What is a Gansta Dog? - Page 13

Duke :

"just saying it is not important if you are line breeding on dog/quality, if that dog is originator or not"

I already stated its only important for the confusion factor, of course the genes dont care.

"also im saying if you have a grandson, or great grandson of such dog, you have no guarantee your pup will have, or pass on the genes of his "line originator" as you have more dogs on that pups pedigree that influence the "soup " as you wish to call it"

Our course (a) pup is not guaranteed to receive every trait your attempting to pass. That would be silly to assume. I have found that from within a litter, finding a trait in numbers that was bred for is often a fairly safe assumption.

Yes BE that is the gold standered xray title breed. Or Import bred. Any art in breeding is pretty rare to find anymore.

Yes…the chances of producing a “great” dog are just as good with two random dogs as they are with using a “great” stud. The pedigree is actually a small piece of what makes a great dog. Most breeders deny the fact that THE HANDLER is the biggest piece of the equation when it comes to a puppy becoming a “great” dog. The reason you see great dogs producing other great dogs is that the top level trainers are more likely to get a puppy or a dog from an already successful or proven stud than they are from a random breeding of no-name/no-title dogs, this leads to the off-spring having a larger chance of becoming a “great” dog themselves.

And by great dog, I'm talking the dogs we all know, not the dogs that are good and never trial anywhere but their home field and Jim Bob the TD says its the greatest dog he's ever seen.

"I know for a fact that my father bred trough the alphabet three times to produce two breeding females he thought of worthy of keeping. "

In case your father bred "through the alphabet three times to produce two breeding females he thought of worthy of keeping" that means 3 x 26 x 5 ( statistics ) puppies = 390 puppies.

In case a female was able to breed 8 litters ( that´s a lot more than statistics ) and the intersection/puppies was "only" 5, he used at least more than 9 different females to reach this goal.

Given that almost no female gives birth to 8 litters ( statistically ) he used some more, in case he was a "honest" breeder, he liked these females...

Why did he breed these females at all, when he had to place 388 mediocre ( in his mind )puppies?

Bärenfang, this is statistics, not necessarily truth, and I don´t want to blame the achievements of your family, but it´s impossible to know "where" a dog got the temperament and drives from. A "real" breeder will always try to get puppies he likes temperament wise; that said he will choose dogs ( sire and dam ) that fit into his personal breeding program, and there is ( not yet ) any way to proof WHERE the final traits come from - sire, dam, grandsire, granddam...

A hard sire, a hard granddam, a hard great grand sire - where did the puppy get the hardness from? From "my" lines, or from "the other side" ?

I believe in science, one day our siblings will know, too late for us, but right now we have to guess.

BW greatness by famous trainer dont pass on to offspring, most good offspring of so called great famous dogs comes from the numbers he breeds and the real good females among the numbers he breeds

I prefer to breed to the great NON famous dog, than the not so great famous dog

but I agree that most people think of a winner as a great dog before thinking about the qualities of the trainer

and it helps to sell the pups LOL

"I prefer to breed to the great NON famous dog, than the not so great famous dog"

That´s a good attitude for a breeder...

Duke, I don’t disagree. The issue with the “not so famous” dogs is that you have to travel and somehow find out about them. I also consider a “great” dog a dog that makes it to nationals, or is showcased in some way on a level where more than just the local folks or the club will get to see the dog. With the internet, we are able to do a little more research about dogs, but it still doesn’t make up for going to watch a dog trial or work. The fact is, the way the IPO is set up, you’re not going to see every amazing dog out there if they’re only trialing at club trials and possibly posting a video or two on the internet. A truly great dog has to accomplish something of note more than just the few people that might’ve seen him work telling some tall tales about the dog. And yeah, the training isn’t passed on, but the genetics behind that training have to be good enough to take the training and do it at the level that allows the handler to showcase the dog. You’re lying to yourself, or being extremely biased if you believe that the dogs that finish in the top 20 at the big national championships or the dogs that end up going to the world championships are bad. They might not be the top 1% genetically, but they’re definitely in the top 5% if not higher. You don’t get to that level on training alone.

My comment about big name trainers being interested in dogs only out of “big name dogs” is that at the puppy stage at least those sires give them the best chance of having the type of drive and nerve necessary to compete at the highest levels. If those types of handlers are just looking for a great dog, they more than likely go with 6-12 month olds who have proven to have the drive and in that case the pedigree matters very little.

first of all a good dog is different definition for everybody, depends on what you are looking for, I know several kennels that are not famous that produce strong dogs on regular base, and I know famous kennels that pay great trainers to present their dogs and that works out well for them

I see/test some 20 dogs a week, sometimes more and see strong offspring from dogs that never went to WUSV and not so good from dogs who went, but there are many factors
some dogs that produce well at the moment in my book are Coudy udoli upi, sharon favory cross, lucas vrtovski doliny, hermann alphaville bohemia (malinois) and some time back hoky va pe, zar schiffslache, bar bar mi-ji/cartouche Bomavzde line (malinois) mambo z pohranicni straze to name a few, dont think any of them were top podium dogs

If random dogs create great dogs, pedigree's being fairly insignificant then why not shop at your local byb? If the trainer is the single greatest factor to great dogs then they could shop next door instead of travelling. Throw a pebble hit a puppy go to the nationals rinse and repeat. No need to choose an older dog.

"And yeah, the training isn’t passed on, but the genetics behind that training have to be good enough to take the training and do it at the level that allows the handler to showcase the dog.

What genetics the random draw?

Im not sure you would carry 5% of all breeders since 1881 with this stuff.

I don’t just look at the podium as “great dogs.” I’m also looking at the dogs that are being showcased at national/regional events. I guess it’s more of a way to advertise and get the dog out there rather than just hope someone shows up to a local club trial to see some crazy awesome dog. The dogs you mentioned, a few of them I’ve heard of. And yes, not podium dogs but many were at their respective national trials or at least regional championships. Many of them also have some very big name dogs in their pedigrees, a few are ellute sons or grandsons, there’s a tom great grandson with olex on the dam’s side as well, so it’s not an accident that those dogs are chosen to be bred to. With those pedigrees I’m also assuming they were able to achieve something in order to separate themselves from the rest of the ellute sons/grandsons or tom progeny.

I guess I was waiting for you to list some dog that no one has ever heard of that you managed to stumble upon during your travels in Europe at some small no-name club that proved to you that he could produce some good dogs. But at this point, even you’re looking at stud dogs that have made a name for themselves trialing, probably were placed in a talented trainer’s hands because of their pedigree, and proved their “pedigree” right. And sure, get bred to enough times, one of those 100s of progeny will end up doing something…but the key is getting those breedings, and that takes accomplishments over those that your contemporaries or siblings are achieving.

End of the day…very few people are going to be breeding to an IPO1 dog that got his IPO1 at a club trial but showed to be something crazy good over a dog that has achieved an IPO3 at a national event. It has nothing to do with the dog and everything to do with how many people were able to see the performance.

Bav, I guess it´s our ( European ) advantage that we are able to see ( in case of Duke even TEST ) real dogs during real training.
For me it´s about temperament and character; and during training ( even on club level ) I am able to see the "real" temperament/character of a dog. That´s our advantage - we don´t need to believe in titles and points "only".

Titles and points aren´t important in this case, because I am able to see the "raw" dog ( and it´s way more insightful to see the training than to see the result online later on ).
A lot of genetically outstanding dogs don´t go to the Nationals, simply because the handlers aren´t able ( you know most handlers aren´t able to train a dog to the highest level ) or willing to go there - but you are able to see their capacities while watching them during training...
What I know ( and you know too ): A dog able to "survive" the Regionals / Landesgruppenausscheidung more than once, but maybe twice or three times, most certainly will be a good dog, because it´s been and is a lot of pressure for the dog, a mediocre dog won´t "survive" the training in the long run.