This is a placeholder text
Group text
by pod on 17 September 2011 - 18:09
Sunsilver, sorry not sure if you're agreeing with me or not :)
The pressing down on the back (and yes I've seen this done for many years) isn't testing if the spine is flexible in the right direction! Judges I've seen press down on the loin, which of course isn't going to flex downwards because this isn't the normal direction of flexion. It should flex upwards, as it does in the gallop.
Handlers demonstrate quite adequately how flexible the spine is by pressing down on the croup in stance, and having the dogs pull hard into the lead in gaiting, both of which flex the spine into an exaggerated curve.
The pressing down on the back (and yes I've seen this done for many years) isn't testing if the spine is flexible in the right direction! Judges I've seen press down on the loin, which of course isn't going to flex downwards because this isn't the normal direction of flexion. It should flex upwards, as it does in the gallop.
Handlers demonstrate quite adequately how flexible the spine is by pressing down on the croup in stance, and having the dogs pull hard into the lead in gaiting, both of which flex the spine into an exaggerated curve.
by Sunsilver on 17 September 2011 - 18:09
Yes, it has been discussed numerous times. Here's a link to one of the more informative discussions:
http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/german_shepherd_dog/forum.read?mnr=8409
http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/german_shepherd_dog/forum.read?mnr=8409
by noddi on 17 September 2011 - 18:09
I,m with yu on this subject Bazza.Am sick to the back teeth with the S/L animals being ripped to pieces.Yes i do own a S/l female here in the uk,who has imo.done very well in the show ring n is of mostly german showlines with a smattering of english lines in the bottom half of her pedigree about 6/7 generations back.I DO NOT CONSIDER HER ROACHED BACK NOR ARCHED BACK.When she is standing 4 square her backline imo.is straight,however when poised in a show stance ,yes,her backline is slightly sloped(as per standard)Now this bitch has has many placings at champ shows under all types of judges except an alsatian judge,so imo.her backline is correct.I have the uk kc standard here in front of me n quote.....WITHERS LONG.OF GOOD HEIGHT N WELL DEFINEDJOINED TO BACK IN SMOOTH LINE W/O DISRUPTING FLOWING TOPLINE,SLIGHTLY SLOPING FROM FRONT TO BACK.Now to me if summat is slightly sloping then it cant be straight as in a straight line can it???I have been in the show scene since 1986 n in all that time i have only seen a few animals with a roach/arched back n by that i mean one that has a definite peak in the backline(therefore breaking the flowing line from front to back)Now i do agree that some animals have a steeper slope from front to back,but imo these animals are more compact n have too much hind angulation.This is all i have to say on this subject.I prefer this backline to the sagging dippy backs of the alsatian type.Carole Spelman Rheinmeister gsds.
by pod on 17 September 2011 - 19:09
Carole, yes it can be straight and sloping. The back is the area between the withers and the start of the croup and this should be a straight line, not level but straight. A line can be straight and sloping but not level and sloping.
by Sunsilver on 17 September 2011 - 19:09
Pod, I totally agree with everything you said above. The reason 'arched back' is being used in this discussion is that's the term the original poster used. But I can see what you are saying about it being used to get away from the derogatory term 'roached'. Arched back, roached back, or, as it was called way back in GSD history, carp back are all the same thing, and they refer to ANY upward curvature of the spine behind the withers.
But of course, as Bazza says the roach is 'more of a myth than a fact!'
(Edited to add: as pod has pointed out, there is a natural arch to the loin, and the spine is actually slightly 'S' shaped.)
(Second edit: And now, Smiley, I think you are begining to understand why no one wanted to reply to your post at first. This is a 'hot button' topic that has been discussed time and time again, and all too often the discussions get nasty. When the long time members on the board see a topic like this, they just groan, "Oh no, not THIS again!" and turn away. A number of other topics produce the same reaction. "Panda shepherds" and "Shiloh shepherds" are the two that first come to mind...
)
But of course, as Bazza says the roach is 'more of a myth than a fact!'
(Edited to add: as pod has pointed out, there is a natural arch to the loin, and the spine is actually slightly 'S' shaped.)
(Second edit: And now, Smiley, I think you are begining to understand why no one wanted to reply to your post at first. This is a 'hot button' topic that has been discussed time and time again, and all too often the discussions get nasty. When the long time members on the board see a topic like this, they just groan, "Oh no, not THIS again!" and turn away. A number of other topics produce the same reaction. "Panda shepherds" and "Shiloh shepherds" are the two that first come to mind...
)by Ibrahim on 17 September 2011 - 19:09
Abby Normal
No arched back hasn't been proven to be stronger than a straight back.
Roach is used by many to describe dogs who are indeed roached and at the same time to describe dogs who are not actually roached but rather have a semi-straight back, a sloping one which looks like a non-severe arch, this term arched back I confess is the term that came to my mind so I can explain the difference between the two backs.
When I buy a GSD I try my best to buy one with as straight a back as possible because the standard says so. In my previous posts I only wanted to illustrate that not all dogs called roached are in fact roached. I also tried to convey/explain why some show breeders like sloped (slightly arched backs), if you ask me which is the absolutely correct one according to the standard I will answer the straight one, if you ask me which is better/stronger I will answer with no shame (I don't know), if you ask me which is more appealing I can honestly say the slightly arched one, moreover if I were a breeder and in order I remain in the safe zone I wouldn't breed for neither roached nor arched backs, but I am a person who is always called, by my wife & daughter, a conservative.
One very important thing is when you want to see if a back is correct or not do not depend on how it looks like in a stack, you should watch the dog in movement.
Ibrahim
No arched back hasn't been proven to be stronger than a straight back.
Roach is used by many to describe dogs who are indeed roached and at the same time to describe dogs who are not actually roached but rather have a semi-straight back, a sloping one which looks like a non-severe arch, this term arched back I confess is the term that came to my mind so I can explain the difference between the two backs.
When I buy a GSD I try my best to buy one with as straight a back as possible because the standard says so. In my previous posts I only wanted to illustrate that not all dogs called roached are in fact roached. I also tried to convey/explain why some show breeders like sloped (slightly arched backs), if you ask me which is the absolutely correct one according to the standard I will answer the straight one, if you ask me which is better/stronger I will answer with no shame (I don't know), if you ask me which is more appealing I can honestly say the slightly arched one, moreover if I were a breeder and in order I remain in the safe zone I wouldn't breed for neither roached nor arched backs, but I am a person who is always called, by my wife & daughter, a conservative.
One very important thing is when you want to see if a back is correct or not do not depend on how it looks like in a stack, you should watch the dog in movement.
Ibrahim
by Wildmoor on 17 September 2011 - 20:09
it isnt a new phenomenon in the 20s in was termed as a 'carp' back
by Sunsilver on 17 September 2011 - 20:09
One very important thing is when you want to see if a back is correct or not do not depend on how it looks like in a stack, you should watch the dog in movement.
I think that's a very good point, Ibrahim!
I think that's a very good point, Ibrahim!
by Abby Normal on 17 September 2011 - 23:09
Ibrahim
I am not challenging your knowledge or view of which is stronger/better/more desirable/less desirable. Rather the general principle behind the 'convex' back. I agree, seeing the dog in movement is important to see if it is correct. For me, I would say that Dingo v h Gero to use your example, had a correct back, both stacked AND in motion. Provided excellent forward reach and rear extension. There are lots of showline that do have a correct back, equally many do not. I guess what I am getting at is that it is undeniable that a more noticeable upward curve has been creeping in since.
What I was getting at with my two questions was to illustrate that the reason usually presented as an argument for a roach, curved or arched back is strength, which cannot be validated. The second question challenges the statement frequently offered that a straight back is weaker which again is not proved to be the case.
Your dogs have beautiful toplines, and IMHO conservative is GOOD, the opposite leads to exaggeration!
Carole
This thread has not been tearing showline to shreds, it is discussing the principles (and existence) of curved, roached or arched spines in the modern GSD. As with Ibrahims dogs, your girl has a very nice topline. This is not a criticism of every SL dog, there are degrees in all things. I think the confusion here is the definition of roach, and the negative connotations it has. When people think of roach they think, as you say, of a definite 'peak' in the backline, but as sunsilver said the 'arch' is ANY upward curvature of the spine behind the withers. It is a deviation from the standard. To ignore the existence of this element of conformation may possibly lead to it becoming more exaggerated as has happened with overangulation.
I think it has been a very interesting thread, and has given the OP who asked the question in good faith (not wishing to start an argument) a wide range of views, and some very informative links (which I also revisted and found very interesting).
The FCI Breed standard does actually call for a straight back
'The upper line runs from the base of the neck via the high, long withers and via the straight back towards the slightly sloping croup'
I am not challenging your knowledge or view of which is stronger/better/more desirable/less desirable. Rather the general principle behind the 'convex' back. I agree, seeing the dog in movement is important to see if it is correct. For me, I would say that Dingo v h Gero to use your example, had a correct back, both stacked AND in motion. Provided excellent forward reach and rear extension. There are lots of showline that do have a correct back, equally many do not. I guess what I am getting at is that it is undeniable that a more noticeable upward curve has been creeping in since.
What I was getting at with my two questions was to illustrate that the reason usually presented as an argument for a roach, curved or arched back is strength, which cannot be validated. The second question challenges the statement frequently offered that a straight back is weaker which again is not proved to be the case.
Your dogs have beautiful toplines, and IMHO conservative is GOOD, the opposite leads to exaggeration!
Carole
This thread has not been tearing showline to shreds, it is discussing the principles (and existence) of curved, roached or arched spines in the modern GSD. As with Ibrahims dogs, your girl has a very nice topline. This is not a criticism of every SL dog, there are degrees in all things. I think the confusion here is the definition of roach, and the negative connotations it has. When people think of roach they think, as you say, of a definite 'peak' in the backline, but as sunsilver said the 'arch' is ANY upward curvature of the spine behind the withers. It is a deviation from the standard. To ignore the existence of this element of conformation may possibly lead to it becoming more exaggerated as has happened with overangulation.
I think it has been a very interesting thread, and has given the OP who asked the question in good faith (not wishing to start an argument) a wide range of views, and some very informative links (which I also revisted and found very interesting).
The FCI Breed standard does actually call for a straight back
'The upper line runs from the base of the neck via the high, long withers and via the straight back towards the slightly sloping croup'
by Ibrahim on 17 September 2011 - 23:09
I agree that breeding for the extremes whatever those are is incorrect and dangerous, such discussions are healthy as the more we deviate from the standard the more difficult it becomes to maintain type, temperament and good traits of the breed, that is why it is healthy to point out with no hesitation where the breed is going wrong/what brought the breed to current faults and what can be done to rectify the situation, to say the current status of show or work is 100% perfect is blind, on the other hand there is still plenty of good in the show and work types.
In regards to topline I can say that the exagerated ones with steep slope and or over angulations are not the majority, when I was considering buying a show puppy I considered many litters, most of the puppies were with straight backs, some with slope, few with exagerated slope and angulations but the sad thing is the few in most cases were condidered the pic of the litter by the breeders !!!!!!.
Ibrahim
In regards to topline I can say that the exagerated ones with steep slope and or over angulations are not the majority, when I was considering buying a show puppy I considered many litters, most of the puppies were with straight backs, some with slope, few with exagerated slope and angulations but the sad thing is the few in most cases were condidered the pic of the litter by the breeders !!!!!!.
Ibrahim
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top
