Fit dogs

[socks 32,253]

2 hours ago, whitefeet4190 said:

I like those merl types aswell, what's the breeding behind them? 

I reckon it could be collie ........

[Trev70 5,185]

1985 I left school at the age of 15 and there was plenty of gear a 15 min walk away so this dog was out 5 nights a week until I looked old enough to get in the pub and then it went down hill for a while .

[sandymere 8,263]

One of the biggest problem theses days is that people are increasingly linking fitness with rippling muscles,  when the opposite is often the case, for anything that needs to run much above 200 meters big muscles are an increasing hinderance.

couple of the fittest fellas alive when this was taken but note the lack of rippling muscles.

even the sprinters are losing the bulk.

Edited November 26, 2020 by sandymere

[Born Hunter 17,763]

20 minutes ago, sandymere said:

One of the biggest problem theses days is that people are increasingly linking fitness with rippling muscles,  when the opposite is often the case, for anything that needs to run much above 200 meters big muscles are an increasing hinderance.

couple of the fittest fellas alive when this was taken but note the lack of rippling muscles.

even the sprinters are losing the bulk.

I'd say another fallacy is equating fitness to endurance.

[sandymere 8,263]

57 minutes ago, Born Hunter said:

I'd say another fallacy is equating fitness to endurance.

Would you like to elucidate? I would equate fitness with endurance whether that be speed endurance, as in a sprinter or of distance endurance as in a triathlete. 

Within the context of lurchers, other than in some very specialised areas,  this is doubly so in relation to carrying excess weight in the form of muscle.

[Born Hunter 17,763]

Just now, sandymere said:

Would you like to elucidate? I would equate fitness with endurance whether that be speed endurance, as in a sprinter or of distance endurance as in a triathlete. 

Within the context of lurchers, other than in some very specialised areas,  this is doubly so in relation to carrying excess weight in the form of muscle.

Fitness is how well adapted/suitable/successful an individual is to a physical activity. That isn't exclusively endurance. I just think it's wrong to consider a foxhound 'fitter' than a greyhound. Apples and Oranges in fitness terms.

[Born Hunter 17,763]

I agree that the layman tends to refer to marathon runners as 'fit' and strength athletes as 'strong' but fitness to the purist is defined by capability imo. It covers any relevant aspect of physicality. What is relevant depends on the task.

The likes of Rich Froning and I'd argue Ross Edgley are incredibly fit lads, in an all round sense, and have Olympian-esque physiques.

[mC HULL 12,423]

I seen plenty of sal x that are muscled but can still go over the 5 min mark

[poxon 5,731]

16 hours ago, Teckers said:

Good thread with some nice dogs and interesting stories this fp fellas, iv had a couple over the years that have shaped up pretty well, looks don’t kill though and as of yet none come close to my scruffy old bitch in the kennel, the dog on top had hell of a lot of potential and was becoming pretty decent at the edible game but  didn’t want anything more than edible so was gifted to a lad up north, bitch on the bottom is still young but slowly maturing and going in the right direction cheers

Nice looking dogs

[poxon 5,731]

3 hours ago, sandymere said:

One of the biggest problem theses days is that people are increasingly linking fitness with rippling muscles,  when the opposite is often the case, for anything that needs to run much above 200 meters big muscles are an increasing hinderance.

couple of the fittest fellas alive when this was taken but note the lack of rippling muscles.

even the sprinters are losing the bulk.

If a dogs doing what someone wants an expects from there dog in the field there fit for the job ain’t it If there happy with there dog/s an want to share a picture who are we to comment on there dogs fitness unless trying to undermine them in some way trying to swing judgment on a well muscle to a fine build dog or trying to prove some kind of point on how hard or not hard enough a dogs worked but I can see why you’ve added this comment as you keep a super fine build of dog but my thread wasn’t posted to undermine any dog there is/was no hidden agenda I just wanted to see some pictures of dogs people are working that are fit for function I couldn’t care less if there ripped with muscle of stream line like a Lamborghini  it wasn’t really posted to have schooling on muscle mass or any expert advice it was plainly for pictures of nice fit dogs people are happy with 

[Teckers 661]

1 hour ago, poxon said:

Nice looking dogs

Cheers pal 

[Shadow100 1,066]

The rippling muscles thing is a lot to do with the skin & coat of a dog, thin skinned short coated dogs always looked ripped when they’re fit, well they should if the muscles are properly hardened anyway. Rough coated dogs like your collie/beddy crosses aren’t ever going to have that heavily muscled look. If you’ve got a short haired dog that’s not reasonably muscled up then chances are it’s not been doing enough running to get properly fit.

[runem 533]

4 hours ago, sandymere said:

One of the biggest problem theses days is that people are increasingly linking fitness with rippling muscles,  when the opposite is often the case, for anything that needs to run much above 200 meters big muscles are an increasing hinderance.

couple of the fittest fellas alive when this was taken but note the lack of rippling muscles.

even the sprinters are losing the bulk.

I had a pure greyhound i road walked her every day ,  i also ran her in the day . she  muscled up well it looked really powerfull and really fit .

I tailed of doing road walking and her muscle bulk decreased in fact she looked slightly underweight , i still ran her in the day and there was a big difference with her , she had more stamina and performed slightly better .

Basically when she didnt look like a body building dog , and her muscle bulk was natural from running around she performed better.

So just because a dog looks the part it may not be , some saluki types look painfull but boy can they run .

[tinytiger 828]

5 hours ago, sandymere said:

One of the biggest problem theses days is that people are increasingly linking fitness with rippling muscles,  when the opposite is often the case, for anything that needs to run much above 200 meters big muscles are an increasing hinderance.

couple of the fittest fellas alive when this was taken but note the lack of rippling muscles.

even the sprinters are losing the bulk.

 

true-and the only man(van niekerk) to break 10 for 100m,20 for 200 m  and 44 for 400m is quite lightly built. (i reckon he could probably give the 800meter record a fright if he tried) .Ive heard of greyhounds becoming over muscular (a tendency to put on so much muscle that it becomes a hindrance to them).

[SheepChaser 8,083]

1 hour ago, poxon said:

If a dogs doing what someone wants an expects from there dog in the field there fit for the job ain’t it If there happy with there dog/s an want to share a picture who are we to comment on there dogs fitness unless trying to undermine them in some way trying to swing judgment on a well muscle to a fine build dog or trying to prove some kind of point on how hard or not hard enough a dogs worked but I can see why you’ve added this comment as you keep a super fine build of dog but my thread wasn’t posted to undermine any dog there is/was no hidden agenda I just wanted to see some pictures of dogs people are working that are fit for function I couldn’t care less if there ripped with muscle of stream line like a Lamborghini  it wasn’t really posted to have schooling on muscle mass or any expert advice it was plainly for pictures of nice fit dogs people are happy with 

Think it’s just called discussion mate ....