3 way split?

[Springfield Pointers]

Qest12. That is purely a conditioning issue, fitness is quickly rectified.

I remember that during my studies, I admit some 'days' ago, that we found out that certain sports require certain body types. See the vid qest12 did send.

That doesn't mean a sprinter is not able to do a marathon or a marathon guy run a sprint, but they will never be winners.

Can't it be that the same goes for dogs; a body type for triallers and for hunters? Only in dogs much more difficult to recognise the difference.??

In other words not a conditioning issue, but a genetical predisposition.

Gr, Jan

I don't think so. IMO. I have had pups from trialling dogs that make great hunting dogs, with regards staying power. I have seen dogs that battle to make 3 x 15 minute rounds lasting full days in the field after a season just from proper conditioning. However, that being said, a dog with little drive will start flagging quicker than an an unfit dog with heaps of drive, the latter will run until it drops from exhaustion. I have seen plenty of trial dogs that lack drive but win trials... So I think one can say that it's a drive issue as opposed to a muscle type issue, and that, I would say, is genetics. So to say that muscle type in a specific breed differs, as Qest12 is suggesting, is barking up the wrong tree I think.

[Bryn]

I don't think so. IMO. I have had pups from trialling dogs that make great hunting dogs, with regards staying power. I have seen dogs that battle to make 3 x 15 minute rounds lasting full days in the field after a season just from proper conditioning. However, that being said, a dog with little drive will start flagging quicker than an an unfit dog with heaps of drive, the latter will run until it drops from exhaustion. I have seen plenty of trial dogs that lack drive but win trials... So I think one can say that it's a drive issue as opposed to a muscle type issue, and that, I would say, is genetics. So to say that muscle type in a specific breed differs, as Qest12 is suggesting, is barking up the wrong tree I think.

That's kind of the point I was trying and failing to make, that IF you continue to only breed from FTCH/FTW winning lines you could end up with that kind of dog as they seem to be the best at that kind of activity, but these aren't necessarily the best dog for a day in the field, just as dogs from a long line of show champions may well be able retrieve and pick up but won't necessarily be the best suited to it. Quite apart from reducing the available gene pool and potentially creating genetic issues.

Agreed it isn't a muscle issue, muscle issue type determines explosive power i.e. speed, how high it can jump etc.

[jeffD]

I would presume that the majority of FT bred dogs go to normal shooting homes and I have never heard of folks complaining that these dogs can only work for 20 or 30 minutes before keeling over knackered. If this was true we would all know about it and breeders would not be able to sell these dogs.
I will not argue about muscle tissue as I have no knowledge in this area but I do know of many FT bred dogs that do full days walked up rough shooting and I notice no more fatigue in these dogs than those with little red ink their breeding. No disrespect to these dogs many of which are fantastic workers. I truly believe that the type of training and more important the type of use a dog receives will determine the speed it works at and if it can last the full day.
Very interesting discussion.

[Springfield Pointers]

That's kind of the point I was trying and failing to make, that IF you continue to only breed from FTCH/FTW winning lines you could end up with that kind of dog as they seem to be the best at that kind of activity

Not what I was saying...

[Bryn]

apologies

[crackerd]

Is the intensely controlled short burst type of climate required to win trials suited to a particular type of dog and could repeatedly breeding for these traits from a limited number of bloodline for a number of generations produce a type of dog less suited to what most would consider traditional gundog work?

In America they have what are called "Hi-drive" labradors ....dogs bred for trial work . They can take the stresses of lots of training and come back for more. These dogs may be a bit more than the average Joe Soap would like to train.

This seems to be leading to some Americans now importing British dogs with calmer temperaments .

Bill, let's clarify something that's a humourous little secret over here. "Joe Soap" and "some Americans" would like not to have to train at all- thus they let themselves be sold a bill of goods that British Labs essentially come "pre-trained." (The "calmer temperament" bit has a little validity but doesn't hold water either for training in water.) And the importers, what you might call shills, are all too happy to spew such effluvium. 99.9% of the North American Lab-owning public who competes in field trials (or hunt tests) goes with a North American-bred Labrador, and 99.9% of the Lab-owning public who do not compete in either nor do much, if any training whatsoever would consider a "British Lab" based on hearing what their "trained ear" wants to hear about imports.

Take a look at what was required to compete 40 years ago before our field trials really stepped it up for intense training: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... /index.htm That's the extreme, an addiction to training if you will that some of us suffer from. I think of the other extreme - doing nothing productive with a gundog - as a fatal allergy for training that's terribly contagious among the hundreds of thousands of North American Labrador owners.

MG

[Qest12]

I think I made the mistake of comparing human physiology to canine physiology - I dont' think the skeletal muscular system in dogs is reliably comparable to the humans.
I think with dogs it's more of an issue of overall fitness and body conditioning......you can alter the fitness = drive = speed by adjusting the intensity, amount and length of physical activity.

[Bryn]

SP wrote "I have seen plenty of trial dogs that lack drive but win trials..."

Is 'drive' level in the individual dog a consequence of training/fitness/conditioning or is it genetic (this is why I quoted the post earlier)> If genetic, by selecting specifically for Fieldtrialability is there not a chance that you are also inadvertantly going to produce dogs with less drive. I'm not saying its an issue now but 20-30yrs down the line?

[trekmoor]

Hi Mike, when I first trialed a lab very nearly 40 years ago one old time trialer indulged in a bit of nostalgia about by-gone days in British Retriever trialing. Young whippersnappers like me and Billy Steele senior were actually handling dogs onto retrieves ! The auld fella (he'd be younger than I am now ) said that "back then" you could be pretty certain that if you had a lab that wasn't gunshy, wasn't hard-mouthed, wasn't a whiner and which could walk to heel without running in , you had a dog that would win trials........ Then along came handling and the baw wiz burst !

He must be turning in his grave at modern trialing and I think his bones would crumble into premature dust if he ever saw a modern American trial !

To be honest I don't think that old man was entirely wrong .... maybe we are getting too "handling dependent ?"

Wullie

[Springfield Pointers]

Is 'drive' level in the individual dog a consequence of training/fitness/conditioning or is it genetic ?

Drive is genetic. If it ain't there, you ain't going to get it in... You can't train drive into a dog.