folks that breed there own stock

I have only bred my male twice. The bitch had 2 pups and we kept both and the second female had 5 and we have 2 of those. I want to wait now and see how they mature to evaluate what we have.
Things tend to pop up in bloodlines later on down the road that you don't want to reproduce. By keeping the majority of them close to you it's easy to track.

 

Would yall breed to a great performing dog that cant produce?

Or a great producer that cant perform? LMAO

If you can find one with both you already half there LOL.

 

Although im not breeding my "own stock"...i actually dont even make breedings I leave that to the professional (my old man) but to me its as simple as each dog is an individual in the family...and u can have a family like the kennedys...or tge

 

(couldnt edit) or u can have a family like michael jordans...the kennedys had a president senators congressmen tv anchors (maria shiver...see even when crossed they still got good %) with the jordans u dont have shit but mike...my old man once told me dnt ever try to chase no dog...dead or alive....make ya own... Aces are so special

 

(damn phone) because of their rarity...my old man believed in eradixation not replication though... And even though may not be able to make that dog again if youre trying to and doing it the right way then youre bettering the family which is a win win

 

thinking a little more about this topic yesterday, it came to my mind some practices that are common for breeders in most areas but don't know if are applied also to dogs...this practices are that breeders, never release/show their foundation stock made by inbred "pure lines" as it is, because they're easy to reproduce and anybody that get a couple of good dogs from him could start selling very similar dogs with almost any work involved, at lower price. To avoid that, they sell hybrids of their foundation lines, also because hybrids are usually better performers, not having the endogamic depression given by very tight inbreding, also are protecting his work, because if you make f2 of this hybris will have a hard selection work, to give consistency to this strain again... you know if somebody works like this to? because i think if you want to breed from that won't be a very good option, but i you want a straight performer i think there's more chances of getting one, also maybe would be good to differ the consistant parental stock you're working and refining, from performing stock... don't kow if this make any sense in dog world but hope somebody find it interesting...

 

Breed to a dog that can't produce?

 

If you breed your own dogs, you will breed to a dog that can't produce. They won't all spit fire and it's only one way ur gonna find that out. U can't say he cant produce shit until you've bred em

 

^^^well put^^^

 

You know benthere I was thinking about that after I typed one thing I think we all have the tendency to be is kennel blind to some extent so putting some of what you breed in close hands with an objective pov maybe you could get a more honest look at what you are breeding by watching those dogs develope in other hands? I have also heard that some dogs did better in other hands so I guess that's just part of the game and you take what you can get and hope for the best.

 

I agree DP I like reading bentheres posts lol he has some great conversation to go around His reasoning is always different than many and I like that about a person nice posts benthere.

 

Damn Naus you aint get my analogy? I thought you was brighter then that? LOL

Yall know a great producer and a great performer are two different things right? LOL

The OP was why a great performer cant produce like himself or better.

There are many factors to help get the percentages in your favor but when it comes down to it, each individual dog , including litter mates will vary to some degree or another each with there own unique traits.

 

I guess some of yall aint experienced enough to see the flaws in this statement? LOL

A good breeder will NOT lower his standards regardless of who's stock is in his hands.

There are people that only breeds dogs and there are people that only shows them and there are people that do BOTH.

I would prefer the one that does both.

 

I feel saying a dog can't be both a performer and a producer is setting your expectations low and they most likely will descend to your expectations. If you are hung up on breeding certain lines you pretty much box yourself in. I'm sure some folks bred great performers and produced dogs as good or better than the sire or dam. Does it happen on a regular basis? No. That is just the nature of dog breeding. Sometimes it skips a generation, but with a little thought and some luck it can and has happened. Now for the whole keeping a litter or putting some in the hands of others. This can be put to rest by simply taking a quick glance back at history. Did Carver become top breeder by showing dogs or selling them. Did he show honeybunch, boomerang, rascal etc. No. Was Colby tops for all the dogs he kept or for the ones he sold. I guess Patrick took Buck down to Florida to beat then grch Sandman. Nope. Some folks are breeders and others goers. There are exceptions to this, but most fall into one category or the other. It is like people. I can tell you all your faults, yet I am blind to mine. Most have read the writings of a breeder of Patrick/Hollingsworth dogs. I can remember him writing about how his dogs lost in the hands of others because the new owners messed up. When it was more than likely a case of the dog being subpar from jumpstreet. I like this thread, have asked this question many times and never tire of hearing good opinions on the subject. Good one BB.

 

This one's correct

 

I didnt see where he said anything about anybody lowering they standards