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

[Officially Retired]

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


.

[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.

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.

[Officially Retired]

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?

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 ...

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


.

[YigYang]

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

[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.

[magilla]

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:

[waccamaw]

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

[wildchild]

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

wildchild

[Officially Retired]

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.


.

[waccamaw]

the true test is the actual hunt