|[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, , 3, 4, 5 ]|
|Subject: Re: JOURNEAY'S RED COCHISE|
Author Host/IP: 188.8.131.52
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Date Posted: 11:46:06 07/01/06 Sat
>i WONDERED WHY THIS LITTERMATE BROTHER TO GERONIMO II
>HAS NEVER BEEN DISCUSSED VERY MUCH, even THOUGH he is
>A CLEAN SPECIMEN OF THE OLD FAMILY RED NOSE blood,
>DOWN from THE GERONIMO X RED DIXIE BREEDING ...
>**As a stud dog, he may have not been discussed very
>much, due to the limited breeding exposure. When
>there is limited information about a dog, I tend to
>look at what breedings the owner performed. This can
>give you some idea of what direction the owner saw fit
>to take the dog too. If the dog is worthwhile, a
>gamedog breeder will take it to competitive, working
>blood. If anything worthwhile comes of that game-bred
>litter, the dog will usually be in demand. You should
>see additional breedings.
>In hindsight, a look back should then reveal some
>consistent winners behind the various breedings. If
>the dog was not worthwhile he would not have been used
>The only point of reference on Cochise is that he was
>bred once, to a ¼ Staff dog.
>MARTIN CEASAR, AN OFFSPRING OF COCHISE, HAS BEEN
>PLAYED DOWN BY JUST A FEW BREEDERS, WHO USUALLY ARE
>WORKING WITH OTHER LINES AND BASE THEIR CONCLUSIONs ON
>**I was around when Martin Ceasar offspring where
>There were some people using OFRN blood that liked
>this cross, as compared to most straight OFRN dogs of
>that time, the Ceasar offspring had a stronger
>A cross will typically add vigor and I think some
>breeders of that time believed the vigor provided by
>Topsey Turvey was an improvement and therefore, bred
>it back into the OFRN blood.
>Personally, I think that when you are going to breed
>back into a bloodline, you should use blood with a
>history of producing good prospects, from a proven
>The blood should be the best available, as you are
>looking to improve the future of your bloodline.
>Based on the breeding choice and then the historical
>information available on the various offspring, it
>looks as if the greatest, most consistent contribution
>by Martin Ceasar was to the Tufftown line of UKC
>The folks who were trying to use straight OFRN stock
>in the late 70’s and early 80’s as combatants, knew
>that the line needed a little boost. Instead of
>Topsey Turvey, I would have liked to have seen a cross
>that would have had a chance to continue producing
>good dogs down the road and not just a one-time vigor
>shot that had some staff blood.
>I tried to stimulate a conversation once, when I
>pretended to turn back time and asked the board what
>they would have bred to Hemphill’s Geronimo, with the
>intent of bringing that offspring back into their OFRN
>line. Interestingly enough, nobody responded by
>saying Topsey Turvey.
>When these Martin Ceasar offspring were being tried in
>the sporting arenas, they were not top end. More
>importantly, they were not producing competitive dogs.
> That’s why outside of some OFRN hopefuls, nobody used
>it. I have SDJ’s ranging from the early 70’s to the
>late 80’s. There are few Martin Ceasar dogs in that
>entire span of time.
>History cannot be changed.
>One thing that bugged me back in the late 70’s was the
>smug UKC show people that acted like they had
>something really special with their Tufftown dogs.
>Of course they were against dog-fighting because they
>owned a bunch of curs, but when they talked about
>their dogs, they spoke with this inner smugness and
>floated the word “Hemphill” as if it was an earned
>medal. This was back when the first Stratton book had
>just been out for a little while and the tufftown
>crowd took great pride that “Hemphill” blood was in
>their stock, even though their breedings and
>intentions would have made Bob Hemphill turn over in
LOL ... BOY YOU SURE HAVE A LOT TO SAY ABOUT EVERYTHING WHICH IS IMPOSSIBLE ... THOSE TIME PERIODS YOU CLAIM TO BE SO UP ON IS A DAM LIE ... YOU TOLD ME YOURSELF YOU WERE CLEANING DOG CRAP FOR A GUY THAT LATER COLD QUIT THE DOG HOBBIE ... YOU GOT ONE DOG ... THATS A PET OWNER ... YOUR THINKING IS BASED ON INFORMATION NOT FACT ... THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE ... SIMILIAR TO PROPAGANDA ... YOUR HISTORY DIALOUGE IS YOUR OPINION ... WE ALL HAVE THAT ...
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]