Dog Site - Dog Stuff
Dog Forum | Dog Pictures

Go Back   Chazhound Dog Forum > Dog Discussions and Dog Talk Forums > Dogs - General Dog Chat


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 02-12-2014, 01:04 AM
Paviche's Avatar
Paviche Paviche is offline
Duuuuude.
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Aurora, CO
Posts: 980
Default

Omg, those Russian collies.



WHAT

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saeleofu View Post
Yes and no. If ears are the only thing wrong in your breed, by all means breed for ears and count yourself lucky. But usually there are more pressing matters. In my breed, most dogs have CEA to some degree. Most dogs are MDR1 mutants. There are also other genetic health issues in the breed, in addition to structure and all that fun stuff. Those, to me, are more important than having perfect naturally tipped ears (and ears are a BIG DEAL in my breed. Most collies, at least in the US, have their ears taped and/or glued at some point, and some people apparently think it's cruel. WTF. Those are the same people who breed houndy-looking ugly-headed European collies, though, too.)
Yeah, that makes sense. But I also feel like there's a difference between there being more pressing matters/health issues to focus on before ears, and cropping because nobody breeds for correct ears because everyone just crops anyway, when the standard says otherwise. I could be interpreting Kady's post incorrectly, too.
__________________

Kendall & the Red Dogs: Rowan & Riff
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-12-2014, 01:29 AM
Saeleofu Saeleofu is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,036
Default

I didn't realize how bad the Russian Roughs looked. Compared to those, the smoothies look amazing (I was actually referring to the smooths when I mentioned Russians the first time)

Czech smoothies, not my cup of tea either

Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-12-2014, 02:45 AM
Romy's Avatar
Romy Romy is offline
Taxiderpy
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Olympia, WA
Posts: 9,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saeleofu View Post
I didn't realize how bad the Russian Roughs looked. Compared to those, the smoothies look amazing (I was actually referring to the smooths when I mentioned Russians the first time)

Czech smoothies, not my cup of tea either

Waht.

That rough too. Part of what really bothers me about European collies is the heads on the smooths and roughs are totally different from each other because they don't interbreed them. That's weird. They're supposed to be the same breed!
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-12-2014, 08:14 AM
SpaceMutt's Avatar
SpaceMutt SpaceMutt is offline
Show Dog
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NYC
Posts: 267
Default

Woah....confession time, those Czech smooths are GORGEOUS to me! I would actually consider getting a smooth that looked like that (not a big fan of Collies, rough or smooth, generally). The one on the left in particular...just breathtaking.
__________________
PitaPata Dog tickers
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-12-2014, 10:57 AM
ruffiangirl ruffiangirl is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Fort McMurray, AB, CA
Posts: 1,681
Default

That collie looking at the camera looks like a chow chow.


I have yet to see a Shiba inu with a proper tail in ANY ring in North America, loose single curl or sickle parallel to the back were the only acceptable tails, when I had mine and Tonka lost because of his tail (to a miss marked dog no less) now they have added double curl and sickle tail pointing up, so basically any.single.tail...awesome.

I would also love to see more colours in the ring, it's always just clear red, no love for the Black and Tan .

This is NOT an acceptable shiba inu colour http://www.calgaryshibas.com/dogs/3 (interestingly he was a half sibling to my female shiba, ruffian)
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-12-2014, 12:40 PM
Laurelin's Avatar
Laurelin Laurelin is offline
I'm All Ears
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 29,545
Default

Overall paps aren't too bad. There's a variety in the breed but I do think the big name specials are going a certain direction for sure.

Coats are definitely getting more profuse, which is annoying. Too much emphasis on ears and not enough on structure.

I also greatly dislike some paps I'm seeing where the breeder is taking the phrase 'slightly longer than tall' to create some weirdly proportioned dogs that have stubby little legs. There's some weird ones out there showing. If it looks like a dachshund x pap, it's not show quality, imo. Show BCs seem to go the same way and a lot look like corgi mixes. They're missing the 'slightly' part of slightly longer than tall.

I also hate chi faces on papillons but that's more subjective as head type in the standard is pretty loose. I just want my paps to look like paps and have more refined features than chis. I don't like overly domed heads and overly short muzzles on papillons. If you want that look, get a chi.

I dislike the lineages I see more than anything. Breeding on Kirby repeatedly until you get a dog who has all their grandparents either being him or sired by/grandsired by him is disgusting. /rant/
__________________
Mia CGC - (5 year old Papillon)
Hank - (approx. 10 month old Spotty Dog)
Summer TG3 TIAD - (10 year old Papillon)
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02-12-2014, 12:44 PM
kady05's Avatar
kady05 kady05 is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Chesapeake, Virginia
Posts: 1,240
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paviche View Post
Yeah, that makes sense. But I also feel like there's a difference between there being more pressing matters/health issues to focus on before ears, and cropping because nobody breeds for correct ears because everyone just crops anyway, when the standard says otherwise. I could be interpreting Kady's post incorrectly, too.
I mean.. while the standard says that natural ears are preferred, for many, many years, cropped have been "in". And everyone knows that just because the standard says so, doesn't mean that's what the dogs are going to look like. Maybe one day natural ears will make a comeback, but until then, I don't have a problem with breeders not really worrying about ears. We have other issues we need to worry about, ears are a "simple" fix.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-12-2014, 12:56 PM
Elrohwen's Avatar
Elrohwen Elrohwen is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posts: 1,036
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Laurelin View Post
I also greatly dislike some paps I'm seeing where the breeder is taking the phrase 'slightly longer than tall' to create some weirdly proportioned dogs that have stubby little legs. There's some weird ones out there showing. If it looks like a dachshund x pap, it's not show quality, imo. Show BCs seem to go the same way and a lot look like corgi mixes. They're missing the 'slightly' part of slightly longer than tall.
I see this a lot in the "slightly longer than tall" breeds. If it's not supposed to be square, it's going to be bred too long by somebody. I have the same complaint about Welshies, and I know a husky person who has the same problem with her breed. It's weird how it happens across breeds. I wonder if the square breed people have a similar complaint (or the opposite with backs being too short)?

Incidentally, some spaniels in the late 1800s became very long and low (basically like the sussex is now) because it was the trend, though they weren't functional at all. The Field Spaniel particularly was redeveloped into a moderate functional dog after going down that road. Funny how that sort of thing is relevant over a hundred years later.
__________________

Watson - Ch. Truepenny Olympic Triumph | Welsh Springer Spaniel | DOB 8.2.12
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-12-2014, 12:58 PM
Elrohwen's Avatar
Elrohwen Elrohwen is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posts: 1,036
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paviche View Post
In Brittanys, there are some dogs that are really waify, like if the wind was strong enough they might get blown away. The standard says this:



I don't care for this look, although I think it is technically within standard:



I much prefer a dog like this:

Totally agree with you on that. I don't like the super racy Brittanies at all. I love the second dog. Some Welshies are too stocky with too much coat for me, and some brittanies are too skinny and racy, but that dog sort of hits the nice mark between both of them.

I looked at Britts before Welshies and if I had seen more dogs like that, I may have ended up with one.
__________________

Watson - Ch. Truepenny Olympic Triumph | Welsh Springer Spaniel | DOB 8.2.12

Last edited by Elrohwen; 02-12-2014 at 01:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02-12-2014, 01:30 PM
FG167's Avatar
FG167 FG167 is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Jefferson, GA
Posts: 2,473
Default

GSDs, I am not a fan of ASL (American Show Lines), they do not look like a breed that is going to be able to do the demanding physical things I want...and I don't personally care for the temperament. WGSL (West German Show Line) is the route I would go if I *had* to get a show line dog. Although again, the temperament in general is not what I like.

Working line GSD = love. Kastle is a pretty good representation of a WL dog, and gets very good critiques when I show him against WGSL dogs. Unfortunately, he's a long coat, which many dislike...and he has some other...issues. But, physically looking at him, he's quite nice. Moderate, he's got good secondary sex characteristics, excellent movement. He could be a touch heavier but with his coat, he looks like he is and he may fill out more as he ages.



Real crappy stack but you get the picture...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Paviche View Post
I much prefer a dog like this:

I adore the look of that dog!
__________________
~Falon~
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:41 AM.


1997-2013 Chazhound Dog Site