Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Locked
User avatar
Chief_dog
Rank: Master Hunter
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:55 am
Location: Oklahoma

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Chief_dog » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:46 am

Tom, Don't worry about not having treelines down here. The dogs learn to run lines and take edges in our terrain by running ridges, ditches, draws, dry creekbeds, etc. If the dog has any brains at all, it will make the transition quickly.

RayGubernat
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3308
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 11:47 am
Location: Central DE

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by RayGubernat » Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:00 am

Tommyboy -

Like it or not,trials are the ONLY meaure of a bird dog which have credibility. I can say i have the greates bird dogs in the county/state/country, but tht ia only MY opinion. I can say they can do this and do that, but again...one man's word about his own dogs.

Does anyone here really believe a used car salesman's pitch?? With dogs is is somewhat the same thing.

There are kennels which have a well deserved reputation for producing quality animals, and in ev ery case, they have earned that reputation and work hard at keeping it. Many have been at it for years and years.

One of the ways to GET that reputation for producing quality animals is to compete successfully(in avenue which will showcase the type of dog you afre trying to produce) because now it ain't just one man's opinion any more. When you have that silly blue ribbon in your hand, you now have the opinion of unbiased strangers that your dog was the best they saw that day.

Oh and by the way...FWIW, I saw that little dog from you kennel. Nicely built pup with a great disposition. Sorry I did not get to see it run but heard it did a fine job.

RayG

Birddogz
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1488
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:18 pm
Location: Garrison, ND

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Birddogz » Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:59 am

RayGubernat wrote:Tommyboy -

Like it or not,trials are the ONLY meaure of a bird dog which have credibility. I can say i have the greates bird dogs in the county/state/country, but tht ia only MY opinion. I can say they can do this and do that, but again...one man's word about his own dogs.

Does anyone here really believe a used car salesman's pitch?? With dogs is is somewhat the same thing.

There are kennels which have a well deserved reputation for producing quality animals, and in ev ery case, they have earned that reputation and work hard at keeping it. Many have been at it for years and years.

One of the ways to GET that reputation for producing quality animals is to compete successfully(in avenue which will showcase the type of dog you afre trying to produce) because now it ain't just one man's opinion any more. When you have that silly blue ribbon in your hand, you now have the opinion of unbiased strangers that your dog was the best they saw that day.

Oh and by the way...FWIW, I saw that little dog from you kennel. Nicely built pup with a great disposition. Sorry I did not get to see it run but heard it did a fine job.

RayG
Bob Farris would disagree with you completely. In fact he believes that FTs are ruining breeds. I have never talked to anyone who is more scientific and thorough than Bob. The guy has developed an incredible hunting breed.
Speak kindly to me, beloved master. Revel in my unconditional love, and give me every minute that you can spare, for my time with you is short.

JKP
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 7:14 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by JKP » Mon Nov 14, 2011 7:34 am

Like it or not,trials are the ONLY meaure of a bird dog which have credibility.
OH..horse dung!!! Teaching dogs to run straight lines along hedgerows on liberated birds is credibility? Scouts "handling" dogs is credibility? Lame call back retrieves is credibility? 40% of the dogs at Ames either running off or unproductive is credibility?? Give me a break. Its a game like all the rest...and there is more than one avenue to a good hunting dog. Why don't you just tell therest of us that we have second class dogs??? Man up...just say it. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
Winchey
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 925
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:22 am
Location: Oromocto New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Winchey » Mon Nov 14, 2011 8:05 am

Birddogz wrote:
RayGubernat wrote:Tommyboy -

Like it or not,trials are the ONLY meaure of a bird dog which have credibility. I can say i have the greates bird dogs in the county/state/country, but tht ia only MY opinion. I can say they can do this and do that, but again...one man's word about his own dogs.

Does anyone here really believe a used car salesman's pitch?? With dogs is is somewhat the same thing.

There are kennels which have a well deserved reputation for producing quality animals, and in ev ery case, they have earned that reputation and work hard at keeping it. Many have been at it for years and years.

One of the ways to GET that reputation for producing quality animals is to compete successfully(in avenue which will showcase the type of dog you afre trying to produce) because now it ain't just one man's opinion any more. When you have that silly blue ribbon in your hand, you now have the opinion of unbiased strangers that your dog was the best they saw that day.

Oh and by the way...FWIW, I saw that little dog from you kennel. Nicely built pup with a great disposition. Sorry I did not get to see it run but heard it did a fine job.

RayG
Bob Farris would disagree with you completely. In fact he believes that FTs are ruining breeds. I have never talked to anyone who is more scientific and thorough than Bob. The guy has developed an incredible hunting breed.
Good for Bob?

slistoe
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3843
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:23 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by slistoe » Mon Nov 14, 2011 8:39 am

JKP wrote: Why don't you just tell the rest of us that we have second class dogs??? Man up...just say it. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Because it isn't true? No one has ever said that those with hunting only dogs have second class dogs. Simply that there is no way for the rest of the world to reliably discern the actual quality of said dog.

As for the other bull excrement in your post - that is the other thing that folks are saying. You simply don't understand the process and would rather tear it apart than try to understand. It is the strangest of dichotomies that folks all over are hunting over top notch hunting dogs with FC dogs littering the lineage, yet the process is proclaimed to be at odds to producing hunting dogs.

adogslife
Rank: 4X Champion
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:06 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by adogslife » Mon Nov 14, 2011 9:30 am

Like it or not,trials are the ONLY meaure of a bird dog which have credibility.
Why is that?

adogslife
Rank: 4X Champion
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:06 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by adogslife » Mon Nov 14, 2011 9:32 am

yet the process is proclaimed to be at odds to producing hunting dogs.
I don't recall anyone ever saying this.

User avatar
brad27
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1334
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:08 am
Location: menifee, CA

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by brad27 » Mon Nov 14, 2011 9:44 am

slistoe wrote:
JKP wrote: Why don't you just tell the rest of us that we have second class dogs??? Man up...just say it. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Because it isn't true? No one has ever said that those with hunting only dogs have second class dogs. Simply that there is no way for the rest of the world to reliably discern the actual quality of said dog.As for the other bull excrement in your post - that is the other thing that folks are saying. You simply don't understand the process and would rather tear it apart than try to understand. It is the strangest of dichotomies that folks all over are hunting over top notch hunting dogs with FC dogs littering the lineage, yet the process is proclaimed to be at odds to producing hunting dogs.
+1

JKP
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 7:14 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by JKP » Mon Nov 14, 2011 10:10 am

As for the other bull excrement in your post - that is the other thing that folks are saying. You simply don't understand the process and would rather tear it apart than try to understand.
I do understand the process....but I also understand the fallacies, weaknesses as well as the strengths...which is why I point them out. Of course, there are great dogs running trials...there are great dogs that run more than one venue successfully. But lets keep a grip...its a game...and its a long way from pen birds to late season sharpie on a windy day. I find that folks that can't discuss what they do honestly usually suffer from partial blindness. I'm just as practical and open about Vdog testing...what it is and isn't and where the holes are. It is offensive and bloviatingly arrogant for anyone to maintain that one venue is the path to credibility...what credibility??

The best dog for anyone is the dog they want and need. I find there is no other group that spends as much time telling others what the pinnacle of dogdom is and why you need it...than (some) trialers....while I and many other owners of "bootlickers" eat wild game 3 times/week. It would seem dogs without head crank can actually find game. I don't talk up my dogs...I don't feel a need to convince anyone that they are the best...are the most "credible"....and folks who need to, need to get a life.

As soon as you show me trial dogs at heel off leash jump shooting ducks, calmly laying in the blind for hours waiting for geese, taking directionals on land and water, etc, etc, etc....I'll consider the statement about "credibility". Trialing is GREAT...but its a great beginning and doesn't tell me enough about a dog as far as being anything more than a dog with heart that can run, point and be trained to be steady.

Back to the subject....there is a fallacy in the premise....there is no style vs efficiency debate because there are enough dogs that have both...in all breeds and all venues....could it be that folks see something they want in dogs that may not have the optimal style??? should we allow breeders to make those decisions on the basis of the whole dog not just beauty??
Simply that there is no way for the rest of the world to reliably discern the actual quality of said dog
The unspoken assumption in this statement is that ALL successful trial dogs are credible. Credible as what? You have trialers that look at AKC trial dogs as pretenders..or AA dogs as the only real top dogs. You forget that within your own ranks, you have folks that wouldn't walk across the street to see an eastern 300 yd hedgerow runner point planted quail. You let the rest of us decide what is credible....you have enough credibility concerns with the trialing world.

Craig Koshyk has published a wonderful book on the Continental breeds. His history section mentions the English breed clubs that bred pedigrees and looks.... to the detriment of many breeds. I see a similar danger in breeding dogs for any limited list of priorities...ability to win (under contrived conditions), to run, to point, and look good....should cause anyone to be cautious about using very narrow parameters. I know some breeders look beyond that...as well they should.

Get outside of trial circles and you will find many folks who don't see trial dogs as the answer to what they want. I see trial dogs as a fine seasoning that you add to the genetic soup...carefully and with much forethought....every breed should have some good ones...
Last edited by JKP on Mon Nov 14, 2011 10:22 am, edited 1 time in total.

slistoe
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3843
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:23 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by slistoe » Mon Nov 14, 2011 10:24 am

adogslife wrote:
yet the process is proclaimed to be at odds to producing hunting dogs.
I don't recall anyone ever saying this.
Well, here is one for starters.
birddogz wrote: Bob Farris would disagree with you completely. In fact he believes that FTs are ruining breeds.

adogslife
Rank: 4X Champion
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:06 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by adogslife » Mon Nov 14, 2011 10:41 am

adogslife wrote:
yet the process is proclaimed to be at odds to producing hunting dogs.

I don't recall anyone ever saying this.

slistoe wrote:
Well, here is one for starters.

birddogz wrote:
Bob Farris would disagree with you completely. In fact he believes that FTs are ruining breeds.
Doesn't say how FTs are ruining breeds.

User avatar
Ruffshooter
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2946
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 7:28 pm
Location: Maine

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Ruffshooter » Mon Nov 14, 2011 10:46 am

In 04 our brace mate at the MO VC ( I believe a Cedarwoods PP, I think I remember right.) He was quiet a dog and did pass the VC with a 200. My Mercy was 196 or7.

But The thing that seems to be missed here is many or maybe most trial dogs are hunted as well. I never get this trial vs hunting test vs hunting thing.

Style and efficiency are two different things. It all goes back to what you want and desire and will accept.
The dog must find birds,, other wise why have a bird dog. Next it must find birds, know where to find birds know what old scent is etc. on a regular basis and have learned how to handle them. That is the efficiency. The style is in the manner it covers ground and how it looks when it hit scent etc. Although I love to see a striking dog work, I like better a dog that just plain gets it done. Now if I can have both I want both. Since Mercy has reached 11 years old and Buster 10 their style on point is not what it was at when younger, but they both still are very efficient and fun to watch as they work a cover. And yes I have had both these dogs in NSTRA, NAVHDA, AKC MH, AKC OGD. with some success not like others, Don't do it much as there is to much travelling and cost. They duck hunt, they grouse hunt they have pheasant hunted etc. Prey drive is what will get you all the different hunting one wants to do then you expose them to it, train them etc.

To each their own.
The best part of training is seeing the light come on in your little prot'eg'e.

Rick

JKP
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 7:14 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by JKP » Mon Nov 14, 2011 10:49 am

Doesn't say how FTs are ruining breeds.
Don't see how FT can ruin a breed because except for Pointers, I don't think there is a large enough segment of any breed devoted to field trialing as to be able to ruin a breed. Don't think this will be an issue because field trialing is in decline...may come back, but right now the cost, rising entry fees, poor economic conditions, decline in hunters, encroachment on trial grounds, etc is bad for the sport.

I won't say it ruins breeds, but it does change them. If you look at most AKC Wirehairs that trial, they look like a sub species of the breed....the sport makes dogs smaller, lighter, whiter....more Pointer like.....but more credible
of course :wink:

Birddogz
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1488
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:18 pm
Location: Garrison, ND

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Birddogz » Mon Nov 14, 2011 10:59 am

Bob didn't develop the PP, but he has been the leader in bringing the breed to what it is today.

Fting does not test a dog in the same way people hunt dogs. Dogs in FTing hunt far too much to the front. They don't retrieve anything. They don't even hunt wild birds normally. They don't go through any hand signals, or retrieve from water. They don't do many things hunters need them to do. How many guys hunt off of horseback? Not even 1%. So we take these dogs that succeed in FTs that do not simulate how 99.99% of people hunt, and we declare that they are improving the breeds that compete? That is THE MOST UNSCIENTIFIC explanation of all time. NAVHDA simulates far more what a hunter is looking for. It is the truth, and that is why FT guys get so defensive. Bob Farris, and numerous others get it. Why? Because they are hunters FIRST!!!!! Not some old guy who can't hunt any more, or some guy who lives where there are no wild birds, talking about how there used to be birds where he lives 20 years ago. This is about people who hunt a lot on wild birds. Any of you guys hunt more than Bob Farris? I doubt it. I doubt there are many that hunt as much as I do. You use FTing to allow yourself to be relavent in your own minds. You can't hunt like you used to, so you create a game for your dogs. That is fine, but don't fool yourself into thinking that you are improving the breed for how the average weekend warrior hunts. SInce (in my opinion)I have written the truth, I am certain (in my opinion) that I will be reprimanded.
Speak kindly to me, beloved master. Revel in my unconditional love, and give me every minute that you can spare, for my time with you is short.

adogslife
Rank: 4X Champion
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:06 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by adogslife » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:11 am

JKP,
Some people would consider that ruined.

User avatar
brad27
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1334
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:08 am
Location: menifee, CA

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by brad27 » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:16 am

Birddogz wrote:Bob didn't develop the PP, but he has been the leader in bringing the breed to what it is today.

Fting does not test a dog in the same way people hunt dogs. Dogs in FTing hunt far too much to the front. They don't retrieve anything. They don't even hunt wild birds normally. They don't go through any hand signals, or retrieve from water. They don't do many things hunters need them to do. How many guys hunt off of horseback? Not even 1%. So we take these dogs that succeed in FTs that do not simulate how 99.99% of people hunt, and we declare that they are improving the breeds that compete? That is THE MOST UNSCIENTIFIC explanation of all time. NAVHDA simulates far more what a hunter is looking for. It is the truth, and that is why FT guys get so defensive. Bob Farris, and numerous others get it. Why? Because they are hunters FIRST!!!!! Not some old guy who can't hunt any more, or some guy who lives where there are no wild birds, talking about how there used to be birds where he lives 20 years ago. This is about people who hunt a lot on wild birds. Any of you guys hunt more than Bob Farris? I doubt it. I doubt there are many that hunt as much as I do. You use FTing to allow yourself to be relavent in your own minds. You can't hunt like you used to, so you create a game for your dogs. That is fine, but don't fool yourself into thinking that you are improving the breed for how the average weekend warrior hunts. SInce I have written the truth, I am certain that I will be reprimanded.
Wow, thats a pretty broad brush.

User avatar
Chukar12
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2051
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 5:20 pm
Location: Northern California

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Chukar12 » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:18 am

So, when I started this it wasn't to learn of the differences in trial dogs and hunting dogs it was to try to get honest answers from people about why they feel and react the way that they do. I am seeing lots of reactions but I am still not sure I understand it. A few scribes back the thread broached the subject of credibility, and why trials and tests (and I am not inclined to limit the venue or format) are the only legitimate way to measure and broadcast the performance and ability of this dog or that one. There are numerous reasons that it works they could be a thread of their own ... but read this thread and a thousand others like it, do you trust everybody’s perception and knowledge of dog performance and breeding that you are reading based on their word alone?

Style and efficiency are subjective entirely and they should be until they are bound by the rules and framework of a measurable standard, i.e. a trial or a test then they become the product and vision of the participants and collective venue that owns them. Do not expect any one of them to be impervious to criticism or holes in their format when they are compared to an individual’s wants, needs or expectations in a dog. JKP pointed that out about a couple of venues and I am not sure any competitor I know would argue or defend their choice as the end all be all. They might however say that this type of dog or that type of dog isn't their cup of tea, some with more tact than others.

The full bag as a metric argument; and my situation is better than your situation for creating or measuring a gun dog is one that will resonate perhaps with an individual or small regional group but will never have a credible place in the sporting dog community when BS can be slung in seconds to the four corners of the globe with a few simple key strokes...Folks need a little more assurance and a better resume that I kill 2,345,567 pheasants a year. By the way, dogs do not research where they care to train or compete, nor do they choose their owner. So we need to be careful about dismissing a dog from this region or that, or this venue or that. A dog that is given the opportunity to perform for third party experts and comes out on top above all others is worthy of a look and I do not care what venue it came from. My current passions are chukar hunting and horseback field trials, NLB wasn't known to be either...but he caught my attention, you cannot win that much and not have the characteristics needed to compete. (Whether you pass them on is a whole other science).

I don't know if I will ever shoot another duck, goose, elk or deer. That fire went out for me; sometimes I think I let it burn too hot too early. It has been replaced with the fascination of watching dogs perform like athletes without the contract disputes, gang bangers in the crowd, and some of the other almost unspeakable social ills dominating the headlines as we argue this. For me it’s an almost perfect escape and distraction.
Last edited by Chukar12 on Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Vonzeppelinkennels
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2107
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 9:14 pm
Location: Amelia,Ohio

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Vonzeppelinkennels » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:25 am

Chukar you know once Birrdogz got involved with this thread where it was going & where it will more & likely end!!
LOCKED!!

User avatar
Chukar12
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2051
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 5:20 pm
Location: Northern California

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Chukar12 » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:26 am

Bob didn't develop the PP, but he has been the leader in bringing the breed to what it is today.

Fting does not test a dog in the same way people hunt dogs. Dogs in FTing hunt far too much to the front. They don't retrieve anything. They don't even hunt wild birds normally. They don't go through any hand signals, or retrieve from water. They don't do many things hunters need them to do. How many guys hunt off of horseback? Not even 1%. So we take these dogs that succeed in FTs that do not simulate how 99.99% of people hunt, and we declare that they are improving the breeds that compete? That is THE MOST UNSCIENTIFIC explanation of all time. NAVHDA simulates far more what a hunter is looking for. It is the truth, and that is why FT guys get so defensive. Bob Farris, and numerous others get it. Why? Because they are hunters FIRST!!!!! Not some old guy who can't hunt any more, or some guy who lives where there are no wild birds, talking about how there used to be birds where he lives 20 years ago. This is about people who hunt a lot on wild birds. Any of you guys hunt more than Bob Farris? I doubt it. I doubt there are many that hunt as much as I do. You use FTing to allow yourself to be relavent in your own minds. You can't hunt like you used to, so you create a game for your dogs. That is fine, but don't fool yourself into thinking that you are improving the breed for how the average weekend warrior hunts. SInce I have written the truth, I am certain that I will be reprimanded.
Is Bob Farris another friend who has never heard of you and who you might quote...and then have somebody produce something in publication that is converse to what you have stated as fact? Did you ever put together a field trial. Do you really own a starter's pistol? I want to see a picture next to a newspaper with today's date on it.

You know where this will lead don't you? Pretty soon you will be sad and frustrated because bo one believes you know anything about dogs. Mostly because it is clear that you don't have anything to offer when it comes to training...you are way more worried about Birddogz than bird dogs.

adogslife
Rank: 4X Champion
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:06 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by adogslife » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:29 am

It has been replaced with the fascination of watching dogs perform like athletes
There are different types of athletes,all of whom excel in their chosen sport.

User avatar
Vonzeppelinkennels
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2107
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 9:14 pm
Location: Amelia,Ohio

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Vonzeppelinkennels » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:32 am

Howie MAYBE one day he will get old & not be able to hunt & then he can argue with his self in the mirrow.I hunted as much if not more then he did at one time but yes I'm old broke down & have phsical problems that no longer allow me to do it.Do I like it NO! but that's life like I said most of these guys will grown up one day!! But Birrdogz I doubt. :roll:

User avatar
Garrison
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1213
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 5:29 pm
Location: Winchester CA

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Garrison » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:35 am

Birddogz wrote:Bob didn't develop the PP, but he has been the leader in bringing the breed to what it is today.

Fting does not test a dog in the same way people hunt dogs. Dogs in FTing hunt far too much to the front. They don't retrieve anything. They don't even hunt wild birds normally. They don't go through any hand signals, or retrieve from water. They don't do many things hunters need them to do. How many guys hunt off of horseback? Not even 1%. So we take these dogs that succeed in FTs that do not simulate how 99.99% of people hunt, and we declare that they are improving the breeds that compete? That is THE MOST UNSCIENTIFIC explanation of all time. NAVHDA simulates far more what a hunter is looking for. It is the truth, and that is why FT guys get so defensive. Bob Farris, and numerous others get it. Why? Because they are hunters FIRST!!!!! Not some old guy who can't hunt any more, or some guy who lives where there are no wild birds, talking about how there used to be birds where he lives 20 years ago. This is about people who hunt a lot on wild birds. Any of you guys hunt more than Bob Farris? I doubt it. I doubt there are many that hunt as much as I do. You use FTing to allow yourself to be relavent in your own minds. You can't hunt like you used to, so you create a game for your dogs. That is fine, but don't fool yourself into thinking that you are improving the breed for how the average weekend warrior hunts. SInce I have written the truth, I am certain that I will be reprimanded.

Does a cover dog trial not simulate a hunting situation on wild birds? It considered a field trial I believe. Are wild birds used for NAVDAH testing? Both "Games" as well as all others where dogs are trained to a very high standard produce great hunting dogs. All breeds and trial formats have a niche that certain types of dogs will excell in, doesn't make them any worse or any better a dog. I have hunted over both Prize 1 NAVDAH dogs and field trial dogs and the result were the same, birds in the bag and smiles on the face. Your style of hunting obviously is better suited to a versatile dog. Doesn't mean a big running dog may be better suited for another's style of hunting.
Last edited by Garrison on Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
“Heaven goes by favor. If it went by merit, you would stay out and your dog would go in.”
- Mark Twain-

Birddogz
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1488
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:18 pm
Location: Garrison, ND

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Birddogz » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:36 am

How many of the guys who disagree with me hunt as mucgh as I do? Ray? VonZ? Slistoe? I can tell by how they post that they don't hunt nearly as much as I do. They like FTing. So why should I listen to them about hunting?

How many on here have as successful kennel as Bob Farris? I don't worship him, but I admire his honesty. I will quote a conversation we had some time ago....."Many FT dogs just like to hear the wind whistle through their ears, put them in a blind and have them retrieve ducks and geese, throw them on a chukar hill the next day, pheasant sloughs the next, grouse woods the next. If you do this with one of my dogs and a FT dog that is from the East coast you will see the difference in breeding." I from that point on knew he was a smart guy. "It isn't about a game, it is about a game that produces dogs that can succeed the way the average guy hunts, that is what makes a dog." Yet another honest quote.
Speak kindly to me, beloved master. Revel in my unconditional love, and give me every minute that you can spare, for my time with you is short.

User avatar
nikegundog
GDF Junkie
Posts: 1508
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 11:21 am
Location: SW Minnesota

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by nikegundog » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:41 am

Vonzeppelinkennels wrote:Chukar you know once Birrdogz got involved with this thread where it was going & where it will more & likely end!!
LOCKED!!
I thought it would likely end the same way whether or not Birdogz was involved in the thread or not. JMI, but I would rather read a debate than listen to another dog food thread.

Birddogz
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1488
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:18 pm
Location: Garrison, ND

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Birddogz » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:44 am

]
Does a cover dog trial not simulate a hunting situation on wild birds? It considered a field trial I believe. Are wild birds used for NAVDAH testing? Both "Games" as well as all others where dogs are trained to a very high standard produce great hunting dogs. All breeds and trial formats have a niche that certain types of dogs will excell in, doesn't make them any worse or any better a dog. I have hunted over both Prize 1 NAVDAH dogs and field trial dogs and the result were the same, birds in the bag and smiles on the face. Your style of hunting obviously is better suited to a versatile dog. Doesn't mean a big running dog may be better suited for another's style of hunting.[/quote]


I should have excluded cover dog trials, I like them, but I need to see some retrieving and marking abilities. I think NAVHDA is WAY too simple. They need to make it tougher for sure. It isn't perfect, but NAVHDA dogs are what the average guy should have for hunting. How many guys East of the Mississippi have access to 10,000 acres of privately owned prairie? None. So why do they desire a dog that runs 6-700 yards or further to the front? Because of Fts.

Now, if I lived in Oklahoma or parts of Texas, let them role. I still don't see the need for more than 300 yards if you are on foot. 400 at the most.
Speak kindly to me, beloved master. Revel in my unconditional love, and give me every minute that you can spare, for my time with you is short.

adogslife
Rank: 4X Champion
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:06 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by adogslife » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:50 am

FTs were not designed to produce versatile dogs.
FTs were designed to produce upland specialists. Seek and point.

JKP
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 7:14 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by JKP » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:51 am

Be a shame to lock this...don't see a reason too...yet :wink:

I have said it before...we ought to fall on our knees and thank folks who want to spend that kind of money and time in an attempt to identify truly great bird dogs through trialing....I mean it. But don't EVER tell me that its the only way to credibility or to a great hunting dog. I can give you the names of quite a few Euro imports that came off the boat and went on to successful trial careers...all dogs from lines hunted as much on big game as planted quail. NOW....they were second class FT dogs, you know the AKC variety. :lol: :lol: :lol:

The ultimate in efficiency is the Euro dog....ducks in the morning, birds and hare in the afternoon and tracking up the wounded deer before nightfall. Sounds pretty credible to me too.

User avatar
Garrison
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1213
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 5:29 pm
Location: Winchester CA

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Garrison » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:04 pm

Birddogz wrote:]
Does a cover dog trial not simulate a hunting situation on wild birds? It considered a field trial I believe. Are wild birds used for NAVDAH testing? Both "Games" as well as all others where dogs are trained to a very high standard produce great hunting dogs. All breeds and trial formats have a niche that certain types of dogs will excell in, doesn't make them any worse or any better a dog. I have hunted over both Prize 1 NAVDAH dogs and field trial dogs and the result were the same, birds in the bag and smiles on the face. Your style of hunting obviously is better suited to a versatile dog. Doesn't mean a big running dog may be better suited for another's style of hunting.

I should have excluded cover dog trials, I like them, but I need to see some retrieving and marking abilities. I think NAVHDA is WAY too simple. They need to make it tougher for sure. It isn't perfect, but NAVHDA dogs are what the average guy should have for hunting. How many guys East of the Mississippi have access to 10,000 acres of privately owned prairie? None. So why do they desire a dog that runs 6-700 yards or further to the front? Because of Fts.

Now, if I lived in Oklahoma or parts of Texas, let them role. I still don't see the need for more than 300 yards if you are
on foot. 400 at the most.[/quote]

Because that is what they like, just like you enjoy filling your bag. The only good dog for your situation is one that can measures up to your standards and produces the way you need him to, it sounds like you have that covered. I don't think that anybody will disagree that a AA pointer will not be able to track as well or break Ice like a Versatile Breed trained to a high standard, so why compare yours to them like they are playing on the same field at the same game.
“Heaven goes by favor. If it went by merit, you would stay out and your dog would go in.”
- Mark Twain-

User avatar
Winchey
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 925
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:22 am
Location: Oromocto New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Winchey » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:10 pm

Birddogz wrote:How many of the guys who disagree with me hunt as mucgh as I do? Ray? VonZ? Slistoe? I can tell by how they post that they don't hunt nearly as much as I do. They like FTing. So why should I listen to them about hunting?

How many on here have as successful kennel as Bob Farris? I don't worship him, but I admire his honesty. I will quote a conversation we had some time ago....."Many FT dogs just like to hear the wind whistle through their ears, put them in a blind and have them retrieve ducks and geese, throw them on a chukar hill the next day, pheasant sloughs the next, grouse woods the next. If you do this with one of my dogs and a FT dog that is from the East coast you will see the difference in breeding." I from that point on knew he was a smart guy. "It isn't about a game, it is about a game that produces dogs that can succeed the way the average guy hunts, that is what makes a dog." Yet another honest quote.
Why do you insist we all need PP's from cedarwood kennels? I have a pup from a kennel that has produced dogs that have seen and have had more ruffed grouse shot over them then all the PP's in the world.

I also have a V dog, I like him but he doesn't hold a candle to a well bread lab on waterfowl that has had good training and as much hunting experience as your dogs. Your V-Dog doesn't either.

I like V-Dogs, just don't how you can insist that's what we should all have.

User avatar
Vonzeppelinkennels
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2107
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 9:14 pm
Location: Amelia,Ohio

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Vonzeppelinkennels » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:21 pm

Birddogz just give it a rest!! I think even you can see that even the members that feel somewhat the same as you have heard enough! :roll:

adogslife
Rank: 4X Champion
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:06 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by adogslife » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:24 pm

I also have a V dog, I like him but he doesn't hold a candle to a well bread lab on waterfowl that has had good training and as much hunting experience as your dogs. Your V-Dog doesn't either.
You are speaking for yourself,right?

Are you comparing a lesser bred and untrained vdog to:"a well bread lab on waterfowl that has had good training"

Granted, the short coated vdogs may have difficulty in the fridgid temps, but performace would be the same for a well bred,well trained vdog than for the well bred,well trained retriever.I know several DK owners in Maine who waterfowl.

User avatar
Garrison
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1213
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 5:29 pm
Location: Winchester CA

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Garrison » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:30 pm

adogslife wrote:
I also have a V dog, I like him but he doesn't hold a candle to a well bread lab on waterfowl that has had good training and as much hunting experience as your dogs. Your V-Dog doesn't either.
You are speaking for yourself,right?

Are you comparing a lesser bred and untrained vdog to:"a well bread lab on waterfowl that has had good training"

Granted, the short coated vdogs may have difficulty in the fridgid temps, but performace would be the same for a well bred,well trained vdog than for the well bred,well trained retriever.I know several DK owners in Maine who waterfowl.

That is supposed to be funny right?
“Heaven goes by favor. If it went by merit, you would stay out and your dog would go in.”
- Mark Twain-

User avatar
Winchey
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 925
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:22 am
Location: Oromocto New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Winchey » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:35 pm

No I am saying if you take 1000 well bread labs and put them against 1000 well bread V-Dogs, give them identical training and exposure, the labs will come out far and away on top when it comes to waterfowl. Cold climate is but one aspect the retrievers excel at, not saying the V-Dogs can't do it, I have hunted ducks with my V at -15F and he got it done, just saying retrievers get it done better.

adogslife
Rank: 4X Champion
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:06 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by adogslife » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:40 pm

the labs will come out far and away on top when it comes to waterfowl
In what respect?

User avatar
nikegundog
GDF Junkie
Posts: 1508
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 11:21 am
Location: SW Minnesota

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by nikegundog » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:42 pm

adogslife wrote:
the labs will come out far and away on top when it comes to waterfowl
In what respect?
Have you ever been to a retriever field trial and saw what they are expected to do?

slistoe
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3843
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:23 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by slistoe » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:43 pm

adogslife wrote:
the labs will come out far and away on top when it comes to waterfowl
In what respect?
In every respect that has to do with the recovery and retrieving of game birds.

JKP
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 7:14 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by JKP » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:45 pm

No I am saying if you take 1000 well bread labs and put them against 1000 well bread V-Dogs, give them identical training and exposure, the labs will come out far and away on top when it comes to waterfowl. Cold climate is but one aspect the retrievers excel at, not saying the V-Dogs can't do it, I have hunted ducks with my V at -15F and he got it done, just saying retrievers get it done better.
Well...I WOULD HOPE SO!!! DUH!!! If it weren't the case, it would sure shoot a hole in the idea of breeding performance, wouldn't it? But, the other side of the discussion is, how many folks need a dog that can be lined for 500 yds out through the rice fields...hupped... and then sent right to town for coffee and donuts. :lol: :lol: Its very easy to teach a Vdog to back, and then right and left on the whistle ...and 100-150 yds will do it for most duck hunters. Sure its intermediate work for a retriever guy at best....if you need more go get a top Lab....I don't see many Labs that are gonna sweep me 150-200 yds in the CRP after we're done in the duckblind. :wink:

Its like the discussion we're having about style and efficiency....what's enough? why buy a 600 yd dog when all you need is 150 yd dog. The vast majority of wild birds shot in this country entail a walk of no more than 150 yds to the point...I'll betcha. And so it is with waterwork...I have never had a dog that I couldn't send across the upper Delaware and then direct to a "fall" on the other side. Easy maybe for you hard core Lab guys, but it gets all I need done.

slistoe
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3843
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:23 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by slistoe » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:46 pm

nikegundog wrote:
adogslife wrote:
the labs will come out far and away on top when it comes to waterfowl
In what respect?
Have you ever been to a retriever field trial and saw what they are expected to do?
The key point here is not what they are expected to do, but rather what they are capable of doing. They are only expected because they are capable.
Granted very few hunters will actually put dogs in situations where those capabilities will be even marginally tested but that does not diminish the fact that the capability exists.

adogslife
Rank: 4X Champion
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:06 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by adogslife » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:49 pm

am saying if you take 1000 well bread labs and put them against 1000 well bread V-Dogs, give them identical training and exposure
Have you ever been to a retriever field trial and saw what they are expected to do?

Is it being said that vdogs can not be trained,don't have the momentum,don't have the drive and don't have an afinity to water?

Have you ever tried to train a vdog like a retriever?
I have.
It's hard work and takes time, no matter the breed.Many will fail in FT and HT , no matter the breed.
I am talking a waterfowl dog,not a FT and HT retreiver.

We are talking well bred and well trained.
Maybe the issue is your exposure to well bred and well trained vdogs?
Last edited by adogslife on Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Winchey
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 925
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:22 am
Location: Oromocto New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Winchey » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:57 pm

JKP wrote:
No I am saying if you take 1000 well bread labs and put them against 1000 well bread V-Dogs, give them identical training and exposure, the labs will come out far and away on top when it comes to waterfowl. Cold climate is but one aspect the retrievers excel at, not saying the V-Dogs can't do it, I have hunted ducks with my V at -15F and he got it done, just saying retrievers get it done better.
Well...I WOULD HOPE SO!!! DUH!!! If it weren't the case, it would sure shoot a hole in the idea of breeding performance, wouldn't it? But, the other side of the discussion is, how many folks need a dog that can be lined for 500 yds out through the rice fields...hupped... and then sent right to town for coffee and donuts. :lol: :lol: Its very easy to teach a Vdog to back, and then right and left on the whistle ...and 100-150 yds will do it for most duck hunters. Sure its intermediate work for a retriever guy at best....if you need more go get a top Lab....I don't see many Labs that are gonna sweep me 150-200 yds in the CRP after we're done in the duckblind. :wink:

Its like the discussion we're having about style and efficiency....what's enough? why buy a 600 yd dog when all you need is 150 yd dog. The vast majority of wild birds shot in this country entail a walk of no more than 150 yds to the point...I'll betcha. And so it is with waterwork...I have never had a dog that I couldn't send across the upper Delaware and then direct to a "fall" on the other side. Easy maybe for you hard core Lab guys, but it gets all I need done.
It is never enough, why would we not alway's strive for a more capable dog? I won't appologize for wanting the best dog more then the good enough one.

If I could only have one dog granted it would be a V-Dog, until then, I won't be settling for a dog that is only "pretty good" at everything.

Do you have indoor plumbing? Outhouse gets it done? Do you drive a car? Cause a horse will still get you there, give me a break.

User avatar
Winchey
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 925
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:22 am
Location: Oromocto New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Winchey » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:00 pm

"Is it being said that vdogs can not be trained,don't have the momentum,don't have the drive and don't have an afinity to water?"

No it is not, but you will always be playing catch up, the best lab has more momentum, more drive, more affinity for water, handles easier, trains easier, marks better, handles the cold better then the best V-Dog...

User avatar
birddogger
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3776
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 11:09 pm
Location: Bunker Hill, IL.

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by birddogger » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:01 pm

[quote]For me it’s an almost perfect escape and distraction.
[/quote

Boy will I second that!

Charlie
If you think you can or if you think you can't, you are right either way

User avatar
Garrison
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1213
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 5:29 pm
Location: Winchester CA

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Garrison » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:06 pm

VC is a great accomplishment and takes an amazing dog to excell in all of the disciplines required. But no VC is going to track like a Bloodhound, clear a field like a Pointer and retrieve like A Lab at the top of their respective games. I would be the first inline to by one. What is wrong with just being on top of the NAVHDA game?
“Heaven goes by favor. If it went by merit, you would stay out and your dog would go in.”
- Mark Twain-

adogslife
Rank: 4X Champion
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:06 pm

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by adogslife » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:08 pm

No it is not, but you will always be playing catch up, the best lab has more momentum, more drive, more affinity for water, handles easier, trains easier, marks better, handles the cold better then the best V-Dog...
It is never enough, why would we not alway's strive for a more capable dog?

Getting the job done effeciently and effectively is all I require in a hunting dog.

User avatar
nikegundog
GDF Junkie
Posts: 1508
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 11:21 am
Location: SW Minnesota

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by nikegundog » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:08 pm

adogslife wrote: Is it being said that vdogs can not be trained,don't have the momentum,don't have the drive and don't have an afinity to water?

Have you ever tried to train a vdog like a retriever?
I have.
It's hard work and takes time, no matter the breed.Many will fail, no matter the breed.
I am talking a waterfowl dog,not a FT and HT retreiver.

We are talking well bred and well trained.
Maybe the issue is your exposure to well bred and well trained vdogs?
When I hear mention of a "well bred and well trained" retriever, I see a dog at a minimum of a MH dog, not saying they need to run hunt tests, however perform at that level. I did not say that vdogs can not be trained,don't have the momentum,don't have the drive and don't have an afinity to water? What I am saying is labs are bred to a higher level of retrieving ability than vdogs and so a well bred retriever should perform better than a well bred Vdog.

User avatar
ezzy333
GDF Junkie
Posts: 16625
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 3:14 pm
Location: Dixon IL

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by ezzy333 » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:14 pm

In an effort to keep from having to lock this we need to consider:

No matter how much you hunt or trial is has no bearing on this thread.

No matter what breed of dog you have it has no bearing on this thread.

No matter how many times you post the same opinion of yours it will not become right.

No matter how much you run down someone else's opinion it will not make it wrong.

And the more you use the word 'I' in your post the less relevant the post becomes.

Think about it before you make your next post if you feel you have something to post that you haven't already said.

Ezzy
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=144
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=207

It's not how many breaths you have taken but how many times it has been taken away!

Has anyone noticed common sense isn't very common anymore.

User avatar
Winchey
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 925
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:22 am
Location: Oromocto New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by Winchey » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:15 pm

adogslife wrote:
No it is not, but you will always be playing catch up, the best lab has more momentum, more drive, more affinity for water, handles easier, trains easier, marks better, handles the cold better then the best V-Dog...
It is never enough, why would we not alway's strive for a more capable dog?

Getting the job done effeciently and effectively is all I require in a hunting dog.
That's fine, just don't say your Miata is as good as a Porche because you only require the Miata.

User avatar
proudag08
Rank: 2X Champion
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 10:33 am
Location: Burleson, TX

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by proudag08 » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:26 pm

Not time to lock it...

As a spectator in this debate I would like to see the discussion continue. I have my opinions sure, but I keep them to myself because I have no credibility and or experience to back it up.

Watching the two sides debate is good for those of us that arent really on one side or the other. Also, it helps me pass the time at work! :roll:

User avatar
nikegundog
GDF Junkie
Posts: 1508
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 11:21 am
Location: SW Minnesota

Re: Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

Post by nikegundog » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:30 pm

proudag08 wrote:Not time to lock it...

As a spectator in this debate I would like to see the discussion continue. I have my opinions sure, but I keep them to myself because I have no credibility and or experience to back it up.

Watching the two sides debate is good for those of us that arent really on one side or the other. Also, it helps me pass the time at work! :roll:
Well said, except for that credibility or experience part that may or may not be true. :D

Locked