Linebreeding on Norbo Ben Ju? - Page 3

Gustav, thank you...I was offended. You can't talk about someone's kids like that!

I wasn't offended about the info offered up, all I asked for was more info instead of mystery. :)

Thanks for the replies everyone, I doubt that Joanro meant to offend anyone with her questions I think her point was that maybe the dam could be accountable for the health issues that arose from the breeding. Either way I thought the question was fair, however I understand why people react the way they do on this particular forum, but I think a debate is always healthy so long as it never gets personal and facts dominate it.

So again, thank you CPHudson for your input but I don't really care for titled dogs much so long as they're effecient in their work whether it be Schutzhund, PPD or law enforcement. OGBS, I'll look up the health issues along with the pedigrees, I hope to find something. Joanro, your contribution's priceless thanks, it's good to know what you get when you strike gold. Same goes for B. Anderson, I love the lanky athletic look your dogs. Your dogs sound like complete GSD, all the best with them. GSDPack, you're right on about genetics, no one can deny that. Gustav thanks for the contribution, good point on Grim, I heard you to watch for the elbows. Funny thing I read was that his hips were perfect dispite what was being said about him, Dargo was testimony to this as he's a hip improver (read this on Hans' forum). There are people that have linebred on Grim successfully, as with everything I think in order to achieve one has to have intimate knowledge of that given dog's pedigree. But I'm not saying nothing new here, as I now you that you stated "of course their are exceptions to every rule but this is in general." Great contribution all in all, appreciate it all. I wanted to get a glimpse of the good and bad of the topic and you guys helped me out, thank you all.
 

Mighty Zeus you started a nice thread and some good info was revealed.....nothing is absolute in dogs....except that dog people being passionate. Now passionate is not always productive....but that's another subject....lol.
Joanro is right in wanting to look at dam side of equation in terms of Norbo. That's why although there are generalizations that can be made about specific dogs and their progeny....all it takes is for a dam to have an overriding genetic makeup in the area for many of the pups to express another look. Take Fero for example, was he more like Troll or Timmy????? He was the father of both and they show a different phenotype and have produced different type dogs in many cases. So what is Fero?...Timmy or Troll.....this is what makes genetics so fascinating and complicated. The more information you have about all the dogs in a pedigree, the better chance you have of being accurate.....and that still is no guarantee. That's why people shouldnt get personal or offended at hearing different things that dogs produced.....there are so many impacts from the other side. So when we share information....we learn. Many people know I like Sid v h Pixner as a stud, for some females; to produce the type of dog that can do LE work. Trust me I know of his faults in production very well. As a matter of fact it is more important to know his shortcomings in producing, or how else am I going to be able to steer clear of incompatible matings. I dont get offended when I read negative about him....first he isnt my dog....lol, and even if I own progeny of him that doesn't affect my dog for me to take offense.(Unless its true about my dog also and then instead of offense, I think confirmation as somebody other than me is experiencing the same thing)
We need the experienced people to step up and weigh in on things about dogs and bloodlines....it helps the breed in enabling more info to be amassed by the dedicated breeders who are interested in the breed. Sure, there are people who are A__holes, that care more about tearing down than building, or people who have their heads in a hole because they dont want to change or acknowledge what is; but there are many people who have learned a lot from this and other forums and what they learn is as good as the quality of the experienced people responding.
C'mon folks lets rise above pettiness.....and good thread Mighty Zeus!

I asked Jiri Novotny once at a seminar on breeding of the PS dogs why I didn't see many offsprings from a particlar stud they had. His reply was they didn't need to use them at the present time. He was using different dogs from the same line to bring into the line something that was beginning to be pushed back. My thoughts were , and still is that they were more concerned with the over all contribution to the line rather than just the individual dog. I haven't changed my opinion of what he said and I agree with it.

I think to often we look to reproduce to much of what we have instead of trying to improve on what is there. JMO

Hank

""they were more concerned with the over all contribution to the line rather than just the individual dog. I haven't changed my opinion of what he said and I agree with it.""

i know absolutely nothing about czech breeding & won't pretend to, but this little bit really caught my attention and sums up the difference in the frame of mind between breeders.  the only reason i took a look at this thread is because it is of the same vein as another thread being debated right now.  this is a good discussion.  i will keep this quote in the back of my mind always.  wish others would too.
pjp

 

"I think to often we look to reproduce to much of what we have instead of trying to improve on what is there. JMO"

I doubt that I could have put it any better. I will also add that luckily not everyone linebreeds to reproduce a given dog (I know that you didn't mean it in this sense), but to rather stabilize, enhance or reintroduce a trait that a given line has lost somewhere along the way. Speaking of Jiri, Hans quoted him to have said that he by far prefers dogs of today compared to those from the "golden era" that everyone seems enthralled with, because dog's of today are by far more stable and versatile generally compared to the infallible "legends" of yesterday. Don’t get me wrong and think that I’m mocking the legendary dogs that have advanced the breed to this point, I’m merely speaking to the nostalgic owners and breeders that always resort to this debate. Nobody should be afraid to state their reality and experience, that’s what will advance the breed. The good and bad are all ultimately GOOD as they tell us what to stick to and stay away from. We all in it for the advancement of the breed and research is the first step in that direction.  

No , I wasn't necessarily refering to just line breeding. But another reason to line breed is exclusion not just inclusion. i think out crossing and line breeding is important in a long breeding program. I also heard Jiri say that, but he was refering to the diversity in a dog to meet the demands of the day. My take was not so specialized at specific tasks but versitile enough to perform a wide variety of tasks. But that was how I understood that to mean and I don't want to put words in his mouth.

Hank

Hank I know exacctly what youmeant, I said as much in my comment. Good point on the fact that line-breeding is also done to eliminate undesirable traits, not merely to enhance and include traits, how did I forget to type that. I think that if it's not versatile, then it's not a German Shepherd no matter what specific task it specializes inn. I wouldn't wanna put words in his mouth neither but I'm sure that's what he meant.

The times have changed and the dogs haved changed.....in the golden age so to speak.....this breed was used for things such as seeing-eye dogs as well as herding, police, military, family and property protection. There was no such thing as a sport dog because sch trials were primarily for breed assessment and to showcase the dog instead of the culture. You almost never saw over the top prey drive as it hadn't been developed to the extent it is today. Dogs in trials were rewarded for hard grips and fight drive instead of full grips and ride along. You never heard full grips mentioned in the judges critque back then, and a 1 to 10 point system was given to measure fight of the dog. A dog back then could have full grips and receive an 8 in his critique, while a dog with 3/4 grips but big fight would recieve a full 1o. Nobody was interested in dogs under 9 and even 9 was not sought. Scores werent as important as the demonstrated strength of the dog....this was the culture. Precision training was not as valued as effective training.
I was fortunate enough to train dogs at a kennel of 250 fifty working dogs of all types,(sentry, patrol, scout, tracker, SAR, mine and tunnel) for over three years.(in early seventies) 
My point is there are great dogs today, and great dogs then, one of the differences is there were no lines back then. Show dogs could work and working dogs could show....so a larger genepool. Different times have dictated different dogs....the different lines of dogs today are necessary to be successful in the current culture of sport/show. The eastern bloc dogs were not available to the west from 1945 to 1990....and viceversa(except for exceptions like Bernd).
So to me there isn't a better dog, with the changing times and USES of the breed different types have emerged. I happen to participate in a venue for the breed that has been consistent for many years with the breed.(Police) A good police dog of the early seventies would be a good police dog today....I dont have to ask anyone I trained them in both eras. Now a dog of the early era would not do well in today's show world, or would not do well in today's top sport world......the times have changed and the dogs have changed and the uses have changed.
One last thing....the primary breeders today pretty much breed for show/or sport....and as such breed for traits that are successful in show/and sport. Many police and military dog trainers will tell you that this doesnt necessarily transfer useable dogs for them. Thus the decline in their use and the incline of dogs like the malinois, (there are also other reasons for the increase of the malinois, but if you talk to breeders of GS they will tell you one thing, if you talk to police dog trainers you get other reasons), so its not about the infallible legends of the older times. The infallible legends(I am being sarcastic), would not do well in sport or show today....thats a given and these are primary engines for breeders today, but for plain work(herding, police, military,seeing-eye) and family protection, I see nothing today that is superior to those dogs back then. This is just my opinion, no more no less,.....the times have changed, and the dogs have changed.