Golden Retriever Dog Forums banner

Blending field and conformation lines

22K views 277 replies 30 participants last post by  hotel4dogs 
#1 ·
I was curious what everyone's thoughts were on blending field and conformation lines?
How would you go about it?
What would you look for in both lines to determine that they should be bred to each other?
Why would you blend the lines?

I bring this up regarding an article in GR News not long ago about needing for field and conformation lines to be blended. It was in either the first or second issue this year.

I have a conformation girl that likes birds. The hunt test last weekend included her mother and 1/2 sister (same sire). Those girls did well, but I do think the line could be improved with additional drive and determination. So if you were looking at a field sire, what would you think would be important, not just in the pedigree?
 
#2 ·
I have a conformation girl that likes birds. The hunt test last weekend included her mother and 1/2 sister (same sire). Those girls did well, but I do think the line could be improved with additional drive and determination. So if you were looking at a field sire, what would you think would be important, not just in the pedigree?
Stacey - wouldn't you be looking for a dog that has strengths where your girl lacks? Particularly if you want to produce puppies who can go into the conformation ring?

I have a boy dog so probably not the same perspective, but I think the type of people who would be looking to breed to him are looking for coat, bone, pigment, and temperament. Which he has all those good qualities there.

If I were looking to get a puppy from him (not saying I will) - but I would probably be hoping for a girlie who has the obedience drive and obedience background that he lacks, and hope he throws all those good qualities that he has.

My thought is if you breed your girlie to a more field type golden - it may strengthen up where she lacks for field qualities, but it may also weaken what she has by way of conformation qualities.
 
#3 ·
Since it would be an outcross breeding, I would be looking for 2 dogs who bring similar strengths to the table but complement each others' weaknesses. It's the only way you can really assure that you don't end up with puppies that are all over the place in terms of looks, structure, talent, and trainability.
Assuming the bitch is the field lines, I'd want a field bitch with a great structure. Nicely built, decent bone and coat. I would not want a field bitch who lacks substance, or has a weedy head, no matter how nice her pedigree is. She should have a CCA.
Assuming the boy is from show lines, I'd want a show dog who isn't overdone in terms of coat, bone, etc. I would want a dog who is proven to be trainable by having titled in various venues, and I don't mean baby level titles. (No offense to anyone, I think it's awesome when people do ANYTHING with their dogs, but from a breeding point of view CD, JH, NX, etc. don't mean squat). Of course, I would want at least a SH on him, higher would be nice but since the bitch is bringing the high level field titles to the table, it's not imperative. Best of all would be if he is actively hunted.
Since both dogs will then be bringing nice structure, trainability, and field desire to the table, you should get a great litter of puppies.
Of course, you could reverse the bitch/dog requirements, I just used that for an example.
 
#4 ·
Barb, I'd like to add to your view which I agree with completely the following.
Folks need to see how the dogs achieved their titles. If it takes a CH or GCH over 20 tries to get their JH (let's say they high level titles in other venues) the owner can not say with a serious face that their dog is birdy or has natural abilities. JH is basically a test of natural ability IMHO and a dog with natural ability should easily pass with minimal training in even 4 straight tests and probably in 5.

Also, some dogs can get a CD and CDX with extremely low scores which doesn't tell me much about trainability either.
 
#7 · (Edited)
JH is basically a test of natural ability IMHO and a dog with natural ability should easily pass with minimal training in even 4 straight tests and probably in 5.

Also, some dogs can get a CD and CDX with extremely low scores which doesn't tell me much about trainability either.
To be fair though.... what about dogs trained by people who are new to both sports or who lack the experience and time that others have?

You have some very experienced and dedicated trainers out there who could make anything out of mashed potato (meaning nothing out of the ordinary) dogs if they wanted to.

And you can have some very talented dogs in the wrong hands who struggle to get anywhere because the owner lacks the strengths that would compliment those dogs.

My Jacks got all scores in the 190's for his CD.... higher than that for his BN, but his best performances (where we were lined up to get 198-199 scores) were blown by stays at the end.

In a more experienced handler's hands - I firmly believe Jacks would have definitely gotten his OTCH by now with a lot of 200 finishes. He's that type of dog and the areas where a lot of other dogs are very weak (heeling and fronts) - that's where his strengths were.

If I were looking to breed Bertie to any dog out there to hopefully get a pup with Bertie's looks and shore up where he lacks or is weak - I'd talk to people whose dogs are more lined up with what I love in Jacks. And you can't see that looking at scores or even titles! You have to know the dogs themselves or watch them work.

I can think of a couple dogs out there who are top goldens and go to NOC every year or whatever.... and while they are very reliable and solid dogs, they are very boring to watch in the ring. The dogs look bored or sleepy while they do every asked of them with as little effort as possible and when they're done they go back to their crates and that's it. These dogs have obedience loaded pedigrees and they themselves are very high scoring - but I wouldn't want puppies from them! LOL. You watch some other goldens out there and you can just hear the "I've got the joy-joy-joy in my heart" song while watching them. That's what I'd be looking for - and you can't find these dogs just by looking for scores and titles.
 
#5 ·
Our original breeder does this regularly. Hunters Trace Kennel although they no longer have a website as Ron and Marsha Beck split up. Marsha was the breeder and Ron was the trainer. They are both still active although Marsha is now in the Phoenix area. She is very knowledgeable and I recommend talking with her about it. Check out the K9 data on my siggy, Hazel and Lila are from them.
 
#6 ·
Thank you for all your thoughts. I'm looking at that long elusive DC (dual champion) title puppy. Combining a field trial championship and a show dog championship. I'm not sure how long ago it was, but it has been awhile since we have had one.

Maybe I should work it backwards. What does a field breeding require? If you are looking to create a pup that could be trained to FC-AFC field trial champion, what would it take to find that right breeding?

Then do the same for creating a show dog champion.

So going back to what Barb said, we need to look at the structure of both dogs to see how they compliment. Barb also wanted to add in additional titles to the show dog, UD, UDX, SH, etc. I think that's on the right track, the show dog has to show the ability for trainability. The field dog I agree has to pass a CCA. Last year my club had a CCA, and we had a wonderful field girl come in still wet from a field trial and passed the CCA with ease. So that's what I'd be looking for too.

So what do you all think, is it possible to still have a DC dog/bitch golden retriever? Is anyone really trying to go in that direction? Just curious.
 
#8 ·
Creating a DC isn't going to happen in just a litter or two. It will be a long term process with a lot of progeny that may be nice, but not competative in either venue. (You're going to have to weather a lot of dissappointment before you're going to start seeing some success.)

Still, the thought has crossed my mind a few times over the years. I'm watching a couple of conformation youngsters from a freezer breeding (pre charlie). If they turn out pretty good I may give one of those a try.
 
#9 ·
It would be nice if there were some easy way other than titles to assess a dog's strengths. Like Megora said a very talented dog without a knowledgeable and dedicated owner isn't going to go very far and won't have a lot of advanced titles. I'm thinking of my Gracie. She's from a blended pedigree and I think has tremendous raw talent but because of my limited experience, time available, etc., I'm not sure what kind of titles she'll end up with.

I know it's a view held by lots of people but I can't help but be a little put off by the comment: "No offense to anyone, I think it's awesome when people do ANYTHING with their dogs, but from a breeding point of view CD, JH, NX, etc. don't mean squat." If you look at Gracie's 5 generation pedigree Five generation pedigree: Sunfire's Amazing Grace you'll see a couple of dual champions and a triple champion, neither of Push's maternal grandparents had any title, Yogi's mother didn't have a title, and Apollo's mother had only a CD, JH, WC, CGC (and, oh yeah, OD).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ljilly28
#19 ·
I got called out on this statement privately, too, and I really need to clarify it. I was really referring to the "show dog" part of the equation when I said that. To me, putting a CD, JH etc. on a "show dog" doesn't prove that he/she has working ability, especially as Rhondas said, that dog may have trained 4 years and taken 15 tries to get a CD. That to me doesn't scream "performance ability". If your goal is to try to bring the breed back together, as the OP said, you need to be absolutely certain that your "show dog" part of the equation is not diluting the working ability of the "field dog" part of the equation. By the same token, it's why I'd want a CCA on the "field dog" part of the equation, to be sure you are not veering away from the structural necessities when bringing the breed back together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nolefan and TheZ's
#10 ·
neither of Push's maternal grandparents had any title, Yogi's mother didn't have a title, and Apollo's mother had only a CD, JH, WC, CGC (and, oh yeah, OD).
When it comes to Field, most females are not campaigned due to their heat cycle. It disrupts their training and competition schedule to such a degree that most owners won't pursue advanced titles. You'll see hunt test titles and QAA status but that's about all. A golden bitch with an FC or AFC is an extremely rare individual.
 
#11 ·
The thing that occurs to me is that getting an dual champion (bench CH and field CH) is that even with an exceptional dog, it would be incredibly expensive. For someone who don't have an extra $50,000 sitting around so they can campaign a dog constantly it would be impossible. Plus, unless you are both a professional handler and a FC level field trainer, you would not get to spend much time with your dog since they would be out campaigning all the time.
 
#12 ·
Money is an excellent point. Time is also a good thought. It takes a lot of time tromp around doing dog shows and field trials.

Push's parents both had titles.

Swampcollie,
I do agree it would take a lot of planning and serious planning with other breeders to pull it all together. But it's hard not to consider the idea that it could be done again. With many breeds it's quite common to have a DC. Chessies for example. But labs, springers, cockers, and many other hunting breeds are in the same boat as us.

Anyone have an idea what the average FC championship would cost both in training (assuming a pro) and trial fees?

I know the minimum for a Ch in conformation with a pro is about $3,000 (what my dog's sister cost to finish).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eowyn
#16 ·
Anyone have an idea what the average FC championship would cost both in training (assuming a pro) and trial fees?

I know the minimum for a Ch in conformation with a pro is about $3,000 (what my dog's sister cost to finish).
You're probably in the range of $200,000 to complete an FC.

If a pro is doing the training and handling, a MH runs between $40,000 and $50,000.
 
#14 ·
Just for yucks I looked at the puppies Push had on k9data. Only one was a Ch, it was a Canadian Ch. He's a great looking dog: Pedigree: HRCH Can CH Goldcker 1Drdogs Next Pushover SH WCX Can MH WCX TD AGX AGIJ AGNS AGNJS RN VCX
His name is Edge. I can only find that he's had one litter on k9data. So should we be looking for these dogs and breeding our bitches to them? What do you all think? Push didn't produce dogs with Ch, but that doesn't mean the pups weren't capable of getting a Ch, they just didn't show up in his pedigree. So was Push an anomaly?
 
#15 ·
Remember that a Canadian breed CH are easier to get than an American breed Ch and the same thing for a Canadian OTCH.

What breed did your sister get a CH on? I have heard that for Goldens in the US you need to budget a minimum of $1000 and that figure is a couple of years old.
 
#17 ·
WOW!!

I had always heard it hurt, but that's way out of my league. No wonder so many people train their own dogs if they can.

How many FC's are given out every year (all breeds)?
 
#18 ·
My pup's sister got her Ch this last winter. She was shown by a pro at every show. Costs of pro, show fees, grooming, points etc. was about $3,000. It's the pro that drove the cost up. She did finish fast. I've shown Lucy almost as many times and have zero points, but I'm also not a pro. $1,000 is probably about what I have in it right now between show fees, tools and equipment.

A Canadian Ch is 10 points I think and American is 15 points. I have heard they are a bit easier to get. I've never tried a Canadian show. I guess it's all about which dogs are at the show that day.
 
#20 ·
A Canadian CH doesn't even resemble an AKC CH. It's not just the points, it's how they earn them.
Also, a Canadian OTCH is just our UD. Not to belittle the UD, or the Canadian OTCH, but you're not comparing apples to apples.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ljilly28 and Titan1
#21 ·
Yes I agree you can take 10 passes to get a JH. But there are factors to consider. Did the owner run the dog too young? Did the owner send the dog off to a trainer and when the dog came back the owner had no clue how to run the dog and it took 10 passes to get the JH because the owner needed training too?

I think what we are trying to quantify is nature vs nurture. The age old discussion. Can you take a show dog and train it to an FC if it is raised and trained the right environment? Can you take a show prospect up at 8 weeks old and send it off to a great field trial pro and get an FC? How much nature is in a show dog vs a field dog?
 
#23 ·
I think what we are trying to quantify is nature vs nurture. The age old discussion. Can you take a show dog and train it to an FC if it is raised and trained the right environment?
With today's conformation breeding? No

There are many traits and qualities a dog must possess in ample amounts to be a contender for an FC. The raw materials have to be present in the dog for a skilled trainer/handler to work with. The Conformation dogs today lack sufficient amounts of the qualities needed to be competitive.

It is a question of breeding, not training.

Keep in mind that in the Open, you are competing against all Retriever breeds not just Goldens.
 
#22 · (Edited)
Wow, there's a lot of stuff in this thread and it's only on the third page!

As you can tell by my signature, I only have experience in field trials, so you can rightfully say that my comments suffer from tunnel vision...that's fair and irrefutable. But that won't stop me from commenting. :)

It seems to me that in light of sheer numbers, to get a dual champion (speaking here of FC and Ch.), someone is going to have to start with a strong field background on both sides of the pedigree. Statistics show that, on average, each year only 1 -2 Goldens earn their FC title; it is a very, very tough title to earn, though not impossible. The dogs must have the right "stuff" to get that title; you cannot train that "stuff" in the dog, they must be born with it (among other things, it's good eyes, physicality, courage, biddability, and lots of other "stuff" that has been discussed on other threads). I don't have the annual number earning a Ch., but I know that it's a good deal above that. So, it seems to me, that the Dual Ch. breeder will need to start with an emphasis on the field genes and try to not overly dilute those genes when infusing the Ch. genes. That is a tall order, but doable!

As for the cost to make an FC, it depends. If things go well and the dog titles by the age of 6 -7 years, even if trained by a professional, adding up the handling fees, entry fees and monthly training fees, I would put the cost just under $100,000. Of course, that excludes the price of the puppy and vet bills, but still it can be done for a hun'do. And being spread out over 6 years ... what a bargain! [Just kidding on that!]

Now there have been some FC-AFCs which were trained and handled by amateurs. Of course, it takes a great deal more time and non-monetary resources (available land and water, a training group, access to a few birds every now and then, training equipment, etc.), but it is certainly possible. The amateur must still have funds and time (vacation time if they have a job) to travel to trials, pay the entry fees, etc., but training one's dog reduces the cost by a great deal.

FTGoldens
 
#24 ·
FTGoldens,
You've pretty much dedicated your free time for many years training goldens to the FC and AFC titles. Along the way I'm sure you've seen some wonderful field dogs that should be bred to show dogs that have reputable titles in field. If you had your choice of combinations, which studs or dams would you look hard at if you wanted that combination of DC? How many generations do you think it would take to get there?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eowyn
#48 ·
Alaska,
That's WAY OVER MY HEAD. I'm not smart enough to figure that out. I know that Topbrass has done a number of beauty & brains breedings, but I've not followed those puppies to see how they turned out.
In my opinion, there's just no way to significantly increase the odds of creating that elusive DC. As mentioned in an earlier post, the biggest problem is that there's no guarantee that an FC x FC breeding will = FC puppies, even when perfectly placed.
I believe that there's going to have to be a certain amount of luck involved, IN ADDITION TO a great deal of study, to make the next Golden DC. It may be an interesting project to go back in the history books to see what it was about the few DCs in the breed that made them what they are.
FTGoldens
 
#27 ·
I think it can happen. I don't think there are many, if any, people who really truly believe that and are truly breeding and competing for that goal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sammydog
#28 ·
I would like to put my two cents in. My personal feeling is that show champions have many characteristics that are counterproductive to excelling in the field. And by excelling I mean coming out on top in competition. This is not testing to a standard, this is competition.

Of course I have my prejudices. However, if you are interested in seeing trial dogs you should go to a field trial. Take note of the physical characteristics of the Goldens and then ask "Why do they look this way?". I have seen these dogs first hand.

Just one example. At a recent trial I saw a water series that consisted of a triple:water-land-water-land-water, then two marks down the shore. The time it took per dog was approximately 30 minutes if my memory serves me correctly. This was done after the dogs had done two water blinds in the previous series, one of which the handlers went to the line with binoculars. I ask, what physical traits in a Golden would be best for this kind of work? What physical traits would be detrimental?

After you look at a trial you will realize why blending the two types is a difficult thing.
 
#29 ·
I've never considered a pure field or a pure show breeding, every litter I've ever looked at have been a mix of the two, some with more emphasis on field than others. But I have no interest in showing in either conformation or field trials.

I do think it's possible that someone who has put in the effort, sacrifice, and years can come up with a DC of present. I think it very highly unlikely that a random show bred puppy would ever become a FC, no matter who it was training it.
 
#30 ·
I already mentioned the major league big teams that I know of and I don't necessarily want a puppy from because their dogs are bored robots out there in the ring....

But there's the other side as well....

I know of novice A people who get their CD's in 3 tries with all first placements.... without their dogs sitting ONCE while heeling. The scores might all be in the 170's, but they still will go around telling everyone their dog finished quickly and they have all the blue ribbons to show for it.

I'd probably listen to somebody bragging on that dog and be nice, but I would not want a puppy from them!

And there's a friend out there that I know who got scores in the 180's with her golden. I think she only got 1 score in the 190's. But went from CD to CDX in 6 trials.

This girlie DOES get recognition for what she did though and it was out of the ordinary.... She was 9 years old when she got her CD and 10 when she got her CDX. She's also a breed champion with grand champion points as a veteran. Canadian breed champion. MACH. Got her rally excellent including showing at a very tough big benched show and getting a 100 score there.

My friend always told me (like every class) - that her dog hated obedience. She would glow and shine in the conformation ring because she loved showing off and being looked at. In the obedience ring and working, I think it was a different mood there and she did not have as much fun.

Obviously there again - you see titles and scores. I probably would not judge a 10 year old for getting scores in the 180's. One of Bertie's breeders took a 10 year old breed champion of hers who was bored and put a CD and CDX title on her. And my comment and she absolutely agreed - if a dog is still jumping her height and working her butt off in the obedience ring when she's up in age, that is a big deal.

But if a dog gets "bored" being trained or quits if you train too much or shows no joy in working in the obedience ring - that's not what I'd be looking for in a puppy.

I'd really be looking for dogs who will drop everything they are doing if they think they'll get to heel and retrieve - even if they just did that 10 minutes ago. And instead of getting bored with repetition, they get more and more energized and hyped up. It takes a lot of time really building an effortless heel that loses no points. It takes a lot of repetitions building fronts that are perfectly straight and finishes which are perfect. It takes a lot of repetition and focused work getting dogs so they will not mouth or juggle dumbbells and gloves. It takes a lot of repetition building articles (holy heck especially if you do around-the-clock!).

It is half the battle if you can keep a dog energized and engaged all through a training session.

^ All that is why I don't think you can look at titles and scores alone.



^^^^^ I was NOT the person PM'ing Barb! :curtain:
 
#32 ·
George,
You are so right on physical characteristics. Conformation has changed the breed over the decades. Looking at goldens from 50 or 75 years ago they were much closer to a field golden is today. Why have we shifted the breed so far? Last year at golden national, we got a few of the conformation judges to come watch the field trials. I thought that should be a requirement to be a golden conformation judge!

Last month at a dog show I met a couple of women with a van load of dachshunds. They had driven all the way from Florida. They told me they had been doing dog shows and field trials all along the way! Wow I told them, that was great that they still did that with dachshunds. The women looked at me puzzled, they thought all breeds should not only show, but be able to do that they were bred for. Off they went to groom their herd of dachshunds. Isn't that they way it should be for us?

So if you could change show goldens, what would you change to make them better in the field conformation wise? Would you shorten their coats? Would you narrow their hips and shoulders? Would you shorten their body length? Would you narrow their heads? What is necessary to change to make a great field golden physically? Then still be attractive enough to compete in the show ring?
 
  • Like
Reactions: gdgli
#33 ·
Stacey, doing CCA was a very interesting experience. Each judge made comments which went something like this..."She has _________ which is missing from so many show Goldens today". I was very surprised at this comment.

I can remember shopping for my third Golden. By this time I knew what characteristics I wanted. I didn't know that there were two types. When contacting breeders I said that I wanted a dog within the breed standard, smaller rather than larger, I didn't care about the color, and not so much hair.

A friend of mine went to Georgia to show her Chessie and she helped me locate two litters. I called someone who had seen one of the litters. She was a Lab person who told me that I was going to get a nice puppy. I ended up with a dog that developed into a 65 lb. male, short wavy coat, a little long in the leg and birdy as hell. I still didn't know that there were two types but soon found out.

Why did I ask for smaller and not much hair? I did a lot of upland hunting, grouse and pheasant, and the smaller size allowed the dog to get into the grouse cover I hunted and the typical pheasant cover that is found on abandoned farms in NY. And all you need to do at the end of the day is spend a lot of time getting burdock out of the hair and you will find out what the problem with the longer coat is.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top