a few sentences, in the spirit of offering another valid viewpoint.
The bitesuit can also be used as a REAL testing tool, if used properly as a test and very infrequently...When you guys use the suit in your IPO training, is it a hidden suit?
If you take a dog that has never even seen a bite suit, and test him in a suit, the suit is real, as real as a hidden suit.
Hidden equipment can also become as NON-real as a visible sleeve can if one really thinks about it.
There are also non-classical prey dogs that will engage people, and not show defensive signs, prey coupled with strong nerves and aggression, is not always play..although those dogs are very rare.
I have no problems with IPO, but to say it is the easiest to transfer to PP may or may not be true. The sport doesnt matter much, the type of dogs matter more I think, and the training, any good NVBK,KNPV dog from serious people will most likely put a real bad hurting on someone, even if he has never been put into defense. Hell many dogs from good bloodlines dont even need training to protect,guard, or bite...they need training NOT to bite... if you have a dog that is bred to have propensity to want to fight people, and is civil, the sport is not going to matter.
I can also say I dont agree that a PP trainer has to compete in a sport at the highest level, and that validation is not something that everyone is out there trying to get. Some people just do not have the interest in competing in a dogsport. Who really cares about validation, unless it is to get more respect from people, or more clients? I dont train dogs to get validation from people.
Validation can also come from the dog acutally doing what the training was intended to do, which may not be sport related at all. I trained up alot of PP dogs, I never competed in a sport, and although it is true that very very few PP dogs ever get really tested in real life, I have had more than a few that I have owned and trained that have validated themselves very well.
Like I said I agree with what you are saying mostly, but there are always exceptions.
what is impressive in PP is that the dog performs for real when needed, engages powerfully, sinks the teeth in, and stays in the fight, no matter where that is coming from prey/fight, defense, or even rage... Real PP is not really a standard of what is impressive in training. It is not about being impressive to dog trainers, it is about being effective when called upon..There are great herders out there as well, that simply show almost zero signs of defense, even when under pressure and pain, it is fight.
Although I do admit I like to see dogs that are impressively trained, there are a whole lot of dogs that will take someone out, that are not impressively trained, like a good top level real deal sport dog is.
With the right dogs, it often does not take much training in the bite work, it can be simply training the dog NOT to bite.
I like to do bitework, I like to be impressed, that does not mean that a dog that is not all that impressive at training by dog training standards will not make an proficient protection dog.
I have worked quite a few dogs that take the training as 100% serious, they know what the equipment is and try to bypass it, get around it, and dogs that are only safe to work in a full suit, by experienced decoys/agitators.
A friend of mine has a dog like this, that I did put training on later after he got a "street dog" foundation from the ever talked about "street trainers". I calmed him down and was able to get him slightly more focused on the equipment, attempted to get more balance, for training purposes, becuase the owner wanted to compete at PP events (mostly sport without the sport type events). that dog was not safe to really work, was not impressive with his grip, or his entries, and was certainly not a calm dog, but an excellent PP dog, if you tried to work him in just a sleeve, it was 50/50 you would be using that sleeve to try to keep the dog off of your balls, or your stomach. He also knew what the suit was, and would try to get around it, often tried to nose his way under the jacket.
An impressive dog, not really by most peoples standards, but he sure as hell impressed the people he has put in the hospital when he was used for real..
training is training, competing is competing, having and training a dog to really engage real people, can be compatible with lots of training, and even sport competiton, but neither is really neccessary with the right dogs, if the people involved are only interested in having a realiable PP dog.
here is some footage of the dog not really impressive, but anyone that chooses to put themselves in a situation where he would be allowed to attack them, would be very sorry.
He is the second dog in this clip, (NOT the malinois, another dog I would never choose to mess with in real life, that also has no sport titles, trained by a good trainer that has no real desire to compete in dogsports, and I dont think ever titled a dog.)The dog is not dragging the guy to the ground to play with him or the suit, you'll just have to trust me on that one. And the mal isnt trying to play with the suit either, again you'll just have to trust me on that one. Both dogs were trained by trainers that never competed in any sports, and both dogs have performed very well in real occurances. That is thier validation, not whether they are impressive to dog trainers, or anyone else.
here is 360 work, a video that usually gets a terrible reaction from sport people, telling me how stupid it looks and how ghetto it is, I know the dog is basically posted and somewhat nutty, but he will certainly bite for real and has several times. Impressive, not really, but the goal was not to impress people, or get any validation from anyone other than guys that the dog needed to bite, or scare off with an active alert, which he has done, and it has validated him.
Validation? by who? for who? and for what? that is the quesion.. Dogs dont need validation, people often do though, it feels nice to be validated for sure But I know of at least a dozen people personally that have never competed in any sport that can put together and excellent protection dog that can be counted on for real, and I am sure there are 100's more that I dont know.
Again not knocking sport or anything you said, just offering another opinion, from an un-validated person.
Thresholds are a whole nuther topic, why do people that are just training a dog for protection really need to talk about various thresholds really, if they are not breeding working dogs, or involved the dogs in rigorous stressful training programs, I love to talk thresholds personally, but if I have a dog that will bite a passive person, with or without equipment, and will also fight a person that is fighting back, in various settings and environments, and the dog is controllable enough and handled responsibly to keep innocent people safe, what do I really need to talk about? what more do I need for PP? Do I care if the dog can undergo the stresses of rigorous training programs to be able to compete at high sport level, not really, if PPD is my only concern.
"There are also non-classical prey dogs that will engage people, and not show defensive signs, prey coupled with strong nerves and aggression, is not always play..although those dogs are very rare."
That is the dog I prefer.
"here is 360 work, a video that usually gets a terrible reaction from sport people, telling me how stupid it looks and how ghetto it is, I know the dog is basically posted and somewhat nutty, but he will certainly bite for real and has several times. Impressive, not really, but the goal was not to impress people, or get any validation from anyone other than guys that the dog needed to bite, or scare off with an active alert, which he has done, and it has validated him."
What was the goal? I see prey movement from agitator and mild stim with distractions and no pressure.