Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 58

Thread: $5000 to Race???

  1. #41

    Re: $5000 to Race???

    Quote Originally Posted by BulldogConnection
    A better way to put what you are referring to is more of an irresponsible gambler or maybe a problem/compulsive gambler. Your brother is a TRUE gambler by definition because he bets money on the outcome of an event with varying odds. He may be a more calculated gambler than others but a gambler none the less. This is a situation where, as mentioned before, labeling can be usefull and maybe even necessary if only for clarity. All gamblers don't exhibit the qualities you see as less than. Some are controlled and calculated; others emotional and unconventional. And everything in between. But I'd go as far as to say ALL want to win.
    This train has gotten a bit off track though...
    Interesting distinctions.

    Just to clarify, the old man was a very calculated gambler, extremely calculated, but (for the most part) he didn't care about the dog's life if there was serious money riding.
    My brother is a calculated gambler in his own way, but he would never put his family's savings at risk or do anything irresponsible in his betting. He sets aside his "gambling money" and keeps this reserve totally separate from his other money.

    There are irresponsible/compulsive gamblers, true, but there are also calculated gamblers who don't care about anything but winning. Hell, I think pretty much everyone wants to win, but where the subject of "ethics" and gambling comes in to play is how far a person is willing to go to win. I would say the definition of a "good sport" is someone who will do anything within the rules to win, while a cheater will do anything to win, period, whether it's within the rules or not. In fact, some people become experts at cheating and have all manner of tricks up their sleeves. You might even call them "calculated, professional cheats."

    Regarding the specific subject of dog deals, another point where "ethics" comes in to play is when the dog's life is sacrificed to gain a win. I believe this would fall under most people's definition of "unethical" or "poor sportsmanship." Consider the same thing in human boxing: everyone can appreciate an epic battle (like Ali and Frazier in 'The Thrilla in Manilla'), where two DG men fight their hearts out, displaying awesome skill till the bitter end, but at some point the greater value has to be placed on the fighters themselves when any fight gets to the point one (or both) will die. It is precisely here where a person's true value system can be seen.

    In the Ali/Frazier deal, any intelligent person could see that both Ali and Frazier were World Class, truly great fighters by that 13th round ... when the fight was stopped, even though the fight was not yet totally over. IMO, it was correct for the fight to be stopped by the ref, and Ali given the nod, and it would have been a crime to just let it go until the bitter end ... to where Frazier (or both) couldn't be salvaged. This is what separates a civilized mentality, which values life over the trivial minutia of 'what would have happened ultimately' ... versus a barbaric mentality, that has no regard for life, but just wants to see 'the final end' with one man a lifeless bloody pulp while another man stands over him (or maybe both are lost).

    This same mentality goes to the dogs. When you have two great dogs go to the bitter end, to me the DOGman values his charge's life and will pick up before all is lost, which is in alignment with the concept of "good sportsmanship" in every other kind of sport or human combat, and it shows that the dog is this man's greatest value, not the bet. By contrast, the gambler will let the deal play out to the bitter end ... because "winning" is the supreme value to him, not the dog. This is just basic logic. For when the dog becomes secondary to a bet, then at that point it logically follows that the person with this value system cannot properly be called a "dog" man. Instead he properly is called a "gambler," a betting man, whose primary value is the bet/money, not his animal.

    Jack

    .

  2. #42

    Re: $5000 to Race???

    Quote Originally Posted by CA Jack
    This same mentality goes to the dogs. When you have two great dogs go to the bitter end, to me the DOGman values his charge's life and will pick up before all is lost, which is in alignment with the concept of "good sportsmanship" in every other kind of sport or human combat, and it shows that the dog is this man's greatest value, not the bet. By contrast, the gambler will let the deal play out to the bitter end ... because "winning" is the supreme value to him, not the dog. This is just basic logic. For when the dog becomes secondary to a bet, then at that point it logically follows that the person with this value system cannot properly be called a "dog" man. Instead he properly is called a "gambler," a betting man, whose primary value is the bet/money, not his animal.

    Jack
    If there are two great dogs going until the bitter end, I can't actively say that any dogman I know would pick his dog up. That lends me to believe that the match is hanging in the balance where either dog can still possibly win. Now, if there were two great dogs, and one one of those great dogs were at the point of no chance at attaining the win, then yes, it becomes about sportsmanship and doing the right thing for the dog without a chance of pulling off the victory.

    I don't see someone that's allowing his dog, that is still in the thick of the battle, the chance to win as a gambler. I see that someone as a man/woman that believes in their dog, and their dog's ability to rightfully claim a victory. I simply don't believe that it's always about the money when a match hangs in the balance. Some people's motives are pure in that they are simply allowing the dog to do what it's heritage dictates it do. And yet others are exactly as you describe, and they make it known for all to see.

  3. #43

    Re: $5000 to Race???

    I agree with what you said.

    By going to the bitter end, I mean when one dog has clearly taken over, and is starting to put the other dog away, the sportsman picks up and concedes the deal (same as in boxing the corner throws in the towel when their fighter is out on their feet). There is no need to let it go all the way to the bitter end and a DOA.

    However, if the dog is just behind, but you can see he is still strong and still has a real shot, that is something else again and no, it is definitely not time to pick up yet.

  4. #44

    Re: $5000 to Race???

    Quote Originally Posted by CA Jack
    I agree with what you said.

    By going to the bitter end, I mean when one dog has clearly taken over, and is starting to put the other dog away, the sportsman picks up and concedes the deal (same as in boxing the corner throws in the towel when their fighter is out on their feet). There is no need to let it go all the way to the bitter end and a DOA.

    However, if the dog is just behind, but you can see he is still strong and still has a real shot, that is something else again and no, it is definitely not time to pick up yet.
    Now this is an interesting thought. So would a man leaving his down dog down because he believes his animal still has a shot be considered just a gambler? Even when everyone around him doesn't think it does and believes he should pick up?

    IMO a pickup should be made when you believe your hound has no chance to win and has just been out dogged. But if someone leaves their dog down longer than I think that dog can take then who am I? That man or woman knows their animal better than me. Many times in a brutal contest a dog may take so much damage that even when picked up it can be lost on the table, on the ride home or even a week later. Even if it was only one hold behind the entire match. A sportsman would give that dog every chance possible to win and possibly lose its life rather than take a loss and lose it later on. Now to a bystander this sportsman could look like simply a gambler who doesn't care for the dogs.

  5. #45

    Re: $5000 to Race???

    thinking ur dog has a chance and him actually having a chance are two different things, if everyone around u thinks u should pick up then there is probably a good reason for it. there is always a possibility the other dog will quit but the probability is unlikely.

  6. #46

    Re: $5000 to Race???

    Quote Originally Posted by bolero
    thinking ur dog has a chance and him actually having a chance are two different things, if everyone around u thinks u should pick up then there is probably a good reason for it. there is always a possibility the other dog will quit but the probability is unlikely.
    This could be true or could not be true, depending on who "everyone" is and whether they have any experience in regards to such matters. The world is ripe with people who pick their dogs when it's painfully obvious the dog is still in the fray, and a lot of those particular individuals are always at ringside adding their opinions like the cheap popcorn they're worth. Many people over the years fancy themselves as dogmen, but they simply don't have the stones to actually compete when their particular row gets too hard to hoe. The owner of the dog, if he's of any repute and consequence, knows his dog and his capabilities a lot more than "everyone" standing around watching.

    But I do agree that thinking the dog has a chance and him actually having it are two separate ideas.

  7. #47

    Re: $5000 to Race???

    Quote Originally Posted by Crofab
    This could be true or could not be true, depending on who "everyone" is and whether they have any experience in regards to such matters.
    This is true, good point. The opinions/motives of the person or persons saying, "Pick up your dog!" have to be examined.



    Quote Originally Posted by Crofab
    The world is ripe with people who pick their dogs when it's painfully obvious the dog is still in the fray, and a lot of those particular individuals are always at ringside adding their opinions like the cheap popcorn they're worth.
    Unfortunately, the world is also ripe with people who have don't have the sense /class to pick up when it's clear that it needs to be done and is the right thing to do ... which is a far greater crime to the sport than a guy picking up a bit too early.



    Quote Originally Posted by Crofab
    Many people over the years fancy themselves as dogmen, but they simply don't have the stones to actually compete when their particular row gets too hard to hoe.
    Yeah well, many people over the years fancy "themselves" as having stones, just because they wantonly put their dogs in bad situations, when the truth is such people wouldn't have the stones to handle anything like that kind of situation "themselves."



    Quote Originally Posted by Crofab
    The owner of the dog, if he's of any repute and consequence, knows his dog and his capabilities a lot more than "everyone" standing around watching.
    This is true in some cases, not so true in others. Sometimes the actual owner is "too close to the tree" to see the whole forest clearly. This is what his second is for also: adding to the perspective.



    Quote Originally Posted by Crofab
    But I do agree that thinking the dog has a chance and him actually having it are two separate ideas.
    I think everyone can agree on that.

    Jack

    .

  8. #48

    Re: $5000 to Race???

    Quote Originally Posted by CA Jack
    Unfortunately, the world is also ripe with people who have don't have the sense /class to pick up when it's clear that it needs to be done and is the right thing to do ... which is a far greater crime to the sport than a guy picking up a bit too early.
    There will be no disagreement from me here.



    Quote Originally Posted by CA Jack
    Yeah well, many people over the years fancy "themselves" as having stones, just because they wantonly put their dogs in bad situations, when the truth is such people wouldn't have the stones to handle anything like that kind of situation "themselves."
    That is true, but I think this may be where we have the same view but with different terminology. A person that wantonly puts their dogs in those unnecessary situations isn't showing they have any stones. They are showing a lack of understanding of what it takes to be worthy to handle and/or care for such an animal. Any total and complete idiot can do that without giving it a second thought as we've all seen for years on end with individuals.



    Quote Originally Posted by CA Jack
    This is true in some cases, not so true in others. Sometimes the actual owner is "too close to the tree" to see the whole forest clearly. This is what his second is for also: adding to the perspective.
    At times, you're exactly right. At times, I'm exactly right. There have been times when I've been "too close to the tree", so to speak; I think we all have if we've done this type of thing with any longevity. As time and the world moved on, I learned how to find, most of the time, a middle ground where I can see the tree and the forest equally. Hopefully people are willing to grow and develop some objectivity to this dear old sport and develop the same mental compass as many others.

  9. #49
    If it looks like I'm going to lose a good dog, even if they CAN, undoubtedly, mount a comeback and win, but doing so will result in their death, I'll pick up and take the L. I know what I have in that particular dog at that point, and that would be the main point of the venture, no?

  10. #50
    In the circle I run with there are only 3 of us. When 1 is going out we put our money together to make the purse. What you put in the pot you get back double if we win. It has worked out pretty good.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •