Have dogs improved over the years

[keepitcovert 842]

I'd say about 99% of the dogs being bred today are'nt a patch on the stuff being bred in the 70's and 's,if anyone kept a lurcher back then it was purely for work,I don't remember anybody keeping them as pets or show dogs,most were good pot filler's because so few people bothered to hunt the land unlike today ,there were no internet sites to search for pups or magazines for terrier and lurcher men to find pups,the only way to find a decent one was to wait for mates to put 2 good dogs together after 5-6 seasons of work to test them properly,or wait till wednesday for the "exchange and mart" to come and hope for maybe one litter advertised miles away, nowaday's there are people breeding off dogs that have seen little work or just shows and that is responsible for all the sh*te dogs that are about,working a dog once or twice a week will not test it fully by any means,ask yourself an honest question before you keep pumping out second rate dogs that lack basic obedience,stock chaser's,jibber's and bad feet,we should only breed off the best and then not for money but to replace an ageing dog with something similar or even better,they are not a status symbol to be paraded about by tracksuited mobs roaming the countryside but another tool to efficiently catch our chosen quarry and slip back home without most people knowing you have even been on their land,so my honest answer is that most dogs being bred and worked today are a poor second to those of yesteryear,atb,wirralman

Your thinking along the same lines as me, lurchers have never been so numerous and that is not in their favour.

[my hounds 308]

NO

[judge2010 196]

Definately NO..

I agree with this, if anything they have become softer.

[am back 31]

Hare dogs have improved no end.. When we used to do best of 3 years ago, the 3rd hare was normally just ran behind, never normally killed. Now how things are different with saluki blood!

TOTALLY AGREE MATE.EARLY EIGHTYS UP MY NECK OF THE WOODS WE RAN MOSTLY DEERHOUND CROSSES COLLIE CROSSES AND BED CROSSES ,NOT TOO MANY TOP CLASS ON LONG EARS DAYTIME ON THE BIG PARKS .BY THE LATE NINETIES WITH PLENTY SALUKI CROSSES THAT CHANGED ,I PERSONALLY GOT 100% MORE RESULTS ,SO DID MY MATES .A LOT OF THE GOOD DOGS WE HAD ONLY CAME ABOUT BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF TIMES WE WERE OUT RUNNING DAYTIME.IM NOT SAYING PRE SALUKI THERE WAS NO GOOD DOGS ,UP HERE THERE WAS ,BUT PERSONALLY FOR ME THE SALUKI CROSSES WERE AND STILL ARE A GOD SEND A T B

[Ideation 8,216]

Some lines will have got better, but the 'average' standard of working lurchers will have dropped most likely. But the 'best' dogs now will be better than the 'best' dogs of the past.

[poacher3161 1,766]

I'd say about 99% of the dogs being bred today are'nt a patch on the stuff being bred in the 70's and 's,if anyone kept a lurcher back then it was purely for work,I don't remember anybody keeping them as pets or show dogs,most were good pot filler's because so few people bothered to hunt the land unlike today ,there were no internet sites to search for pups or magazines for terrier and lurcher men to find pups,the only way to find a decent one was to wait for mates to put 2 good dogs together after 5-6 seasons of work to test them properly,or wait till wednesday for the "exchange and mart" to come and hope for maybe one litter advertised miles away, nowaday's there are people breeding off dogs that have seen little work or just shows and that is responsible for all the sh*te dogs that are about,working a dog once or twice a week will not test it fully by any means,ask yourself an honest question before you keep pumping out second rate dogs that lack basic obedience,stock chaser's,jibber's and bad feet,we should only breed off the best and then not for money but to replace an ageing dog with something similar or even better,they are not a status symbol to be paraded about by tracksuited mobs roaming the countryside but another tool to efficiently catch our chosen quarry and slip back home without most people knowing you have even been on their land,so my honest answer is that most dogs being bred and worked today are a poor second to those of yesteryear,atb,wirralman

True as the days long.atb Dell

[willow 53]

people will bred off average dogs so more rubbish that couldt catch a cold going on names of dogs not work ability so no

[am back 31]

Some lines will have got better, but the 'average' standard of working lurchers will have dropped most likely. But the 'best' dogs now will be better than the 'best' dogs of the past.

THATS A BOLD STATEMENT MATE ,TO ME A GOOD DOG TEN TWENTY YEARS AGO ISNT ANY WORSE OR BETTER THAN A GOOD DOG TODAY .WAS ALI BETTER THAN TYSON?SAME THING MATE DIFFERENT TIMES SAME HARE.

[KittleRox 2,147]

Jmo But I think the potential in a dog would be the same as years back, the problem is not as much game as before, round my way anyway

[bunnys 1,228]

Iwould saynot general hardiness his missimg in a great deal of the modern lurcher strains ,not all but the vast majority could not function on the meagre rations some dogs had to in times gone by ,strong constitution good grubber all thrive on ought ,no room for the picky fussy types couldint stand a decent nights lamping never mind 5 good winters .atb bunnys.

 

IM NOT GETTING YOU PAL..

YOU AGREE THEN CONTRDICT YOURSEF TWICE

obviously you have miss read or do not or understand what i had to say like ya sayime not getting you ,but i think the majority got my drift ,what i was trying to get across was most types are not has constitutionally has strong has dogs of times gone by also dogs could thrive on much less than the modern hound dogs that were fussy pickers were given short thrift ,lurchers were kept and in some cases still are to supplement flesh for the house hold never did much schooling my education was the woods fell and fields atb bunnys.

[Ideation 8,216]

Some lines will have got better, but the 'average' standard of working lurchers will have dropped most likely. But the 'best' dogs now will be better than the 'best' dogs of the past.

THATS A BOLD STATEMENT MATE ,TO ME A GOOD DOG TEN TWENTY YEARS AGO ISNT ANY WORSE OR BETTER THAN A GOOD DOG TODAY .WAS ALI BETTER THAN TYSON?SAME THING MATE DIFFERENT TIMES SAME HARE.

 

 

No mate, but no one was selectively breeding boxers were they. That's the point. If you had a good line 20 years ago, and you have been breeding best to best and working at improving your line, then theoretically you should have better dogs the longer time progresses. The average standard will have dropped due to an increase in popularity. Just my thoughts mate.

[am back 31]

Some lines will have got better, but the 'average' standard of working lurchers will have dropped most likely. But the 'best' dogs now will be better than the 'best' dogs of the past.

THATS A BOLD STATEMENT MATE ,TO ME A GOOD DOG TEN TWENTY YEARS AGO ISNT ANY WORSE OR BETTER THAN A GOOD DOG TODAY .WAS ALI BETTER THAN TYSON?SAME THING MATE DIFFERENT TIMES SAME HARE.

 

 

No mate, but no one was selectively breeding boxers were they. That's the point. If you had a good line 20 years ago, and you have been breeding best to best and working at improving your line, then theoretically you should have better dogs the longer time progresses. The average standard will have dropped due to an increase in popularity. Just my thoughts mate.

I HEAR WHAT YOUR SAYING .THE THING IS THE AVERAGE LURCHER HAS AND ALWAYS WILL OUTNUMBER A RIGHT GOOD DOG 1000-1.TO KEEP A GOOD LINE GOING ANY LENGHTH OF TIME TAKES SOME DOING WITH ALL THE SHIT WAITEING TO JUMP ON IT AND FK IT

[Ideation 8,216]

Some lines will have got better, but the 'average' standard of working lurchers will have dropped most likely. But the 'best' dogs now will be better than the 'best' dogs of the past.

THATS A BOLD STATEMENT MATE ,TO ME A GOOD DOG TEN TWENTY YEARS AGO ISNT ANY WORSE OR BETTER THAN A GOOD DOG TODAY .WAS ALI BETTER THAN TYSON?SAME THING MATE DIFFERENT TIMES SAME HARE.

 

 

No mate, but no one was selectively breeding boxers were they. That's the point. If you had a good line 20 years ago, and you have been breeding best to best and working at improving your line, then theoretically you should have better dogs the longer time progresses. The average standard will have dropped due to an increase in popularity. Just my thoughts mate.

I HEAR WHAT YOUR SAYING .THE THING IS THE AVERAGE LURCHER HAS AND ALWAYS WILL OUTNUMBER A RIGHT GOOD DOG 1000-1.TO KEEP A GOOD LINE GOING ANY LENGHTH OF TIME TAKES SOME DOING WITH ALL THE SHIT WAITEING TO JUMP ON IT AND FK IT

 

 

Very true mate.

 

I'm just guessing that if it was some way possible to line up all the dogs EVERYWHERE, the best one you found now, would perform better than the best one from the past.

 

But you are right, there is a lot of shit out there.

 

ANd you may be right that the 'peak' of some of these lines has long gone, and we are just grasping onto the remnants.

 

Other than coursing that is.

[cheeseboard 2]

yes with the internet and transport more people have come together to breed better to better then the old days where they kept em all in the same clique,

so i say better now then the old days

[boyo 1,398]

what you have to put into context is years ago the only people that kept a lurcher were people that worked them and in most cases worked them real hard .compare that with today when there are as many not worked as there are worked perhaps even more . so imo you can not really compare those of yesterday with todays lurchers if your talking about the average lurcher .