Comment to 'why do dobermans seem weak?!?!?!'
  • You are still attempting to blame one specific group of people and doing so falsely. There are breed registries. There are no requirements to breed a dog. Most dogs registered in the breed registry are not from people that participate in Show competition. Additionally they are not actively using a dog t perform the work that is was bred to do. We are not going to agree and that is fine. Again you take practically everything stated out of context. You still neglect to admit that the original purpose of a show was to evaluate the stock to see if it was suitable for breeding. It wasn't about ego as you claim. There is no science behind that. It has been proven that more than the dog's genealogy, temperament that determines how good of a worker the dog will be. Everything factors into it. The is why environment is so important. If you do not expose the pup to the right things it does not become a good worker or more accurately it will not become the ideal worker. That is even subjective. Because your ideal is going o be quite a bit different that others ideal.


    There is no doubt that breeds of dogs do not look like they did many years ago. Some will argue that this is because is show breeders.  Some will say it is evolution.  There is also scientific evidence that point to the region in which is was born or raised. The dogs had to adapt to survive is a setting. Additionally instead of focusing on one group the truth is everyone that breeds a dog or have bred a dog play the same role. There are people that are called breeders that have their own ideas of what they want in a dog. Some wanted exaggerated features. This is not limited to one group. This is done but the one that hunt, guarding, retrieve, police, etc. In order to produce these exaggerated features they select dogs that have some of those feature even if that means selecting dogs that are not of the same breed. I use the term exaggerated. This is not limited to excessive size like the great dane.  This can be in shorter legs, longer or shorter muzzles and more. This is not done to create to show dog as you have suggested. This is done because people have their ideal of what they desire. Additionally they are many more people that breed dogs that don't use any type of selective breeding. They breed dogs just for the same of breeding. Some do it because they have been told that you are supposed to breed a dog. They will let any dog breed. then try to sell the pups. Often they end up in a shelter. If we take a look at the pit bull. It was a small dog. Now we have people claiming that they have pure bred pit bulls over 150lbs. You don't breed dogs that are around 35lbs and get 170lbs dogs. You don't do this be selective breeding of the largest dogs of this breed and get them to produce even larger dogs. You do this by adding a mastiff into the gene pool. This is not a function of "Show Breeders" That is a function of anyone that has a dog.


    You've said that in the show there is no considerations for the dog's function. I'm not quoting you. But this is what your statements has implied. I have to disagree with you. In the written standards the dogs has to have stable temperament. It needs this to perform it function. It need to be of a certain size to perform its function. It is to have a certain temperament or confidence to perform its function. I can also tell you from persona experience that I had one of my pups in a UKC dog show. Personally I didn't and still don't agree with the judge. But I am able to accept the judge's opinion and ruling. My pup made it to best in breed. The judge chose this other dog over mines. The judge told me that my dog had the better gait for the breed. My dog had the better conformation for the breed. Everything on my dog was better head, muzzle, mask, gait, hocks, tail, etc. But the other dog was chosen because at that stage the other dog was more equipped to take down cattle than my pup/ My pup was maybe 6 months or less at the time. The other dog was over 18 months. Of course in theory the other dog had the appearance that it can take dog some wild cattle better that a immature pup. I accepted what the judge said and moved on. We don't know if that was true. But the judge made the decision based upon size and maturity. It is quite possible that the other dog has never seen cattle and would have run at the sight of one. It is also possible that my dog that was born on a farm with a guy that hunted on a regular basis and the one I chose because it was the first pup that began to chase the livestock and had a very strong prey drive would have been the one that would grab and hold that wild cattle.

    I find it odd that you mention since and you call the dog a pack animal. According to science dogs are not pack animals. They do not have a hierarchy. They do not use the hierarchy to preserve the existence to the pack. This was debunked by science long ago. In fact pack and dominance have debunked. The person that originally wrote the book that was quoted as being the first to say wold pack later wrote a new book and said he made a mistake about packs, and alpha male and alpha females. Many books were written after the first book and used what he said about wolves and later associated with dogs. So if his writing were wrong everything everyone else wrote that used is wrong information must also be wrong. Apparently he went to the publisher and wanted them to change what he wrote with correct information that he learned after more research. The publishers refused to rewrite and publish the book. Therefore he had to write a new book that didn't become as popular and o one knew that they were using bad information.