Random Question

[foxdropper 17,092]

double posted

[foxdropper 17,092]

 

 

Hyperthetically speaking lol what Jeemes writes is text book, got to hand it to him but reality is another curved ball.The question is based around a linage is it not and therefore anything not working must not re-enter the breeding ,period no come backs no arguing .if you have no other dog to put it to you either look to a close line or take a chance on a complete outcross. Like Hotmeat said and i agree ,confidence plays a huge part in the way you enter a pup IMO so to have a spewer in the mix is a big set back in that respect .Theory is always in the back of my mind but commen sense would prevail .

I agree with Hotmeat and you completely on the confidence thing. You are much more likely to forgive and wait for a dog to express its genes if you know whats behind it is inbred pure stuff rather than if you know there are jackers in its make up, but remember the theory isnt guess work and its in text books because cleverer people than us have proved things in a scientific way.

 

Theory is good to know but who the hell has the time to weed out the shite from many litters to get back to what you started with.By not allowing a dog into a line with any undesirable traits you are considerably ramping up the odds of consistency.Please dont advice lads to put in what is not required as this is not the way .like i said theory is good to have in the back of your mind but reality can and does allow us to jump forward and keep jumping . Personally to breed from inferior stock is to take a huge leap backwards but what do i know .All hypothetical i know but advice is taken on here whether meant or not .

 

[atilla the hunter 60]

Thanks for replys boys just noticed thers a few more can't read them now just finished a real big drive and won't take it in properly gona sort my dogs and have a hour or 2 look forward to reading them later

[pablo esc 1,598]

It must be really hard to know, but maybe that's happened even way back. When men have used an kept the good ones and say, brothers, sisters never any good. How's that distinguished, and wouldn't they come out again if overlooked. Because surely you get through backs, breed, character. It wouldn't be a thing to go along with,, unless you're happy with dog, out and type

[loafer 47]

Back in the day, Gamecocks were tested and tested some more, then the brother was used as a broodcock, the reason being the original cock would of lost vigour through over exertion, the lines and strains still went forward.

[gonetoearth 5,144]

You lot must have turned out some litters. Genetics Breeding out problems my god. Dawin. Would have been impresed

Edited May 18, 2014 by gonetoearth

[timmy k 571]

I think I read somewhere that parson John Russell would test a dog and if satisfied use the brother ( might of been someone else, it was a long time ago ). But this kind of thread really interests me and it also prompts the debate over using young untested stock.

[jeemes 3,517]

Back in the day, Gamecocks were tested and tested some more, then the brother was used as a broodcock, the reason being the original cock would of lost vigour through over exertion, the lines and strains still went forward.

Thats what Ive read aswell but that was when they didnt know about the existance of genes.

[jeemes 3,517]

 

 

 

Hyperthetically speaking lol what Jeemes writes is text book, got to hand it to him but reality is another curved ball.The question is based around a linage is it not and therefore anything not working must not re-enter the breeding ,period no come backs no arguing .if you have no other dog to put it to you either look to a close line or take a chance on a complete outcross. Like Hotmeat said and i agree ,confidence plays a huge part in the way you enter a pup IMO so to have a spewer in the mix is a big set back in that respect .Theory is always in the back of my mind but commen sense would prevail .

I agree with Hotmeat and you completely on the confidence thing. You are much more likely to forgive and wait for a dog to express its genes if you know whats behind it is inbred pure stuff rather than if you know there are jackers in its make up, but remember the theory isnt guess work and its in text books because cleverer people than us have proved things in a scientific way.

 

Theory is good to know but who the hell has the time to weed out the shite from many litters to get back to what you started with.By not allowing a dog into a line with any undesirable traits you are considerably ramping up the odds of consistency.Please dont advice lads to put in what is not required as this is not the way .like i said theory is good to have in the back of your mind but reality can and does allow us to jump forward and keep jumping . Personally to breed from inferior stock is to take a huge leap backwards but what do i know .All hypothetical i know but advice is taken on here whether meant or not .

 

 

You keep trying to knock theory but what you yourself practice comes from your own theory which you got from who? and who did he get it from? My point is all practice good or bad starts with theory. When the practice goes wrong we go back to the theory and start again..

[jeemes 3,517]

You lot must have turned out some litters. Genetics Breeding out problems my god. Dawin. Would have been impresed

Whos Dawin?

[forest of dean redneck 11,189]

Worker to worker bred,anything not satisfactory should be neutered and pet homed or PTS ,then rescues wouldn't be so overflowing!

[BRICKTOP 126]

Hyperthetically you know the way this dog works he is going to meet his maker sooner rather than later ,so to keep his blood take a few straws from him for the future .Breed from the best and cull the rest

[gonetoearth 5,144]

 

You lot must have turned out some litters. Genetics Breeding out problems my god. Dawin. Would have been impresed

 

Whos Dawin?

. Terrier man for the atlantis fox hounds

[gonetoearth 5,144]

 

Back in the day, Gamecocks were tested and tested some more, then the brother was used as a broodcock, the reason being the original cock would of lost vigour through over exertion, the lines and strains still went forward.

 

Thats what Ive read aswell but that was when they didnt know about the existance of genes.

. And have you had one of your terriers genetically investigated. By a genetic engineer Do you even understand the expense and what goes into idenification. Of genes , when what you really mean is selective breeding Edited May 18, 2014 by gonetoearth

[rob284 1,678]

something i dont understand which would be great if someone could explain. example: bitch from a great line, works a treat. dog from another line, good at its job. both lines are tested and are built for the same job and bred through generations. what is different in lining them together, instead of keeping to their own blood? in a way, worker to worker.