Breeding For "performance", Not Show

[megan_]

Good conformation is what makes a good athlete who will stay the distance. And no you should not breed a limited registered dog.

Showing is about a lot more than structure though. Why else do people put glitter etc on their dogs for shows ?

Dogs can have excellent structure and not be show winners. There ae a number of breeds (mals, bc's, Aussies etc) that have split working and show lines.

[benshiva]

Good conformation is what makes a good athlete who will stay the distance. And no you should not breed a limited registered dog.

Showing is about a lot more than structure though. Why else do people put glitter etc on their dogs for shows ?

Dogs can have excellent structure and not be show winners. There ae a number of breeds (mals, bc's, Aussies etc) that have split working and show lines.

Who uses glitter on their dogs in the show ring? Why on earth would someone do that? The mind boggles.

Also, I agree that some breeds have distinct show vs working lines, however, in my breed (Border Collie) whilst there are two distinct lines, there are some show lines where the dogs excel at the highest level both in show and performance. Some of the best agility/obedience dogs are from top show kennels. Without doubt, the splits are there, but with research I believe a person could have the best of both worlds in most breeds.

[Kavik]

Both of the breeds I own have quite a definite show/working split.

[Dory the Doted One]

In most breeds, I would think 'the best of both worlds' is a bit of a dream. A fantastic ideal, though and one I think should be worked towards.

Unless 'best of both worlds' is simply trending towards the upper percentage of top performance in both (multiple) disciplines. Then I haven't seen it myself.

Definitely happy to be wrong. But I can't say (in my limited experience) I know too many Gr. Ch./Ch and simultaneous Top Scoring in Job I Was Originally Bred For Dogs.

I have seen plenty of people doing both with a degree of success and I massively applaud them.

[RallyValley]

I would consider myself a breeder that breeds for performance first, as I work my dogs in the field as well as show them. When looking at stud dogs most important is temperament then structure which is followed very closely behind by working ability. The sire of my first litter was chosen based on this formula, he is not a show champion and if I hadn't started taking him to shows he would never have seen a show ring in his life. However he is one of the finest field Brittanys in the country. To me a show champion does not tell me anything about a dogs structure but an assessment with input from my mentors does.

This has worked quite well for me so far, all the pups that are being taken out in the field are showing the drive, great nose and natural ability of their sire and dam. Two of the pups are also in the show ring, one of those pups is consistently winning class in group awards and the other is taking out wins over older bitches.

To start with unless one of my pups have excellent structure they wouldn't be in an agility home because of the demands of the sport on their bodies. If someone wanted one of my pups, wanted to do agility but not show and had experience in training agility dogs I would consider allowing the dog on main register. Without experience it would be limited register with the potential to upgrade once they proved they would commit to the training etc.

[OSoSwift]

Who uses glitter on their dogs in the show ring? Why on earth would someone do that? The mind boggles.

Plush Puppy Pixie Dust

[OSoSwift]

Mine do excel in any given area becasue I cannot commit to going every weekend.

I know of quite a few dogs over here who are show agility and obedience champions. Sometimes they leave the ring after gaining their champion title, not because they are not good enough but because their owner does not have the interest or drive to keep competeing in the show ring.

My dogs do have the ability to do better in the dog sports rings and show rings, unfortunately I do not have ready access to mentors which would help me become a better handler so they can do better in those areas, considering they have a self taught handler I think they do admirably.

[Bjelkier]

In most breeds, I would think 'the best of both worlds' is a bit of a dream. A fantastic ideal, though and one I think should be worked towards.

Unless 'best of both worlds' is simply trending towards the upper percentage of top performance in both (multiple) disciplines. Then I haven't seen it myself.

Definitely happy to be wrong. But I can't say (in my limited experience) I know too many Gr. Ch./Ch and simultaneous Top Scoring in Job I Was Originally Bred For Dogs.

I have seen plenty of people doing both with a degree of success and I massively applaud them.

I would hazard a guess and say the reason a number of top show dogs don't have woeking titles is its simply too hard to do both. It takes a lot of time and dedication to title a dog that far.

For what it's worth there are a lot of samoyeds who excel at both and there isn't an obvious divide between working and show dogs.

[OSoSwift]

In most breeds, I would think 'the best of both worlds' is a bit of a dream. A fantastic ideal, though and one I think should be worked towards.

Unless 'best of both worlds' is simply trending towards the upper percentage of top performance in both (multiple) disciplines. Then I haven't seen it myself.

Definitely happy to be wrong. But I can't say (in my limited experience) I know too many Gr. Ch./Ch and simultaneous Top Scoring in Job I Was Originally Bred For Dogs.

I have seen plenty of people doing both with a degree of success and I massively applaud them.

I would hazard a guess and say the reason a number of top show dogs don't have woeking titles is its simply too hard to do both. It takes a lot of time and dedication to title a dog that far.

For what it's worth there are a lot of samoyeds who excel at both and there isn't an obvious divide between working and show dogs.

Agreed. A lot of dedication goes into excelling in one ring never mind both or many.

[Dogsfevr]

Many showdogs are dual purpose ,the only issue i have in performance dog breeding only is when you can no longer recognize the breed as for many the breeders don't care about the looks just how they work & many will forgo many breed specific traits to do so .I now in my breed it is often hard to tell what some of them are in the working lines ,they have become so tiny & weedy that they no longer fit the bill for the "breed Standard" but have been breed to exaggerated standards to suit the field world of faster is better instead of incorporating the whole package & essence of what the breed is ,

In the JR world there is a person with very competitive JR that are show lines that do flyball(national level) ,agility & TV roles but the trainer completes the package .He works with about 4/6 on his team ,Still look like JR,great natures,biddable & fit into a frenzied dog environment without going crazy & easy to live with .

I would love to do both but like many i don't have the time to dedicate to field work in the small season you have we run a business 24/7 all year round but my dogs breeder do compete in dog sports & my guys are from highly titled dogs .They also have dogs out in pet homes that are competing in varying activities so there is beauty & brains in there lines & yep the best of both worlds but they are also loving family pets which is also important when pups have to go to homes & working/more intense pups can often need special owners to keep there brains amused when you decide to breed for particular traits ,it truly needs to be the whole package & who ends up owning them & above all the breeders being honest about the differences & ensuring people understand that sadly something the is often not explained in my breed & the new owners first experience is not a pleasant one for them & the dog .

Not all states also offer the titles one may seek in there breed so some states may have more titled dogs compared to another simply due to that state not alllowed to hold those tests .Earthdog titles aren't held here nor do we have lure coursing titles but many dogs could fit the bill

[Salukifan]

I think the point's already been made but in some breeds, "performance temperament" for dog sports is not going to be the traditional breed temperament, nor the one specified in the breed standard.

And frankly, that may also be the case for structure. I'm not talking about tests of working ability like gundog work but even they have been stylised to some degree. I've heard it said that a dog that can win a US retrieving trial is not necessarily the dog you want to go and and shoot over every day.

So I think it pays to remember that for all competitive pursuits, the traditional breed conformation and temperament may be altered to make for a more competitive dog. Singling the show ring out as the sole source of this is inaccurate.

So for JRT's is a biddable, people focussed dog, higher on leg for speed what the breed was bred for? Is performance in agility the "test" of a "proper" JRT?? Is that what breeders should be selecting to take forward in the breed?

Edited May 2, 2014 by Haredown Whippets

[Rebanne]

Good conformation is what makes a good athlete who will stay the distance. And no you should not breed a limited registered dog.

Showing is about a lot more than structure though. Why else do people put glitter etc on their dogs for shows ?

Dogs can have excellent structure and not be show winners. There ae a number of breeds (mals, bc's, Aussies etc) that have split working and show lines.

I didn't actually mention showing at all so why quote me and bring it up?

[Kavik]

I think the point's already been made but in some breeds, "performance temperament" for dog sports is not going to be the traditional breed temperament, nor the one specified in the breed standard.

And frankly, that may also be the case for structure. I'm not talking about tests of working ability like gundog work but even they have been stylised to some degree. I've heard it said that a dog that can win a US retrieving trial is not necessarily the dog you want to go and and shoot over every day.

So I think it pays to remember that for all competitive pursuits, the traditional breed conformation and temperament may be altered to make for a more competitive dog. Singling the show ring out as the sole source of this is inaccurate.

So for JRT's is a biddable, people focussed dog, higher on leg for speed what the breed was bred for? Is performance in agility the "test" of a "proper" JRT?? Is that what breeders should be selecting to take forward in the breed?

This is a good point. People are now breeding various breeds (including both of mine) for success in performance sports rather than the job they were originally bred for. This can cause problems sometimes with people breeding very high drive dogs without the other necessary temperament or physical traits necessary for their original job.

[The Spotted Devil]

Let's be honest. All our breeds have evolved and changed to suit our purposes. You can't select for everything all of the time. There will be extremes in the show ring and extremes in dog sports.

In agility and obedience you can title a dog with "passes" but in retrieving trials you have to win to title a dog in Novice and Restricted. It's very, very competitive and it isn't enough that a dog just likes to retrieve. Recently a QND (qualifying Novice dog - 5 finishes) has been introduced to encourage people to stay in the sport and there is a similar proposal going to the National rule change committee for Restricted. In All Age you have to finish 10 trials to earn your AARD - pretty tough when your dog has to pick up 2-3 items of game on each of 3 runs in a specified order and can be DQ'd at any point. You need to win twice to become a Retrieving Champion. An incredibly difficult feat, especially when you are competing against other RetCh. Most breeders of working gun dogs that I know rarely advertise that dogs of their breeding have gained their RRD or AARD. It's only RetCh or FTCH that count. Ten years ago the standard of All Age was equivalent to the current standard in Restricted. Most people like to win so that's also going to add to the selection pressure.

The English Springer Spaniel, the Cocker Spaniel and the Welsh Springer Spaniel were originally from the same litter. Now we have split ESS and Cocker lines as well. The ESS used to be a dog that was in the field one day and in the show ring the next so it wasn't unusual to have dual champions. As often happens, people liked different things about the breed and the activities - some didn't like what running in the field did to the ESS coat and stuck with showing. The show ESS has changed - the pendulous ears, the long coat and feathering and excessive skin around the head. The field ESS has also changed - the flashier dogs were winning field trials in the UK so of course that's what was bred. In the US, the field bred ESS is much taller than the UK dogs - because the cover is heavier and it's difficult for a smaller dog to manage.

My Dalmatian does pretty well in agility and obedience - he has an amazing temperament and good structure but is of a lighter frame than dogs in the show ring. Perfect for agility and he would be a nice genetic balance for a bitch that was on the coarser side but he's never going to be a Grand Champion in the ring even if I did have the time.

Not every dog is capable of doing everything extremely well.

Live and let live. Vive le différence!

[Kavik]

For me I guess the important thing is being honest about what your dogs can do if you are a breeder. So as long as show people are honest about what their dogs can do, and don't pass them off as working dogs if they are not, and working people are honest and don't pass them off as show dogs, and sports people acknowledge that is what they are breeding for, then it is ok. And if you are a buyer, research the lines, look at structure and temperament, and what the breeder's goal is, let the breeder know what you want to do with the dog.

The problem is when show people say that their dogs can still work just as well as the working dogs, when they don't know if they could or not, or if sports bred dogs claim the same thing if they do not test and work their dogs.

Since some people still do need their dogs to help with their livelihood, I feel that honesty in this regard is important, and one of the reasons there is so much heated discussion about working/show

ETA: Quite interesting in GSDs as well. The people working security with GSDs that I know do not like a lot of prey drive in their dogs, they prefer more defence, and like calmer more relaxed dogs. The people using and breeding GSDs for sports do like a lot of prey drive in their dogs, makes it easier to build a reward system using toys and tug, and they give a flashier performance.

Edited May 2, 2014 by Kavik

[Mystiqview]

Despite what the breeder chooses to breed for - show, performance or pets. Temperament, health (both physically and genetically) and structure/conformation needs to be there and included into the breeding program

It is my belief that those who breed for performance have to also be extra vigilant on structure or conformation. A dog with plenty of drive is not going to get very far if it's structure is wrong and breaks down to injury in a short term or repeatedly. While some breed faults in some breeds ( such as pricked ears, blue eyes, colour etc) are not as critical in the overall scheme as compared to the correct structure of the animal. And while some breeders may say "I am not breeding show dogs, they need to still breed to the standard with respect to conformation as a top priority and not sacrifice this. Some do not and look possibly at the breed standard as for show dog people who want pretty dogs.

The nature of agility or jumping and intense sports put way more stresses on the joints that calmly gaining around a show ring.

To breed, the dog still needs to be on the main register and should meet the standard. In reality with all breeders, many if not most of the pups end up as family pets first and sporting second. So temperament is important in both cases. Within litters there will be those pups based on temperament who would lend better to this activity or that.

Pups from show lines can be very good sporting dogs. The biggest thing with any litter and pup is the physical exercise of getting someone to want to take a pup into a sporting arena and not just enjoy a family pet. Some sports are very competitive and some breeds equally competitive to get dogs out there in a sporting or showing home. Titles front and rear of a name simply means in essence, someone has put in the effort to compete with the dog. There are equally good dogs sitting around in pet homes, because the buyer just wanted a family pet and the breeder was not able to place that pup in a competitive home at the time.

Advice I give to puppy buyers, if you want a show dog, talk to people who breed and show their dogs. If you want a sporting or working dog, talk to those breeders who are in that field. Both sides offer great wisdom and insight into their chosen field.

Edited May 2, 2014 by Mystiqview

[dragonwoman]

I am interested in whether there is such a thing as a breeder who breeds based on the success of their pet dog/s at agility, obedience etc, rather than on show performances. So if I was to buy a puppy for a pet (on limited register), but the dog grew up to be amazing at agility etc, would it be considered acceptable or unacceptable to breed from the dog to aim to pass on this ability? I understand that you should be a registered breeder to breed, but do you have to breed based only on show performance? And what if the dog is on limited register because the intention was never to show it?

I'm from a horse breeding background where performance is pretty strongly heritable and it's considered normal and desirable to breed with well performed animals, regardless of registrations (though the horse breeding world is considerably less restrictive than the dog breeding world).

Interested to hear your thoughts...

I would hope that good breeders bred for both.................you soon get to suss out the ones breeding for looks.....quite often the breeder may not be into performance but their prefix will pop up time and again in performance catalogues...........

ETA the dog needs "heart" too, many a greyhound written off by some has been a top performer, same with working dogs, most would work despite a less than "ideal" structure, they need to work, it's in the genes!!

Edited May 2, 2014 by dragonwoman

[Cosmolo]

My Jack Russell terrier (Gilbert) has an excellent temperament- IMO very much a correct JRT temperament.

Taking what was there and moulding it from the day he came home has created a dog that would not be out of place in a variety of dog sports if we so desired AND is an exceptional pet/ companion.

Terriers are of course different to gundogs and herding dogs. BUT a correct JRT temperament IS suitable for performance if the owner/ trainer knows what they're doing and does it from the start.

Conformation is important too- Gilbert has structure that allows him to run all day and look effortless while doing it- you need the complete package for performance, same as with horses.

[kelpiecuddles]

For me I guess the important thing is being honest about what your dogs can do if you are a breeder. So as long as show people are honest about what their dogs can do, and don't pass them off as working dogs if they are not, and working people are honest and don't pass them off as show dogs, and sports people acknowledge that is what they are breeding for, then it is ok. And if you are a buyer, research the lines, look at structure and temperament, and what the breeder's goal is, let the breeder know what you want to do with the dog.

The problem is when show people say that their dogs can still work just as well as the working dogs, when they don't know if they could or not, or if sports bred dogs claim the same thing if they do not test and work their dogs.

Well said Kavic, I agree entirely.

[espinay2]

1398991292[/url]' post='6474895']

1398988464[/url]' post='6474857']

In most breeds, I would think 'the best of both worlds' is a bit of a dream. A fantastic ideal, though and one I think should be worked towards.

Unless 'best of both worlds' is simply trending towards the upper percentage of top performance in both (multiple) disciplines. Then I haven't seen it myself.

Definitely happy to be wrong. But I can't say (in my limited experience) I know too many Gr. Ch./Ch and simultaneous Top Scoring in Job I Was Originally Bred For Dogs.

I have seen plenty of people doing both with a degree of success and I massively applaud them.

I would hazard a guess and say the reason a number of top show dogs don't have woeking titles is its simply too hard to do both. It takes a lot of time and dedication to title a dog that far.

For what it's worth there are a lot of samoyeds who excel at both and there isn't an obvious divide between working and show dogs.

It is the same in Pyreneans. There are top show dogs that are also working dogs (note that for Pyrs the definition of 'performance' is working as a livestock guardian, not obedience and agility which require traits counter to correct working temperament for this breed). I am right at this moment attending the Great Pyrenees Club of America National Specialty, and attended a judges training seminar less than two hours ago. One thing greatly emphasised was that the working dog and the show dog were one and the same (and photos of working dogs in the 'field' were also used to illustrate good type and structure ect along with 'show dogs') in some breeds breeders may have created a division. In others this is much less the case.

Edited May 2, 2014 by espinay2