Nothing wrong with this thinking. The strength of a yard is directly related to the standards of the man or woman behind it. I don't agree with the way the roll went down as I think it's a waste of time to do it that way but I do feel like they should have gone and wouldn't have stuck around here much longer afterwards.Originally Posted by luvmybulldogs
Good point.
However, "standards" for true athletic excellence and deep gameness are one thing ... while unprofessional methods (followed by quick judgments) are quite another ...
The guys who gave Dibo and Chinaman time to school out and be judged properly had "standards" ... whereas many "who would have culled them after the first roll" THINK they have high standards, but in fact they're just impatient.
I would have to disagree with you jack on me skipping some steps. I dont think i skipped anything at all. Made a mistake in judgement by putting two greenies together when i know better... yeah, took shortcuts... no sir. Shortcuts wont get my yard where I want it to be. If anything, I feel like im setting a standard. Again jack these hounds are 3 years old. Both of them. I gave in on hound A because of your example with ch vengenance... not gave in but realized hey maybe im being a little hasty.... on the other hand, hound b IMO is a cull. she is 3 years old and with limited space, she has to go. If chinaman or dibo was in my possesion and didnt start at three years old, they would be "walking the green mile" however, im not breeding a family of dogs... i just got a couple bulldogs guys....
Judging them before schooling them is skipping steps, is it not?
Well, we just disagree then. Going from "first time down" to "judged" in the same roll is the very definition of shortcut-taking IMO.
You are setting a standard for quick judgments, and taking a shortcut on schooling, that is all I am seeing here.
Neither Chinaman nor Dibo would start until 4 or 5 respectively ...
You're being hasty with both, the principle is the same across the board, but that is your right to do.
Well, here again, the decision to kill 3 year olds that won't start has nothing to do with actual "standards of excellence," as you've never owned a dog as excellent as either Chinaman or Dibo, which means your decisions are just a matter of impatience, limited space, and the preference for early starters. Excellence has to do with ACTUAL ABILITY, once started and once schooled, not on how quickly they're willing to crank-on and go.
As I mentioned in my first example, Pretty Boy was by far an earlier-starting, better-acting young dog than Silverback ... but as far as "True Excellence" goes, Silverback has more ability and physical excellence in his toenail than Pretty Boy had in his whole body.
The desire and willingness to "start early on the first time down" is not excellence; it's just early starting.
Jack
.
Good thing about your site jack, we can agree to disagree. I see what you're saying about schooling the hound out first. My thing is if the dog didnt show any willingness to continue, i dont think its worth my time to continue schooling before passing judgement. Im not expecting to see a miracle the first time out but what i am expecting to see is a willingness to compete. If that's not there then IMO i have no use for you. If hound a would have continued, i wouldve been happy... even with the butter mouth cause she showed style and smarts..... again jack... i dont want you to get me wrong, these dogs are 3 years old and i know about some mature faster than others and all that but not around here. 3 is the cut off.
Yes, we can just agree to disagree pleasantly, because at this point we're just going in circles :?
Thank you for an interesting topic that "caught fire" right away
Cheers,
Jack
.
Jack just for questions sake, what is the oldest you have HAD to wait on one to start, and what is the longest you WOULD wait on one to start? I've never had a late starter, but I do believe in the motto' "Early to start, early to ruin". Most are incapable of doing a dog properly, regardless at which age it starts.
Interesting question.
Like you, most of my dogs are early starters and get right with it, from the first time down. Even Silverback, who started late for my stuff, still defended himself and DOAd the first bitch who ever bit him ... and would have DOA'd both dogs I put on him on his first two times (after he got pissed) ... he just didn't initially "aggress" at them ... but he damned sure wouldn't sit there and take being bit either. By his 3rd time down, Silverback would hit the opponent right from the get-go and was totally with the program by 2 years of age.
I guess the latest-starting dog I ever had was Diamond Girl. She too "defended herself," but you could see her heart wasn't really into it. Diamond Girl actually stood there on the second scratch of her first roll. A lot of "experts" there told me that I should "put her down," but I ignored their bad advice and knew that Diamond Girl was just a sweet dog who hadn't "got mean" yet. She just wanted to play at that point, and didn't really consider other dogs "her enemy," so Rudy and I waited and kept trying until she was 3,where she started to show promise, and by about 3.5 years of age, Diamond Girl was fully-on and as mean and nasty toward other dogs as her little snub-nosed self could be
In the end, I suppose I really haven't had to wait too long to get what I want out of most of my dogs, and very rarely do I get anything but the proper result right off the bat. Still, for the most part, my being patient with a few well-bred dogs has paid off. Naturally, like anyone else, I prefer "instant results," but if I don't get them I will still be patient and allow each dog to bloom at his/her own time and pace.
Jack
EDIT: As for how long I would wait, I guess that depends on how much I like the individual dog in other ways (looks, overall intelligence, ease-of-care vs. hard-to-keep, how rare/good its immediate ancestors were, etc.)
.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote