I gues in a 500.000.000$$ racing industry they know stuf you dont...
I gues in a 500.000.000$$ racing industry they know stuf you dont...
Yeah Limey, and Fat Bill once put out a keep that called for using Corn Flakes. He probably won more shows that me too, but that doesn't mean the guy knows anything about nutrition. Smith & Walton fed Ol' Roy when I got there, and he won a lot of shows too. Winning contests and making a profit on the kennel isn't a good measure of sound nutritional choices. In fact, if profitability is a key driver, poor nutrition likely will provide a much more attractive return on investment.Originally Posted by Limey Kennels
Generally dog people of any fancy are blind idiots following idiots with a little more, yet still limited vision. So these "knowledgable" Greyhound fanciers may not be knowledgeable whatsoever. In fact, I am supposing that because they keep hundreds and hundreds of dogs and cull a majority of them, that this feed choice has much more to do with economics than it does nutritional benefits.
OK the only thing THEY the greyhound people are doing WRONG is that they breed BEST TO BEST ONLY. and as WE KNOW the random out come of producing high quality animals is of a far less %%%... In what your saying about idiots fallowing Idiots . , is ACZACKLY THE REZEN ME being one of the few who questions raw feeding diets as being superior..Yeah Limey, and Fat Bill once put out a keep that called for using Corn Flakes. He probably won more shows that me too, but that doesn't mean the guy knows anything about nutrition. Smith & Walton fed Ol' Roy when I got there, and he won a lot of shows too. Winning contests and making a profit on the kennel isn't a good measure of sound nutritional choices. In fact, if profitability is a key driver, poor nutrition likely will provide a much more attractive return on investment.
Generally dog people of any fancy are blind idiots following idiots with a little more, yet still limited vision. So these "knowledgable" Greyhound fanciers may not be knowledgeable whatsoever. In fact, I am supposing that because they keep hundreds and hundreds of dogs and cull a majority of them, that this feed choice has much more to do with economics than it does nutritional benefits.
Feeding raw its being presented in sutch a way that if your making coments against it your a fool and dont know shijt and your doing your dogs wrong blablablabla. Al BS
as it isend al that great in the first place. As it has as many weak points and in my point of vieuw iven more to it as kibble feeding .. EVERYTING being claimed is hypt up with NO solid background . to put fear in people that Kibble is bad wrong and dangeres for your dogs.. compleatly disreguarding the many flaws in raw diets....
I still feed a quality kibble to my adult dogs, and my dogs live a long, long time. So please don't lump me in with the "raw only" feeders. I do start the pups on raw for the first few months, but I am very busy and have no time at this stage of my life to deal with raw food prep on an ongoing basis.
With that said, A) I think in most cases a raw diet is actually superior, and B) any kibble with "cereal" as it's top ingredient is certainly not a quality kibble.
Finally, a sensible post.Yeah Limey, and Fat Bill once put out a keep that called for using Corn Flakes. He probably won more shows that me too, but that doesn't mean the guy knows anything about nutrition. Smith & Walton fed Ol' Roy when I got there, and he won a lot of shows too. Winning contests and making a profit on the kennel isn't a good measure of sound nutritional choices. In fact, if profitability is a key driver, poor nutrition likely will provide a much more attractive return on investment.
Generally dog people of any fancy are blind idiots following idiots with a little more, yet still limited vision. So these "knowledgable" Greyhound fanciers may not be knowledgeable whatsoever. In fact, I am supposing that because they keep hundreds and hundreds of dogs and cull a majority of them, that this feed choice has much more to do with economics than it does nutritional benefits.
It's pretty much this simple: Mohammad Ali eating McDonald's french fries would probably have whipped 99% of humanity in a boxing match, even if those people ate great food, but that doesn't make french fries "good food."
Every "old timer" idiot out there thinks because his dog wins a match that his "feed keep" is what won the match
Wrong! All it means is the guy knows a "Mohammad Ali" when he sees one and can put him in decent shape. One thing old timers generally get right is what a good dog is, how to find its best weight, and how to keep him in good condition ... in fact a good dog at its best weight, right there, is hard to beat coming right off the chain fed kibble.
But that does NOT mean kibble is "optimal nutrition" nor that coming off the chain is "optimal condition."
Jack
PS: The only thing I disagree with is the long term economics of feeding poorly mean shorter lives, more vet bills, and more problems down the road. Long term, it is actually less costly to feed raw. Better stated, long term feeding raw is an investment into your dogs.
Jack dont you see how rediculees your post looks like??.. so al the idiot oldtimers DO KNOW how to reconize a good dog when they see one, but dont know and have no clue how to feed them and at the same time take a huge gamble of putting lots and lots of money on these dogs!!!. and are only able to put them in desend shape!!. and that the dogs kept on the chain at ideal weigh fed on kibble coming right of the chain is hard to beat!!!!!!!!!!. yet feeding kibble is not IDEAL.. you know how rediculess and trivializing that looks.....Finally, a sensible post.
It's pretty much this simple: Mohammad Ali eating McDonald's french fries would probably have whipped 99% of humanity in a boxing match, even if those people ate great food, but that doesn't make french fries "good food."
Every "old timer" idiot out there thinks because his dog wins a match that his "feed keep" is what won the match
Wrong! All it means is the guy knows a "Mohammad Ali" when he sees one and can put him in decent shape. One thing old timers generally get right is what a good dog is, how to find its best weight, and how to keep him in good condition ... in fact a good dog at its best weight, right there, is hard to beat coming right off the chain fed kibble.
But that does NOT mean kibble is "optimal nutrition" nor that coming off the chain is "optimal condition."
Jack
PS: The only thing I disagree with is the long term economics of feeding poorly mean shorter lives, more vet bills, and more problems down the road. Long term, it is actually less costly to feed raw. Better stated, long term feeding raw is an investment into your dogs.
And jack thuse that mean that people who feed raw have crap dogs in the first place to up the chanses of winning??.. last but not least YOU have NOT been feeding kibble long enoughf to know if they live longer on raw!!. and there is no sientific evidens that that is the case . nor have you been a sporting dogman long enoughf yourself to be able to have tested that.... a long time ago a very wel respected dogman told me. that the diferense in feeding the right and bad kibble is that the dog in both cases wil grow just as old as the internal biologicel clock is tikking reguardless. But when feeding him better kibble is feeding him a more HEALTYER life. compeard to feeding him bad kibble. I know this line has its flaws as wel. but i gues you get the picture. and 90% of the dogs dont grow old in the first place REGURADLESS what your feeding them.. fact is you can trow and state everyting you can ore feel doing about Raw vs Kibble and there wil ALWAYS be a imidiat awnser to counter it and wave it of as BS..
My post is not as ridiculous as your spelling
Nor is it as ridiculous as your posture that, just because a man knows what a badass dog looks like, that this suddenly makes him an expert in either nutrition or in medicine. Many, if not MOST, old timers are utterly clueless in both regards. For example, I know an old timer who's been doing dogs since the mid-60s, who has matched into more legendary dogs than you've ever seen, who's gone into Mayfield, Burton, Indian Sonny, Hargrove, Crenshaw, ete., etc. ... and yet who STILL thinks "pennicillum" is the best antibiotic for wound care (and, like you, he can't even pronounce or spell the word right). And, as far as nutrition goes, this man's big "feed keep" was Diamond Dogfood, some liver, and a can of vegetables. That's it. Yet this man faced and made more Grand Champions throughout his 50 years of being in the fast lane than anyone you know.
So no, I don't think my position (that there are many old-timers, who know what a good dog looks like, but who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground on the subject of meds or nutrition) is ridiculous at all. It is pretty much right on the money.
Dude, you're really starting to sound foolish. You actually think you're in a position to know something about "me" or my feeding habits!
First of all, I have been into sporting dogs for 23 years.
Secondly, regarding "all raw feeders having crap dogs," this is simply an asinine statement ... especially coming from a man who just lost to a raw-fed dog (don't think I don't know
Moreover, speaking of old timers compared to the newer generation, and regarding that same old man above, I stayed on a piece of property that guy owned for 6 years. Yet still, with all that experience, EVERY time I rolled one of my dogs into one of the old man's dogs "he" is the one who picked up. In short, the man knew how to "buy" a great match dog that he "saw" ... but he could never figure out how to breed them
Thirdly, I have fed a larger yard of dogs than you ever have (an average of 40-50 dogs at one time) ... and I have done so for 14 years BEFORE I ever fed raw. So I have plenty of experience feeding kibble. I have also exclusively fed ONE family of dogs during the entire time, comparing the results of "kibble versus raw" not to just dogs in general, but to the same line of dogs to boot. That means I have MORE experience feeding kibble to MORE dogs than you do.
Now then, I have only been feeding raw exclusively since 2006 ... to the same family of dogs ... and, when I started doing this, I had 85 dogs at the time ... ALL of whom had been fed kibble up to that point ... and ALL of whom immediately looked, felt, and acted better within 1-3 months of the change. Moreover, my line of dogs tends to have low fertility in a lot of the males (when fed kibble) and that problem UTTERLY disappeared when I fed raw. I also had many dogs die of cancer at 4-7 years of age, fed kibble, and NEVER had that happen when I fed raw. Sure, my dogs still die like anyone else's, but the difference in longevity, general health, and reproductive fertility was dramatically improved when I started feeding raw.
So please don't sit there in your little fantasy world of ZERO experience feeding raw and preach to "me" about what "you" know about feeding raw ... because it's next to nothing ...
Because, in the end, the truth is those experienced dog men ... who DO continuously learn about about meds, nutrition, etc. ... make THE most knowledgeable dogmen of today ... NOT the ones who may have learned what a good dog looks like "years ago" ... but who stay in the dark ages on these other critical subjects
I certainly agree that there is "good kibble" and "bad kibble" ... that is absolutely correct.
But what you cannot seem to fathom is NO kibble is EVER as good (after being cooked into a little brown pellet) as the raw, natural components it started out as BEFORE it was cooked into a pellet.
There is no BS here except the inane notion that "little brown pellets" are more optimal in nutritional value than the natural, raw ingredients they started out as.
Jack
Jack a man like you should leave the spelling thing as it is , thats for ignorend people. you know my spelling from way back in the late 90,s of the previus century.
when I stoot bij you giving you moral suport where the intire world was against you, and when you had to leave your home. no need to endors you words bij using my spelling against me thats low class Jack....
You have not been actif enoughf as a sportsman in such a way that you can claim!!. Nor whats the best way and you know it.. I NEVER CLAIMED that raw feeders have CRAP dogs. i ASKT if they have, , Thats a compleat diferend thing Jack . and to again endors your way ore words to tell the world about a show we had, is compleat idiotic and dangeres and desperate in order to stop me off ore redicule me!!. This is the same as putting it in the newspappers. And for the record in my return post to you. wat did my post said. It was a very tight inbred brood dog that needed to be chekt out i order to be qualified as sutch!. not even match worthy in way of being aworking stabderd dog. and no more worth then putting a crate of beer on so to speak.. so dont pretend that one bird in the sky makes a flock..AS I ALREDY TOLD YOU......IN PRIVATE..
In contrary to you and lots of others, Brood stock of this famely is strecht to the max. iven the very inbred bred brood dogs. And yes miner amounds is put on them in order to find out. People who do these individuals are not afreight to come out at the other end of the stick.. Having clear this up and sins you let this cat out of the bag, i sirguest that you never put anything private on this forum that should not be on there ,unless i do it myself. as in your pm you wrote that my fellow country man didnt whant to compromize my privacy!!!!. So why the Hell would YOU do that JACK.. The shear fact that HE shears his info with someone that hassend f.ck all to do with what happend shows a GREAT DEAL of being a ROOKY and not being very profesional himself altho he likes to pretend he thuse....
It also tell me that over the cours of the 20 years you have been involved with these dogs you havend learnd a lot about integrety eather in doing so what you did..at the same time you screw him over bij mentioning it as im sure he trusted you enoughf to tell you!!!......as he was told and aware to shut the f.. up
As for you having fed more dogs then we ever had. then thats good for you Jack .It mearly proves that we did someting right and better!. as our famely produced a hell of a lot more quality dogs yours ever did. like more then 35 ch 3 grch and 4 rom dogs from a famely that at any given time never had more then 20 /25 individuals including pups!. and as a famely being douwn twice to only 5 dogs..due to the dangeres doglaws that hit us back then.. At the same time we have only send out/sold a handfull of dogs and the last ones where 10 years ago ""we have no agenda in selling""... So i gues that makes us iven in the ""you ever had":". Departmend..
Are you realy that ignorend in belivieng you know more about feeding when you one arend iven close in feeding dogs as long as we do . how many dogs have you actualy conditiond! Jack. and have you done so the world over on varius contignends.!!. have YOU actualy traveld the world! conditioned and fed dogs in diferend geografic parts in the world at diferend altitutes with diferend water and feeds at hand??.. Have you ever left the two states you been in feeding your dogs Jack.
now About ""QUOTE Jack "" Because, in the end, the truth is those experienced dog men ... who DO continuously learn about about meds, nutrition, etc. ... make THE most knowledgeable dogmen of today ... NOT the ones who may have learned what a good dog looks like "years ago" ... but who stay in the dark ages on these other critical subjects ""end of quote..
I asume with those dogman who stay in the dark. you obviusly point to me. let me tell you someting. WE have ALWAYS been inovatif. when it comes to feeding and conditioning. and have steard away from those rediculess old way where people use 90 days to work there dogs for more then 5 hours a day.
yes WE where umongst them when we started out working 90 days and doing 3 1/2 hours of road work and 75 min of treadmill work.... Our feeding with suplemends and conditioning has been fine tunned to sutch a way. where no dog is workt longer then 42 days and peak work is no longer then a hour walk and no longer then a 50 min treadmill sesion!!. where work and feeding and sups are indiscriminate linkt together where one can not go without the other!, And where peak condition on a dog has a window of only 3 to 4 hours befor dropping of THATS FINE TUNNINMG JACK .like a race car engine.
have you ever heard of being able to conditioning and feeding a dog in sutch a way where you can beat a better dog ten your own bij prolonging his first wind in order to work on a down that hits the wall afther 25/30 min!!. being able to do the most significant work in those 5 to 10 min where your dog has alonger wind!. just like having 2 500 hp cars at the strip, where one has to shift at 5000 rpm and the other at 6000 rpm. taking a little lead at every shift!! yet they both have the same horshe power!!.. Ore force that better dog to go along and burn himself up!!?? PUSHING ITSELF IN THE RPM RED ZONE... sure you do NEED a working dog to do so. but thats fine tunnig Jack.
lots of people today stil dont realize that LESS CAN BE MORE. working a dog for 2 ore 3 days in a row and rest them!??. And where you can beat a better dog then your own when feeding conditioning and sups are tunned into one.. you whant to talk nutritien suplemends and conditioning, and lay it out on the table???. Im sure the people here whant to see how deep the rabbit holle is.. and whant to know what REAL understanding of it al is.. and how WE have aprotchst it in one of the most up to date ways to bring a dog in shape.. bij shortining the keep over the cours of 35 years and rely more on feeding and suplemends.
Last but not least. the gross of the dogs been seen the last 15 years. 15% of the dogs have lost on quality, the rest 85% lost on FEEDING and conditioning. NOT on quality.. thats how high the level of comp is in some parts of the world......let me give tyou a hint on modern day meds and sups you every heard of ANARESP...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darbepoetin_alfa .. about treadmend barbesia gibsony wellvone atovaquon +sandoz azitromycine 10 days oraly and its gone!!.. as a barbesia treadmend ecsept for gibsoni CARBESIA(not availeble in the USA). wich at the same time can be used as a VACSINATION to stop a dog from being infected. it works for 6 weeks and can be used preventif to your dog not getting Gibsoni!! when in the fields..... make sure you use that in your necst book ore video
I learned this method in the early mid to late 90's. The entire point of the keep is to go longer than the next guy, create separation by going when he breaks and recovering before he does. I have been doing the same basic feed plan since then. There have been changes and advances that I have implemented but lots of stuff that I went with the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" thought process. I agree feed and supplementation are key factors. But, I as well as a few others that were 'educated' in conditioning years ago by the same "old guy" feed very differently in the keep. One or two are out there with the latest and greatest. Another is stuck around 1980 feed/supplementation wise. I am somewhere in the middle. What we have in common (besides a good dog) is the keep.
I believe in good nutrition and good supplementation as a contributing factor but a good dog coming off a good keep is a high % winner even off corn flakes. (throw back to the other post). My point is that it takes everything to win at a high %. First and foremost it has to be a good dog. A great keep and a great feed plan will not make a good dog out of a bad one. It may hide him for a while but not very long.
I have always liked the Limey posts. I was a little slow to the internet concerning the dogs and one of the first things I ever read on the internet was the Limeys Tug story. I have always enjoyed the "Limey post". I do not always agree but enjoy the read nonetheless. We have been conditioning dogs this way for a number of years. Our dogs are fit and ready on the chain. We very seldom have a dog that needs a -pre-keep-. Our keep lasts 6 weeks as well and I am usually encouraged when I hear about the long work sessions by others. Good posts. EWO
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
