What do we miss about the older bloodlines? - Page 8

The type of aggression you wrote about? Yeah I think so, but not 100% and so that type of dog would need to be managed and not set up to fail. I personally wouldn’t stop a dog from growling or try to change that behavior. I think dogs with lower thresholds that warn are one thing…but dogs that go ballistic and clearly want to strike are another. Dogs that don’t warn and just go for a strike right away would be much harder to modify such a behavior and still expect them to be powerful working dogs. I think the dog could be shut down to not react, and still needs to be managed because an outburst should be expected at any time, but I don’t think you can then ask that dog to be a monster out on the field or in a PPD type of situation.

I think you can teach a dog that certain commands mean “don’t react” and when you give such a command they’ll allow certain things. But dogs that are unstable and react with a lot of outward aggression, and what many would consider unnecessary aggression, or what humans would call an “over reaction” will be hard to teach to not react and then expect them to react in certain other contexts. For example…I work a dog that has shown the propensity to strike without warning in situations that don’t call for that reaction. The dog has been shut down and taught to control himself, still always managed by his handler, but he’s now what I would consider “safe” in most situations. We train in IPO, he’s definitely inhibited in IPO because there is conflict and confusion at the moment about the fact that he’s now allowed to strike. That is a dog who is learning that he’s allowed to get aggressive and bite when there is a sleeve present, but not other times. He is also quite quick and strong in a strike when he’s allowed to be worked up in drive, but when told to shut down or be obedient, his response is clearly delayed…again, due to the conflict. He gets told “sit” or “fuss” to shut down and listen to the handler, yet then the reward/threat/bite is coming from the helper and he is definitely not striking like you’d expect from a dog in such a situation. But due to the way he can act off the field…this was the only way to continue training and allow his handler (who won’t get rid of the dog) to enjoy training as well. This was explained to the handler (first dog) and he’s fine with the way the dog will be trained. He’s willing to give up the points on the field in C phase in order to have a “safer” dog in public.

I hope you don’t take this the wrong way…but have you ever met a breeder who doesn’t speak the world of their dogs? Of course the breeder is going to think their dog is amazing, but when it doesn’t get bred to by outside breeders I always wonder why that is. Especially in Europe where people do take more chances and are much more open to breeding to other dogs because their customers tend to actually go and watch dogs so a good dog on the field would be seen without winning regional/national/world championships.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
YES! YES! YES!
It is next to impossible to actually do that. Not even with local clubs without calling ahead prior to showing up. It's what I miss. We had four clubs in my city, I was able to just join any and all training, watch dogs, and get to see the good, bad and ugly about those dogs. You can't do that over here.
A: Clubs are not public, they are mostly closed to the publics eye.
B: Distance

___________________________________________________
He’s also not that old, he’s 2 years older than what most would consider one of the most successful stud dogs and producers in Tom van’t Leefdaalhof, and only 6 years younger than Troll von der bosen Nachbarschaft. Two of the major dogs that people either blame for the shift to more driven dogs or dogs that people praise for having proper aggression (I can never get a clear picture). I’m not sure if the most ethical and honest of breeders are capable of being objective about their own dogs. I think if they’re competing at a high level they know what they need and if they’re washing their own stock you can see that they don’t think their dogs are capable of that, but if they’re just titling at their local club and not worried about much past that…most speak as if what they produce is the best thing out there. I don’t really blame them though because a lot has to come together in order to produce a dog that might do something noteworthy.
___________________________________________________

Do we really need to do something noteworthy in order to breed a good dog? Or even able to claim that we do have good dogs?
I've found some of the best dogs come from small local hobby breeders that are not on the big training field and don't have the top pointing dogs.

I don't think you need to do anything to produce good dogs...but if you want to produce a dog that will be talked about, bred to, and remembered, it has to do something noteworthy. "Best dogs" according to you probably doesn't mean the same thing as it does to me and if you're finding your best dogs from small local hobby breeders, I know that to be true. The moment you also mentioned pointing dogs I know exactly where you're coming from and are on the band wagon with all the other people that CAN'T score points so they poo-poo any dog that does.

You've also again proved my point...the local dogs are the local dogs. They're local for a reason. They might be good dogs and they might have qualities that make them breed worthy, but they'll never become memorable in anyone's but the breeder's eyes and maybe a few people that know them. Nothing wrong with that, but they just won't compare to the dogs that become popular producers and litter pedigrees for generations to come. The only information you'll get on them is highly biased and subjective and I just don't trust that kind of information. Dogs that might compete at a few local trials and maybe in today's day and age we will get a video of the trial, but 5 or more years ago you weren't going to so there was no way to make an objective decision on that dog without going out to the trial, and that's just not possible in the United States unless you are one of those local people. If all you do is stay local though you close yourself off from the rest of the breeding pool, if you think that what you have in your back yard is the best possible dog, that's just highly unlikely and how the breed slowly gets worse because small pockets of breeders don't look outside their local area and believe that the best dogs they have are comparable to the rest of the world. Just look at what happens with small, isolated, countries...

You are talking local trials. I'm talking LOCAL dogs. Dogs that are close to me.

You know who is a local dog to me? Eros!
Any dog that is within a close driving distance 3-5 hours, I consider local.
I like to see the dogs for myself because I don't necessarily trust what others have to say about a dog. Personally, I know exactly what I want in a dog, and if there is one thing I've learned, you only get to know the dog if you actually get to meet and see the dog yourself.

And i have absolutely no issues using a lesser known male if he's got what I want. I don't give a rats ass. If I've watched a dog ever since he was young, saw him grow, train, the good bad and ugly and deem him worthy, I'm going to breed to that dog.

Because at the end of the day, every breeder makes a decision for what they want in their dogs. I could care less what you anyone else thinks... the breeder makes the decision and carries the responsibility. Not anyone else.

Barenfang so true. The key to breeding is matching sire and dam in compensatory way and knowing strengths/weaknesses of both. High level training will not pass to pups but genetics will. It takes an experienced eye to really tell the real genetics from the training. Especially with the prolific use of electric. You have people that breed for perfect pup, and some that breed for litters. Some understand that, others don't. Breeding for litters doesn't mean breeding for all in litter to be show or sport, but rather for most in litter to be sound with varying levels of drives and temperaments but still sound. Our breed is not a singular breed like the Mal, in looks, drives and structure. You don't breed for all to be on podium for sport, or all to be cookie cutter gaiters. That is what many consider top breeding, producing top dogs, but I feel it gives immediate gain for long term damage. The problems in the breed today usually are result of excessive breeding for bad recessives which many don't realize accrue as they strive for podium or show. The breed is a versatile moderate dog of immense workability and uses, you lose that when you breed for or to podium winners trying to produce podium winners. Now breeding for solid strong dogs in litter that will reflect balance is better for breed long term, but it won't get to podium these days in either venue. Maybe this thinking is antiquated, but I feel it is sound.

Now I am curious - which Eros?

"Local dogs" only make sense in case you are able to see them during training for quite some while, and not only in their personal comfort zone ( ! ). No pressure = no proof

High level training will not pass, but for sure the genetics that are necessary for even thinking about "high level training", will.

What has "electric" to do with "high level training"? The e-collar doesn´t change the temperament, a mediocre dog trained with an e-collar will remain a mediocre dog. Maybe I misunderstood your point?

Iron von den Wolfen.

What does high level training have to do with electric? Points!

Iron makes sense ( didn´t know his "nickname" though ...)

Gustav, electric doesn´t change drive and temperament - it´s good for "some" points, but doesn´t change the dog..

Maybe in the hands of a skilled handler it´s able to make the difference between #1 and #10 - but everybody involved in dogsport knows that it´s not important at that point ( only for the winner, but for sure not for breeding...)

After reading this thread and also a few on facebook over the last few days I’ve come to realize that a dog which “shows out of control” is considered powerful. A dog which is in control, is able to get the points, even if new/advanced training methods are used in order to get that dog there…it’s a weaker dog and must not be breedworthy. It’s what people believe about the old dogs as well…because they looked to be borderline out of control, and clearly weren’t trained as well so they came off as “less biddable” they must be better. The idea is that there is no way that training methods have advanced and that people could’ve learned how to train dogs better, the dogs must’ve become softer and more biddable, it’s just the only explanation for why they look the way they do.