What dogman had the biggest impact on the game as a breeder?

[grindhard]

i dont look as patrick or carver as men who just bred for papers. they paved the way for all dogmen and work speaks for it self. unfortunately in todays world of dogs are generation lacks hard work. as anything else in 2013 we live in a microwave society we wont it now. and it has damaged the work that the patricks and carvers has done

yet and still they birthed this generation of dogmen and the roosters have came home roost.

[evolutionkennels]

Numbers go both ways. it's like when someone says well he was bound to produce good dogs sooner or later. same can be said about a dog with good numbers who's only had two litters. That dog is bound to produce bad ones if you breed him enough. that's just the way it goes, and you can't really grasp how someone's producing based on looking at peds online pages of offspring compared to number of champions lol. Today you have to think about how many of those offspring really went to Dogmen, really went to good Dogmen, n how many were just pets. this obviously plays major role in a breeders %. A lot of it has to do with the luck of a good dog going to a good dogman. A breeder has no control once that animal leaves his yard.

Well stated

[Down_on_the_bayou]

Boudreaux hands down for me almost all of carvers success can be attributed to dogs bred by or down from Floyd's dogs. its funny that everyone says tudor when every old timer that knew him that I spoke to never considered him much of a breeder he had some great dogs yes indeed. Carver was out of this world with the dogs he produced. those two for mw are 1A and 1B. from there id go with guys like Patrick, garner, tant , Hollingsworth, thibadeaux and a few others im surely missing

[ROCK-MACHINE]

Great thread, thanks for bumping it.

I'll go with Carver.


http://www.fiapbt.net/carver100years.html

https://youtu.be/2DzgN3-3F8s

[EWO]

Over all, Mr. Carver as well. Just so many dogs over such a long time with his name/family.

EWO

[brokeback]

Carver/Crenshaw... depending on which ped you believe of the "Carver" dogs lol..

[EWO]

Agreed.

Taking the pedigrees on face value and then thinking they are different than advertised can easily sway the opinion.


I had dogs bred down out of Patrick's Kasai. He stamped his puppies to the point the female could contribute color, but that was about it. They looked like him, acted like him, developed like him and the most tell-tale sign was they barked like him (early and often). Nearly identical.

There is a prominent dog man in the south that bred to him several times and never got puppies. He never missed otherwise. We often joked about it but there was never a way to say it was a fact one way or the other.

I visited his yard some two years later and as we walked toward the dogs I did not need a lie detector test, a blood test or a DNA swab. It was no doubt he had puppies on those breedings. His dogs were shaped like mine, carried on like mine and that tell-tale sign was they barked just like mine.

I believe this happens on every level.

So I agree with the above post, taking peds at face value or not can swing a vote one way or another.

EWO

[apeman]

John P Colby

Colby had a major impact on the breeding programs of Heinzl, Komosinski, E. Crenshaw, Carver, and Tudor.
Dibo/Colby was one of the most popular crosses of the 1950's, 1960's, and 1970's.

Carver's impact imo was mixed as a breeder and dog broker. The dogs he placed (whether he bred them or not) created most of the popular bloodlines of the last 40 years.

Patrick had a major impact on the breed from the 1970's to the late 1990's. Boyles, Garner, WCC, Hollingsworth, Mickels, and many others created programs that had a major impact in the breed world wide from the 1980's to the 2000's.

I think T. Garner and Southern Kennels had the biggest impact as breeders from the mid 1990's to the present due to the volume of dogs produced and the replication of their genetic blends.

[ROCK-MACHINE]

What dogman had the biggest impact on the game as a breeder?

I disagree with Garner's name even being mentioned in this thread, in my opinion his one claim to fame is that he turned peddling into big business. Just look at the amount of pups he's pumping out there per year and how many actually become stand outs. I know the man, have nothing against the man personally, just think his ''contribution'' to the sport as a whole is vastly overrated, especially when compared to some of the other names being mentioned through out this thread. I know this post may not be to popular, as I said before people tend to defend Garner as though he were kin, I'm not here to argue the fact just ''voicing'' my own personal view.

[brokeback]

I have to agree...