1xL or D: ch or gr ch?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrostyPaws

Sampson never lost. I believe you're referring to Sandman.

---

Yep, my bad on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrostyPaws

I also think we should keep in mind that it simply isn't easy to win 5 legitimate matches into legitimate competition. I personally don't care if the dog is a 6xw, 1xL. You can call him a grand champion if you like. It is, afterall, your dog. If a top flight dog wins 6 and loses 1, it is still a top flight dog, and it is still better than most dogs kicking up dust. Is it simply more glorious sounding to say your dog is a grand champion as opposed to saying your dog is a 6x winner?

---

If a dog has to win 5 to be considered a Grand Champion, losing a fight after that (and all the wear) still doesn't mean he didn't win the 5 matches required to get the title.

Again, I don't see the logic where a 3xW, 1xL remains a Champion ... but a 6xW, 1xL does not remain a Gr Ch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrostyPaws

Dogs that win against all comers never to lose deserve to be recognized as an animal that's a cut above the norm. If you have a dog that wins 9 and loses at the age of 9, can that really be the fault of the dog? That is where decision making by the person comes into play, and usually not for the betterment of the dog but for the betterment of their own name with no regards for the dog.
The ability to know when to stop is just as important as the ability to know when to go.

---

I agree.

And IMO, a dog like Sandman (a 6xW, 1xL to Gr Ch Buck in 3:17) is a cut above a standard 5xW Grand Champion.

Jack

Jack, exactly. But what makes you think people do not follow you like a lemming. Who wants to be in a discussion with you :mrgreen: (JK)
I do have my own opinion, but im also not ashamed to tweak or change it after learning to respect other people's insights.
That being said, im certainly not contradicting myself by agreeing its already hard work to make a ch or gr ch. It would be ridiculous not to agree.
Think i've said enough and its being a little difficult/time consuming to discus in a foreign language. Time for others to reply.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R2L

Jack, exactly. But what makes you think people do not follow you like a lemming.

---

:rotflmao:

All right, that was funny :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R2L

Who wants to be in a discussion with you :mrgreen: (JK)

---

Ouch :crying:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R2L

I do have my own opinion, but im also not ashamed to tweak or change it after learning to respect other people's insights.

---

Well said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R2L

That being said, im certainly not contradicting myself by agreeing its already hard work to make a ch or gr ch. It would be ridiculous not to agree.

---

The contradiction was in the use of the word "absolutely."
The word absolutely implies no room for anything else, as opposed to "partially" ...
So when you "absolutely" agree, there is no more room for a "yeah but" anymore ... just for your edification :mrgreen:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R2L

Think i've said enough and its being a little difficult/time consuming to discus in a foreign language. Time for others to reply.

---

LOL, I am sorry if I frustrated you man, and I also need to keep in mind that this isn't your first language.
I would be stumped and run over if I had to argue in your language, so your point is well taken here.

:cheers:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CA Jack

Agree 3x. However, if the SDJ mag is in a foreign country that allows that sort of thing, I don't see why it couldn't act as a sanctioning body.

---

If that's the case then now would be an ideal time for the online SDJ to stop mimicking the old SDJ, become a front runner and make changes in the dog game.

I guess that's something you'd have to discuss with the editor though Jack.

If a dog loses a show after winning 5, I don't believe anyone thinks that dog didn't win the needed 5 to gain the title. Well, let me rephrase that a little. I don't believe that anyone with half a brain would take that stance. But if the criteria that was set forth is that a dog has to remain undefeated to keep the title of Grand Champion, then that's probably the criteria that most people are going to utilize.

If memory serves me correctly, didn't the new version of YF&M allow a dog to keep the Grand Champion title if the dog lost game? I want to say I'm right about that, but that was so many years ago that I'm not sure if that's correct or not. It would almost be easier just to do away with such titles. Just label the dog in accordance to how many won and how many he lost.