Conformation

[labsnlurchers 39]

As above.

Just interested in the opinions of others as to the relevance of conformation in a working dog.

[Bosun11 537]

I voted yes and yes.

 

A good looker is always a sight to behold but Form Should Follow Function, seen some ugly miss-shapen critters that really were the nuts and that's what would count in my book.

 

As for showing, yes, if taken light-hearted and in the right spirit (just for fun) and most of all a great way to meet up with like minded people.

[labsnlurchers 39]

To me conformation is as important as working potential. A well conformed dog will have more of a chance of putting in a full life of service and have less chance of injury in the field when compared to a dog with poor conformation.

[Bosun11 537]

I understand that logic L&L and would agree with you but for some it's more about getting the job done and I don't need a film star for that

[labsnlurchers 39]

I was thinking earlier after reading about the dachshund in hungary (thread by manipulus on here) and after listening to a friend of mine talking about the GWP breeds. Its a shame there is such a split in this country where if you work your dogs then serious showing can be seen as molly coddling them and if you show your dogs then heaven forbid you should ever get them a little bit muddy in the field!

 

If conformation was considered more then it would only lead to a healthier working dog population imo.

[Jim Grant 4]

I voted Yes and Yes. I think that the summer shows are a great way of socialising pups and older dogs who are not town dwellers. I also race the dogs over the summer, they love it, sim copursing and straight racing, don't matter.

 

Getting back to the post, if the animal doesn't have good confirmation then you could be in for big vet bills if you run it on open ground.

 

PS I don't insure my doge take it on the chin, much cheaper.

Edited November 27, 2008 by Jim Grant

[MuttleMcTuttle 21]

I think conformation is important but looks aren't everything. Most good working dogs are pretty well put together or they just don't stay the course. But unfortunately there will always be some people who insist on breeding inferior stock, and continue to pass on genetic faults to unsuspecting buyers.

[Bosun11 537]

I was thinking earlier after reading about the dachshund in hungary (thread by manipulus on here) and after listening to a friend of mine talking about the GWP breeds. Its a shame there is such a split in this country where if you work your dogs then serious showing can be seen as molly coddling them and if you show your dogs then heaven forbid you should ever get them a little bit muddy in the field!

 

If conformation was considered more then it would only lead to a healthier working dog population imo.

 

Again L&L I see your point but what is a shame in the world of working dogs is 'serious showing' which is almost always to the detriment of working ability. Thousands of years in breeding the best to the best in working sighthounds has left us with some seriously wonderful, beautiful and phisically sound animals, using these in production of working lurchers should always throw sound stock.

And again, we wouldn't have the sound working instinct (underground) in the working terrier if it wern't for hundreds of years of only solid graft behind them.

Both these types were forged in the field not the ring.

 

Serious showing has done nothing to promote either!

[Jim Grant 4]

Confirmation does not have a lot to do with looks. It is their skeleton and Musculature. Nicely set together.

 

Good looking dogs, what is it colour, coat, size, what.

 

I know what I am after and I go for confirmation every time.

[labsnlurchers 39]

I was thinking earlier after reading about the dachshund in hungary (thread by manipulus on here) and after listening to a friend of mine talking about the GWP breeds. Its a shame there is such a split in this country where if you work your dogs then serious showing can be seen as molly coddling them and if you show your dogs then heaven forbid you should ever get them a little bit muddy in the field!

 

If conformation was considered more then it would only lead to a healthier working dog population imo.

 

Again L&L I see your point but what is a shame in the world of working dogs is 'serious showing' which is almost always to the detriment of working ability. Thousands of years in breeding the best to the best in working sighthounds has left us with some seriously wonderful, beautiful and phisically sound animals, using these in production of working lurchers should always throw sound stock.

And again, we wouldn't have the sound working instinct (underground) in the working terrier if it wern't for hundreds of years of only solid graft behind them.

Both these types were forged in the field not the ring.

 

Serious showing has done nothing to promote either!

 

Thats the exact thing im talking about, in this country there are now with most breeds those for the ring and those for the field. I just think that its a shame more people dont show their working dogs to get the lines out there and clear up some of the show bred animals.

I've been told (by my friend who breeds and shows and works daily gwp's) that in germany the GWP is far superior to most of those being bred in this country due to the fact that what works in this country is in generly not shown and what is shown does not genrally work therefore creating 2 seperate 'types' that are bred from where as in germany the only GWP that can breed are the ones that have proven in the field and so in the ring you get 'working' GWP and not the fancy show stuff you can get at some KC shows in this country.

Even though i am talking kc registered dogs in theory it could be applied to all dogs. I have seen lurchers being shown that quite obviously have never done a days work in their lives.