Toplines - Page 5

Shepherd11112  That's the same one you put on our new forum.  No the dog isn't roached back.  IMO she has a very straight back!  See if you can put a stack picture of of the dog.

http://lcgsd.proboards98.com/index.cgi

Good Morning Guys,

I see that Uwe chimed in and put a name to this dog. Thanks!

Andrew, Harras is a representative of the line which you mentioned: Cary and Ando! You have a good eye for that!

Let  me put two more dogs up for a "graphic" comparison:

The first one is VA-1 1920 Erich von Grafenwerth, the second one a modern V-rated dog. To make it easier, both in black and white photography.

My question now is: Is the second dog overdone? What has changed? Keep in mind that there are about 85 (!!) years in between them.

My point of view: No, there are not too many changes, other than major improvements in substance, front (I think the second dog has a great front), stop. The angulation in the rear does not seem too much different, other than the length of the stifle. The 1920 Sieger has very steep pasterns which is an obvious fault and will influence movement. When I compare the toplines, I see improvement. Don't you? Looking at these two pictures, I can only emphasize again that Rittmeister von Stephanitz had envisioned an ideal dog and knew that it would take years. When people point out the dogs from the first part of the 20th century, I often mention that. The early dogs are transitional!

I would love to hear other opinions, as compared to these two black and white photos!

Chris

hi im new to this gsd thing so i really dont know what a roached back is.this is my first showline german shepherd.she is a female. i think her topline is quite good i just wanted to share her with you. can you tell what type of 'back' she has???? she is vp rated and is the grand daughter of dux de quatro flores and esko vom danischen hof.

Shepherd women, There is nothing wrong with me going to a different site and posting the same picture. And that picture i posted she is in a stack but i addmit it that is not no best stack.

In Chris's 2 black and white photos: I see the first dog as almost having what I would call a "saddle back", in that it is slightly swayed. The second dog, to my eyes, has a lovely strong flowing topline, and a very much improved conformation overall.

LOL I didn't say there is anything wrong with it, LOL.  Wow how people jump to off opinions on this board.  I only made a comment, lol.  And I didn't realize your dog was in a stack postion in this picture.  Normally they are a little bit more stretched out and feet are positioned differently! 

Yes, Ranchinglady. Absolutely right! The 1920 Sieger has a severe (not slight but severe) dip behind the withers. I know that you know a lot about horses and their conformation.

The transitional dogs had less than ideal backs which in combination with lack of substance could be problematic. The judges and breeders tried to improve it by adding chest depth and substance to the dogs. Here is a link to the 1965 Sieger: www.pedigreedatabase.com/gsd/pedigree/2030.html Improved substance and topline, but because of the excessive length of the middle back, the illusion of a horizontal back is present as compared to modern dogs. The rear angulation is also not too different from our current showlines dogs.

Chris

OK, I'll stick my neck out here. IMO and for what it's worth,  the  dogs with correct "straight" toplines on the colored photos are Dingo and Fedor, Fedor having the better backline of the 2.  All the others have some degree of arch to their backline. Having said that I will also say that I noticed at NASS handlers set dogs up to look roachy. Coming from the AKC show world where a straight topline is desired in almost every breed and any sort of arch anywhere on the backline is considerd taboo and a major fault, I have never been able to understand why it would be desirable to make a dog look roachy. Many have said they would like to see the dogs standing naturally and I would too. I have seen a number of movement photos of GSD's moving out with their backs roached. To me, those dogs are very faulty. I have also read commentaries touting the same dogs as  "outstanding movers". I often wonder if we are all looking at the same photos.

IMO the second dog in the black and white photo is typical of what we AKC people call  "common looking". Not good breed type, he is not harmonious as he looks like a composite of 3 different dogs - head from a smaller dog, neck from another, body from a 3rd.   I don't know an awful lot about the history of this breed, but Erich seems to be a typical representative of an early dog back in the days when it was all about function before breed type had a lot of influence on the overall picture. Of all the dogs pictured here, he is probably the least "typy" but I think he is also the one that is most likely to have been able to tend a flock 24/7.

I would consider the first dog Chris posted here to have a roached topline judging by that photo. Standing naturally - maybe not. Frankly, I'd be more concerned about his overly long tongue, but that's off topic so I won't expound on that other than to say it is not a good thing.

"The line of the back slopes downward from the withers into a straight, strongly developed and relatively short back".

Here's a challenge to anyone who can photoshop a picture. Take the above photo of Haras and flatten his topline so it's perfectly straight from the highest point of his withers to the base of the tail. I think the results would be very interesting.

Also, take a photo of a current AKC line smooth collie and compare it to photos of the foundation dogs like Erich.  There is an obvious similarity. I haven't yet figured out how to post photos here or I'd do that myself.

Fun discussion, Chris!!