BIKRS wrote:BAGUIO, FTCH Larford Elma was put to two non champions and produced FTCH Argyl Warrior and FTCH Argyl Chiefton. If you look around Champion bitches are often put to non champions by good dog men who can see potential in a dog or a dog that has not reached his potential.
How many times do you see a TOP line of a pedigree full of FTCH's ie dogs producing champion sires generation after generation. I think it was Erlandson who said the problem with modern breeding was average bitches put to popular FTCH sires.
Champion bitches are SOMETIMES and definately not OFTEN put to non Champions dogs and even these Non Champion dogs are definately NOT Average dogs like the thousands of very average bitches that are put to FTCH dogs every year.
What I'm saying is it's not an even split or anywhere near it so I fail to see how a good and educated deduction that a bitches' line is the most important can be made? You might be correct and you might be wrong but I am so far unconvinced!
As for 'Erlandson who said the problem with modern breeding was average bitches put to popular FTCH sires, well what is the problem? Surely the pups should end up having better qualities than the bitch by doing this? It's got to be better than putting a average bitch to an average dog and therefore flooding the market with more sub standard dogs. The pups will be born anyway so surely in order to improve the breed you should put any bitch to health tested, quality dogs, and if you don't know a good dog then FTCH infront of the name says it all and saves the guess work!
I'm another one that thinks it is roughly a 50/50 split.
Wullie
If at first you don't succeed .....find out if there is a booby prize !
-----------------------------------------------------
Don't do what doesn't work - do what does.
.
As for 'Erlandson who said the problem with modern breeding was average bitches put to popular FTCH sires, well what is the problem? Surely the pups should end up having better qualities than the bitch by doing this? It's got to be better than putting a average bitch to an average dog and therefore flooding the market with more sub standard dogs. The pups will be born anyway so surely in order to improve the breed you should put any bitch to health tested, quality dogs, and if you don't know a good dog then FTCH infront of the name says it all and saves the guess work![/quote]
It is a problem because people automatically think using a FTCH will improve things. I would rather line breed using an average dog than outcross to a champion any day.
I don't know much about line breeding but I personnaly wouldn't pay out for health testing of an average dog in order to put it up for stud. Maybe it's another thread but how can using an average dog improve the breed?
johnplumbal wrote:HI Guys.
Does it really matter if the parents are not FTCH/FTW, if the dog is only going to be used for rough shooting? Many argue that it is vital, where others say a pup cannot be judged at a young age(obviously), it's what the trainer puts into the dog itself...... WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Well i think it depends what you term roughshooting. The letters FTch should mean the dog will enter water and has a soft mouth, it don't mean it has a genetic propencity to sit in a pigeon hide all day or a cold muddy gutter waiting of Wildfowl indeed it might mean the oposite if you read the words "fast and stylish". That said as long as its not a case of a below par bitch put to the most popular FTch stud of the day it should mean it (the resultant pup) has some / more potential than long lines of shooters dogs that never realy were very good at thier given jobs. There are plenty great non trialing bred dogs out there but the pups dont sell well from adverts compared to ftchxftch or ftchx ftw
I do 100% believe that to lock in desireable genetic features you need to get a line breeding true to type though, random matings no matter how good the sire and dam can not garantee a pup of a certain type. My wife and i have two daughters, one of which is just the female form of myself the other just like her. Now if we were both related by close genetic links and were more similar in type our selves then our children might also be much more typey, they might also have medical issues from weak inbred genes to boot though- a whole new issue!
I think puppy that is most likely to suit your needs is one from parents which do the job you will require of your dog in the future.So....if you want to go for the Championship it'll be easiest with a FTCH xFTCH pup but if you want a steady pigeon hide dog go for parents who have proven they can do that. FTCH's have only been proven to be great at a very particular type of gundog work.....I'm sure many also excell in other disciplines like wildfowling, pigeon shooting and sitting on the peg but many don't.
pontbeck wrote:I would rather line breed using an average dog than outcross to a champion any day. Quote
I totally agree
The pups do receive 50/50 genes from each parent but it`s not as simple as that.
Bill
Can someone please explain to me why you would line breed from an average dog in order to improve the breed. It's average so it therefore passes on average or am I wrong? If it's too slow it surely produces slow puppies, poor nose then puppies with poor noses?
There has got to be something in this line breeding but I don't get it?
It surely has to be better to put an average bitch to a FTCH and hope all the pups take the dogs traits than to get a guaranteed mixture of average and with possible health problems to boot from the close relationship?
