UKC Forums - breed issue idea

Show all 14 posts from this thread on one page

UKC Forums (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/index.php)
- UKC Coonhounds (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=4)
-- breed issue idea (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?threadid=5402)

Posted by Sawblade on 10-01-2003 10:06 PM:

breed issue idea

I've got an idea for next years breed issues.

I'd like to see UKC list the top 25 "living" stud dogs of each breed ,listed strickly by percentage . Regardless of number of pups.

This would help to find good reproducers before their too old to still breed a female .I hunt Redbones and I know that there has got to be more dogs out there that haven't got a hundred pups yet but already have more NtCh than most the dogs on the current list.The new Hunter and Breeder preformance program is going to be a real winner and this is the kind of information that we breeders need to pick stud dogs and get their owners to enter them in this kinda program.

What ya'll think.

__________________
Sawblade Kennels/owner Kelly Hyde

Proud Breeder of the following dogs
GrNiteCh Sawblade Fiddle "no.5 historical female
QuadGrCh Yellow River Red Blaze
GrNiteCh Copeland's Red Hot Clyde
GrNiteCh Stone's Midnight Red Jake
NiteCh Brights Choctaw Night Time Sissy
NiteCh Sawblade Red Reckon
NiteCh Brasee Red Penny
NiteCh Nacalus Mandolin
Yellow River Fiddle II " good reproducer"
NiteCh Krasa Sawblade Quikstuf Bone
GrNiteCh Krasa Hair Trigger Hope
GrNiteCH Locked and Loaded Jake
GrNiteCh Moonlight Woody
NiteCh Sawblade Mac Truck " Jake and Hopes' brother"
NiteCh After Dark Spark " brother to Fiddle"
NiteCh Morgan's Boone " sister to Fiddle"
NiteCh High Water June " out of Reckon"
NiteCh Sawblade Timberline Rusty
Sawblade Ribbon,

They are bred with heart and drive included.

From a small kennel with Big results.

Posted by on 10-01-2003 10:17 PM:

I like that idea but I bet there'd be some who wouldn't. Say a guy nobody ever heard of uses his own NiteChamp to put 6 pups on the ground and 5 of them make NiteChamp, he could be getting a bunch of phone calls instead of the big names that have spent a ton on advertiseing.

Posted by on 10-01-2003 10:20 PM:

Pretty Good One Sawblade...

Just think for a second about how many red dogs you know who have like 20-60 pups on the ground and two to six nt.ch.'s

The owners don't care (and that's fine) and the dog will never see the light of day. If they do care it's still a long road for 'em.

The only downside I'd see is that those 20-30 pup dogs have only been bred to 3 or 4 females...are they really good producers or are they the recipient of a strong producing female???

I agree on the performance program. That is one program where the rubber is going to meet the road. Especially in the minority breeds.

Jim, Isn't what you were getting at the general idea?

Posted by Joe Maitland on 10-01-2003 10:42 PM:

Jim-

you need to cuff yourself up side the head. The whole point is to uncover the guys who HAVEN'T taken a reproducing dud and spent a bunch of money to promote it.

I like the idea. It has merit. It would work for the smaller breeds especially- like Reds and Plotts. But it would put poor Sara under the table around walker issue deadline. There's probably 200 walkers tied for 2nd place with 2 nite champions out of 20-30 pups.

I know of a redbone that died a few years back. I believe his 6th or 7th pup just made nite champion and he had 28 or so on the ground. A guy ought to check UKC on him for sure, but I know he did cross well on the 4 or so bitches he covered.

One things for sure. It'll still have an asterisk behind it due to the lack of different matings. I can take my best male and best female, cross them, raise all the pups, and finish them all out to Nt.Ch. It still won't present a clear picture of my dog's reproducing abilities.

I still think like my idea of making UKC records open to the public for free (some how), so that responsible breeders could query their next cross based on %, #, breeding, and any other recorded stat. on a dog.

IE: I want to be able to go online and search a dog by UKC # to find a stud that: (Hypothetical here now) 1. Is a direct son of Tex 2. Has a 10%+ reproduction record 3. Has never been written up 4. Finished to Nt.Ch. in three hunts with 3 first place wins.

The point is, we pay to play and pay to register, so we ought to be able to utilize UKC's data.

Posted by on 10-01-2003 10:49 PM:

Joe, my post was a failed attemp at sarcasism but I guess everybody took me seriously.

Posted by Sawblade on 10-01-2003 11:01 PM:

Who's better

RedCedar , Who's the better reproducer one that's only bred two females and has 4 NtCh out of the two or the dog with twenty females under him and a couple hundred pups but only 3 or4 NtCh.... This is an easy one ,you can figure it out if you try.

Posted by Fireball on 10-02-2003 01:38 AM:

sawblade,
let me ask you a question???
who is the better reproducer, a dog that 2 nt.ch. made all at big hunts with 100+dogs or a dog that has 4 nt.ch. all made at micky mouse backyard hunts???

Posted by skyblu on 10-02-2003 02:55 AM:

statistics on producing winners

Statistics can indicate certain tendencies, but if a high percentage of the pups go to pleasure hunters or pet homes then no one ever really knows the potemtial of all the pups produced. The only way to assure good totals for a dog would be to keep all the pups & title them yourself - which of course isn't a logical solution. The other factor is genetics. You'd need to know which females "nicked" the best to produce winning pups, as well as the pedigrees of those females.

__________________
SKY
___________________
Author of the novel "Follow Jennifer"

Posted by Sawblade on 10-02-2003 05:23 AM:

depends

To answer you in less than a book Fireball ,I'd say it depends .If the dog only produced two dogs that could win, out of a couple hundred pups I don't care where they got their wins. There has always been the super dog from the freak cross,I'm looking for better odds.

don't run down the dogs that win at the little hunts. they are just as good of a coondog in many instances.

Big hunts sometimes bring out the worst in a handler ,I think you even said in a recent post that "some go out for blood" at the National hunt. Thats why I like to hunt with a dog before I breed to him.

I've never won a big hunt but I've hunted with some dogs that have and have held my own .Once I even lucked out and won a cast with two nationally advertised stud dogs in it...They were fine dogs too.with some big wins on them. My little hunt winner was right in there.

Posted by Bullet on 10-02-2003 05:35 AM:

I like the Idea..

Sounds like a good idea to me. I'm curious.

__________________
Travis Brittain
Orebank Creek Kennels
Know Jesus.....Know Peace
No Jesus.....No Peace

Posted by on 10-02-2003 10:14 PM:

Sawblade

With all due respect,

How do you know that the dog with two females under him will continue to reproduce at the current rate once he is exposed to more females.

How do you know that dog b that you mentioned didn't start out like dog a. Hit two nick crosses right off the bat and then shot 0-forever from there on out? Just curious. Still, I'd probably go with dog A and you would too.

Your idea is good as it would get the guys that are having good luck out of the woodwork and give them some recognition. The smaller breeds would surely benefit from something like you described.

I think it would even work on the more populous breeds as it would give some of the guys an alternative to look at opposed to the stuff they get to see in the ad's every month...still, I think some folks like breeding for names instead of results, it gives them something to talk about at the tailgate.

Posted by walkerdawg on 10-02-2003 11:33 PM:

Breed Issue Idea

I too think this has merit...It would let everyone know...and each could make their OWN decison on which one would reproduce. A dog doesnt have to have well know sires in order for it to be a coondog. the paper game is to attract people...Why else would a person " put " a set of high powered papers on a dog..because almost everyone would look twiceat them then...and very few would look before. And i am curious...how many World Champions have produced World Champions???...A lot has to do with the handlers too...Most would not be where they are now if i handled them..lol

__________________
http://coonhuntinheaven.freeservers.com
Dean Lambert

Ring-tail Kennels

It takes as much to feed a good hound as a sorry one!!!!

Posted by John D on 10-03-2003 12:49 AM:

Some good ideas being thrown out but the one I like the best is JOe's idea to make the records available to the public. I don't know about anybody else, but I'd even be willing to pay to get a crack at UKC's database on reproducing records.

At work we have databases of all kinds of company records and with a little training, about anybody can create their own report and sort it by about any way imaginable. I can't see why dog reproduction records should be any different. The data can be sliced and diced any way someone wants it to be. I'm sure there could be some reports that would be meaningful only to the person that generated them. On the other hand, a person that was able to use this tool in a way to get an advantage, would rise to the top and I can't see anything but good coming from that.

Posted by Samhain on 10-03-2003 01:38 AM:

How about a stud dog directory?Mostly ads (hopefully more than the regulars) breeds listed seperately,stories/articles on the "legends",and maybe some classic reprint ads of them.

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:19 AM.

Show all 14 posts from this thread on one page