The TT and the WAE are basically the same. The AKC TT (ATT) is the same without gunshot and without a bad guy because this is for all breeds most of which are not expected to be protection dogs. I don't know who has a patent on testing temperament, so why the fuss? Basically the DPCA wanted to have a "untrained" temperament evaluation with gunshot and "the bad guy" because with many show bred Dobermans, you won't find this inherent ability anymore. It's a good way to find a naturally good nerved dog. I think the DPCA wanted a test specifically for the breed under their judges who know Doberman temperament and won't be comparing them to other breeds in the same test. Also they are the parent club with AKC, so this test (not being an AKC test) can be put on the end of your dogs name as a title would be.
I've never had a gun dog or any interest in that sort of activity, but I'd guess maybe they might also need to have nerves of steel when it comes to gunshots, too?
The aggressive stranger is definitely protection-specific.
I don't think you can have an 18 month + dog that hasn't been exposed to these thing in some way or another. Hell, good breeders expose their litters to different surfaces and sounds before they're 8 weeks old! And you absolutely cannot train a dog to accept gunshot if they have poor nerve. I know several people in the IGP world with a good dog, but could not get through the obedience because of gun shyness/noise reaction. So startling is fine, but recovery is what you have to see within seconds. I've watched countless WAE's on Youtube, including failures and have seen dogs get behind their handler when the bad guy shouts at them. They do not have anything in their rules against Dobermans taking the WAE test who have had bite sports or other protection training, so even tho they say "not to train", this is a standard test that many working Dobes do at UDC events and those dogs are doing bite sports! So, I'm not understanding what you are calling "cheating". I trained at a club in AZ and as the morning warmed up, half a dozen people would get out their umbrellas for shade. I took Asha out under an umbrella to potty as a young puppy. So yes, "trained" to ignore the umbrella.
When I speak of "cheating," I mean systematic desensitization in psychological terms-- something that goes well beyond routine socializing and daily life. Things like people knowing that the challenge will be someone popping an umbrella, walking over fencing material on the ground, a sheet of landscaping plastic on the ground, a tottering board, hearing a gunshot, and being approached a raging bum, and they actually torture the dog through repeatedly confronting it with those things & working on calming/control commands, until it gets used to them and has minimal reaction and recovery time. Basically, bomb-proofing training. There are some scenarios where you want to bomb-proof an animal, such as a service dog or a police horse, and if you can desenstize a horse, a nervy prey animal by its nature, to gunshots, just about any dog can be desensitized eventually, too. It's cheating a temperament test to bomb-proof an animal for the purpose of passing the test, which is utterly meaningless at that point.
I don't know what the point of a WAE would be if a dog is already doing bitesports, unless it's still very much in prey engagement & confidence building stages. I think the value would be in making an informed decision on whether to continue investing in bitesport training if the pup isn't bold & resilient enough to succeed.
What is a relatively clear-cut thing is that a long list of temperament tests and IPO titles in tracking and obedience phases does not make a working dog if said dog can't complete protection phase IPO or IGP. It makes a fantasy that will definitely burn buyers who are looking for a puppy to do bitesports with, especially if that pup balks in fear when confronted with a chihuahua photo on a calendar. Such things can be avoided if the breeder doesn't cheat the temperament tests and is honest that their dog simply can't cut it as a working dog, and probably won't be successful at producing working dogs, and the harm being caused is to buyers who think the WAE means the dog isn't an anxious wreck. In other words, you can cheat the temperament tests, but it's a much heavier proposition to fake success even in the lowest level of SchH/IPO/IGP titling.
I see nothing wrong with this basic observation of a dogs natural tendencies and if I were a breeder or looking for a puppy of NOT-working lines, I would still look for a WAC on the show dogs. I don't think it should be used as a test to toss out breeding dogs for many reasons, but for those who want to keep strong nerve and a defensive attitude in the Doberman breed should seek this out. Full on protection lines are many times too much dog for JQP to raise and socialize properly and they badly need a job to do and I don't think it would benefit the breed to go strictly back to what it was 100 years ago. Not to mention the shallow gene pool.
I agree with what you state here.
I'm just saying that it's dishonest to train to a test in a way that fundamentally misrepresents the true character of the animal. I'm sure there are more than a couple deceitful techniques used in conformation showing, I can only think of using dye or shoe polish to conceal disallowed markings that would be a fault or outright DQ as apparently happens in horse shows. I'm sure there are other shenanigans, and they're not fair to other breeders, or to prospective customers.
He was 4 years old at the time, and neutered...I just wanted to see how he 'measured' up. He was a very suspicious boy in our home, and only accepted our friends and family who came often. If we had people we only saw on occasion; we needed to put him behind a gate where he could see; but not touch. He would follow and do the hard stare, and seemed like he 'might' cause trouble for himself, so it was safer for all with him behind a gate. And he never barked or whined....just hung out as though he was relieved he didn't have to take action. Here were his results.
(what Asha has listed on her signature line, not to be confused with the test you took).
. She simply was not interested in directly greeting the stranger which is acceptable for a doberman and why a -1 for that exercise is still a passing score. I personally think she was a zero but hey one person's interpretation gave her that score and I'm stuck with it. This where two evaluations would be nice. But then you remove the element of "they've done this before"
