# The field and obedience connection in pedigrees



## Alaska7133 (May 26, 2011)

I started this same thread over on the GRCA Field Education Committee page on facebook. So for those of you not on that facebook page, I thought it might be a fun discussion on this forum.

Here's my statement: 
How about a discussion about the connection between field trials/hunt tests and obedience trials? I was just looking at the OTCH points standings for 2014 all breed list. 7 out of 10 dogs were golden retrievers. I looked up the pedigrees on several of the dogs and they come from some heavy hitter field pedigrees. Nice to see. Just curious what you all think about the connection?

Here's the 2014 list of top OTCH dogs.

OTCH Goldenloch Lay Down Your Bets UDX14 OGM RN
Golden Retriever P McConnell 2127

OTCH Companion's He Reigns In Victory UDX13 OGM
Border Collie V HuleZ/R Windley 1747

OTCH MACH Tanbark's Who's The Boss UDX39 OGM RA SH MXB MJS
Golden Retriever D Gannon 1703

OTCH Tanbark's Honey Of A Cheesehead UDX15 OGM GN VER
Golden Retriever J Thomas/B Riemer 1693

NOC OTCH High Times Ris'N Above The Tide UDX23 OGM RE
Golden Retriever K Rasinowich- PlaZ 1627

OTCH Trifecta's Super Cooper UDX26 OGM
Golden Retriever F Hulme 1575

OTCH Redtop You're The One UDX27 OGM
Border Collie L Meredith 1464

OTCH High Times Uncharted Waters UDX6 OGM GN RA
Golden Retriever K Rasinowich- PlaZ 1304

OTCH Goldenloch Makin' A Statement UDX15 OGM
Golden Retriever G PlaZ 1168

OTCH Faerie Master CraWsman UDX10 OGM GN GO RAE6 PT
Shetland Sheepdog C Chmura/L Lundgren 1127


----------



## TheZ's (Jun 13, 2011)

Somewhat relevant to this discussion is the data compiled at _GoldenStudiesLink. _It provides lots of interesting information on dogs that have been successful in multiple activities, as well as info on the descendants of some of the very significant dogs in the breed.


----------



## hollyk (Feb 21, 2009)

What would make a pedigree be considered a heavy hitter field pedigree?


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

My impression is basically nods to Tanbark (2 Tanbark dogs, Tanbark appears behind the High Times dogs and the Trifecta dog) and High Times for being so dominant in the obedience ring. I think it shows what you get when the breeders themselves are so active and competitive in the obedience ring. 

And then each of those dogs is owned by a very dedicated and competitive owners (Jeanne, Platts, Fred Hulme, etc)....


----------



## MillionsofPeaches (Oct 30, 2012)

I know that with Proof, though he may someday do something great in the field, I know in my heart he could do something amazing with obedience. I thought my other dogs were decent at obedience but there is such a difference with Proof and he is strictly field bred. 

It is just this innate desire to work as a team and learn new things. He is always curious and the effort he gives me is just outstanding. I just think it is something in his make up, I don't know if it is his long line of hardworking pedigree but I would assume so. I would assume this has something to do with the fact that he was bred to hunt and work but at the same time be a companion but it is just a wonderful feeling to have a dog that is as eager to work with you and you are to work with him and I think that has got to be bred into him.


----------



## Alaska7133 (May 26, 2011)

Holly,
Here's what I consider a heavy hitter: a dog that has won or placed in a field trial in the US or Canada or has a field trial championship. So when I look at the very first dog: Pedigree: OTCH Goldenloch Lay Down Your Bets UDX9 OGM RN 2 out of 4 grandparents for this dog fit in that category. 
Next dog has 1 out of 4: Pedigree: OTCH MACH Tanbark's Who's The Boss UDX40 OGM RA SH WCX MXB MJSX OBHF
Next dog has 3 out of 4: Pedigree: OTCH U-CD Tanbark's Honey of a Cheesehead UDX13 OGM GN VER OBHF
Next dog has both parents: Pedigree: NOC (2010 and 2013) OTCH U-CD High Times Ris'n Above the Tide UDX26 OGM RE OBHF CCA CGC
Next dog 1 out of 4: Pedigree: OTCH Trifecta's Super Cooper UDX11 OGM OBHF
I could go on, but I'm running out of time. The dogs on this list have a very strong connection to field trial pedigrees. More so than to show pedigrees. Only one of the above dogs has a parent or grandparent with a conformation championship.

What I'm getting at is, fieldwork is tied to obedience. Without strong obedience, our dogs wouldn't walk to the line off leash next to piles of dead ducks smelling oh so good. They wouldn't stop on a whistle 300 yards out and take a cast. 

It makes we sad when I see so few OTCH dogs with conformation backgrounds. There are a few. I have a young bitch in my area with a GCh and an Open title and she's not even 2 years old. She's the unusual one though. 

Which came first the OTCHs or the ***s?


----------



## Swampcollie (Sep 6, 2007)

To compete in either of these venues requires a dog that has a little something between the ears. It also helps to place puppies with people who have demonstrated a solid training/competition resume.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Alaska7133 said:


> Holly,
> There are a few. I have a young bitch in my area with a GCh and an Open title and she's not even 2 years old. She's the unusual one though.
> ?


That I think is my dog Mystic's "sequel" littermate Oakley - their mother won the National specialty Best Of Breed. Megora's point I agree with- that part of it is the interests and talents of the heavyhitter owners too. In obedience the interest and passion and skill of the owner is a big factor, and it is not all that common for show dog owners to have a torch burning OTCH bright in obedience, though of course there are some famous ones. I also agree the Tanbark dogs are really amazing in agility and obedience. 


Of course the question is interesting asked inside out too- how many OTCH obedience dogs have correct enough conformation, breed type, and movement to finish a CH or Grand CH. Probably some that never get to try due to lack of interest of the owners too.


----------



## hollyk (Feb 21, 2009)

Stacy,
I when I saw your post I don't know why but I was expecting to see FC/AFC's in the first three generations. The pedigrees listed are what I think of as heavy hitter performance pedigrees and they hold a whole lot of interest for me. 
Yes, I do believe field instincts are important and are the needed to play the games at a high level.

I do often see listings for "performance litters" where I have a hard time seeing the where the performance is coming from.


----------



## MillionsofPeaches (Oct 30, 2012)

hey Jill---everytime I see that photo in your siggy I giggle. That is my body in the plaid behind the handler, ha ha!

As far as the golden "types" I find it interesting that nowadays the golden can't do it all. A very awesome field golden can go far in the field, meaning derby, QAA possibly FC, and that same golden more than likely could have gotten an OTCH if that were the direction the owner wanted to go. AT this time I'm going to get flamed but I will not consider a MH to be at that same level. I am talking about competitive venues. But that very golden Most likely wouldn't have gotten a CH. On the flip side, that CH is more than likely not going to go far in the field and I'm not sure about OTCH or MACH. Meanwhile, the breed standard is based on build alone when getting a CH. The hunting instinct is kind of hard to know for a judge in a show ring. ON the other hand, the FC/MACH/OTCH usually cannot go and get a CH, maybe for standard reasons, or maybe because attaining these other titles are so time consuming and costly in itself the owner doesn't have the time to try for a CH. So how is it possible to merge the two lines if there is no bridge between the two?


----------



## TrailDogs (Aug 15, 2011)

Give me a golden that can work anyday! There is a reason the top notch obedience handlers are selecting from performance lines.


----------



## Alaska7133 (May 26, 2011)

Holly,
If I see stars with a dog's name, I know that placing in a field trial is a very special thing for me.

Jill,
You are referring to little Oakley. I was lucky enough to photograph her at both our club's specialty and WC/WCX. John and Danette have done an excellent job with Oakley. Her current ad in GR News is incorrect, she has an Open title now, not just a Novice title. John & Danette have competed in all kinds of dog sports and are very familiar with training dogs. So they have a bit of a leg up than a lot of owners. Oakley fits their lifestyle quite well.

Jill,
Also on the issue of working it backwards, yes, how many people with show dogs will be interested to go into dog sports? All dog sports take up so much time, not just in competing, but in training. Unlike conformation, points can be earned and a Ch can be won on a dog without ever competing against another breed. Whereas field trials and obedience trials mean competing against all breeds. 

On another note, field trial spaniels and pointers, only compete against their own breeds. Their FTs are not all breed, they are breed specific. As far as I know only retrievers compete all breed. Yet their hunt tests are all breed.

The obedience component to field work is so important that you can't do one without the other. So many parts of a utility test are very similar to what is necessary to pass a hunt test or field trial. Kind of interesting isn't it?


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

> What I'm getting at is, fieldwork is tied to obedience. Without strong obedience, our dogs wouldn't walk to the line off leash next to piles of dead ducks smelling oh so good. They wouldn't stop on a whistle 300 yards out and take a cast.
> 
> It makes we sad when I see so few OTCH dogs with conformation backgrounds


I guess the very important point to make is labs beat goldens in field. Or so that's what I have to assume based on the predominance of labs competing in field trials and stuff like that. 

Now, there are OTCh labs out there for sure, but the breed does not dominate in obedience the same way golden retrievers do. So it isn't strictly the field background which creates the perfect obedience dog.

And actually one local trainer and breeder used to compete in both conformation and obedience. And her dogs did initially show up behind field pedigrees. Far back. 

An ideal obedience dog is one that thrives on working with their owner and is so eager and willing to please. And then you need solid handling in the ring to get the dog to work the same in the ring that it does outside the ring - which is where you need to have really good obedience people partnering with the dog. 

Most obedience people I know get obedience dogs. So if you look at those pedigrees - take note of how loaded they are as far as obedience. That's what matters to people who are very serious in the sport. 

Conformation dogs who lack any diversity in their pedigrees are unproven and more of a gamble to somebody who just wants an easy dog to work with.

A friend of mine who got a puppy the same time I did... her motivations when looking for a puppy was getting "a little red dog". And she's said time and again, that qualifying and titling isn't the goal. It's getting 200's or close to it every time she competes. This is an OTCH person, btw. 

Another trainer (one of those on the list above) got a puppy last year from Tanbark again. And she went back there because of the success of her other dog. 

Even buying a puppy from a obedience loaded pedigree offers no guarantee. You have to work with the dog. And you have to go out there and compete every weekend of the year practically. >.<

*Can't resist pointing out. The last trial I did, my little boy broke his down stay which NQ'd us. Had he stayed, we would have likely gotten HIT and beat one of those trainers and dogs in that top obedience list. The judge was impressed with him and was just cussing under his breath when Bertie followed me. So obedience ability isn't isolated to field pedigrees. Any dog at all can be trained for obedience and do well - providing that intelligence and eagerness to please is there. The rest just takes a bit of work and "molding".


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Alaska7133 said:


> Holly,
> The obedience component to field work is so important that you can't do one without the other. So many parts of a utility test are very similar to what is necessary to pass a hunt test or field trial. Kind of interesting isn't it?


A few of favorite people who work their dogs at my training center have field goldens with UDX/ ***. I agree none of them have any show lines and all have wonderful temperaments with dedicated owners totally passionate about field work and obedience. It seems seasonal, with field being the true love and obedience more a heavy focus in the winter. We do not have any OTCH goldens working here, though one is a win off AFC . One boy is a Choctaw golden who I am just crazy about- such a wonderful dog with ten tons more drive than most dogs we ever see for working, but then a happy soul for playing and hanging out. I love goldens. 

I do admire the OTCH goldens like Deni who do have conformations lines Pedigree: CH OTCH CanCH SHR DocMar Westmarch Denim Jeans UDX6 OGM VER RE JH AX AXJ WC VCX OD OBHF BISS , but I didnt realize what a rare accomplishment, so now I will admire even more. 

Yes, Oakley is Mystic's littermate by repeat- Presto x Groovy so conformation lines.


----------



## Vhuynh2 (Feb 13, 2012)

I wonder if it's because field/performance Goldens generally have more of a "no quit" attitude. A dog that excels in obedience has to be perfect and precise. Sometimes, asking a dog to be perfect can take a lot out of the dog. A dog that excels is going to want to do something over and over and over again, whether they've been wrong or right.


----------



## hollyk (Feb 21, 2009)

Stacey 
Yes, stars are bery impressive thing like I said I don't know why but I was expecting FC's. 

MOP 
Yes, I agree FT dogs are amazing but usual less then 100 Goldens a year earn a MH title. So not a walk in the park while picking up birds either. (it occurs to me I maybe arguing both sides of this point now since I don't consider MH high power either  )

Jill
Yes, very few CH/OTCH but I love to see any performance titles behind that CH. I also love to see CCA's on performance dogs. This maybe not apples to apples but you have to start somewhere. 

But regardless of pedigree, when a Golden steps to the line or enters a ring I root for Gold.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

When I think obedience pedigrees, I don't typically think "field lines." You are likely to see some strong field dogs in there, some dogs more than others, but it's really a line unto itself that has evolved over the generations from a blend of field and show lines. But it's almost as rare to see a top obedience golden with a field only pedigree as it is to find one with a conformation only pedigree. 
And remember only two people have ever been able to get both FC and OTCH on the same dog: Janice Gunn and Connie Cleveland. Interesting to note that as Janice focuses more and more on obedience, her puppies' pedigrees get farther away from field lines. Boomer and Stanley were what I would consider all field. This is her current puppy: http://www.k9data.com/pedigree.asp?ID=680261


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Vhuynh2 said:


> I wonder if it's because field/performance Goldens generally have more of a "no quit" attitude. A dog that excels in obedience has to be perfect and precise. Sometimes, asking a dog to be perfect can take a lot out of the dog. A dog that excels is going to want to do something over and over and over again, whether they've been wrong or right.


Maybe I am reading this incorrectly. Even field/performance dogs have a quitting time. Just because the owners are too obsessed with the ribbons or have no life/work it does not mean the dogs do not have a quit point. There are many young dogs pushed by moronic ambitious people who are washed up after derby age. You see this with both goldens and labs. 

But yes, the field dogs do have more go and thus they actually take more pressure than a show dog whose working ability has been bred out of. And frankly their structure no longer allows for the working ability. And to whom reads this and says my dog fetches a stick out of the pond or goes hiking that is NOT working ability. A dog that can use both his endurance and his brains at the same time is working ability. 

What I feel Stacey meant is dogs that come from pedigrees that show field working ability. And she is correct. The obedience in the field can be taken into the ring where the opposite is not so easily achievable.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

50% dog
50% trainer

Trainer has to be motivated to achieve the title(s) and dedicate their training and tailor it to that specific dog. Cannot train all dogs alike.

So few people really truly MAKE IT THEIR *GOAL* to have a dog with high level titles in multiple venues. They might dream about it and think it's great but they don't even try. Or they try in feckless ways and say it's too hard, or forget about it and get distracted. A very small handful of people stick with it.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

Deni is my all time favorite bitch. Jane Docter works diligently to prove that Goldens truly can have it all, and has produced many many Golden's who are not just CH or GCH but also have many, many performance titles. All this while putting temperament at the top of the list.
I think she is one of the best breeders out there, she doesn't just talk the talk.



Ljilly28 said:


> A few of favorite people who work their dogs at my training center have field goldens with UDX/ ***. I agree none of them have any show lines and all have wonderful temperaments with dedicated owners totally passionate about field work and obedience. It seems seasonal, with field being the true love and obedience more a heavy focus in the winter. We do not have any OTCH goldens working here, though one is a win off AFC . One boy is a Choctaw golden who I am just crazy about- such a wonderful dog with ten tons more drive than most dogs we ever see for working, but then a happy soul for playing and hanging out. I love goldens.
> 
> I do admire the OTCH goldens like Deni who do have conformations lines Pedigree: CH OTCH CanCH SHR DocMar Westmarch Denim Jeans UDX6 OGM VER RE JH AX AXJ WC VCX OD OBHF BISS , but I didnt realize what a rare accomplishment, so now I will admire even more.
> 
> Yes, Oakley is Mystic's littermate by repeat- Presto x Groovy so conformation lines.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Claudia M said:


> But yes, the field dogs do have more go and thus they actually take more pressure than a show dog whose working ability has been bred out of. And frankly their structure no longer allows for the working ability. And to whom reads this and says my dog fetches a stick out of the pond or goes hiking that is NOT working ability. A dog that can use both his endurance and his brains at the same time is working ability.


Claudia, the issue is that you are referring to dogs who have not been proven in field. And those of us who have no ability or desire to prove our dogs in field can only go off of those "markers" which field people offer time and again.

People say that a dog needs to go all day across rough terrain and have the drive and boldness to go swimming across ponds and lakes regardless of temperature or conditions. They say the dog should be able to shake the mud and water off and keep going. They say the dogs should have sufficient drive to retrieve items when sent. For that matter, they should have the drive and focus to not just retrieve, but hunt for items when sent. The coats and structure of the dog should be such that the dog is able to move out all day without strong likelihood of injury or dealing with excess matting and tangling.

These are all markers - according to some - as far as what you want in a dog who hasn't lost a lot of the hunting dog traits. 

And no - a golden retriever coat like the ones my dogs have is not a problem. Anyone who thinks so should try walking in the woods with a rough collie and then try to get the leaves and twigs brushed out when you get home. Goldens won't usually mat unless you leave stuff in their coats for a few days. Collies seem to mat almost immediately - and the kinds of stuff you wouldn't think should cause matting. IE leaves and twigs.

As far as the thing about structure having anything to do with working ability - I don't even know what you are talking about. Only connection between the two that I can think of is when a dog has really poor structure and has joint problems which inhibit free and easy movement + endurance. Poor structure occurs in all kinds of pedigrees. 

But even those dogs with poor structure or weak areas - they still manage to excel. One of my instructors - her dog (not a golden) just got her CH. So she is now a CH MH and working on that UDX and OTCH points. This dog has the benefit of being owned by somebody who knows what she's doing in both obedience and field... and she sent her dog out with a handler for conformation. This dog had soundness issues early on as a young dog and still does seem to have a weak hip (has excellent hips) or something weak in her back. It's something her owner keep in mind and takes care of with various treatments - they do not hold her back as far as working and competition.

If you are referring to fronts which is a favorite focal point for many people - keep in mind it's important to look at the whole dog. They should have good strong toplines and good rears, straight legs, good sized feet (not hare feet), etc)....


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Loisiana said:


> When I think obedience pedigrees, I don't typically think "field lines." You are likely to see some strong field dogs in there, some dogs more than others, but it's really a line unto itself that has evolved over the generations from a blend of field and show lines. But it's almost as rare to see a top obedience golden with a field only pedigree as it is to find one with a conformation only pedigree.
> And remember only two people have ever been able to get both FC and OTCH on the same dog: Janice Gunn and Connie Cleveland. Interesting to note that as Janice focuses more and more on obedience, her puppies' pedigrees get farther away from field lines. Boomer and Stanley were what I would consider all field. This is her current puppy: Pedigree: FlashPaws Firecracker


 I agree with this post wholeheartedly. Lots of people working seriously in obedience do neither conformation nor field. Around here in the extremely northeast, they often have obedience dogs from Sunfire with some really cool breedings even to MACH/ADHF sires but usually to sires gifted in obedience , or some obedience people really seek out Yogi's lines specifically.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

K9-Design said:


> 50% dog
> 50% trainer
> 
> Trainer has to be motivated to achieve the title(s) and dedicate their training and tailor it to that specific dog. Cannot train all dogs alike.
> ...


I also really agree with this that truly few people make high level titles in multiple venues a goal/priority. More often people have one love, and pursue that with gusto, ambition, and enthusiasm, and perhaps more dabble in other venues.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

"Claudia, the issue is that you are referring to dogs who have not been proven in field. And those of us who have no ability or desire to prove our dogs in field *can only go off of those "markers" which field people offer time and again.*

People say that a dog needs to go all day across rough terrain and have the drive and boldness to go swimming across ponds and lakes regardless of temperature or conditions. They say the dog should be able to shake the mud and water off and keep going. They say the dogs should have sufficient drive to retrieve items when sent. For that matter, they should have the drive and focus to not just retrieve, but hunt for items when sent. The coats and structure of the dog should be such that the dog is able to move out all day without strong likelihood of injury or dealing with excess matting and tangling."

Kate,

I am glad that you finally admit that you have no clue of what it takes for a retriever to be a retriever and you go off "markers" that you read on a blog. You keep on saying that the dogs are not "proven " in the field thus insinuating that they could be. Fact is they can never prove themselves in the breed when the instinct has been bred out of them. 
The truth is that field work is addictive when you see the dogs doing what they were bred to do. Unless of course they were bred for something else regardless of what the breed says. 

Please tell me what value does a CH or GCH retriever have if that dog cannot hunt? To me it is none. And unfortunately they are sold for high value pups as if they are indeed made of platinum gold while they have between 30 and 50 coefficient of inbreeding. 

Please tell me what value does an FC AFC retriever have is that dog does not have the breed structure and temperament (and no - I do not mean the structure developed since the 60s by the ring fancies)? 

Yes, I want to see hunt accomplishments on the CH dogs, not because I feel it is cool but because that makes the handler get out there and see what it takes for the dog to hunt and be in the field structurally. 

And YES, I want to see CAA on the field dogs (which is more comprehensive than a show ring) to show that the dog is withing breed structure. 

Unfortunately the breed is split to the point that you will hardly see a CH, MH/*** dog unless you have a person who hires people on both ends or is a person that travels all over the place shopping for judges and easy hunt tests. 

As far as coat goes? I ask people how many times they wash their dogs. And I do not mean hose the mud off. I mean shampoo and condition their coat. When you wash your dog once to twice a year and their coat can repel the mud, twigs and other stuff off then you can say they have a correct coat. 
I went with the girls out yesterday. They were so muddy the coat looked like braids all over them with twigs and grass intertwined. It was cold and did not feel like hosing them off. I just let it dry off and fall on it's own. By this morning they looked like they have never been outside. So we went out and got muddy again. The last time they had a bath was in May.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

I know this is just argument baiting again and know better, but what the heck. 



> I am glad that you finally admit that you have no clue of what it takes for a retriever to be a retriever and you go off "markers" that you read on a blog. You keep on saying that the dogs are not "proven " in the field thus insinuating that they could be. Fact is they can never prove themselves in the breed when the instinct has been bred out of them.


1. Actually, I am dumbing it all down to the essentials that some crazier field people are always complaining about or insinuating.  Because when you have no proof at all as far as what dogs can do or not do - you can only attack based on what you see. And that seems to be the case with some funnier comments - like conformation dogs are apparently too heavily boned and coated to do anything but waddle across a yard. That they can't hold up to running across rough terrain, don't have the water courage or whatever to go swimming in anything, etc... Oh and the heavy coats will weigh them down in water. I remember a funnier one that somebody told me about heads that are too big for the dogs to retrieve properly! 

2. "Fact is they can never prove themselves in the breed when the instinct has been bred out of them." <= Would you mind explaining this profound statement? Keep in mind, we are talking about dogs who are not owned by field people, not trained for field, etc. If a dog is not exposed to something and trained for something and tested - imo, you can't prove instinct is or isn't there. 



> Please tell me what value does a CH or GCH retriever have if that dog cannot hunt? To me it is none. And unfortunately they are sold for high value pups as if they are indeed made of platinum gold while they have between 30 and 50 coefficient of inbreeding.
> 
> Please tell me what value does an FC AFC retriever have is that dog does not have the breed structure and temperament (and no - I do not mean the structure developed since the 60s by the ring fancies)?
> 
> ...


Claudia, do you think your two golden retrievers have correct structure? And what do you define as correct structure? I know what it is based on the breed standard, but I'm curious what you think it is. 

And then can you explain why structure that a lot of golden retrievers have (you can use my youngest boy's structure as an example since that would vastly entertain me) would make it very difficult for these dogs to do the job they were bred to do. Namely running across fields and jumping into lakes to retrieve and working all day without being more prone than others to injury. 




> As far as coat goes? I ask people how many times they wash their dogs. And I do not mean hose the mud off. I mean shampoo and condition their coat. When you wash your dog once to twice a year and their coat can repel the mud, twigs and other stuff off then you can say they have a correct coat.
> I went with the girls out yesterday. They were so muddy the coat looked like braids all over them with twigs and grass intertwined. It was cold and did not feel like hosing them off. I just let it dry off and fall on it's own. By this morning they looked like they have never been outside. So we went out and got muddy again. The last time they had a bath was in May


A lot of the shampooing and conditioning done for show is in excess of what is required for a round the house kind of dog. It's a choice if you want to keep a coat in prime condition for show. And clean right down to the skin.

You don't need to bathe your dog every week, even if he's a normal dog and running around in the rain and mud, goes swimming every week, gets dirty, etc.. my first two dogs were only bathed once a year or less. If they went swimming, we called that bathed (nervous laugh).

Difference now though is both my dogs sleep with me. I hate finding dirt in my bed just as much as I really have an issue with dog hair coated sheets and blankets. 

When I bathe my dogs once a week (sometimes I go 2-3 weeks), they may look really clean and have people raving about clean and groomed they are... but the water in the bathtub turns black from the dirt coming out. Especially with the younger guy who is a roller. 

So for me being concerned about hygiene + my bed - my dogs are bathed every week. 

Going beyond that, yes - I can tell the difference when they are not bathed every week, even when they've gone swimming. Their coats feel different to the touch.

Same thing with other people's dogs who are not bathed more than every 2-3 months.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Oh gosh Kate. Hate to say tjis but all three dogs were on my bed last night and the cream light sheets are still cream and nice. Also no hair on them either. 
Back to your point, I guess you are correct, you can keep on assuming the dog has what he was bred for of you never get out and train for it. Just like a parent who assumes the kid can do trigonometry and geometry with a few algebra classes. It was just that they did not have roughy sharpened pencils to go forward; or did not like being around dead ducks. &#55357;&#56876;
But once again this is getting off point. The obedience a field bred dog is much higher than the obedience a dog has to show in the ring. Training for field sets above requirements in the obedience ring. That is why field dogs are better in the obedience ring. 
Now, you were saying that labs should dominate the obedience ring because of their performance on the field. True and they would if not 80% of the field people buy labs to hunt with and not to go in the obedience ring with. Very few go in the obedience ring, and very few field golden people do. Why? I cannot speak for others but to me it is boring and i personally get less needed exercise. Also my hobby is in the field, reason why I bought retriever dogs.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

Big words from someone who has no more than two Junior Hunters.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

> Back to your point, I guess you are correct, you can keep on assuming the dog has what he was bred for of you never get out and train for it. Just like a parent who assumes the kid can do trigonometry and geometry with a few algebra classes.


No. I am saying you can't brush off and say a dog has no instinct for field work if there has been no attempts to proof either way. 

Just the same as I'd equally say there is no proof the dog has the instinct or ability bred into him, if there have been no attempts to prove it.

There is an opportunity of “fresh blood” getting into the breed and doing all the stuff possible to get more conformation dogs into field - but you and others have to drop the blind negativity and divisiveness. Stop telling people what their dogs can or can't do based on nonessential stuff (proper breed standard length coats with undercoat, etc). Tell them to try it and see. And encourage people when they try and succeed. 



> The obedience a field bred dog is much higher than the obedience a dog has to show in the ring. Training for field sets above requirements in the obedience ring. That is why field dogs are better in the obedience ring.


Can you explain how obedience for field is more demanding than obedience for the ring? 



> Now, you were saying that labs should dominate the obedience ring because of their performance on the field. True and they would if not 80% of the field people buy labs to hunt with and not to go in the obedience ring with. Very few go in the obedience ring, and very few field golden people do. Why? I cannot speak for others but to me it is boring and i personally get less needed exercise.


But then, if they’ve never gone into obedience or train for it… then how do you know they have the skills and temperament you want in an obedience dog? 

The thing with labs - I train with somebody who is one of the very few people out there I know personally who does do both field and obedience with her labs. And she has both show labs (that she does conformation with) and field labs that she does everything but conformation with. 

She does accomplish a ton in obedience with her dogs - but she is a better trainer with more experience than most. Two issues that she works through are dealing with dogs who are not exclusively glued in to her when working... and then dealing with dogs who have the tendency to be more wired and out of control than what is required for very controlled work in the obedience ring. With her field dogs - she has a LOT of dog that she has to bring down and really harness in the ring. And it's not easy. The average owner isn't going to be able to handle that and most obedience people don’t want that. It’s more work – and that’s with people who are experienced with obedience.

Through classes I’ve seen more than a few field trained labs come up through the classes with their owners – and they are not obedience dogs. Their focus is on everyone and everything else but their owners. 

Obedience is much easier when your dog is zeroed in on you and doesn't see or care what else is out there. And it's easier when your dog has the intelligence and eagerness to please which helps him learn fairly quickly. Plus, they have all the other assets which help them succeed in the ring (ability to jump, desire to retrieve, intelligence and instincts which help them when scenting for correct articles, etc).

A lot of people zero in on obedience litters (those that are loaded with OTCH's) because you have dogs who have all the right stuff as far as focusing in on the owner and desire to please, intelligence, etc.


----------



## TrailDogs (Aug 15, 2011)

These discussions/arguments would all be over if people would stop pretending their dogs are capable of things that they are not. 
Here is a 10 month old field bred golden. She is a fabulous hunting dog, finding, flushing, retrieving birds, chasing crippled roosters, at a very young age. Will she be a competitive field trial or obedience dog? I don't know that yet. She is biddable, birdy, training well and shows a lot of potential. 
What I can tell you she is not, is a conformation dog. She would be laughed out of the ring. What is the value in saying she 'could' do it but I just don't have time, money, etc. That is unrealistic and like selling snake oil to the public. I happen to like her length of leg, medium bone, field type coat. I don't want her to look like a GCH golden. 
People can and will breed what they want but just be honest about the qualities you are selecting for.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

K9-Design said:


> Big words from someone who has no more than two Junior Hunters.


Funny, but the very little accomplished has been done without strapping two ecollars on the dog (at each end) or your famous force fetching. It does take more workout in the field! Keeps both the handler and the dog in shape.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

TrailDogs said:


> These discussions/arguments would all be over if people would stop pretending their dogs are capable of things that they are not.


Yes - absolutely when the dogs can't do something or are not show quality. 

But you have no idea how frustrating it is when people get locked into their own little worlds about the types of dogs they think can "do stuff" and can't simply based on pedigree and looks. 

I've never liked that simply because - the style of golden that I love is not bred by people who breed for obedience. I wish it were and maybe with enough people actually buying the style of dogs they love and doing what they want - we'll get back to a point where we have CH UDX dogs more frequently. I think that's a decent goal and something I'd love to see and it is possible. 

And you will get more JH dogs out there if people were more welcoming and less divisive. More friendly clubs - and I can see that. Local clubs are very friendly and welcoming and you do have local dogs who show in conformation dabbling at lower level field titles. 

Bottom line though is stop telling people what their dogs aren't capable of just because they don't look like your dog or have nothing in their pedigree that shows they can do.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

Keepin in classy Claudia!!! Wake me up when you get a MH or any FT ribbon. Yawn.


----------



## TheZ's (Jun 13, 2011)

K9-Design said:


> 50% dog
> 50% trainer
> 
> Trainer has to be motivated to achieve the title(s) and dedicate their training and tailor it to that specific dog. Cannot train all dogs alike.
> ...


Doesn't it all come back to this. Even though the dog may be great or we think it's great, if the trainer doesn't know how to bring the dog along, doesn't have a vision of what they want to accomplish and doesn't put in the time with the dog, we'll never know for sure how good the dog is.

Interesting to look at the pedigrees of 2 dogs mentioned above, Deni _Pedigree: CH OTCH CanCH SHR DocMar Westmarch Denim Jeans UDX6 OGM VER RE JH AX AXJ WC VCX OD OBHF BISS_ and Yogi _Pedigree: Am. CH OTCH CT; Can. CH Highmark Mirasol Once A Knight VCD4 UDX3 JH MX MXJ WC VCX OS SDHF OBHF _. These dogs have both been very successful in multiple venues and attained an OTCH but if you look at their pedigrees there isn't much to suggest that they would achieve any success other than in the show ring. But their owners had a vision of what they could be and did what was necessary to help them show just what they could accomplish.

For myself, I'm struggling now with a dog that I think could do great things, but I may never know for sure because of my own limitations. There's a lot to learn in each venue and succeeding in multiple venues is a pretty daunting task unless you have the resources and are willing to send the dog out with a professional handler.

Thinking about another comment above about repetitive work as an important aspect of obedience, I remembered the trainer that introduced me to obedience and who had trained multiple OTCH's. She said you've got the right dog for it . . . Goldens will tolerate the repetition that's necessary to achieve success where other breeds won't stay with you till they get it right.


----------



## Alaska7133 (May 26, 2011)

I didn't mean to start any arguments just a conversation about the connection in pedigrees between field and obedience.

It's one thing to breed a litter with a great pedigree for whatever venue, it's another matter to find puppy buyers with the wherewhithal to get that puppy to the titles you think it should be capable of.

I have seen a trend though in conformation litter listings. They will note that the show puppies are all spoken for but they have 6 performance puppies left in the litter. It's as if the breeder is saying, if it's not a show quality puppy, then it must be a performance puppy. Instead of just calling the puppy a pet quality pup. Then when you look at the pedigree, there is nothing to suggest the puppies will be performance puppies. It is always possible o do a lot with a golden retriever. 50% nature 50% nurture.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

Here is an interesting study that was done, it looks at numbers of ancestors in the five generation pedigree that would be considered field, conformation, and obedience. If you look at the red circle, that shows the average for the top 100 OTCH dogs. (and if you look at the word "Phoenix", that is my dog, he made it into a study! ). I did not ask Charles what would make an ancestor qualify to be considered into a certain group.

MeanIndiviudalGroup5Gen


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Alaska7133 said:


> I have seen a trend though in conformation litter listings. They will note that the show puppies are all spoken for but they have 6 performance puppies left in the litter. It's as if the breeder is saying, if it's not a show quality puppy, then it must be a performance puppy. Instead of just calling the puppy a pet quality pup. Then when you look at the pedigree, there is nothing to suggest the puppies will be performance puppies.


Have to ask... do these pedigrees suggest that the show puppies will actually be show puppies? 

I had my brain going two different directions (ouch) on this... heheh. 

I can think of breeders out there who really want their puppies placed in "active" homes. So this is a good way (I guess) to direct traffic. 

Or this could be marketing. <= there's a breeder out there where their stud dog's highest title achieved in obedience is a CD. And based on what I've seen of this dog, probably won't ever go beyond CD if the owner is even thinking about doing Open. And yes, this dog has field titles.

This dog is bred to girlies who have no obedience titles or backgrounds - and it's always advertised as show/obedience potential litters. And falls into the same category as people putting rally titles and CGC "titles" on breeding dogs and advertising litters as obedience potential litters. 

My opinion is that any dog has the potential of becoming an obedience dog. It's what you put into a good dog that counts. <= But yeah, the above is a good reason why I don't always trust marketing or what other people say is an "obedience litter". You're better off buying from litters where you know the parents or the parents and the pedigree reflect something of what you want in your puppy.


----------



## Kmullen (Feb 17, 2010)

Stacey, I agree on that. I can't stand to see breeders try to market unborn or just 2 week old puppies as performance or show!! Like "2nd pick show male available" when the puppy is 2 weeks... Drives me bonkers! Just because you have two CHs does not mean you will have show quality puppies. I never promise show puppies or performance puppies to anyone until I watch the pups grow!


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Megora said:


> And you will get more JH dogs out there if people were more welcoming and less divisive. More friendly clubs - and I can see that. Local clubs are very friendly and welcoming and you do have local dogs who show in conformation dabbling at lower level field titles.
> 
> Bottom line though is stop telling people what their dogs aren't capable of just because they don't look like your dog or have nothing in their pedigree that shows they can do.


Agree 100 percent


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Claudia M said:


> Kate,
> 
> 
> Please tell me what value does a CH or GCH retriever have if that dog cannot hunt?


That made me giggle. Clearly you are the the one person qualified to say hey lets eradicate/PTS all those icky CH and GCH goldens, and put those dumb breeder judges out of their meaningless jobs evaluating breeding stock.


----------



## TrailDogs (Aug 15, 2011)

Megora said:


> Bottom line though is stop telling people what their dogs aren't capable of just because they don't look like your dog or have nothing in their pedigree that shows they can do.


Well, there's a huge leap of faith. The puppy buying public is supposed to believe a dog can do something even though the pedigree and lack of performance titles says the odds are not in favor of the dog being able to do anything?
Honesty is always the best policy.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

TrailDogs said:


> Well, there's a huge leap of faith. The puppy buying public is supposed to believe a dog can do something even though the pedigree and lack of performance titles says the odds are not in favor of the dog being able to do anything?
> Honesty is always the best policy.


TD - It's not a leap of faith when you are talking about titles that are based on effort and application. And owner knowledge and experience. 

You have nothing if you don't apply yourself. And that's regardless of what kind of dog you have with you. 

A performance bred puppy is going to be a dynamo when it comes to a lot of stuff. So yes, it's dishonest to sell a puppy as a performance pup when it was not bred for that purpose.

But that doesn't mean that somebody else can't excel with a dog not bred for a purpose (obedience or field). They just have to put the work in. <= And train with the right people. 

Can you imagine how much #fail an instructor would be if she checked pedigrees at the door and told people right from the start what they could or couldn't do with a dog (that "well, instinct has been bred out of your dog, I can tell by this pedigree"). Even before seeing the dog work?


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Megora said:


> Yes - absolutely when the dogs can't do something or are not show quality.
> 
> But you have no idea how frustrating it is when people get locked into their own little worlds about the types of dogs they think can "do stuff" and can't simply based on pedigree and looks.
> 
> ...


Cry me a river Kate! Why do you expect cheerleaders to welcome you to a sport. Put your big girl pants on and get out there and do it. Don't keep on pretending that the dog has it but it was just not proven. Or if your feelings are so soft just take your dog out hunting and see exactly what it actually takes to be a retriever. 
After all this is their purpose! Field work. Anything beyond is cream on top. 
The fact that field goldens are better in the obedience ring only shows that they still have the traits originally bred in them. It takes concentration and stamina before it takes a handler willing to play the game.


----------



## SheetsSM (Jan 17, 2008)

After reading through this thread I am thankful to belong to my local GR club. Regardless of the venue, if you demonstrate a willingness to learn and pitch in to volunteer you will reap the rewards of having a great support group willing to teach & if needed even provide a little cheerleading which is nice touch for a newbie like myself who has a pup with potential but is held back by completely green handler. While folks have been interested in her pedigree, not once have we been shoo'd away & told we don't belong or to not bother trying.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Claudia M said:


> The fact that field goldens are better in the obedience ring only shows that they still have the traits originally bred in them. *It takes concentration and stamina before it takes a handler willing to play the game*.


Can you explain this - particularly the part in bold - as it applies to obedience. 

I think this is the second time I'm asking this. 

I know you said that you dropped out of obedience because field is more fun, but I am curious about what your field bred dog (and you only have one field bred dog based on pedigree) has accomplished in obedience and what she will accomplish. 

Can you really say she's an OTCH dog in the making based on what she does in field? What have her parents accomplished in obedience?

And then again (third time I'm asking this) - what is it that field dogs do which requires more obedience than asking an obedience dog to zero in only on the owner and to perform tasks without mistake (or very few mistakes).


----------



## TrailDogs (Aug 15, 2011)

Megora said:


> And then again (third time I'm asking this) - what is it that field dogs do which requires more obedience than asking an obedience dog to zero in only on the owner and to perform tasks without mistake (or very few mistakes).


This is not a simple answer, field trained dogs are required to perform at high levels of obedience in a highly stimulating environment. It requires a ton of teamwork and control. How you and the dog communicate on the line is more than half the battle in picking up all the birds.
Dogs that demonstrate this drive and ability to be a team player often make very competitive obedience dogs. It is much easier to be compliant in the controlled environment of an obedience ring.
This brings you back full circle to Stacey's original comment.

It doesn't mean that no other dogs can be successful at this or should try it, just that many competitive obedience people want to increase their odds with proven bloodlines.
If I wanted to be competitive in conformation I wouldn't buy a field dog and expect high levels of success.
The intangible qualities are less easily assessed than the physical appearance of the dog so some evidence needs to be there that they exist.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Megora said:


> Can you explain this - particularly the part in bold - as it applies to obedience.
> 
> I think this is the second time I'm asking this.
> 
> ...


Well according to you I only have one golden retriever currently. I have two. And while Rose is half European limes and half American lines both her parents are hunting dogs. 

Once again, as traildogs has stated and it has been stated on this forum gazilion of times. You put a dog in a field with a lot of scent and distractions and birds flying around and that dog heels with you from the car to the holding blind, sit there with all the commotion around it and then gets nicely to the line and zooms to get that bird while fire builds underneath its legs, bring it back to you zooming back and then nicely sitting at your heel. All that takes concentration and stamina. The fact that the dog is able to do that and is easily trained to do that is an enormous plus. 
And as I explained to k9 I did not have to put ecollars on each end of my dogs, I did not have to force fetch them and go thru pressure and every day non stop training to get there. 
This whole conception out there that field goldens are uncontrollable is a complete farce. 

But again, unless you know what a retriever is bred to do and understand that, you will keep on being defensive and then keep on talking about a structure without understanding/knowing the function.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Claudia - can you post Rose's pedigree? Her parents had field titles? And they had field bred type pedigrees behind them?

*I'm trying to be civil here, but I'm wondering if you actually are paying close attention to the arguments you are making.

1. You are trying to say that you have to selectively breed for field in order to have a field dog. You can throw away a good percentage of the breed, because these dogs do not have field titles in their pedigrees. And you don't even need to see them work to know the instinct has been bred out of them.

2. You only have one golden retriever who was bred for field. And she's currently not titled in anything, that I know of (which is OK because she's young). The golden retriever you own who is titled comes from a pet bred type pedigree, that I understand. There are no performance titles to speak of behind her. By your own arguments, you would have blindly stated that she lacked instinct based on not being bred for it.

3. Obedience competition - is actually hectic for the dogs. A big reason why some people just drop out of pet classes - is it's very difficult to get their own dog's attention in a crowded group class. And there can be a lot of stuff going on and it can be very loud. That's just training in class. Going to trials, it's another issue because the nerves/anxiety of the owner go down the leash to the dog. And there are dogs barking and there can little room to maneuver from your crate to the ring entrance and no space to warm up. Going into the ring, you have to have a dog trained not to sniff or look around. Barking, bumping, forging, etc... are not permitted. And the entire time your dog is in the ring, there is no release for the dog like you have in field where the dog is sent to retrieve. The dog has to be kept in tight control and focused the entire time. Dogs have to be under tight control going into the ring, working in the ring, and then leaving the ring. Points get whittled off the entire time you are in the ring. <= To me, this is a big reason why you do not have a lot of field people trying obedience and liking it. It is a completely different discipline.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Megora said:


> Claudia - can you post Rose's pedigree? Her parents had field titles? And they had field bred type pedigrees behind them?


I doubt that it is needed to post her pedigree since we have discussed it privately on FB before. And maybe you do not understand the word hunting. It is a big difference between hunting dog and a hunt tested dog. The first requires a little more. ? - nice try! Or maybe Steeler did transfer some genes down the line. None of our previous goldens were ever in a hunt test but they surely did a better job hunting.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Claudia M said:


> And maybe you do not understand the word hunting. It is a big difference between hunting dog and a hunt tested dog. The first requires a little more.


Claudia, I'm a Michigander. I'm pretty sure I understand the word hunting.  

So.... basically, then a lot of show people are OK then. Because I'm sure either they or their puppy people take the dogs hunting from time to time. In fact, I know of at least 2 breeders who I've spoken with whose husbands and sons take the dogs hunting with them. If that's all you need (verbal confirmation from the breeder of course) as proof that they've keep the hunting dog in the breed. Well, no reason to argue then.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

I don't think dogs from field line pedigree goldens naturally make the strongest obedience dogs. If that were the case, the top golden obedience handlers would be lining up for those breedings. Instead having some field lines in the pedigree is just a part of the recipe for a pedigree of great obedience lines. Sometimes both a great field dog and a great obedience dog can be found in the same package, but more often to compete at the highest levels you are going to be looking for the little things that make you more competitive in that specific area. That's true of anything of a competitive nature. And like I said earlier, there have only ever been TWO people to be able to get both FC and OTCH on the same dog. Only two people, going all the way back to the creation of the OTCH some fifty or so years ago. And like I also said earlier, one of those people is moving away from a strictly field pedigree in order to become even more competitive in obedience.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

Megora said:


> Claudia, I'm a Michigander. I'm pretty sure I understand the word hunting.
> 
> So.... basically, then a lot of show people are OK then. Because I'm sure either they or their puppy people take the dogs hunting from time to time. In fact, I know of at least 2 breeders who I've spoken with whose husbands and sons take the dogs hunting with them. If that's all you need (verbal confirmation from the breeder of course) as proof that they've keep the hunting dog in the breed. Well, no reason to argue then.


Kate I have said many times that I will take a dog that has been hunted over a MH dog ANY DAY! I do want to see the dogs and I do want to see them around gun shots - which I have done . It would be great to actually see the dog hunt. 

There is one huge flaw in your argument though. You view the dog going after the bird as a release and thus the dog is under no control. Wow! Completely false. And you also completely disregard obedience against instinct. It takes much more self control in the natural element than in a barn/classroom. Think of a recovering alcoholic working in a bar as opposed to in an office.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

Claudia M said:


> Once again, as traildogs has stated and it has been stated on this forum gazilion of times. You put a dog in a field with a lot of scent and distractions and birds flying around and that dog heels with you from the car to the holding blind, sit there with all the commotion around it and then gets nicely to the line and zooms to get that bird while fire builds underneath its legs, bring it back to you zooming back and then nicely sitting at your heel. All that takes concentration and stamina. The fact that the dog is able to do that and is easily trained to do that is an enormous plus.
> *And as I explained to k9 I did not have to put ecollars on each end of my dogs, I did not have to force fetch them and go thru pressure and every day non stop training to get there. *


Claudia, you have only trained your dogs to perform at the Junior Hunter level, which is exactly the scenario you presented in the top paragraph quoted here. 
So far I know you have two junior hunters plus a year old puppy in training, you use an ecollar like the rest of us, and weekend-warrior train. You've never competed in obedience.
WHEN you get to the Master+ level, I will be all ears on how you've done this with no force fetch or collar pressure or training more than one day a week.

NONE of this applies to the actual topic. 

Yes, a lot of "field bred" goldens are bred specifically to be energetic, intelligent, team players, and that can get you a lot of mileage in obedience. There are two edges to that blade. Field bred goldens are bred to be highly sight sensitive, environmental and reactive. EXCELLENT for marking. TERRIBLE for having a stable obedience trial dog. The "bombproof" show bred dog often has a leg up in obedience for this reason...ESPECIALLY with a novice trainer.

It's finding a BALANCE of temperament. It's being a good trainer, and bringing out the potential in each dog. 

As someone else pointed out, most of the top 25 obedience goldens really are from obedience/performance (agility/hunt test) bred lines. Not field trials and not breed champions. Like begets like. If I spend a lot of time at obedience trials I am going to be attracted to dogs who perform well at obedience trials. I'll go out and buy a puppy out of that dog I like at the obedience trials, and I'll train it and show it in obedience trials. I would be stupid to like a dog at an obedience trial, then go out and buy something from a completely different pedigree. There are lots of kennels that breed primarily PERFORMANCE dogs...easy examples would be Gaylans, Morninglo, Meadowpond, Sunfire, the list goes on. A majority of their dogs go to obedience, agility, hunt test homes. They may have some outliers who are capable in the breed ring or field trials. This is a very typical pedigree for "obedience" goldens IMO.


----------



## Alaska7133 (May 26, 2011)

Just to clarify, I'm a total newbie to dog sports. My titles are: 3 CGCs, 1 JH, and 1 CD, oh and 1 RN. Oh and 2 points in the conformation ring. So all really basic titles. I've owned 6 goldens with a variety of pedigrees. I have taken many obedience classes over the years and trained all my goldens. My personal knowledge of working with dogs is growing all the time.

I never intended for this discussion as a platform for anyone to slam people. Keep it up Claudia and I will ask that this thread be closed. We can all learn from each other. We own wonderful dogs that are amazing. We need to remember that.


----------



## Claudia M (Aug 8, 2012)

K9-Design said:


> Claudia, you have only trained your dogs to perform at the Junior Hunter level, which is exactly the scenario you presented in the top paragraph quoted here.
> So far I know you have two junior hunters plus a year old puppy in training, you use an ecollar like the rest of us, and weekend-warrior train. You've never competed in obedience.
> WHEN you get to the Master+ level, I will be all ears on how you've done this with no force fetch or collar pressure or training more than one day a week.
> 
> NONE of this applies to the actual topic.


I guess you would be surprised to know that there are goldens out there in today's age what are MH and Qualifying level dogs that have made it just fine without an ecollar on their behinds and pro trainers. There is a saying that I like very much - "The end does not justify the means."

You can continue to disregard and put others down all you want. I am not the first or the last person you do this with. It does not bother me. It is actually funny to see how you jump on every post. Very easy! :wavey:


----------



## Alaska7133 (May 26, 2011)

OK I'm asking this thread be closed. Claudia you have got to get a clue. Stop it. Just stop it. You are argumentative for no reason.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

> If I spend a lot of time at obedience trials I am going to be attracted to dogs who perform well at obedience trials. I'll go out and buy a puppy out of that dog I like at the obedience trials, and I'll train it and show it in obedience trials. *I would be stupid to like a dog at an obedience trial, then go out and buy something from a completely different pedigree.* There are lots of kennels that breed primarily PERFORMANCE dogs...easy examples would be Gaylans, Morninglo, Meadowpond, Sunfire, the list goes on. A majority of their dogs go to obedience, agility, hunt test homes. They may have some outliers who are capable in the breed ring or field trials. This is a very typical pedigree for "obedience" goldens IMO


Just a tiny note here - first golden I ever sat and watched do obedience looked more like my boys right now than what is produced by Gaylans, Sunfire, and even Meadowpond now... that's why I sought a different pedigree which looked more like my dream golden. Basic style/look and health were two things I was concerned about. And that wasn't me outright thinking I wanted a conformation dog back then.

The nice thing about our breed is there's all kinds of goldens that go into the obedience ring and do well and are gorgeous to watch. I guess that's the bottom line for me.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

Alaska, this is a productive thread, rather ask the mods to police the board and sanction users who abuse its privileges.



> I guess you would be surprised to know that there are goldens out there in today's age what are MH and Qualifying level dogs that have made it just fine without an ecollar on their behinds and pro trainers. There is a saying that I like very much - "The end does not justify the means."


No I wouldn't be surprised. I've trained two Master Hunters without collars around their waists and without the help of pro trainers : Fisher and Slater. Oh, and show/performance bred 

You're easy too -- to slip up in your own arguments.


----------



## Rob's GRs (Feb 25, 2007)

This thread has been closed from the request of the OP.


----------

