I believe you already know what I am taking about. Good luck with your pupOriginally Posted by Kimo615
I believe you already know what I am taking about. Good luck with your pup
Hi;
Again, the good or bad regarding the "tightness" of any breeding hinges entirely upon whether 1) it was tightened up on the right dog and 2) whether the genes stacked as hoped in the pup you selected.
I can't possibly tell you whether I personally would have tightened up on that dog myself (or even bred to him at all) ... without seeing the animal itself ... and I can't possibly tell you whether the genes of the breeding based on him stacked well or not in the dog you're asking about ... again without seeing that animal itself.
I know this is not the standard "Looks good!" answer that most people give; however it is the most honest, accurate response that is possible for a man to make who knows absolutely nothing about the dogs being discussed.
As I have mentioned in many other posts on this forum, everyone who thinks you can breed dogs "too tight" has merely tightened up on the wrong dog(s).
When the inbreeding selection process is done correctly, tightening-up improves the line
Jack
Those same guys will say inbreed and then outcross. When that actually works odds are the outcross was better than the animals being inbred. If you have to go over there to get it, one should have been over there from the start. EWO
EWO, the inbreed then outcross breeding philosophy is basically like asking a contractor to build a building, then asking him to partially disassemble it again, or asking a race car driver to take it around the track for 3 turns, and then put it in reverse before crossing the finish line. When you stabilize a gene pool, outcrossing it destroys the whole intent of the beginning effort. People who do this really don't understand genetics well.
Why do you say that OGDogg? I'm all ears.
Can't agree with that, really at all.Those same guys will say inbreed and then outcross. When that actually works odds are the outcross was better than the animals being inbred. If you have to go over there to get it, one should have been over there from the start. EWO
Suppose I have a highly-linebred bitch who has everything (speed, timing, reflexes, brains, air, the style I like, etc.) ... except she doesn't have a heavy mouth.
But I want to outcross her to mouthy dog down from a line known for heavy mouth in crease the mouth in my dogs a bit?
Does that mean I should shitcan my whole game, intelligent, longwinded yard ... just to "have mouthy dogs" ... even if those dogs SUCK as overall athletes compared to what I have?
Suppose that the heavy mouth dog doesn't have her speed, doesn't have her moves, doesn't have her style, etc. ... but he has the MOUTH I want ... comes from mouth ... and so I breed to that dog?
Suppose I then breed the best male back to my bitch, to double-up on what I like, and push the influence of that stud down a notch.
Typically, 3/4, 1/4 crosses have always been awesome.
My bitch might outclass the shit out of the "mouthy male" I bred to in a fight at even weight. He may never get his mouth on her one time.
Just because I bred to that male doesn't mean that he is "better," or his line is "better"; it means he has ONE trait I am looking to add to my (overall FAR better) dog and line.
But if I had to make an "either-or" decision, I would rather keep my line pure, and have everything BUT mouth ... than to lose everything I have to say, "I bite hard."
Most mouthy lines aren't known for gameness.
Most truly game lines aren't known for mouth.
All throughout history, dogmen have mixed inbred individuals from mouthy lines with lines known for gameness to "get it all" ... and I reckon this will always be the case.
Jack
Can't agree with that, really at all.
Suppose I have a highly-linebred bitch who has everything (speed, timing, reflexes, brains, air, the style I like, etc.) ... except she doesn't have a heavy mouth.
But I want to outcross her to mouthy dog down from a line known for heavy mouth in crease the mouth in my dogs a bit?
Does that mean I should shitcan my whole game, intelligent, longwinded yard ... just to "have mouthy dogs" ... even if those dogs SUCK as overall athletes compared to what I have?
Suppose that the heavy mouth dog doesn't have her speed, doesn't have her moves, doesn't have her style, etc. ... but he has the MOUTH I want ... comes from mouth ... and so I breed to that dog?
Suppose I then breed the best male back to my bitch, to double-up on what I like, and push the influence of that stud down a notch.
Typically, 3/4, 1/4 crosses have always been awesome.
My bitch might outclass the shit out of the "mouthy male" I bred to in a fight at even weight. He may never get his mouth on her one time.
Just because I bred to that male doesn't mean that he is "better," or his line is "better"; it means he has ONE trait I am looking to add to my (overall FAR better) dog and line.
But if I had to make an "either-or" decision, I would rather keep my line pure, and have everything BUT mouth ... than to lose everything I have to say, "I bite hard."
Most mouthy lines aren't known for gameness.
Most truly game lines aren't known for mouth.
All throughout history, dogmen have mixed inbred individuals from mouthy lines with lines known for gameness to "get it all" ... and I reckon this will always be the case.
Jack
or.... How about breed together two game lines that aren't known for mouth but are both game as can be, maybe the other game line is known for tough skin and really good air, traits that a high ability fast pace intelligent dog can use... and watch the mouth appear from nowhere!
Thanks Jack...I appreciate the answer you gave me. Better than some BS answer like you said. I still learned something from that answer though. So I appreciate it. And EWO ....your right. That makes sense to. So far he's turning out pretty good. But only time will tell. He ain't scared of shit...I can say that much. My neighbors got a big ass Am staff that wants to eat my pup alive. My pups 5 months old. But he will not even flinch when that Staff is trying to get at him. He's got excellent confirmation. Build is alot like Chinaman. Very lean athletic look. He resembles him alot even at such a young age. I got to go to TGs and hand pick my pup. I picked him because he act like he owned tha Damn place at 3 months old he was whooping all his littermates ass for a chicken quarter lol.
That's great info TFX. Seems you have alot of knowledge on Garner dogs. Real knowledge not just hear say or looking at a ped. I do know the Little Gator stuff...Like 4x Black Angel and 1x Joe black are some good dogs. Just not sure how they are as producers. Of course this are BMW's dogs though. Tom really likes that bitch Pew and Pew 2. He uses them often in his program. So far my pup is looking good. But to young to tell Right now I'm gathering as much info as I can on his heritage. I've never ran Chinaman dogs before. The last of my yard got old died on me and I was always a fan of Chinaman himself so I decided to try a new line. Before I ran stuff down from Gr Ch Art...Eli Carver blends and some OFRN stuff.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
