This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Blitzen on 05 June 2012 - 00:06
Sitasmom asks........
Why don't showline people comment on the short, upright forearms and straight hocks when a working line dog is stacked for comments on this board?
I don't because the one time in 8 years on this board that I did say one negative thing about working lines I ended up getting tarred and feathered
. SL posters are clearly in the minority here. Descretion is the better part of valor.
Why don't showline people comment on the short, upright forearms and straight hocks when a working line dog is stacked for comments on this board?
I don't because the one time in 8 years on this board that I did say one negative thing about working lines I ended up getting tarred and feathered
. SL posters are clearly in the minority here. Descretion is the better part of valor.by SitasMom on 05 June 2012 - 01:06
marjorie
he is amazing....fluid motion......thanks for the photos.
by SitasMom on 05 June 2012 - 01:06
Blitzen - what your're saying is that they can dish it out, but they cannot take it?
When they post a stack of a working dog, one would THINK that they would want a true critique......
When they post a stack of a working dog, one would THINK that they would want a true critique......
by Gustav on 05 June 2012 - 02:06
Most workingline people feel that the structure of Marko vom Cellerland, Mutz vd Peltzerferm and Bernd v Lierberg IS correct struture , which is similar to what WL look like. They are not interested in SL structure of today. All of those dogs were judged by the standard......so everyone can feel happy....WL people want the standard structure of the 50's,60's and SL people want the structure that has evolved. So everyone is happy
. Both judged by the standard which hasn't changed.
. Both judged by the standard which hasn't changed. 
by Red Sable on 05 June 2012 - 02:06
When they post a stack of a working dog, one would THINK that they would want a true critique......
According to those who think roached back hock walkers are what a GSD is supposed to be?
Show us an example of your short upright forearms and straight hocks and lets compare.
According to those who think roached back hock walkers are what a GSD is supposed to be?
Show us an example of your short upright forearms and straight hocks and lets compare.
by Blitzen on 05 June 2012 - 03:06
No way am I going to post pictures of other's WL dogs with bad fronts. Let's get real, not all WL's have those faults anymore than do all SL's have roachy toplines and are hockwalkers. The last big SV show I attended had a large entry of working females and males. There was only one dog in either of those classes with a roach back and he didn't place very well. I didn't see one hockwalker either. The fact is SL's with roach backs and sickle hocks are no more common than are WL's with bad fronts.
My guess is few WL lovers have ever attended an SV show. Look at a dog of another line and you will get turned into a pillar of salt. Go to an AKC show, god forbid, to watch the GSD judging and you will most likely be struck dead by a bolt of lightning. Most breeds are populated by people who like to help other breeders become successful. Not this one; all we seem to get done is to argue over which line is the better line while turning a blind eye to the faults in our own dogs.
My guess is few WL lovers have ever attended an SV show. Look at a dog of another line and you will get turned into a pillar of salt. Go to an AKC show, god forbid, to watch the GSD judging and you will most likely be struck dead by a bolt of lightning. Most breeds are populated by people who like to help other breeders become successful. Not this one; all we seem to get done is to argue over which line is the better line while turning a blind eye to the faults in our own dogs.
by Ibrahim on 05 June 2012 - 06:06
I may not agree totally with all the details Sitasmom is saying but she has my appreciation for speaking her mind honestly in a not-very friendly environment, also if it wasn't for Gustav I might have never learned how vital the temperament is for the breed especially with all the fascination I had about the structure and beauty of movement and as a matter of fact still do.
I might be totally wrong but at this point I believe what makes the GSD unique and different is its structure that makes it suitable for almost all types of work. At the beginning of creating the breed the creator looked for and chose specimens of what he thought resembled the image of his breed type he had in mind, he started with shaping the type he longed for keeping in mind preserving the work ability which at the time was available in the working dogs which in turn were the herders, no other work was more important to the man then than herding flocks of sheep and guarding/protecting them and those herding dogs had the inner quality he appreciated and wanted in his breed. As breeding program went on he always went back to the working dogs to enhance the work ability in his on going forming of dog type and that is how the type was developed and work ability/temperament was preserved.
In the beginning he had a vision of the type he wanted to reach and he worked on forming it and he did a good job though at the time he left our world it is true he was closer to that type but not 100% there and the mission then was handed over to his successors.
From the above it is false to criticize the present type by comparing it to the dogs promoted at his time, the type then was still a vision not a reality and was not a done job.
Through the process of shaping the type/form he and his mates faced various falls which they corrected instantly with courageous measures and as civilization developed more jobs evolved for the dog and they played along with them and the inner quality of the GSD proved fit for all of them to varying degrees of success. The learned lesson from all that is the GSD breed came up with a unigue form of a dog as the form wasn't there in any single dog but it was shaped through selective breeding of chosen specimens and setting of consistent type and preserving the inner quality while developing the outer form. Good working dogs were available in the start but unified form wasn't and that was the goal, making a new form of a dog that is to have certain appreciated inner qualities.
Those who think or claim that type or form is not important are way from understanding the vision of the creator of the breed and those who think or claim inner quality (temperament and work ability) is secondary are way from understanding what was the biggest concern of the creator while he shaped the form of the breed he had in mind.
Also in logic those who think work ability when forced to make a choice is the right decision are also wrong as the GSD is Form + inner quality not either one. It maybe correct in general that what a dog can do is more useful than what it looks like, but then we're not talking GSD which as per the creator is special form combined with inner quality, otherwise what was it behind creating the new breed, the GSD from the beginning ?!!! Good working dogs were available and plenty !!!
Coming back to present reality we now reached a point where the form/shape/type of the breed is excellent and maybe better than what the creator himself was hoping for and it is being produced with very good consistency, there is no breed on earth that is as beautiful, well balanced and can move efficiently as the GSD is and does.
Also there is no other breed that can do various types of jobs as the GSD can and does, till this time there is a suitable GSD for almost all and each individual.
Is the breed at this time perfect with no dangers at the door of its future?, I say it is not and the dangers are there and horrifying.
Were we without mistakes in moving on with the breed? I say we made several serious mistake that need to be addressed and serious measures should be taken.
The biggest mistake was the evident split between work and show, the breed was meant to be one that has the correct form and the work ability simultaneously in one dog.
The Show limited the breed to one color and that is a big mistake, to understand why please refer to previous posts by Gustav & other valued members on the subject.
The Show stopped going back to the working dogs and ended up with a softer GSD while the creator when needed always went back to the working dogs to get back and or enhance a lost or weakened trait.
The Work forgot what the breed was all about; form but yet preservation of temperament and ended up with a strong temperament, good work ability without form !!! Most Wl breeders have a higher voice here but that does not make them right and doesn't cover their sins, the mistakes Sl breeders made and make does not make the Wl breeders the right doers as they too did harm to what the breed was intended to be and made the other side of the deteriorating coin.
There are Show dogs with good work ability but it's not the normal of today and not consistent.
There are Work dogs with good form but it's not the normal of today and not consistent.
At the same time there are structural faults in the Show but its not the usual. Also
there are temperamental faults in the Work but its not the usuall and the latter two , though important, are not the biggest dangers facing each type of the breed idividually.
The solution is possible and achievable for those who realize that those dangers are present and need to be courageously admitted, and the solution is not necessarily a one-path solution but might be a multi-approach one.
The Show breeders are more admitting of the dangers the breed is facing and therefore most probably the solution will come from within them. while the Work breeders are very happy with what the Show dog is going through thinking since they don't have the same issues they're safe and need not do any corrections and some are even asking the Show dog be re-named and have a seperate breed thinking their dog is closer to the standard when it is actually gone astray from the form the GSD was made around in the first place. The breed type and form is in good status, using the work dogs to enhance and return back the lost traits is achievable, it was done before using a less favorable dogs and it can still be done by smart breeders, no matter what Daryl claims of genetics barriers, it would have been beneficial if he used his genetics knowledge into a positive push forward for the breed rather than discouraging other breeders from re-doing what was done before successfully.
Just my opinion and at this very point as I know I am learning a new thing everyday.
Ibrahim
I might be totally wrong but at this point I believe what makes the GSD unique and different is its structure that makes it suitable for almost all types of work. At the beginning of creating the breed the creator looked for and chose specimens of what he thought resembled the image of his breed type he had in mind, he started with shaping the type he longed for keeping in mind preserving the work ability which at the time was available in the working dogs which in turn were the herders, no other work was more important to the man then than herding flocks of sheep and guarding/protecting them and those herding dogs had the inner quality he appreciated and wanted in his breed. As breeding program went on he always went back to the working dogs to enhance the work ability in his on going forming of dog type and that is how the type was developed and work ability/temperament was preserved.
In the beginning he had a vision of the type he wanted to reach and he worked on forming it and he did a good job though at the time he left our world it is true he was closer to that type but not 100% there and the mission then was handed over to his successors.
From the above it is false to criticize the present type by comparing it to the dogs promoted at his time, the type then was still a vision not a reality and was not a done job.
Through the process of shaping the type/form he and his mates faced various falls which they corrected instantly with courageous measures and as civilization developed more jobs evolved for the dog and they played along with them and the inner quality of the GSD proved fit for all of them to varying degrees of success. The learned lesson from all that is the GSD breed came up with a unigue form of a dog as the form wasn't there in any single dog but it was shaped through selective breeding of chosen specimens and setting of consistent type and preserving the inner quality while developing the outer form. Good working dogs were available in the start but unified form wasn't and that was the goal, making a new form of a dog that is to have certain appreciated inner qualities.
Those who think or claim that type or form is not important are way from understanding the vision of the creator of the breed and those who think or claim inner quality (temperament and work ability) is secondary are way from understanding what was the biggest concern of the creator while he shaped the form of the breed he had in mind.
Also in logic those who think work ability when forced to make a choice is the right decision are also wrong as the GSD is Form + inner quality not either one. It maybe correct in general that what a dog can do is more useful than what it looks like, but then we're not talking GSD which as per the creator is special form combined with inner quality, otherwise what was it behind creating the new breed, the GSD from the beginning ?!!! Good working dogs were available and plenty !!!
Coming back to present reality we now reached a point where the form/shape/type of the breed is excellent and maybe better than what the creator himself was hoping for and it is being produced with very good consistency, there is no breed on earth that is as beautiful, well balanced and can move efficiently as the GSD is and does.
Also there is no other breed that can do various types of jobs as the GSD can and does, till this time there is a suitable GSD for almost all and each individual.
Is the breed at this time perfect with no dangers at the door of its future?, I say it is not and the dangers are there and horrifying.
Were we without mistakes in moving on with the breed? I say we made several serious mistake that need to be addressed and serious measures should be taken.
The biggest mistake was the evident split between work and show, the breed was meant to be one that has the correct form and the work ability simultaneously in one dog.
The Show limited the breed to one color and that is a big mistake, to understand why please refer to previous posts by Gustav & other valued members on the subject.
The Show stopped going back to the working dogs and ended up with a softer GSD while the creator when needed always went back to the working dogs to get back and or enhance a lost or weakened trait.
The Work forgot what the breed was all about; form but yet preservation of temperament and ended up with a strong temperament, good work ability without form !!! Most Wl breeders have a higher voice here but that does not make them right and doesn't cover their sins, the mistakes Sl breeders made and make does not make the Wl breeders the right doers as they too did harm to what the breed was intended to be and made the other side of the deteriorating coin.
There are Show dogs with good work ability but it's not the normal of today and not consistent.
There are Work dogs with good form but it's not the normal of today and not consistent.
At the same time there are structural faults in the Show but its not the usual. Also
there are temperamental faults in the Work but its not the usuall and the latter two , though important, are not the biggest dangers facing each type of the breed idividually.
The solution is possible and achievable for those who realize that those dangers are present and need to be courageously admitted, and the solution is not necessarily a one-path solution but might be a multi-approach one.
The Show breeders are more admitting of the dangers the breed is facing and therefore most probably the solution will come from within them. while the Work breeders are very happy with what the Show dog is going through thinking since they don't have the same issues they're safe and need not do any corrections and some are even asking the Show dog be re-named and have a seperate breed thinking their dog is closer to the standard when it is actually gone astray from the form the GSD was made around in the first place. The breed type and form is in good status, using the work dogs to enhance and return back the lost traits is achievable, it was done before using a less favorable dogs and it can still be done by smart breeders, no matter what Daryl claims of genetics barriers, it would have been beneficial if he used his genetics knowledge into a positive push forward for the breed rather than discouraging other breeders from re-doing what was done before successfully.
Just my opinion and at this very point as I know I am learning a new thing everyday.
Ibrahim
by Red Sable on 05 June 2012 - 09:06
Blitzen I have been to AKC (well CKC) shows, and I have shown a GSL. That is where I began, however, my post was directed as Sitasmom.
I'm not a WL fan, I am a GSD fan (of the good ones that is) so it does NOT hurt my feelings in the least to pinpoint faults on any dog. No one is going to fix this mess by burying their head in the sand or by being politically correct.
by Gustav on 05 June 2012 - 11:06
Ibrahim, I respect you a lot but in your dialogue you have confused me. If I look at the form of the dogs of the creator's time, and I look at the form of the golden era of Quanto, Mutz. Marko, and Bernd, they look closer to typical WL today then the dogs "winning" in the show ring. Here's where I am confused.....if the prior dogs were judged by the same standard,(Bernd, Mutz, Marko), where is the deterioration of the WL structure, if the WL look and approach these dogs in structure. These dogs were Seigers and high VA as judged by the standard.....yep the same standard!!. If the standard hasn't changed and the structure was deemed excellent then, why would it not still be excellent. I'm not comphrehending this.
Secondly, I think you take some liberty with the creator's look on work vs show. I have had his book for over forty years and read it numerous times....he makes it clear about how he feels about show and work....he makes it clear that in terms of BREEDING, one you should not breed for and one you must never lose. This theory that he felt that both of these things are equally important in breeding German Shepherds is not in line with the creator. Or else I misunderstand what he wrote
.
So we have to start at proper foundation, of what the creator stressed, to have adequate dialogue on this subject and be able to assess what has happened and how far has it strayed from the creator that you kept referencing. Otherwise, we are back to promoting what we like over what should be by the standard. Case in point,I know that the creator didn't favor Black and Red over all other colors....in fact he was quite clear about the importance of color.....doesn't it appear we have that twisted somewhat in our selections in the show world????....Again, Abrahim, I will repeat this to you because you have integrity and will not twist my words, I like Black and Red dogs in terms of color just as much as I like sable, bi, black, or black and tan. I really do!!!! Owned black and red dogs before most people on this forum was born, handled a black and red dog in the military as narcotic contraband dog. I'm just a guy that has read the book, tried to grasp the principles from the book, and have dedicated my life to continuing to perpetuate the types of dog the book says the breed should be....no more no less.
Thanks
Secondly, I think you take some liberty with the creator's look on work vs show. I have had his book for over forty years and read it numerous times....he makes it clear about how he feels about show and work....he makes it clear that in terms of BREEDING, one you should not breed for and one you must never lose. This theory that he felt that both of these things are equally important in breeding German Shepherds is not in line with the creator. Or else I misunderstand what he wrote
.So we have to start at proper foundation, of what the creator stressed, to have adequate dialogue on this subject and be able to assess what has happened and how far has it strayed from the creator that you kept referencing. Otherwise, we are back to promoting what we like over what should be by the standard. Case in point,I know that the creator didn't favor Black and Red over all other colors....in fact he was quite clear about the importance of color.....doesn't it appear we have that twisted somewhat in our selections in the show world????....Again, Abrahim, I will repeat this to you because you have integrity and will not twist my words, I like Black and Red dogs in terms of color just as much as I like sable, bi, black, or black and tan. I really do!!!! Owned black and red dogs before most people on this forum was born, handled a black and red dog in the military as narcotic contraband dog. I'm just a guy that has read the book, tried to grasp the principles from the book, and have dedicated my life to continuing to perpetuate the types of dog the book says the breed should be....no more no less.
Thanks
by joanro on 05 June 2012 - 13:06
V Stephanitz clearly stated: ABOVE ALL, THE GERMANSHEPHERD DOG SHOULD BE A WORKING DOG. He didn't say, above all the gsd should be a b/r hock walking speed trotter running around in circles, chasing squeaky toys/bells/whistles. To v. Stephanitz, beauty was secondary, his motto was, " utility and intelligence" and a dog was worthless if it lacked the intelligence, temperament and structural efficiency that would make it a good servant of man.
His description of the GSD: "The most striking feature of the correctly bred Germanshepherd are firmness of nerves, attentiveness, unshockability, tractability, watchfulness, reliability and incorruptibility, together with courage, fighting tenacity, and hardness."
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top