This is a placeholder text
Group text
by missbeeb on 07 April 2010 - 07:04
We have some wonderful sables here... being shown, successfully. Only one black one that I know of at present, but again, a good dog!
by noddi on 07 April 2010 - 08:04
yes Misbeeb,for some reason sables are making a come back here in the uk.i used to hate sables but for some unknown reason i decided to mate Lily to a sable male i liked.i only got 1 sable in 6 pups and wow it was a female but unfortunately as she got older i realised she was a long coat so i had to settle for a black and gold and i love her to bits.was going to put her to a sable male but due to hubby,s health and other problems i,ve never mated her and now at 7 i think she,s too old for a 1st litter so my next girlie is defo.going to be a sable.Carole S.
by missbeeb on 07 April 2010 - 09:04
Hi Carole, I love sables! I remember when Moritz & Lass Kammberg (I doubt the spelling's right) were brought over... I'd never seen the rich dark sables before, lovely! What the Americans call "black sable" is really beautiful.
by noddi on 07 April 2010 - 12:04
yes,i remember those 2.prefered Moritz to Lasso tho.,more the shape i prefer.i like a shapely animal.then one i really liked was an oldie....SHERCOZ BON JOVI.i did like Juupala Quino but he was at that time too dark for me as i like golden sables but surprisingly am coming round and have seen some nice examples on other threads and some of the classified ads.i like Lynne Camdens NECK VON WOLFENDEN(hope thats a correct spelling Lynne)i would consider using him,i know he,s W/L but i like him and i also think his sire is very nice too.we should get on methinks.see ya in a couple of weeks.Carole.
by dani81176 on 07 April 2010 - 12:04
When was the last time a working dog won the seiger show, and when was the last time a "show" dog really worked well? Exactly.
The GSD is loved worldwide, but sadly, not enough to be kept whole as a functional, handsome, working animal as V. Stephanitz desired. Instead the show folks want banana backs and egg beater legs because they feel it is "extreme" and "beautiful".
To a dog lover, or a lover of the GSD as V Stephanitz desired it, it is very, very difficult to take the above advice of just "don't look" at dogs which represent the very real weakening of the breed. If V. Stephanitz was live today, would you give him this advice?
And do you think he would take it?
Just posted this again as I like it a lot.
I have seen many a show line dog in training and man... what a nightmare... it is very hard to find a show dog that can work well, further more, not work well but simply pass the courage test. Watch last year's BSZS if you think I am talking nonsense. On the other hand, some of the working line GSD's look really good.
Going back to the topic, in my view, bad breeders are all those breeding for money and not out of passion for the breed. Someone in this forum not long ago criticized breeders who don't produce many dogs in a single year. I say that's because they're not after money and I honor them.
Bad breeders - those who would throw pieces of paper before your eyes on which you can read "Champion". I've seen quite a few of those, their dogs are just good looking pets, far from the true GSD Max v Stephanitz wanted.
The GSD is loved worldwide, but sadly, not enough to be kept whole as a functional, handsome, working animal as V. Stephanitz desired. Instead the show folks want banana backs and egg beater legs because they feel it is "extreme" and "beautiful".
To a dog lover, or a lover of the GSD as V Stephanitz desired it, it is very, very difficult to take the above advice of just "don't look" at dogs which represent the very real weakening of the breed. If V. Stephanitz was live today, would you give him this advice?
And do you think he would take it?
Just posted this again as I like it a lot.
I have seen many a show line dog in training and man... what a nightmare... it is very hard to find a show dog that can work well, further more, not work well but simply pass the courage test. Watch last year's BSZS if you think I am talking nonsense. On the other hand, some of the working line GSD's look really good.
Going back to the topic, in my view, bad breeders are all those breeding for money and not out of passion for the breed. Someone in this forum not long ago criticized breeders who don't produce many dogs in a single year. I say that's because they're not after money and I honor them.
Bad breeders - those who would throw pieces of paper before your eyes on which you can read "Champion". I've seen quite a few of those, their dogs are just good looking pets, far from the true GSD Max v Stephanitz wanted.
by dani81176 on 07 April 2010 - 12:04
I am into media production and I have too watched the documentaries posted online about show dogs. I too have my own recordings (shot with my own cameras) from different canine events where I can prove poor quality dogs are being promoted. Money is dictating the future of this poor breed, shame to all those claiming to be true GSD breeders for blending with the system instead of fighting it off. "Poor" breed because of the changes it had to undergo in the last years.. but while I use the word "poor", some are making huge money on the back of their dogs...
by dani81176 on 07 April 2010 - 12:04
Showshepherds4me,
you have got to be kidding by praising the German judges... you just have to be kidding.....
The German show dogs work.. really..? about 40% SCHH2 and 3 titled show dogs failed the courage test at last year's BSZS.
The funniest comment on that I heard so far was "maybe they (the dogs) were just having a bad day"
you have got to be kidding by praising the German judges... you just have to be kidding.....
The German show dogs work.. really..? about 40% SCHH2 and 3 titled show dogs failed the courage test at last year's BSZS.
The funniest comment on that I heard so far was "maybe they (the dogs) were just having a bad day"
by Gustav on 07 April 2010 - 13:04
Showshepherds4me,
When you say there is a standard color for "show" German Shepherds, and it is Black and red , not sables or blacks.....well I'm sorry I was not aware of this. I inserted myself in a conversation that is far above my head and knowledge base. My apologies!!
When you say there is a standard color for "show" German Shepherds, and it is Black and red , not sables or blacks.....well I'm sorry I was not aware of this. I inserted myself in a conversation that is far above my head and knowledge base. My apologies!!
by dani81176 on 07 April 2010 - 13:04
Gustav,
I wouldn't be too surprised if they modified the standard for the sake of the show dogs. We all know the standard already suffered some modifications some years back, 1991 if I'm not mistaking, also we now have IPO which is 'weaker' than SchH. Obviously things "moved on" to an attempt to ban protection sports in Austria...
I wouldn't be too surprised if they modified the standard for the sake of the show dogs. We all know the standard already suffered some modifications some years back, 1991 if I'm not mistaking, also we now have IPO which is 'weaker' than SchH. Obviously things "moved on" to an attempt to ban protection sports in Austria...
by charlie319 on 07 April 2010 - 23:04
I've been kind of busy the last couple of days, so I have not been able to see the replies.
To suggest that the breed was split into "show-lines" and "working lines" to preserve anything other than the pocket books of a handful of breeders affiliated to the then enshrined power players (the Martin brothers) is certainly a less than a serious evaluation of the developments that have skewed the breeding of showline dogs to the point that it is hard to find a dog in the top ten at any important show that doesn't look like it came out of a cookie-cutter. As to the standard of color, you must be reading some edited version of the breed standard as the black&tan is not the standard and there is quite a bit of room for variation. If Stephanitz were alive today, he'd cringe at what has happened to his beloved dog. If showline dogs worked well, there would be no need for the somewhat recently coined title "Universal Sieger".
"Bad" breeders, in my book, are those who do the same formulaic breeding that others did before. Not because they know it (their breeding) to be good, but because they lack the knowledge, vision and/or boldness necessary to create a dog that is an all-around top performer and it is sooooo much easier to breed towards a few salient if inconsequential traits while disregarding the fact that the GSD is a whole dog. Both lines do it and the flavor du jour in working lines are black sables and big-blocky heads... Now as to the question of who are the bad breeders, there begs the question of "who are the good breeders?"
IMPO, the good breeders are those who are willing to look for a solution to this schism within our dog's breed and forge a better dog that is in the mold of 1974 Siegger Enno v. Antrefftal or even 1989 Sieger Aco v. Burg Esch. These were dogs that could tear up the competition in the ring and in the field. But, breeding dogs like that is just too damn hard, and costly for many of our so called "good breeders" to undertake. They'd rather go along breeding the equivalent of knock-off dogs that look nice on paper, but lack temperament and in most cases can be shown, but the only way they can win anything would be with a "scratcher" lottery ticket.
Take a sire like Javir vom Talka Marda, I'm sure that there will be a handful of showline breeders that would turn their noses at injecting him into their kennel pedigree, however, I can't see how adding a dog of such substance and class could do anything but have a possitive impact on a branch of the breed that suffers from too much Canto/Quanto. Mind you, my male has a large amount of both in his pedigree, but I find that too much of a good thing can be bad for the breed. If you read old pedigrees and see the description of the dogs, you'll see that GSD's didn't use to be "nice, nicer, nicest"... Nor should they be. These are dogs that herd and protect their charges from predators, be they four or two legged and are loyal to their master. If a person can not control a particular breed of dog, maybe they should shop for something they can master. Dumbing down the GSD so that every Tom Dick and Harry can have one, is not only unfair to the breed, but it also keeps a lot of Labs, poodles and cockers from their propper owners.
To suggest that the breed was split into "show-lines" and "working lines" to preserve anything other than the pocket books of a handful of breeders affiliated to the then enshrined power players (the Martin brothers) is certainly a less than a serious evaluation of the developments that have skewed the breeding of showline dogs to the point that it is hard to find a dog in the top ten at any important show that doesn't look like it came out of a cookie-cutter. As to the standard of color, you must be reading some edited version of the breed standard as the black&tan is not the standard and there is quite a bit of room for variation. If Stephanitz were alive today, he'd cringe at what has happened to his beloved dog. If showline dogs worked well, there would be no need for the somewhat recently coined title "Universal Sieger".
"Bad" breeders, in my book, are those who do the same formulaic breeding that others did before. Not because they know it (their breeding) to be good, but because they lack the knowledge, vision and/or boldness necessary to create a dog that is an all-around top performer and it is sooooo much easier to breed towards a few salient if inconsequential traits while disregarding the fact that the GSD is a whole dog. Both lines do it and the flavor du jour in working lines are black sables and big-blocky heads... Now as to the question of who are the bad breeders, there begs the question of "who are the good breeders?"
IMPO, the good breeders are those who are willing to look for a solution to this schism within our dog's breed and forge a better dog that is in the mold of 1974 Siegger Enno v. Antrefftal or even 1989 Sieger Aco v. Burg Esch. These were dogs that could tear up the competition in the ring and in the field. But, breeding dogs like that is just too damn hard, and costly for many of our so called "good breeders" to undertake. They'd rather go along breeding the equivalent of knock-off dogs that look nice on paper, but lack temperament and in most cases can be shown, but the only way they can win anything would be with a "scratcher" lottery ticket.
Take a sire like Javir vom Talka Marda, I'm sure that there will be a handful of showline breeders that would turn their noses at injecting him into their kennel pedigree, however, I can't see how adding a dog of such substance and class could do anything but have a possitive impact on a branch of the breed that suffers from too much Canto/Quanto. Mind you, my male has a large amount of both in his pedigree, but I find that too much of a good thing can be bad for the breed. If you read old pedigrees and see the description of the dogs, you'll see that GSD's didn't use to be "nice, nicer, nicest"... Nor should they be. These are dogs that herd and protect their charges from predators, be they four or two legged and are loyal to their master. If a person can not control a particular breed of dog, maybe they should shop for something they can master. Dumbing down the GSD so that every Tom Dick and Harry can have one, is not only unfair to the breed, but it also keeps a lot of Labs, poodles and cockers from their propper owners.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top