Thanks, I understand as far as private owners not titling a good dog for whatever reason. But wouldn't it make sense for a breeder if he has good dogs to begin with, having strong working titles espesially on his breeding stock, as an extra layer of proof, beyond just his word? Plus it shows more commitment when he/she the breeder is actively involved in titling dogs in the area that he/she claims their dogs are good at?

I'm not sure where you are in the country but it's not always that simple. It's certainly much different here in the the states than it is in European countries for training.

Not to find an excuse here but it's a task indeed. I have to drive 3.5 hours each way weekly for training and that can be time consuming. I leave some mornings @ 10am to get there by noon, we train for several hours and by the time I get home it's 10 or 11pm. Some people just don't have that kind of time.

But on another note, even titles these days can have little merit in some instances. I have seen several SchH3 dogs not worth giving a dog bone to. Must have been a Tuesday trial in their cases? Not sure...

I guess what it boils down to if you knowing what you are looking for. If it's a working prospect you should know what desired traits to look for.

Lastly it can also be complex to drag several dogs at one time less known trial them. I guess that's the joy of having multiple dog ( = more responsibility).

Then include all the political crap with clubs these days which really makes you want to says "screw it just not worth it".

I don't think I can shed more light on this subject. Perhaps you can PM Ed and get his personal view on things in why he has continued to put good working dogs out there despite the fact (as he mentioned) titling is not a criteria for him in all cases.

He's got Working GSD OJT <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Many years of it...

Lets take Ed for example. . .

Ed has more dogs who have taken their handlers to the USA Schutzhund III club than any other breeder anywhere.

Ed has had a number of dogs compete at an international level.

Who knows how many of Ed's dogs are working on the street??


Yet, a good many of those dogs are from untitled parents. . . .



Hmmmmmm. . . .


<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Thanks for pointing that out Robert,

I think the GSD world could learn a bit from that. Instead of only focusing on the SCH test, they need to look at the results. A lot of very good Malinois I've seen come from an untitled mother (why bother titling a brood bitch to a FR III?), but if they don't produce dogs that work, they are out of the program.

I think that the SV might need to look at incentives for kennels that produce a certain number working dogs - if a kennel produces verified street patrol dogs, they don't have to title their females, or if a kennel produces enough patrol dogs they get so many points in the kennel title in the BSZS. I'd like to see the best working stud every year given a VA spot as well... .(Asko von der Lutter maybe?)

cheers,

Alan...

Just to kind of expand on this and give a few of my random thoughts...

The people that tend to complain the most about dogs being bred without titles are those American breeders that adhere strictly to the SV system. Breeders in Belgium, Holland, France, etc don't really put as much emphasis on it as the American breeders. Probably because over here it's so competitive trying to get those puppies going into a working or sport environment, not sure. OH! And the modern myth that's circulated by American SV style breeders that if the parents aren't titled, the litter should never have been bred because they're not worthy and the pups probably won't be able to work (which in their world means do sport). I LOVE that one! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

A dog being titled does not change what the dog has to offer genetically. A titled dog might actually be hiding something that the handler/owner doesn't want seen, which has been hidden by countless hours of training...then when it pops up in the pups, well..."It must've come from YOUR bitch because MY male isn't like that!" Dogs only pass on their genetics, not their training...titles don't mean squat to the pups, nor does it change their value as a working or sport dog...well, except that some want to charge a hell of a lot more for those "titled puppies."

A bitch's true value is in the whelping box, not on the trialing field. Yes, they must be trained and evaluated...a breeder must be hypercritical if they wish to produce top prospects. However, what happens if you get your bitch out on a long bite and she flips off the sleeve (like the dog in the vid that was posted recently) and breaks her neck...and she was the best producer you had. No more pups from her because you wanted to put some more alphabet soup behind her name and now she's eliminated from the gene pool.

I'm a firm believer in the double standard! If it's not a male that I own or train with, I want to see titles and I want to see that dog work (or work him myself) in situations that he would never see on a sport field. I'd rather breed a bitch to a working PSD (preferably dual purpose) than a SchH3 stud. Females on the other hand, I still want to see them work, but I'm not as strict about them having titles.

I probably forgot half of what I was going to say, or didn't explain what I did as well as I'd like to, so I'm just going to leave it at that for now! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I'm a big believer in the absolute truth that if a breeder has gone to the trouble of AD,BH,Sch I,II,III, and kkl for life as well as hip certifications she could produce three eyed cows and the breeder would declare the pups superior and keep breeding her.
In the US it is an necessity to develope a breed registry, and evaluation system that is quick, efficient, cost effective, and provides the greatest amount of info possible if we are to have a true working GSD movement that is from the US and for people in the US.
I could give a sh*$ if the dog that works well is bred out of any body's famous dog or owned by anybody famous in dog circles. In fact, I am so tired of hearing the my dog is out of So and So's dog I could puke.
Fad breeding or title breeding is a downfall in working breeding.
I have worked tons of dogs, and as I think back most of the most imporesive working dogs were never in the hands of breeders and never got recognized titles. We leave out the greatest animals because it is not cool (or profitable) to breed to them.
Maybe a change in the system can alleviate that for some concientious breeders of working animals.

 Quote:

A dog being titled does not change what the dog has to offer genetically. A titled dog might actually be hiding something that the handler/owner doesn't want seen, which has been hidden by countless hours of training...then when it pops up in the pups, well..."It must've come from YOUR bitch because MY male isn't like that!" Dogs only pass on their genetics, not their training...titles don't mean squat to the pups, nor does it change their value as a working or sport dog...well, except that some want to charge a hell of a lot more for those "titled puppies."

 Quote:

Symeon

I think you dug up an old topic and missed the point Ed was conveying.


It doesn't matter if the titles from from Eastern Europe, Belgium or Mars for that matter.

I think Ed meant while titles are good to have, there are even dogs (such as his) which are sometimes untitled yet of proven working quality.

I agree.

Forunately I have the time and resources to have to drive 3.5 each way weekly to find a club that meets consistently but not everyone can do this.

Also there are some good dogs out there without titles. These dogs may have still been worked in all phases but the owner for some reason may not have wanted to title the dog. There are endless reasons why this happens.

Anyway I won't "blab" too long on a topic dug up from July. But I think that's one of the points that was trying to be made

i think what he is saying is that at least with a title there is a sanctioning body that "certifies" the dog. if a dog passes some selection test, there is no proof that it passed. this would be an issue for only the most novice of prospective dog owners who could not see working ability on their own. so from that point of view, he has a good point.

 Quote:

i think what he is saying is that at least with a title there is a sanctioning body that "certifies" the dog. if a dog passes some selection test, there is no proof that it passed. this would be an issue for only the most novice of prospective dog owners who could not see working ability on their own. so from that point of view, he has a good point.

Except that people (especially novices) get caught up in the idea that dogs MUST be titled to be producers of working/sport dogs and also in the fallacy that a title proves the dogs are worthy of breeding. As I said before, it tends to be the American breeders that follow the SV system that perpetuate these myths the most.

I'm not saying that good dogs don't exist without titles. Though that's what everyone seems to be focusing on. As VanCamp stated all these "facts" about Leerburg's dogs for example, If I was to buy a dog from such breeder, being that I would have to fly there, to look at the dogs, I would like to see some kind of proof that the dogs passed some kind of sanctioned test at the minimum, besides the breeders claims of quality. before I commited to booking a flight reserving a room e.t.c. Also claims from the breeders associates, friends, and others don't go as far as an independent sanctioned body at the least.

Off topic.. but what happened to the helper on the IPO2 trial video on the Dobermann page? Did he twist his ankle or break his arm when he fell?