Sloping backlines and over angulation - Page 4

Here is a littermate brother to the bitch I posted (the one so many here liked).  He is closer to the AKC standard than she is.  Mentally speaking, he is a better stock dog.  Physically, he is a worse stock dog.  He is not as agile as his sister in the turns, and, much like his mother, wipes out more easily if he has to make a tight movement

He covers a lot of ground, but agility is sacrficed for those angles.  I still like this dog very, very much, but recognize him as overdone.  Of course other AKC fanciers don't agree with me...but they don't have to :)

My working line puppy freestacked.  Beautiful angles right now, but I expect him to end up being a bit underangulated like his father (though I was hoping he'd take more after his mother in that department).  Very agile puppy, but he has to run to keep up with my AmLine puppies while they trot.  Depending on who he is (was) paired with, he was either matched in agility with the puppies from my last litter, or he smoked them.

I got a couple with way too much ass end for my tastes, but they're only coming on 6 months old and will change a lot by maturity.  The ugliest puppy from the second litter, who had the nicknames of "Tube of Meat" and "Princess Floppy" is turning out to be the nicest one :p

Your work line pup's rear angulation used to be the correct angulation ( maybe very slightly underangulated), nowadays he is considered way underangulated. I think today's standard went too far with making too much angulation the desired one, this will result in even further angulated dogs than your two showlines. Judges baseline their critiques according to those angles specified in the standard, that is why you never hear a judge describing a dog as overangulated, even if the tip of rear foot scrapes the floor when moving under the body while trotting, that is a real shame, stupidity and inhumane on the part of standard and judges.

I consider my WL boy's angulation correct presently...but I also know how to look ahead to a certain degree, and his pedigree says he's probably going to lose some angles, in which case, he *will* be underangulated.

While I do not agree with people who do not work their animals using theoretical principles to justify an overdone dog, I dislike it just as much when people use the same to justify a dog that is lacking. I DO seek balance, and work my dogs on stock and in other sports to see where my animals are at.

My experiences have debunked the theory of the need for excessive angles, but they've also debunked the idea that "less is more". Balance is best and all sides have lost that focus.

I am happy with the animals I am producing so far, but I am only on my first generation. I try to be as honest as possible about the dogs I have. That's certainly the best I can do

With all due respect, the question is asked in respect to " work" and in that capacity I think life reflects the answer. Again with all due respect, a dog dealing with three to five sheep,( which in 95% of times are dog broken and contain no Rams ), really does not reflect a true working dog. It's fun and almost any dog with minimal instinct can do this; when you have a dog work 200 or more sheep at a time, which includes unruly sheep, Rams, and open terrain, then you can say a dog is working,imo.
Also, common sense dictates to me if I really wanted serious answers to the type of structure that " wins" in show ring, I would go to successful show participants and judges. By the same token, if I want to know what is successful angulation in working, why would I not go to trainers of working dogs. And this has nothing to do with bite work, there are still GS dogs worked on sheep in Europe,and parts of US and Australia .....I would love to hear their answer to this question based on decades of actual use and experiences.

Great post, Gustav !

You beat me to it, aykay

Well, Guatav, I'd love to have my dogs work a flock of 200, but there's only one place in the entire country to do that.

At least I work my dogs in something, and know they have the instinct and drive to do as I ask.

And yes, I'll admit to being insulted when i work so hard with my dogs when so many in my "camp" choose to do absolutely nothing with theirs.

Three to five sheep is better than no sheep at all. And when you get to a trial, "dog broke" still doesn't automatically equate to "cooperative".

It´s not about angulation "only" - it´s about the LENGTH of bones, too ( upper thigh, lower thigh, HOCKS ) - too much simply is too much - and it´s a result of angulation AND length of bones.
AKC German Shepherds do have way too long hocks, as have some German lines - no more stability.

Gustav is right, there is a difference between "playing" with some sheep and real sheep herding. Don´t misunderstand me - it´s better to herd 5 sheep than to do nothing - but this is no proof for "working ability" ( like a "barking dog" is no proof for a PPD, and a dog able to bite into the puppy sleeve is no proof for a IPO dog ).

Xeph, that´s funny, we wrote to the same time ( 5 sheep are better than nothing..).