The ideal GSD before the breed was bifurcated into WL and SL - Page 4

I agree she is a bit too long, but cut 2" from the middle and she would be great.

every dog has a flaw, even the best of the best.

So then, neither short or long backs appearantly mattered very much.  Must've been the "look of eagles" ?  Naw, probably just politics and money, ego and selfishness that separated the winners from losers in the breed.

Quote: I agree she is a bit too long, but cut 2" from the middle and she would be great.

every dog has a flaw, even the best of the best.


Thats the problem right there....That bitch was probable and awesome GSD back then but here we go and try to change the dogs looks. 

I would buy her before i buy any other show dog today.

The dogs that work well are correct, the shape of the head is irrelevant.

Jeff, there is truth in what you're saying. There are may breeders out there who would spare no expense to purchase a Bodo clone, despite the rather unattractive head, and I'd be one of them.

However, you have to draw the line somewhere, and that's what the standard is for. What if the dog had helicopter ears, and was missing a couple of premolars? Sure, it can work just fine if it looks like that, but we are running the risk of losing breed type if we start breeding this sort of dog..

Balance. That's the key, IMO.  You don't have to have a dog that looks pretty, but can't work. Nor do you have to settle for one that's ugly as sin, but works rings around everyone else on the trial field.  And before the split, we had dogs that rated well in both categories.

Well, I like to have both.  I have to look at the dog day in and day out.  I've seen beautiful dogs that can work, and I'll keep striving to find one of those.  However I see we all have different tastes in what looks good and what fits the standard, so obviously we are going to have the variety in the GSD for a long time to come.  I just hope breeders keep breeding the type I like.  I may have to start breeding for myself.

I see the men saying beauty is in the utility, and looks don't matter, does that apply to women too? 

I don't think so, a woman should first have a sweet soul as a basis and then the more beauty she has the better, just trying to be honest

 Quote: However I see we all have different tastes in what looks good and what fits the standard,

There are many dogs that do not fit the standard and people swear up and down that they do. Remember that documentary with the GSD's with the flip floppy back legs ? 

How about sickle hocks ? Where is the roach back in the standard ?  What about depth of chest being translated incorrectly. A GSD should not have a greyhound chest. If it were so, then why are all the early examples of the dog not shaped like that ?

The last thing, is you statement is based on looks.

Awww, that's sweet.  Some of us demand more from our dogs than we do our women.  Guess we could put together a breeding standard, with emphasis on conformation, and less on social aggression!  Is there such thing as a balanced woman?!

I totally agree with you Jeff, yet when a thread comes up criticizing a dog, some get all bent out of shape saying most of us, unless we show or are a judge don't know diddly squat about what proper conformation is... yet these judges do??!!   Puhleeze.

I've seen so many pathetic looking V dogs, with roached backs, easty westy front feet and overly angulated back ends.   Also, many workingline dogs are going V with the same problems.  So like I said, I just hope someone with good eye sight and common sense keeps breeding well conformed dogs that can work, or this breed is screwed.

Ibrahim, thanks for your honest comment.  We girls want the same in a man.

Daryl, is there such a thing as a balanced man? LOL.  I can see this thread heading for the gutter.

Now, ask me about my stud fee ;-)