Czech 4th Line and 2nd Line Studs - Page 3

Oh no.
Sunday last half of a meal...today is ...Thursday. Heartbreaking.
Hope Splash rallies again. Will you keep us posted?
Will keep you guys in my thoughts.

Jesse, thank you, I will.
He is in beautiful condition, not obease but plenty of fat researve, so I'm hoping he will get his appetite back. I offer him some pellets out of his feed tub by hand, and he only politely flips his upper lip over my hand playing with the pellets and takes a couple peices then spits them. Tomorrow vitamine b shot if he does not start eating tonight.

Rik:well, I;m going to tell you all the secret to breeding. and this is after 40 years. doesn't matter what you are breeding for, w/l, s/l, service, tracking, LE, PPD, sport pts..

breed a good, successful female to a good successful male in whatever you do and sometimes you get good successful offspring. not all the time.

all the rest is just hype. does anyone here really think the Captain was looking past what he saw in the flesh when he created this breed?

Prager Hans: I am in dogs for 52 years and disagree. So what? Does that mean that I am better than you? No, that is not the reason. Nice doggie bred to nice doggie = type breeding as you do it is beginners fallacy of breeding which some do not ever get over. Yes, it will produce some ok dogs and even excellent dogs. So what? BYB do the same. Nice doggie to nice doggie. IMO one of the purposes of breeding is to improve the breed. And that is easier done while breeding using knowledge of Male lines then to ignoring them.
That is not saying that if you use the male line that you can do it haphazardly. You always select the best representative in the line you are breeding which is available to you. Nobody is saying that you can breed schit and if you do it using male lines you will get great dogs. But to ignore lines is to the detriment of the outcome. Meaning you can do better with it than without it.
As far as Stephanitz ("Captain") goes he, for example, was very influential when 1st, 2nd line was created and mostly the third line by promoting Klodo von Boxberg about whom he said that he is an epitome of GSD or something like that. ..... That kickstarted the third line. Of course, the line would disappear if it Klodo would be genetically weak and would not produce himself and same goes about his progeny.
Keep in mind, Male lines are not intentionally made they happen spontaneously due to the desirability of the genetic characteristics of the dogs who started it.

I know I am stressig the topic, but genetically ( and that's proven genetics, no hearsay, no tell tales)
the sire of a litter is not able to contribute more than 50% of his genetics to his offspring (1. generation)
Grandsire (2.) = 25%
Great grand sire (3.) = 12,5%
4. = 6.25%
5. = 3.124%

That's the amount of a current SV pedigree...

The "founder dogs"" of your lines are at 0,0000 somewhat %, even with a lot of linebreeding included-
that's fact, science, reality...

All those traits people are thinking are the genetic result of dog x, born decades ago, in reality are the genetic result of ancestors born 1, 2, or 3 generations prior to the offspring, for sure no "Hettel" or others.

Only for the record: This year even SV officially acknowledges the Motherlines, too (50% of a litter), they are shown this weekend in Nuremberg,.

Honestly, I'm going to stick with what I said. Breeding is breeding. Doesn't matter if S/L. W/L. L/E, seeing eye dogs, dairy cows, beef cows, show winning cats, rabbits or hamsters or big azz pigs for bacon.

of course, what came before matters. but what is presented in the flesh/here and now, matters most.

in s/l (which by the way is no less difficult to do successful than any other line), the best one could do is consider what was needed, longer upper arm, longer croup, heavier coat, better color, rear angle, higher wither, better character. any breeder who tells you they are successfully getting more than the top 2 priorities successfully is lying.

People breeding for LE (few left} breed dogs suitable for LE (and again, they consider what came before). same for dogs winning S/L, High Points, S&R.

Successful dogs are what create the next generation of successful dogs. doesn't matter the venue.

jmo,
Rik

susie, quantity of purity in genetics is secondary and of course one cannot preserve 50% through multiple generations.
the point of breeding by method, advocated by Prager - if that done correctly, you will have constancy of traits (for which line was established) among majority, produced in following generations.


Rick, what is your meaning behind "successful"?

Rick, what is your meaning behind "successful"?

Valk, successful (in what I said, not what I consider) is success in whatever one chooses to do. certainly did not mean in what someone else deems successful.

I really doubt that someone on this board who could train a cow to do rodeo tricks would consider someone who could only train a dog to run in circles as "successful". But it's all relative to what one does and chooses.

what exactly did you mean by your question?

to put it in the lowest denominator possible, I consider successful as obtaining the breeders goal in breeding. possibly you haven't noticed there are quite a few different goals in breeding the GSD.

successful GSD, well that's another matter and I would only consider those close to V.S. original goal as successful.

jmo.
Rik

Sussie that is a quite silly explanation of genetics of breeding. I suggest you study Mendel's laws of inheritance. 

Susi  please explain to us how come that we can get a litter of all solid black pup when all solid blacks go back to Roland tens of generations ago? 

 

Pragger - Sorry, but I did...

 . 

Susi  please explain to us how come that we can get a litter of all solid black pups when all solid blacks go back to Roland tens of generations ago? That according to your theory is not possible.