|
|
|
|
|
Classified: Famous working litter solid black females
|
The Evolution Of The Topline In The GSD (58 replies)
|
|
| I know that we often discuss the topline of our dogs, specifically the appearance of an excessive "roach" that has appeared during the last twenty (20) years or so. There is an interesting commentary by Herr Walter Winkler, Ex-Präsidenten der Österreichischen Hundesport Union (ÖHU) that furnishes some history of this evolution and to the future that it may influence. There are some links as well to interesting comments by Dr. Helmut Raiser. This document was written several years ago, but much of the information in timeless, in a sense. The comments by Herr Winkler may have been no doubt influenced by some input from Dr. Raiser, as well as others.
This is all written in the German language, so my apologies to those who cannot easily read it. But it does provide some interesting history of the changes and the issues caused by these changes. It can be seen at this link: http://www.hund.ch/insider/owsv.htm
Please consider this just additional information and ideas, and not an attempt to attack the ideals of the S.V. or other GSD organizations.
Bob-O |
|
|
|
|
| Thanks Bob-O. I can see I'll be busy on the Google translation page.
-Tina |
|
|
|
|
| that's a laugh --- seriously thinking of dropping my membership out of the SV --- what's to comment on --?? how even though somew dogs grater than the standard heioght have made it to VA or High V -- ?? the evolution of topline -- mhey -- let's stop the baloney -- the "STANDARD IS THE STADARD " as it is written in all the parent clubs -- the structure includes the exact angulation .. the exact length and width , the exact propertions , colors , coat type etc etc --- so if anyone can answer me ... why has this not been strictly adhered to in the pasat and presently breeding/showing ?? --= the topline -- as far as i am concearned -- there is no evolution -- the topline is stated with exactitude !!IMO -- there should never have existed those roach backs -- the croup angulation from the rear is 30 degrees -- and how long has that standard existed ?? was it since the days of max v. stephanitz ?? -- just a matter if you have breed and select for it or not !! please you folks that get all wrapped up and sucked into the so call fads -- reminds me of the american bred dogs with their hocks on the ground and the breeders say ..oh it's the american correct way -- foolish people --since when did you ever seee any canid with it'sd hocks on the ground ?? -- forget the buzz -- let's just stick to the STANDARD -- i for one do -- and i can give a hoot what anyone else says nor do give a hoot about having a VA dog -- and issue number two -- so concearned about the roach backs -- .. i think the behavioral traits betyter get even more attention !! seems like the ,malinois are far outdoing the GSD -- even in germany as well as France and Belgium they have gained enormous popularity - i think the SV really ought to clean house |
|
|
|
|
| Very interessting article on the "BERGABSCHÄFERHUND". I enjoyed the humor "man beachte die Hinterhand, das Sprunggelenk hat den Boden fast erreicht, das nächste Zuchtziel wäre die Fortsetzung unter der Erde! "
And further down he comments that pictures where taken placing the dog on a slope to enhance the downhill appearance. I enjoyed reading the comments about testicles which should be considered a fault if laying almost on the ground, and the remarks by Helmut Raiser "A frog in the back and a dog in the front" and the remark "die Leere im Kopf und der langweilige, doofe Gesichtsausdruck..." Don't believe that this humor will come across in a Google translation from german to English |
|
|
|
|
| Alphapup, thanks for the observation. I was careful as I presented a comment about this old webpage, as an earlier thread appeared about "the splitting of the S.V." and just after I added a comment the thread was yanked. No, I didn't say anything vulgar or politicising, but basically commented that the world waited to see whether this would really happen. The original post was not inflammatory in any way-just repeating to some degree a post made a few days earlier. Don't know who did this or why, but that's not important.
I have not paid any attention to remarks made by Dr. Raiser until his recent departure (some might say ouster) from a high-level position inside the S.V.. Evidently he has been talking for a long time and finally went too far with some of his remarks as they fell upon ears that did not wish to hear them, or hear anymore. I will not ask that he be a candidate for sainthood, as I feel that while has his heart in the correct place that some of his ideas are too radical.
It is neverthess interesting that his remarks caused such a stir inside the normally staid S.V.. Obviously he went too far for many of the governing members.
Bob-O |
|
|
|
|
| Uvar,
Do you have any suggestions for a free translation site that may do a better job then Google? For those of us that cannot read German that would be welcome information.
Thanks,
Tina |
|
|
|
|
| Thanks Bob-O. This website does a fair trasnlation. Atleast well enough to understand the commentary.
http://babelfish.altavista.com/
Kyle |
|
|
|
|
| The author of this article, a criminal investigator if I understand this correctly, appears to be an excellent writer. Humorous phrases mixed with accurate observations are outstanding. No suggestions, you would need to go to university and study German. |
|
|
|
|
| Alpha,
The practice of ignoring the standard is as old as the dog show. It results when a judge is impressed with a particular animal ( or his good friend who owns it) and gives a commentary that conveniently glosses over or even misrepresents the dogs shortcomings. How many times do we see a Koerschein that seems to be describing a different and much better dog than the one pictured? It is normal to say that every dog is pronounced in courage, hardness, and fighting drive, and is becoming more common for an overangulated dog to be described as having "very good angulation". These judges are not ignorant, and so we must suppose that they are following SV policy of promoting such dogs or that they are caught up in the politics. Bob, I think Raiser was pushed out because he became an embarrassment to the SV. Best Wishes, Jonah |
|
|
|
|
| Jonah, absolutely correct comments. According to what I have read Dr. Raiser was indeed pushed out of the S.V. by an overwhelming vote. It was not a close vote where one might say that it was a fair contest. It was a coup, plain and simple.
Some have taken issue with this type of "expulsion" and sided with Dr. Raiser, who states that he at the genesis of his new version, or I should say alternative to the club known as the S.V. While I think he might have some success in at least the formative years of such a club, I doubt that ten (10) years from now it will even exist, or be remembered by anyone.
Again, while I feel his heart is in the right place, I think his mouth may dissuade those who he needs for support.
Bob-O |
|
|
|
|
| Agreed Bob,
Raiser might be 90% correct in his perspective, but his mouth seems to get him into trouble. I believe that the "interbreeding with Malinois" comments seriously undermined his credibility. It would be very difficult to stand behind a national breed warden who advocated breeding muts. Hence the swift and decisive action. Best wishes, Jonah |
|
|
|
|
| Bob-O, here's my take on the history of topline in the GSD:
1-excessive length and weak back became an occasional and growing problem for Capt. Von Stephanitz and those with iron backs had to be periodically selected for breeding to compensate for this.
2-a weak backed dog with excessive length of back appeared (Rolf Osnabruckerland). He had to be used extensively because he was so exceptional as a producer for temperament, working ability, masculinity, etc. But, the breeders had to be careful to breed to his blood carefully to overcome his tendency to produce a seriously sagging back.
3-Breeders ended up with fantastic males that just happened to have a long, saggy back (the only serious fault). This tragic occurrence resulted in a gross over-reaction to breed those bloodlines to dogs with arch backs which would never sag under any circumstances.
4-This tendency to overcompensate to the prepotenty of Rolf blood to break through and continue producing such saggy backs, led to a continued emphasis on breeding to and producing arch backs.
|
|
|
|
|
| my take on the history of topline in the GSD (part II):
5-When Dr. Rummel took over as SV President (one of the greatest ever if not the greatest SV Presidents), he became depply concerned about the arch backls being untrue to the standard and being asociated with other serious faults such as excessive length, functionally steep croups, improper movement with rump-rollup, etc.
Therefore, even knowing the risk of a severe political reaction against him, he went ahead anyway and instituted a complete ban on roach backs by refusing to place any in the VA and high V positions and instructing other SV judges to adhere to the same policy at landsgruppen shows. Dr. Rummel emphasized short and straight backs, proper proportions, heavy masculinity in males and correct GSD working temperament like Capt. Von Stephanitz demanded. Dr. Rummel proceeded to crown Natan Peltierfarm Sieger two years in a row, 1981 & 1982 and this dog was absolute perfection in every way. I saw him in person and close up and saw his bite work and he was the living standard itself. I heard that Natan didn't produce as well as hoped long term, but he himself was the epitomy of absolute perfection. His color was black and red (I still have a good photo I took of him).
6-Once Dr. Rummel's reign ended, breeders eventually went back to roach backs because it allowed them to have a long dog whose back wouldn't sag. And this makes breeding and showing easier since excessive length can cover up imbalance between the front and rear during movement because it creates a lever/stabilizing effects bi-directional front to rear and vice-versa. Plus, it's always hard to breed any dog with a hard back, even if it is short backed.
|
|
|
|
|
| Thanks Preston. I had heard some time ago that Rolf was responsible for the "correction" that was later applied. I don't remember much about Nathan other than the fact he was twice Sieger. It was during the mid 1980's that I saw what I thought was a roached back on a West German dog, but attributed it to poor positioning for the photograph. Later on I realized that something had changed. It was not a gradual change as I recall, but seemed very sudden. Or maybe that was the way that saw it.
I thought these dogs had no place in the conformation shows but was obviously very, very wrong about that thought. During the later 1990's the roached back seemed to become the norm rather than the exception. I thought that A.K.C. shows gathered several strange-looking and strange-moving dogs many years ago, but have come to realize that the dogs appearing at S.V. shows are just as far away from the standard as possible, at least in a couple of areas.
And yet it continues, as the leadership of the S.V. surely cares somewhat but sure seems to look the other way when judging dogs by the conformation standards. Perhaps in the end, if Dr. Raiser's antics and chest thumping do nothing else they will remind us that a standard still exists and that our dogs must comply to this standard first, before being judged by the "modern" S.V. practice or the A.K.C. practice.
Bob-O
|
|
|
|
|
| Thanks Prston and Bob..nice posts... |
|
|
|
|
| It's amazing to look through the "Historical VA list" here on the data base. It brings the evolution of the top line to life in pictures.
As DR said, nice posts Preston and Bob. |
|
|
|
|
Can anyone share his ideas on what bloodlines were used to correct "Rolf blood" in our GSDs..??? ALF NORDFELSEN was one... Who else...??? And... is the "IRON back" the term to describe the slightly arched back...??? If that is so... then Quanto Wienerau had a Roach back ... I haven't seen any picture of a roach older than this one... Roulette Wienerau and she has missing ancestors through Delfy von Schaffhausen... I was able to see a picture of Quanto's father Condor Zollgens... that has a slight impression of a roach...
http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/gsd/pedigree/1238.html
|
|
|
|
|
| Great posts Preston and Bob-O - thanks to both – real meat! – but what’s left to add?
As I read it, ALPHA, the GSD was begun basically from scratch, with early animals largish, square-like, tall and long-legged, and not all so pretty. A constant striving, flux and trade-off toward establishing type and temperament, with Standard an ideal or template yet to be realized - despite present love affair with now well-entrenched Wienerau style.
It’s also far easier to breed for something like rear angulation than good fronts, say. The same for drive, vitality and instinct, and where inbreeding persistently on the same basic stock creates its own defects anew. Topping all else of course, the dog must be a superb mover. And yet still far to go; far too many overly long dogs, badly balanced with backs excessively sloped, over-sized and steep fronts, general fitness and health, etc, etc, and temperaments that seem to be going backwards – either cuddly soft and friendly or plain hyper.
Bob-O understated Raiser’s hybridization idea most diplomatically (as for comments on American GSD), particularly since clubs worldwide are founded and base their very reason for existing on the notion of ‘pure-bred’! Completely agree with comment relating to judging and judges’ subjectively opportune dog description (rather than objectivity it’s too often about wheels spinning within more wheels!)
I’m struggling with, and hope he’ll expand, where Preston says, “And this makes breeding and showing easier since excessive length can cover up imbalance between the front and rear during movement because it creates a lever/stabilizing effects bi-directional front to rear and vice-versa.”
|
|
|
|
|
Speaknow, if you have a GSD with a front that has a steep upper arm and thus can't reach very far coupled with a sickle hocked rear (long lower thight bone) and steep croup, there is a given imbalance between the front and rear. The front has short reach and the rear has long reach as well as a powerful lifting/propelling force (for short periods of time--ie diminished endurance). There are several ways for the dog to compensate. One is to lift and hold the front legs up (like a saddle bred horse) or a second is to bend the frront legs upward at the elbow (false reach--appealing to the uninformed). The key is to keep the front legs up and off the ground until the rear end's rear extension is completed. The best structural representation of this incorrect rear action vs correct action is Wynthia Strickland's classic book on the GSD. Her book is bar far the best I have ever read and well worth acquiring and owning.
The long back (versus the short back) constitutes a longer lever. It's like a seesaw. If one side is very long, even a light person can raise a heavy person on the other side if it is shorter. Therefore if the dog's back is long the weight of the front assembly serves to stabilize the excessive drive and lift of the sickle hocked rear, which itself has a strabnge wind up, spring discharge action (this action appears very impressive to many, especially American Shepherd show enthusiasts and AKC GSD specialty judges--however, it is very incorrect and there is diminished working ability, endurance and soundness.
The overall cost of this long back is not just reduced endurance, but a structurally weaker back, less efficient transmission of power through the back, and diminished attractiveness of the GSD (exaggerated, distorted, stretched profile). A GSD with a short iron back flexes less, looks much more attractive, transmits power and drive much more effectively and efficiently, has less back problems orhopedically, less myopathies and better general health holding all other things constant. |
|
|
|
|
One last point about short, iron backs. If a zuchschau GSD has a short, iron back, it better be balanced in range of motions between the front and rear assemblies (that is front reach and extension must be equivalent to rear reach and extension). If not there is not excessive back length to stabilize and compensate for this imbalance and the handler must make sure the GSD pulls hard on the lead to cover this up. That's why SV judges insist on the GSDs gait off lead for evaluation.
If one ever has the rare privilege to see a well angulated GSD at both ends with a short iron back and correctly angled croup of proper length and a correct wither (which helps smooth out the front ends action) gaiting loose lead or off lead, it is an amazing thing. Add true suspension to this and you see poetry in motion. And the GSD can do this all day without tiring much, because there is no wasted motion and little enegry extended compensating for an imbalance between the front and the rear. Of course if the rear doesn't have the range of motion of the front, then the GSD will have a "hitch" in the rear that looks like unilateral HD in many cases or has to roll up in the loin (rump-roll) to compensate, each of which takes energy and reduces the endurance and working ability of the GSD. This is whty we have the FCI/SV standard which is really very good. Now if it was just enforced and used more by all, breeders, buyers and judges alike. |
|
|
|
|
| Thanks for taking the trouble, Preston.
Know what you mean by ‘poetry in motion’ – it can take your breath away!
I agree with all you say but still missing something.
First paragraph, no problem. The rear in effect overruns the front, more so as steep croup partly misdirects hind force upwards.
The second is where I’m lost. Longer back equates to longer lever etc. Apart from creating ‘sloppiness’ by virtue of increased length, why wouldn’t it instead result in exacerbating the effect above? Rather than covering it up or somehow compensating for it? Same hind force but now with a longer lever for pushing down or overrunning the front even more effectively? I seem to recall that dog’s center of gravity (or your seesaw’s fulcrum, maybe?) is somewhere near the withers but that doesn’t improve this scenario much.
Anyway, don't worry about it unduly.
|
|
|
|
|
| Once more testing your patience, Preston!
In above scene I visualized a relatively level or horizontal back but just realized that if it were strongly sloped instead, hind propulsion would be automatically delivered to dog’s front in a more upward direction. Mentioned compensation results from longer back in conjunction with steeper topline?
|
|
|
|
|
Speaknow, yes that is correct. The increased weight at the front end due to the increased leverage it applies on the rear helps to direct the propulsion level rather than just upward. It better harnesses the rear drive, but at a great loss of efficiency and endurance. Some American Shepherds move beautifully and suspend 100% for short periods of time, with only a few able to do it all day (these are the shorter backed dogs).
Even in a GSD without a steep croup (ie normally sloping), the croup does direct propulsion upward a bit to cause a tendency towrds full suspension during a very brief time during the gait. This has been proven in slow motion photos.
If the croup is too gflat ior the back is too arched, the rear propulsion force can be directed to push the front down, causing a falling in the front during gaiting. This is very visible in slo mo and why roachiness can serious impair gaiting.
Once you see a GSD who is built correctly move, it is a breathtaking site. The GSD does not need to be heavily angulated, but blanace is the key here and the coordinated vectoring of all angles and ranges of motions. This is very hard to get and is highly preferred when it occurs loose lead or off lead. If anyone doubts this just ask yourself why Kirshental Kennels has always bred for correct, balanced, powerful sidegait for their sheepherding GSDs which are proven working animals? Because sound gaiting makes a better working GSD holding all other things equivalent. |
|
|
|
|
Preston, is this an example of what you'd call 'rump rollup'?
I've been trying to figure out just exactly what is wrong with this dog's structure. I know the tight leash is making his faults appear worse, by increasing the roach. He doesn't really look all that badly roached when stacked.
|
|
|
|
|
Sunsiler, could be, but as you stated the tight lead and a very motivated GSD can cause this temporarily. But the dog has an apparent break or arch in the middle of his back and this is what rump rollup looks like on a loose lead or off lead. It is obvious the dog's croup in the actual first photo is far too steep to direct propulsion at the proper forward vectoring (too much upward) and this coupled with an upward arc in the back, can cause the front to be forced down ward. Its like rolling steel balls down a straight channel, the roll straight compared to rolling steel balls down a C shaped channel where they roll in an arc rather than a straight line.
There is a second issue here that is relevant to discussion. That is the break point or top of the apparent arch in the GSDs back in the photos (more easily visible in the first photo). I have seen this in young dogs wgere it went away with maturity, and some where it didn't. It appears to be a genetically based weakness at the mid or toppoint of the arch, but only flexes upward, not downward. I hypothesize it is a vertebral defect with perhaps a ligamentation problem too, but I don't know for certain what it is.
I love these kind of discussions because we are getting into trade secrets that are very hard to get from others and usually must be figured out on one's own or taught by a breeder or exhibitor with at least 20-25 years experience. It took me 30 years to understand most of the movement technology. This information is tremendously valid to those who cannot get it other than through sharing.
I have been amazed occasionally in the past to see an individual working line GSD with only moderate angles, moderate croup, short straiight back outmove a highly angulated GSD with sickle hocks and rump rollup, and be able to do this all day long (true poetry in motion like a well oiled, smooth running, powerful machine. It always comes down to the individual GSD, I don't care what the genetics are or the bloodlines. |
|
|
|
|
In my opinion, the world's top expert on the movement in the German Shepherd Dog is without questiion Ricardo Carbajal of Del Cono Sur Kennels. He is the author of the famous "German Shepherd Dog" video series. This set of videos is essential for anyone who wants to understand proper GSD construction, conformation, movement and faults in such. I am not friends with this man, don't know him, get no incentive for sales, etc. I have viewed his videos a number of times and find the knowledge they contain essential for novices. I don't know if they are still available or not. I know some GSD clubs have bought them in the past to share amoung members. And I might add quite a few judges need to watch these many times and really pay attention, hopefully memorizing the concepts properly and then following them, because they are based on the FCI standard.
In my view one of the greatest, most dynamic and correct GSD movers in the showring was British Champion Muscava's Rocky. He was an unbelievable athlete and could go all day with complete balance. One impressive dog. |
|
|
|
|
Now let's take a look at a dog from lines with a fair number of arch backs (ranging from mild to moderate). This particular dog I will refer to here as very nice in the back construction and croup angle is V1 Shotaan Alfons, which has much construction-wise which is praiseworthy. Note his straight back, nice angles at both ends, proper shoulder layback and upper arm angle and length, very nice croup, nice male type. I have no idea what this GSD can produce, but as a specimen he is worthy of notice and is the type we should be promoting and breeding for. A GSD that is built this well does not appear very often. |
|
|
|
|
I am really enjoying this thread! Nice short back on that dog, almost level too, Good shoulder angle and upper arm. Wouldn't mind seeing a bit more muscle in the thigh, though.
Gee, an Ursus grandson...no surprise there! (Gives her Ursus granddaughter a pat on the head...)
|
|
|
|
|
Never fails to amaze me how you can see the Ursus 'stamp' , even in the second and sometimes the third generation...here's my bitch, at a year of age for comparison. Although she's got a longer back, I think you can stil see a strong resemblance, especially in the topline and shoulder.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, you can see the Ursus stamp of typ, but no roach problem and no steep croup ! Nice feet, good pasterns, adequate angles at both ends and no apparent east west in the front or cowhocks in the rear. Is she as solid mentally as most with Ursus close up? I do not think the back is too long. If the croup was steep her back would appear even shorter. GSDs like this can usually gait all day long and can be true working dogs. |
|
|
|
|
The standard calls for a level back moving, not standing. I believe that V1 Shotaan Alfons has a perfect topline (and bottom line too) and I predict that it is highly likely he moves level, that is correctly with balance, power and grace. If anybody has seen this GSD in the showring, perhaps they can comment. To my view he is one very good looking Male Stallion. |
|
|
|
|
| Thanks again, Preston. Given a well-slanted back, with direction of hindquarter drive roughly similarly aligned, it’s easy to see how frontal lift thus produced serves to compensate in part for inadequate reach, and as partly absorbed by the center of gravity up front. As you said, not exactly efficient, with part of propulsion wasted in overcoming the front’s bad geometry!
I’ll go further and say that, despite appearances, it’s altogether bad construction, especially since any dog with even fairly average fore and rear proportions/angulation will easily outperform one with merely a good front or decent hindquarters only. You’ll agree that an equally effective, well-matched reach and drive is paramount, if only to promote a smooth unhindered gait. Little wrong with a slightly sloping back, or even a slightly curved spine for extra strength, but here we’re talking about extremes.
I still can’t figure the back as a seesaw, which entails a fulcrum somewhere, but see it as a straightforward strut or connecting bridge; or your: “The increased weight at the front end due to the increased leverage it applies on the rear helps to direct the propulsion level rather than just upward.” Or: “And this makes breeding and showing easier since excessive length can cover up imbalance between the front and rear during movement because it creates a lever/stabilizing effects bi-directional front to rear and vice-versa.”
Generally I agree that even a very gentle croup may to some minor degree project rear propulsion upward (or away from back’s slope rather); but, not only need croup run smoothly into backline (with angle appropriately related to back’s length), but delivery of rear thrust, or its manner, is subject to a whole range of other factors as well (rear angulation or/and length and relative proportions of bone, ability to drive off good, strong hocks say, being but two).
A too flat croup on the other hand, with drive directed forward at too shallow an angle, will see part of it wasted, but whether it also pushes the front down seems a moot point.
I meant to avoid any mention of ‘roaching’ – the lifting of back above height of withers whilst dog is in motion – but apart from inherent inefficiencies this curved transmission of thrust clearly must push the front down to some extent. Again, difficult to deal with in isolation, as for ‘topline’ itself considering its close connection to length of loin and ‘coupling’, as well as overall proportions, arc of limb movements etc, etc. As you say: “…balance is the key here and the coordinated vectoring of all angles and ranges of motions.” (Not to mention harmoniously proportioned length for all major bones).
Like this topic and reading more of your insights.
|
|
|
|
|
To make it understandable in Layman's term ( heck... we're not all engineers here) The angle of the croup should compensate the weight of the front (e.g. bigger head, heavier bone needs a steeper croup to push the dog upward...) the Flat croup ( and / or Roach back) will just just make the dog DIG the ground while gaiting... the Steep croup on the other hand coupled with long (weak) backs will just propel the dog upwards (as if like a HACKNEY pony) and will not cover a great amount of distance... Leverage and length of the topline works like a SEE-SAW.... say a heavy front needs a short back that is... closer to the withers, a longer and sloping rear end towards the croup to make it balanced... The longer over-all proportion (not a longer back) gives a stabilizing effect like that of a F-1 racer ... should be level in MOTION (not on stance) higher withers unless well-angled and long-boned will only lower the position of the head... the slight arch of the back will hold up to the weight of the entire body... the slope of the loin and croup, compensates the weight of the front... This is all about the TOPLINE ... but if you dont consider the length and angle of the fore and rear legs ( plus the thighs) its like driving a BMW motorcycle with Bicycle wheels...
Now can I ask...??? With short legs in the rear... or if they are pulled towards the rear (stacked)... or if they are well-angled (almost like kneeling)... this will make the topline level...Right.??? But for less-angled rear legs (but long)... well-laid and flat withers (making the neck and head carriage high)...the rear paws directly BELOW the PELVIS... Wouldn't it give the outline of a roach or a dipped-back... or the back sloping towards the front and not towards the back??? (like most MALs that doesn't have pronounced withers...) |
|
|
|
|
bob, thank you very much for starting this thread ( just could'nt resist writing)
and preston ....................... i am just speechless, as usual with your posts
i have just dropped my jaws upto my knees .. |
|
|
|
|
Cracking topic... which I think I might be keeping up with!
Can we then say that the lay of the croup is too steep/shallow only when viewed within the confines of a particular dogs structure?
AandA |
|
|
|
|
| Yup, the croup needs to join back smoothly.
Shorter, tighter backs have croups trending toward a 30 degree angle (with backline), and those for longer backs may go down as low as 20. Length and lay of croup of course also influences width of thigh, as well arc of movement possible from hindquarter.
|
|
|
|
|
So a dog with a steep croup that is outside the standard but suits it's structure should move better than a dog who's croup is correct to the standard but not to it's structure.
In this case who should/would be judged the better dog?
AandA |
|
|
|
|
Preston, my bitch is very sweet-natured. She will bark at strangers, but once introduced, she treats them like old friends. We were at the vet's yesterday, and I had to stop her from licking his hand while he was writing up her chart! He had to express her anal glands, and she did not so much as whimper or growl during the procedure. Her pigment and ears could be better, but she moves VERY nicely, and is very agile. When she and my male GS are playing, she sometimes jumps right overtop of him! Her mom has great movement too (Imp-Cen's Wings of Grace.) She's a little soft as to temperment, but does forgive if the correction's not over the top. She has excellent ball drive, and fairly strong prey drive. Any critters entering my yard do so at their peril!
AnadA wrote: "I have just dropped my jaws upto my knees .."
[scratches head as to how this could be anatomically possible...]
AnadA, you have a DOUBLE jaw?? And it's ABOVE your knees, not below? Oooookayyyy ....backs sloooowly out of thread.....
|
|
|
|
|
Sunsilver, so based on how your bitch appears to be built from her photo, I am not surprised that she is agile and has good movement. I'll bet she can move all day long too. You say her temperament is a little soft. Guess what, how you described her temperament is exactly what Capt. Von Stephanitz's GSDs were like. I'll bet she could become "tough as nails" if their was a real theat. What you have is just the type of temperament that makes great family pets and good overall home protectors.
As far as the issue of force vectoring, it's not as complicated as it sounds. With a GSD we want the propulsion from the rear directed by the angle of the croup to be linear in its expression. This is possible with a short, firm back that is relatively straight or only very slightly arched. The worst situation is a curvilinear transmission of force from ther rear directed by the croup (angle).
Curvilinear force is best explained in this way. If I take 50 nails and nail them in a piece of plywood in two parallel curved lines 1/3 inch apart, 25 to each line, 1/16" next to each other (this will give you two parallel lines of nails forming a curved channel about 5" long with a 1/3" space between them--Now arrange them in a smooth curve with the end pint about 1-1/2" below the starting point, and about 3/4 inch higher at its midpoint, giving you a 1-1/2" arch. Take a piece of 1/4" od somewhat flexible poly hose one foot long and insert it in the space between the two parallel lines of nails. As you push the hose back and forth, the force generated from the front where you push the hose to the back is transmitted and expressed at its end point curvilinearly, that is at approximately 1-1/2 inches below the point you push from and faces at a downward angle.
Now do the same with two parallel lines of nails that are completely straight. The hose is pushed back and forth in a straight line (not curvilinear like the first example). What is important is the final direction to which the force is expended at its end point (the withers). With the curvilinear, the force is expressed somewhat downward. With the linear the force is expressed straight ahead and only slightly upward as directed by the croup, enough to provide some lift for suspension. |
|
|
|
|
Marci, if a GSD doesn't walk naturally into an attractive show stance, it is not constructed optimally. Take V1 Shotaan Alfons above. This appears to be a natural pose. This dog is built true to the standard. The main points of my posts in this subject line is: that a long back can stabilize a GSD with very faulty movement, making it appear a much better mover than it is (esp. if it has long lower rear thigh and is sickle hocked), but at a great cost; and that a highly roachy (arched upward) back transmits power curvilinearly downward to the front, causing rump rollup and very faulty movement; and any back issue including a weak back reduces the efficiency and enduarnce of the GSD and it's working ability. What we want to see in the GSD is a short, strong back and styraight linear transmission of rear drive from the croup at a slight upward angle, permitting maximum efficiency of movement forward while allowing enough lift for full suspension. |
|
|
|
|
I'm glad you like her, Preston. BTW, you do realize she's half American showlines? Yes, there's a few good ones out there still I'm hoping to see more American breeders making use of German blood in the future, to improve soundness and temperment. Okay, maybe I'm dreaming, but there are some hopeful signs: the dog that took best of opposite sex at Westminister this year is a grandson of Jim v. Fiemereck!
When comparing my bitch to Stephanitz's dogs, she's sure got the mischief part down pat!  I am hoping once spring comes, and we're able to get out more, she'll work off her energy, and won't get into quite so much trouble, but in the meanwhile, she has to go in her crate every time I leave the house. The dogsitter left her out while I was away for a few days recently, and boy, did I come home to a mess! I had to put her outside for a bit until I calmed down. Lucky for her she's so sweet natured: she plunks herself in my lap, and begs to be petted, gives me kisses in return, and all is forgiven! |
|
|
|
|
Preston... the back consists of the vertebrae on top of the rib-cage past the withers then upto the vertebrae of the loins (pelvis not included...thats the croup right.???) I noticed that the curvation of the backbones in the MIDDLE between the rib-cage and the loin being the highest peak... ribs^loin.... and the loin vertebra slopes downward toward the pelvis making the croup's leverage longer than the withers (considering the back as the fulcrum...) I noticed the rib-cage-topline sloping FORWARD ( then connects to the withers) and the Loin area sloping towards the rear... So when you have the rear Paws directly below the pelvis... the HUMP ( joint between the rib-cage and Loin area) shows and the UNLEVEL Short Back... The Back is level only when the rear legs are towards the rear and not directly below the pelvice... This is common also in Belgian Mals... I am currently looking for a good one that I could apply the Conformation and engineering of the GSD... But anyways... You still must look for a level back when the dog is running OFF-leash... |
|
|
|
|
| You ask curly ones, Aand: “So a dog with a steep croup that is outside the standard but suits it's structure should move better than a dog who's croup is correct to the standard but not to it's structure. In this case who should/would be judged the better dog?”
The ideal croup is of good length, blends smoothly into backline, and for the GSD ideally lies at vaunted 22 odd degrees. Trouble is, this angle presupposes that backline, if not the rest, is of similar ideal shape, whatever that is: the Standard doesn’t give much in the way of precise dimensions, more in terms of overall proportions and ratios (doesn’t devote much space to steeply sloping toplines either!) Then, what’s ‘steep’? – anything approaching 30 degrees certainly is, whereas our ‘perfect’ 22 degrees would fit rather oddly to the shorter curvy back. I think you’d have to go by which dog as a whole is the most harmoniously proportioned, whilst preferring the croup which most smoothly continues/extends the backline.
I agree with Preston’s ‘vectors’ but think it far better to picture a dog’s structure as a relatively straightforward mechanical contraption, a system of levers (major bones) and pulling ropes (muscles/ligaments). The most efficient way to pull at a lever is at 90 degrees and this simple fact underlies much of the rationale relating to angulation/function etc. Instead of continuing and as my understanding generally varies from his, best left at that.
|
|
|
|
|
This line came from Blitzen... while I was reading from some of the previous threads...
The sighthounds do want a slight arch beginning in the loin area never just behind the withers as seen in some GSD's.
Is this the same BREAK in the topline I'm seing in modern GSD's ( rib-cage^loin area ). ???
And then...when the paws are directly below the pelvis this "break" is accentuated.. In movement or when the rear legs are stacked... the shortback become level to the ground...
|
|
|
|
|
Speaknow, unfortunately curly questions often get curly answers... but in this case the reply does strike as being reasonable.
AandA |
|
|
|
|
Glad to be back... Checking on the recent posts in the ***messageboard*** I stumbled upon this dog that visualized what I am asking from Blitzen about the UNLEVEL TOPLINE...
The dogs name is Hill v. Pannonia Wolf... ANY IDEAS about this MODERN GERMAN Topline.??? What lines contribute to it.??? I know for sure the Rickor Badboll line has this type of back line...
I'm just happy to be back and browse again very important knowledge gained from GSD enthusiasts...
MARCI |
|
|
|
|
Ah, yes, that dog is in my Uglydog picture file already.... I'd like to hear others comment on his structure. If you check his pedigree, there are some very nice dogs there, including Kevin v. Murtal. His sire has a rather ugly looking topline, too, but most of the other dogs in his pedigree have nearly level backs.
The picture on file with his pedigree doesn't make him look quite as bad as that photo does. |
|
|
|
|
I do not like that dog at all he is roach backed and over angulated to steep on the croup |
|
|
|
|
Actually, the upper arm is short and steeply angulated, while the back is overangulated. I hate to think what the poor beast must look like when he's moving! His front end looks far too heavy for his back end to drive forward. |
|
|
|
|
Hello all. I'm just looking at the photo of ' Hill ' , The handler is not doing this dog any favours is he ?.
No disrespect intended to the handler but in this case I wouldn't be very happy with him if it were my dog he was stacking !.
I would like to see someone else stacking him in a different way or even see him free standing.
Without being to technical for me the handler has over stretched him and it looks to me like the dog had started to lean back on his front legs so instead of re stacking him the handler has made it a whole lot worse by pushing the dogs rear end down and forward with his hand hidden on the other side of the dogs thigh totally distorting the dogs shape and making a hinged effect in the middle of his back . Anybody agree ???. |
|
|
|
|
No. See he PDB photo...it's better, but he still has one heck of a sloped back!
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with both Sunsilver & Trueview, the dogs front assembly isn't the best in the world but the way the dog has been stacked doesn't help either. The front legs in both photos aren't vertical & the dog is leaning back almost as though he's going to go into a sit, which then accentuates/creates a steep upper arm and overangulated rear.
I wouldn't say his pedigree was crammed with quality, especially on the sire's side, but I did notice that his GG Grandfather (V Aranyvölgyi-Örseg Brass) has a similar structure & stack.
It would be better to see a photo of him naturally walking into a stack but having said that the photo of him in this thread does give an impression of two dogs sewn together!
AandA |
|
|
|
|
| Amazing AandA: here’s my post, typed before I saw yours! (Great minds …)
I only saw the PDB photo but still, very strange: almost as if the rear and front hands belong to different dogs!
An oddly upright front joined by steeply sloping top-line to a strongly angled hind. The dog’s front does look as if it’s leaning backward, whereas rear hock angles forward from the vertical.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I saw his great great grandsire's photo, AandA, and was even more shocked to read his Koer report! If my translation is correct, here's what it says
Harmonious lines, expressionful head, pronounced withers, very good length and angulation of the croup, correct angulation (of fore and hind)
Pronounced withers??? The last time I studied structure, the withers were located ontop of the shoulderblades, where this dog has a pronounced dip in its back!! And to my eye, that dog has a very steeply sloping croup!
No wonder some of us are so confused about what constitutes a good, correctly angled croup: it depends on who is judging the dog, NOT the SV standard! 
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you about the WITHERS... Its definitely NOT PRONOUNCED... The back is definitely SHORT... This MODERN TOPLINE is the problem... Noticed that the topline nowadays looks similar to herding dogs and NOT WORKING DOGS... |
|
|
|
|
Good thread! This is what I expected when I reigstered here.
For anyone who is interested: The book referred to is The German Shepherd Today, in several editions, by Winifred Gibson Strickland. She ran the Wynthea kennel for many, many years and used both American and German GSDs in her breeding program; she quit showing in AKC breed when the excessively angulated dogs took over. Her kennel is still running apparently; just google Wynthea.
Ricardo Carbajal's Del Cono Sur is on the web; google the name and look for the kennel link www.delconosur.net The videos are still available. Just click on the link for them on DelConoSur's articles page. I think I will order them. I've been looking for something like this.
|
|
|
|
|
Sam1427, excellent post. Wynthea includes drawings of various types of GSD angulation, structure and movement. These are most informative and valuable. Ricardo Carbajal is considered by many to be the world's foremost expert on proper GSD strcture and movement. His videos are a must for anyone that wants to learn proper vs faulty GSD structure and movement. |
|
|
|
|
| I’d like to change tack somewhat - maybe look at other construction elements? The GSD is foremost meant to be a functionally efficient trotter, one able to cover the maximum distance with the minimum effort, with good reach and drive translating to fewer strides. To further de-mystify, a particular breed’s ideal proportions largely relates to height at wither to that of overall length, together with depth of chest to length of leg - both of which in turn dictate relative bone length. As said previous, the dog is most easily understood as a system of levers (major bones) and pulling ropes (muscles/ligaments), with the back acting as a strut connecting the front and rear assemblies. And the simple fact that a lever is actuated most efficiently at 90 degrees underlies rationale relating to angles etc. If bone lengths, and respective ratios, at the front and rear are even, the dog is correctly balanced or proportioned. And with a firm back and balanced angles front and rear, a dog of fair but only average construction will generally outperform one with only a good front or just a good rear.
Overall construction should be such that reach and drive are equally effective; imbalance results in uneven gait and other restrictions. And where do we go from here?
|
|
|
You need to be a registered user to post messages
Login
-
Register
Classified: EXCELLENT GSD
|
|
|
|
|
Start Page
Search Website
Login
Messagelist
Post Reply