The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Gun Dog Broker
Page 7 of 18 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 175

Thread: FT Goldens then and now =Barty?

  1. #61
    Senior Member Jennifer Henion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Far Northern California
    Posts
    1,223

    Default

    Fantastic commentary, Gerry! Thanks for sharing your insights. Never knew of the spaniel theory. My pup has the white freckled feet. Can't imagine the white freckled faces you mentioned! Haven't noticed any white feet or patches on the photos of UK Goldens I've seen in recent years. I see quite a few of their photos on facebook etc as an observer of several UK Golden field clubs.

    What got me thinking me of importing UK seed was the pedigrees of the UK FTCH studs of today. You can see many shared ancestors to those in Barty's and Stilrovin dog's pedigrees. Some of the Irish and Scottish field line types also look very similar to some of our field lines. At least the females do. FT CH Gorton's Red Ruby Rascal "Heidi" as an example.

    So the history of similar successful ancestory along with the potential perceived benefit of outcross genes, seemed attractive to me. However, the UK dogs generally have a large COI number. Many are in the 25% to 35% range. Is it beneficial to breed a closely line bred bitch to an even closer line bred male even though they are of different lines? I don't know. Haven't taken the genetics classes yet.

    But I digress. Great post Gerry. Thanks for that!

    Jennifer

  2. #62
    Senior Member Jennifer Henion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Far Northern California
    Posts
    1,223

    Default

    Paging back in my own pup's pedigree tonight, I also see that Carma Futhey had an English bred female born in 1970 FC AFC Kate of Rocky-Vue FDHF http://www.k9data.com/pedigree.asp?ID=18740

  3. #63
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,169

    Default

    So the history of similar successful ancestory along with the potential perceived benefit of outcross genes, seemed attractive to me. However, the UK dogs generally have a large COI number. Many are in the 25% to 35% range. Is it beneficial to breed a closely line bred bitch to an even closer line bred male even though they are of different lines? I don't know. Haven't taken the genetics classes yet.
    Since those common ancestors are far back in the pedigree, if you bred an import to a "typical" No American bitch, the COI would drop dramatically. However, that very low COI will also mean that the results could be highly unpredictable in many respects. This might mean that hips, elbows, etc. might be "off the wall" ... either good, if you get lucky; or not so good if you don't have the stars align for you.

    Imagine the highly inbred dog as a jar of marbles of red, green, and yellow. If you have an inbred bitch whose marbles are blue, purple and orange, when you combine the two you get a much broader range of color in the mixture of the two. Now if the girl happens to be red, green and orange, you might get a better "click", since the offspring will have overlap of genes that might be for the good traits you want. Or they might overlap on the genes for things you do NOT want.

    I bred to a UK import some years ago. The bitch was somewhat linebred around 10%; the sire 16-19%. The COI for the litter was .02%/.16% ... possibly could have gotten about that low by breeding to a Lab All hip xrays came back "mild"; elbows all normal. So that was a dead end for me, since I had nothing to go forward with.

    If you do a "radical" outcross you may not get the results you seek in the first generation, but you could bring out the traits you want by continuing to "mix 'n match" for more generations. Thus, you begin to establish your own unique "line".

    Simple, huh? NOT! Good in theory, but dog breeding has a way of making you humble

    This is the principle that drives people to linebreeding ... that by getting genetic uniformity the results will be more predictable for the traits you wish to preserve. In theory, one has to also be prepared to discard those individuals who end up getting a "double dose" of the bad genes that are also available. OTOH, dogs like Cotton (COI .93%/1.63%) prove that outcrosses CAN be successful as well. And Cotton was pretty amazing ... I didn't know him, but Jackie's article in the GRCA News told the story of how incredibly good he was at the game.

    As an "aside", k9data indicates that the breeding that produced Cotton was done 5 times. The first breeding produced his very capable sister, FC-AFC Mandy, T Markin' Masterpiece *** & Sharon Long's OTCH Topbrass Ric O Shay Barty. The 2nd breeding produced Cotton and some others of lesser achievements. Thus, the first two breedings seemed to produce the best of that gene combo.

    We often ask the question of whether the "old" dogs could compete today. Someone mentioned earlier that they might be able to. And maybe they could ... after all, the dogs we have today came from the good genes those dogs gave us. The training techniques of today have advanced so much, if those dogs had the basics of intelligence, marking ability, and courage we sought then, with the benefit of training advances that have been made, they might actually be quite capable in challenging today's tests.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  4. #64
    Senior Member John Robinson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Bigfork, Montana
    Posts
    3,011

    Default

    Excellent post Gerry!!!

  5. #65
    Senior Member Jennifer Henion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Far Northern California
    Posts
    1,223

    Default

    Wonderful post, Gerry! Am hurrying to get ready for work, so can't write anything intelligent at the moment. But thanks and I'll re-visit and re-read in a couple of hours!!

    Jennifer

  6. #66
    Senior Member gdgnyc's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    2,230

    Default

    Glad you started the thread, Jen. Excellent information from those who have posted.
    "I love the rod and gun and where they take me."

  7. #67
    Senior Member jd6400's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    NE OHio
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Gerry, from a trainers view point,I noticed 2 very distinct types in the goldens of early 70`s here.One was very soft and couldn`t handle the pressure of methods back then.The other was a very aggressive (tuff,not fear) that did very well understanding pressure but would let you know also!!!!Only get a couple through here lately and am seeing the best of both worlds.
    I personally think yesterdays Goldens would do very well in todays world!!!!Just rambling on,Jim

  8. #68
    Senior Member gdgnyc's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    2,230

    Default

    jd6400

    You're not on Team Golden, are you?
    "I love the rod and gun and where they take me."

  9. #69
    Senior Member jd6400's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    NE OHio
    Posts
    834

    Default

    No I`m not ,got a nuff problems with the peakes.....Haaaa, Jim

  10. #70
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jd6400 View Post
    Gerry, from a trainers view point,I noticed 2 very distinct types in the goldens of early 70`s here.One was very soft and couldn`t handle the pressure of methods back then.The other was a very aggressive (tuff,not fear) that did very well understanding pressure but would let you know also!!!!Only get a couple through here lately and am seeing the best of both worlds.
    I personally think yesterdays Goldens would do very well in todays world!!!!Just rambling on,Jim
    I think that both of those types still exist today, but owners may have learned through early experience that the aggressive Golden can be a great liability in various ways, so are less likely to invest in such a dog today. Could be wrong, but it sounds like common sense to me. I think that breeders also became better at evaluating what works best overall, and made progressive changes in their breeding choices.

    I think, too, that today's training methods, not the least of which, of course, is the intelligent use of the e-collar, makes a difference as well. I've had a couple of "sensitive" dogs and often found that physical correction was less harmful to their attitude than angry, verbal correction. Even today there are dogs who find that kind of "personal" correction more impactful than the "impersonal" collar correction, once they have the background of good teaching with the use of the e-collar. Because of the background training with the e-collar, the personal correction doesn't need to be as forceful as was more common before the near-universal use of the e-collar. It seems that when one can combine the e-collar with occasional "personal" corrections the dogs with some "conscience" can tread the line between toughness, without aggression or shutting down (softness). All in all, the advances in training techniques have given the dogs a better life, I think. FYI, I am a LOUSY trainer, but sometimes better as an observer

    Jim, it would be interesting to me to hear the opinions of experienced trainers to hear what differences you all see in the training/learning attitudes of the different breeds. I've often been told: a good dog is a good dog. Can agree with that.

    However, does the psyche of each breed differ, so that it may take a different approach, here and there within the overall process, to bring out the best of that dog. Have also been told that the differences between individual dogs don't really align with the breed of dog; are more related to the individual dog, regardless of breed. For example, that there can be sensitive Labs (even Chessies?), and tough Goldens. Some (Lab breeder) have said that Labs have been specifically bred to take straight lines, while Goldens less so. So a Golden must use more "learning" to develop that skill in order to excel in field trials. So, maybe some of the differences are related to breeding? But maybe that is more within lines of dogs within a breed, rather than different breeds of dogs? What differences might exist in the ability of dogs to "not hold a grudge" for significant corrections? I'm already anticipating that these are subjective questions for which there could be different opinions based on different dog experiences.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •