Need to be schooled on understanding a list of linebreeding - Page 2

Sweet Jeazus !!!  is this an ACTUAL linebreeding report -  generated by this database????  if so --   please print the NAMES --  i need to know more about this breeding --   I doubt that it is German  --  there is lots of  3's and 2's there - and I didn't think they did that to this extent?? 
Also -- i wouldn't call this dog  linebred - (anymore)  to me -- it's INBRED.
I'm super old-school - but  to me --  linebeeding on 3-4-5 dogs in the 4th, 5th, 6th generations is one thing --- but what you represent here is pretty insane to me.  but what do I know. 
I have seen "American pedigrees' with linebreeding on the SAME DOG -- 12 TIMES in just 3 or 4 generations --  that's extremely concentrated blood that's sure to bring out the worst when you least expect it.

Yes, I found it linked in one of the more recent GSD threads today. I can't remember exactly each one and since the list was long it stood out but I did not understand enough to know if it was bad or good.

I thought the hole purpose of linebreeding was to set some traits then you outcross in to new blood? Seeing this much is just not enough genetic diversity possibly.

Many of the people who defend line breeding as a positive are people who actually have dogs with much back massing. The pedigree you have listed is starting to back mass if its not already there. Line breeding and occasionally inbreeding can be a valuable tool, but when you continue to do it over and over and over again, it becomes back massing. Some of the advocates of line breeding actually have back massed dogs and then they get quiet as a church mouse when this subject is broached.
Another point on line breeding...that is it is good to use for short term use to improve an essential trait like nerves, temperament, hips, etc, or to eliminate a negative like weak ears, faded pigment, missing teeth, etc. but many people today are doing extensive line breeding strictly for cosmetic purposes....ie to lengthen the stifle, increase the rear, extreme shoulders, excessive head sire, and that almighty color.  Good breeders use line or inbreeding for basics because too much of it after the goal is achieved always leads to deterioration of the breed overall....don't take my word for it...there is 40 years of empirical evidence in the breed to support this supposition.

Look at the results before condemning the breeding.

If u want to know about linebreeding ask duke. He linebreeds and produces quality stock. Its about the knowledge of the breeder.

Well yes it is but the numbers of the sort of knowledgeable and
concientious breeder who can get good results are far outweighed
IMO by the number of ignoramuses also doing it, just to get "things
to sell" or "things to win with" - no interest in the overall benefit / the
future of the breed.

And even the knowledgeable can get it wrong.  As the owner of an
ostensibly 'carefully' bred British/Germanic Showline, I can say that
with feeling!  Despite being bred by people who generally 'knew their
stuff',  he is IMO much too line-bred on Uran;  he is too big, he is
overshot & he has an umbilical hernia.
Apart from that he's lovely - loads of ball drive, good natured, rich
black & red, [even now he's ten (8th Dec), and some of his nails have
pailed].   Hips are L3:R3=6, and although he hasn't had his elbows
x-rayed,  never  had problems with those;  plus he is Haemophilia A clear.   
It is still a 'crap-shoot' ...

I  firmly believe in line breeding. the only thing I see is a lot of people line breed to names in which they are bred to reproduce what has already been. that includes all the positives. as well as the negatives. The whole objective in line breeding should be to bring to the front the positives and push down the negatives. That then puts the priority on selection of individuals in the line that demonstrate the positives and show no signs of the negative, while they do exist.

I have noticed in my lifetime most top breeders seem to always have dogs or horses that are always producing  just a little better than most people year after year, by line breeding. While they may offer to others the same bloodlines, most are never as successfull as the original breeder over a period of time. It is the ability of a person to recognize the qualities the individual posseses.

A guy years ago told me "not all my dogs have it, but when one does I know it"

Hank

(tag for future reference)

I have zero understanding of line breeding... So my question has no solid informational background.      I thought breeding sibling to sibling was a really bad thing genetically.    I thought this was as bad as Father to Daughter or Mother to Son.   If I understand above correctly, the OP shows sibling breedings.  Why would this be done (other than for the awful love of money)?

I doubt money had anything to do with it. jmo. But a couple questions would be did they have to go that close to achieve the same results. And was the outcome of it for better or for worse . Again not the line breeding but the selection of individuals. Time always tells.
Hank

@Blitzen.......I totally agree with the results being the determinant of good breeding practices.....and in many cases we have whole lines that have excessive line and inbreeding, and there is a history of the mental and physical condition of these lines in general. Yesiree you have to judge the results, I agree with that 100%. 

Too close for comfort.