I shave my my dogs front legs the day before the deal to better expose the vein that i am going to hook a line into after the deal "if needed" All this other stuff about shaving is quite laughable to me A Bulldog is gonna be a Bulldog bald or with fur period !!
With all things being equal except the weight i believe it does equal a 100% success rate. Even if if doesn't it is still an advantage. Jack if you were fighting your self with the same training and a 15lb weight advantage that it would be an even matchup?Quote:
Originally Posted by CA Jack
misleading yourself from this post is quite laughable to me. Before you laugh out of no where awkwardly, read and understand this post carefully. No one said anything about making a bulldog with or without fur and if you didn't know, you were suppose to have a bulldog in hand to bet with.Quote:
Originally Posted by bullyson
I can't see the benefit but that's just me. If hair weighs a couple of ounces, (which I think might be a stretch but I have never weighed hair, or weighed a dog pre- then post- shave. So for that my knowledge is limited). Since lots of people use digital scales now maybe a couple three ounces can be helpful in making weight. I will admit last Feb. we saw one pay the forfeit at 39.1 and maybe a good haircut prevents that from happening. When they did the dogs anyway I can't see where there was a bunch of difference between the 38.9 and the 39.1. (Did I say I dislike digital scales?, but that is a different topic altogether)
In one of my very first posts I made a point and I will make it again here. If a guy shaved his dog and he won then odds are he will shave the next one, even if it had little to do with the good performance. If he wins again with a shaved dog then he has developed his way. Let him teach that way to another and if the other wins then you would be hard pressed to convince them otherwise.
I made the point about feed, if a guy is winning feeding corn flakes and cabbage, anyone, board members included, will have a hard time convincing him otherwise.
EWO
:appl:Quote:
Originally Posted by EWO
Perfectly said EWO, it is a strategy that a handler/conditioner come up with that they feel gives them a slight edge because of exactly what you just said.
You are insane to think a 5 oz weight advantage = a 100% success rate.Quote:
Originally Posted by gotap_d
Do you have the same running score every time?
How about the same weight lift results? Every time?
How about when you play a game? Same score every time?
You have different capabilities each day, hell each hour, and so would your mirror opposite.
To think that the adding of a mere 5 oz would slide the scale to from 50-50 to a 100% success rate is daft, at best, if not insane.
A 5 oz advantage :rotflmao:Quote:
Originally Posted by gotap_d
A 15 lb advantage is significant ... a 48x more significant advantage than a 5 oz advantage ... but even this is not a 100% guarantee of success.Quote:
Originally Posted by gotap_d
Ever heard of David and Goliath?
It's all about ODDS ... a 5 oz advantage is negligible ... a 15 lb advantage would dramatically change the odds, but yet still not guarantee success.
Jack
Anyone who doesn't think any weight differenve is an advantage with ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL is insane. All things equal if you're 100% your mirror is 100%. If dog A has a slight cold his mirror has a slight cold. Track runner #1 runs a 4 minute mile today his mirror runs a 4 minute mile today.Quote:
Originally Posted by CA Jack
Your laughing at a 5oz advantage. Thats fine laugh at all the dogmen who take the forfeit and run when the other dog is over 5oz. They must believe they are at a disadvantage.
And i brought up a 15lb difference to illustrate an example using humans not dogs.
Yes i have heard of david and goliath. What does that have to do with what we are talking about? Nothing because they ARE NOT MIRRORS of each other. Two different people with different skill sets and different weapons.
It was a good topic but i think the dead horse is being beaten. I've stated my OPINION and enjoyed the discussion. Thats all i have to say.
Huh ???
Gotap_d I respectfully disagree with you, but to each his own, no harm no foul on my end. However, riddle me this. If a conditioner takes the time to put a hound on a scale twice a day, weighing his feed, and regulating his water, for 8-10 weeks, why would you change anything at the last minute? That makes zero since to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by gotap_d
I have two full grown Akitas (90 and 110 lbs) and I could guess what 5 oz of hair looks like, and I don’t see that coming off of 40 lb bulldog.
:-tREALLY! If you think that 5 oz of hair is going to be difference maker in a hound’s performance, more power to you. If I bring ANYTHING and 5 oz stands between me and a win, I would seriously have to reconsider my position on a whole lot of things.
I have won more than once with what I thought was an inferior hound, not because I shaved him down to his nuts chasing 5 oz. I don’t care what “lane” you are in it boils down to conditioning. Bringing the bigger dog is as much science as it is an art when it comes to conditioning, and then their still is not guarantee that you are fielding the bigger hound.
Assume for a minute that you have two equally matched opponents in all areas; the athlete in superior condition will win the majority of the time.
You don't have the ability to say the same thing twice and keep your thoughts consistent.Quote:
Originally Posted by gotap_d
You first said you thought a 5 oz advantage was a 100% guarantee of success.
Now you're saying it's "an advantage" =;
Well, no shit, I already agreed it was an advantage ... a 5 oz advantage :lol: :rolleyes:
You're, not your.Quote:
Originally Posted by gotap_d
Just because some dogmen run over 5 oz doesn't mean anything.
Other dogmen push weight and win.
I agree weight matters, when it's significant; we just disagree that 5 oz is "significant."
You also have yet to prove that shaved dog hair = 5 oz, which I doubt very much, so I think "shaving hair" is even less significant.
In addition to having trouble with concepts, you also have trouble with proportions and math.Quote:
Originally Posted by gotap_d
15 lb = 48x greater than 5 oz
(1lb = 16 oz x 15 = 240 oz)
240/5 = 48
The average pit dog is 40 lb.
The average human fighter around 160.
This means the average person is 4x the size of the average dog (not 48x the size).
This means you are exaggerating to make a point, so let's bring you back down to reality.
If the average man is 4x the size of the average dog, then you multiply 5 oz x 4 which would = 20 oz (1.25 lb).
This means your big 5 oz "advantage" in a 40 lb bulldog is equal to a 1.25 lb (20 oz) advantage in a middleweight (160 lb) human, which again isn't shit.
Even the same two people would be different. You are different now from what you were yesterday.Quote:
Originally Posted by gotap_d
If you played a computer game twice, you would make different choices and get different scores.
As with your lack of understanding of everything else, you're not understanding this concept.
People are not robots who do the same things every time; they are different every single day.
Well, it is a good topic, but when you actually THINK about it, and use facts, 1) no one has yet to prove what dog hair weighs, and even if it weighs 5 ounces, which I very much doubt, it still doesn't do shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by gotap_d
I do agree that weight is significant, when the amount of weight is significant.
But 5 oz isn't shit to a dog (and I still don't think dog hair even weighs 5 oz).
The best middleweight human fighters are not going to win/lose over a 1.25 lb difference in weight, and the best 40 lb dogs are not going to win/lose over 5 oz either.
Other factors will make the difference.
Jack