|
|
Post by rosamburg on Jan 10, 2012 11:48:00 GMT -5
Hi Esther, Candidates are just that until they compete and are successful. I am not sure but I think Gamy would have to participate in the AWDF and get a "V" score before she could go to the IDC and then to an all breed championship I do not think that is what it takes to go to the IDC from the USA. When Roberto took a team he just invited the people who passed the ADA meisterschaft that year and Butch Henderson. John Soares went representing the UDC so maybe had to pass at the UDC Nationals (though I do not recall him even doing that). I think Matt Arpano just took his dog and competed..not sure about that. |
|
patrick
Titled Dobermann
Posts: 133
|
Post by patrick on Jan 10, 2012 15:03:56 GMT -5
Ulrike go for it! You're doing a great job. Stand by your believes. You have my support. I never had problems finding the right studs for my breeding but now I cannot find one for my girl. The ones I do like have dogs in their lines that I do not like healthwise. Then I find a dog I like that is not tested etc etc.. When I ask them if they want to do tests they comment why bother he already 8 :-(( Maybe it's because the owner isn't intrested in the mating and that's why he doesn't want to do the Vwb test with his 8 year old dog. The owner has a job to pay his bills and doens't need the dog to do as much matings as possible for the sake of earning money. I hope the owner of the 8 year old made himself clear  |
|
|
|
Post by rasmuscm on Jan 10, 2012 19:57:36 GMT -5
Wow Steve, you're pretty critical. I was wondering, do you have a video of a performance of yours that perhaps we can all critique to see if we agreed with the judge? :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by octavian2 on Jan 11, 2012 1:25:28 GMT -5
WOW! I had know idea my mention of Gamy Von Der Burgstatte would cause such a discussion or critique. But it never hurts the breed to hear a judge (Sch1) say " In 35 years in the sport and 10 years judging I have never seen a dobermann this phenomenal in my life" Cashmandol- Congrats on your new puppy  "if I had to say anything negative, is that for me I like a little more of a serious dog" not sure if your definition of "serious" is the same as mine but Gilla is my males mother! and genetics being what they are you may just get that serious dog your after I look forward to follow your training! Lisa |
|
|
|
Post by rosamburg on Jan 11, 2012 4:22:10 GMT -5
Wow Steve, you're pretty critical. I was wondering, do you have a video of a performance of yours that perhaps we can all critique to see if we agreed with the judge? :-) I am just reviewing what is on the video. The rules are the rules. If you take the time to read them it describes pretty well what an exercise is supposed to look like, and how points are deducted. Chris, you were the one that stated no points could be taken away. I strongly disagree. It does not mean it was not a good performance or that the dog is lacking. I think it is a very good dog that had a good to very good performance just not an excellent one. I think it benefits everyone to really try to get an understanding of the rules and the intent of the rules. I see absolutely nothing wrong with discussing what we see. I get sick and tired of everyone getting together and singing Kumbaya when our breed is in serious decline as a healthy and viable working dog. When we attend trials, and watch and listen to excellent judges then our understanding grows. I have also been to trials with crappy judges who have done some pretty outlandish things that have made me question their ethics. Some of it has turned my stomach and I believe makes a farce out of the sport. As far as video of trials of Hara, that you can critique....There is none available that I know of. There were a few times there were video's taken but I never got any (even though I asked). As a first time handler with a not so super strong dog, a lot of it was not pretty. There were other times that she shone and surprised a few people. I think the highest we ever scored in protection was a 90 or 91. I am sure most of the scores were on the money based on the type of judges I had and am just as sure I got a few gifts along the way based on a few of the others. However my handling ability or the quality of my last dog, really has nothing to do with this thread. Except for the fact that I personally developed some perseverance and have taken some steps to grow in the sport. Someone brought up the dog and the trial in question just happens to perfectly illustrate what was brought up in the thread before Gamy was even mentioned. Like I stated before, I really hope that Gamy is shown at higher levels. I would be the first to applaud a great performance by a very good Dobermann in a good test. I am glad the Jacobson's imported a good working dog, rather than getting a show dog, which would have brought them more notice and profit in the Doberman world. Over the last few years my understanding of the sport and reading dogs has improved immensely. This has come from listening to judges in the realm of Jurgen Ritzi, Elmer Mannes, and Gunther Diegel. These are the type of judges that I admire and feel have a lot to offer us in terms of increasing our knowledge. When we choose to bring this quality of judge in then everyone benefits, except perhaps one's score-book. On the other hand when clubs repeatedly bring in people with a limited ability to read dogs and with a Santa Claus mentality, I think it absolutely limits the opportunity for growth. Believe it or not, by nature I am actually a person who is not comfortable with conflict (it amazes me that my career for most of my life was as an addiction/intervention specialist) I do however believe in taking a stand for something I believe in, even though it often leaves me feeling very uncomfortable. I think a conspiracy of silence is detrimental. I know that taking a stand can be unpopular. Many people are comfortable with the status-quot and choose to shoot the messenger. I am also aware there is a strong possibility that if I am critical of a judge there remains a possibility I may have trial under them. My thinking is oh well, if they try to get revenge then it is still worth it to speak the truth as I see it. Some people may believe I think I am better than others or that I am a know it all proselytizing to the masses. That is untrue. The truth is that I am passionate about the Dobermann breed and passionate about Schutzhund and sometimes go overboard on things. I also know that while I have learned a few things along the way, I still have an incredible amount to learn. I believe in truth and integrity. Unfortunately I think it is lacking in many circumstances around the sport of Schutzhund. Sometimes it is just about a lack of understanding. That is something that can be remedied. When it is about money, greed and ego, then I think everyone suffers. |
|
|
|
Post by rasmuscm on Jan 11, 2012 5:45:56 GMT -5
Steve - I said, regarding ALL her performances, (I didn't specify which one), 'you will find it DIFFICULT to fault her scores, easy judge or not'.
You've never seen a judge hand out a few more points for an excellent performance? It happens all the time - any breed.
Also - I see NO issue with a dog earning all three SchH titles on its home field with its home helper. In fact, I think it's a good idea to ensure the best controlled experience for a young/inexperienced dog. It's not even just to get the same helper your dog is used to, it's also many times to use your own tracking fields. You want a really confident dog once you start hitting the road to other big events.
It's AFTER the first three titles that separates the 'club' dog with the national level dog. That's why when someone says 'their dog is the finest SchH dog in the country', yet they haven't earned a title off their home field, I have to wonder if they're all talk.
Specifically with regards to Gamy, AFAIK, she has earned the SchH III title just once. Her future is bright and hopefully we'll all see her on the big fields soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by elucas on Jan 11, 2012 12:16:32 GMT -5
I know Elmar. A dog that scores 96 under Elmar will probably score different under a judge like Glenn Stephenson. Does that mean that Glenn is a bad judge? Does that mean that Elmar is a Santa Claus?
The state of the breed is where one thinks it is. Steve, you say it is not good right now and you would like to see something different. Other people want to see other things in the breed. Are they wrong? Or just wrong in your eyes?
How are your current dogs doing in training these days? Haven't seen any updates lately.
|
|
|
|
Post by vrulli on Jan 11, 2012 12:28:28 GMT -5
This is an interesting topic even though it has been discussed before it is nice to hear most people share many of the same opinions about the unique traits of the doberman. It's important to understand and accept this… then there's the question Steve originally brought up "Breed Improvement".
This has drifted off to a discussion on judging handling skills. My intention is not to dispute the dedication and success of those who have achieved advanced titles with their dogs. No small feat and depending on the circumstances, can tell you so much about the animal at the end of your leash. On the other hand, an IPO title does not change the genetics of a dog.
Were I think the emphasis should be for improving on a breed type would be evaluating the "raw dog". By that I mean the basic temperament and drives of an animal before advanced training. This would be similar to a Korung and the Swedish Mentality Test. Doberman entered would require health clearances as well. From my perspective the results would offer better evaluations of breeding candidates then a increasingly stylized sport, which in reality may not be the best test of the doberman breed.
However this would require a breed warden and restrict the freedom of individual breeding choices. Then there would be the test itself… should it be the same as the Malinois Korung (very difficult looking) or German Shepherd's? Suit or sleeve? Would it be a good idea to develop a unique test for dobermans for just this purpose?
Virginia
|
|
|
|
Post by rosamburg on Jan 11, 2012 12:42:28 GMT -5
Steve - I said, regarding ALL her performances, (I didn't specify which one), 'you will find it DIFFICULT to fault her scores, easy judge or not'. You've never seen a judge hand out a few more points for an excellent performance? It happens all the time - any breed. Also - I see NO issue with a dog earning all three SchH titles on its home field with its home helper. In fact, I think it's a good idea to ensure the best controlled experience for a young/inexperienced dog. It's not even just to get the same helper your dog is used to, it's also many times to use your own tracking fields. You want a really confident dog once you start hitting the road to other big events. It's AFTER the first three titles that separates the 'club' dog with the national level dog. That's why when someone says 'their dog is the finest SchH dog in the country', yet they haven't earned a title off their home field, I have to wonder if they're all talk. Specifically with regards to Gamy, AFAIK, she has earned the SchH III title just once. Her future is bright and hopefully we'll all see her on the big fields soon. Fair enough, and I agree with what you say here to a point. I don't have a problem either with a dog earning its titles at its home field on a club helper. The issues I have is when a club continuously seeks out the easiest judges possible and the helper does not help the judge make a determination as to the quality of the dog, and instead does whatever they have to do to help the dog pass. I am not even speaking of the helper having to be a super hard-ass bad guy. But come on, there should be a limit. I really do not even have a problem with there being a bit of leeway in the level of points you should expect from different judges or perhaps even a judge being slightly generous, given the right circumstances when it is not going to have a negative impact on the competitors or the sport. For example I have seen a judge give a very new and nervous handler with a marginal dog in a Sch1 trial a score in the very low 70's when their score should have been something more in the high 50's or low 60's. This is an example of encouraging people to continue in the sport. However in both those circumstances that come to mind, they did point out that the dog was not breed-worthy in terms of their working ability. The last scenario is very different than say a judge going over and picking up an errant dumb bell throw in a National level competition and putting it directly in front of the jump. That is an action that affects the competitors and is detrimental to the sport in general. Judges are human, and they also have a varying degree of their ability to read dogs. On the other hand I do not like to see a marginal judge being asked to judge at a high level competition. I remember we had a judge come to judge one of our club trials, who clearly stated "I think I am a pretty easy judge". As long as they they are consistent and ethical I don't have a problem with that. When they turn into Santa Claus I do take issue with that. I also believe that in every single circumstance for any level of a trial, including a club trial, that the V score should be awarded sparingly and only when it is absolutely warranted. In regards to the trial in question, I just do not think the IPO3 trial was an example of an excellent performance, SG, ok... When I inquired out of curiosity, about the judge, I heard this is a common practice. As far as the first 2 trials, it was much more of a legitimate test because the helper provided a lot more pressure. As far as points I did not agree there with the level of points handed out either. For example, how can a dog be awarded 100 points when their feet were on the helper during the entire bark and hold? The test is not only about biting ability. Part of the test, particularly in an IPO3 performance is about how well the dog holds up to pressure as well as to how they perform when under complete control. It is also about how much control the team can show when everything in the dog is telling them to give into their primary instincts. There are many dogs who look great until they are asked to show control. That is why points are supposed to be deducted for examples of a break down in control. |
|
|
|
Post by rosamburg on Jan 11, 2012 13:32:35 GMT -5
I know Elmar. A dog that scores 96 under Elmar will probably score different under a judge like Glenn Stephenson. Does that mean that Glenn is a bad judge? Does that mean that Elmar is a Santa Claus? The state of the breed is where one thinks it is. Steve, you say it is not good right now and you would like to see something different. Other people want to see other things in the breed. Are they wrong? Or just wrong in your eyes? How are your current dogs doing in training these days? Haven't seen any updates lately. I really don't want this to turn into a big comparison of judges. I find it kind of strange that you would pick Glenn Stephenson and Elmer Mannes for comparison, from what I have seen. I earned a BH under Glenn Stephenson and watched him judge another trial or two. He was very gracious to me as a new and extremely nervous handler. As far as his overall judging I think he is ok. I don't think he was the most difficult judge that I have seen, by any stretch. As far as Elmer Mannes, I was speaking more of his ability to read dogs and his knowledge as an asset. I actually made a mistake in my earlier post, and confused him with another SV judge I saw cover a trial. As far as my own dogs, I gave my 11 year old daughter the male out of my breeding. His lack of consistency in bite-work made me decide to focus my energy on the female. I got behind schedule in training Cairo due to having to get a house ready to sell, and then having to move. We still have some things to work out. We are back on track and hope to trial later this spring, I am happy with our progress. I think the state of the breed is not far off from what Ulrike describes. There is no question that as far as health issues we are in real trouble. The tiny gene pool of strong working dogs is a huge concern in my view. |
|
|
|
Post by cashmando1 on Jan 11, 2012 17:54:01 GMT -5
WOW! I had know idea my mention of Gamy Von Der Burgstatte would cause such a discussion or critique. But it never hurts the breed to hear a judge (Sch1) say " In 35 years in the sport and 10 years judging I have never seen a dobermann this phenomenal in my life" Cashmandol- Congrats on your new puppy "if I had to say anything negative, is that for me I like a little more of a serious dog" not sure if your definition of "serious" is the same as mine but Gilla is my males mother! and genetics being what they are you may just get that serious dog your after I look forward to follow your training! Lisa Thanks Lisa! I am hoping for a nice mixture of Eiko and Gamy, I think this is a super breeding! I consider myself lucky to be able to get a puppy from these two. |
|
|
|
Post by cashmando1 on Jan 11, 2012 18:44:32 GMT -5
Wow Steve, you're pretty critical. I was wondering, do you have a video of a performance of yours that perhaps we can all critique to see if we agreed with the judge? :-) I am just reviewing what is on the video. The rules are the rules. If you take the time to read them it describes pretty well what an exercise is supposed to look like, and how points are deducted. Chris, you were the one that stated no points could be taken away. I strongly disagree. It does not mean it was not a good performance or that the dog is lacking. I think it is a very good dog that had a good to very good performance just not an excellent one. I think it benefits everyone to really try to get an understanding of the rules and the intent of the rules. I see absolutely nothing wrong with discussing what we see. I get sick and tired of everyone getting together and singing Kumbaya when our breed is in serious decline as a healthy and viable working dog. When we attend trials, and watch and listen to excellent judges then our understanding grows. I have also been to trials with crappy judges who have done some pretty outlandish things that have made me question their ethics. Some of it has turned my stomach and I believe makes a farce out of the sport. As far as video of trials of Hara, that you can critique....There is none available that I know of. There were a few times there were video's taken but I never got any (even though I asked). As a first time handler with a not so super strong dog, a lot of it was not pretty. There were other times that she shone and surprised a few people. I think the highest we ever scored in protection was a 90 or 91. I am sure most of the scores were on the money based on the type of judges I had and am just as sure I got a few gifts along the way based on a few of the others. However my handling ability or the quality of my last dog, really has nothing to do with this thread. Except for the fact that I personally developed some perseverance and have taken some steps to grow in the sport. Someone brought up the dog and the trial in question just happens to perfectly illustrate what was brought up in the thread before Gamy was even mentioned. Like I stated before, I really hope that Gamy is shown at higher levels. I would be the first to applaud a great performance by a very good Dobermann in a good test. I am glad the Jacobson's imported a good working dog, rather than getting a show dog, which would have brought them more notice and profit in the Doberman world. Over the last few years my understanding of the sport and reading dogs has improved immensely. This has come from listening to judges in the realm of Jurgen Ritzi, Elmer Mannes, and Gunther Diegel. These are the type of judges that I admire and feel have a lot to offer us in terms of increasing our knowledge. When we choose to bring this quality of judge in then everyone benefits, except perhaps one's score-book. On the other hand when clubs repeatedly bring in people with a limited ability to read dogs and with a Santa Claus mentality, I think it absolutely limits the opportunity for growth. Believe it or not, by nature I am actually a person who is not comfortable with conflict (it amazes me that my career for most of my life was as an addiction/intervention specialist) I do however believe in taking a stand for something I believe in, even though it often leaves me feeling very uncomfortable. I think a conspiracy of silence is detrimental. I know that taking a stand can be unpopular. Many people are comfortable with the status-quot and choose to shoot the messenger. I am also aware there is a strong possibility that if I am critical of a judge there remains a possibility I may have trial under them. My thinking is oh well, if they try to get revenge then it is still worth it to speak the truth as I see it. Some people may believe I think I am better than others or that I am a know it all proselytizing to the masses. That is untrue. The truth is that I am passionate about the Dobermann breed and passionate about Schutzhund and sometimes go overboard on things. I also know that while I have learned a few things along the way, I still have an incredible amount to learn. I believe in truth and integrity. Unfortunately I think it is lacking in many circumstances around the sport of Schutzhund. Sometimes it is just about a lack of understanding. That is something that can be remedied. When it is about money, greed and ego, then I think everyone suffers. Great post Steve! |
|
|
|
Post by dobimouse on Jan 12, 2012 1:38:48 GMT -5
Hi, Virginia,
wonderful posting!! I aggree with you to 100% and there is nothing to add!!!!
best regards
Ulrike
@all
IMO Gamy is -currently- the one of the best trained and titled Doberman in USA!! I watched the videos of Gamy and I am really impressed. I hate discussions round about judges and judging . It's the same her in Germany, if one dog shows real working abilities and is titled high scored, the big discussions begin.... it's absolute nasty and just shows that many people are envious.
|
|
|
|
Post by octavian2 on Jan 12, 2012 16:07:09 GMT -5
Hi Virginia, I agree with Ulrike nice post! especially "an IPO title does not change the genetics of the dog" and evaluating the "raw dog" IMO that would contribute more to the over all breed improvement than IPO scores or judges. It sounds like the "new" path the IPO sport rules are taking is geared to a more "balanced" dog that more positive training methods will bring out. I can see why some clubs will be up dating how they train with their currant systems because if the judging is to reflect the new rules we will see more dogs that are really happy on the trial field instead of just trained to just express the picture! if it happens in time the future could bring a new path to a better read on what a title really means for all the working breeds as another valid option for breeding decisions that has been lost along the way.
|
|
|
|
Post by rosamburg on Jan 13, 2012 2:19:16 GMT -5
Personally I think that is untrue in the context of this discussion. Absolutely nobody is saying anything negative about the dog whatsoever. Quite the contrary, I stated repeatedly in the discussion that it was a very good dog and that it was a very good performance. The fact is that the quality and in some cases integrity of judging here in the United States with some judges (Of course not all of them, but there are relatively few to begin with) is a real problem. I was at a trial a few years ago (in the United States) as a spectator where a dog ran off the field twice during the blind search in a Sch1 protection routine. The first time the dog ran off the field the handler called it 4 times. The dog finally came back to the field. The USA judge that was judging the trial allowed the dog to continue. The handler for some reason sent the dog back to the same blind. The dog AGAIN ran off the field, into the crowd and started eating hot dogs off of the barbecue grill. The handler this time called the dog 5 times. The dog finally came back onto the field. I had been filming it but turned the camera off because I naively figured the judge would have some integrity and follow the rules at least to a degree. But no, he allowed the dog to continue. This time the handler sent it directly to the barking blind (apparently a good choice). The dog continued to do some marginal (at best) work. The judge awarded the dog 80 points, pronounced. The dog went high in trial BTW. This judge lost his license a short time later for some other misbehavior. When he managed to get it back many clubs went to great lengths to proudly announce that this judge would be judging their trial. I for one am absolutely sick of this kind of crap. I place too high of a value on our sport not to speak my mind about it. I don't think we need another temperament test that can be bastardized. We need good judges with integrity that have a clue what they are doing and who will follow the damn rules. We need helpers who will make the exercises a real test. I for one felt no envy for the high points. AGAIN I think it is a good dog. I hope it goes onto be one of the great dogs of our time. Especially because I of course like the bloodlines. I like the dog, I think it is an excellent handler ( her accomplishments in the dog sport speak for them-self). I think the breeding to Eiko is good. Eiko is also a good dog. I hope many people decide to breed to him rather than some well known show dog. I would not hesitate to recommend people who want a good working dog to consider a puppy from the Chalmar breeding. I hope every puppy goes to a working home that follows through. North America desperately needs good working Dobermann's. I am not going to restate my initial points about this. You can go back and read it. Post Note: I was told that the judge at the "hot dog" trial was an FCI judge who lives in the States. I thought it was a USA judge, I did some more research and see he was an SV judge at time. I apologize for the misinformation. It does not take away from the fact that in the US this is a highly sought after judge for club trials, so still speaks to the culture of many clubs. |
|
Apr 19, 2016 22:54:07 GMT -5
Apr 19, 2016 22:55:22 GMT -5
Apr 19, 2016 22:55:22 GMT -5