by guilliam on 15 May 2018 - 10:05
asking google the same question led me to deviantart(art website) which says:
"Terms and conditions of entering
In order to qualify for entering the BSZS, the dog must be within standard, have earned BH and at least one IPO or a HGH degree. To qualify for the BSZS Sieger title, or at least a VA title, the dog must be within standard and titled BH, AD and at least IPO2 (or IPO1 and HGH). Dogs with undesireable colors aren't likely to do too well in this show."
from here: https://schaeferhund-verein.deviantart.com/journal/SV-Bundessiegerzuchtschau-2015-OPEN-480930111
so does this mean a dog can be sieger or siegerin even with IPO2 or SCHH2? are there any difference on the requirements with male and female?
by susie on 15 May 2018 - 18:05
As far as I know BH is no requirement, in some countries dogs don't need a BH prior to IPO. SchH titles are not existant any more.
After all it's a show, no trial.
It's about the best looking dogs, not about the best working dogs.
In the beginning there were no working requirements at all, then for years no "out", and no heelwork.
Although people don't want to believe me the requirements became way harder during the decades...
by guilliam on 16 May 2018 - 03:05
by Gustav on 16 May 2018 - 18:05
by susie on 16 May 2018 - 19:05
During the 70s up to the mid 80s a lot of German showlines weren't even worth to be called GSDs.
Because of that requirements increased, breeders had to react.
No hearsay, no single dogs - a lot of clubs, dogs, and ( VA ) breeders in my surrounding - I have seen the dogs, I joined the BZSs, I was a part of " training groups " - I absolutely know what I am talking about.
Gustav, although we seem to have the same idea about the breed as a whole I know we do differ about this part of history - but honestly, I had hands on hundreds of showlines since the mid 70s, I handled and show trained more than I am able to remember, a lot of times I was part of their SchH training team, I know how they were trained ( more important: WHY they were trained like they were trained ) - so I guess I am pretty well able to distinguish.
by Gustav on 17 May 2018 - 12:05
I’m not questioning your sincerity or involvement, Susie. I have limited exposure in comparison to you, but as you know I have owned direct progeny of Marko, Meik ( Mutz’s Brother), Frie very Gugge, as well as second generation Quanto and Canto mixed with Bernd through Busecker Schloss. ( I was fortunate to have a direct link to Otto Muller( VDH Judge) during that period)
I have also attended many American Seiger shows from the past 15 years and have seen the current dogs that are in the shows( many who were very successful in Germany to include VA and high V dogs), and unless I really don’t know what I am looking at in terms of good strong dogs, I would swear there is difference. My history of the breed, in experience, is quite similar to the article we were recently discussing.( so I’m not only one that feels as I do 😊)
But, I definitely admit you have much more exposure to these dogs than I ever will.....so I leave you with one question; IF the dogs in BSZS are stronger today than the past, than why have they dropped off of the performance field almost completely in sport and work in the past thirty years?
I’m just curious?
Or am I to believe that if they were trained differently they could be representative of their numbers on performance fields to reflect this strength I am missing.
Btw, for 6 years ( 2000 to 2006) I was member of one of the few American Sch clubs that catered to GSL dogs....our President of club and TD as well as most members had SL dogs. Doesn’t make me an expert, haha, but I like to think I could tell what I was looking at in terms of working dogs.
by susie on 17 May 2018 - 20:05
No "working dog" of the 70s or 80s would even be able to qualify for those events today.
The difference is magnificant; not only the training methods changed, but the dogs bred for major points changed, too ( way more prey drive, hunt drive, aggression than 30 or 40 years ago ). A "showline", bred for medium drives, has no chance, and no top handler will waiste 3 or 4 years for low or medium success.
The main difference between today's working/showlines is not color or structure, but the drives, the damned and to the same time that impressive drives a modern dog needs to be able to perform on top level.
And thanks to all the International buyers a mediocre V rating on the BZS is 10 times more worth than a G rating on the BSP.
I guess our memory mainly has to do with the dogs we met and trained during that time.
I met a lot of mediocre dogs - bred by "normal" breeders, trained ( and titled!) in local clubs. Those dogs would not pass today, no chance at all.
But that's just my personal memory...
by Centurian on 17 May 2018 - 21:05
Yet , I have the same feeling and impression as Gustav ! I am not thoroughly convinced .. I understand and know the Sch requirements were very different decades ago . Goodness , at one time all the dog had to do was bite the sleeve for crying out loud . But here is where I need something more substantial . To me , there is a difference in the capabilities of the dogs , the temperaments of the dog , in relation to what the requirements in t he tow different eras are. Just because the requirements were less demanding does not mean in and of itself the capabilities , temperaments of the GS back then , were less / inferior in quality and quantity . it is highly possible there was a stronger , better Gs in those respects that what was asked of it . what it was trained to do , was less . If that indeed is the case, then actually the opposite of what you say about GS from past compared to present is actually holds true.
What I can state for sure , even progeny that I had from Odin Tannenmeise and Jeck Noricum were trained by me and capable of doing true Personal protection. One dog had it all even to have done Police duties if I so pleased. I can hardly find any SL that has a robust stress level never mind hard line protection work attributes. Many of the SL today I don't seeing to far from Golden Retriever temperaments. The fact of the matter is that IPO is a joke , is not true protection defined. Let me make clear !! : does that mean all the GS with IPO titles are worthless .NO , I have seen many a good working GS do IPO!! . But I don't see that supposedly harder requirements today in truth being significantly * harder for the DOG . IPO is laughable today ,no matter what the requirements of today and yesteryear were. That is not a viable comparison to make when one discusses to the GS past and present. It is not a legitimate , to discuss GSs past and present requirement basis. . The truth may very well be that the nGS had better attributes and capabilities but what was asked to prove it was less.
How can Iiken this. Because an academic test for a student was easier years ago compared to the academic test given to students presently , does that prove or disprove that students in the past or that students in the present were smarter and more or less gifted than present day students ? No it does not.
by Lenny on 18 May 2018 - 04:05
by jdiogoc on 18 May 2018 - 11:05
This is also valid for the first 30 SG's in youth classes (except IPO/Breed Survey of the participating dogs if they are not old enough yet).
You must be logged in to reply to posts