Breeding for Form.

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Sun May 13, 2012 2:30 pm

Alright, another question for the breeders out there. I've been doing a lot of studying on form and any article or literature at all that I've read about proper form in working dogs says you want a dog with about a 90' angle from the elbow to the front point of the shoulder to the top point of the shoulder blade (withers). This tight angle makes for a kind of absorbant suspension as the front end of the dog comes down, sotening the impact. When you look at dogs that run at Ames, though, the top tier for endurance testing, a lot of the dogs have straight shoulders. I've heard people say the dogs will run that long on sheer will, but over the dog's life he'll break down faster than he would have with more angulation.

I went and looked at Moxy who is real snappy when she runs, always moving. Had her out with a bunch of guys the other day and turned her loose to have fun while we were just sitting around, talking. Cinna sat by the pickup and tried to catch her breath while Moxy wouldn't yield. She's like the energizer bunny. But, I put her up on the table and got a good look at her the other day. She has incredibly short hind legs and her shoulders have real open angles. I remember when I've pitted her against other dogs she has a lot of enthusiasm and looks animated in the field, but on the break away the other dog always beats her out. She's just not a particularly fast dog, although she's light, energetic and really wants to go.

Does anyone out there pay attention to the physical dog beyond just looks? Does anyone not follow the school of thought that form, automatically, follows function? Maybe function follows form? Why or why not?

fuzznut · Post by **fuzznut** » Sun May 13, 2012 4:12 pm

Two things... Balance and heart.
A dog can be pretty straight in the front end and as long as his rear end balances the front... it's not perfect, but works. A dog with a ton of rear anglulation, but straight in the front end... or a dog with lots of front angulation (don't see that too much) and straight in the rear.. that's trouble.

heart... can't build it into them! I've seen dogs that should barely be able to put two feet down in a row, cow hocked, weak rear, straight fronts... and they run like the wind! Physically they are a mess, but the heart of a lion!

You will see dogs that just float when they run, others are pumpers. Both get there, but which is more pleasant to the eye?
Yes, conformation is important in the long run.
Fuzz

hi-tailyn · Post by **hi-tailyn** » Sun May 13, 2012 5:23 pm

My 4 yr old National Champion GSP got hit by truck and broke front leg and tore both ACL and ? that keep the knee together. Had plate put in front leg, then went to specialist in Dallas that was recommended by several top vets in the Ft. Worth/Dallas area. We did PTLO that puts plates on knee and then re levels the plane of the joint. It turn a 20 degree plane to a 2 degree plane which the joint won't slide off of. Too hard to explain all that went to this.

What I want to bring up is what this specialist in skeletal structure of animals said to me. He said were hurting our dogs by breeding for the sloping back line. That this is what put so much stress on the dogs back knees. This is partly why there is a increase in ACL sports injuries in our canines. He said that if a dog tore one ACL by running, no matter how it was repaired, most likely it would tear the other one as well.

I did the PTLO then went on to win 3 RU Nat. Gun dog Championships.

From looking at my own dogs. They don't have the sloping back. I've been told by a show person they have great angles and front ends. They never talked about the dogs top line. One of my dogs did have a straight front end with little angulation. The show guys said she was not built well. She was one of the fastest, biggest running and could run for hours floating across the country. Go figure.

To me Form follows function. If it can do it, then the form is correct. I have seen dogs with so called good form that couldn't run with the good ones.

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Sun May 13, 2012 5:36 pm

I think it's funny that the shoulder angulation is the hot topic of the day. Conformation show people have been preaching it for years and, for just as many years, they've been growing and grooming coat to cover poor structure and doing a dropped stack to rock the dog's front into a better look. A true performance dog lives and dies by its......

Elbows.

And function follows form.

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Sun May 13, 2012 5:54 pm

Stoneface, when you say her rear legs are short are you talking about her foot (heel to pad)? Generally, the rear foot from heel to the end of the pad will measure a little bit less than 3/5ths the length of the front leg from elbow to pad. For instance my male's front leg measures 13 1/2" and his rear foot measures 8 1/4". That's bending the leg/foot over a ruler and going form the outside of the bend to the end of the pad. My puppies measurements are along the same lines at 11 5/8" and 6 7/8".

They are both quite fast when full out running. I agree form follows function, but I prefer the more graceful gate, as long as it is the fastest

Trekmoor · Post by **Trekmoor** » Sun May 13, 2012 6:28 pm

I wish I understood all this "conformation" stuff but I don't. I just know when a dog looks "right" and when it doesn't.

I don't even know much of the terminology that describes good conformation. What I do know is that too much of a sloping back and too much emphasis on hind leg angulation leads to big trouble. The British Police Force had to stop using British bred German Shepherds many years ago because show fads and fashions had decreed that dogs with steeply sloping backs and a lot of hind leg angulation looked better and should therefor win and be the dogs that get bred from.

The dogs bred could hardly run never mind jump fences and all the other things that could be reasonably expected of an active police dog. The breed would have been far better off if breeders had stuck to dogs that could do the job rather than dogs that could win in a show ring.

Bill T.

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Sun May 13, 2012 8:45 pm

Trek, I get what you and Hi are saying about sloping backs, but what do you mean about rear angulation causing trouble?

SCT, I believe it's in her lower thigh, from the top of her hock to he knee. When I stack her up with her hocks perpendicular to the ground, her legs are practically right under her. I don't have any decent photos of her right now, but...

...this dog looks like she has good back legs. Ample length.

This isn't a birddog, obviously, but his legs come straight down, like what I'm talking about with Moxy.

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Sun May 13, 2012 9:52 pm

That photo is not a good representation with her standing in that pose. The femur bone looks about right in that photo but the overall length of the leg looks short, BUT, the photo seems to be from the front quarter which would make her back end look smaller... I like her straight back line by the way. When standing square her back line (which will be a bit more rounded with her legs straight under her) should be 1/2" or so lower than the top of the shoulder blades. It's tough to get photos of them (pointers) standing still and square. A shot of her walking parallel to the photographer may be more revealing.

There are measurements you can take that don't change, with some big calipers. As a sculptor I've taken lots of carcass measurements and it's best to do it with the dog laying down, like when they're sleeping. You could do some easy comparisons between dogs and then compare performance if you had access to enough dogs. Judging performance would be completely subjective though.

Steve

Trekmoor · Post by **Trekmoor** » Mon May 14, 2012 3:13 am

Hi Stoneface, what I meant about the hind legs (without having the right words to say it :roll: ) is that our German Shepherds hind legs stick out too much behind them . This gives the dog the sort of "stretched" look that show folk seem to like when in standing pose. German Shepherds did not look like that when I was young. The show folk have bred an exaggerated stretch of the hind legs because that is what judges want to see and those stretched out looking legs have come to be regarded as correct for the breed by new generations of human fanciers.

It weakens the legs and the dog looks "wobbly" This does not help it move well for the show folk still want to see that sharply sloping backline when the dog is in motion around the ring. The hind feet do not seem to have a normal forward reach under the dog as it moves. This might be O.K. for a dog that does only wee trots around a show ring but it is no use at all for a dog that is meant for work.
In other words the dog can stretch it's legs out behind but it cannot place them properly underneath it when in motion. The dog loses forward thrust ..... and maybe balance too.

Bill T.

JKP · Post by **JKP** » Mon May 14, 2012 7:19 am

An old dog mentor once told me to look at horses....Thoroughbreds are highly angulated, longer in back on thinner bones...geat for high speed shorter distances. Arabs are short backed, more upright, take a shorter efficient, ..over ventilated for their size...a long distance runner. Take a look at the best hounds.....they don't look anyhting like the over angulated show dogs. Dual said it right...balance, efficient movement, enough "reach" and "drive" to easily repeat for the distance. Looking at the extremes, a Greyhound has to catch the coyote within a mile or so...after that the coyote wins...so say pro hound hunters I know.....extreme angulation only goes so far.

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Mon May 14, 2012 8:36 am

I agree balance is key, there will be gains and losses with any changes to the form of the skeleton. A good point about coyotes, they are long distance runners but are very fast at short bursts also, so are foxes. Find some good photos and compare to photos of pointers. It would be interesting to have a few carcasses of all three to skin and compare.

Remember though, form is only part of the equation, good bird dogs need (not in this order) brains, desire, nose, natural come back, tenacity (physical and mental), etc.

Good thread,

Steve

MHWH · Post by **MHWH** » Mon May 14, 2012 12:55 pm

I have always heard that for a dog to have good endurance he needs to be square.
This means the distance from the top of the shoulder to the ground, and from the the
shoulder to the hip should be the same. Also the distance from the top of the hip to the
ground should be the same as the other two measurements.

This would then make a dog that has is not lower in the rear than the front. He would look
square.

I have no argument with this idea. But coyotes and wolves have good endurance and they don't
look square. They are longer from shoulder to hip than they are tall from top of hip or shoulder
to the ground. Or they seem like that to me.

I think there may be a difference in what people call endurance. Wolves are known to cover a lot
of miles to find food, in a day. AAA pointers run faster. But the contests are usually an hour. The
Nationals at Ames is three hours. There could be others I am uncertain.

This square idea seems to be opposite of some of the accepted criteria for a good bird dog.

Just some thoughts. Good thread, interesting.

Mike

RayGubernat · Post by **RayGubernat** » Mon May 14, 2012 1:48 pm

I try to look at the whole dog and how it moves. Balance is a very good word. A square dog will move well, but if the dog was a little longer in the body, it could cover more ground with each stride simply becasue the front and back legs are farther apart. The square dog will very likely have more pop and snap than the longer backed dog and the longer backed dog will tend to run more like a hound.

I want to see a dog with a narrow, deep chest and big, honkin' back hams. The narrow chest is key because that allows the dog's front legs to reach pretty much straight out and lay straight back, covering the most ground with the least effort. A front end that is too wide, both limits the amount of leg extension the dog can manage and the legs must go out and around the chest , wasting effort and motion.

The big back end gives the dog its explosive power and sprint capability, in addition to strength and endurance. For half hour and even one hour stakes, the ability of a dog to come out of the hole smokin' at the breakaway is important. I actually like to see a dog that is ever so slightly cowhocked, because that angulation seems to add to the dog's ability to come off the line quicker.

It is also vital for the dog be able to grab a gear and leave its bracemate in the dust at the later stages of the brace. The big back end gives the dog that ability because the drive, the power is back there in that muscle mass. When the dog reaches well underneath itself and uses those big back leg muscles to drive itself forward it can change speed in dramatic fashion.

RayG

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Mon May 14, 2012 1:58 pm

RayGubernat wrote:I want to see a dog with a narrow, deep chest and big, honkin' back hams. The narrow chest is key because that allows the dog's front legs to reach pretty much straight out and lay straight back, covering the most ground with the least effort. A front end that is too wide, both limits the amount of leg extension the dog can manage and the legs must go out and around the chest , wasting effort and motion.

Do you have any photos of any dogs that have this kind of chest? Everyone screams about broad-chestedness. It almost sounds like you're talking about the chest common in the show dogs?

Do you have a website?

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Mon May 14, 2012 2:25 pm

Miller's Happy Jack. Pics on Cross Country's site.

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Mon May 14, 2012 2:50 pm

Couldn't find a photo, Felicia.

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Mon May 14, 2012 3:06 pm

Cajun Casey wrote:Miller's Happy Jack. Pics on Cross Country's site.

My bad. He's on their Facebook page. Not the typical Company dog.

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Mon May 14, 2012 3:24 pm

He doesn't look narrow-chested to me.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set ... 410&type=3

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Mon May 14, 2012 4:05 pm

He (Miller's Happy Jack) looks narrow chested to me, but also broad shouldered. He looks to have plenty of room in the brisket below the ribcage to allow full movement of the elbows. He is a specimen, and his stud fee is only $1,000. If I was looking to make money on a litter, (which is tough to do) He'd be in my top tier of prospects.

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Mon May 14, 2012 4:07 pm

I would love to see video of him running to see how he covers the ground. Anyone got any video they can post??

Thanks, Steve

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Mon May 14, 2012 4:25 pm

SCT wrote:I would love to see video of him running to see how he covers the ground. Anyone got any video they can post??

Thanks, Steve

You can see some action stills on the Ames Plantation site. You are correct that his chest is not particularly wide compared to his heart girth. Some people mistake shoulder load for chest width.

fuzznut · Post by **fuzznut** » Sat May 19, 2012 7:30 pm

hope this works... here is a good idea of what you should/could be looking for in structure.... each breed will differ some, but in general....

377916_2316473031380_1236090886_1891418_542119211_n.jpg

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Sat May 19, 2012 8:48 pm

Nice diagram with big differences in each model. It would be real cool to compare these drawings to some high performance champions. Probably would take a few hundred dollars worth of x-rays.

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Sat May 19, 2012 9:23 pm

Cajun Casey wrote:
SCT wrote:I would love to see video of him running to see how he covers the ground. Anyone got any video they can post??

Thanks, Steve
You can see some action stills on the Ames Plantation site. You are correct that his chest is not particularly wide compared to his heart girth. Some people mistake shoulder load for chest width.

I wouldn't agree with that, Felicia. What's narrow on Happy Jack is his briskett, not chest. His chest, between his shoulders, is not narrow. I wouldn't say he's particularly broad-chested or anything, but not narrow-chested, either. No matter what he is, one thing's for sure; he's a heck of a good looking dog.

I think we may have just gotten our terms mixed up. This is a narow-chested dog in my opinion:

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Sat May 19, 2012 9:54 pm

I've always considered the ribcage on a dog to be their chest. Like when I say deep chest I mean how far the bottom of the brisket falls below the thoracic vertebrae. That dog looks narrow shouldered to me. Look at his chest (ribcage) from above (birds eye view). I agree, we are confusing terms. Webster describes the chest as "the part of the body enclosed by the ribs and breastbone"

Wide shoulders should produce a fuller stride, just my opinion though.

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Sat May 19, 2012 10:15 pm

Rib spring equals chest width in my evaluation and it is viewed from the top, not the front. We're talking structure, bone, not muscle bulk.

Post by **ezzy333** » Sat May 19, 2012 10:18 pm

SCT wrote:I've always considered the ribcage on a dog to be their chest. Like when I say deep chest I mean how far the bottom of the brisket falls below the thoracic vertebrae. That dog looks narrow shouldered to me. Look at his chest (ribcage) from above (birds eye view). I agree, we are confusing terms. Webster describes the chest as "the part of the body enclosed by the ribs and breastbone"

Wide shoulders should produce a fuller stride, just my opinion though.

Don't believe this is ever true in any animal. Well maybe a snake. :roll:

Ezzy

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Sat May 19, 2012 10:27 pm

SCT, I think you're right about confusing terms. What do you call the area between the shoulders? It wouldn't be prosternum, because that's a bone, not an area of the body. It wouldn't be the shoulders and it wouldn't be neck. Kind of a limbo zone. I guess you could call it and the rib spring (what I've been calling a brisket) the chest, but how would you describe Happy Jack? He's broad between his shoulders, but his rib spring is now broad. What do you think?

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Sat May 19, 2012 10:32 pm

So you believe narrower shoulders produce a better stride Ezzy? To me the opposite would make sense, but I don't know. Narrow shoulders would bring the elbows closer together, would they not??

wems2371 · Post by **wems2371** » Sat May 19, 2012 10:37 pm

If anyone is interested, there's a pretty detailed book called "STRUCTURE IN ACTION The Makings of a Durable Dog" by Pat Hastings. It's chock full of diagrams and photo examples of the good and bad, and goes for around $25 on Amazon.

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Sat May 19, 2012 10:44 pm

Honestly, we are comparing photos, if we could see the dog from the top and take caliper measurements we would see true comparisons. I think it's all subjective until proven with living measurements. X-rays would be fantastic but they would have to be taken when the dog is in a standing pose to be truly accurate. I like this discussion, but in reality, I doubt there's any real evidence either way as to what produces better stride.

In the diagram there are comparisons between GSPs, and for that breed the left model looks "better" to me, but not for a pointer. Again, I can't prove any of this, so it's just subjective debating. I would love to see a diagram like that for pointers, field not show, created form high performance specimens. Does that mean all age field trial champions would be the best comparisons, I don't know, but I'd love to see that.

That would be a neat book Weims2371 and may clear some of this up, especially if the sequenced photos are timed to see which confirmation glides faster. I'll look into it.

wems2371 · Post by **wems2371** » Sat May 19, 2012 10:50 pm

Here's an excerpt regarding shoulders. Please excuse my typos... And yes, she puts photos with all descriptions to show the type of movement that would be charactorized by that particular conformation. Maybe I'll scan a page...

Wide shoulders are the second cause of wrinkles over the shoulders. As with straight shoulders, the neck does not properly flow into the shoulders when there is too much space between the tips of the shoulder blades. Neck skin will sag into wrinkles over the shoulders when it has no better place to be.

Risks: Wide shoulders create a wide front movement, ultimately wasting motion. This creates a lateral (side to side) displacement, which in turn can cause a rolling motion. This lateral displacement is very tiring and leads to bulking and loaded shoulders.

Narrow or tight shoulders--The ability of most breeds to lower their noses to the ground depends largely on the proper spacing between the tips of the shoulder blades. When a dog lowers its head, its shoulder blades move toward one another until the tips touch. Consequently, if the space between the blades is too narrow, or "tight," then the dog is unable to lower its nose to the ground from a standing position.

Risks: Tight shoulders may pinch the elbows, which causes pasterns and feet to turn out. This, in turn, creates wasted motion and puts greater stress on the elbows, pasterns, and feet. Tight shoulders also may cause the dog to stand in an A-frame fasion for proper balance. As with straight shoulders, a dog with tight or narrow shoulders that does regular jumping increase the chance of injury and structural degeneration. This is a deal-breaking fault for working Scenthounds and Retrievers, as well as Sighthounds that are expected to catch game while in full motion.

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Sat May 19, 2012 11:00 pm

Okay, you sold me on it. I am going to get it. Does it have diagrams that show skeletal structure while standing and in motion of pointing breeds (or something similar). I noticed on their website they teach puppy evaluation for breeders.

KwikIrish · Post by **KwikIrish** » Sat May 19, 2012 11:02 pm

I wish I had seen this thread sooner. Good topic. Here is a front angle diagram that really explains itself well.

Balance is essential in the grand scheme IMO, but there is nothing more pleasing to my eye than a correct front build and a rear which follows suit. I'll post pic of examples of this tomorrow, Rowdy.

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Sat May 19, 2012 11:09 pm

Thanks Rowdy, looking forward to it.

wems2371 · Post by **wems2371** » Sat May 19, 2012 11:28 pm

It's pretty much an all breed book. So there are pics of a lot of different breeds, from beagles to bulldogs, but not a pointing dog specific section. A friend turned me on to it, since she knew I would be interested. I believe she's also been to a Hasting's puppy evaluation seminar and wants me to attend one too--so I think she was pretty impressed. Maybe she'll chime in.

I don't know if it's the do-it-all of conformation books

, but I like it.

KwikIrish--What book did you pull your diagrams from? Looks interesting...

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Sat May 19, 2012 11:56 pm

SCT wrote:Thanks Rowdy, looking forward to it.

Ditto. Thank you, Rowdy. You're a heck of a guy!

Wems, which book is that?

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Sun May 20, 2012 12:03 am

I did a search for Steven Robinson (was the copyright noted in the watermark in the above image) and turns out the guys is a Rottweiler enthusiast. He gives this page as examples of outstanding front angulation. I've been looking all over the internet, comparing photos of Pointers, but I've been frustrated because I haven't found any that looked "great." I thought I just wasn't getting it, but after looking at these photos I'm thinking maybe there's just a terrible shortage of great fore angulation in Pointers, and birddogs in general for that matter. When you look at these photos, although they're far from birddogs, you can really see how the shoulder blade well laid back and the elbows are well under the dog's body.

http://darkstarrrotts.com/frontphotos.htm

wems2371 · Post by **wems2371** » Sun May 20, 2012 12:04 am

The scanned pages are from "STRUCTURE IN ACTION The Makings of a Durable Dog" by Pat Hastings.

Munster · Post by **Munster** » Sun May 20, 2012 1:59 am

Stoneface wrote:I did a search for Steven Robinson (was the copyright noted in the watermark in the above image) and turns out the guys is a Rottweiler enthusiast. He gives this page as examples of outstanding front angulation. I've been looking all over the internet, comparing photos of Pointers, but I've been frustrated because I haven't found any that looked "great." I thought I just wasn't getting it, but after looking at these photos I'm thinking maybe there's just a terrible shortage of great fore angulation in Pointers, and birddogs in general for that matter. When you look at these photos, although they're far from birddogs, you can really see how the shoulder blade well laid back and the elbows are well under the dog's body.

http://darkstarrrotts.com/frontphotos.htm

This seems to be a problem in my breed to. From what I have heard and read, it can also be a difficult one to fix.

The book mentioned above is a very good read for those that are interested in this topic. It is informative and doesnt take you 20 minuted to figure out what she s trying to tell you.

SHe has another book called the "Puppy Puzzle" That I think would be good for breeders. It teaches you how to pic your puppy at 8 weeks + or- 3 days. At this stage in puppy developement they are suppose to be pretty darn close to the conformation they will be when they are fully grown. With obvious exceptions such as bone density and height.
both good reads, if you can get to a seminar, thats even better. If you can get her to put one on at your event that is better yet.
This lady can look at your dog on the table and pretty much tell you if and where your dog will break down.

fuzznut · Post by **fuzznut** » Sun May 20, 2012 5:17 am

Here is a pretty interesting website.... watch the video to see a bunch of different breeds trotting and galloping. A bit later in the video there are xrays of dogs in actual motion
http://www.vdh.de/dogs-in-motion.html

another video- Dogsteps by Rachael Page Elliot- long considered the grand dame of dog movement. It's bit more technical, but worth a watch if this sort of structure interests you
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nESyr_-M ... re=related

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Sun May 20, 2012 8:02 am

Thanks fuzznut, both of those videos are excellent. "Dogs in Motion" looks like a really good book too, costs a bit more though. The one points out that the scapula spine should be on a 36 degree angle for proper form. I'll have to try and check it on my dogs. Thanks everyone, great thread.

KwikIrish · Post by **KwikIrish** » Sun May 20, 2012 10:29 am

Rowdy, you're right to feel a challenge when looking for a pointer with the type of front angle we are discussing. They are few and far between. Here is a picture of one of the best fronts I've seen on a pointer in regards to placement of point of shoulder angle of the thoukder, and length and angle regarding the return of upper arm. The middle dog is the one I am referring to. I took this picture this year at the Westminster kennel club.

Next picture regards one thing I see consistently in pointers and that's lack of forechest.
This picture shows the most common type in pointers (lacking forechest) at the rear, the middle dog with a bit more and the front dog appears to hav the most.

Next ill show a few types of movement I see in my breed. I took these pics at the Irish national last year.
First we have a really nice example of movement. You'll see reaching from the shoulder, good follow through of the returning front leg, and an equal ammount of drive off the rear and nice reach off the forward rear leg. Ideally, we look for tHe front and rear legs to form their own equilateral triangles.

Next I have a dog who doesn't reach from his shoulder, but his elbow.

And finally I have a pic of a dog who based off his movement picture has much more angle in his rear than his front. I assume this based off his lack of ability to reach and the excess of drive he exhibits.

KwikIrish · Post by **KwikIrish** » Sun May 20, 2012 10:39 am

Finally, I'll share some pictures of dogs, mostly ones that I have shown.
This first boy is a good example of a nice front, though not flawless, it exhibits most of traits of the good front in the diagram I posted talks about.

Here is a bitch who also exhibits good qualities in front structure, her length of rear is another story.

Next I have a dog with a straight shoulder but good length and angle of upper arm

Next I have a dog who exhibits a front that though it's equal, is considered rather straight.

And my favorite, a 6month old puppy in which you can really see proper front angle.

ACooper · Post by **ACooper** » Sun May 20, 2012 10:43 am

I hope you guys keep this going, a very interesting topic for a person like me who is ignorant in regards to structure. I've been in the if it moves well when hunting it must be "good".

Post by **ezzy333** » Sun May 20, 2012 11:17 am

ACooper wrote:I hope you guys keep this going, a very interesting topic for a person like me who is ignorant in regards to structure. I've been in the if it moves well when hunting it must be "good".

Andy there is some truth to that but the problem is some poorer quality dogs move wel but are apt to break down rather early in life plus it is often hard to see just exactly what their movement is when running through cover a foot tall.

It all comes back to the importance of all aspects of a dog such as conformation, temperment, hunting desire and capabilities if we want to breed a better dog or even maintain what we have. That was one of the things that jumps out at me as you read and hear about the history of our dogs, just how much attention was given to every aspect and not the shortsightedness of thinking one was better than te others that we see today.

Ezzy

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Sun May 20, 2012 11:40 am

You will notice Elliott speaks of "structure" rather than "form." Also, most of the authorities cited are from the conformation world. A note on the Irish setters shown, I see a noticable issue with overstepping in most of the in motion shots.

Post by **Sharon** » Sun May 20, 2012 12:00 pm

Very informative. Thanks for your effort here Irish.

SCT · Post by **SCT** » Sun May 20, 2012 1:11 pm

I've been looking at a lot of photos of pointers and the thing that stands out the most to me, that goes against the theory of angles, is, most, if not all, have very little angle in the top two shoulder bones (scapula and humerus). But, the vertical line from the back edge of the scapula to the elbow is often correct. These are all FIELD dogs that I'm looking at. So, considering the strength, speed, and endurance of the average pointer, I can only believe that the form and structure is "right" for a high performance field dog. The only difference I can see in the front end would be how far the breast bone comes forward, this seems to be different in each dog.

So, why are these so called perfectly formed dogs not as strong, or fast as a champion pointer?? Not too many breeds are designed to move across the ground like a pointer, setter, gsp, greyhound, borzoi etc (not intentionally leaving any out

). Are they exceptions to the "standard" rule??

Steve

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Sun May 20, 2012 1:41 pm

SCT wrote:I've been looking at a lot of photos of pointers and the thing that stands out the most to me, that goes against the theory of angles, is, most, if not all, have very little angle in the top two shoulder bones (scapula and humerus). But, the vertical line from the back edge of the scapula to the elbow is often correct. These are all FIELD dogs that I'm looking at. So, considering the strength, speed, and endurance of the average pointer, I can only believe that the form and structure is "right" for a high performance field dog. The only difference I can see in the front end would be how far the breast bone comes forward, this seems to be different in each dog.

So, why are these so called perfectly formed dogs not as strong, or fast as a champion pointer?? Not too many breeds are designed to move across the ground like a pointer, setter, gsp, greyhound, borzoi etc (not intentionally leaving any out ). Are they exceptions to the "standard" rule??

Steve

The defining gait of a show dog is a trot and what can trot around a ring for ten minutes may not have what it takes to compete at a lope or a gallop on variable terrain.