Let's talk structure - Page 1

Since we have a wide array of east/weat/czech/american fanciers engaged in some heated debate these last few days, I thought I'd try to start a thread to help us understand each others' tastes, goals, and breeding decisions. Let's save working titles and temperment for another thread and discuss first what we want anatomically in a GSD. So let me pose the follwoing questions:

What are your number one physical traits that a GSD must have for you to own the dog or breed to it?

For me: Strong, firm back with no weakness, no break, no roach.  The dog MUST be correct coming and going. Correct postion of the stifle.  Sufficiently strong pasterns and good feet.  Must be a harmonious mover.

What are your secondary important traits, the next things you would look for in a dog and expect him/or her to have at least some if nto most of these traits?

Strong rear propulsion, correct lay of croup, correct lay of the upper arm, good wither.  Masculinity/feminity. Strong head/expression. Dryness.

What is your "icing on the cake" your personal, but gratuitous favorite traits that make a dog really gorgeous to you?

Color, coat.  Long croup, long upper arm. (Just because they are so damn hard to come by)

Now lets go in the other direction. What negative traits would immediately turn you off to a dog?

Wobbly hocks, weak back, over/under size. Poor front.  Extreme toplines over/under angulation. Bitchy looking males. Ridiculously long bodies/incorrect height to length ratio.

What are some secondary negative traits, not to you as severe as the prior but would definitely give you pause?

Slightly insufficient front reach. Overly deep brisket (within reason).  I have a thing with tails, I can't stand a tail that curls.

Now, no dog is perfect, the idea behind this thread is so we can discuss what we would be willing to give up if the dog has the rest of the package you're looking for. I'll tolerate a short croup if the dog has a perfect front, substitute color for a dog that moves like a machine, and so on.

I would also like to say these recent heated debates are a hell of a lot better than the personal vendetta BS. So lets have at it!

i pretty much agree with all you said

physical traits- the dog mus be in proportion and have nice angulation level top line and a nice gait, health and temperament are my priority's when i am looking for a stud. working ability is a must.

secondary traits- pigment, nice head/expression, color i love sables. dark eyes

the icing on the cake-blimey....perfect hips -elbows, true dark sable

negative traits- no working ability or if the dog is too far removed from the breed standard, poor temperament.

secondary negative traits- low drive, heavy bone, pale eyes, washed out looking 

YEH now we,Re talking!!!

I'm at work but I'll come back later for my view...can't wait..

For me when a look a shepherd let's say on a stack, what I'm asking first is does he seem confortable cause usually when they look like they are forcing themselve to stay that way it tells me that the angles are incorrect.

1) A nice head, not too coarse ( like a rottie) with tigh lips masculine or feminine with dark almond shape eyes, erect ears, firm strong back with a nice slopping croup,Topline  Proper angles, long neck, pastern not ot straight or to down, and expression that only you can get from a GSD. While moving he needs to be clean coming and going and be single track, on the side he need a nice flowing and fluid gait, effortless and efficient, back still firm and no jumping of the croup, good balance drive at both ends.

2) secondary for me is more round eyes, doggy bitch or big female if they still have a feminine look, a little ring on the tail, washed out colour or bad coat condition.

3) x tra..colours, very good coat.

What tun's me off:Poor temperament  straight front, poor angulation (to square), bouncing back or roach , dragging toes, east west feet, cat feet or too long,  floppy ears, unbalanced gait.lock hock, neck too short, steep croup, 

Minors: lighter eye, dog a little too long

I think that's about it..

 Funny sometimes..Now this is a good subject but nobody's talking..lol

There is surely someone else on this site that knows or at least have an opinion on structure!!

LOL welcome to the board. I'll admit I have very strong opinions and I'm quite bullheaded but engage me in a civil, educational topic and you'll find I'm not so bad.

I was hoping to see some marked differences between what the owners/breeders of various lines are looking for, really narrow down our likes/dislikes and discuss them separately.

I love straightforward bullheaded people with opinions!! I think i'm very close to that description.

I think it's a great topic because a lot of fancier and unfortunatly breeders don't even know what good movement is.  They think if the dog can run or jump that mean ihe is well built.  A lot of foks judt don't understand what a good balance dog is.

Working titles are important, but 3/4 of the standard talk about STRUCTURE. It most be important too yet too many people read it but don't know what they are talking about..

At least that is what i'm thinking now 

I would have love hearing about the different opinions/ different line..YOUHOOUUUUU 

A dog is only as good as it's feet and pasterns. I always judge a dog from the ground up. Bad feet and I lose all interest.

I agree Blitzen, but I add in the back to that as well.

 I agree I don't like bad feet and pastern also.  Some pasterns a way too soft..and some others are way too straight for a good propulsion. Very good angles in pastern is hard to get. Poor ligamentation is the problem..but I think it has improve

For the feet..I really dislike tose little terrier feet or those looonnnng toes..WASHHHH..