Littermates

Try this one: 1 Example, Why is it we acknowledge Davis' "Boomerang" a line of dogs but not the same for Art's "Missy" as I see it Art's "Missy actually give us more in what we consider great dogs. Is it because of the # of Wins or who owned them??? Now the 2nd part is the debate, some of you younger guys give us some more examples of that going on today with some littermates. And why don't we just get a puppy off a lesser known littermate than paying Big Bucks for the Gr. Ch./ROM or so on.

 

because most folks who get these dogs are only after paper, especially when they get advice from others who typically respond in a general manner. bottom line most people only own pets and not working dogs so they rely on the merits of ancestors to justify their pets, rather than the merits of their dogs

 

This example is a little special, a male can be a hundred times without problems and prouduce his own line, but a bitch has limited breedings but this bitch (Missy) produced alot of dogs (fake or real) breed to Bullyson or Stompanato, or just Carver dogs.

The reason you want a good performer dog... even if they have a similar makeup gene pool, a dog can carry defects that his littermate doesnt, and those are less likely to pass to their own offspring. Thats the reason people not just breed, but picks the best dogs on every litter for his breedings, hoping to just pack the good traits and delete the bad ones.

When dogs are linebreed/inbreed you put dogs with similar traits, good or bad, and even if genetics goes to father or mother sides, they are pretty similar, so you have more chances to have solid dogs and know their own traits beforehand.

Now, the more they are breed the more chances they'll establish their own family or strain, depending if they are succefull as producers as well.

 

The reason you breed to one litter mate and not the other is because they dont throw the same stuff...Devil Deacon didnt throw the exact same kinda dogs as Hunter Red..its as simple as dominate and recessive traits.. say Hunter Red got the recessive trait to throw a high % of Harder mouthed dogs (example) ,but deacon got the Dominate RB trait to throw a high % of game plugs (again example)..now say you have a game plug bitch and you need to add mouth and ability to your yard..but the hypothetical owner of deacon sells his dogs for 300 and the hypothetical owner of Hunter Red sells his dogs for 600...would you by a deacon dog knowing chances are you wont add the traits you need and you'll spend more money down the line? or would you go ahead and spend the extra cash and hope Hunter Red adds what your lookin for..?

 

its bc that dog is obviously a better worker than their littermate. Thats like saying if a girl has a kid by you then a kid by ur brother both the kids are gonna come out the same. Thats just not the way its works. You are two different people and those would be 2 different dogs.

 

Remember this is just an exmple: So let's say I have a Gr. Ch. and You have it's Littermate Female. You really don't want to take a chance of losing her. But you have tested her and she passed the test but only you and a few buddies know she's honest. Then you bred her to a proven male that has No title. Do you think she is capable of throwing the traits of my Gr. Ch., I think you would and I do to. But people will still pay the big bucks for the Gr. Ch. and you are sitting there wondering what's up. I guess what I am getting at is, can a Littermate throw as good or better dog then my Gr. Ch. where he may only throw average dogs. Where I may be able to get a pup from you, for let's say $400.00 but to get one off of the Titled dog it's going to be $800.00 or more.I see this alot and myself that's why I'm always am looking for a nobody Littermate of the big Titled dogs. Am I going the wrong direction, because I've been in this situation with my brood bitches before.

 

Refer to post # 4...even though its hypothetical it has truth to it...Hunter Red was considered a "poor quality" pit dog but was game...Deacon was a great pitdog from what i've gathered and was also game..Hunter Red got bred to everybody and there momma for cheap and had a wide variety of offspring quality because or the wide variety of females bred too (in my opinion)...Deacon was bred alot to though but probably for alot more money...Did Hunter Red through just as good or better offspring then Deacon? in my opinion Hell YEahhh..not necissarily better but just as good..

 

imo they might or might not.id rather take a chance with gr ch.but if the litter mate good dog that just havent been contracted but tested well than you prob have a high chance of getting good offspring you just wouldent have that title in the ped.

 

exactly and do you wanna pay 400 dollars more for 4 letters?