ov_blues
UKC Forum Member
Registered: Feb 2007
Location: Pomeroy, Ohio
Posts: 2838 |
Re: Maybe young and dumb
quote:
Originally posted by BluBritches
This was back before I knew what hounds was making a name for themselves and never seen or hunted with him so not pretending to know anything in specific........
But in general maybe only a handful of females was the reason percentages were so high
I (for now) believe that A: REPRODUCER list is not a perfect system cause no way to know how many pups turn out to be good hounds that just never go to town
But more importantly B: if top name studs bred less females of a higher caliber maybe our percentage would look better. Honestly if 10% was the best we could reproduce that's kinda sad
Quantity or quality
A stud with 50 pups 0 titles and 40 coonhounds to me out weighs a stud with 500 pups 50 titles and 100 or less real good ones
Sexton's Jimmy had 141 pups, 6 Grand Nights, and 17 Night Champions for a 16.3% average. That was back when hunt numbers were higher, firsts for Night Champion and high scoring Nt Ch per night were harder to get. I'm sure that he produced several behind the barn coon dogs, dogs that weren't hunted in hunts, or not enough to get the elusive first place win etc. He had to be a top reproducer to get those numbers.
Just to give a comparison to that time frame and now, I had a female that I had 320 points on before I got my first place win. She was a low end strike dog and a first tree dog. When they changed the rules to 125 tree I finished her and then went on to finish her to Grand Night without a problem although there were still several Nt Ch wins that never gave me any wins toward Grand. If I had her today she would get her 13 cast wins to make Grand Night in a lot less time than it took to make her Grand Night back then.
__________________
John Smith
Ohio Valley Bluetick Kennel
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
05-01-2020 06:17 PM
