Who gets the credit for a great hound??????

[big mike 50]

The reason guys at trials and in the feild can just let their dogs go is because of hours of training. I can't believe none of you guys are talking about breaking a dog from off game. I have had way too many days ruined as a kid before shock collars and talked to way too many guys who have had to give up on dogs for running deer. Even now the brush is so thick it is hard to tell what a dog is running for quite a while. As far as the post goes I appreciate a well bred dog and there are so many choices out there I respect the breeder. A well bred dog makes a poor trainer look like an ace. JMO.

[mdbeagler]

I would have to say they all play a role in a great hound. The trainer for giving the hound the proper opportunity and exposure. The owner for knowing what to do with the dog, and putting it in the right hands to train if he does not have the time or experience. The breeder and the pedigree go together, the breeder has to have some knowledge of the history of the dogs in the pedigree before making the right cross which increases the odds of making a great cross and not just wishing on all luck. I have seen some great dogs ruined when placed in the wrong hands.

[Newt]

So, ELmer Gray, Willett Randall, Branko Krpan, Les Blondino, and Paul Short were/are all great trainers. Interesting that beaglers are more interested in buying a dog with Short, Bucks Branch or Branko blood than dogs trained by those guys.

When Elmer Gray wrote his book "The Linesman Story", he indicated that his success was due to LInesman nicked with the faster bitches of the day to porduce a better hound. He never once mentioned it was his training technique. I guess he was too modest.

[blckcrk-dog]

well I voted pedigree because that is where it all starts they have to have it in them ,but the trainer brings it out ,and the owner keeps it going ,but the most important thing is the rabbit track it keeps it interesting,just my 2 cents but this was a great post it gets you thinking.

[don nash]

I think the breeder is most important because with out the breeder theres nothing to train. A well bred pup makes training easy. I think they go hand and hand for the most part you need both to have a great hound. You can't consistently turn out top hounds with out a good breeding program and yes there are some trainers and owners who turn out top hounds from different bloodlines but somewhere behing them somebody did there home work and made the right crosses.

[warddog]

I'll have to agree 100% with DRamey. I've yet to get down on all fours and teach a single dog dog to smell a rabbit let alone track it and use tongue. I have however taken them to the field where they have the opportunity to hone what skills GOD gave them. I've owned and seen a LOT of sorry TOP bred dogs in my time of following hounds and some of the best I've owned and seen were dogs that no one knew what the ancestry was. That said I believe that top dogs are made by the creator just as any human that happens to be blessed with some almighty talent. YES, an individaul or individauls may hone it but that talent is God given. If folks are able to breed, train or make top dogs then none of us should have that quest at heart. I'm not saying that the breeding, handling and the giving the dog the opportunity to do what it is naturally bred to do is not important but that don't make the dog because if you have a dog that absolutley lacks the DESIRE to pursue it's quarry. I don't care how well it's bred, how great of a trainer or handler you think you are YOU are not going to make a top hound of that dog. The dog has to be born with the desire to do the things it takes to survive as it all goes back to the survival of the fittest. Fittest not only relates to body but to mind and sole as well.

[Duke]

Great hounds are born to be great!!!!! Therefore I have to say the breeding. Some great ones come from random breeding but more often than not the great ones come from a long line of great ones.

The really great ones only need time in the field. They will become great despite their owner. I have been lucky enough to own such a hound. He was going to be great no matter how many stupid things I did. He taught me about rabbit dogs and its not surprising that his grandfather was also a hall of fame dog. Great ones are born and only need to be given the time to grow.

[PREACHERS,KENNEL]

i wouldnt say they r born great,, but greatness has to be within that dog.. 1=bloodline- if it aint in it it cant come out..
2=breeding- the breeder has to know what he wants in a litter so the knowledge of what to breed to within that bloodline is very important..
3=training-if all the other is lined up right, you can train a dog, correct mistakes, but if all the other has been done correctly this process should an be easy one. including off game..the owning of shock collars and trackers are a must imo for puppie training.
4=owner -if he bought the dog and all was good at this point then ,he still gets some credit for not screwing it up. if he keeps the dog run up. wormed ,feeds and keeps the dogs healthy he too deserves some of the credit.this is how i would rank it ...
all play a role and even the owner if her is an idiot with a shock collar in hand can ruin the best laid plans.or simply dont do anything like run the dog lay it up for a yr and you have probably lost a good dog ..

[bucks better beagles]

This is a no-brainer. Take the best breeder in the land. Give one pup from a litter to a good trainer and another to a person who wants to walk a dog around the block on a leash. Give them about 8 months or any length of time. Now, which dog you gonna put your money on? Of course, the one that gets trained in the bush. I have seen this dozens of times. A dog can't learn anything on a chain or while his owner lies on the couch.

There is never a guarantee no matter how well a dog is bred but, they must be encouraged to do what they can do.

[JUDE]

I agree with Preacher but a potentially great hound hasn't
got a chance in the hands of a stupid trainer ...





.

[J.C. Blair]

I guess I'll give my 2 cents, which don't count for much these days. Too many people today are hung up on pedigrees and linebreeding this, that, triple cross of whatever. I guess as a dog guy, first you must be able to evaluate a dog, and again most people can't be honest with themselves at times. A pedigree is nothing more than a roadmap, you have to know where you've been, before you know where you're going. Then it's just a roll of the dice, breeding 2 exceptional dogs, not a superstar male and a dud bitch. On being the trainer and helping develop talent in a hound, I guess a great friend of mine once put it the best, "You can take the best, most expensive clay you can buy, but it's up to you whether it turns into a pretty vase or an ashtray" How true!! So I guess I would say its the combination good solid breeding and a good trainer to bring the best out of that cross. OK off my soapbox now, and going back to the corner.

[Cutemloose]

I would have to say breeding beagles arent dogs that need to be trained to retrieve or point and hold they do what they do and it is what it is i bet if someone would give the best trainer the worst dog he wouldnt be able to change the fact that the dog sucks its all instinct imo think about it when you start pups do you teach them commands like hunt and it starts running rabbits or do you drop the dog on the ground and it sniffs and starts barking thats just my 2cents

[JUDE]

I have a friend that has some nice little rabbit dawgs . All day hunt
good search JUMP DAWGS over 200+ rabbit's per year killed to these
hounds . Sometimes one of them will run a strange dog until it will
jump up onto the back of the truck seen it happen , a lot of
hunching going on for a good while but that one will eventually get
tired of hunching and go jump a bunny . I'd say some of his hounds
could be competetive in trials but I doubt ARHA would allow you to
call your hounds in with a 12 ga cracking .

Now imo and like Chad has already said it don't mean much but you
can agree or disagree and we won't fall out over it ... for a dog to
be a great hound it MUST hunt hard consistantly , jump it's own
rabbit consistantly , hold it's mouth well under any weather condition
consistantly , blow out of the check consistantly , obey it's master ,
if it has littermates they should be similir in style (not duds) and it
must produce it's likeness when bred to a good female . JMO breed
what you want . I guess if we get right down to it there's no wrong
answer if we breed what we like for ourselves and it makes us happy .




.

[mtnwaykennel]

I got a couple questions....

How much training do we really do?? Are we leading them around... chasing the rabbit with them and telling them every step of the way that this is how we do it? Sure we take them out... and we do train basic things, but how can anyone take credit for the training? The other hounds that we run our young stars with do all the training. So should we vote for them?

When I was young I was told "if a dog has IT, he has IT, It will come out if you give him the chance". We all like to think we have a little more to do with it then we do, The select breedings are IMHO the only thing that we as people can take credit for except for food selection, and time.

Best things about it are we all have our own opinions. I just toss mine into the breeder and pedigrees.

Ever notice the amount of great soldiers who are third generation military men? Or Third generation CEO's? Third generation football players? We are not that different than the hounds we love in a lot of aspects.

My opinions while smoking the morning cig before the shower and work.
Bill Woods

[hounddog]

Heres a question for those of you that voted for breeder/ pedigree. As we all have seen a very good one in our times, what about the grade dogs. I have had some good ones and had no idea what they were out of. Can you still say it was there breeder and their pedigree?

hounddog
Jim Umbarger