VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1[2]345 ]
Subject: Re: JOURNEAY'S RED COCHISE


Author:
MH
Author Host/IP: 207.69.140.33
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous 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
>much.
>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
>SPECULATION ...
>**I was around when Martin Ceasar offspring where
>being tried.
>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
>constitution.
>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
>subject.
>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
>show-stock.
>
>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
>his grave.

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 ]


Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.