IPO-R title - Page 7

I hope this helps.
HGH is fully acknowledged, no difference to IPO.
Please don´t forget - there is some ( mediocre ) bitework within the HGH trial, and the breed survey FOR ALL DOGS IS THE  SAME INCLUDING BITEWORK.

Momosgarage stated:

@clc29  I agree and I also mentioned the "liability issues" of bite-work training a million posts earlier in this thread, but I would add that there is a subtle difference between the "explosive" type drive needed to do protection phase and the "endurance" type drive needed to a 2000 paces track in an RH.  From my experience a high "endurance" drive dog doing FH trials really well, can go on to be a mediocre or better IPO-3 dog, but not many top IPO-3 sport dogs can go on to be good at long 2000 paces tracking.  A Tr3 equivalent track is certainly no FH or RH, heck its not even close to an AKC TDX or VST title.  There is a TOTALLY different thought process going on in the dogs brain as far as I can tell.  Same goes for herding, these dogs can certainly do IPO-3 titles, they may not be the best, but they can do it, good luck getting those IPO-3 bred sport dogs to do herding at the HGH level.

All anecdotal on my part, so I would agree before people start getting upset that there are "exceptions to the rule" and that "my personal experience is not universal".

Anecdotal is correct, I assume you are basing your statement on "tesimonal and not testing?"  What is your personal experience?  You posts on other topics place a great deal of emphasis on your college classes regarding behavior and you are quick to mock those that have actual training experience but lack the vernacular that you learned in "your classes."  My experience, actual hands on experience, shows that dogs with "explosive drive" for bite work coupled with high prey and hunt drive make excellent tracking dogs.  The endurance needed to complete a one or two mile track is a combination of conditioning, training and the dogs drives.  Most if not all "top IPO" dogs could certainly complete an FH or FH 2 track with the proper training and time investment.  Tracking is the most natural thing a dog can do; dogs that can not perform in bite work can certainly be taught to track.  Virtually any dog, of most any breed can be taught to track, tracking is really not that hard.  The biggest issue for an IPO trained dog to do a VST is the foundation training on grass and foot step tracking.  When you look at the dogs doing the TDX and VST trials few are German Shepherds.  It is an all breed event and many different breeds compete.  I regularly train one mile hard surface tracks with my dog in 90 degree temperatures.  We cover several surfaces from busy streets, parking lots and fields.  My longest track to an apprehension was just under two miles, this alone does not make my dog breed worthy.  We have many "explosive drive" dogs in my unit that perform the "protection phase" at the end of very long tracks.  Tracking in my opinion, while an essential skill is not a suitable test for the breed worthiness of a GSD.  An HGH title would mean more to me than a tracking title.    

As some have said before and I agree,  an IPO title alone does not mean a dog is breed worthy, a TDX, VST, or RH certainly does not mean a dog is breed worthy.  A V rated conformation dog with an IPO 1 is probably not breed worthy in my book.  It is the rare dog that is so spectacular in it's work, in it's temperament, it's structure and drive that should be considered breed worthy.  Most dogs fall short of this mark, IMHO.  Titles alone do not make a dog breed worthy, it is a start.  The dog must be exceptional overall, more than just in conformation or working ability.  If the dog is marginal in most of these areas then it simply should not be bred.  If a GSD lacks the nerve, hardness or drive to be titled to an IPO 1 then it probably shouldn't be bred, IMO.  
 

If a GSD lacks the nerve, hardness or drive to be titled to an IPO 1 then it probably shouldn't be bred, IMO.  

yes, but not "probably"....
 

That is what I meant, susie.  

The dogs that impress me the most are the ones that do it all well like the Quasliner dogs linked above. Multiple HGH qualifiers,  SCH 3's, advanced obedience, some are guide dogs now. It's the versatility of the breed that sets it apart from the rest of the working dogs and that's what I think makes a GSD breedworthy.

Blitzen
Quite an interesting letter i note the bit about Bite work and the need not to bite However to gain a Korung with an IPO dog they first must walk off leash at the handlers leg and without warning from behind a blind helper appears and threatens the dog, the dog can then attack and the dog must be fast and the bite full plus the dog must release the Sleeve first time told. Then they have a long attack and the dog again must bite full and hard and again release on command. what is good for one Sport should be the same for another along with the UV, title Show grade etc Perhaps i will write to the SV asking them why this is not so and why one sport should have a breed survey given on a plate, when the same breed of dog in another sport has to do so much more work for many months to obtain the same thing
Thank you for your time and effort much appreciated
Steve1

@Slamdunc

Not sure why you jumped in to criticize what I have seen first hand during trials.  I generally respect your opinions here on training and don't think we've had such a conflict to date.  I will clarify a little further, there is a small group of AKC venue people, that I train with, whom go out of their way to do the just the BH and to go on to the FH and RH, even though their dogs are primarily SAR, AKC UD and/or herding dogs.  From what I see very often, a handler with an IPO 1-3 dog thinks the FH is no different than the Tr and fails on trial day, never attempting it again, thinking the FH its a "stupid" test that doesn't "prove anything", steve1's mindset is something I have encountered on many occasions.  So many times in fact, I couldn't even begin to count them all up at this point. 

I consider those "IPO only" folks "hard headed", while on the flip side, I see my AKC colleagues pass the FH and more recently, the RH with non-shutzhund eligible breeds.  Is it likely the handlers fault for not knowing how to train for an FH?  I believe so, but I am also not discounting the temperament of the dog, especially when FEMA certified Labradors are making the IPO trainers look bad on the FH and RH courses.  So if you think my comment was limited to dog temperament and drive, I guess I was not clear enough.  I have a feeling that Slamdunc and I are in different regions and are likely seeing a discrepancy between handler ability, not necessarily the dogs ability.  I also assume Slamdunc is former law enforcement or military handler.  I NEVER see the the kind of NEGATIVE thought process, from LEO and Military handlers, that I see from folks like steve1.  My gut says military handlers and law enforcement folks know dog training is more than "wives tales" and "tradition" and in turn are more open to try non-traditional training methods, without hostility toward, the presenter of the unknown methodology.  I HOPE Slamdunc that you are in this camp, to date I have assumed you were.

I mention "school" a lot because I don't want people tying my real world dog accomplishments to my comments on a public forum where I "test the waters" to garner opinions, feedback and alternative training methods.  Some may not like this and call me "theoretical only" and thats fine, but there is a high likelihood some of us have met already in real life or have great potential to meet down the road, I'd like those real life encounters to stay civil.  This forum is a "test bed" for my ideas and thoughts, I make no apologies for it.

Now back to the discussion about rules, is the RH going to be the same breed survey level as the HGH and IPO-1-3 in the USA anytime soon?

Steve, the breed survey is the same for all dogs, no matter if HGH or IPO titled.

Susie
Then that is fair enough no more to be said on that. so long as they all have to do the same to get a breed survey then it is fine
Steve1

@Slamdunc

Please note, Steve1 has posted another thread about a recent IPO2 trial where his dog was confused by a cross-track.  Note, I am NOT criticizing his performance.  However the description of his dog making some errors during the tracking phase for the IPO2 is EXACTLY what I see happening, when SOME IPO3 dogs attempt to do the FH or RD.  I am simply citing this posting, which coincidentally, is an EXACT replay of what I see when dogs used to doing ridged 400 pace IPO tracks getting put on the more rigorous RH and FH tracks.  This is a real phenomena occurring, but as I said earlier, it may be limitations of the handlers training methods OR the dogs lack of concentration due to having a certain kind of drive OR both.

http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/forum.read?mnr=748066-ipo-2

Also I think we may have had a miscommunication about what a "bred survey title" should be. I have NEVER said a FH (Fahrtenhund) should be eligible for a breed survey, I SAID an RH (Rettungshunde) should be eligible.  In order to earn an HIGHEST RH title a dog must complete an obedience phase, tracking phase and agility phase.  As suzie noted they will still need to perform on the same breed survey as everyone else.  Some have certainly misunderstood my points, I am in support of the RH being BREED SURVEY ELIGIBLE title in the USA, not changing HOW breed surveys are conducted.