"Fast Lane"?

[bulldoghistorian]

Okay, when I interviewed Hardcore Kennels back in 2000, we discussed a lot of subjects, including breeding of course.

Big Mike told me he did NOT like inbreeding either, just like you, and pointed out his many accomplishments (ROMs, Ch's, etc.) using his 3-ways crosses.

However, at the time, despite a fabulous career, Mike lamented that had never produced a single Grand Champion yet ... and how he had always come up short, even with great dogs.

Well, it also happened to be the time he was campaigning Ch Nine Milli ... who eventually became Gr Ch Nine Milli DOY ... and I pointed out to Mike that (ahem) Nine Milli was an inbred aunt/nephew breeding (Redman and Felony were littermates)

Just sayin'

Jack

PS: You will almost invariably notice that the best dogs in the world are either inbred, or based off of inbred dogs. Almost without exception.

spoke to him once , someone referred him to me on raw feeding during the keep
he sounded like a true competitor
send me a thank you note and a pic of the dog after he won , dog looked stunning

his record is amazing
PS I never had a rom dog either but came damn close once 2 failed reaching their championship , just needed one more point

who knows maybe one day

[Officially Retired]

I have to admit those are the facts
By the way although chosen I have refused the DOY title in later years , brings to much attention
but the moya dog up till today is the only gr.ch I had LOL

Funny story coming ... stay tuned

[ragedog10]

You have to agree with that, and great point on their first grch was with that auntie/nephew breeding! Time has shown us, the breeding of auntie/nephew and uncle/niece is when you really get to see a line root itself! Also that breeding way sometimes has a better out come then a father/daughter or mother/son breeding!
Bottom line is Hardcore started with a solid family of bulldogs! Maybe someone can tell us why it is that when you do that inbreeding there " if done with a solid family behind them" is when all the magic happens!
Now i pose the same question to all, Do you do a inbreeding on two very game bums who are outta a very solid family of chest dogs? Both bums are a all over dumb if you will game gotta snuff them out type. If i breed these two bums together will i get what the line is know for or will i have more crazy all over game bums?
Jack your line is know to be tuff head dogs, but now you have a very tuff fight your toe dog and have a niece to this male who is very tuff but all she wants is the left leg. Is it a gamble or based on their family backing you pretty much know that your going to get a Head hunter?

[Officially Retired]

You have to agree with that, and great point on their first grch was with that auntie/nephew breeding!

Why thank you

Time has shown us, the breeding of auntie/nephew and uncle/niece is when you really get to see a line root itself! Also that breeding way sometimes has a better out come then a father/daughter or mother/son breeding!

Yep. The Yellow/Breaker breeding produced Hardcore's best dog ever Ch Redman. (That is what he told me first hand: Redman was the finest fighting machine he ever had.). In breeding Ch Mystic (Redman/Snowball) back to Felony (Redman's sister), Mike essentially tightened up 3/4 on this best breeding combination ever (Yellow/Breaker) to create Nine Milli (5xW), his only Grand Champion.

Whether Aunt/Nephew or Uncle/Niece is "better" than either father/daughter or mother/son, I don't know about that.
It is similar, but I wouldn't say better, as there have been awesomely talented/prepotent father/daughter and mother/son dogs put out there ...

Bottom line is Hardcore started with a solid family of bulldogs! Maybe someone can tell us why it is that when you do that inbreeding there " if done with a solid family behind them" is when all the magic happens!

Exactly. There is no point on inbreeding on mediocrity

Now i pose the same question to all, Do you do a inbreeding on two very game bums who are outta a very solid family of chest dogs? Both bums are a all over dumb if you will game gotta snuff them out type. If i breed these two bums together will i get what the line is know for or will i have more crazy all over game bums?

I would never, ever, ever inbreed on bums.

You inbreed on GREAT dogs, PREPOTENT dogs, you never inbreed on bums.

You can "use" a bum that is inbred on great dogs ... and get greatness again in doing so ... but if you start inbreeding on "bumness" (lol) ... and you start solidifying those traits ... then pretty soon you will have a yardful of bums

People like Bulldog Historian correctly point out that you need to breed FOR match dogs.
But that doesn't necessarily mean you have to breed TO a match dog to GET a match dog.
A particular dog like Werdo, who is a bum inbred on a GREAT dog, and a great breeding combination, can oftentimes produce great dogs ... as Werdo did.

However, that doesn't mean you start inbreeding on Werdo
You just use him as a tool, but you never want to get sidetracked and start breeding for bums.
The more you start breeding TO bums, the more you start breeding FOR bums.

It's a delicate situation ... and therein lies the paradox ... use the tool, but use it sparingly

Jack your line is know to be tuff head dogs, but now you have a very tuff fight your toe dog and have a niece to this male who is very tuff but all she wants is the left leg. Is it a gamble or based on their family backing you pretty much know that your going to get a Head hunter?

I eventually got to the point I would get rid of dogs for not immediately fighting the head.
They don't have to be aces, but I do not want a leg dog.
I would overlook the first few rolls, as they're just learning, but after they had their bearings, if I saw "a front leg shaker" I would sell it cheap as a "dud" from my program.
It simply was NOT what I wanted.

Silverback never grabbed a front leg in his life. He was on the ear, on the muzzle, or in the throat. Period.
Icon never grabbed a front leg in his life. He was on the ear, or in the throat. Period.
U-Nhan-Rha, never grabbed a front leg in his life. He was on the face, in the mouth, on the ear, or in the throat. Period.

You get what you breed for

Jack

[STA8541]

I eventually got to the point I would get rid of dogs for not immediately fighting the head.
They don't have to be aces, but I do not want a leg dog.
I would overlook the first few rolls, as they're just learning, but after they had their bearings, if I saw "a front leg shaker" I would sell it cheap as a "dud" from my program.
It simply was NOT what I wanted.

Silverback never grabbed a front leg in his life. He was on the ear, on the muzzle, or in the throat. Period.
Icon never grabbed a front leg in his life. He was on the ear, or in the throat. Period.
U-Nhan-Rha, never grabbed a front leg in his life. He was on the face, in the mouth, on the ear, or in the throat. Period.

You get what you breed for

Jack

This was truly informative. I had no idea you could breed for style of battle. I have heard of breeding for mouth, so I guess breeding for a specific style makes sense. I always thought that if you chased teeth all the time, or stifles, or heads, or what have you, the gameness of your stock suffered. Maybe start w/really game dogs (of whatever style) & then "layer on" preferred style w/dogs that fight w/whatever style you're looking for as you go? I am obviously no breeder, lol.

U-Nhan-Rha is a good looking little dog.

[Officially Retired]

This was truly informative.

It was designed to be

I had no idea you could breed for style of battle.

Most people don't, which is why most people never get consistency: they don't breed for it.

I have heard of breeding for mouth, so I guess breeding for a specific style makes sense. I always thought that if you chased teeth all the time, or stifles, or heads, or what have you, the gameness of your stock suffered.

I don't chase anything; I started with an absolutely game, primo head dog ... from absolutely game stock ... that absolutely threw extreme percentages of gameness.

So I stuck with that

The gameness only "suffers" if (say) I have a head dog that isn't game ... and decide to keep using him. (Or a mouthy dog that isn't game, but keep using them.)

But I have always had an eye for extreme gameness, and I have always kept only those dogs that I felt in my bones were extremely game.

This doesn't mean I beat my dogs half to death by doing crazy horrible things to them; it means I gave them reasonable and controlled tests and never saw a bad move.

That, combined with the style I selected, has kept them in the winner's circle for 2+ decades straight.

Maybe start w/really game dogs (of whatever style) & then "layer on" preferred style w/dogs that fight w/whatever style you're looking for as you go? I am obviously no breeder, lol

That is exactly right: I started with extremely game stock (Ch Hammer x Hollingsworth's only true 3/4 Lady In Red bitch, Trinx) that exhibited the style I liked.
Poncho had an all-controlling ear style; his two sisters Missy and Ruby had devastating face styles.
I have always kept and bred for this ever since.

Only with The Gorilla did I start to breed for killer finish ... but I never spent the time refining it.

I am 100% positive I could have, had I kept a large yard, and kept selecting for it.

U-Nhan-Rha is a good looking little dog.

Thank you.

[STA8541]

I started with an absolutely game, primo head dog ... from absolutely game stock ... that absolutely threw extreme percentages of gameness.

So I stuck with that

Good job, lol. You're talking about Poncho, right?

I have always kept only those dogs that I felt in my bones were extremely game.

This doesn't mean I beat my dogs half to death by doing crazy horrible things to them; it means I gave them reasonable and controlled tests and never saw a bad move.

It has been said that a seasoned dogman who says he "never saw a bad move" speaks volumes w/the phrase. Far more so than some amateur who bought a dog b/c it was the color of his wife's hair! And so I shall take you at your word. Hard-nosed selectivity is key w/any breeding program.

That is exactly right: I started with extremely game stock (Ch Hammer x Hollingsworth's only true 3/4 Lady In Red bitch, Trinx) that exhibited the style I liked.
Poncho had an all-controlling ear style; his two sisters Missy and Ruby had devastating face styles.
I have always kept and bred for this ever since.

I got it right! And knowing what you wanted, & that you could breed for it, w/out losing gameness, is obviously why you've gotten long-term consistency: you bred for it. Question: if a fellow preferred a hard-driving chest or shoulder dog as his favored combatant, could that guy breed for it? Using the exact same formula of always starting w/good game stock w/that style, then selecting for it as you go (using only the game dogs that come down)? It stands to reason that you could, but I was wondering what your thoughts were on it.

Only with The Gorilla did I start to breed for killer finish ... but I never spent the time refining it.

I am 100% positive I could have, had I kept a large yard, and kept selecting for it.

You like a head dog to finish in the throat, correct? Given your track record, I'm sure you could have bred that finish into them too.

Thank you.

Anytime.

[ragedog10]

I have read your other post on the matter so i know what your answer will be,but for those that have not gotten around to reading some of the older post

[FrostyPaws]

Rage, that's way too many variables to answer. Frosty Paws was dumber than a box of hammers. I've had dogs off him just like that, but like him, they didn't reproduce that particular ignorance when bred. If I have 2 game bums off Frosty, will I breed them? Without a doubt. I've bred 2 quality dogs off Frosty and gotten bums like him, but that's the price of doing business at times. While, in the long run, breeding those types of dogs will give me more like that, it will also continue to nail down the type of gameness that I want my dogs to be based around. I don't make particular breedings for match dogs. If I get those, that's great. Even when I get match quality dogs, I don't always want, or need, to match them. They are dogs I throw back in my program to continue breeding. Not only do they have the gameness I want, but they also have the match qualities I want in a dog, so I'm effectively killing two birds with one stone.

What I hear, at times, is how do I know if they're match dogs? They may not win vs another man's dog. Once a person has been successful for a certain amount of years, they tend to know what quality dogs are for the most part. Those guys don't have to match every quality dog they have to know it's a quality dog. They've been around quality dogs long enough to know what that looks like when it pops up. The best dog I've ever owned, and one of the best I've ever SEEN, was never matched once. Now, probably given it all over to do again, maybe I would've matched her instead of trying to get pups from her. Doesn't really matter at this point, but I saw her do things in such a way that I'd never seen another dog do in all my years with dogs.

The point is that over time, the more you select for one type of animal, the more you'll get that type of animal. Always try to remember that and you'll be fine if you stick with it.

[STA8541]

The point is that over time, the more you select for one type of animal, the more you'll get that type of animal. Always try to remember that and you'll be fine if you stick with it.

This is gold. Thank you for the post.