Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23
  1. #11
    Senior Dog
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanked: 2277
    Quote Originally Posted by TuMicks View Post
    Hmmm... so what you're saying is my dream of the reunited lines is still on the drawing board.

    Are the people trying to breed the "moderate lab" using a lot of UK lines? It would seem to me that trying to split the difference starting with today's FC/AFC's would be a relatively herculean task, but might be easier going to the UK gun dogs. (I think their FC's do not appear that different from ours.)

    (I guess my ignorance is showing again. By "moderate" I mean like median or mean in statistics, as much field as show, strictly speaking not looking like either side, but having some of the appearance and functionality of both. I'm probably using the wrong terminology.)
    It probably depends on who you ask, but I know a couple people who are doing it by combining field/show lines. Usually mostly show with a little field thrown in (25% or less). They don’t necessarily show in conformation though.
    Annette

    Cookie (HIT HC Jamrah's Legally Blonde, UDX, OM2, BN) 6/4/2015
    Sassy (HIT Jamrah's Blonde Ambition, UDX, OM2, BN) 6/4/2015

    Chloe (HIT HC OTCH Windsong's Femme Fatale, UDX4, OM6, RE) 6/7/2009

    And remembering:

    Scully (HC Coventry's Truth Is Out There, UD, TD, RN) 4/14/1996 - 6/30/2011
    Mulder (Coventry's I Want To Believe, UD, RN, WC) 5/26/1999 - 4/22/2015

    And our foster Jolie (Windsong's Genuine Risk, CDX) 5/26/1999 - 3/16/2014

    Hidden Content

  2. #12
    Senior Dog Labradorks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,947
    Thanked: 2421
    I thought he seemed a little long-backed, coat doesn't seem quite right. Definitely moderate but not really what you'd see in the ring.

  3. #13
    Senior Dog TuMicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,366
    Thanked: 1096
    Quote Originally Posted by Annette47 View Post
    It probably depends on who you ask, but I know a couple people who are doing it by combining field/show lines. Usually mostly show with a little field thrown in (25% or less). They don’t necessarily show in conformation though.
    They might be able to get more field "bang" for their buck and get more drive in their dogs if they looked at dogs like this one. That is to say, they might be able to have a higher % of field dogs in the pedigree without losing balance.

    There is some controversy about how well UK labs might do in US FT's. They breed for nose, we breed more for marking. They breed for balanced temperament and we... well, we don't. So... that might not bring the lines any closer to unity after all.

  4. #14
    Senior Dog Berna's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Belgrade, Serbia
    Posts
    4,080
    Thanked: 4633
    I don't know how this dog could be a dual CH.

    From the breed standard: strongly built, short coupled. Broad skull. Broad and deep through chest and ribs. Broad and strong over loins and hindquarters.
    This dog lacks all these. Also he has a bit longer back.
    Cookie Black Snowflake
    July 12th, 2006. - May 25th, 2023.

    Hidden Content

    Hidden Content

    Hidden Content
    Hidden Content | Hidden Content | Hidden Content | Hidden Content

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Berna For This Useful Post:

    Annette47 (04-08-2017), Labradorks (04-08-2017)

  6. #15
    Senior Dog TuMicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,366
    Thanked: 1096
    I pointed to this dog because he has the drive and physical strength and stamina to become a FC. (We don't know if he can mark which is paramount in the US. so it's hypothetical). The Fenway kennels made the video to display this stud's look and function, so he makes a great case study for discussion.

    And, I'm starting see how the divergence in the breed has become so extreme.

    You can see it in FT's. Because retrievers are getting very, very good at the work of retrieving and because the judges have to separate the first-second-third-etc. place dogs from the 70 or more that are entered, they have come up with extreme tests like ridiculous 400 yard marks and blinds so long that the handler can't see the dog to handle him.

    Likewise (I think) in the ring, the judges are using those aspects of the standard that are subjective to separate the top dogs among the many entries. So, "deepness" is objective (brisket comes to elbows.) Height and weight are objective. But things like broadness is relative as is the thickness of the coat. So the judges are being honest when they pick those characteristics to separate the winners from losers. And breeders are being totally rational when they begin to breed dogs to win under those judges.

    A solution to that problem has been developed on the field aspect of Retrieverdom... the hunt test. If the ring side came up with something similar... maybe people will once again try to make the grade on both appearance and function.

    And I think some title that would recognize Labs of highest "Dual Merit" would be a very good thing for the breed.

    OK... I'll adjust my pipe dream slightly and recognize that the Dual CH is never going to happen. But the idea of the Dual should be hammered out (IMHO).
    Last edited by TuMicks; 04-08-2017 at 11:45 AM.

  7. #16
    Senior Dog
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanked: 2277
    Quote Originally Posted by TuMicks View Post

    A solution to that problem has been developed on the field aspect of Retrieverdom... the hunt test. If the ring side came up with something similar... maybe people will once again try to make the grade on both appearance and function.

    And I think some title that would recognize Labs of highest "Dual Merit" would be a very good thing for the breed.

    OK... I'll adjust my pipe dream slightly and recognize that the Dual CH is never going to happen. But the idea of the Dual should be hammered out (IMHO).
    A major difference between hunt tests and field trials is that hunt tests are non-competitive, meaning that there isn’t a single winner. Conformation is competitive - a non-competitive conformation “test” already exists - the LRC’s conformation certificate, so I’m not sure what you are suggesting.

    Plenty of conformation dogs are successfully running hunt tests. There are quite a few CH/MH out there who have proven they both adhere to the standard and can work in the field. Maybe not succeed at the extremes of today’s field trials, but I would argue that as you say field trials have become much more extreme than they were back in the days of the true Dual champions.

    If you really don’t think a CH/MH is impressive enough, maybe a solution would be to make hunt tests more like Obedience - which is pass/fail as far as getting regular titles, but competitive as far as getting an OTCH. So grade the performances of the MH/SH dogs and declare a winner (and a point schedule towards earning a HTCH), but the rest still can earn qualifying scores towards their titles. The test itself would stay the same but the criteria for evaluation would get stricter. For example, in Obedience you need a total of 170/200 to get a leg towards a title, but it would be very difficult to earn an OTCH without repeatedly scoring 197/200 or better. I don’t know if that could even be done in HT as it would depend on how clearly defined the exact way the tests should be performed ... it hasn’t been done in Agility where getting a MACH is not competitive (it’s given after a certain number of QQ’s, similar to a UDX in Obedience but adding in points for speed), nor in tracking (a Champion Tracker hasn’t defeated other dogs - it’s passed all three tracking tests - TD, TDX, and VST).
    Last edited by Annette47; 04-08-2017 at 12:15 PM.
    Annette

    Cookie (HIT HC Jamrah's Legally Blonde, UDX, OM2, BN) 6/4/2015
    Sassy (HIT Jamrah's Blonde Ambition, UDX, OM2, BN) 6/4/2015

    Chloe (HIT HC OTCH Windsong's Femme Fatale, UDX4, OM6, RE) 6/7/2009

    And remembering:

    Scully (HC Coventry's Truth Is Out There, UD, TD, RN) 4/14/1996 - 6/30/2011
    Mulder (Coventry's I Want To Believe, UD, RN, WC) 5/26/1999 - 4/22/2015

    And our foster Jolie (Windsong's Genuine Risk, CDX) 5/26/1999 - 3/16/2014

    Hidden Content

  8. #17
    Senior Dog TuMicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,366
    Thanked: 1096
    It's kinda being done in HT's. They came up with the Master National and more recently Master Invitational that requires that the dogs that qualify to run be only amateur handled.
    The MN has produced some problems for the sport in that they require (I think) 7 Master Q's in one year to qualify to run. (I think September through September and the MN is run in October.) So the entries to run Master Stakes are limiting out almost as soon as the club begins to take entries (since it's done via Entryexpress.com... there are actually people who sit at their computers and watch the clock and the stakes are full within 5 minutes. It's getting ridiculous. People are complaining that pros have developed algorithms to enable them to enter 20 dogs with one key stroke. That's how crazy it's getting.)

    Maybe it makes sense to do it like the Obedience people do. But I have a feeling the HT people would have seizures if you tried to do it that way. And I would bet you almost instantly, the Master Tests would look just like FT's.

    So... on the conformation side... you're right. The conformation certificate is sort of one and done. Not awfully exciting. Kinda like the working certificate. Not very demanding, so what does it really do for the breed?

    Hmmmmmmm.... how could you do this?

  9. #18
    Senior Dog windycanyon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    C. WA
    Posts
    1,624
    Thanked: 1235
    Quote Originally Posted by barry581 View Post
    I think he's a nice looking Labrador. Very nice head, but I doubt he has enough "body" for today's judges. I looked at the other dogs they have, and there are some very nice looking dogs, and some not so nice looking. I thought this chocolate dog was very nice!

    Fenway Timber - Welcome to Fenway Labrador Retrievers
    I agree w/ the comments on Brock. Nice dog but not enough of him for today's AKC show ring. He looks like many of my "tweeners" actually!

    Timber doesn't do a lot for me. Eyes would likely not be dark enough for our show ring, his left hock looks like there may be a problem there (appears swollen/ OCD?) and really not that much turn of stifle from that photo anyhow. He also looks a little jowly and has a roll over the shoulders so you have to wonder about shoulder construction.
    Hidden Content
    The WindyCanyon Girls (taken Summer 2018)
    IntCH WindyCanyon's Northern Spy CDX RA JH OA OAJ CC (14.5 yrs)
    IntCH WindyCanyon's Ruby Pink BN CD RA CC (4.5 yrs)
    IntCH WindyCanyon's Kanzi BN CDX RE JH (5 yrs)
    IntCH WindyCanyon ItsOnlyMoneyHoneycrisp BN RN CC (16mos)
    IntCH WindyCanyon's Pippin BN RI CC (2.5 yrs)
    IntCH WindyCanyon's Envy CDX RE JH CC (10.5 yrs)
    IntCH HIT WindyCanyon's Kiku A Fuji Too CDX RE JH CC (10 yrs)







  10. #19
    Senior Dog TuMicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,366
    Thanked: 1096
    Thanks for these observations. I'm learning some things, (kinda sorta) if slowly.

  11. #20
    Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Greenwood, Delaware
    Posts
    7,348
    Thanked: 7148
    Quote Originally Posted by windycanyon View Post
    I agree w/ the comments on Brock. Nice dog but not enough of him for today's AKC show ring. He looks like many of my "tweeners" actually!

    Timber doesn't do a lot for me. Eyes would likely not be dark enough for our show ring, his left hock looks like there may be a problem there (appears swollen/ OCD?) and really not that much turn of stifle from that photo anyhow. He also looks a little jowly and has a roll over the shoulders so you have to wonder about shoulder construction.
    I definitely agree on the light eyes, didn't really notice the first time I looked at him, which is odd because it's one of my pet peeves with chocolates. It's funny you mention the stifles, as I don't think you see the nice turn that you did in the past. When I watch Brooks I often think how nice his stifles are because it's something I don't see often, even in conformation Labs.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to barry581 For This Useful Post:

    windycanyon (04-08-2017)

 



Not a Member of the Labrador Retriever Chat Forums Yet?
Register for Free and Share Your Labrador Retriever Photos

Posting Permissions

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