Quote Originally Posted by skipper View Post
Pretty hard to breed to a dead game dog unless u have him collected. females are just impossible. I go by game enough for my standards. But i rather say good enough for my standards.
That's why I said ''dead'' game. But, I agree. I want something game enough, or good enough, by my standards. If a dog is deeply game with the ability behind it, more power to him.

Quote Originally Posted by CA Jack View Post
People always make these "totally polar opposite," extreme comparisons.

For me, I wouldn't breed to any dog (dead game or destroyer), unless I knew what was behind it

That said, I don't think anyone is an idiot for breeding to a (nearly) dead game dog, if it comes from high-percentages of this trait in the background.

Looking at it this way, if you want to talk about extremes, I would gladly breed to the game plug (from a litterful of great dogs) ... over the "destroyer" out of a litterful of curs

In other words, I would rather breed to the game plug Long's Werdo (all day, every day) ... while you couldn't pay me to breed to Roadblock's Gr Ch Joey

From what I understand, every dog in Joey's litter quit, and his mama and daddy quit. So, yeah, Joey was a great "destroyer" individual animal, but the average of his line was a bunch of curs, and consequently Joey produced "mostly curs" on average ... whereas Werdo through badass dog after badass dog.

Idiocy in breeding would be the man who only looks at "individual dog ability" and doesn't pay attention to percentages and lineage to make sure he's not breeding to a fluke (either way)

Furthermore, when you're speaking of producing, sometimes ability doesn't matter even among littermates. Still remember a conversation between Pat Patrick and myself about Kincaid's Ch Princess and her sister Pretty Girl. Both were game dogs, yet Princess had the match ability while Pretty Girl was a plug ... yet, despite the same pedigree, and despite being bred to the same dogs, Patrick said, "(the plug) Pretty Girl could out-produce (the ace) Ch Princess any day of the week." So what does anyone have to say about that?

The reverse was true for me: I had the littermates Duke Nukem and Jezebel. Duke was a game plug; Jezebel was an A+ dog. Almost every dog Duke threw was game (but took forever to win), while every dog Jezebel threw whipped Duke's offspring when schooled together. So, in that case, breeding to the ace of the litter was the way to go, but the thing that made me love breeding to either one of them was they were out of an all-game litter. If every other dog in their litter quit, I wouldn't want to breed to either one of them.

MORAL: DEAL IN GAMENESS FIRST ... high percentages of it ... if you expect to breed BULLDOGS on a consistent basis ... and then worry about the proper mixes you need to employ to get you some ability.

That's my $0.02

Jack
Of course people use extremes when comparing; it's a way to show a preference and make a point. On the subject of litter percentages, I should have clarified. I would rather have a higher percentage of quality match dogs that may or may not be deeply game than a litter full of deeply game hounds, but lack ability. I'm not saying I won't look at the total package of the dog and base a breeding off that. If I had a choice between breeding to a destroyer from a litter full of curs or a game plug, I'm not going to breed.