View Full Version : 1xL or D: ch or gr ch?
A discussion developed here: http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/showthread.php?905-New-GRAND-CHAMPION-%E2%80%93-F2F-and-Solo%E2%80%99s-El-Titere-5XW-%E2%80%93-Son-of-CH-Panthro-4XW Fair enough to respect the dog and owner in matter and continue here.
Do you think a dog which loses or has lost a game should still carry the name GR CH, and what about a draw?
found them..
european results for draw game
http://www.uploadplaatjes.nl/img1/20120507/566847.jpg
TopShelfKennels
05-06-2012, 05:56 PM
I don't think it should really make a difference. No other sport doesn't go by this method for any title. If I lose game for #3 and win 3 more after that, I think a dog should still have the right to be GrCh, the dog still earned it. JMO
Officially Retired
05-06-2012, 06:13 PM
R2L, I took the administrative liberty of adding a poll to your thread, I hope you don't mind :mrgreen:
I think this is a great subject for debate, and of course my own opinion is that any dog that wins 5x in the pit is a GRAND Champion.
As MTK pointed out, the majority of the fraternity are following the beat of Jack Kelly's drum, and believe that any loss is a tarnish on the record, and that such a Grand Champion should be demoted back down to Champion.
I for one think that dogs like Sampson, Melonhead, Robert T, Silver, etc. are in every sense of the term GRAND Champions, having records that actually dwarf virtually all common 5-6x winners, and still deserve to be Grand Champions for their accomplishments.
Thanks for the reference poll,
Jack
AmberLamps
05-06-2012, 07:12 PM
I believe the fraternity will continue to follow that beat as long as there remains nobody to act as a sanctioning body.
Whether we agree with JK's rule or not, it's set a precedent that's followed by the majority, and unfortunately I can't see that changing anytime soon, unless someone steps in to sanction matches and bestow titles using an improved set of rules, or someone really makes it their business to get the message across to the fraternity just how outdated and unfair it is to strip a dogs hard earned title.
Considering it's a public magazine, I don't believe the online SDJ would be any good to act as a sanctioning body, (who in their right mind would report matches to a public magazine?) but i do think it would make an ideal platform to open the fraternitys eyes and get people to actually think for themselves, instead of simply following.
Officially Retired
05-06-2012, 08:00 PM
I believe the fraternity will continue to follow that beat as long as there remains nobody to act as a sanctioning body.
I agree.
Whether we agree with JK's rule or not, it's set a precedent that's followed by the majority, and unfortunately I can't see that changing anytime soon, unless someone steps in to sanction matches and bestow titles using an improved set of rules, or someone really makes it their business to get the message across to the fraternity just how outdated and unfair it is to strip a dogs hard earned title.
Again, I agree. It is kinda like the age-old adage, "If you rip open a pillow from a tall building, you will never be able to collect all the feathers."
Considering it's a public magazine, I don't believe the online SDJ would be any good to act as a sanctioning body, (who in their right mind would report matches to a public magazine?) but i do think it would make an ideal platform to open the fraternitys eyes and get people to actually think for themselves, instead of simply following.
Agree 3x. However, if the SDJ mag is in a foreign country that allows that sort of thing, I don't see why it couldn't act as a sanctioning body.
I was considering doing something similar to that from this site here, once it gets finished and firmly-established; however, I couldn't do it from the US because of the laws regarding "organizing and promoting."
In that regard, although I am not in cahoots with the people over there, the Japanese have perhaps the most organized and professional dogging that I know of, with everything legal and rigidly standardized, with bona fide sanctioning bodies, mandatory challenges, etc.
I would be curious to learn their take on this subject.
Jack
I have voted for yes actually. A dog won't lose any of his glory when losing his title, its achievements are still there. Dogs like Jack mentioned, these dogs were the best of the best no matter what title they got. Thoug i think gr ch should remain a special title which is a reward for both the dog and his owner. Pera brought Silver when he had been sick and he lost, he brought king to another gr ch when he was almost 9 years old and lost. I think a dog and its trainer go hand in hand more then any other sport and if you want to keep that title, make sure you bring your dog top fit. Incase of a draw when already a gr ch i doubt. But where do you draw the line, 4x L 5x W, should this be rewarded with the highest title? I vot for an extra title in between :mrgreen:
Officially Retired
05-07-2012, 04:33 AM
What is so "special" about winning 5, and then retiring, versus winning 9 (beating two Gr Chs and 2 Chs along the way) and losing one to a Champion as an old man?
The dog who won 5 is a common animal compared to the dog who wins 9, so why should the dog who wins 5 and retires get a title the other does not get?
In other words, by what logic do you think a 3xW Champion gets to keep his title, if he loses his 4th, but you say a Grand Champion loses his title for losing his 10th?
Jack
I agree with Jack on this one. 3xw is a ch. 5xw is gr.ch.
At the other hand i can see what R2L is saying. If i would breed a bitch to a Gr. Ch. And someone says he is an Ex. Gr. Ch. i would laugh my ass of !
This is true what you're saying
But I guess you can say when you bring a 9 year old animal to match another gr ch in his prime, you dont even care about a title. The dog deserves it more then any other but goes hand in hand with its owner. A dog who retires after winning 5 could be the less dog but thats how it works in the world. Same with money. Some take it and leave it, some lose all trying to double up. I want to say i respect the people who continue, take challenges and end up losing in the end much more. They have the courage and knowledge to go in many matches with 1 dog and will always be the ones with more credibility no matter what title they been given. Think this can be an endless discussion. There will always be "average"(relatively) dogs with a title and good dogs without unless you judge them individual.
Officially Retired
05-07-2012, 05:35 AM
This is true what you're saying
But I guess you can say when you bring a 9 year old animal to match another gr ch in his prime, you dont even care about a title. The dog deserves it more then any other but goes hand in hand with its owner. A dog who retires after winning 5 could be the less dog but thats how it works in the world. Same with money. Some take it and leave it, some lose all trying to double up. I want to say i respect the people who continue, take challenges and end up losing in the end much more. They have the courage and knowledge to go in many matches with 1 dog and will always be the ones with more credibility no matter what title they been given. Think this can be an endless discussion. There will always be "average"(relatively) dogs with a title and good dogs without unless you judge them individual.
I agree there is a certain sense of the arbitrary when bestowing titles. Why 3 wins, why not 4, to make Champion? Why 5 wins, why not 6, to make Grand Champion?, etc.
Yet, even if we concede the sense of the arbitrary here, there at least should be some order and consistency to it all.
With that said, you still haven't explained the lack of logic here.
If the 3xW keeps his title if he loses, why does the 5xW lose his? Logically-speaking, either both lose their title or neither does.
Logically-speaking, if a 3xW = Champion, and if a 5xW = Grand Champion, then the dogs still remain 3- and 5xWs even if they lose later. The fact that they attained the required number of wins do not change through subsequent loss.
In the end, there simply is no logic in stripping a 5xW for his title, if his owner decides to keep going with him and loses, while you let the 3xW Champion keep his title if he does the same and loses.
Jack
Dont know why you are asking me. i dont think its logic.
Officially Retired
05-07-2012, 05:56 AM
Dont know why you are asking me. i dont think its logic.
You don't?
I suppose I am asking you because you made this thread, after snickering at a loss on the previous thread, all because you think a Gr Ch should lose his title if he ever loses, but yet you don't think a Champion should.
So I am asking you to explain where is the logical consistency, or to admit there isn't any :mrgreen:
Jack
I didnt put the word champion anywere.. wasnt snickering at a loss either. Don't make that up. I think its funny when people put times/opponents/matchreports on pedigrees online/ boards w/e and write its fiction, had to make a little joke. Just robbed a bank in fiction. 1xL is not considered a gr ch, i cant help that.
But since you ask me. Logic is when you get 2 pieces after slicing a pizza in half. I think its fair for a champion to lose his title too, yes. Letting hem both keep it and put higher standards like you mentioned, maybe not a bad idea at all.
Officially Retired
05-07-2012, 07:36 AM
I didnt put the word champion anywere.. wasnt snickering at a loss either. Don't make that up. I think its funny when people put times/opponents/matchreports on pedigrees online/ boards w/e and write its fiction, had to make a little joke. Just robbed a bank in fiction. 1xL is not considered a gr ch, i cant help that.
But since you ask me. Logic is when you get 2 pieces after slicing a pizza in half. I think its fair for a champion to lose his title too, yes. Letting hem both keep it and put higher standards like you mentioned, maybe not a bad idea at all.
LOL, how do two pieces of pizza fit into here?
And what is a "higher standard?"
Winning 6x against a mediocre lot of 1-2x winners, and maybe beating 1 obligatory Champion?
Or winning 9x over the best in the world, defeating two Grand Champions and two 4xWs (going for their Gr Ch-ship) along the way, plus a bunch of other highly-regarded 1-2xWs, finally losing at 9 years of age to yet another Champion?
Who, really, is the "Grand" dog in this equation?
Jack
Maybe you shouldn't look for logic. Cause even if they keep it there can two dogs with the same title while one would beat the shit out the other.
Why 3 wins, why not 4, to make Champion? Why 5 wins, why not 6, to make Grand Champion?, etc.
Maybe the harder to make a champion or grand champion the more people would agree they deserve to keep the title? You cannot judge any dog's wins individual so it has to be by numbers. Might encourage people to continue too if they were to keep the title.
Officially Retired
05-07-2012, 08:25 AM
Maybe you shouldn't look for logic. Cause even if they keep it there can two dogs with the same title while one would beat the shit out the other.
There has to be logic in the way things are done, otherwise there (literally) is no rhyme or reason to what is being done.
Maybe the harder to make a champion or grand champion the more people would agree they deserve to keep the title?
It already is hard to earn these titles.
The error in thinking is to assume that because a given dog "lost" that this automatically means he is inferior to a dog that did not lose.
You cannot judge any dog's wins individual so it has to be by numbers.
This is true, there are so many variables that it is impossible to stack wins against the other.
However, if it has to do with numbers, then two things are true: 1) the dog who beats titled opponents with more wins has to be a higher-ranked dog than the one who beats 0-1x winners, and 2) the dog who fights 8x and beats 7 opponents, while losing once, still beat more dogs than a 5xW with no losses ... and, as such, is more of a "Grand Champion" than a 5xW who safely retired.
Might encourage people to continue too if they were to keep the title.
I agree, definitely.
Jack
It already is hard to earn these titles.
I absolutely believe that, no doubt about it. But obviously not hard enough for majority of people to say a dog should keep his gr ch title with 5 w 1l. Even most of the votes for 1 draw went to no. I just like the idea of a dog having to be flawless to earn and keep his title, this also takes a very good estimation from its owner. But i must say I also respect the idea that a reward in form of a title given to a dog for its performance, should be honored forever. Ah well, its just 2 letters, once a good dog loses its title it doesnt lose its credibility
The error in thinking is to assume that because a given dog "lost" that this automatically means he is inferior to a dog that did not lose.
100 % true
FrostyPaws
05-07-2012, 09:56 AM
Sampson never lost. I believe you're referring to Sandman.
I also think we should keep in mind that it simply isn't easy to win 5 legitimate matches into legitimate competition. I personally don't care if the dog is a 6xw, 1xL. You can call him a grand champion if you like. It is, afterall, your dog. If a top flight dog wins 6 and loses 1, it is still a top flight dog, and it is still better than most dogs kicking up dust. Is it simply more glorious sounding to say your dog is a grand champion as opposed to saying your dog is a 6x winner?
Dogs that win against all comers never to lose deserve to be recognized as an animal that's a cut above the norm. If you have a dog that wins 9 and loses at the age of 9, can that really be the fault of the dog? That is where decision making by the person comes into play, and usually not for the betterment of the dog but for the betterment of their own name with no regards for the dog.
The ability to know when to stop is just as important as the ability to know when to go.
Officially Retired
05-07-2012, 09:59 AM
I absolutely believe that, no doubt about it. But obviously not hard enough for majority of people to say a dog should keep his gr ch title with 5 w 1l.
You contradict yourself.
If you "absolutely" believe that, you cannot then follow this absolute statement with a "but not hard enough" statement, as this is a logical contradiction.
Further, the "majority" of people's opinion has already been discussed. In point of fact, the majority of people actually have no "opinion" of their own, they are just following convention like mindless lemmings.
Even most of the votes for 1 draw went to no. Even most of the votes for 1 draw went to no.
Excuse me, but as right now, a 3-1 landslide majority is in favor of keeping the title based on the votes here ... and it would have been over there too, had I been making arguments over there :)
I just like the idea of a dog having to be flawless to earn and keep his title, this also takes a very good estimation from its owner.
Well, I can't argue your "likes" with you, they're yours, but I don't understand what you mean in your last sentence.
The dog that retires after 5 had an owner who retired his dog, while the dog whose owner went for 8 had an owner who took his dog out much more times. Surely this has to be held in higher estimation, especially if it was into other Champions and Gr Champions, not just "dogs."
But i must say I also respect the idea that a reward in form of a title given to a dog for its performance, should be honored forever. Ah well, its just 2 letters, once a good dog loses its title it doesnt lose its credibility
100 % true
Why should a dog lose his title, when he went out there harder and longer than another dog, just because he finally lost?
Why should a dog who never took the same risks be favored?
Jack
Officially Retired
05-07-2012, 10:18 AM
Sampson never lost. I believe you're referring to Sandman.
Yep, my bad on that.
I also think we should keep in mind that it simply isn't easy to win 5 legitimate matches into legitimate competition. I personally don't care if the dog is a 6xw, 1xL. You can call him a grand champion if you like. It is, afterall, your dog. If a top flight dog wins 6 and loses 1, it is still a top flight dog, and it is still better than most dogs kicking up dust. Is it simply more glorious sounding to say your dog is a grand champion as opposed to saying your dog is a 6x winner?
If a dog has to win 5 to be considered a Grand Champion, losing a fight after that (and all the wear) still doesn't mean he didn't win the 5 matches required to get the title.
Again, I don't see the logic where a 3xW, 1xL remains a Champion ... but a 6xW, 1xL does not remain a Gr Ch.
Dogs that win against all comers never to lose deserve to be recognized as an animal that's a cut above the norm. If you have a dog that wins 9 and loses at the age of 9, can that really be the fault of the dog? That is where decision making by the person comes into play, and usually not for the betterment of the dog but for the betterment of their own name with no regards for the dog.
The ability to know when to stop is just as important as the ability to know when to go.
I agree.
And IMO, a dog like Sandman (a 6xW, 1xL to Gr Ch Buck in 3:17) is a cut above a standard 5xW Grand Champion.
Jack
Jack, exactly. But what makes you think people do not follow you like a lemming. Who wants to be in a discussion with you :mrgreen: (JK)
I do have my own opinion, but im also not ashamed to tweak or change it after learning to respect other people's insights.
That being said, im certainly not contradicting myself by agreeing its already hard work to make a ch or gr ch. It would be ridiculous not to agree.
Think i've said enough and its being a little difficult/time consuming to discus in a foreign language. Time for others to reply.
Officially Retired
05-07-2012, 11:51 AM
Jack, exactly. But what makes you think people do not follow you like a lemming.
:rotflmao:
All right, that was funny :lol:
Who wants to be in a discussion with you :mrgreen: (JK)
Ouch :crying:
I do have my own opinion, but im also not ashamed to tweak or change it after learning to respect other people's insights.
Well said.
That being said, im certainly not contradicting myself by agreeing its already hard work to make a ch or gr ch. It would be ridiculous not to agree.
The contradiction was in the use of the word "absolutely."
The word absolutely implies no room for anything else, as opposed to "partially" ...
So when you "absolutely" agree, there is no more room for a "yeah but" anymore ... just for your edification :mrgreen:
Think i've said enough and its being a little difficult/time consuming to discus in a foreign language. Time for others to reply.
LOL, I am sorry if I frustrated you man, and I also need to keep in mind that this isn't your first language.
I would be stumped and run over if I had to argue in your language, so your point is well taken here.
:cheers:
AmberLamps
05-07-2012, 12:39 PM
Agree 3x. However, if the SDJ mag is in a foreign country that allows that sort of thing, I don't see why it couldn't act as a sanctioning body.
If that's the case then now would be an ideal time for the online SDJ to stop mimicking the old SDJ, become a front runner and make changes in the dog game.
I guess that's something you'd have to discuss with the editor though Jack.
FrostyPaws
05-07-2012, 02:45 PM
If a dog loses a show after winning 5, I don't believe anyone thinks that dog didn't win the needed 5 to gain the title. Well, let me rephrase that a little. I don't believe that anyone with half a brain would take that stance. But if the criteria that was set forth is that a dog has to remain undefeated to keep the title of Grand Champion, then that's probably the criteria that most people are going to utilize.
If memory serves me correctly, didn't the new version of YF&M allow a dog to keep the Grand Champion title if the dog lost game? I want to say I'm right about that, but that was so many years ago that I'm not sure if that's correct or not. It would almost be easier just to do away with such titles. Just label the dog in accordance to how many won and how many he lost.