Who says competitive WL GSDs can't have excellent conformation

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by Red Sable on 24 October 2010 - 19:10

" If the breedstandard hasn´t changed then a good structure in former years should be it also today. It´s actually the other way around, the dogshows have made many GSDs looking as something that seems to get farther away from the standard, and not preserving a certain structure and looks according to the standard. "

Well said, and EXACTLY right.

by Ibrahim on 24 October 2010 - 20:10

Please someone from the well informed take a break and answer this question for me and others:
Many as I know believe/understand that the standard was made with intention/aim to be achieved through selective breeding over a period of time, so the dogs at the time the standard was made were not complete good representitives of the standard but the future GSD might and hopefully will be (and that is why you hear for the betterment of the breed). Many think that today's GSD is the closest to the breed in regards to structure and I am one of them (excluding the roach back) but needs enforcement in regards to temperament and working abilities.
If this belief or understanding is correct why do people (like dear Red Sable) keep repeating " a good structure in former years should be it also today" ? Some one please answer.

Ibrahim

by Red Sable on 24 October 2010 - 20:10

Ibrahim, why wouldn't Max's dogs be what the standard was based on, as he created the breed?

by Ibrahim on 24 October 2010 - 20:10

Because they were only foundation dogs with too varying traits and structures, he had a vision in his mind of the perfect GSD ( a dream) and wanted to reach it through selective breeding using the standard as the guideline.

Ibrahim

by Ibrahim on 24 October 2010 - 20:10

I think he would be proud of what West German Showline looks like nowadays but he would ask for removing the roach and lessen a bit in angulation but would not be happy of the ability for work and ask to strengthen it.

Ibrahim

by Red Sable on 24 October 2010 - 20:10

And you think that dream was froggy backends and a roached back? A flying trot? He warned about keeping it a working breed. IMO he was very wise, almost like he could see into the future. I bet if he did see what we were doing to the GSD he'd cry.

Anyway, obviously I'm in the minority, and that's fine, I'm used to it.

I'm done with this. This is exhausting. What will be will be.

by Ibrahim on 24 October 2010 - 20:10

No I am not pro the roach back neither the overangulation, what he warned against is while progressing towards the required structure keep it a working dog which many SL breeders slipped but it can be rectified by introducing working dogs of good enough anatomy and who are of great working ability into the SL breeding programs in a well thought of doses so we don't loose the anatomy we reached, SL dogs of today are much better in regards to front and rear angulation, chest, topline etc but not work and tepperement.

Ibrahim

by Rik on 24 October 2010 - 22:10

It started getting tiresome for me when a thread clearly marked and intended to discuss good conformation in the w/l, as set forth by the SV, is set upon as always by the same usual suspects.

Who cannot tolerate any opinion other than their own, who cannot stay out of any discussion that has nothing to do with their opinion. And hopes that everyone gets Mals, because no else in the world can possibly understand what a GSD is.

Rik

by Gustav on 25 October 2010 - 00:10

Rik,
I am not trying to turn this into a SL vs WL subject. What some of us are saying is that the structure of "V" today whether it be SL or WL is not necessarily good working structure. That WL breeders are striving to get structure like the SL structure and maintain it is a workingline. Some of us define workingline by work, and good structure is balance that is needed for work. Not pleasing length of stifle, or excessive angulation, or extreme flying trot, as these things are not something needed for the dog to work and actually decreases work capability. Good solid conformation from 50, 60, 70's provided both good structure and good working from the SAME dogs. Why should we move away from that???? The prettier we got and the sportier we got the less we started seeing our breed working. Could be coincidence?????NAH!

by Rik on 25 October 2010 - 00:10

Gustav, I do understand what you are saying. I also understand you are saying it from decades of choosing dogs for work. Others just parrot what they read from a book or cruising the internet.

I do not agree that the decline in working is the result of the dog being sportier or prettier or a little more angulation. It is the result of not choosing work as the first attribute and considering these other issues further down the list.

As for dogs of the past being better, 1937 Sieger Pfeffer presents an almost identical rear to many SG and V rated w/l dogs today. So do I believe that a little extra angulation is what contributed to the decline in working ability. To quote you, "Nah".
www.pedigreedatabase.com/german_shepherd_dog/pedigree/2043.html

Best,
Rik

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

Who says competitive WL GSDs can't have excellent conformation - Page 15

Pedigree Database