RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

Labs today vs labs of yesteryear/

9K views 47 replies 14 participants last post by  jd6400 
#1 · (Edited)
The thread about 65 national and Cotton brought out some of the older guys that have seen a few of the labs and labs today.My question to them is.
Are the labs today as good as the labs we had back in 60`s and 70`s?Or have training methods gotten so much better that we are getting more out of a lesser animal?

Now when I say "as good" I`m talking of marking ability,trainability, both which I feel are genetic trait.Along with willingness to "go thru a brick wall"mentality to get a bird in any condition.
Would love to hear from you guys that field trial along with you gundog guys like myself that have been around doin this for 35 + yrs.

I will give my thoughts also. Hope all can stay civil!!!! Mr. Connor would really love to hear from you.This should be interesting for the younger crowd also.

I will also give my dads thoughts about this in his years after getting out of the game. Jim
 
#2 · (Edited)
I think the dogs are at least as good as they were, or better percentage wise.

I think the training is much better. The use of the collar is better understood by more people. I think that's the biggest difference.

I think the expectations are higher today. The dogs of yesterday weren't asked to do what the dogs of today are. With today's training methods I'm sure they could have.

We go to fields we used to be able to do 2 or 3 setups in and they have gotten too small to do 1 setup. We train at Keiths a lot as you know. Run marks from one end of the property to the other. Go to a trial and the marks are still longer...
 
#3 ·
The expectations are greater,because training has gotten better,hence the need for tougher tests to get rid of enough dogs to finish the wknd? Right?
 
#4 ·
Yes, that's my opinion. If most of the dogs can do the test it has to be made more difficult.

As it's made more difficult, trainers learn how to teach the dogs to do those. Now the tests have to be made harder, etc., etc.
 
#5 ·
My thoughts too...Wheres Mr. Fallon?
 
#6 ·
Heres a few things I`ve noticed about what has been going on in the last 30 yrs.

An influx of cruciate ligament tears.

Cancer is more prevalent

Markin ability is better

Trainability is better

Ability to get in water has greatly diminished! (this has me concerned)

now realize this is a generalized statement and I don`t get a ton of super well bred FT bred dogs through here to work with also.
 
#10 · (Edited)
Jim I agree with some of that, but not the getting in the water part. Some dogs have a deficit in training in that they're too honest around the water. Taking too much water, staying in. You need to come over to Keith's sometime. I think it's part super bred FT dogs and part, getting in the water is a way of life from a pup on. Part of "better training." It used to be "get in the water and stay in the water." Now it's get in the water, get out then get back in, or don't get back in." As trials evolve staying in the water is no longer always what you want to do.

Cruciates and cancer, yeah...Few seem to be breeding for longevity in our dogs, not that it's easy to do. One could argue that cruciate problems come from simply covering more miles these days than yesteryear. Going hard and stopping hard.

Northernstorm, I agree with you whole heartedly, although most won't. Trying to be better benefits everyone. I've always had a problem with, "my dog got his MH with all barely acceptables, yours got a MH with all excellents." Hunt tests were based on the premise of doing good enough. If the dogs 50 years from now are just good enough what is gained? A MH with a "D" average is a MH, one with an "A" average is a MH. Of course the same could be said about many things in life.

There is always the argument that if you don't agree with HT you can go run FT. Sounds like maybe you should come over to Keith's too. He's between Springboro and Conneautville.
 
#14 ·
Northernstorm, I agree with you whole heartedly, although most won't. Trying to be better benefits everyone. I've always had a problem with, "my dog got his MH with all barely acceptables, yours got a MH with all excellents." Hunt tests were based on the premise of doing good enough. If the dogs 50 years from now are just good enough what is gained? A MH with a "D" average is a MH, one with an "A" average is a MH. .
John, you hit that one right on the nail!!!! I have trained out at Keiths before, awesome grounds.
 
#13 ·
Good point, yesteryears, "My dog died." Today, "My dog died from cancer." The lifespan probably hasn't changed much.

I think cruciate problems are more common now. I had a dog in about 1983 that had cruciate surgery. Most hadn't heard of it.
 
#17 ·
IMHO the FT lab of the past would mark and handle as well as those of the present time given modern training methods applied.
As an unofficial personal observation today's lab tends to be smaller and faster. Could this be related to the frequency of various orthopedic conditions? Is the FT gene pool shrinking allowing more diseases to manifest? Time will tell.

Tim
 
#23 ·
A great question to ponder Tim! Jim
 
#18 ·
the trainers of yesteryear didnt have wingers, stickmen,two way radios, and multi frequency collars....

but they did have access to more and sometimes better training and trialing grounds than their contemporaries of today, the loss of those grounds can never be truly measured, but the current venues are used by both HT and FT along with other dog breeds

the dogs of yesteryear were great dogs then and would be great dogs now...all you have to do is take a look at the National fields and see how many current and future champions were in those Nationals, along with how many RHOF dogs were around on a weekly basis

You could beat Corky, Honcho,Piper,Moon,Moose,Rascal or Kate back then and chances are you wouldnt beat them now
 
This post has been deleted
#19 ·
i feel hunt tests are more for the handlers, meaning the guy who loves to train his hunting buddy and is rather good at it but can afford nor do the field trail life style. i feel thats wut it is, your whole life revolves around trials, right? i think hunt tests are meant for the "average" guy who wants to show the skills of his dog and its fun for him n his dog. i kno for some hunt tests are just as serious. Guess what im trying to say is wouldnt making hunt tests harder can push out those "average" guys with great dogs?
 
#20 ·
Kinda where I wanted this to go!We ran the first AKC hunt test Buckeye put on.We took 16 dogs and passed everything!!!I can remember the trip back to the kennel and dad said,"this is going to do nothing for the retriever breed"but will be great for people who can`t afford the FT game.Then he said "mark my word,people are still going to want to know who has the better dog"

Several yrs. later along came the master national! Just some observations of years gone by!!!! Jim
 
#28 ·
jd - i've erased the quote for ease of answering -

Heres a few things I`ve noticed about what has been going on in the last 30 yrs.

An influx of cruciate ligament tears. Somewhat bigger dogs, longer tests, more training - I have always been partial to smaller dogs - Code Blue, Watergator Sam, Paha Sapa Chief size - they hold up well over their lifetimes.

Cancer is more prevalent - When it strikes a high profile dog we notice it more - I would say because of a lot of use of a limited gene pool we are seeing more conditions - food allergy, skeletal, CNM - in the old days the best local stud was bred to the best local bitch, pups went to the good trainers, sometimes that worked, but we actually saw the dogs so knew their issues.

Markin ability is better - I started in '63, the guy that taught me a lot of what I know was a guy named Bob Sparks who owned at the time a pup named Moon - In my days of watching dogs I have never seen a dog that could consistently mark better - on occasion dogs like Ray's Rascal & Corky could come close or equal, but none better. 9 Derbies, 30 points, 5 wins, 1 second, 1 third, 2 greenies against some very high powered Derby dogs - I've ran against Lean Mac, trained with & ran against Charmain -

Trainability is better - training tools & techniques are better - help is more available - people who know are willing to share what they know - people have more leisure time to devote to this pursuit

Ability to get in water has greatly diminished! (this has me concerned) - Don't agree, water for training is at a premium - unless you have the knack of reading dogs it is an easy part of the process to screw up - I have seen some great water dogs all through my trialing experience.

now realize this is a generalized statement and I don`t get a ton of super well bred FT bred dogs through here to work with also.
 
#30 ·
Good stuff right there Marvin,thanks for your insight!!!Hopin a lot of the younger crowd is takin this in.....Jim
 
#32 · (Edited)
I saw Ray's Rascal on more than one occasion, even watched him win the National Am in '74, he WAS the finest marking dog I have ever seen...threw great marking dogs too..we had one in a dog named Rex (John Rex Rascal) who was named for John Luther my brother's first teacher/mentor of dog training and as a tribute to Rex Carr..Rex could mark with radar like precision, he would appear to run straight at the guns and then peel off and pin the birds...

another great marking dog was one owned by a then young man from Oregon named TJ Lindbloom, and that dog was named McGuffy...he won the National in 79..his sire was also Ray's Rascal
 
#33 ·
Having judged & run against Rascal I won't disagree with your assessment except to say he could be beat in certain situations :). McGuffy was injured & never returned to his old form (I think I may have judged him as a Derby dog) as did not Cougar's Rocket after his injury.
 
#37 ·
As far as dogs from the past, if Sweet Pea by some sort of magic had any Charlemagne juice in storage I would buy every bit of it. Same for Itch.
 
#43 ·
Itchin to Go ( FC Air Express x Stillwater Peggy) was owned by Dr David Bird, and he was one helluva dog.... Peggy was bred to 5 GREAT dogs who were RHOF members,
 
#41 ·
Pretty sure it was Jim and Pam Bird......Super good folks!!Who owned itch Jim
 
#48 ·
Ha Bill,we have fun..doin some weird stuff with handling but dad said the same of me and the collar!Enjoyed the thread....Jim
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top