Few versus the many?

I hate to be a "Debbie Doubter' but I have never really bought into that. It should be that way and when the pup leaves the breeder the odds are that way. The puppy will end up in hands that are better than the breeder, equal to or less than ideal. I believe the less than ideal scenario happens at a greater rate than the other two.


Grading a dog on what could have been or even should have been is miles apart from how it actually turns out. I think that will always drag the percentages down. Maybe not much but consistently finding good places is difficult.


The pro of the larger yard is that they do not have to find the 'good places' thus the odds of them maintaining that percentage is not as difficult, or better said, the finding of the good place is not a variable that effects their percentages.


S

 

If I could have and manage a larger yard (with help) I'd want to do it at one location. As Blue just stated you can never trust somebody 100%, so with that in mind I'd rather have the operation at one location where the day to day can be observed and kept in line. Nothing worse than something not going right and everybody pointing the finger at each other because nobody had any idea what the others were really doing at their yard.

 

I have seen a ton of dogs that left home with everything in their favor only to see them stopped early by a guy with no patience. I have never been able to say that I believe this dog was dealt an unfair shake so let's not let it factor in the percentages.


Unfair to the dog, unfair to the breeder, and even unfair to the family or the line. But at the end of the day the dog either makes it or he does not. Based on years of running up and down the road with these dogs there are more people forcing the negative side of the percentage than the positive side.


There is a popular guy on the other boards that claims a 90% success rate. 90% of his dogs are game, match quality dogs. The odds of producing at that clip is difficult in itself and my debate with him over the years has been the same. If you sell the majority of your dogs, as he has, my doubts are not in the ability to produce at 90%, but finding a successful place for the dog 9 out of 10 times.


Maybe I do not have a lot of faith in my fellow (dog)man. S

 

What I was basically trying to express was that if one is breeding his own, and the breedings are done by maintaining the same criteria and quality controls, that whatever the inflation in dog population is, there shouldn't be much variance in trait. You'll basically just have more of everything you already have with this inflation in yard size. What I meant by 2 locations is say, one had a like thinking, like acting partner. You have 25 and your partner has fifty, right down the road. The dogs are all of your breeding and he raises them and cares for them as do you. I meant nothing about placing dogs with random others. I agree that may ruin any comp's one might be able to run. It can be a careless thing to do without strict discretion. I should have clarified that. T.

 

Agree with you TDK. And it gets to be a play on words and away from the intent of the original poster. But, like all good conversations, the topics will change, and can get all over the place.


If all things the same, the percentages will be very similar. If one maintains his selectivity on his yard, big or small, and even maintains the same on another yard, those percentages should be close to the same.


The point I was making is that the larger yard does not have to place his dogs as often. The smaller yard, with less room, or the desire to keep less, must place more dogs.


If the small yard guy hits a high percentage early on and he has bred himself into a corner. Within a couple of years he has a yard 'full' of good dogs. Unless he places these good dogs or places the offspring off these dogs he has bred himself into a corner whereas the large yard guy just keeps right on rolling.


Finding good hands is tough at times, finding it consistently over long periods of time can be a lot more difficult.


So if both yards are selectively perpetuated in the same manner, and their percentages of success are the same, in time the smaller guy 'paints (breeds) himself into a corner' and is forced to stand pat with what he has or place dogs on order to continue.


I do not have a lot of faith in the placing of dogs.


With that said, I think it is the best option. Placing dogs can be a more selective process than simply selling them. Even high prices (again, another topic altogether) won't prevent adverse impact to a line's percentages.


After babbling, my point is simply that the changing of hands will alter the percentages. Some will find an equal or better place and the percentages will be more in line with the percentages of the breeder/family/line/selective process. I also think a larger amount will find a 'less than' place and the percentages will be lowered. S

 

Slim, did you check with chickenoncrack before you used the word "selectivity"? LMFAO

 

Seriously, Slim, I equate what you posted (in part) to why I preach that one CANNOT judge entire lines of dogs. Especially the most popular and peddled ones which are in just too many different hands, being done too many different ways to speak collectively of them.