Best breeding dogs don't win big events - Page 1

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Nadeem6

by Nadeem6 on 15 April 2012 - 12:04

The dogs you want to breed are not the ones that win the big events.  They are ususally in 5 or 6th place.  The winners are too compliant and biddable and won't produce what you want in a litter.

Our TD at our club made this statement to someone that was looking at pedigree's and researching a new puppy.  I was thnking about this and i think he is right.  Since IPO/Schutzhund is dominated by obedience exercises.  Tracking, obedience of course, and protection are all obedience based. The more compliant dogs will eek out a couple more points than the "harder" more dominant type dogs. 

But i see lot's of breeders wanting to breed to the top winners and sometimes even stating something to the effect of "i used him 'cause he is the top dog since he won nationals, etc."

I am sure there are many exceptions since genetics is basically rolling the dice and just trying to get the odds in your favor, but seems like a good rule of thumb for the most part.  But as always it's best to go and look at the dog you are considering breeding or getting a pup from if possible.

Jenni78

by Jenni78 on 15 April 2012 - 13:04

I don't think biddable is a bad thing. I disagree that biddability is why they win. I think high high prey paired with a lack of initiative to think for themselves is closer to accurate, and I agree that the dogs you (I) want to breed to are not the top winners though. If you look at the "big names" (flavor the week types) you'll see that the don't always produce what you want. I will take the V Snoopy von der Fasaneries (failed SchH1 more than once I believe, for not outing), V Chico vom Inheidener Sees, etc.  any day over the easily frustrated, hectic, more showy, less naturally aggressive types that make the big points.

I don't see dominant as a positive trait- it is a nuisance I put up with because it is often paired with other traits I value very much. Take the good with the bad. This could be one of those semantics arguments, though, because what I call dominant is probably far different than what Mrs. Jones down the street calls dominant.


Hired Dog

by Hired Dog on 15 April 2012 - 13:04

I believe that at any given time, there are about 5 dogs on the planet in each breed that are true producers and I assure you they are not on any ring. They live in someone's back yard, working sheep in some obscure place somewhere...
Those are the dogs to breed to, but, unfortunately, for many reasons, these dogs do not get bred. Having said that, I want nothing to do with the top winning dog of any competition...someone else in here described why very well.

In my area of interests, I would rather breed to someone like Nierlenders Egbert than the dog that won the Nationals. Breeding to any dog, of course, is playing the genetic lottery, but, once you find that one dog that will produce what you want litter after litter, with several females, that is the dog to breed to, regardless of titles. I am sure there are many serious dog people that can tell a good dog without needing a judge to point it out to them.

by joanro on 15 April 2012 - 13:04

Excellent post, Hired Dog.

Chaz Reinhold

by Chaz Reinhold on 15 April 2012 - 14:04

Well, sometimes those dogs don't reproduce themselves either. Depends on the dog that wins the trial. If mike Diehl wins next week in Columbus, is it because the dog is exactly how you described? I don't think so. If he takes 4th, does that mean he is breed worthy? Take a look at the dog, and cross your fingers. Your TDs theory isn't foolproof. Just like thinking that any dog that won't out is "tough".

Jenni78

by Jenni78 on 15 April 2012 - 14:04

Hired dog- nice post. My sentiments exactly.

My favorite dogs of all time (ones I actually know/knew) are not dogs that most of the sport world has ever even heard of. 

Much of who wins has to do with the handler, too. 

Chaz, is THAT what you thought I meant by mentioning why (if memory serves) Snoopy failed his SchH1??? Um, no. 

Chaz Reinhold

by Chaz Reinhold on 15 April 2012 - 14:04

Jenni, I knew you would take that the way you did. I just happened to use you example. Dogs don't out for many reasons..nothing is exact.

Jenni78

by Jenni78 on 15 April 2012 - 14:04

Whatever. That doesn't really make any sense. "Just like thinking any dog who won't out is tough" was your statement, and it makes zero sense (since nobody said anything about a dog who won't out except my brief reference, as an aside) except if you assumed I was talking about dogs who won't out being tough. Hence, my question. 

I knew, posting on here that a dog failed, would mean someone would ask why he failed. So, I gave the reason I remembered being told. It was neither here nor there and certainly not central to WHY I would take ten of that dog over one million Javirs. 

by duke1965 on 15 April 2012 - 14:04

nadeem, very much so , and even with todays training techniques there are more top sport dogs you dont want to use for breeding, unfortunately many breeders and puppybuyers think differently and run to the flavor of the day for breeding or to get a puppy from , furthermore the most sportdogs today are so much outcrossed that the chance of reproducing anything close to similar to themselves is almost 0 %  and they depend on the quality bitches bred by them to have some good offspring, some of these guys need 1000plus offspring to have a few good ones running around

Chaz Reinhold

by Chaz Reinhold on 15 April 2012 - 14:04

Ok, let me slow it down for you. The point of my original post was that you need to still look at the individual dog. Whether he won a WUSV, etc. My analogy on outing had nothing to do with you. Most things don't, honey. Dogs don't out for various reasons. Look at each dog. Just like my point of looking at the dogs, not where they place. The difference between 1st and 10th place in a trial, can have zero to do with genetics, and all to do with training.





 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top