Phenotype or Pedigree? - Page 1

Which do you think is more valuable for breeding...the dog itself or the dog's pedigree? For instance, we've heard about siblings wherein one is a better producer, even when it's not generally a better performer. Would you rather breed a dog with a rather iffy pedigree that performs well in the hopes of him reproducing himself or a dog from known lines that have rather predictable results?

I would most certainly keep away from iffy pedigree's but to do so is virtually impossible nowadays !!!.

Breeding to the pedigree encompasses the dog as a whole,
what I mean is, you are more likely to get uniform results, by
breeding based on pedigree, and it lessens the guess work.

I quite agree with you mirasmom , it does lessen the guesswork but unfortunately increases the many problems we are seeing today with the bottle neck of bloodlines most of which have undesirable traits which most breeders are totally ignoring and throwing caution to the wind more and more !!! , probably because there is no where to go next bloodline wise....... other than to introduce the working lines for a generation or two and vice versa which to my mind the only sensible & safest way forward.

  You must look at both!

I believe less and less in the almighty pedigree as an infallible religion.  I don't dispute the fact that some dogs and/or breeders are good producers, but I've had too many flukes to suit my own taste.  If I had to choose a breeding partner for a dog, a solid pedigree is a definte plus, but I wouldn't accept a mediocre dog in the hopes that he/she would produce better just because the ped is full of glitzy stars.