And here's another question:
Should showing EXTREME GAMENESS qualify a dog for DOY Candidacy?
VOTE HERE!
Or forever hold your peace
YES: Gameness is the essence of the breed, and dogs who show it to the extreme are deserving.
NO: The DOY title should only be about performance.
Should Showing EXTREME GAMENESS be Part of DOY Candidacy?
And here's another question:
Should showing EXTREME GAMENESS qualify a dog for DOY Candidacy?
VOTE HERE!
Or forever hold your peace
Being an extremely game dog is what every bulldog should possess. Being extremely game and talented and facing the same adversaries is stepping it up to an elite level.
Extremely game dogs already have an award system in place GIS.
I think to carry the prestigious title of "Dog of the Year" that dog should be the exception to the rule. That dog should do what no other dog within that same calendar year has done. They aren't all going to be GR CH's who beat other GR CH DOY'S like GR CH TITERE. So IMO to truly be considered the DOY they should stand out in front of the rest of the candidates.
S_B
High ability dogs also have titles in place (BIS/CH/GR CH) ... yet they get DOY consideration too ... so why shouldn't the exceptionially-game dogs of our sport also have a title for their "over and above" displays of extreme gameness?Originally Posted by S_B
Yes, Titere did beat a 6xW/DOY ... but did he belly-crawl, after being a mile behind for 3 hours, losing half his blood supply, on two broken legs?
There are dogs who did these things ... don't you think they deserve Extraordinary Consideration also?
Jack
They have a title of their own Jack, GIS. Like Mister said some of the gamest dogs to ever crawl didn't' have the ability to win. Often times when a dog shows extremely game they either were outclassed ability wise or they were neutralized by an equal opponent.High ability dogs also have titles in place (BIS/CH/GR CH) ... yet they get DOY consideration too ... so why shouldn't the exceptionially-game dogs of our sport also have a title for their "over and above" displays of extreme gameness?
Yes, Titere did beat a 6xW/DOY ... but did he belly-crawl, after being a mile behind for 3 hours, losing half his blood supply, on two broken legs?
There are dogs who did these things ... don't you think they deserve Extraordinary Consideration also?
Jack
S_B
I guess no one actrually read what I said, so, once again, we already have titles for "ability" also: do not the titles of BIS / Ch / Gr Ch already reward ability?
So, following your logic, why do we even need DOY?
Isn't Dog of the Year to separate the best-of-the-best?
If we're going to go over and above the already-existing titles of BIS/CH/GR CH, and add another title (Dog of the Year) ... for ability ... why don't we *also* give some extra title to the extremest of extreme game dogs for all the GIS winners?
Also, to say that just because a dog lost, "it doesn't have the ability to win," is a pretty far stretch.
Ozzie's Homer didn't have the ability to win, against Jeep, at 2 lb below his best weight, C/H by Stepps (as opposed to fighting at his best weight 44 lb, in Ozzie's hands), but that doesn't mean Ch Homer "didn't have the ability to win" ... AT ALL ... Homer just didn't have it that day, at that weight, in those hands. But his gameness was so extreme as to be remembered, historically, more than 99.99% of any Gr Ch ever.
So let me say this again: we already have titles for ability: CH/Gr Ch/BIS ... and DOY ... that is 4 different ways to confer glory to winners ... and yet we only have ONE way to confer glory to our GAME dogs
That sucks IMO.
Why shouldn't there be equal consideration given to the extremest of game dogs of our sport?
The more I think about it, the more the title of Game Dog of the Year is a title that is long, long, long overdue
Jack
Focus on the fact that Homer did lost. Can't just assumed that he would've could've won if he was in different hands and at the correct weight. Not saying you don't have a point. All I'm saying is that the fact is that Homer did lost.
Why not. But I could never vote for showing gameness that I didn't witness.
Exactly, that is why imo the performance record is what speaks to the quality of a DOY.
If you're not going to trust others' opinions on gameness, how can you trust their opinions on ability?
If people have produced better, winninger dogs than you ... might their opinions carry more weight than yours?
If 30 people at a huge convention ALL give a dog accolades for its extreme gameness, do you think this carries more weight than "your" opinion on extreme gameness?
Jack
Jack I never mentioned this in the previous topic for DOY but the way I'd like to see it done is every year we vote amongst ourselves for these three categories and three prizes are given out (usually a small trophy), each year it is the job of the previous years category winner to provide the prize for the new winner but that bits not important.
We have :
The dog of the year award (the outright most awesome DOY)
Gamest dog of the year award (for a dog that showed to be deep deep game, usually dead game)
Kennels of the year (the kennels that showed and achieved a lot within the year)
The last one would be the hardest to come up with I think as a lot won't want to divulge too much and understandably so.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
