"TESTED HARD" --- What Does That Mean?

Does being "tested hard" really make a dog "worth breeding to" ... or even "worth a bet"? I see people claim their dogs are "hard-tested" ... but I am always left curious as to what that means exactly?

• How hard is "hard"?
  "Tested" against what?

I understand gameness is important, even foundational, and I have bred my share of game dogs. But I never understood the value of beating the shit out of a dog "to see if it would scratch." I have never done this, and yet I have regularly bred dogs that have been 100% DG ... and yet most of the people who claim that they "test hard" really don't have much of a successful program.

Why is that?

Could it be that there is something more to "a good dog" than being "tested hard"?

Curious as to other people's thoughts on this ...

Jack


.

For one dogs usually produce the average of their line not themselves. So said hard-tested dog may in fact be a garbage producer, where as his untested sibling could possibly be a great producer.

The "Hard-Tested" moniker is to make the owner feel better about what they are feeding. When in actually a person should only be concern with thier own feeling towards an animal. Learn the line and learn the individual then learn some common sense.

One fact to always remember is an animal is only as game as his last showing. Deep game today may not be quite as game tomorrow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AL Clown

For one dogs usually produce the average of their line not themselves. So said hard-tested dog may in fact be a garbage producer, where as his untested sibling could possibly be a great producer.

---

Or, worse, a hard-tested dog from a garbage line will probably be a garbage producer ... while an untested dog from an excellent line will regularly throw bulldogs.
The trouble is, as you know, is that a person can only get away with "not testing" for so long, before his "good line" turns to garbage itself.

Are we just testing for "stupid game" ... or are there other things to test for?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AL Clown

The "Hard-Tested" moniker is to make the owner feel better about what they are feeding. When in actually a person should only be concern with thier own feeling towards an animal. Learn the line and learn the individual then learn some common sense.

---

Bingo. And, if I can add to that, learn to get a taste for what "a good dog" really is ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AL Clown

One fact to always remember is an animal is only as game as his last showing. Deep game today may not be quite as game tomorrow.

---

Another good point, which is precisely why I don't think beating the bolts off a dog in practice does him any good at all. I have never needed to see a dog beat all to hell to figure out if he's game or not. IMO, at best, beating a dog to hell only proves his owner wants "everyone else" to approve of his doggie ... which is a mark of insecurity ... but being beat all to hell sure won't help that dog win a match (in fact, it might hurt his chances if he gets injured too bad or gets used up) ... and a "hard test" doesn't mean that dog will scratch to his next opponent either.

In other words, I am much more impressed when a good dogman says a dog is "a really good dog" ... than I am to hear someone say his dog is "hard tested" ...

Jack


.

i totally understand...but just curious i have always been told there puppies are what there parents where simpley because its just like humans. All of the traits and charecteristcs they we have where influeced and giving to us by our parents genes and genetics... so why or why not it be the same for a dog

Ca Jack,

This is a good topic, as a matter of fact a friend of mines was discussing this on a 3 way call on Christmas night. When people say a hound is “oil checked hard” What do they really mean? What did you check it against? Another few pieces of average dogs or did he bump shoulders with 6 nationally or locally renown dogs and surpassed 6 beatings that have claimed lives of others. I personally would respect a person saying hey this is my dog for stud he’s a pretty decent hound and leave it at that. I could fully understand that and if they bred their dog and have some results, and wanted to share that is fine. I’m more interested in that hounds traits and what you may have seen from some of his offspring, his littermates traits and how they compare to the overall family. Is he one fast dog with great timing reflexes out of 80 or is this common. Is his intelligence above average and is this something that has been shown as a dominant trait etc.., I don’t understand the value of stating “testing hard” for any animal whether it’s a brood stock or a prospect that you are willing to bet some frog skins on. What do you get out of checking them hard? That won’t make your dog produce any better than he was going to do if you just seen if he would go and how he handled different opportunities and scratched back and no better if you never touched him/her.

I also agree Gameness is very important but I think when people are honest with themselves a lot of times gameness or dead game doesn’t come into account all that much. I see more dogs lose because of bad conditioning or just outright not being at the right weight or a person not having enough dedication to even make sure their charge has a clean bill of health then I have seen pack it in because they didn’t have no heart. I believe there is a lot more to a good hound then just being tested hard. Reminds me of GrCh Badger hound, who whipped through everything he faced and then was muzzled to see how he would respond to being beaten up on without being able to dismantle his opponent, all so that he could be said he was tested hard. Makes no sense to me at all because either that dog is good or not and a lot more, you going to kill your charge just to say, oh boy he got tested and went out game. There is no value in a dead game dog but to say you had a good one that you lost and 9 of 10 it was owners fault.

I have to think that it’s about personal ego and chest bump to say, oh yea he belly scratched 2 times for me, and I’m not saying that’s a knock on the individual or the hound but my first thought is how did it get to the point he had to belly scratch and why wasn’t he picked up after he made that first amazingly game attempt.

Imho no matter what we do with our dogs it needs to be fun and entertaining for them . When any animal is put into a scary situation it's fight or flight mechanism kicks in, so just because you got fight does not mean it was not thinking flight. I also feel that when they see you are happy with what they are doing they will want to please you no matter what . 90% of elite athletes will tell you if im not having fun im done. Sorry for my poor typing skills :oops:

when it comes to testing a dog ,that depends on the man behind the dog .a great dog in the hands of a IDIOT is doomed .how many times have you heard a dog is game i seen 2 hrs out of him ,then he curs in a hunt in 30 min. condition is the biggest player in one curring out .which he is really fatigued out andf there is a diff

Hard Tested? I always thought it was a great marketing ploy but hey what do i know. :mrgreen:

wildchild

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CitySwamp

Ca Jack,

This is a good topic, as a matter of fact a friend of mines was discussing this on a 3 way call on Christmas night. When people say a hound is “oil checked hard” What do they really mean? What did you check it against? Another few pieces of average dogs or did he bump shoulders with 6 nationally or locally renown dogs and surpassed 6 beatings that have claimed lives of others. I personally would respect a person saying hey this is my dog for stud he’s a pretty decent hound and leave it at that. I could fully understand that and if they bred their dog and have some results, and wanted to share that is fine. I’m more interested in that hounds traits and what you may have seen from some of his offspring, his littermates traits and how they compare to the overall family. Is he one fast dog with great timing reflexes out of 80 or is this common. Is his intelligence above average and is this something that has been shown as a dominant trait etc.., I don’t understand the value of stating “testing hard” for any animal whether it’s a brood stock or a prospect that you are willing to bet some frog skins on. What do you get out of checking them hard? That won’t make your dog produce any better than he was going to do if you just seen if he would go and how he handled different opportunities and scratched back and no better if you never touched him/her.

I also agree Gameness is very important but I think when people are honest with themselves a lot of times gameness or dead game doesn’t come into account all that much. I see more dogs lose because of bad conditioning or just outright not being at the right weight or a person not having enough dedication to even make sure their charge has a clean bill of health then I have seen pack it in because they didn’t have no heart. I believe there is a lot more to a good hound then just being tested hard. Reminds me of GrCh Badger hound, who whipped through everything he faced and then was muzzled to see how he would respond to being beaten up on without being able to dismantle his opponent, all so that he could be said he was tested hard. Makes no sense to me at all because either that dog is good or not and a lot more, you going to kill your charge just to say, oh boy he got tested and went out game. There is no value in a dead game dog but to say you had a good one that you lost and 9 of 10 it was owners fault.

I have to think that it’s about personal ego and chest bump to say, oh yea he belly scratched 2 times for me, and I’m not saying that’s a knock on the individual or the hound but my first thought is how did it get to the point he had to belly scratch and why wasn’t he picked up after he made that first amazingly game attempt.

---

Very good post.


.

the true test is the actual hunt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by waccamaw

the true test is the actual hunt

---

I don't think there is such thing as a "true" test.

For example, say if two dogs are hooked ... one dog gets a super keep and comes in at his best weight ... while another dog gets a terrible keep and comes in weak and dry ... was that really the "truest" evaluation of the dogs? It was a "real match," but I don't think it was a fair evaluation of the second dog. (I am sure, as a breeder, you have had people do your dogs wrong ... where the dog didn't do so well ... but yet you knew the dog was better than what he showed, IF he would have come in better shape.)

There are also plenty of dogs that do great in one match, but hang it up the second time around. There are even a few dogs who show desperately game the first time ... but that was all they had ... and can't do that again for the second time.

Does a "win" mean a dog won't quit its next time out?
Does a "win" mean a dog is guaranteed to win its next time out?

IMO, the answer is no to both questions.

Jack


.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by waccamaw

the true test is the actual hunt

---

In my eyes this is only true 2 a certian degree. U have 2 factor in the hunts that go 2:15 but neither hound needed a band aid
afterwards.

wildchild

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wildchild

In my eyes this is only true 2 a certian degree. U have 2 factor in the hunts that go 2:15 but neither hound needed a band aid
afterwards.
wildchild

---

What about this Wildchild?: is it harder for a dog to make it to :50 in top physical condition in cool weather, or is it harder for a dog to go :50 a little fat in the summer?

Which effort do you think tests the dog's will power the most? ;)

Jack

.

when i say the true test is the actual hunt ,i am talking about to hunters that are both top notch and know their dogs .what we call head hunting ,look for the best comp.and the rest of your post relates to what i said about a good dog in the hands of an idiot is a doomed dog ,dog to dry ,sick ,under wght,worms ,low blood count .only a true idiot would take a dog hunting like this ,then say he is a cur when it was the mans fault.what i am saying is if he is in great shape ,all the way around and he hunts with another lets just say C- HAM then you know he was tested above and beyond ,where bas if it was a young punk with his first dog then you know that is no test .

[quote=What about this Wildchild?: is it harder for a dog to make it to :50 in top physical condition in cool weather, or is it harder for a dog to go :50 a little fat in the summer?

Which effort do you think tests the dog's will power the most? ;)

Jack

.[/quote]

A dog a litte fat in the summer going :50 is gamer in my eyes than the top shaped 1 in the cool going the same :50
I truly feel that gameness is not a matter of the :50 mins " or any time alone" but by the amount of adversary each charge has 2 over come in said :50 mins. Thats where i belive most get it confused.

wildchild

The biggest part in the Test is the conditioning.
Everything your dogs has relies on his conditioning and endurance.
A dog is like a human. For example lets use boxing.
You are not going to put a boxer in a ring that has been out the gym for awhile.
why??? simply because he or she is in no condition to compete.
I made the claim that the ability also relies on the conditioning of a dog because a boxer who has not been conditioned or prepaired physically will not compete at its full potential because while in the ring. Without conditioning your arms and legs become fatigue, same thing with a dog, its mouth, strengh, ablility, endourance all relies on the conditioning part on the keep

I think testing "Hard" is a waste because i see it as in why test a dog "Hard" if the dog isnt prepaired or conditioned to be tested hard, while in his real test you can make an evaluation because your pet will be in some type of its peak. Take it how you want to but I have seen many people loose great pets like this, coming from experience

Hope this help a little bit

jack have you seen the thread on the other board basically asking the same question? there is a video involved

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by waccamaw

when i say the true test is the actual hunt ,i am talking about to hunters that are both top notch and know their dogs .what we call head hunting ,look for the best comp.and the rest of your post relates to what i said about a good dog in the hands of an idiot is a doomed dog ,dog to dry ,sick ,under wght,worms ,low blood count .only a true idiot would take a dog hunting like this ,then say he is a cur when it was the mans fault.what i am saying is if he is in great shape ,all the way around and he hunts with another lets just say C- HAM then you know he was tested above and beyond ,where bas if it was a young punk with his first dog then you know that is no test .

---

I agree with what you're saying Sonny, which kind of underscores my point. There are so many variables involved that when a person says his dog was "tested hard," it really means nothing.

However, when a dogman who's been associated with multiple top-shelf animals says, "This right here is a really good dog," and the proceeds to tell you why, meaning he explains the specific great qualities this dog has, that carries the most weight, to me anyway.

For example, if a guy who repeatedly and consistently breeds winning, high-pressure kidney dogs ... and he tells me, "This right here is one of the baddest kidney dogs I have ever had in my career," this tells me a whole lot more about what to expect from the dog ... than somebody who's never bred a winner saying his doggie (that he just bought) was "tested hard" :roll:

Jack


.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wildchild

A dog a litte fat in the summer going :50 is gamer in my eyes than the top shaped 1 in the cool going the same :50
I truly feel that gameness is not a matter of the :50 mins " or any time alone" but by the amount of adversary each charge has 2 over come in said :50 mins. Thats where i belive most get it confused.
wildchild

---

Very well said, good sir 8-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YigYang

The biggest part in the Test is the conditioning.
Everything your dogs has relies on his conditioning and endurance.
A dog is like a human. For example lets use boxing.
You are not going to put a boxer in a ring that has been out the gym for awhile.
why??? simply because he or she is in no condition to compete.
I made the claim that the ability also relies on the conditioning of a dog because a boxer who has not been conditioned or prepaired physically will not compete at its full potential because while in the ring. Without conditioning your arms and legs become fatigue, same thing with a dog, its mouth, strengh, ablility, endourance all relies on the conditioning part on the keep
I think testing "Hard" is a waste because i see it as in why test a dog "Hard" if the dog isnt prepaired or conditioned to be tested hard, while in his real test you can make an evaluation because your pet will be in some type of its peak. Take it how you want to but I have seen many people loose great pets like this, coming from experience
Hope this help a little bit

---

Good point to bring up YigYang.

I agree, there is no question that top conditioning brings out the best potential in any performance animal. Absolutely. However, wouldn't you agree that overcoming adversity is another matter entirely?

In other words, I agree that a dog in top condition going :50 is going to put on "a better performance" than he would if pulled off the chain ... but the point I am making is it will be harder for that dog to go :50 while not in shape. When checking for gameness, adversity is what challenges "the will to continue," so being tired as hell (through lack of condition) will be a bigger game test for a dog than will being fresh as a daisy through optimal condition, thanks to the dog being in the best shape of his life.

So, yes, being in top shape will bring out the best in any dog, no question. However, being out of shape will challenge a dog's "will to continue" more quickly, and thus will let you see just how game your dog is a whole lot sooner, thus minimizing the trauma because you don't have to sit there and watch them for 2 hours before they start to slow down.

This brings up another matter, which is AIR, or natural stamina. Some dogs have great natural air, and can actually go :50 no problem because of this. In fact, one old man I know (who's been doing dogs since the mid-60s) said this to me: "Jack, if any dog doesn't have the natural wind to go a good strong hour, hard, right off the chain, then I don't need that f---ing dog."

And he has been associated with some of the greatest dogs in the history of the game ...

Jack


.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluebeard

jack have you seen the thread on the other board basically asking the same question? there is a video involved

---

No, I skip most of those threads, and I live way out in BFE and don't have a land internet connection, and can't even watch streaming videos.

Jack


.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YigYang

The biggest part in the Test is the conditioning.
Everything your dogs has relies on his conditioning and endurance.
A dog is like a human. For example lets use boxing.
You are not going to put a boxer in a ring that has been out the gym for awhile.
why??? simply because he or she is in no condition to compete.
I made the claim that the ability also relies on the conditioning of a dog because a boxer who has not been conditioned or prepaired physically will not compete at its full potential because while in the ring. Without conditioning your arms and legs become fatigue, same thing with a dog, its mouth, strengh, ablility, endourance all relies on the conditioning part on the keep
I think testing "Hard" is a waste because i see it as in why test a dog "Hard" if the dog isnt prepaired or conditioned to be tested hard, while in his real test you can make an evaluation because your pet will be in some type of its peak. Take it how you want to but I have seen many people loose great pets like this, coming from experience
Hope this help a little bit

---

Good point to bring up YigYang.

I agree, there is no question that top conditioning brings out the best potential in any performance animal. Absolutely. However, wouldn't you agree that overcoming adversity is another matter entirely?

In other words, I agree that a dog in top condition going :50 is going to put on "a better performance" than he would if pulled off the chain ... but the point I am making is it will be harder for that dog to go :50 while not in shape. When checking for gameness, adversity is what challenges "the will to continue," so being tired as hell (through lack of condition) will be a bigger game test for a dog than will being fresh as a daisy through optimal condition, thanks to the dog being in the best shape of his life.

So, yes, being in top shape will bring out the best in any dog, no question. However, being out of shape will challenge a dog's "will to continue" more quickly, and thus will let you see just how game your dog is a whole lot sooner, thus minimizing the trauma because you don't have to sit there and watch them for 2 hours before they start to slow down.

This brings up another matter, which is AIR, or natural stamina. Some dogs have great natural air, and can actually go :50 no problem because of this. In fact, one old man I know (who's been doing dogs since the mid-60s) said this to me: "Jack, if any dog doesn't have the natural wind to go a good strong hour, hard, right off the chain, then I don't need that f---ing dog."

And he has been associated with some of the greatest dogs in the history of the game ...

Jack


.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CA Jack

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluebeard

jack have you seen the thread on the other board basically asking the same question? there is a video involved

---

No, I skip most of those threads, and I live way out in BFE and don't have a land internet connection, and can't even watch streaming videos.

Jack


.

---

well basically it is asking the question "is this too much for a hound's first time at schooling?" which was about 17 minutes in length. i was just curious as to your answer/insight. both dogs ran hot, both mixed it up, and both wanted more. i personally said it went too long(poll question)

IMO "Hard Tested" means, I don't know what I'm looking at, OR what I'm looking for.

I don't believe you need to hard test an animal. The ONLY reason I could see it is in the case of a low talent individual. So if for some reason you're looking for a reason to keep that low talent individual, you test him hard and keep him based on "gameness".

I'm not interested in low talent individuals, no matter how game they are. I'm looking for an all around good dog, from a good gene pool. You should be able to see all you need about an animal rather quick IMO. Is the dog high ability? How does he work, does he blow his wad or pace himself. I think too many people don't know what it takes to truly be an athlete, and simplify it to Mouth vs Gameness. If he doesn't have "mouth" he has to be "game". Mouth isn't high on my list of priorities. It's in there, but much farther behind things like athletic ability, speed, wind, balance, intelligence. Honestly, those things I mentioned come before gameness to me. A dog possessing the traits I mentioned, against dogs his own weight, isn't going to NEED his gameness too often. It's nice to know its there if he needs it, but I want more of a "total Package".

So I think "Hard Tested" usually comes down to: I have this dog, he aint got much, but I can say he's hard tested...

Again, the biggest issue is "hard tested" against WHAT... As an example, I saw a dog that dog was supposed to be "hard tested" and deamed game by some big names. But when that dog couldn't get his mouth on his opponent, he packed it in rather fast. I think being totally controlled is going to cause a "hard tested" dog to stop, far more often than a hard mouth dog would cause one to stop. If the dog can get in there and mix it up, a lower level of gameness is going to keep him going, whereas if that same dog is being totally controlled, he has to be ONE GAME MOFO to keep on coming... but "Fatigue makes cowards of us all".

Ah I'm starting to ramble...

MinuteMan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MinuteMan

IMO "Hard Tested" means, I don't know what I'm looking at, OR what I'm looking for.

I don't believe you need to hard test an animal. The ONLY reason I could see it is in the case of a low talent individual. So if for some reason you're looking for a reason to keep that low talent individual, you test him hard and keep him based on "gameness".

I'm not interested in low talent individuals, no matter how game they are. I'm looking for an all around good dog, from a good gene pool. You should be able to see all you need about an animal rather quick IMO. Is the dog high ability? How does he work, does he blow his wad or pace himself. I think too many people don't know what it takes to truly be an athlete, and simplify it to Mouth vs Gameness. If he doesn't have "mouth" he has to be "game". Mouth isn't high on my list of priorities. It's in there, but much farther behind things like athletic ability, speed, wind, balance, intelligence. Honestly, those things I mentioned come before gameness to me. A dog possessing the traits I mentioned, against dogs his own weight, isn't going to NEED his gameness too often. It's nice to know its there if he needs it, but I want more of a "total Package".

So I think "Hard Tested" usually comes down to: I have this dog, he aint got much, but I can say he's hard tested...

Again, the biggest issue is "hard tested" against WHAT... As an example, I saw a dog that dog was supposed to be "hard tested" and deamed game by some big names. But when that dog couldn't get his mouth on his opponent, he packed it in rather fast. I think being totally controlled is going to cause a "hard tested" dog to stop, far more often than a hard mouth dog would cause one to stop. If the dog can get in there and mix it up, a lower level of gameness is going to keep him going, whereas if that same dog is being totally controlled, he has to be ONE GAME MOFO to keep on coming... but "Fatigue makes cowards of us all".

Ah I'm starting to ramble...

MinuteMan

---

Great post and I agree with you! If you don't have a "good eye", hard testing usually ruins many! The amount of damage sustained and wear and tear on a dog is more harmful than good! You should be able to tell what kind of dog you got in a couple 10-20 min rolls. IMO!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluebeard

well basically it is asking the question "is this too much for a hound's first time at schooling?" which was about 17 minutes in length. i was just curious as to your answer/insight. both dogs ran hot, both mixed it up, and both wanted more. i personally said it went too long(poll question)

---

Well, as it states in my book, I don't believe young dogs should ever be pushed into a "running hot" situation while they're learning; they should just be learning the ropes and having fun in fairly-brief schooling sessions. So I would agree with you.

However, I would also say that if two dogs are "running hot" enough to be gasping at :17 that either a) they must have been going at it hard as hell, b) it was really hot outside, and/or c) they have lousy natural stamina.

Jack


.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MinuteMan

IMO "Hard Tested" means, I don't know what I'm looking at, OR what I'm looking for.
I don't believe you need to hard test an animal. The ONLY reason I could see it is in the case of a low talent individual. So if for some reason you're looking for a reason to keep that low talent individual, you test him hard and keep him based on "gameness".

---

Agreed. And what's interesting is, with a low-talent individual, he is already "being tested" by virtue of the fact he's behind all the way :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MinuteMan

I'm not interested in low talent individuals, no matter how game they are. I'm looking for an all around good dog, from a good gene pool. You should be able to see all you need about an animal rather quick IMO. Is the dog high ability? How does he work, does he blow his wad or pace himself. I think too many people don't know what it takes to truly be an athlete, and simplify it to Mouth vs Gameness. If he doesn't have "mouth" he has to be "game". Mouth isn't high on my list of priorities. It's in there, but much farther behind things like athletic ability, speed, wind, balance, intelligence. Honestly, those things I mentioned come before gameness to me. A dog possessing the traits I mentioned, against dogs his own weight, isn't going to NEED his gameness too often. It's nice to know its there if he needs it, but I want more of a "total Package".

---

http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/appl.gif http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/appl.gif http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/appl.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MinuteMan

So I think "Hard Tested" usually comes down to: I have this dog, he aint got much, but I can say he's hard tested...
Again, the biggest issue is "hard tested" against WHAT... As an example, I saw a dog that dog was supposed to be "hard tested" and deamed game by some big names. But when that dog couldn't get his mouth on his opponent, he packed it in rather fast. I think being totally controlled is going to cause a "hard tested" dog to stop, far more often than a hard mouth dog would cause one to stop. If the dog can get in there and mix it up, a lower level of gameness is going to keep him going, whereas if that same dog is being totally controlled, he has to be ONE GAME MOFO to keep on coming... but "Fatigue makes cowards of us all".
Ah I'm starting to ramble...
MinuteMan

---

http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/appl.gif http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/appl.gif http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/appl.gif


Excellent post MM, I agree with you 100%.

Jack


.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CitySwamp

Ca Jack,

Reminds me of GrCh Badger hound, who whipped through everything he faced and then was muzzled to see how he would respond to being beaten up on without being able to dismantle his opponent, all so that he could be said he was tested hard.

---

That never happened. That story was just the BS sales pitch of his owner for a magazine interview, trying to appeal to the gullable nature of most folks who want them "tested hard". :roll: I don't care much for the man and have not had dealings with him for nearly a decade, but to his credit........... he was a much better dogman than that.

most people don't know a good dog when they see one. Most of the time when he's been skull dragged he's not worth nothing in the sense of using for performance. I've seen many done like this and made it . But hunted afterwards and pulled up early. "HARD TESTED" usually means I'm an IDIOT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MinuteMan

IMO "Hard Tested" means, I don't know what I'm looking at, OR what I'm looking for.

I don't believe you need to hard test an animal. The ONLY reason I could see it is in the case of a low talent individual. So if for some reason you're looking for a reason to keep that low talent individual, you test him hard and keep him based on "gameness".

I'm not interested in low talent individuals, no matter how game they are. I'm looking for an all around good dog, from a good gene pool. You should be able to see all you need about an animal rather quick IMO. Is the dog high ability? How does he work, does he blow his wad or pace himself. I think too many people don't know what it takes to truly be an athlete, and simplify it to Mouth vs Gameness. If he doesn't have "mouth" he has to be "game". Mouth isn't high on my list of priorities. It's in there, but much farther behind things like athletic ability, speed, wind, balance, intelligence. Honestly, those things I mentioned come before gameness to me. A dog possessing the traits I mentioned, against dogs his own weight, isn't going to NEED his gameness too often. It's nice to know its there if he needs it, but I want more of a "total Package".

So I think "Hard Tested" usually comes down to: I have this dog, he aint got much, but I can say he's hard tested...

Again, the biggest issue is "hard tested" against WHAT... As an example, I saw a dog that dog was supposed to be "hard tested" and deamed game by some big names. But when that dog couldn't get his mouth on his opponent, he packed it in rather fast. I think being totally controlled is going to cause a "hard tested" dog to stop, far more often than a hard mouth dog would cause one to stop. If the dog can get in there and mix it up, a lower level of gameness is going to keep him going, whereas if that same dog is being totally controlled, he has to be ONE GAME MOFO to keep on coming... but "Fatigue makes cowards of us all".

Ah I'm starting to ramble...

MinuteMan

---

Fantastic post, MM. The first sentence sums it up perfectly, IMO. Every successful dogman or oldtimer who's been around the block I've ever spoken with has communicated the exact same sentiment -- if you can't tell what you're looking at in a short amount of time, you ought not be the one looking at them. Jimmy Mayfield has said numerous times that he wouldn't look at a dog before FULL maturity, and he wouldn't put real time on them until he's putting a bet on them. Makes all the sense in the world to me. Having a real "eye for a dog" is about the best standard of a GOOD dogman to me.

why isnt there a such thing as a hard tested hound? If u put ur hound in every situation duriing schooling and test the gameness as much as u can without losing the hound then ur testing hard. Example u taking ur hound and take him up-hill 5 lbs with a good skilled dog and they go 35 min. and the smaller dog starts to piss on hisself and starts the process of checking out and through all that once seperated said hound scratches when there seems no way he could make it thats a hard tested hound. Now the true test is always the match if u have a match quality hound, but a hound can be severely tested hard through school and if ur not testing hard in school how could u ever know if there worthy of a bet? I'm not that keen to knowing how talented, or game a hound is without testing HARD!!!

From what I have been raised on part of the testing comes from whether or not they are ready. Taken from the chain to school and the exams determine their grade rather than homework and the last test determines their value or feed. I may be wrong but like I said I was brought up on they go or they go to sleep. I have seen a lot of good dogs in the wrong hands get punished to hard and if it wasn't the right move, the right act or the right defense they got the boot. SO it really depends on the owner and his right judgements rather that feed an untested or none worked dog, I know I wouldn't.

I think a properly schooled hound has seen or been through every obstical that could be brought to them in a match. A hard tested hound is one who has been put in the situation to quit and against all odds they keep coming without hesitation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by H.B.K.

why isnt there a such thing as a hard tested hound? If u put ur hound in every situation duriing schooling and test the gameness as much as u can without losing the hound then ur testing hard. Example u taking ur hound and take him up-hill 5 lbs with a good skilled dog and they go 35 min. and the smaller dog starts to piss on hisself and starts the process of checking out and through all that once seperated said hound scratches when there seems no way he could make it thats a hard tested hound. Now the true test is always the match if u have a match quality hound, but a hound can be severely tested hard through school and if ur not testing hard in school how could u ever know if there worthy of a bet? I'm not that keen to knowing how talented, or game a hound is without testing HARD!!!

---

I completely understand and respect the point you're making, H.B.K.

What I was getting at is there are no certainties in these dogs ... and a dog that was "hard-tested" can still quit when he's matched ... and a dog that "showed gameness" in his last hard match, can still quit his next time out ... therefore, ultimately, being "tested hard" is not a certification for anything.

Jack

Without question jack nothing u did in the schooling gaurentees a victory once matched, but a hound can be tested hard through schooling to determine if there game to the extent in which u tested. And to ur point thats why schooling is what it is and competing is the only way u can judge the level of ur yard and what ur investing ur time in. But still a hound can be hard tested in school.


By the way jack i think ur on to something with this site and really like ur code of conduct and ur hard work in all aspects with these dogs, two thumbs up!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by H.B.K.

Without question jack nothing u did in the schooling gaurentees a victory once matched, but a hound can be tested hard through schooling to determine if there game to the extent in which u tested. And to ur point thats why schooling is what it is and competing is the only way u can judge the level of ur yard and what ur investing ur time in. But still a hound can be hard tested in school.

---

Agreed. And "who" is saying they're hard-tested can either carry a lot of weight, or no weight, depending on the source of the statement.
I think sometimes school is the hardest test, especially if they're pushing weight and not in shape.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by H.B.K.

By the way jack i think ur on to something with this site and really like ur code of conduct and ur hard work in all aspects with these dogs, two thumbs up!!!

---

Thank you very much; it is nice to just be able to talk dogs without being "on defense" for the eventual attacks and uncalled-for remarks ...

Jack


.

It sure is refreshing to have good bulldog banter without the confusion of non-sense on every post!!! :D

Given the right opponent the right handler the dog will what he's suppose to do but the right situation the right match he or she will quit! Nothing is ever written in stone with these hounds. They'll all quit given the right dog and the numbers of matching one after the next.

HOW WOULD YOU FIND OUT "FOR YOURSELF" IF YOU SHOULD CULL OR USE IF NOT FOR A HARD TEST?

[quote=CA Jack]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by "H.B.K.":zn5s1wbt

why isnt there a such thing as a hard tested hound? If u put ur hound in every situation duriing schooling and test the gameness as much as u can without losing the hound then ur testing hard. Example u taking ur hound and take him up-hill 5 lbs with a good skilled dog and they go 35 min. and the smaller dog starts to piss on hisself and starts the process of checking out and through all that once seperated said hound scratches when there seems no way he could make it thats a hard tested hound. Now the true test is always the match if u have a match quality hound, but a hound can be severely tested hard through school and if ur not testing hard in school how could u ever know if there worthy of a bet? I'm not that keen to knowing how talented, or game a hound is without testing HARD!!!

---

I completely understand and respect the point you're making, H.B.K.

What I was getting at is there are no certainties in these dogs ... and a dog that was "hard-tested" can still quit when he's matched ... and a dog that "showed gameness" in his last hard match, can still quit his next time out ... therefore, ultimately, being "tested hard" is not a certification for anything.

Jack[/quote:zn5s1wbt]
that may be true, but gameness is what sets this breed apart, so what he may do the next time out is irrelevant, if they show game when you ask then that is all that need to be done from that point you decide whether to take them out again or be satisfied without you saw