
This is a placeholder text
Group text

by pod on 20 January 2009 - 09:01
David, could you say which parts of the UK KC standard you believe to favour the Alsatian type construction. One major difference I can see between this and the FCI standard is in the back and topline.
The KC allows for a slightly sloping back - "falling away slightly in a straight line to the gently sloping croup" in that the back is part of the topline therein described......
The FCI also asks for a straight back but also a level back in movement (as shephersmom has earlier highlighted)
"With his head thrust forward and a slightly raised tail, a balanced and even trotter will have a topline that falls in moderate curves from the tip of the ears over the neck and level back through the tip of the tail."
See Dingo vom Haus Gero to illustrate the slighty sloping back in stance -
http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/gsd/pedigree/39.html
and straight, level back in movement -
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TIFpKL0qRQ0
There may be a very slight convex curve in his back in stance and this is probably attributable to handling techniques, but apart from that, this dog complies with the FCI standard in topline and back.
So, from what I can see the UK KC standard, if anything, favours the sloping modern day WG type over the Alsatian (which generally has much less, or no slope) in allowing a sloping back, both in stance and movement.

by Videx on 20 January 2009 - 11:01

by pod on 20 January 2009 - 12:01
Edit to add: I'm not saying for one minute that the KC's is ideal, and there are better worded clauses in the FCI's that I can see too, but I'd just like to know exactly which bits you refer to when you say that the KC favours Alsatian type.

by missbeeb on 20 January 2009 - 12:01
Hello pod, we're all too aware of how much credence David's argument has... shame we've waited so long really.


by pod on 20 January 2009 - 12:01

by missbeeb on 20 January 2009 - 12:01
Pod, One only has to look at the 'photo to feel slightly apoplectic! You're after a "debate" and I guess no-one's interested... it's been going on too long.

by Videx on 20 January 2009 - 12:01
by Member on 20 January 2009 - 13:01
I cannot believe that someone can be saying the FCI standard is simular to the one put forward by the UK Kennel Club when you only need to look at the picture which has been put forward to represent the Breed on the so called new standard which is currently being displayed on the Kennel Club Site. A very good dog man once told me "YOU NEED EYES TO LOOK BUT VISION TO SEE"!!! All the talk and postings in the world will never alter personal beliefs and this is why no matter how many pictures or drawings you put on the DATA BASE people will only see what they want to see. If you look at the progress made in Germany with regards to the type of "Horand" and those that followed under the same leadership for many years( Max) the dogs improved and have continued to do so ever since. Look at Chapter One in Word and Picture of the GSD and then the improvement that was made in type over the next 50 years, do not try and tell me they looked the same as "Horand".
John Ward

by funky munky on 20 January 2009 - 13:01

by pod on 20 January 2009 - 16:01
I do find it incredible that breeders/judges who found dogs like Uran and Dingo to be superb examples of the breed in the 80s can now say that the modern day WG show winner is also of correct type.... or somehow better. There is no comparison.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top