workingline best new stud - Page 23

 Quote: I think within the knowledgable dog circles there is an awareness of the dogs that "are" and the dogs that are "made".

Made. That would be Asko. God, I do not like that dog. I do not want that dog in my dogs pedigrees.

Quote:  The stud is only as good as the female breed to him.

That is crap. LOL There are many dogs out there that are bred and produce nicely, but most of what he produces depends on who he was bred to. That to me is not really a stud dog. I think the stud dog beats the numbers game and produces no matter who he is bred to. 

Quote:  IN THE U.S. production of working police dogs means little?

Gods honest truth, it means nothing to me. I have seen more than my share of dogs that were nothing special that were police dogs. There is a HUGE myth out there that if a dog is a police dog, it is all that.

I would like to see some more names of good quality dogs here in the states. I thought there would be more names being thrown out there.

Jeff:

        Quote: The stud is only as good as the female breed to him.

That is crap. LOL There are many dogs out there that are bred and produce nicely, but most of what he produces depends on who he was bred to. That to me is not really a stud dog. I think the stud dog beats the numbers game and produces no matter who he is bred to.


Your comment only shows your lack and understanding of genetics.
 

 

"That is crap. LOL There are many dogs out there that are bred and produce nicely, but most of what he produces depends on who he was bred to. That to me is not really a stud dog. I think the stud dog beats the numbers game and produces no matter who he is bred to. "

WOW! The female is merely an incubator that does not pass on half the genes! WIth this type of logic please do not do any breeding.  So all of the successful breeders should no longer pay attention to the damn of a litter and wing it? If this is the case why bother training and titling females?

Now if you made the argument that the stud has a larger impact on the breed over dams, because a stud can have say 20 breedings at 6 per litter, adding 120 pups to the GSD community.  Versus a female who may have 5 litters, at 6 pups per litter, adding 30 pups to the GSD community.

You also leave out one very important factor the "Trainer".  If a stud is going to be judged on successful performance of progeny.  Their are but so many trainers that can get the best out of a dog.  Too many trainers are cookie cutter and call a dog sh*t if it does not fit their training model.

Kyle
 

I'm going to surprise myself here and say that the previous posts by Jeff and Daryl are very good ones, IMO.  See Jeff, I agree when you stop cussing and flailing your arms around, you can actually share some good information. 

I agree with Jeff's last post - I personally like to see a stud dog produce "himself or better" whatever female he is bred to.  I think that is not the norm.  I also think it's ok and acceptable to use a stud dog whose offspring is impressive from very quality females - no problem with that.  I also think it's ok and acceptable to use a stud dog who is very impressive himself, even if he is young, Schh1 or police or SAR or advanced obedience or........ titled  - with the idea of seeing what he can produce (only if he is worked, can be seen worked, is hip/elbow rated, and is bred to a proven or titled female of course) -

Anyway, I'll put another name on the list (for workingline best NEW stud dog) -

My other new boy - V-H'Doc v Rex Lupus Schh3,FH2 (100 pts), KKl-1lbz, a-normal HD/ED ZW 70.  He comes from a little-known kennel and was not bred in Europe, though his sire is in this country and seems to be producing very nicely - Doc  is now siring litters and the puppies are looking very nice so far.  He is super in the work and has the drives, temperament, nerve strength, and working ability to pass along with quality females.  His pedigree is Fero-free, and his very low hip ZW make him an interesting stud dog to consider in this country.
http://www.rokanhaus.com/doc.html



molly
Eichenluft
http://workinggermanshepherd.com

Not necessarily.  There are some breeders that ask very little from their females, and still produce astoundingly well through their males.

Reportedly, Mike Suttle of Loganhaus and some of his associates accomplish this in their dutch shepherds.  That would not be my prefered approach however, and one of the things Jeff and I discussed a bit and differ a bit in opinion about.

Also, Mike's had some great "performers" that just couldn't produce themselves, and I would not necessarily suppose they were "made", as much as just lacking the prepotent/homozygous genetics for it.  Females of the proper phenotype could add in that respect, but what ends up happening and perhaps not so bad is; the sire's line may be narrowing the genepool while the female's are thinning out the inbreeding.  I'm not a big believer in broadening the genepool, unless it's by use of multiple unrelated linebred lines.  Since I don't study DS lines, I'm sure I'd have a different picture than I do with this breed, because past practice will influence future intent.

In any regard, titles are certainly the most commonly used means we have of measuring genetic strength, although they are not the only measure to go by.  Personally, I'm more comfortable in selecting from title-proven lines, of consecutively unbroken chains of top performance producers.  While I've seen some nice untitled dogs that I wouldn't hesitate to breed with, they also had some accomplished producers significantly close behind them.

The title of this thread is "workingline best new stud". That is an impossibility. If they are "new" you don't know what they produce, so how can any be the "best"? It takes a few years to really assess what has been produced and it takes many litters also. It's like grading an NFL team's draft on draft day.

The current best son of a best son of a best son, would be one way to look for it.

Who doesn't want there male to throw him self or better?????? But because a male gets the ability to breed to more females then females to males only gives him more chances at bat to hit a home run no matter how many swings and strikes at the ball he takes. I believe that is "Puppy MIll" mentality and doesn't surprise me considering the source.

 Why would you not take the same time and care picking your females as you would your males? Only unless your main objective is to machine gun out puppies with your kennel name and for $$$$$$$$$$$$. If more care was taken in choosing the breed able females it would only increase the chances of outstanding the breeding pair.

The best example of what I'm talking about is Hank. Heavily used right now, but it will be a few years before we can say anything. He is "new", but too early to be called the "best".

Yeah, "best" and "new" combined is sort of a conundrum.