Toplines - Page 8

Well very interesting. I did say in my first post I bet if this dog were standing in a natural position he would not look roached. I think he is gorgeous in his bl/wh pic. I have a question though. What is it about the stack that is giving his back the "rounded" look? For example to me his rear angulation and turn of stifle looks much the same as Dallas.... is it the middle piece is longer, length of back or is it something in the stack itself?

Wow, Chris! LOL...what a lesson!

And, like Blitzen, I'm curious as to why handlers stack dogs as they do.

Chris, I never said you called me a name. I was speaking in general about the whole board, not you specifically. Sorry you misunderstood! 

Okay? Are we cool now? Good...gonna go walk the pooches. My bitch, Star,  is in season for the first time, and she's driving Ranger CRAZY with her excess energy. Needs to work some of it off...

I agree, great thread and great lessons - Thanks, Chris!

Hi guys,

I just came back in from being out with the dogs.

Sunsilver, yeah, we are cool, lol.

Trailrider, stacking makes all the difference. That is why I never go by a photo. I always look at movement. My puppies get picked by gaiting and movement, never a stack. When you push the front legs in as far under as you can, take the rear leg and place it well under the dog, you create a rounded back, provided the dog has high withers and a sloping croup. Of course, it all depends on the individual dog as well. I have to admit that neither Joe nor I are good stackers, though. There are people in Germany who can stack any dog to look like a top V-rated contender.

Ranchinglady and Blitzen, I can't answer why dogs are stacked like that. Fashion I guess. I could ask the same thing about the Ambreds, though. Why are they pulled out so far that they slope downhill so much? Again, I know that is also an illusion to a certain extent, but it does fuel the fire about the crippled AKC dogs (now I did not say that, I know that not all are like that, but it is the general consensus).

In Germany, people don't call these dogs roached. They (usually the workingline people) call them "downhill" dogs, and are shocked when somebody points out the Ambreds as being worse.

AIR, Harras appears more deep chested than he really is because the black and white photo was taken in a slightly downward angle. Check it again and you will see. If you look down on a dog, even ever so slightly they look more deep chested or short legged. Again, photos can be deceiving. Although I have to agree that he is pretty deep for his age already.

The reason I started that thread was to point out that most dogs are not roached. They are only made to look like that. Like Preston and Jagenstadt pointed out, he only way to label a dog roached is if in movement or stance (naturally) any part of the back is higher than the withers.

Chris

Thanks Chris!

I have been told that my girl has a nice topline and good angulation. She does have other flaws, and this was a 'natural'  stack, or I would have corrected how east-west she's standing. But I thought that the standard stated a gently sloping topline that ends in a sabre-like tail...jh

oh, BTW- she is linebred on Fanto....jh

Chris,

  If this "roach-back" is an illusion then why does it not show when dogs such as Marc (shown above) are stacked.  I would think that if it were truly an illusion and not caused by the dogs ACTUAL CONFORMATION then it would show when all dogs are stacked. 

 He looks just like I thought he would standing naturally. Nice dog.

Good thread.