breeding theory

[EWO]

I posted this on Jacks' old board around the time it ended so it never had many replies/thoughts. And this is just for arguments sake as I am looking for insight from people with far more experience with breeding than myself. So here goes.

Just names not an actual breeding. Lets say Poncho was bred to a daughter of Redboy (and this daughter was everything redboy from the tip of her nose to the tip of her tail) There were two females and two males. Female A is everything Poncho. Like Poncho spit her out. Female B is everything Redboy. Like she was out of him all over again. If Female A was bred back to Poncho this would be inbreeding on paper as well as an inbreeding on genetic traits. If female B was bred back to Poncho and she is everything redboy, this would be a paper inbreeding just like her sister, but in reality it would be genetically/traits-bred breeding similar to the first breeding to get these two daughters.

[EWO]

And the males. If Male A is everything Poncho, like Poncho spit him out. And when he is bred he throws the Poncho traits consistently, is he a Poncho dog in reality or is he still a Ponch/Redboy cross like his papers suggest?

[EWO]

And Male B. He has the traits of both (proverbial) smart like Poncho game like redboy but he throws everything from Masons hammer to Teals Jeff and everything in between when bred to close family members. Where does he fit in if he is throwing all over his genetic map? Sort of bored waiting for paint to dry on the truck in the shop. My brain is sort of wandering this morning, it could be the fumes, not sure. EWO

[Officially Retired]

You are essentially speaking of the difference between "paper breeding" and understanding the traits of the dogs you're working with

It is similar to the write-up I did on the Wright's Inbreeding Coefficient for this website: these "paper indicators" and "calculations" only deal with PROBABILITY not certainty.

At the end of the day, you still have to use your eyes, and school your dogs, to see if they're what they're "supposed" to be on paper

When you begin to think like you're thinking, this is where you begin to "let go of the side of the pool," so to speak, and "swim" out there into your own ideas and perceptions and really get to know the gene pool(s) you're dealing with.

I have a ton of metaphors I can use to describe breeding, another one being a deck of cards. You get Ones and Twos ... Aces, Kings, and Queens ... the occasional Joker ... and many things inbetween. If you continuously pay attention (like what you're talking about) ... get rid of your low cards ... take advantage of what an occasional wild card can bring ... but mostly put the High Cards back into your "genetic deck" ... then over the years you will eventually be dealing a "consistently-stacked deck" that the average person trying to breed dogs will never be able to duplicate.

Jack

[TFX]

With my dogs there are two reasons we can keep tightening up and not get hurt by turning out inbred bums. One is selectivity, always trying to go to the higher end of the line. Second is that we keep breeding individuals from two sides of the line together to essentially refresh the original cross. You can do this kind of "cross" in a tightly inbred family over and over and over. Your average dummy looks at a pedigree like that as "inbred", and often avoids it because of a perception that the dog is bred "too tightly", giving no credit to the breeder's understanding of the genetics at hand. This is because too many dumb breeders in history have stacked pedigrees with little regard for selection and turned out litters of nothing dogs that only had some fancy names in the pedigree.

[Kimo615]

What's y'all opinion on this ped? I own this dog. I'd like to hear from you to Jack as I value your opinion.

http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum...p?dog_id=15485

[Officially Retired]

What's y'all opinion on this ped? I own this dog. I'd like to hear from you to Jack as I value your opinion.
http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum...p?dog_id=15485

Thank you for your kind words, and I would love to provide a good opinion for you.

Unfortunately, the truth is the value of my opinion (or anyone's opinion) on a given dog's breeding is directly proportional to their experience with the dogs behind it. Since I am personally unfamiliar with the traits of any dog in that pedigree, my opinion is worth little or nothing here.

The people who owned/saw the dogs in your first 3 generations would be the best to ask (especially if they had knowledge of the littermates to those dogs as well).

Jack

[Kimo615]

I appreciate your response Jack. His WIC is high. What's your thoughts on having a dog that tight? Any dog in general. Most dogs in his ped or just famous dogs in general are not that tight that ive seen. Most 20% and below. What effects would that have? If he turns out to be as good as I hope I planned on breeding him. With it being that tight. My plan is to take him to some heavy Chinaman or Frisco. I got access to a pup off Gr Ch Garners/GTOs Ceaser who appears to be a good one. I've seen him in person and liked him but never seen him perform. But I guess Gr Ch speaks for itself. I was just wondering your thoughts on dogs bred that tight in general. In 7 Gen I believe his WIC is 76 or 79% if I recall.

[Officially Retired]

Hi;

Again, the good or bad regarding the "tightness" of any breeding hinges entirely upon whether 1) it was tightened up on the right dog and 2) whether the genes stacked as hoped in the pup you selected.

I can't possibly tell you whether I personally would have tightened up on that dog myself (or even bred to him at all) ... without seeing the animal itself ... and I can't possibly tell you whether the genes of the breeding based on him stacked well or not in the dog you're asking about ... again without seeing that animal itself.

I know this is not the standard "Looks good!" answer that most people give; however it is the most honest, accurate response that is possible for a man to make who knows absolutely nothing about the dogs being discussed.

As I have mentioned in many other posts on this forum, everyone who thinks you can breed dogs "too tight" has merely tightened up on the wrong dog(s).

When the inbreeding selection process is done correctly, tightening-up improves the line

Jack

[EWO]

Those same guys will say inbreed and then outcross. When that actually works odds are the outcross was better than the animals being inbred. If you have to go over there to get it, one should have been over there from the start. EWO