roxy25

Labs then


AKC labs now


Now if you see UKC / working labs they look more like the then Labs

Then Golden


AKC golden now


Again Working Goldens look similar to the then dogs.

roxy25

GSD then


Most European Show GSD look like this and they call them Western showlines ( now)


Working GSD aka DDR , east german , Czech gsds. ( now)


AKC dog now ( this is one of the top 25 GSD in the country)


UK dogs looked like our dogs but a little better ( I can not find a picture of one) most UK breeder converted to the west german showline strain ......

roxy25

Bulldog then


Bulldog now ( another top 25 bis dog in our country )


Here is an example of a working "bulldog" this is a new breed that looks very promising renaissance bulldog ( people are putting sch and psa titles on them)

mandi

Will try to post my pic of our German Shepherd-here we go...she is 2.5 years and trained pretty good.

Attached Thumbnails

 

KPoos

I'd like to know the reasons for such drastic changes in certain breeds. That lab posted is HUGE and how is that thing going to swim for a duck or even have stamina for a working field dog which is what they are supposed to be used for. The GSD's are just sad. Look at the hind legs on that top winning dog. I mean how does he walk?

PonkiPoodles

There is nothing wrong with the GSD's legs, it's just the way they stack them for show. I've seen goldens at the AKC shows I go to and I have to say they are so good looking, I definitely prefer them the way they look like today.
I think many breeds have actually been improved on, but I know there are also many breeds that really went down hill from what they use to be.
The other thing is with many breeds there are a difference in those that are bred for work versus the ones that are bred for confirmation.

roxy25

IA

I also agree with you on goldens they look better now than then. Some breeds where improved but some are not. The lab is an example of not improvement same goes for the bulldog. Some breeds have been unchanged which is amazing IMO.

KPoos

Obviously neither of you watched that video that was posted if that's what you believe about the GSD. Even the top winning dogs at CRUFTS can barely stand on their back legs and specialists have come out and said that the way the bones are formed isn't strong enough for them to hold themselves up much less work in the field that they are intended. It's not the way they are stacked because they showed them in movement.

Please explain to me why a dog should be bred for a conformation ring and be different in strutcture and look than a dog that's bred for working which is what the breed is intended for in the first place? Standards are not for beauty, they are supposed to allow the breeder basic knowledge of the breed for structure for the purpose of the original intent of the breed not just for it's beauty. There is no reason a dog shouldn't look the same if it's "working" and if it's in a show ring. That's absolutely ridiculous to think that there should be two separate standards! People change things based on looks and looks alone. What the "trend" is and what looks better. The breeders of ridgebacks in that video were idiots! They were culling puppies without the ridge when the ridge is a genetic deformity! I'll never look at dog showing the same again even though I still intend to do it. I always knew it was political and it was a beauty pagent not just for the dogs but also who was on the end of the lead. To see these dogs that are ending up with painful horrific conditions because someone thinks it's cute or pretty to have a dog with no face or with so much extra skin that they constantly rub against themselves is just the definition of insanity to me.

Fluffyspoos

http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/gsd/...ad/271081.html

I guess this is how they're suppose to be?

(^sarcasm)

FUZBUTZ

KPoos, I totally agree with you. I hate whats been done with the GSD and the Ridgeback. Its really sad, the dogs look absolutely miserable to me.