"TESTED HARD" --- What Does That Mean?

[Officially Retired]

Does being "tested hard" really make a dog "worth breeding to" ... or even "worth a bet"? I see people claim their dogs are "hard-tested" ... but I am always left curious as to what that means exactly?

How hard is "hard"?
"Tested" against what?
I understand gameness is important, even foundational, and I have bred my share of game dogs. But I never understood the value of beating the shit out of a dog "to see if it would scratch." I have never done this, and yet I have regularly bred dogs that have been 100% DG ... and yet most of the people who claim that they "test hard" really don't have much of a successful program.

Why is that?

Could it be that there is something more to "a good dog" than being "tested hard"?

Curious as to other people's thoughts on this ...

Jack


.

[AL Clown]

For one dogs usually produce the average of their line not themselves. So said hard-tested dog may in fact be a garbage producer, where as his untested sibling could possibly be a great producer.

The "Hard-Tested" moniker is to make the owner feel better about what they are feeding. When in actually a person should only be concern with thier own feeling towards an animal. Learn the line and learn the individual then learn some common sense.

One fact to always remember is an animal is only as game as his last showing. Deep game today may not be quite as game tomorrow.

[Officially Retired]

For one dogs usually produce the average of their line not themselves. So said hard-tested dog may in fact be a garbage producer, where as his untested sibling could possibly be a great producer.


Or, worse, a hard-tested dog from a garbage line will probably be a garbage producer ... while an untested dog from an excellent line will regularly throw bulldogs.
The trouble is, as you know, is that a person can only get away with "not testing" for so long, before his "good line" turns to garbage itself.

Are we just testing for "stupid game" ... or are there other things to test for?






The "Hard-Tested" moniker is to make the owner feel better about what they are feeding. When in actually a person should only be concern with thier own feeling towards an animal. Learn the line and learn the individual then learn some common sense.

Bingo. And, if I can add to that, learn to get a taste for what "a good dog" really is ...






One fact to always remember is an animal is only as game as his last showing. Deep game today may not be quite as game tomorrow.

Another good point, which is precisely why I don't think beating the bolts off a dog in practice does him any good at all. I have never needed to see a dog beat all to hell to figure out if he's game or not. IMO, at best, beating a dog to hell only proves his owner wants "everyone else" to approve of his doggie ... which is a mark of insecurity ... but being beat all to hell sure won't help that dog win a match (in fact, it might hurt his chances if he gets injured too bad or gets used up) ... and a "hard test" doesn't mean that dog will scratch to his next opponent either.

In other words, I am much more impressed when a good dogman says a dog is "a really good dog" ... than I am to hear someone say his dog is "hard tested" ...

Jack


.

[YigYang]

i totally understand...but just curious i have always been told there puppies are what there parents where simpley because its just like humans. All of the traits and charecteristcs they we have where influeced and giving to us by our parents genes and genetics... so why or why not it be the same for a dog

[CitySwamp]

Ca Jack,

This is a good topic, as a matter of fact a friend of mines was discussing this on a 3 way call on Christmas night. When people say a hound is “oil checked hard” What do they really mean? What did you check it against? Another few pieces of average dogs or did he bump shoulders with 6 nationally or locally renown dogs and surpassed 6 beatings that have claimed lives of others. I personally would respect a person saying hey this is my dog for stud he’s a pretty decent hound and leave it at that. I could fully understand that and if they bred their dog and have some results, and wanted to share that is fine. I’m more interested in that hounds traits and what you may have seen from some of his offspring, his littermates traits and how they compare to the overall family. Is he one fast dog with great timing reflexes out of 80 or is this common. Is his intelligence above average and is this something that has been shown as a dominant trait etc.., I don’t understand the value of stating “testing hard” for any animal whether it’s a brood stock or a prospect that you are willing to bet some frog skins on. What do you get out of checking them hard? That won’t make your dog produce any better than he was going to do if you just seen if he would go and how he handled different opportunities and scratched back and no better if you never touched him/her.

I also agree Gameness is very important but I think when people are honest with themselves a lot of times gameness or dead game doesn’t come into account all that much. I see more dogs lose because of bad conditioning or just outright not being at the right weight or a person not having enough dedication to even make sure their charge has a clean bill of health then I have seen pack it in because they didn’t have no heart. I believe there is a lot more to a good hound then just being tested hard. Reminds me of GrCh Badger hound, who whipped through everything he faced and then was muzzled to see how he would respond to being beaten up on without being able to dismantle his opponent, all so that he could be said he was tested hard. Makes no sense to me at all because either that dog is good or not and a lot more, you going to kill your charge just to say, oh boy he got tested and went out game. There is no value in a dead game dog but to say you had a good one that you lost and 9 of 10 it was owners fault.

I have to think that it’s about personal ego and chest bump to say, oh yea he belly scratched 2 times for me, and I’m not saying that’s a knock on the individual or the hound but my first thought is how did it get to the point he had to belly scratch and why wasn’t he picked up after he made that first amazingly game attempt.

[magilla]

Imho no matter what we do with our dogs it needs to be fun and entertaining for them . When any animal is put into a scary situation it's fight or flight mechanism kicks in, so just because you got fight does not mean it was not thinking flight. I also feel that when they see you are happy with what they are doing they will want to please you no matter what . 90% of elite athletes will tell you if im not having fun im done. Sorry for my poor typing skills :oops:

[waccamaw]

when it comes to testing a dog ,that depends on the man behind the dog .a great dog in the hands of a IDIOT is doomed .how many times have you heard a dog is game i seen 2 hrs out of him ,then he curs in a hunt in 30 min. condition is the biggest player in one curring out .which he is really fatigued out andf there is a diff

[wildchild]

Hard Tested? I always thought it was a great marketing ploy but hey what do i know. :mrgreen:

wildchild

[Officially Retired]

Ca Jack,

This is a good topic, as a matter of fact a friend of mines was discussing this on a 3 way call on Christmas night. When people say a hound is “oil checked hard” What do they really mean? What did you check it against? Another few pieces of average dogs or did he bump shoulders with 6 nationally or locally renown dogs and surpassed 6 beatings that have claimed lives of others. I personally would respect a person saying hey this is my dog for stud he’s a pretty decent hound and leave it at that. I could fully understand that and if they bred their dog and have some results, and wanted to share that is fine. I’m more interested in that hounds traits and what you may have seen from some of his offspring, his littermates traits and how they compare to the overall family. Is he one fast dog with great timing reflexes out of 80 or is this common. Is his intelligence above average and is this something that has been shown as a dominant trait etc.., I don’t understand the value of stating “testing hard” for any animal whether it’s a brood stock or a prospect that you are willing to bet some frog skins on. What do you get out of checking them hard? That won’t make your dog produce any better than he was going to do if you just seen if he would go and how he handled different opportunities and scratched back and no better if you never touched him/her.

I also agree Gameness is very important but I think when people are honest with themselves a lot of times gameness or dead game doesn’t come into account all that much. I see more dogs lose because of bad conditioning or just outright not being at the right weight or a person not having enough dedication to even make sure their charge has a clean bill of health then I have seen pack it in because they didn’t have no heart. I believe there is a lot more to a good hound then just being tested hard. Reminds me of GrCh Badger hound, who whipped through everything he faced and then was muzzled to see how he would respond to being beaten up on without being able to dismantle his opponent, all so that he could be said he was tested hard. Makes no sense to me at all because either that dog is good or not and a lot more, you going to kill your charge just to say, oh boy he got tested and went out game. There is no value in a dead game dog but to say you had a good one that you lost and 9 of 10 it was owners fault.

I have to think that it’s about personal ego and chest bump to say, oh yea he belly scratched 2 times for me, and I’m not saying that’s a knock on the individual or the hound but my first thought is how did it get to the point he had to belly scratch and why wasn’t he picked up after he made that first amazingly game attempt.

Very good post.


.

[waccamaw]

the true test is the actual hunt

[Officially Retired]

the true test is the actual hunt

I don't think there is such thing as a "true" test.

For example, say if two dogs are hooked ... one dog gets a super keep and comes in at his best weight ... while another dog gets a terrible keep and comes in weak and dry ... was that really the "truest" evaluation of the dogs? It was a "real match," but I don't think it was a fair evaluation of the second dog. (I am sure, as a breeder, you have had people do your dogs wrong ... where the dog didn't do so well ... but yet you knew the dog was better than what he showed, IF he would have come in better shape.)

There are also plenty of dogs that do great in one match, but hang it up the second time around. There are even a few dogs who show desperately game the first time ... but that was all they had ... and can't do that again for the second time.

Does a "win" mean a dog won't quit its next time out?
Does a "win" mean a dog is guaranteed to win its next time out?

IMO, the answer is no to both questions.

Jack


.

[wildchild]

the true test is the actual hunt

In my eyes this is only true 2 a certian degree. U have 2 factor in the hunts that go 2:15 but neither hound needed a band aid
afterwards.

wildchild

[Officially Retired]

In my eyes this is only true 2 a certian degree. U have 2 factor in the hunts that go 2:15 but neither hound needed a band aid
afterwards.
wildchild

What about this Wildchild?: is it harder for a dog to make it to :50 in top physical condition in cool weather, or is it harder for a dog to go :50 a little fat in the summer?

Which effort do you think tests the dog's will power the most? ;)

Jack

.

[waccamaw]

when i say the true test is the actual hunt ,i am talking about to hunters that are both top notch and know their dogs .what we call head hunting ,look for the best comp.and the rest of your post relates to what i said about a good dog in the hands of an idiot is a doomed dog ,dog to dry ,sick ,under wght,worms ,low blood count .only a true idiot would take a dog hunting like this ,then say he is a cur when it was the mans fault.what i am saying is if he is in great shape ,all the way around and he hunts with another lets just say C- HAM then you know he was tested above and beyond ,where bas if it was a young punk with his first dog then you know that is no test .

[wildchild]

[quote=What about this Wildchild?: is it harder for a dog to make it to :50 in top physical condition in cool weather, or is it harder for a dog to go :50 a little fat in the summer?

Which effort do you think tests the dog's will power the most? ;)

Jack

.[/quote]

A dog a litte fat in the summer going :50 is gamer in my eyes than the top shaped 1 in the cool going the same :50
I truly feel that gameness is not a matter of the :50 mins " or any time alone" but by the amount of adversary each charge has 2 over come in said :50 mins. Thats where i belive most get it confused.

wildchild

[YigYang]

The biggest part in the Test is the conditioning.
Everything your dogs has relies on his conditioning and endurance.
A dog is like a human. For example lets use boxing.
You are not going to put a boxer in a ring that has been out the gym for awhile.
why??? simply because he or she is in no condition to compete.
I made the claim that the ability also relies on the conditioning of a dog because a boxer who has not been conditioned or prepaired physically will not compete at its full potential because while in the ring. Without conditioning your arms and legs become fatigue, same thing with a dog, its mouth, strengh, ablility, endourance all relies on the conditioning part on the keep

I think testing "Hard" is a waste because i see it as in why test a dog "Hard" if the dog isnt prepaired or conditioned to be tested hard, while in his real test you can make an evaluation because your pet will be in some type of its peak. Take it how you want to but I have seen many people loose great pets like this, coming from experience

Hope this help a little bit

[bluebeard]

jack have you seen the thread on the other board basically asking the same question? there is a video involved

[Officially Retired]

when i say the true test is the actual hunt ,i am talking about to hunters that are both top notch and know their dogs .what we call head hunting ,look for the best comp.and the rest of your post relates to what i said about a good dog in the hands of an idiot is a doomed dog ,dog to dry ,sick ,under wght,worms ,low blood count .only a true idiot would take a dog hunting like this ,then say he is a cur when it was the mans fault.what i am saying is if he is in great shape ,all the way around and he hunts with another lets just say C- HAM then you know he was tested above and beyond ,where bas if it was a young punk with his first dog then you know that is no test .

I agree with what you're saying Sonny, which kind of underscores my point. There are so many variables involved that when a person says his dog was "tested hard," it really means nothing.

However, when a dogman who's been associated with multiple top-shelf animals says, "This right here is a really good dog," and the proceeds to tell you why, meaning he explains the specific great qualities this dog has, that carries the most weight, to me anyway.

For example, if a guy who repeatedly and consistently breeds winning, high-pressure kidney dogs ... and he tells me, "This right here is one of the baddest kidney dogs I have ever had in my career," this tells me a whole lot more about what to expect from the dog ... than somebody who's never bred a winner saying his doggie (that he just bought) was "tested hard" :roll:

Jack


.

[Officially Retired]

A dog a litte fat in the summer going :50 is gamer in my eyes than the top shaped 1 in the cool going the same :50
I truly feel that gameness is not a matter of the :50 mins " or any time alone" but by the amount of adversary each charge has 2 over come in said :50 mins. Thats where i belive most get it confused.
wildchild

Very well said, good sir 8-)

[Officially Retired]

The biggest part in the Test is the conditioning.
Everything your dogs has relies on his conditioning and endurance.
A dog is like a human. For example lets use boxing.
You are not going to put a boxer in a ring that has been out the gym for awhile.
why??? simply because he or she is in no condition to compete.
I made the claim that the ability also relies on the conditioning of a dog because a boxer who has not been conditioned or prepaired physically will not compete at its full potential because while in the ring. Without conditioning your arms and legs become fatigue, same thing with a dog, its mouth, strengh, ablility, endourance all relies on the conditioning part on the keep
I think testing "Hard" is a waste because i see it as in why test a dog "Hard" if the dog isnt prepaired or conditioned to be tested hard, while in his real test you can make an evaluation because your pet will be in some type of its peak. Take it how you want to but I have seen many people loose great pets like this, coming from experience
Hope this help a little bit

Good point to bring up YigYang.

I agree, there is no question that top conditioning brings out the best potential in any performance animal. Absolutely. However, wouldn't you agree that overcoming adversity is another matter entirely?

In other words, I agree that a dog in top condition going :50 is going to put on "a better performance" than he would if pulled off the chain ... but the point I am making is it will be harder for that dog to go :50 while not in shape. When checking for gameness, adversity is what challenges "the will to continue," so being tired as hell (through lack of condition) will be a bigger game test for a dog than will being fresh as a daisy through optimal condition, thanks to the dog being in the best shape of his life.

So, yes, being in top shape will bring out the best in any dog, no question. However, being out of shape will challenge a dog's "will to continue" more quickly, and thus will let you see just how game your dog is a whole lot sooner, thus minimizing the trauma because you don't have to sit there and watch them for 2 hours before they start to slow down.

This brings up another matter, which is AIR, or natural stamina. Some dogs have great natural air, and can actually go :50 no problem because of this. In fact, one old man I know (who's been doing dogs since the mid-60s) said this to me: "Jack, if any dog doesn't have the natural wind to go a good strong hour, hard, right off the chain, then I don't need that f---ing dog."

And he has been associated with some of the greatest dogs in the history of the game ...

Jack


.

[Officially Retired]

jack have you seen the thread on the other board basically asking the same question? there is a video involved

No, I skip most of those threads, and I live way out in BFE and don't have a land internet connection, and can't even watch streaming videos.

Jack


.

[Officially Retired]

The biggest part in the Test is the conditioning.
Everything your dogs has relies on his conditioning and endurance.
A dog is like a human. For example lets use boxing.
You are not going to put a boxer in a ring that has been out the gym for awhile.
why??? simply because he or she is in no condition to compete.
I made the claim that the ability also relies on the conditioning of a dog because a boxer who has not been conditioned or prepaired physically will not compete at its full potential because while in the ring. Without conditioning your arms and legs become fatigue, same thing with a dog, its mouth, strengh, ablility, endourance all relies on the conditioning part on the keep
I think testing "Hard" is a waste because i see it as in why test a dog "Hard" if the dog isnt prepaired or conditioned to be tested hard, while in his real test you can make an evaluation because your pet will be in some type of its peak. Take it how you want to but I have seen many people loose great pets like this, coming from experience
Hope this help a little bit

Good point to bring up YigYang.

I agree, there is no question that top conditioning brings out the best potential in any performance animal. Absolutely. However, wouldn't you agree that overcoming adversity is another matter entirely?

In other words, I agree that a dog in top condition going :50 is going to put on "a better performance" than he would if pulled off the chain ... but the point I am making is it will be harder for that dog to go :50 while not in shape. When checking for gameness, adversity is what challenges "the will to continue," so being tired as hell (through lack of condition) will be a bigger game test for a dog than will being fresh as a daisy through optimal condition, thanks to the dog being in the best shape of his life.

So, yes, being in top shape will bring out the best in any dog, no question. However, being out of shape will challenge a dog's "will to continue" more quickly, and thus will let you see just how game your dog is a whole lot sooner, thus minimizing the trauma because you don't have to sit there and watch them for 2 hours before they start to slow down.

This brings up another matter, which is AIR, or natural stamina. Some dogs have great natural air, and can actually go :50 no problem because of this. In fact, one old man I know (who's been doing dogs since the mid-60s) said this to me: "Jack, if any dog doesn't have the natural wind to go a good strong hour, hard, right off the chain, then I don't need that f---ing dog."

And he has been associated with some of the greatest dogs in the history of the game ...

Jack


.

[bluebeard]

jack have you seen the thread on the other board basically asking the same question? there is a video involved

No, I skip most of those threads, and I live way out in BFE and don't have a land internet connection, and can't even watch streaming videos.

Jack


.


well basically it is asking the question "is this too much for a hound's first time at schooling?" which was about 17 minutes in length. i was just curious as to your answer/insight. both dogs ran hot, both mixed it up, and both wanted more. i personally said it went too long(poll question)

[MinuteMan]

IMO "Hard Tested" means, I don't know what I'm looking at, OR what I'm looking for.

I don't believe you need to hard test an animal. The ONLY reason I could see it is in the case of a low talent individual. So if for some reason you're looking for a reason to keep that low talent individual, you test him hard and keep him based on "gameness".

I'm not interested in low talent individuals, no matter how game they are. I'm looking for an all around good dog, from a good gene pool. You should be able to see all you need about an animal rather quick IMO. Is the dog high ability? How does he work, does he blow his wad or pace himself. I think too many people don't know what it takes to truly be an athlete, and simplify it to Mouth vs Gameness. If he doesn't have "mouth" he has to be "game". Mouth isn't high on my list of priorities. It's in there, but much farther behind things like athletic ability, speed, wind, balance, intelligence. Honestly, those things I mentioned come before gameness to me. A dog possessing the traits I mentioned, against dogs his own weight, isn't going to NEED his gameness too often. It's nice to know its there if he needs it, but I want more of a "total Package".

So I think "Hard Tested" usually comes down to: I have this dog, he aint got much, but I can say he's hard tested...

Again, the biggest issue is "hard tested" against WHAT... As an example, I saw a dog that dog was supposed to be "hard tested" and deamed game by some big names. But when that dog couldn't get his mouth on his opponent, he packed it in rather fast. I think being totally controlled is going to cause a "hard tested" dog to stop, far more often than a hard mouth dog would cause one to stop. If the dog can get in there and mix it up, a lower level of gameness is going to keep him going, whereas if that same dog is being totally controlled, he has to be ONE GAME MOFO to keep on coming... but "Fatigue makes cowards of us all".

Ah I'm starting to ramble...

MinuteMan

[Blackfoot]

IMO "Hard Tested" means, I don't know what I'm looking at, OR what I'm looking for.

I don't believe you need to hard test an animal. The ONLY reason I could see it is in the case of a low talent individual. So if for some reason you're looking for a reason to keep that low talent individual, you test him hard and keep him based on "gameness".

I'm not interested in low talent individuals, no matter how game they are. I'm looking for an all around good dog, from a good gene pool. You should be able to see all you need about an animal rather quick IMO. Is the dog high ability? How does he work, does he blow his wad or pace himself. I think too many people don't know what it takes to truly be an athlete, and simplify it to Mouth vs Gameness. If he doesn't have "mouth" he has to be "game". Mouth isn't high on my list of priorities. It's in there, but much farther behind things like athletic ability, speed, wind, balance, intelligence. Honestly, those things I mentioned come before gameness to me. A dog possessing the traits I mentioned, against dogs his own weight, isn't going to NEED his gameness too often. It's nice to know its there if he needs it, but I want more of a "total Package".

So I think "Hard Tested" usually comes down to: I have this dog, he aint got much, but I can say he's hard tested...

Again, the biggest issue is "hard tested" against WHAT... As an example, I saw a dog that dog was supposed to be "hard tested" and deamed game by some big names. But when that dog couldn't get his mouth on his opponent, he packed it in rather fast. I think being totally controlled is going to cause a "hard tested" dog to stop, far more often than a hard mouth dog would cause one to stop. If the dog can get in there and mix it up, a lower level of gameness is going to keep him going, whereas if that same dog is being totally controlled, he has to be ONE GAME MOFO to keep on coming... but "Fatigue makes cowards of us all".

Ah I'm starting to ramble...

MinuteMan

Great post and I agree with you! If you don't have a "good eye", hard testing usually ruins many! The amount of damage sustained and wear and tear on a dog is more harmful than good! You should be able to tell what kind of dog you got in a couple 10-20 min rolls. IMO!!!

[Officially Retired]

well basically it is asking the question "is this too much for a hound's first time at schooling?" which was about 17 minutes in length. i was just curious as to your answer/insight. both dogs ran hot, both mixed it up, and both wanted more. i personally said it went too long(poll question)

Well, as it states in my book, I don't believe young dogs should ever be pushed into a "running hot" situation while they're learning; they should just be learning the ropes and having fun in fairly-brief schooling sessions. So I would agree with you.

However, I would also say that if two dogs are "running hot" enough to be gasping at :17 that either a) they must have been going at it hard as hell, b) it was really hot outside, and/or c) they have lousy natural stamina.

Jack


.

[Officially Retired]

IMO "Hard Tested" means, I don't know what I'm looking at, OR what I'm looking for.
I don't believe you need to hard test an animal. The ONLY reason I could see it is in the case of a low talent individual. So if for some reason you're looking for a reason to keep that low talent individual, you test him hard and keep him based on "gameness".


Agreed. And what's interesting is, with a low-talent individual, he is already "being tested" by virtue of the fact he's behind all the way :lol:






I'm not interested in low talent individuals, no matter how game they are. I'm looking for an all around good dog, from a good gene pool. You should be able to see all you need about an animal rather quick IMO. Is the dog high ability? How does he work, does he blow his wad or pace himself. I think too many people don't know what it takes to truly be an athlete, and simplify it to Mouth vs Gameness. If he doesn't have "mouth" he has to be "game". Mouth isn't high on my list of priorities. It's in there, but much farther behind things like athletic ability, speed, wind, balance, intelligence. Honestly, those things I mentioned come before gameness to me. A dog possessing the traits I mentioned, against dogs his own weight, isn't going to NEED his gameness too often. It's nice to know its there if he needs it, but I want more of a "total Package".


http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/appl.gif http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/appl.gif http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/appl.gif






So I think "Hard Tested" usually comes down to: I have this dog, he aint got much, but I can say he's hard tested...
Again, the biggest issue is "hard tested" against WHAT... As an example, I saw a dog that dog was supposed to be "hard tested" and deamed game by some big names. But when that dog couldn't get his mouth on his opponent, he packed it in rather fast. I think being totally controlled is going to cause a "hard tested" dog to stop, far more often than a hard mouth dog would cause one to stop. If the dog can get in there and mix it up, a lower level of gameness is going to keep him going, whereas if that same dog is being totally controlled, he has to be ONE GAME MOFO to keep on coming... but "Fatigue makes cowards of us all".
Ah I'm starting to ramble...
MinuteMan

http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/appl.gif http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/appl.gif http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/appl.gif


Excellent post MM, I agree with you 100%.

Jack


.

[TFX]

Ca Jack,

Reminds me of GrCh Badger hound, who whipped through everything he faced and then was muzzled to see how he would respond to being beaten up on without being able to dismantle his opponent, all so that he could be said he was tested hard.

That never happened. That story was just the BS sales pitch of his owner for a magazine interview, trying to appeal to the gullable nature of most folks who want them "tested hard". :roll: I don't care much for the man and have not had dealings with him for nearly a decade, but to his credit........... he was a much better dogman than that.

[BME]

most people don't know a good dog when they see one. Most of the time when he's been skull dragged he's not worth nothing in the sense of using for performance. I've seen many done like this and made it . But hunted afterwards and pulled up early. "HARD TESTED" usually means I'm an IDIOT.

[QCKLime]

IMO "Hard Tested" means, I don't know what I'm looking at, OR what I'm looking for.

I don't believe you need to hard test an animal. The ONLY reason I could see it is in the case of a low talent individual. So if for some reason you're looking for a reason to keep that low talent individual, you test him hard and keep him based on "gameness".

I'm not interested in low talent individuals, no matter how game they are. I'm looking for an all around good dog, from a good gene pool. You should be able to see all you need about an animal rather quick IMO. Is the dog high ability? How does he work, does he blow his wad or pace himself. I think too many people don't know what it takes to truly be an athlete, and simplify it to Mouth vs Gameness. If he doesn't have "mouth" he has to be "game". Mouth isn't high on my list of priorities. It's in there, but much farther behind things like athletic ability, speed, wind, balance, intelligence. Honestly, those things I mentioned come before gameness to me. A dog possessing the traits I mentioned, against dogs his own weight, isn't going to NEED his gameness too often. It's nice to know its there if he needs it, but I want more of a "total Package".

So I think "Hard Tested" usually comes down to: I have this dog, he aint got much, but I can say he's hard tested...

Again, the biggest issue is "hard tested" against WHAT... As an example, I saw a dog that dog was supposed to be "hard tested" and deamed game by some big names. But when that dog couldn't get his mouth on his opponent, he packed it in rather fast. I think being totally controlled is going to cause a "hard tested" dog to stop, far more often than a hard mouth dog would cause one to stop. If the dog can get in there and mix it up, a lower level of gameness is going to keep him going, whereas if that same dog is being totally controlled, he has to be ONE GAME MOFO to keep on coming... but "Fatigue makes cowards of us all".

Ah I'm starting to ramble...

MinuteMan

Fantastic post, MM. The first sentence sums it up perfectly, IMO. Every successful dogman or oldtimer who's been around the block I've ever spoken with has communicated the exact same sentiment -- if you can't tell what you're looking at in a short amount of time, you ought not be the one looking at them. Jimmy Mayfield has said numerous times that he wouldn't look at a dog before FULL maturity, and he wouldn't put real time on them until he's putting a bet on them. Makes all the sense in the world to me. Having a real "eye for a dog" is about the best standard of a GOOD dogman to me.

[H.B.K.]

why isnt there a such thing as a hard tested hound? If u put ur hound in every situation duriing schooling and test the gameness as much as u can without losing the hound then ur testing hard. Example u taking ur hound and take him up-hill 5 lbs with a good skilled dog and they go 35 min. and the smaller dog starts to piss on hisself and starts the process of checking out and through all that once seperated said hound scratches when there seems no way he could make it thats a hard tested hound. Now the true test is always the match if u have a match quality hound, but a hound can be severely tested hard through school and if ur not testing hard in school how could u ever know if there worthy of a bet? I'm not that keen to knowing how talented, or game a hound is without testing HARD!!!

[Supercharged99]

From what I have been raised on part of the testing comes from whether or not they are ready. Taken from the chain to school and the exams determine their grade rather than homework and the last test determines their value or feed. I may be wrong but like I said I was brought up on they go or they go to sleep. I have seen a lot of good dogs in the wrong hands get punished to hard and if it wasn't the right move, the right act or the right defense they got the boot. SO it really depends on the owner and his right judgements rather that feed an untested or none worked dog, I know I wouldn't.

[H.B.K.]

I think a properly schooled hound has seen or been through every obstical that could be brought to them in a match. A hard tested hound is one who has been put in the situation to quit and against all odds they keep coming without hesitation.

[Officially Retired]

why isnt there a such thing as a hard tested hound? If u put ur hound in every situation duriing schooling and test the gameness as much as u can without losing the hound then ur testing hard. Example u taking ur hound and take him up-hill 5 lbs with a good skilled dog and they go 35 min. and the smaller dog starts to piss on hisself and starts the process of checking out and through all that once seperated said hound scratches when there seems no way he could make it thats a hard tested hound. Now the true test is always the match if u have a match quality hound, but a hound can be severely tested hard through school and if ur not testing hard in school how could u ever know if there worthy of a bet? I'm not that keen to knowing how talented, or game a hound is without testing HARD!!!

I completely understand and respect the point you're making, H.B.K.

What I was getting at is there are no certainties in these dogs ... and a dog that was "hard-tested" can still quit when he's matched ... and a dog that "showed gameness" in his last hard match, can still quit his next time out ... therefore, ultimately, being "tested hard" is not a certification for anything.

Jack

[H.B.K.]

Without question jack nothing u did in the schooling gaurentees a victory once matched, but a hound can be tested hard through schooling to determine if there game to the extent in which u tested. And to ur point thats why schooling is what it is and competing is the only way u can judge the level of ur yard and what ur investing ur time in. But still a hound can be hard tested in school.


By the way jack i think ur on to something with this site and really like ur code of conduct and ur hard work in all aspects with these dogs, two thumbs up!!!

[Officially Retired]

Without question jack nothing u did in the schooling gaurentees a victory once matched, but a hound can be tested hard through schooling to determine if there game to the extent in which u tested. And to ur point thats why schooling is what it is and competing is the only way u can judge the level of ur yard and what ur investing ur time in. But still a hound can be hard tested in school.


Agreed. And "who" is saying they're hard-tested can either carry a lot of weight, or no weight, depending on the source of the statement.
I think sometimes school is the hardest test, especially if they're pushing weight and not in shape.




By the way jack i think ur on to something with this site and really like ur code of conduct and ur hard work in all aspects with these dogs, two thumbs up!!!

Thank you very much; it is nice to just be able to talk dogs without being "on defense" for the eventual attacks and uncalled-for remarks ...

Jack


.

[H.B.K.]

It sure is refreshing to have good bulldog banter without the confusion of non-sense on every post!!! :D

[Supercharged99]

Given the right opponent the right handler the dog will what he's suppose to do but the right situation the right match he or she will quit! Nothing is ever written in stone with these hounds. They'll all quit given the right dog and the numbers of matching one after the next.

[BIGFLA73]

HOW WOULD YOU FIND OUT "FOR YOURSELF" IF YOU SHOULD CULL OR USE IF NOT FOR A HARD TEST?

[bolero]

[quote="H.B.K.":zn5s1wbt]why isnt there a such thing as a hard tested hound? If u put ur hound in every situation duriing schooling and test the gameness as much as u can without losing the hound then ur testing hard. Example u taking ur hound and take him up-hill 5 lbs with a good skilled dog and they go 35 min. and the smaller dog starts to piss on hisself and starts the process of checking out and through all that once seperated said hound scratches when there seems no way he could make it thats a hard tested hound. Now the true test is always the match if u have a match quality hound, but a hound can be severely tested hard through school and if ur not testing hard in school how could u ever know if there worthy of a bet? I'm not that keen to knowing how talented, or game a hound is without testing HARD!!!

I completely understand and respect the point you're making, H.B.K.

What I was getting at is there are no certainties in these dogs ... and a dog that was "hard-tested" can still quit when he's matched ... and a dog that "showed gameness" in his last hard match, can still quit his next time out ... therefore, ultimately, being "tested hard" is not a certification for anything.

Jack[/quote:zn5s1wbt]
that may be true, but gameness is what sets this breed apart, so what he may do the next time out is irrelevant, if they show game when you ask then that is all that need to be done from that point you decide whether to take them out again or be satisfied without you saw

[Officially Retired]

HOW WOULD YOU FIND OUT "FOR YOURSELF" IF YOU SHOULD CULL OR USE IF NOT FOR A HARD TEST?

What do I personally do?

I see if the dog has the style, the skills, the smarts, and the intensity that I have come to recognize as "the stamp" of the good dogs in my line ... and if they never once show any sign of diminished interest. Me personally, if a dog slacks-off at all, I lose confidence in the dog right there and have no more interest in the animal, and don't need to see things play-out any further: I've already made up my mind I don't want that dog.

I do understand that dogs get tired, but tired dogs can still exhibit single-minded purpose and intensity, even while they're tired, and if I ever see them lose "that" then I want no part of the animal. And I don't have to beat them all to hell to see it (or its lack) :)






that may be true, but gameness is what sets this breed apart, so what he may do the next time out is irrelevant, if they show game when you ask then that is all that need to be done from that point you decide whether to take them out again or be satisfied without you saw

I agree with you. I absolutely believe gameness is the #1 trait in these dogs, and I have repeatedly sought (and produced) extreme gameness, not just in single individuals but in making sure they come from high-percentage litters.

My point is not to suggest people not evaluate their animals, they should! My point is to suggest that saying a dog is "tested hard" is not necessarily as meaningful as people like to think it is.

I also believe that a dog who shows extreme gameness to one dog, might not show anywhere near that level of gameness to another dog ... based on dealing with levels of skill/style that they've never seen before.

I guess what I am saying is the expression "tested hard" means different things out of different mouths. It is only an IDEA, but it is not an absolutely definitive statement.

What I was trying to do was have people think about all of the given variables that can (and do) happen, within different situations.

Jack


.

[H.B.K.]

[quote="H.B.K.":5jsspz6o]why isnt there a such thing as a hard tested hound? If u put ur hound in every situation duriing schooling and test the gameness as much as u can without losing the hound then ur testing hard. Example u taking ur hound and take him up-hill 5 lbs with a good skilled dog and they go 35 min. and the smaller dog starts to piss on hisself and starts the process of checking out and through all that once seperated said hound scratches when there seems no way he could make it thats a hard tested hound. Now the true test is always the match if u have a match quality hound, but a hound can be severely tested hard through school and if ur not testing hard in school how could u ever know if there worthy of a bet? I'm not that keen to knowing how talented, or game a hound is without testing HARD!!!

I completely understand and respect the point you're making, H.B.K.

What I was getting at is there are no certainties in these dogs ... and a dog that was "hard-tested" can still quit when he's matched ... and a dog that "showed gameness" in his last hard match, can still quit his next time out ... therefore, ultimately, being "tested hard" is not a certification for anything.

Jack
that may be true, but gameness is what sets this breed apart, so what he may do the next time out is irrelevant, if they show game when you ask then that is all that need to be done from that point you decide whether to take them out again or be satisfied without you saw[/quote:5jsspz6o]



That is what im saying regardless of the future if schooled hard and right and they stay true there is no future there is only the now. Without question the true test is when u compete under contracted conditions but a hound can deff be hard tested in a hard schooling

[CitySwamp]

H.B.K some good responses, i have a question though, if the ultimate test is the show, why do you need to have kill em in school? And if every time you taking something out of that animal, just as every boxing round takes something out of that boxer why kill in sparring then have nothing for show time? You gave an example of a test, pushing 5lbs for 35 mins, could you not see what you needed 15 mins prior? Normally if a dog off the chain, after a good 15 mins is starting to get tired a lil bit and if you placing them on a good one that is pressing and bringing action for 20 mins is that not enough to know if you can place a bet? I know a few people who dont show their bitches but instead basically "skull drag" their bitches and i ask them every time does that make her a better producer and did she not show enough heart befor she had to basically crawl across? I just dont see point in taking that much out of a hound whether preparing for show or brood pen.. Either it has the qualities you appreciate or it doesnt..

[H.B.K.]

H.B.K some good responses, i have a question though, if the ultimate test is the show, why do you need to have kill em in school? And if every time you taking something out of that animal, just as every boxing round takes something out of that boxer why kill in sparring then have nothing for show time? You gave an example of a test, pushing 5lbs for 35 mins, could you not see what you needed 15 mins prior? Normally if a dog off the chain, after a good 15 mins is starting to get tired a lil bit and if you placing them on a good one that is pressing and bringing action for 20 mins is that not enough to know if you can place a bet? I know a few people who dont show their bitches but instead basically "skull drag" their bitches and i ask them every time does that make her a better producer and did she not show enough heart befor she had to basically crawl across? I just dont see point in taking that much out of a hound whether preparing for show or brood pen.. Either it has the qualities you appreciate or it doesnt..


I think it dpends on the hound and what there showing throughout the contest. Ive seen hounds go for 15 min and knew there was something special in a hound, and other times it took that 35 min. I must say 15 min in no way is a game test and could never bring myself to take one to the box regardless how good they r in school on 15 min rolls. I understand the wear and tare hounds take in rolls so i dont believe in 3 and 4 rolls, give me a good 20 min first time and then a real hard game test and if all looks according then box time. In that hard game test do i want to take them to the brink of death NO, but if they make it throough it scratching then im pretty confident that scratching isnt goiing to be my problem. If i do take them there then its on me to make sure they make it back strong. And ur right i can see those qualities when it comes to ability, mouth, and intellegance in 15 20 min but i cant judge a hounds heart in that time and above all else gameness is most important!!! I also hear a lot that every dog will quit and that is a crook!!! It's a slap in the face to the hounds that have given there lives scratching. I have heard well they could of quit on the next scratch and all that is is a terrible injustice to that dg dogs heart. This was a dg dog who gave all she had and when no one else thought she could or would she made one of the gamest scratches u wcould ever see and gave her life doing it. http://www.apbt.online-pedigrees.com/mo ... _id=342693 (http://www.apbt.online-pedigrees.com/modules.php?name=Pedigrees&file=printPedigree&dog_id=342693)

All in all every dogman has different criterias and different ways of schooling there hounds and thats what makes compition that much better.

[bolero]

H.B.K some good responses, i have a question though, if the ultimate test is the show, why do you need to have kill em in school? And if every time you taking something out of that animal, just as every boxing round takes something out of that boxer why kill in sparring then have nothing for show time? You gave an example of a test, pushing 5lbs for 35 mins, could you not see what you needed 15 mins prior? Normally if a dog off the chain, after a good 15 mins is starting to get tired a lil bit and if you placing them on a good one that is pressing and bringing action for 20 mins is that not enough to know if you can place a bet? I know a few people who dont show their bitches but instead basically "skull drag" their bitches and i ask them every time does that make her a better producer and did she not show enough heart befor she had to basically crawl across? I just dont see point in taking that much out of a hound whether preparing for show or brood pen.. Either it has the qualities you appreciate or it doesnt..
it depends what you want i might have a do that is very well rounded and not have much interest in matching him because he is so damn good and to be honest i really could care less if he is a one time winner or a gr ch as long as i lnow he is above average in every area, now in order for me to know this i would of had to seen some good dogs in my day to know my evaluations are correct, so now i know my dog is good but is he game so i test him uphill off the chain but he is in good health and in decent shape, i do this to see if he is what i want in a bulldog so he is loosing the whole time but never loses interest and scratches when asked now that dog is retired to stud, the match is not the true test for the dog the match is the true test for the conditioner, when conditioning comes into play it is not just the dog against the other dog it i is dogman vs dogman

[Officially Retired]

it depends what you want i might have a do that is very well rounded and not have much interest in matching him because he is so damn good and to be honest i really could care less if he is a one time winner or a gr ch as long as i lnow he is above average in every area, now in order for me to know this i would of had to seen some good dogs in my day to know my evaluations are correct, so now i know my dog is good but is he game so i test him uphill off the chain but he is in good health and in decent shape, i do this to see if he is what i want in a bulldog so he is loosing the whole time but never loses interest and scratches when asked now that dog is retired to stud, the match is not the true test for the dog the match is the true test for the conditioner, when conditioning comes into play it is not just the dog against the other dog it i is dogman vs dogman

:idea:

[H.B.K.]

i agree one can be tested hard in school, and thats the post. but for me its all about getting to the box and bringing a good dog in the best shape i can put them in. i love putting the work in to see the transformation and theres nothing better then to see 2 conditioned athletes perform in the square.

[CitySwamp]

Good thread fellas,

Bolero i always believed the test was the show to see who has best at that weight. I mean the handler is always a play bc just like show where it's about conditioner even a roll the handler plays major role, his overall care, the hound physical condition, the health, is hound not worked but gets good exercise and things which handler controls even when not showing.. Just as show handler has to bring in a parasite free hound in good shape.. Handlers always play a role from womb to the tomb..

[Crofab]

Nine times out of ten, the show isn't really a test of any magnitude. As Jack has pointed out in other instances, most shows average out to about 45 to 50 minutes. Most shows are decided by one dog that is blatantly better than the other, so in that aspect, the show isn't a test of anything aside from one person giving their money to another.

What Bolero said rings true the most for me personally. There have been other valid points throughout this thread. Your eye for a dog, your level of experience, and your ability to know quality as opposed to the next person truly determines what hard tested means.

[CitySwamp]

Nine times out of ten, the show isn't really a test of any magnitude. As Jack has pointed out in other instances, most shows average out to about 45 to 50 minutes. Most shows are decided by one dog that is blatantly better than the other, so in that aspect, the show isn't a test of anything aside from one person giving their money to another.

What Bolero said rings true the most for me personally. There have been other valid points throughout this thread. Your eye for a dog, your level of experience, and your ability to know quality as opposed to the next person truly determines what hard tested means.

So 35 mins is hard test with two dogs with no work in them but 40-50 mins of two conditioned hounds going full speed with the shape in them to do it is no test? Dont that kind of contradict

[Officially Retired]

So 35 mins is hard test with two dogs with no work in them but 40-50 mins of two conditioned hounds going full speed with the shape in them to do it is no test? Dont that kind of contradict

I think what Crofab means is that, in an actual game test, you're specifically selecting an animal that will put your dog behind and keep him there ... which IS a test of his willpower ... whereas oftentimes, in a match, your dog may completely dominate the other dog and so it's no test at all: he just defeats a dog.

Jack

[Crofab]

I think what Crofab means is that, in an actual game test, you're specifically selecting an animal that will put your dog behind and keep him there ... which IS a test of his willpower ... whereas oftentimes, in a match, your dog may completely dominate the other dog and so it's no test at all: he just defeats a dog.

Jack

Yes, that's exactly what I meant. My abilities to explain may need a little work.

[Officially Retired]

Yes, that's exactly what I meant. My abilities to explain may need a little work.

Well, I understood you perfectly, and I agree with you :)

.

[HOMEWORK215]

WOW for all that responded to this post i want to say THANK YOU . some one once told me the best way to learn is to JUST SIT BACK AND LISTON AND YOU WILL LEARN ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW. jack i just love this board you can truly learn something and enjoy what you are learning WITHOUT ALL THE DISTRACTIONS like the other board had .

[Fatcat]

Crofab and Jack so I have a question for yall ( anyone else feel free to put your input in also) So in the situation where you have a good hound and the last roll you want to put something on him that will dominate him, what if he's such a good animal that you really don't see too much dominating or better yet you might have one that you know will dominate him but he's a match hound and has already been campaigned! What do you do? Would u put your match hound on him??? :?

[FACE203]

From what I have read, you just put said hound on the mill. For how ever long it takes to get the hound tired. 20,45 mins then see what you have. I wouldn't think you would have to put your best on him, to see any thing.. JMHO

[Officially Retired]

Crofab and Jack so I have a question for yall ( anyone else feel free to put your input in also) So in the situation where you have a good hound and the last roll you want to put something on him that will dominate him, what if he's such a good animal that you really don't see too much dominating or better yet you might have one that you know will dominate him but he's a match hound and has already been campaigned! What do you do? Would u put your match hound on him??? :?

If were a competitor, the little one whipping the big ones would be my match dog.

Jack

[Crofab]

Crofab and Jack so I have a question for yall ( anyone else feel free to put your input in also) So in the situation where you have a good hound and the last roll you want to put something on him that will dominate him, what if he's such a good animal that you really don't see too much dominating or better yet you might have one that you know will dominate him but he's a match hound and has already been campaigned! What do you do? Would u put your match hound on him??? :?

If I have a dog that's so good that nothing much is dominating him, then I have a decision to make. I can either decide to show the dog on the strength of what I've seen him do already, or I can set it up for the campaigned dog to give him a little go to see how he handles that pressure. By your description, the dog you're looking to school his last time sounds like a match quality dog.

Those kind of decisions are made on a case by case basis. Usually, if I have a dog of that caliber, I'm not looking to stick him in a meat grinder. Unless I've seen something I deem as negative from the dog, I will let someone else deal with him. Now, if somewhere along the way, I saw something I didn't quite agree with, then I would let the campaigned dog have a go at him and see how he handles that particular pressure.

[Fatcat]

I agree with you 100% Crofrab, well put

[Officially Retired]

Concur: that was well put, very.

[snake252]

nmo there r alot of quotes & hype pple put on our beautiful animals n order to make a SALE or they just b ego trippin!!the 1 i smiled @ which i like is!!!A LOVED CUR WILL WIN OVER A ABBUSSED GAMEDOG ALLDAY!!RUDD!!

[SonicKennels]

Damn good thread!

[Leroy]

My partner in crime sonny mean streets. ( scratch in peace ) was a firm believer in testing a dog to the fullest. Thats if you were trying to base a foundation off of him/her. Now a brood dog and a match dog are completely different. To test a dog extremely hard that u were planning on taking out would not be to wise. look at Ali there's only so much damage a dog or human for this matter can take before certain things to start failing .. And since dogs can't talk it's a little harder to see what is actualy hurt inside of them. Every dog we have in our foundation stock was put to the test How can you put ur life into something that u have questions about. Just cause their parents were spectacular dogs doesn't mean to much as far as ther offspring goes Now Iv seen to curs produce a litter with two Ch a one Gr Ch but what pride can u really take in breeding something that isn't tested all of the way. Personally Iv had to cull whole litters because of not testing hard enough. Thought I had a dog worthy of being put into our blood bred it then turned out to be a better than average cur u have to test hard and cull hard if you want a solid line. If your just looking for a match dog then that's a whole mother story. U can get a pup out of a Sunday paper and make a winner out of em. I just feel like if I'm putting my life into something why would I want question marks throughout the pedigree. I want something that I am proud off point blank not a single question. I might be ass backwards but with our line I am very thankfullnthat sonny culled as hard as he did and tested as hard as he did now 3o years later I have something that I know is worth it. Not a yard full of questionmarks. Granted that most dogs will tap out in the right cercomstance I feel a lot better knowing my fam comes from a line of belly scratchers than just some pretty peds and decent dogs

[FACE203]

Tested hard, what does that mean...
Guess it depends on who you ask :o

Things that make you said hmmm... Can a cur hog, test your game dog... :shock:
Not a ?...

[saw]

[quote="waccamaw"]the true test is the actual hunt[/quot ;)

[H.B.K.]

the true test is the actual hunt[/quot ;)

The true test is always is the hunt! but now i wonder r these hounds being game tested the ones who r competing, and how much timw constitutes a game test? I was brought up in these hounds that u school to teach ur hound and the handler. This is only a matter of opinion but i think those first two schoolings r to teach ur hound against different styles so maybe said hound learnes and can adapt if they see it in a match. I also thought that game test was for the handler to see if he was bringing a game hound to bet on. Not saying he wont quit but u sure have a little more understanding about the level of gameness with witch ur bringing. I guess im from the old school i could never bring myself to compete with an animal that i have not severly game tested.

[Officially Retired]

the true test is the actual hunt ;)


If a dog goes on a hunt, and blows through his opponent in :20, that was no test at all.

The hunt is not always a test; a "win" doesn't necessarily mean a dog is good or worth breeding to ...

I have seen "winners" perform that I wouldn't give a quarter for ... and I have seen dogs rolled that I would be proud to own.

Jack


.