SENTRY K9.COM

Mental ability is of course the most important factor when selecting a dog. No experienced dogman would disagree with that. Also, every dog should be measured as an individual. That said, what general size, build, and type of dog have you favored and why?

I can't say what's "best."  I also can't say I am a dogman either.  That being said, I generally like smaller, leggier dogs.  Part of that is due to health, part of it is speed & agility.  I also think to some extent it comes from what I know of martial arts.

Not that size is inherently bad, and as a deterrent it can be a plus, however speed kills.  That is what is appealing to me about the Malinois and Dutch Shepherd.  They are swift, agile, athletic, and still strong.  I've also seen a small little Mal take out a decent size decoy, so if they can do that (not to mention if you have multiple dogs) they seem highly capable of taking down next to anything.  On the other hand, with size generally comes more strength and deterrant from size.  Bulldogs and Mastiffs are just awesome and can be quicker than they look, plus they should have more stopping power (although this usually sparks debates where nobody agrees).  An APBT can take out a bull though, so I'm not sure it's necessarily size doing the work.  Some lines are longer-living and healthier than others as well with longer working lives as well, however in Mastiffs that seems to be the exception, which again leads me to prefer a smaller more streamlined type of dog.

Overall, I tend to like leggier, less-excessive bully types, although I do think the herders are amazing to watch work.  Something like a lighter less-bully Standard American Bulldog (or Performance AB ala. Rode Hawg, Steve LeClerc, Fala Woods Contender, and Hardly Dangerous Kennels), Bandogs or Presa Canario (again, generally the leaner examples) are really the phenotype I find I am drawn to as I research my next dog.  I also think the Donovan Pinscher is a fascinating concept and they tend to run smaller yet are reportedly strong and bite hard.  I also often tend to prefer females.

So the smaller the better as long as it is able to do the job with the caveat that it's more important to consider the individual.

-Cheers

I tend to like bigger dogs both because they do provide a better deterrent and because of the added power. I like a dog over 100#'s personally. I have done alot of Martial arts and always been a superheavy average body weight over 250. I was a rarity being able to move fast and fluid at that weight, but if you have size, speed and agility, bigger is always better. IMO

However, I will admit that comparing martial arts to dogs is not a fair way of looking at it. Still it does give us a reference to something we know about.  

JohnnyC at 12:16PM on Jun 18, 2009

I tend to like bigger dogs both because they do provide a better deterrent and because of the added power. I like a dog over 100#'s personally. I have done alot of Martial arts and always been a superheavy average body weight over 250. I was a rarity being able to move fast and fluid at that weight, but if you have size, speed and agility, bigger is always better. IMO

 

However, I will admit that comparing martial arts to dogs is not a fair way of looking at it. Still it does give us a reference to something we know about.  

I have done alot of Martial arts and always been a superheavy averagebody weight over 250. I was a rarity being able to move fast and fluidat that weight, but if you have size, speed and agility, bigger isalways better. IMO

Johnny, you guys make me sick.  You and your big, strong, AND fluid.  You make us slower, fatter guys look bad.

There is a guy in my Judo class that is like you, built like a linebacker, solid, strong, and his body moves pretty well.  He's a white belt (should probably be green based on talent, but still) and he goes head-to-head with the brown and black belts.  So yes, he'd be formidable as a body guard.  Not that you'd know it since like, nobody'd ever mess with him.  Everybody else is lighter than me so I get stuck with him.  He's a good guy and I can attest he's both good at combat and nice about not totally shmearing me all across the mat or else I'd have no chance.  Yet.

So I agree size and strength can be tremendously helpful.  There are things that smaller and faster fighters can do to more than compensate.  My sensei is a smaller, older female.  She's also totally ripped, a 7th Dan Black Belt, and oh yeah, medaled in the Olympics.  All else being equal (skill, experience, etc.), the big guy above would have a huge advantage with size and reach.  Still, she'd probably cream him pretty quick unless he got REALLY lucky.

If you can get a dog that is big, strong, fast, AND agile . . .  It is going to be @#$% formidable.  Neos and Caucasian Ovcharkas are supposed to be fierce and tough animals and their size undoubtedly adds some advantage.  Martial Arts is not a direct correlation, but the analogy DOES somewhat apply.  In nature generally the bigger animal is the alpha or the more dominant due to greater strength.  To play Devil's advocate though, a small dinky little Pit Bull Terrier can take a full-grown raging bull.  So a bigger dog might arguably be better against a perpetrator, I just find a smaller dog to be potentially easier to take everywhere and I get a little paranoid (figuratively) about joints and longevity, and at some point it seems like overkill.  Still, a great dog that was big and healthy and was likely to have a fairly long working life, it'd be hard to find any fault in that.

So I sorta agree with you on every point.

-Cheers

In my experience the agility of the dog is more about build and strength to weight ratio. A 500 pound tiger is still fast and agile because they're built for agility, and power. I've seen some Dane/Pit crosses that are still over 100 pounds, but extraordinarily fast, agile and strong. The reason I like a bigger dog is I wouldn't want a protection dog that someone could kill with their bare hands as they could with a 40 pound dog. I recall a few years ago a woman was attacked by a bullmastiff, a man came to help her and started kicking the dog then a second man came up and started hitting the dog with a tree limb, then a third man came with two kitchen knives stabbed the dog in the head which broke the first knife on the dogs skull. Finally he stabbed the dog to death with the second knife by attacking the body and saved the woman's life. While it was obviously a bad thing that the woman was attacked, it shows how hard it can be to stop a mastiff type dog without a gun. That's something I want in a dog that's to protect my family, especially if I'm not there and can't give the dog any backup. Toughness is a must if the dogs job is to potentially fight several men who could easily be 200 pound or more, without any help. While most people run from dogs because they don't want to get bitten but you can't count on crazy people or crack heads to act normally.

It's interesting how many people in the working dog community have a background in MA, I've got 11 years myself, But I'll say this there are a lot of things that come into a fight for your life, that don't come into sparring, a bigger guy has stronger joints and bones that are harder to break, a who loosed their head and who manages to keep thinking while fighting, who is the first to pick up an improvised weapon, and who is fighting to fight and who is fighting to kill. I have to agree with Johnny fighting a dog for your life and sparring a person are so different that I wouldn't see much cross application. Not to say that MA training wouldn't help you fight a dog but just that it's a very different situation.