It is all a matter of opinion. Gets back to covering the most distance with the least effort!!!
Mary At 01:31 PM 3/31/2015, randall chesnut wrote:
PlumeI would say no to the first part, and probably to the second part. I noticed the same thing you did in the videos. Most of the ones shown were lacking in rear drive, and high in the rear end in motion. The angulation in the rear was certainly not what we have today. Good or bad? You be the judge.Randy C. Plume<https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/features/stationery>Stationery, an att.net Mail and Paperless Post collaborationOn Tuesday, March 31, 2015 12:27 PM, "edwinx@xxxxxxxxxxx" <edwinx@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:I have often referred to the standard as a "moving target"... And this reference was NOT my original thought ( I don't have many), it was told and explained to me by a great breeder who is not on this list so I'll leave his/her name out of this discussion. I think you'd all agree that we created the standard and we can, and have in the past, change it again! .... If we WANT to! I looked at the 1974 video ( thanks Linda) and those dogs don't look like most of the dogs I saw two days ago in Sacramento! Now that video was 41 years ago... Could most of the 1974 dogs win today? Could most of the dogs today win in 1974?... I say no to both questions, the two TARGETS are different ( moving)... But what the hell do I know... I'm just a cook..... Changing the subject I forgot to tell you yesterday what the sperm VET told us at the end of his presentation!..... " just remember, when your feeling down and having a bad day, your life began as being the fastest strongest sperm in the village".... FBSent from Xfinity Connect Mobile App
