
This is a placeholder text
Group text

by darylehret on 19 March 2010 - 11:03
Sorry, about that. Maybe you can find relief in the fact that I view COI's as totally useless information, and it's just that everyone's so fascinated or confused by the numbers that I feel obliged to explain what I can.
On a similar note, I've made completely rational arguments against the validity of ZW ratings as well. And again, some people think this is 'neat stuff', where I see it as inaccurate over-simplification that dangerously gives the wrong perception.
You'll do much better by keeping an observant eye for patterns or trends in phenotype, than you ever will dumbing-it-down with a calculator in your hand. I don't think either model is very accurate or reliable (COI's or HD-ZW's) and each is only modestly useful, but there are definitely other more effective means of stacking odds in your favor.
I tend to get thrashed on for talking theory in breeding strategies, with no 'walk' to back it up by, so anyone who truly cares to know would just have to buy my dvd/book when it's out, and be prepared to throw everything you know and abide by out the window.
On a similar note, I've made completely rational arguments against the validity of ZW ratings as well. And again, some people think this is 'neat stuff', where I see it as inaccurate over-simplification that dangerously gives the wrong perception.
You'll do much better by keeping an observant eye for patterns or trends in phenotype, than you ever will dumbing-it-down with a calculator in your hand. I don't think either model is very accurate or reliable (COI's or HD-ZW's) and each is only modestly useful, but there are definitely other more effective means of stacking odds in your favor.
I tend to get thrashed on for talking theory in breeding strategies, with no 'walk' to back it up by, so anyone who truly cares to know would just have to buy my dvd/book when it's out, and be prepared to throw everything you know and abide by out the window.
by VomMarischal on 19 March 2010 - 13:03
Thanks. I find the numbers vaguely comforting...I'm an English major, not a mathematician, so they only translate into trends in my head, but since I did the breeding for a certain effect I like, and now it looks like the numbers match that goal without getting TOO heavily line bred (one grandparent out of 4 is an outcross), I will be even more eager to see what positives/negatives come up.

by GSDXephyr on 19 March 2010 - 13:03
I find them interesting, the numbers. Even if no one is singly, hugely important, even small bits of the puzzle can help fine tune the big picture, don't you think? There are so many things to take into consideration, I wouldn't expect there is 'ONE GREAT THING' that answer the breeding question easily and efficiently so that very little work or thought has to go into it. I'm not really *into* math either, but it is interesting to me that someone came up with these calculation schemes if only to compare different number results with actual dog results (COI, ZW, etc.).
Heather
Heather

by darylehret on 19 March 2010 - 14:03
Yep, just a component in the overall weigh-in of a sound breeding strategy. But that initial "novelty" of it somehow becomes a primary focus for some people, like a type of magical formula for a cookbook approach, and for some breeders, an element of deception to implement in their marketing strategy.
Brackett's Formula: "Let the sire of the sire become the grandsire on the dam's side." Lloyd Brackett's prescription for line breeding has proven very effective WHEN the dog line bred on is a truly superior example of the breed and can correct the weaknesses in the bitch/pedigree in question.

by Franki on 19 March 2010 - 23:03
I think darylehret is right in the statement below (depending on what you are breeding for)
You'll do much better by keeping an observant eye for patterns or trends in phenotype, than you ever will dumbing-it-down with a calculator in your hand. I don't think either model is very accurate or reliable (COI's or HD-ZW's) and each is only modestly useful, but there are definitely other more effective means of stacking odds in your favor.
Understanding these are not German Shepherds bred to work and I believe most on this board are looking for working ability along with physical soundness not show lines. Please don't blast me if that is a wrong assumption.
The first two are dogs that I have owned, that are tightly linebred which were then bred together to produce the last dog which is the bitch that I kept (if I get the photos in there correctly).
They are very much alike in phenotype. The father had one quality that I wanted to improve as did the mother. Different traits on each parent but strong in the trait that I wanted. The registry standard is always the measuring stick.
Careful linebreeding will begin to establish a type within the breed which should reproduce itself as the gene pool isn't as wide open.
The litter was very consistent in type and structure. I fully believe in selling puppies on a very tight contract with limited registration unless spayed or neutered and also having a clause in the contract that they must have titles on them before breeding.
Respectfully,
Franki
Father
Mother
.jpg)

Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top