Breed Standard re. gait - Page 4

Well, I guess I'm not with the majority here, I really don't like this dog very much for one reason - he does not look as if he has the agility and athleticism to tend 24/7 and/or to bring down the bad guy if he had to chase him very far. IMO he is way too overdone in the front, his muzzle is too short and blocky to maintian a patent airway and I don't like his rear much at all.  Somehow I cannot picture him scaling a high wall.

Having said that I can see that he would have done well in the conformation ring as he is the type that most seem to fancy today.  I just don't see him being much of a tending dog due to his overall bulk. Also, it's hard to judge any dog from one still photo and I often think handlers set up GSD in wonky poses for these show photos. Seems they try to make them look all squatty in the rear. I will defer to Preston on his opinion on his movement; he knows more about that that I do. This dog just doesn't appeal to me personally; obviously I'm in the minority with the showlines people but have a feeling most workingline owners wouldn't care much for his overall conformation either.

Speaknow, sorry for not responding earlier to your thread, but cleaning out my attic of over forty plus years of accumulation took priority.  I do not recommend keeping baby cribs, old clothes, old pieces of furniture, etc.  My recommendations GET RID OF IT when their usefulness has expired, otherwise you will learn to regret it.

I THANK YOU FOR YOUR EXCELLENT RESPONSE TO MY QUESTION.  There are a few points with which I take exception.  Allow me to respond and then you respond (or any one else who wishes) to my comments.  Thus we learn from each other and newbies gain an insight into the subject matter and then investigate to their own satisfaction.

I think the croup has much more importance than merely transmitting forward progress from the drive created by the rearassembly.  Also the croup does have differences in length.  In most every Kor report you will find reference to it: phrases like “croup could be longer,”  “Croup is long and well placed”  “Excellent length of croup”, and others.  Remember, a one-inch difference is a lot.

I am in accord with you regarding the upper and lower thigh, and the angulation created.  I feel that most American breeders seek a longer lower thigh giving many of their dogs that overangulation look.  I think we agree here.  But an observation I have made, it seems as if a lot of German breeding has longer upper thighs and shorter lower thighs, a lot of angulation but lower than that of the American bred dog.  Look at Preston’s X-Sensation.  This is really the thrust of my question to Preston.  What differences in gait does this make?

If I understand you correctly, you say the hock should remain firm (agreed) and upright (disagree).  I really don’t think you meant this the way I interpreted it.  I am sure you know that the rear foot crosses the front foot in a scissor type motion, - Well shown on the Diego video.  (A subject unto itself.) Coming to rest under the center of gravity of the dog. (Of course w4e are speaking of well-constructed dogs such as Dingo.)   Here the hock is severely angulated from upright.  Many American breed animals are accused of running on their hocks meaning they are so angulated that the hock actually hits the ground.  So much for forward extension.  What about rear extension.

We know that the standard calls for the feet to stay close to the groun

(continued)

We know that the standard calls for the feet to stay close to the ground.  That was what caused Sunsilver to begin the thread in the first place, though I suspect he/she had more interest in the front feet as showinby the picture submitted.  When the drive of one rear foot is completed, muscels and ligaments along the lower thigh attached to the top of the hock, constricts and snaps the hock open giving the animal that little extra kick.  The hock at this point is close to a rearward 45 degree angle, just the opposite direction it was in on the forward step.  Here again I say this with a well structured dog in mind.

All of this is well seen in this excellent vidio of Dingo, thanks to Blitzen.  I'll not go into detail to the following only to say that it is my opinion that the angle of the croup determines how long the drive is.  In an extremely rear angulated dog with a steep croup, the hock will not extend as depicted above.  All of that angulation has to go somewhere, so where does it go.  The only place possible-- upwards and on this side of the pond in many areas it has been referred to as "--kicki8ng up in the rear."  (SueB, if you are reading this, this is what you and I discusssed in times past.)  I 've gone long.  Hope I can get it all on the thread.  I would welcome any and all comments, especiallyu yours, Speaknow.   ecs

My sympathies with disposal of accumulated paraphernalia, ecs. Your wide knowledge of GSD structure, as well as personal modesty, surpasses that of most experts, and I can but reply as able.

You said: "I think the croup has much more importance than merely transmitting forward progress from the drive created by the rear assembly. I'll not go into detail to the following only to say that it is my opinion that the angle of the croup determines how long the drive is. Also the croup does have differences in length."

I certainly agree with first two sentences, ecs – a direct geometric out come in fact; with steep croup, or pelvis rather, restricting hindquarters’ rear swing, and a too flat one similarly hampering its forward reach. Length of ‘coupling’ playing its role here as well of course – short-coupled dogs, especially if well angulated, can’t get their hindquarters underneath themselves well enough to drive effectively off their hocks. I spoke solely of pelvis length - not its angle or lay within associated structure as makes up the croup. And yes, it’s a medical fact that within a breed length hardly varies, except for small variation between male and female (I’m speaking of actual length here, unaffected by tilt or as judged externally as croup). I speak from past research and can’t readily offer any substantiating link.

Maligned Linda Shaw offers some insight: "The croup consists of the fused sacral vertebrae, or sacrum, that form the roof of the pelvis, and the first few caudal vertebrae of the tail, depending on how long the croup is. Its slope is usually determined by the slope of the pelvis, but not in all cases. Most dogs with a very steep pelvis will show similarly steep croup, but it is possible for a steep pelvis to carry a very high tail, and show a flat, short croup. A flat pelvis will show a flat croup, but it could be long or short depending upon the tail set. Even an ideally set pelvis can show a croup that is long or short. In fact, the length of croup really has little or no effect on gait.

You said: "I am in accord with you regarding the upper and lower thigh, and the angulation created. I feel that most American breeders seek a longer lower thigh giving many of their dogs that overangulation look. I think we agree here. But an observation I have made, it seems as if a lot of German breeding has longer upper thighs and shorter lower thighs, a lot of angulation but lower than that of the American bred dog."

Despite appearances, alas another medical statistic, ecs: you’ll rarely find a GSD where upper thigh is longer than the lower (as accurately measured bone-wise from hip joint, that is), although it does occasionally occur. There’s an easy way to check: raise dog’s hock up to pelvis end: if point of hock meets up with pelvis end, the upper and lower thighs are of equal length (giving proof also of good angulation, assuming a reasonable length) – if point of hock extends beyond pelvis rear end, the lower thigh is longer than the upper.

You said: "If I understand you correctly, you say the hock should remain firm (agreed) and upright (disagree). I really don’t think you meant this the way I interpreted it. I am sure you know that the rear foot crosses the front foot in a scissor type motion. Many American breed animals are accused of running on their hocks meaning they are so angulated that the hock actually hits the ground."

I stand wholly corrected on first point, ecs (my mind was no doubt locked on posed side-view!) Scissor type motion is, of course, part and parcel of maintaining a proper track. Latter hock action amounts to travesty?

ECS and Speaknow, you have lost me with your last posts. Any chance you could link us to some still photos and movement photos of the same dogs that would illustrate  your descriptions of the dynamics of locomotion? So far we only have Dingo to compare and it looks to me as if he is one of those rare dogs that  uses himself beyond what would be expected from evaluating him in a show photo.  As Preston as mentioned a number of times, the flexibilty of the ligaments and muscles come into play as well as the angles, bone length, etc.. I'm also interested in finding some videos and/or stills of GSD's coming and going. It seems a lot more emphasis is placed on side gait in this breed so few dogs are filmed from other angles. Thanks....................

ECS, in the AKC dog world we describe dogs with too much rear kick as "showing pad" and it is faulted in most breeds. In my experience with my original breed, it can also be the result of too flat a croup.

As you know, many not all, of the Am line GSD's are hock walkers due to their being sickle hocked; another problem that is IMO the result of a hock joint with restricted motion and thus very little flexibility.  The ligaments are so are tight and inflexible that the dog cannot open that joint wide enough to place it's weight on the pads. They will probably never "show pad".  I'm not really convinced it is all about too much angulation; maybe the dogs appear to be overangulated due to their being sickle hocked.? I think that strong ligaments and long, flat, flexible muscles are as crucial to movement as is overall structure. I've often seen a dog standing still that looked like it would not be able to get out of it's own way move relatively well. They may lack good breed type, but their movement is not bad at all and just as sound as many dogs that look a lot better standing still. Some just seem to defy the old statement that no dog can reach any farther than its shoulder layback will allow.

Well stated Blitzen.

Thanks for your informative input, Blitzen. I’m sorry we lost you with our fairly self-explanatory posts. Bereft of sought-after links, I thoroughly recommend Linda Shaw’s worthy articles instead. Well illustrated, they explain structural components and related functionality in some detail.

Tell the truth, I’m still struggling with most of Preston’s assertions. As they evidently received your praised and unquestioned acceptance, perhaps you, or Preston for that matter, can help me out?

Preston said: "Here is the actual cause: force vector of the rear drive is directed upward too much, can be a byproduct of steep croup or abnormal ratio between rear upper and lower leg and rear hock. The reason this is abnormal is that it is inefficient. Good slow motion analysis at 1/1000 sec per frame will easily show this abnormal force vectoring of the rear drive and any shockwaves or rumba generated by imbalance between the front and rear."

As I understand it, vectors graphically express, symbolize, explain, or are used to geometrically resolve a force’s direction. To then constantly invoke ‘vectors’ per se, as if it were in itself some sort of blanket explanation, without actually describing the forces in question that is, and for what in this case is in effect merely a relatively straightforward mechanical assembly of levers and pulleys, bewilders me no end.

Not only does opening lifted paw snapshot signify very little, but "abnormal ratio between rear upper and lower leg and rear hock" confuses me no end, and in that your average dog, sporting correct croup or not, and speaking of length only, seems mostly either correctly angled or over-angulated, whereas hocks are seemingly either firm and of correct relative length, or otherwise. We also strike, "the reason this is abnormal is that it is inefficient". It is surely rare to find a dog that’s mechanically one hundred percent efficient, or any other mechanical/organic system for that matter, which must leave us with an awful lot of abnormal animals?

Preston also said: "Generally however, a very steep croup tends to cause the dog to propel his whole body upward if the length of the dog is not too long"

With weight mostly located well forward, and rear drive delivered foremost via hip joint to pelvis and lumbar spine, first upwards and then more horizontally, as I understand it anyway, it seems remarkable to me that a "very steep croup" should nonetheless propel the WHOLE body upwards, and irrespective of length! Similarly, I’d rather not raise how "force vectoring forward will be curvilinear", or how that long body helps to "transmit faulty rear drive that’s force vectoring upward too much", but clarification would be much appreciated.

I was of course much taken by the enthusiasm for Canto, not to forget Walter Martin’s wonderfully prescient insights, but other than contributing problematic temperament and various health problems, I thought his transmitted hemophilia affliction was proven fact, rather than just "alleged"? Dying at the ripe old age of four, didn’t he also leave relatively few offspring – as compared to Quanto say?

Thanking you in advance.

Someone should be taking pictures at my house, over the next hour or so, as I raise all my dogs hind legs to see if their hocks extend past the point of their pelvis....poor dogs. jh