$5000 to Race???

[BulldogConnection]

Do this if you want to get yourself into problems.

You could say that about even getting involved with these dogs in the first place. Now my advice would be either save your money or stay out of matters you that can get you into trouble in the first place. But if you want to play above your pay grade sacrifices have to be made. If you can't afford to eat at a 4 or 5 star restaurant then don't go. Don't cry about how it's not fair the menu is too expensive. Go over to to Applebee's and eat some decent food on a budget. Or you could stop going to Applebee's every weekend and save that $$$. Then after a little while go see what that 4 star restaurant is all about. Maybe you realize that's not your scene and you wasted a lot of money or maybe you find out the meal was worth the price tag. Or hell maybe you decide it was good and if you could afford it you'd go more often but Applebee's tastes just fine.

[BulldogConnection]

Do what you have todo you dont need the purse up front. Give yourself 8-10 weeks. Fall behind on a few bills of you have to then when your charge pulls through take those winnings and get the lights turned back on. And if shit doesn't go the way you thought then you figure out what you're gonna do next.

Do this if you want to get yourself into problems.

I agree, this is totally irresponsible and bad advice.

Betting money you can't afford to lose might be fine if you're 25 and live by yourself, with no one else depending on you (and if you want to run the risk of developing some seriously bad habits) ... but if you're older and, hopefully, with better sense than to think like this, allowing yourself to fall behind on your financial obligations just to do some dogs shows a serious thinking disorder and total lack of responsibility. This kind of mindset is typical of people who get desperate and cheat, is when their entire livelihood is riding on a dog deal, and they will "do anything" to win. There is no fun in competing like that, and there is no "good times" to be had with people who have seriously poor judgment like that.

Making a $5000 bet with a man who makes $150,000 a year can be fun.
Making a $5,000 bet with a group of guys who pooled their extra money together to make it happy can be fun.

But making a $5000 bet with a guy who's missed his mortgage payment, whose kids are hungry, and whose lights are turned out ... who has everything he's got riding on the outcome of a dog deal isn't "fun" at all ... it is feeding the gambling disorder of an irresponsible derelict ... and if things start to go bad for that man's dog, you can bet your ass he will not show anything close to "good sportsmanship" and pick up ... and things might get even uglier than that if he loses both his dogs and his money over the deal.

So, no disrespect to anyone, but that is about the furthest thing from a sensible opinion that has been posted to date IMO.

Jack


.

I agree with a lot of that but when I say fall behind on a few bills I don't mean take food out of your kids mouths but I suppose I did leave that open to however the reader saw the situation. Maybe they go late on the phone bill or cable doesn't get paid that month. Neither of these is ideal and if you have to struggle to make the purse then what's the point.

However if someone is going to be picking up just because "things start to go bad" then he'd be better off not doing dogs at all. Things are going to start going bad at one point or another. It's not all just a walk through a flower patch. Everyone has their own ideas on when to pick up and when to leave em down but IMO when you fully believe there is no way to win then you pick up. Picking up just because the going gets tough is goin to get expensive and pretty pointless.

[Officially Retired]

I agree with a lot of that but when I say fall behind on a few bills I don't mean take food out of your kids mouths but I suppose I did leave that open to however the reader saw the situation. Maybe they go late on the phone bill or cable doesn't get paid that month. Neither of these is ideal and if you have to struggle to make the purse then what's the point.
However if someone is going to be picking up just because "things start to go bad" then he'd be better off not doing dogs at all. Things are going to start going bad at one point or another. It's not all just a walk through a flower patch. Everyone has their own ideas on when to pick up and when to leave em down but IMO when you fully believe there is no way to win then you pick up. Picking up just because the going gets tough is goin to get expensive and pretty pointless.

Well, I think getting late on any bills to do a dog deal is irresponsible. I am not saying I have always been responsible, LOL, but as I get older I realize how foolish I was when I was younger.

I agree with your thoughts on picking up, you're there to win not molly-coddle your dog, and it's a tough sport. But, if there's no way to win, it's time to exercise good sportsmanship and go home clean ... but the man who's "desperate" for the money isn't going to think like that ... whereas the man who's comfortable either way is going to be the better sport in most cases.

I don't think anyone should "bet the farm" on any dog (or bet what he cannot afford to lose); I just don't think that's responsible nor the pathway to good results & happy endings.

Naturally, you have the right to feel different.

Jack


.

[lilpitgirl]

some of the best shows Ive seen have been for500-1500 and always good sportsmanship

[thefoodchain]

Sign of the times. These are the ways of these days and times. I read this yesterday and had a reply then but I said to my self "self look at it from all perspectives". And I did and the song remains the same. There is the mindset of if you can't pay the cost, then you can't be the boss. Our thing , if you take time to do the knowledge. Is full of the haves and have nots. From the days of moonshine to narcotics, it's always tipped the scale in a direction that only a handful came out a race a car that has been tuned up with the greatest of commitment. My thinking on this is, I thought it was an agreement between two parties to find the truth.

In some cases it seems to limit the pool of contenders, they just don't have the resources. And I hear those of you that are saying, they had no reason being there to start with. I don't fully agree with that premise. I can site far too many examples where as money from the street had a TRUE competitor have to say thanks but no thanks. All the while knowing who owned the truth. Cause when it's all said and done, it's about the competition. Right.

[DROPZONE]

Alot of working people cant afford 5k . But when the crowd that school with fimd out that ypu want to hook a nice one that they have seen, the money gets.high and then you can go into the same. In my opinion i think thats why when you go into people that go into the deep water thats why thee money might get high .havent read all the post ,so sory if i wrote the same thing as someone else. Also having people back you should be a compliment to.you and your hound. And it will improve your yard. Because you will travel to other stateswih people that also have backing (quality stock). Ps i will do it for dog food lol.

[Officially Retired]

Sign of the times. These are the ways of these days and times. I read this yesterday and had a reply then but I said to my self "self look at it from all perspectives". And I did and the song remains the same. There is the mindset of if you can't pay the cost, then you can't be the boss. Our thing , if you take time to do the knowledge. Is full of the haves and have nots. From the days of moonshine to narcotics, it's always tipped the scale in a direction that only a handful came out a race a car that has been tuned up with the greatest of commitment. My thinking on this is, I thought it was an agreement between two parties to find the truth.
In some cases it seems to limit the pool of contenders, they just don't have the resources. And I hear those of you that are saying, they had no reason being there to start with. I don't fully agree with that premise. I can site far too many examples where as money from the street had a TRUE competitor have to say thanks but no thanks. All the while knowing who owned the truth. Cause when it's all said and done, it's about the competition. Right.

Well, I think it is hard for anyone to say what "it's all about" that covers everybody's opinion. I have known people who think it's "all about winning," to the extent that they would actually cheat to get there. I have known dozens of people who would leave a dog down to get there too, sacrificing the life of their game dog just for the $$. As an example, when the old man's 8xW Gr Ch Doolie was dying to Gr Ch Melonhead there were people in the crowd telling him to pick up, and the old man actually said, "I need the money more than I need the dog." Finally, the owner of Melonhead told the old man he'd pay him to pick up, because even he didn't want to see a great, DG, 8xW dog get killed when he just couldn't win. So trying to say what "it's all about" simply can't cover all the bases for everybody, because too many people think differently and have different values.

Yes, the above-described demonstrates the fastest of fast-lane matches. Truly, even the Buck / Sandman match wasn't as big a deal as the Melonhead / Doolie match (dog-wise), it just got written about more because STP and Rebel were more flamboyant, but in the end it was a 6xW versus a 5xW with Buck and Sandman, not a (then) 12xW versus an 8xW in Melonhead and Doolie. In fact, the old man never reported a single match in his life. In his direct words to me he said, "Jack, I don't want fame, and I don't want publicity, all I want is the money."

Now, if it were me, I would have wanted my Grand Champion more than the money, and I would gladly kiss the money goodbye to make damned sure I took my Grand Champion home alive. To my way of thinking, a person who is willing to let his friend's life slip away right before his eyes, all over a "win" or "$$" has lost his humanity somewhere along the line. I like winning too, and I do like money also, but what I like most of all is to be able to live with myself when I shut the lights off. However, if it was an $80,000 bet it wouldn't be quite as easy to kiss that amount goodbye as it would $2500. Would the money make the dogs better? Nope. The winner was going to be the winner, regardless of the amount bet. However, the lower bet would make the sportsmanship better, where people can stand to lose and pick up like a good sport, versus a super-high bet where (even though he knows he has the losing dog), the owner still won't pick up out of some "lightning-in-a-bottle" hope that the other dog just stands there and his own dog still somehow wins.

So, to me, it's "all about" having the best dogs, and conducting myself with good sportsmanship, and being in an environment of surrounding people who are not likely to bring-in the law. To someone else, it might be all about "winning and getting that money," regardless of the costs, and they might enjoy the company of people who are much more likely to get popped, due to their mentality and lifestyle.

It would be my own opinion that, ideally, in a sport about dogs, that "dog quality" should come first ... but, after careful study of the general natures of dogmen over the course of 2 decades, the reality seems to be that MOST people put "some other value" ahead of the actual dogs involved, for one reason or another.

Jack


.

[BulldogConnection]

In fairness to the comment about a man losing humanity, while I realize this was only your opinion. To some people the dogs aren't looked at as "friends" being sent to slaughter. They are tools or livestock. Working animals they own in order to fulfill a task, in some cases to make money. A real man will take great care of his tools and livestock providing them with the proper care and handling them with respect but at the end of the day they are still only an outlet or avenue to a means for him. A dog left down to win money is a dog being given absolutely every chance possible to fulfill its task for its owner. As long as that dog wants to be there then I don't think it's cruel. Cruel being a word that's very subjective. Can something like that be hard to watch? Sure, but many things in this life are.

While I'm not advocating any sort of behavior or saying its how I go about things I am able and try as much as possible to look at both sides. Playing devils advocate.

[Officially Retired]

That is a good post, BC.

However, I am not talking about "cruelty," I am talking about value, and where a man's ultimate values get placed.

First of all, I agree/disagree that cruelty is subjective. Yes, cruelty is subjective insofar as what may be cruel for one dog is not cruel to another. If a pit bull is killing a poodle, for example, the affair is subjectively cruel for the poodle, and subjectively enjoyable for the pit bull, and any observer with an IQ over 80 can see this objectively. In the same way, regarding the presence or absence of cruelty in our sport, if one pit bull is curring-out, and not wanting to be there, then yes the affair becomes cruel for him, but not for the other dog. However, when the losing dog is DG, and still wants to be there even though he is dying, then I agree there is no cruelty at all to let him die in there ... but what there IS is a lack of value for the life of a DG dog in the owner. To me, this is the big issue here!

Therefore, and logically-speaking, it would be my opinion that any man who values a "win" (or "the money") over the life of his DG dog, logically places greater value on winning/money than his dog, and so cannot properly be called a "dog man" in the trenches, when the life/death of his dog is on the line. Instead, because he places more value on the winning/$$ than preserving the life of his DG dog, such a man is more properly called a GAMBLER, who is using dogs as his tools. His ultimate value isn't in his dogs, it's in the winning/$$$.

By contrast, and (really) by definition, the DOGman places his highest value in his dogs first, not second, and doesn't look at his DG dog as a "disposable item" ... but rather as an example of the ultimate goal in this breed to be salvaged and perpetuated, not merely discarded for a bet or a buck.

Jack

.

[BulldogConnection]

Valid opinions.

You are right in that what's cruel to one may be perfectly acceptable to another. There are many people that believe actively doing dogs is cruel behavior while others do not. Certain people view Captial Punishment as a cruel practice however many are fine with its use. What's cruel or crude behavior to me may not have the same effect on you regardless of mental capacity. There are some subjects that seem to share the same view across the board but as a whole cruelty is very subjective and takes many factors of a persons background and upbringing into account.

Some people might not want or care to hold the title of dogman. Or even be labeled a gambler as there are many gamblers who don't own a dog, drive a car or ever touched a horse in real life. Being a gambler doesnt have to be a discredit to character. Someone can make bets on a dog but never show one themselves because they dont hve the resolve to actvely participate in the sport. There isn't even a real need to label them at all. They might just be a man, or woman, with a dog.

Again not arguing your opinion or saying its wrong. Just playing off it.