Looking at the NARC nationals of 138 entries there is ONE Golden and ONE Chessie. I am a lab guy through and through, just curious why other choose a different breed to run. Pretty obvious Labs dominate. I would think most running at this levell are first and foremost wanting to win......and would run with a Basset Hound if they could win.
Why would others run another breed? To me this game is hard enough with a Lab.
This is NOT a bash other breeds posts, just wondering why they choose another breed other than a lab to compete.
At this point in the lifetime of the FT game, it’s, at least in part on a macro level, a numbers game pushing lab dominance. We can discuss all day long as to why and when it became such, but that’s what it is at this time. Around this area, it’s not unusual for me to have the only Golden entered. So it’s 1 vs. 50/60/70. (And hey, I don’t mind the odds, especially if I’m standing beside the right dog.) So looking at a granular level, it’s dog vs. dog vs. dog, etc., but at the breed level it’s 1 vs. 50/60/70 … i.e. the odds of any particular dog entered being awarded the blue ribbon (you have to have one of these to qualify for a National) is 1 to 50/60/70, regardless of the breed, but the odds of a lab getting the blue ribbon in the typical trial is 50/60/70 to 1.
On the personal side, similarly to Mr. Connor (hello Bill), I started with Goldens.
For me, I've had sufficient success with my Goldens...maybe it wouldn't be enough for some people, but it is for me.
Of course, over the many years that I've played the FT game, I've been asked, innumerable times, why I didn't run labs ... well, I've never felt the need to change.
Even if I hadn't been blessed with FC AFC Jake and FC AFC Lucy, I'd nonetheless still be running the long hairs.
Andy
>>> GO PISTOL!!!
