Only time to inbreed!

kergin, you prbly couldn't find one cuz that is too tight...IMO that is really almost pure inbreeding for 3 generations.

 

EZ - thanks again

minor threat - heard that before too. that's why you gotta cull hard, right?

BB - I've seen a ped before, i think it's Red Dangers (tight OFRN) that, if memory serves me right, was a product of many in-breedings.

lemme find the ped...

2 gens of brother/sister breedings, and iono how many gens behind the 4th were inbred off sander's satan & hemphill's rebel (minus the Red Devil blood through Hemphill Lil Babe). tornado & storm were from an in-breeding, duster to his daughter cyclone (if i'm reading it right), they produced twister and hurricane, and they produced red danger.

that's in-breeding with positive results.

now, i know when you say "such-and-such a dog is in my dog's blood," some will respond with something like "it's too far back to matter." other's will say sit down and draw up a 12-16 gen ped (if you can trace it back) and get a look at the big picture. like ez said, different schools of thought [which is my favorite part about these dogs, everyone has what they were taught and believe, and you can never get enough opinions as long as you take it with a grain of salt]. obviously you gotta make sure the recent ancestors were correct...i remember reading a post where a fella said, "just b/c you great grandfather (or great great, etc) was albert einstien, doesn't make you a genius.

**edit**

SW - sorry for taking the thread ina different direction, just tryin to understand in-breeding vs line-breeding, how it plays out in the long run, etc etc

I.M. - iono if you still check this forum out every once in a while, but if you had any input, that'd be great. you're one man that comes to mind that's kept a family of animals going this long, maybe any links or anything that might help someone understand long-term thought process behind in-breeding and line-breeding to keep it how you want...

 

"Brood stock" or "bred to produce!" is puppy peddler bs. Your buying and selling papers, nothing else. Without looking, you have no idea what traits are even present, so what if it's 75% "this dog" on paper, if none of his/her influences are present in the dog?!

You know what is "brood stock" and "bred to produce"? Proven dogs, generation after generation. Take a look at SCK breeding programs, and tell me how many gaps you find in the recent, average pedigree of their best? Theres a reason these dogs are 4-5 generations bred by one kennel, and still producing better dogs than they started with. Half of it is starting with good stock, the other half is knowing how to evaluate that stock, and breed it to your requirements. Do they look particularly tight on paper? Are they loading up on long-dead famous dog as many times as possible in the fewest generations, with no regard to the dogs actually contributing to the offspring? No.

Inbreeding is essential, inbreeding for papers is for the birds and has no sensible basis or logic.

 

Cant get any straighter than that! Most ppl that deal in animals (APBT) shouldnt breed!

 

Nico didnt take hold

 

Very true. Peddlers do use that term "BROOD STOCK", & "BRED TO PRODUCE", as part of the "SMOKE & MIRRORS", game. ( As well as "TESTED" ) Yet I feel it is legitimate, when used the right way, by the right person. Breeding for papers is wack, which is why the dog in question should be studied carefully. Nothing is a sure thing. If you are buying stock from a reputable dogman, that you trust, it is worth investing in, if you feel the dogman in worth investing in. If the dogs have been bred 5 or 6 gens. by the same kennel, that is a good sign. It shows consistancy. (Not Always, I know.)
BROOD STOCK I would get:
Tom Ratliff
Southern Kennels
Wildside Kennels
Tom Garnder
Gary Hammonds
Gotti & Mugleson's ... ( Ha ha, just wanted to see if you were paying attention)
I think the Gotti & Mugleston would fall into the "SMOKE & MIRRORS", category, but not the others. See the difference?
Granted some of the first group may fall into the peddler category, but they earned the right to be there by producing quality.

 

Did he cross? Curtesy?

 

I'm assuming you mean in his loss to IBM?

Tom Ratliff is RIP
Southern Kennels is going out of business
I don't know a Tom garnder (LOL only)
Hammonds and WSK are still producing good dogs, if you like their lines. Since neither have been "active" for quite awhile, that is a good indicator of how well they breed these dogs. Both kennels participate in legal means of the APBT, and breed for this purpose now.

 

I know SK is out of the game, but here is an IE: of "BROOD STOCK" that is not peddler "BS".

Southern Kennels is closing. Fire sale time. (hypothectically) They Bred GR.CH. MAYDAY to his littermate (BELLY) sister CH. DRAGONLADY. Bred GR. CH. MAYDAY back to his Daughter to that breeding. ( Or bred the littermates of that). (asumme it worked or didn't) Then bred father daughter breeding to littermates, or the littermate breeding back to GR.CH MAYDAY. (Which didn't work) Dogs are 5yrs old and cold as shyt. Are they wothless? Would they be worth taking a chance on to add to your program? Good outcross? Say you have a hook up in Wisc., with Pxxxxx and White's Tab (ADBA reg., DNA profiled son of JEEP). You wouldn't breed the SK "BROODSTOCK"?. If it isn't brood stock, what is? That's not "BRED TO PRODUCE"?
I think that paritcular Broodstock would outcross great. With or without a tight bred stud.
Now if the famous Blue breeder ( named after a mobster) tried to sell me "broodstock", or "bred to produce", I'll slap fiyah out of his a$$, quick fast, 2x. If SK tries, I will investigate further. It depends on the persons' credibility. If you have managed or bred reputable champions, I am going to listen, because I haven't.
Who would you take finacial advice from: Donald Trump or Bill Gates? ok: either one, vs. a homeless bum, sleeping on the train?
TG, and GH are out, but they were "in", at one time. They have just commercialized thier success and "notitiriaty". I would trust them more that someone , a dogman, (so called) who commercialized thier commercialization. ( I:E: Mobster line, = name changed to protect the guilty)

I believe you should breed the two best dogs possible and thats that. There are much better dogman than me who believe there is more to it than that. (which it is) My mistake was thinking best in terms of one catergory, where the wiser dogmen felt the best covered several categories.
I was wrong because, although I did well, my breeding philosphy was a few generations (usually 1) long. This can result in tunnel vision. (can't see the forrest for the tree's...scenario). Only breeding for one thing creates the opposite of the "TOTAL PACKAGE", one negative result would be the "mobster line". ( I'm sorry for bashing them repeatedly, but they just keep coming to mind, whenever a negative example is needed.)
Wiser dogman considered several other factors. IE: Lineage's production record, concentration of blood, (reffered to as %), physical aspects, intelligence, Lineage's intelligence, ability to pass genetics, previous history of compatibility, historical results , and they planned ahead with greater preparation, vision and detail. They knew they would need to outcross eventually, and even created thier own outcrosses. Sure being cold played a role, but if being cold today, produced many hotter tommorrows, (according to thier plans) it wasn't the decinding factor. In fact, many felt females were only for breeding. They had the experiance of having the dogs for 30 - 40 yrs, and countless generations.
When asked about my opinion about this in a PM, I never said "GET A DOG FROM ME..etc." I told the person, to find the dogman who bred the foundation dog, and see if he could locate some of his stock, for an outcross. Going 5 generation or so, back into his own ped. So I am not talking puppy peddler "BS". I have no vested (money making) intrest in what I've said.

 

Slick, what Old Timer said is correct. If you line breed, you will not be doubling the negative traits, and they will stay recessive. If you inbreed, then traits you cannot see will show up, and you will see the good, bad and ugly of the dogs your using. That is why most folks say inbreeding makes a dog a freak, cause it bring the trash to the surface. And that is why most folks prefer linebreeding, as most of the recessive traits stay back, and it does tighten the good up a bit. I was actually taught to linebreed first, then years later to inbreed.
Having said all of this, you said you do not plan on letting any of them go, correct? If that be the case, I would inbreed, and just be honest with the pups as they grow, and cull hard. Someone said that linebreeding would tighten the paper up, if that is what your interested in, and that's not true, inbreeding tightens that up, but we arent breeding for paper, are we?

Hope I helped and did not confuse. In the end, Like Old Timer said, it is you that must make the decision. Good luck with whatever way you choose to go, and I hope they turn out well for you.

 

I would try both. Really catastrophically is the intermarriage only if the genetic task has no working background. Therefore, show dogs have become so crippled and have degenerated.

 

that dog was pretty gaff heavy on top and gaff is a well known am staff blood. well, in all the staffies i have seen. it doesn't really matter when it comes to akc or ukc cause it's the same damn thing pretty much.

 

Well, it does matter to the AKC, because they won't register an APBT as an Amstaff, but you are right the UKC will register an Amstaff as an APBT...They will always be a different breed to me though.

 

Interesting info.

 

Inbreeding has it's bad sides to those reseaive gens are donate until u keep bring them up ! That's why more lines run flat ? And never breed a cold man

 

good post, genetics is cool stuff...line breeding should only be done with very proven animals, that way you keep the good stuff goind and dont bring to much of the bad out.. inbreeding is only for very very proven animals, who are know to have very little negatie traits..dat way you get the least poop possible. but at the end there are so many genes and posibilities that none of us really know whats gonna happen, those look like well bred dogs and if they are worth breeding any of them could be the one to produce good. the nice thing about breeding is that you always expect the best but you never know untill you know...lol good luck!!

 

if u cant reproduce what u have inbreed to preserve what u got u can always linebred or outcross but u cant inbreed linebreed what u dont have anymore and im at a bit of a loss on the advice to breed a certain way to sell what the hell does that mean i like when u all r worried about inbreeding and the so called shit coming out when u inbreed how inferior is the blood ur breeding i would like u boys to elaberate on that some how loaded with defects r ur dogs that u got to worry about all these bad traits comin out with one inbreeding some times i think most guys think to much breed as often as u can as many ways u can sort em out and enjoy what u create

 

This dog is the only survivor of a litter of six. Two got eaten by their mother, she sensed something wrong with them and did what her instincts told her to do, Two more had defective back legs that were paralyzed, The fifth one was weak and died at 6 weeks old. But on the other hand The only one to make it is perfect physically, never has had a sick day, smarter than the average dog, super strong mentally, and all around just a specimen. A great asset to the yard and program.
My dad uses inbreeding/line breeding in almost every litter. By using half siblings together. Along with line breeding on those same individuals.

 

There are all kinds of way to go about it and There is no right or wrong way. More so on what works for your program and line.
Were glad this male is what he is! We got what we wanted from that bro/sis mating even if it was just this one dog that wasn't a rejecto.

 

Testing.....