Schutzhund and IPO Explained: Understanding Working Dog Titles

When breeders advertise dogs with Schutzhund, IPO, or IGP titles, they're referencing a specific testing system that evaluates working ability. Understanding what these titles actually mean—what they test, how scoring works, and what passing indicates—helps buyers interpret breeding advertisements and assess dogs accurately.

This system originated in Germany over a century ago as a breeding suitability test for German Shepherds. It has evolved into both a sport in its own right and a breeding requirement for working breeds internationally. The titles reveal real information about dogs, but only if you understand what you're reading.

History and Naming

The terminology surrounding this sport has changed repeatedly, creating confusion. Understanding the naming history clarifies what various titles mean.

Schutzhund (German for "protection dog") was the original name when the sport developed in the early 1900s. German Shepherd breeders created the test to evaluate working capacity before breeding. Titles were designated SchH1, SchH2, and SchH3, representing increasing difficulty levels.

IPO (Internationale Prufungs-Ordnung, or International Trial Rules) became the official name when the FCI standardized rules internationally. The titles became IPO1, IPO2, and IPO3. This change occurred around 2012, though the exercises remained substantially similar.

IGP (Internationale Gebrauchshunde Prufung, or International Working Dog Trial) replaced IPO in 2019 as the current official designation. Titles are now IGP1, IGP2, and IGP3. Again, the substance remained similar while the naming changed.

All three naming systems describe essentially the same testing framework. A dog with SchH3 from 2010, IPO3 from 2015, and IGP3 from 2023 passed comparable tests. The naming reflects administrative changes, not fundamental differences in what was evaluated.

The Three Phases

IGP evaluates dogs across three distinct phases: tracking, obedience, and protection. Dogs must pass all three phases to earn a title. Failing any single phase fails the entire trial.

This three-phase structure matters because it requires versatility. A dog cannot succeed through excellence in one area while being deficient in others. The complete working dog must demonstrate capability across all phases. This prevents specialization that might hide weaknesses.

Each phase is worth 100 points for a total possible score of 300. Qualifying requires 70 points in each phase. Scoring within phases follows detailed rubrics that penalize specific faults while rewarding correct performance.

The phases progress in difficulty across title levels. IGP1 tracking might be 300 paces old; IGP3 tracking covers 800 paces with multiple turns. IGP1 obedience includes basic exercises; IGP3 requires advanced precision. IGP1 protection involves simpler scenarios; IGP3 includes complex attack sequences. Higher levels demand more from dogs and handlers.

Tracking Phase Detailed

Tracking evaluates the dog's ability to follow human scent across terrain and locate objects dropped along the track. This phase reveals scenting ability, concentration, and handler independence.

A tracklayer walks a designated path, making turns at specified angles and dropping small objects (usually leather or fabric) along the way. After an aging period—the time between laying and running—the dog works the track while the handler follows at distance.

IGP1 tracking requires a 300-pace track with two turns and two objects, aged twenty minutes. The track is on grass or similar natural surface. The handler follows on a 10-meter leash.

IGP3 tracking requires an 800-pace track with five turns and three objects, aged sixty minutes. The track includes changes in cover and terrain. Turns are sharper and the aging period allows scent to disperse more.

Scoring evaluates several components. The dog's nose should remain on the track consistently. Speed should be even—neither rushing nor stopping excessively. Object indications must be clear (usually down). The dog should work independently without excessive handler guidance.

Obedience Phase Detailed

Obedience evaluates the dog's training, handler relationship, and ability to perform precise behaviors under distraction. This phase reveals trainability, handler engagement, and self-control.

Exercises occur on a field with another team (gunfire test participant) present. The presence of another working dog tests focus. Gunshots fired during exercises test nerve stability. The environment is designed to challenge the dog's concentration.

Required exercises include heeling (both on and off leash), sits and downs in motion, retrieves on flat ground and over obstacles, and a long down under distraction. Each exercise has specific requirements and common deductions.

Heeling evaluates precision and attention. The dog should move fluidly with the handler, maintaining position through turns, pace changes, and distractions. Forging ahead, lagging, or drifting wide costs points. The ideal dog appears connected to the handler without visible tension.

Retrieves evaluate willingness and delivery. The dog must retrieve a specified dumbbell (weight varies by level), return directly, and deliver to hand. Dropping, mouthing, or reluctance costs points. The retrieve reveals drive and handler cooperation simultaneously.

The send-out with down (at IGP3) requires the dog to run straight away from the handler at high speed, then drop immediately on command. This tests both drive (the speed away) and control (the instant compliance). Dogs must want to run and be willing to stop.

Protection Phase Detailed

Protection evaluates courage, hardness, control, and the critical ability to engage and disengage on command. This phase reveals the temperament characteristics most relevant to protection-bred dogs.

The protection routine involves a decoy (helper) wearing a protective sleeve and performing scripted scenarios. The dog must find the hidden helper, guard without biting, respond to attacks, and release on command. The sequence becomes more complex at higher levels.

The blind search requires the dog to check a series of blinds (hiding places) to locate the hidden helper. The dog must search efficiently, indicate the find, and hold the helper without biting until the handler arrives. This tests prey drive channeled into search behavior.

Hold and bark evaluates the dog's willingness to engage without physical contact. The dog must bark vigorously at the helper without biting until commanded. This tests drive and control simultaneously—the dog must be aroused enough to engage but controlled enough to wait for permission.

Escape bite sequences test pursuit and engagement. The helper attempts to escape; the dog must pursue and bite. The helper pressures the dog through physical confrontation and threatening behavior. The dog must bite firmly and maintain the grip despite pressure. This reveals courage and hardness.

The out (release) is critical. On command, the dog must release the bite immediately and guard the helper without contact. A dog that will not release fails. This test ensures that drive exists alongside control—the dog can be turned off as well as turned on.

Scoring and Ratings

Understanding the scoring system helps interpret what specific scores indicate about a dog's performance.

Maximum score is 300 points—100 per phase. Minimum qualifying is 210 points with at least 70 in each phase. These thresholds establish that passing requires reasonable competence across all phases, not excellence in one offsetting failure in another.

Ratings classify scores into qualitative categories. Insufficient (below 70 in any phase) means failure. Satisfactory (210-239 total) indicates basic passing. Good (240-269) indicates solid performance. Very Good (270-285) indicates excellent performance. Excellent (286-300) indicates superior performance.

For breeding evaluation, the numbers matter more than the rating. A dog scoring 90-90-85 (265 total, Good rating) has shown good tracking, good obedience, but weaker protection. A dog scoring 72-72-96 (240, Good rating) barely passed tracking and obedience but excelled in protection. Same rating, very different dogs.

Phase scores reveal strengths and weaknesses. Dogs with weak tracking may lack concentration or scenting ability. Dogs with weak obedience may lack trainability or handler focus. Dogs with weak protection may lack drives or nerve strength. The pattern matters for breeding decisions.

What Titles Actually Indicate

An IGP title indicates that a dog demonstrated working ability meeting defined standards on a specific day. Understanding what this does and doesn't mean helps interpret titles accurately.

A title confirms minimum competence. The dog can track, respond to obedience commands, and perform protection work well enough to pass. This eliminates dogs entirely lacking working capacity. Dogs with zero drive, nerve, or trainability cannot pass even IGP1.

A title doesn't confirm elite ability. Passing IGP1 with 210 points differs enormously from scoring 295 at IGP3. Both dogs have titles. One barely passed the easiest level; the other performed excellently at the highest level. "Titled" covers a vast range.

Titles can be earned with training that compensates for weak genetics. A genetically mediocre dog with an excellent trainer may pass trials. The training polishes what genetics provided. But breeding from such a dog won't pass the trainer's skill to offspring—only the mediocre genetics transfer.

Titles don't persist. A dog that earned IGP3 at age three and hasn't trained since is not demonstrating current working ability. Titles reflect historical performance. Current capability may differ.

Breed-Specific Considerations

While IGP was created for German Shepherds, many breeds now compete. Performance varies by breed characteristics, and evaluating dogs requires breed-appropriate expectations.

German Shepherds typically excel across phases when properly bred. The test was designed around their capabilities. Strong GSDs show balanced performance—good enough in all phases without dramatic weakness anywhere.

Belgian Malinois often score highest in protection due to intense drives. Tracking and obedience scores may be slightly lower as handlers work to channel enormous energy. Malinois energy creates brilliance in protection but can challenge precision work. Our comparison of Malinois and Dutch Shepherd standards explores these breed-specific characteristics in detail.

Doberman Pinschers can excel but may show more variation. Some lines produce strong competitors; others have drifted toward show type with reduced working capacity. Evaluating Doberman titles requires understanding the specific lines involved.

Dutch Shepherds and other KNPV breeds often show extremely high protection drives. These dogs were developed for police work that emphasizes apprehension. Their IGP performance reflects this background.

Rottweilers, Boxers, and other breeds participate but with varying success. Breeds developed primarily for other purposes may have characteristics that don't align perfectly with IGP's three-phase structure. Titles in these breeds may require more training to achieve comparable scores.

The BH Prerequisite

Before attempting IGP titles, dogs must pass the BH (Begleithundprufung, or companion dog test). This basic evaluation ensures that dogs have fundamental obedience and social stability before advancing to more demanding tests.

The BH includes basic obedience in a controlled environment and a traffic test in public settings. Dogs must demonstrate reliable responses to commands and appropriate behavior around people, other dogs, vehicles, and urban distractions.

Dogs that fail the BH reveal temperament problems that would make advanced work inappropriate. Aggressive dogs, extremely fearful dogs, and dogs with no handler focus fail before reaching IGP evaluation. The BH serves as a preliminary screen.

For breeding evaluation, BH is necessary but insufficient. Any dog suitable for breeding should pass BH easily. Dogs that struggle with BH have temperament problems that disqualify them from working programs. The BH represents minimum acceptability, not breeding quality.

Training for Titles vs. Training for Work

An important distinction separates training dogs specifically for IGP titles from training dogs for actual work. Understanding this distinction helps evaluate titled dogs accurately.

Title training optimizes for test performance. Trainers know exactly what exercises will be required and what judges evaluate. Training can focus precisely on test requirements without developing broader capabilities. A title-trained dog may perform test exercises excellently while lacking real-world working ability. This distinction parallels the broader gap between show ring success and actual working capability that affects all working breeds.

Working training develops general capabilities that transfer to various applications. Police dogs, military dogs, and personal protection dogs need skills beyond IGP routines. Their training emphasizes adaptability, problem-solving, and performance in novel situations—capabilities that IGP doesn't directly test.

The gap between title training and working training varies by trainer. Some trainers produce titled dogs that could transition directly to professional work. Others produce dogs that perform beautifully in trials but would fail in real applications. The title alone doesn't distinguish between them.

Serious buyers should ask about training approach, not just titles earned. Dogs trained by handlers with professional working dog backgrounds typically develop broader capabilities than dogs trained by sport-only trainers. The training context shapes what the dog actually becomes.

Interpreting Titles in Breeding Advertisements

Breeding advertisements often list titles prominently. Interpreting these listings requires asking appropriate questions.

What level? IGP1 indicates minimum working ability. IGP3 indicates high-level performance. The difference is substantial. Advertisements sometimes list "IGP titled" without specifying level—always ask.

What scores? A dog with 290 total performed very differently from a dog with 220 total, even if both earned the same title. Scores reveal performance quality that titles alone don't communicate.

How recent? A title earned five years ago doesn't indicate current capability. Young dogs with recent titles show current working capacity. Older dogs may have declined.

What organization? Most IGP trials follow FCI rules, but quality varies by venue. Trials at major events with experienced judges maintain higher standards than local trials with less experienced judges. The same score can indicate different performance levels depending on trial context.

What about ancestors? A dog's own titles matter, but titles throughout the pedigree indicate whether working ability persists across generations. One titled dog from untitled parents is less encouraging than a dog from multiple generations of titled ancestors.

Limitations of the System

IGP provides valuable information but has limitations that should inform how titles are interpreted.

The test is standardized. Dogs learn specific routines performed in predictable sequences. This enables training to the test rather than developing general capabilities. Dogs may perform test exercises without having the problem-solving capacity that real work requires.

The protection phase uses equipment. The helper's sleeve attracts and absorbs bites in ways that human bodies do not. Some dogs bite sleeves excellently but have never bitten without equipment. The test may not reveal whether protection drive transfers to real-world scenarios.

Handler skill influences scores substantially. An excellent handler can earn respectable titles with a mediocre dog. A poor handler may underperform with an excellent dog. Separating handler contribution from dog contribution requires expertise.

Temperament evaluation during protection has limitations. The scripted nature of trials means dogs know what to expect. A dog that performs confidently in trials might react differently to genuinely unexpected confrontation. Trial nerves and real-world nerves aren't identical.

Using Title Information Wisely

For buyers seeking working-bred dogs, IGP titles provide useful information when interpreted appropriately. Understanding how FCI breeding systems incorporate these requirements helps contextualize what titles mean in different breeding programs.

Require titles from breeding stock. Dogs intended for working programs should come from titled parents. This eliminates dogs from populations that have never been tested and might lack working capacity entirely.

Examine scores, not just titles. Request scorebooks or trial records. Evaluate phase scores separately. Look for consistency across phases rather than extreme variation that suggests training compensation for genetic weakness.

Consider the context. Dogs titled at major trials with rigorous judging have demonstrated more than dogs titled at club trials with lenient evaluation. Ask where titles were earned.

See dogs work if possible. Video of trial performances shows what a dog actually does. Numbers on paper communicate less than watching a dog track, respond to commands, and engage in protection. Request video when buying based on titles.

Talk to trainers. The people who trained titled dogs know more than the titles reveal. Ask about the dog's learning process, strengths, challenges, and character. Trainers' impressions provide context that scores cannot communicate.

IGP titles represent valuable information for evaluating working dogs, but only when understood properly. A title is the beginning of evaluation, not the end. It answers whether a dog can work at some level. It doesn't answer whether the dog is the right choice for a specific purpose. That determination requires deeper investigation that titles alone cannot support.