Jump to content

Opinions Please


Sandra777
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ignoring the head and everything else such as colour, size, bone, type and 'I know nothing about the breed' .. :laugh: . could I have people's opinions on which of these two puppies complies better with the breed standard which requires:

Neck: Muscular, rather short, clean in outline gradually widening towards the shoulders.

Forequarters Legs straight and well boned, set rather wide apart, showing no weakness at the pasterns, from which point the feet turn out a little. Shoulders well laid back with no looseness at the elbows. (note... puppies' pasterns don't turn out at this age, it comes later :) )

Body Closely coupled, with level topline, wide front, deep brisket, well sprung ribs, muscular and well defined.

Hindquarters Well muscled, hocks well let down with stifles well bent. Legs parallel when viewed from behind.

I will be very interested in people's opinions and perhaps the reasoning?

ETA: Yes I know the date is wrong :o

DSCN0434.jpg

DSCN0425.jpg

DSCN0429.jpg

DSCN0421.jpg

Edited by Sandra777
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK I am going to stick my neck out, noting that asessing from pictures can sometimes give you the wrong idea of a dog and getting your hands on them is really the only and best way.

My pick is number 2.

While the standard calls for a short neck, the picture of pup number one looks to be too short.

If you draw a line from the withers horizontally across, the head of no1 is mostly below the line.

Now it could be just the photo so best to look at it in a mirror.

Even with a short neck, the head should be above the line. Below the line can indicate a problem with shoulder angulation for example.

no 2 also has a more level topline.

No 1 seems to slope across the loin, though you would need to check if it is a result of how the rear is set up for the photos.

Edited by espinay2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two also be my pick! Also how old are they here I found with my pick of litter she was the nicest in the 4week photos then she went very ugly for a while and at 8weeks was back to being my pick 110% I have recently had to sit her out for 6 months to grow into herself I guess she was always going to be a bitch that was hard to grow, but now she is lookin great again!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Number one . I prefer the depth of chest and the pro sternum. I'm trying to ignore the colours and think that possibly there's a litter more upper arm. Prefer the pastern and the feet on the white. Would like to move the back leg slightly but also think there's a acceptable turn of stifle. Also much prefer the lower tail set on number one. The first also looks cleaner and maybe not as leathery as the second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am certainly not a show person but would pick Pup 2.

From the front Pup 1 already has RF foot turning in. As pup grows and shoulders expand, I would be concerned this would then be exaggerated.

Pup 2 has even front legs and as chest fills, I feel it would develop across there nicely.

Pup 2 has a better topline. It is more level between the wither and hips than Pup 1.

Pup 1 has a little arch in its back.

Pup 2 has a better matched neck. By this I mean the top part of neck (throat) looks like it then thickens out to match the bottom part near shoulder. It does this in proportion. I think Pup 1 has a thin part under throat and then a thick part at shoulder.

I think if you were to cover the body from mid neck and look at the 2 sections, Pup 2 joins a lot smoother and each section would match.

Pup 1 is tidier in the rump where the tail joins. It does flow on as a continuation of the spine whereas pup 2 has a distinct rump/tail junction. Not sure if this is an issue though as not familiar with the breed AT ALL and have never shown a dog. I have shown horses and cattle though but these look nothing like them. LOL

Does pup 1 have a little concave section in the sternum area in the front on pic? It may just be the colouration difference in the pups that allows that to be seen.

So given I have no experience in selection of show traits in dogs, I would pick

PUPPY 2

Good luck choosing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I was ignoring the topline issue I would pick puppy 1 as he has the better front. Puppy 2 doesn't appear to have a straight front, slightly east west and in my experience this is not an issue that gets better - in my breed anyhow. Puppy 1s topline could very well be the way he is stacked, would watch him on the ground standing naturally

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone who expressed an opinion, it was very interesting and helpful to get another point of view.

The photos were taken the morning after the pups were 6 weeks old. Both pups are bitches incidentally...

From the moment they were born the white pup has been our pick (no, not because of her colour - we are actually a bit disappointed she is white), but when we took these pictures the brindle one just leapt out at us.

The thing we wanted in a pup from this mating was a level topline. We have no concerns about subtleties of the breed, they're both very good in the main points of type etc.

My concern with the brindle one is that her topline appears flat but weak - to me her wither is at a greater angle to her topline (back) than the white one - with the thought that this could lead to a dip behind the wither when she's an adult.

IRL the white one has never seemed to have that slight banana-back look she has in this photo, but the photo shows it's there which is good enough for me.

Interestingly even now, if you hold these pups verticle allowing their bodies and hind-legs to dangle, the brindle one's topline curves, while the white one hangs straight from wither to tail set-on, when they were younger the curve in the brindle one was much more noticeable.

Other thoughts anyone??

Edited by Sandra777
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would love it if you could post pics of them at 8 weeks. 6 weeks may be too early to get a true picture but 8 weeks is generally thought to be the right age for the truest assessment of what they will be as an adult. So much can change in 2 weeks.

Assess them yourself by looking at them in a mirror too so you are not looking straight at them. It actually provides a little more perspective.

Thanks foir being brave enough to do the subject, it is interesting to see what people think and always a good learning opportunity!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always found 6 weeks is better for Staffords espinay but it's a constant assessment process anyway :)

They are 7 weeks today and we're planning on taking some photos tomorrow anyway (never seem to have time on "the birthday day") so will post them and see what people think.

We have always found it useful to photograph them then look at the photos - probably the same theory as a mirror but allows for more measuring and comparing - got to get the photos right of course.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just curious but when the side on photos were taken was it done using a tri-pod on the camera as the side shots look to be slightly different angles. I thought at first the white one looked a bit short on length and hind legs but if there is a slight variation of angle that could give a distorted view. A slight movement of the camera operator, by as little as an inch, slightly forward and looking back along the dog will give a different look to the dogs profile. Even holding the camera slightly elevated from one shot to the next will alter the profile.

Use of a tripod would mean the camera is constant height, angle and distance which would give a better comparison of the two. However I should point out that I am used to looking for squareness of body and level topline as these apply to our breed.

Not that I am trying to be critical. I just feel that when comparing two dogs in photos you need to present each dog exactly the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...