IPO prospect? - Page 4

FCI championships 2015  is won by GSD  diiference  one point        TOP 10  / 8   malinois   2  GSD


Top 20          14 malinois 5 GSD 1 riesenschnautzer

 

http://www.hondensport.com/CWH/WKFCI/2015/uitslag_indiv.html

 

Worldwide there are much , much more  workingdog GSD breeders than   malinois  for many years.

Actually, Haz, I think you have very to extremely poor comprehension of the written word. Let's not revisit the Troas vs. Truce mix-up again.

Nowhere in my post did I disparage you personally whatsoever. Yet, you seem to be trying your damndest to insult *me* every chance you get, and for what? Pointing out that your philosophy is only one opinion and that many gain "success" in various degrees by doing things differently than you do? I guess it doesn't matter what is actually said because all you seem to be able to grasp is a pissing contest. "Show me yours and I'll show you mine." Seriously? Are you 12?  I don't have anything to sell here. I don't care what you think but I really don't think you'd have any problems at all if you actually came here and met my dogs. Or maybe there are some located near you that the owners would let you test. You don't see sales videos of them because they're never for sale. Videos are for marketing. Dogs are for testing and judging. Come on down, Haz! If you wait a month, I'll have a nice guest room for you to stay in. 

Thousands of people read these threads and your attitude is exactly the kind of attitude that turns them off to the working dog world (yes, at this point I AM speaking to/about you, Haz. Before, I was speaking generally and in theories).

And again...what place did the FCI champion finish at the WUSV?

To claim that the working world is dominated by malinois is based in very little truth. There are plenty of GSD still competing at very high levels and with the same abilities that malinois bring to the table. The championships are, like I stated in my original post, dominated by trainers not dogs. The same handlers tend to be heading to the world championships year after year. Yes, the dogs are a big part of the equation, but those handlers have the ability and the knowledge to get the dogs that they know will take them to that level. GSD and malinois alike.

IPO isn't the end all be all test of breedworthiness, most logical people know that. But IPO provides a venue and a goal for people to train and exhibit their dogs. Without the goal of training towards something more than "family pet" how do we keep the working ability of the breed intact? Even those people that claim to do personal protection or any type of other bitework with their dogs to show their breedworthiness...those are all rooted in the original idea from Schutzhund that the protection phase is an important test of the dog. End of the day...even those breeders that now days claim they can read a dog and don't need to title...at some point started out by learning through Schutzhund. I've just personally seen very few of those types of breeders actually produce as good as they claim to. Most of it is rooted in the fact that their standard for breeding (when they were titling) started much lower than what today's higher standards are and many have realized they don't need to do that much work to provide solid puppies for the pet market. Like I stated...once you've made your reputation, avoiding negative reviews is way more important than producing highly successful working or sport dogs.

A good working dog is a good working dog. KNPV gets a lot of credit for making the malinois a better working dog than a GSD because they only care about the working ability of the dog. All of their dogs are tested to a high level and sold/placed in working and sport venues where the dog can do what it was bred to do. Each time someone makes the claim that a breeder doesn't have to title their breeding stock, even in a "lesser" venue like IPO, you're diminishing the standard of the dogs. You can't just keep trusting that these people know/understand what they're looking at when they're not going out there and comparing their dogs to other dogs out there. Those that defend those breeders, are the ones that have come to look at them as mentors and also tend not to look outside that kennel, or when they do look outside that kennel they are so biased and blinded that they automatically dismiss the dogs they're looking at because of whatever their mentor has told them at one point. Lack of keeping an open mind, defending the few successful dogs they've seen, and not realizing why those dogs are considered successful or good because the standard they have been taught to judge dogs by is the lower standard their mentor/breeder has shoved down their throats from day one.

Bavarian Wagon,

refreshing!
Martina

 

Good post Bavarian .

 

"Refreshing" is a good word, Martina!

Bavarian Wagon,
I was thinking the same as GSDPACK and susie and just read their comments.Yes it is refreshing to read your comments on this subject.
As far as breeders are concerned,anybody can say anything on the internet,claim anything.Having tested a few dogs for our police force from such types,very few can deliver the quality they claim to be able to produce.
When you can find a good breeder of true working types hang on to them.If they have worked dogs in any serious fashion they can develop an eye for what you need,otherwise their claims have little value.

Mike

Points scored in an artificial sport be it IPO, football, basketball, fencing, ice hockey, etc. does not indicate quality, intelligence, health, genetic superiority, or bravery. Humans, dogs, horses, or any other animal are not superior because of some silly game they play be it NFL Football, Olympic Figure Skating or IPO ( an all breed dog sport ). The original post had to do with inbreeding and suitability of an inbred puppy for IPO. The future performance of a puppy can not be predicted from parental and pedigree related performance in IPO which pretty much is end of story. What can be predicted from close inbreeding is an increased possibility for health and mental problems related to inbreeding 2-1. Since future performance of a child or a puppy in a sport can not be accurately predicted based on parental or pedigree performance of that individual's relatives in that same sport I advised that the potential benefits of inbreeding to achieve some hope of a genetic miracle IPO dog were outweighed by the far more probable risks associated with inbreeding 2-1.

Good posts Bavarian. You have the patience and tact to spell things out in a way that is more palatable for some.

Bottom line for me if you don't work dogs seriously, train with people better then you and train / trial to win at higher levels you cannot be trusted to read a dog or evaluate a dog.

Making this your goal gets those rose colored glasses off real quick.

Jenni my ability to decifer and dispense the written word is sufficient to grasp your innuendo.
You keep implying that I dont know what I am talking about because I havent been putting dogs together for years like you.

My response is and was simple. You develop the experience and the ability to read a dog through training. Through working dogs.
I posted some proof of me doing just that and asked you to do the same.
Your usual evasion leads one to the conclusion that you have nothing to show.

Enough of the video nonsense. Your argument is stupid and makes no sense. I can pull up hundreds of video of people working their dogs that has nothing to do with sales. I train and trial with and against people that aren't selling their dogs and have video of their work. I can watch dogs and handlers all over the world working their dogs.

Why should I have to come to you to test your dogs? I should see working videos all over, I should see trial results, where are they?
I can find all these for numerous other kennels here in the USA / Canada and have also seen real examples of their breedings at trials or seminars.

It comes down to this for me and most other people that want dogs that are capable of competition and breeding.
If the breeder does not have success, if the dogs have no success then generally you will not find success with a pup from there.
That person may mean well but they cannot properly evaluate what they are using and producing.

Lastly I will address this strawman argument about dogs that are capable of high levels being unable to relax. This is used by many to excuse themselves from breeding dog capable of competition.

It is complete nonsense. How many competition dogs do people making this statement own? How many have they even met in person. The 2015 FCI world champion goes on hikes and is a regular pet with his owner when not competing as did his previous dog Chris spod Lazov.

You need more then tons of prey drive to make a champion if it was that easy everyone would be doing it. 

I’m just saying what I see…too many people have ONE mentor in this breed/sport. That ONE person is their mentor based only on circumstance and luck. That’s the guy they found nearby, they had good credentials at the time, the dog they got there was solid, they achieved some level of success with them. Many of these people idolize these mentors as if we’re back in grade school discussing our favorite athletes. I guess it’s just shocking to me sometimes when adults speak about other adults as if they’re god’s gift to anything…many times without any real achievements in a decade or two. Training with other people is generally frowned upon in this world, those mentors are so scared to let anyone venture outside their little pocket so that they don’t figure out there might be something better out there. New ideas? Why? If it worked 40 years ago, it will work today! Why compete/compare the dogs? They know, they’ve done it for decades, sold hundreds of puppies to “active pet homes” a handful to police departments or club level IPO people if they’re lucky. Of course the dog will trial and title on its home field, with its training helper doing the work, with a judge that was brought in and told about the club members.

I’ve seen quite a few of these types of people get an adjustment to their reality over my time in the breed/sport. Usually takes a trial or two. Sometimes this will open up the eyes of their underlings, or it just provides the person with a chance to make up more excuses about why they failed or didn’t have the success that they’ve been planning on having over the past decade.

Until you venture outside the box you’ve lucked into, you won’t really know much about your own dog or your training. I wish more people would do that, but like I stated earlier, most aren’t encouraged to do first hand research, they’re just busy repeating what they’ve heard about this guy or that club or that training method. Not realizing that the opinions they’re hearing are highly biased and not coming from a qualified, objective, reviewer. More people need to question the qualifications of where the opinions they're listening to are coming from. The internet truly does give us a great place to do that. But all too often people get zoned in on their ONE situation and think that someone's post is attacking their situation or single truth they've known their whole "dog training" life. Scary to think that something you've believed for years or decades might be wrong, so they go on the offensive instead of truly trying to figure out which opinion/fact is the more correct one. Too often this also involves age/time/experience instead of real results and proof.