Form vs Function in the working dog

[Ravenbird]

As I have sifted through so many articles and photos of so many different sports done by so many different breeds it has become more than obvious that form equals function actually has become a misnomer of sorts. Form is form and function is function. If you don't work the working breeds but breed them to "look" like what you think would work, it's like making a fantasy cartoon.

Breeders who breed strictly for form without testing a higher level of function in work ends up morphing the shape of the working dog as well as the invisible internal temperament/drive that it uses to do the work. I'm not saying anything is wrong with having two lines of one breed: one show/companion, one working. They can each have their place. What I would like to express is my concern when we have a breed like the Doberman that is suffering from multiple health problems due to smaller gene pools, is that it is further being divided because neither show nor working lines want to cross over due to the division. I'm especially concerned about extreme inbreeding to capture certain looks, further tightening the gene pool. We are shooting ourselves in the foot so to speak. I don't have an answer, I'm just standing back watching the changes.

 

[Ravenbird]

 

[Fladobe]

The ''fake it till you make it'' path should be employed to define a champion.
You look like a doberman now prove you can act like one.

 

[Sunje]

So much agree. Many breeds have diverged, separating into 2 distinct breeds w/ the same name, working and show. I met a working line labrador once that simply exuded intelligence and ability, and after being around so many show line and crappily bred pet dogs, it was amazing to see this dog that is everything a proper lab should be.

I see the goldens have incorporated the damn pigeon chest into their show lines now, as evidenced by the 2015 photo above.

 

[Ravenbird]

Many breeds have diverged, separating into 2 distinct breeds w/ the same name, working and show.

And I will say again, I don't really care if they do or not - something for everyone, you do you kinda attitude. I get that not every family needs a working dog and it would only be trouble if they got one. (Mals are filling the shelters as we speak). EXCEPT, the Dobermans pool is so small now I only see two smaller pools getting smaller. The health & longevity is my #1 concern.

The first working lab I ever met was in the IGP club I went to in AZ, they offered RH (SAR for sport & titles, not deployment, extremely fun!) and this lab puppy showed up for that at about 6 months old. I couldn't even figure out what it was. It was just like a Mal, only not bitey and it was extremely social. It looked alike a "plain ol' dog". But wild energy and ball drive and food drive, learned everything lightning fast. I finally had to ask what breed it was and it was a working line lab, bred for SAR & detection work. I was embarrassed that I never even thought of that and I know dog breeds fairly well.

I see the goldens have incorporated the damn pigeon chest into their show lines now,

Right? What IS it about that? ...happens only in the show lines, you don't see it in the high end working lines whether bird dogs or terriers or protection dogs. It's so obvious that it was never there and never needed by the original working dogs of any breed. And the legs get shorter in all the ones I pictured...

 

[Two Dobes]

It is an absolute crime what they have done to the GS in my opinion....when I see them at shows, they look as though they are in pain walking on their hocks..all slumped over. When I see them around here, at the Tractor Supply, or Lowes, they are upright, and gorgeous, and mostly working on their family farm type dogs. Able to jump a fence! How on earth does the AKC justify when the breeds change so much? That first photo of the 1920 Golden, looks like the goldens we had in our neighborhood as a kid. They were small, fast and swimmers. The one's I see now look like the last photos...all white and too big.

 

[JanS]

We were just having this same conversation at training today and how much some of the breeds have changed over the years and have lost the functionality they were bred for.
The Rotts pictured above and really disturbing and they've done the same thing to a lot of Boxers.
Many hunting dogs have lost their function as well with the way they've been bred to prettify the look..

 

[Ravenbird]

You can apply this to all the dogs in the photos above. (I should get an old photo of a Rottweiler!) I'm purposely applying this to all working breeds because it's not just a Doberman problem! It's changing entire structure of a well formed dog into what the human "thinks" would be better.

Sorry, I didn't get the authors name on this, but it came out of an article a while back, I think from a dog show judge, but don't hold me to that.

 

[BGpa]

You can apply this to all the dogs in the photos above. (I should get an old photo of a Rottweiler!) I'm purposely applying this to all working breeds because it's not just a Doberman problem! It's changing entire structure of a well formed dog into what the human "thinks" would be better.

Sorry, I didn't get the authors name on this, but it came out of an article a while back, I think from a dog show judge, but don't hold me to that.


View attachment 161100

The trend to more smooshed in face especially on mastiffs and roots has gotten freakish and frankly sickening to me, when I hear them struggle to breath like a pug.

I'm reading that vets are pushing back on that, and a mod from a UK lab forum noted vets disqualled a GSD from appearing at Crufts, the big yearly show for excessively slanted back.

 

[BGpa]

"Standing over plenty of ground" is a very well put description, esp for functional working breeds. And even more evocative if one imagines the dog moving out from that stance, quickly, with agility, flexibility, and power, depending on tasks the breed standard conformation was meant to support.

I wonder what Doug Matson might say about that, in re: dobes, at the UDC show during Breed Standard explanations next weekend, if anyone here has a chance to ask.

 

[Ravenbird]

The trend to more smooshed in face especially on mastiffs and roots has gotten freakish and frankly sickening to me, when I hear them struggle to breath like a pug.

I'm reading that vets are pushing back on that, and a mod from a UK lab forum noted vets disqualled a GSD from appearing at Crufts, the big yearly show for excessively slanted back.

Or what about the totally invisible defects of severe inbreeding such as propensity to early cancer, heart disease, eye disease etc etc.

In the '80's at the vet clinic we called Boxers "cancer machines" and every single dachshund over the age of 4 that came in with a physical problem, it was always found in back. Now they are even longer backed and shorter legged.

 

[Ravenbird]

Breed Standard explanations

Breed Standard is taking a back seat to the judging a conformation show - it has become an opinion. Like what I see as a pigeon chest others say is "well defined". What I see as "gay tail" is now somehow accepted/ignored quite often as evidence in the specials ring (class of dogs who already have won their championship title). What some are calling a "good square muzzle" I'm seeing the standard of a dry mouth totally ignored. What I read in the standard, is obviously not what the judges are reading.

The DPCA standard was last changed (regarding colors) in 1982. But the grand champions of 1982 and 2022 are quite different, despite the exact same standard. So as far as I'm concerned, these dogs (any breed) are chosen by what current fads are, stretching the standard as far as the eye and word of mouth and popularity of a look can take it.

Evolution of the Standard | DPCA

dpca.org