# Lean Mac progeny



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

OK... so I was eaves dropping in the gallery once upon a time. Overheard two guys talking and since they dressed par (ie, looked like experienced dog people with the lanyards and whistles and duck calls and all) I couldn't help listening in and they were saying that Lean Mac was an extreme product of Field Trial breeding, everything go and nothing no... a handful and a half. These guys were opining that Lean Mac off-spring/line-breedings are not for the faint of heart, "ya' gotta know what yer doin' with one of them" etc. etc. 

Since Lean Mac's DNA has found its way into a huge number of pedigrees, I'd like some more opinions. Reckon this is the place to get them. 

Thanks in advance!


----------



## RJW (Jan 8, 2012)

This should be interesting. If you haven't, you may want to take a look at this thread...... http://www.retrievertraining.net/fo...tar-Lean-Mac-The-Pictures&highlight=Lean+Mack

I had also heard what you mentioned, that he was a handful but in the right hands he was phenomenal. Whether that is true or not, I do not know. But I love hearing and reading about him.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Maxx was a great dog who arrived when frozen semen techniques had been perfected. He was bred more than any dog before or since by a large margin. He was a pre potent sire producing many fine dogs. His influence will continue for awhile. His detractors focus on the unsuccessful offspring rather than the successful ones which were/are many.


----------



## AmiableLabs (Jan 14, 2003)

EdA said:


> He was bred more than any dog before or since by a large margin. He was a pre potent sire producing many fine dogs. His influence will continue for awhile. His detractors focus on the unsuccessful offspring rather than the successful ones which were/are many.


Not to detract from Maxx, but an argument can also be made for the quality of puppy-buyers.

It still takes talented dogs. But it helps to have quality puppy-buyers to give a talented dog the opportunity to title.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

Not to mention owners with the time and resources to go from trial to trial to trial... not to mention the time to train with sufficient rigor... and a good training group... etc. etc.


----------



## Dave Farrar (Mar 16, 2012)

I love my Lean Mac grandson. He is smart, has an ON/OFF switch and a great pup to have in the house. He is sleeping on my bed right now. My pup's sire is an 8x GRHRCH, UH, MH, QAA so I'm guessing he is a pretty good dog. We will begin hunt tests in Sept when they start up again here in CA.


----------



## Mike Perry (Jun 26, 2003)

I saw where someone posted on another thread "If you can't beat them, talk about them".
Check the statistics then decide.
Just saying.......
MP


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

1tulip said:


> OK... so I was eaves dropping in the gallery once upon a time. Overheard two guys talking and since they dressed par (ie, looked like experienced dog people with the lanyards and whistles and duck calls and all) I couldn't help listening in and they were saying that Lean Mac was an extreme product of Field Trial breeding, everything go and nothing no... a handful and a half. These guys were opining that Lean Mac off-spring/line-breedings are not for the faint of heart, "ya' gotta know what yer doin' with one of them" etc. etc.
> 
> Since Lean Mac's DNA has found its way into a huge number of pedigrees, I'd like some more opinions. Reckon this is the place to get them.
> 
> Thanks in advance!



Fishing must be pretty bad in Nevada huh?


----------



## blackasmollases (Mar 26, 2012)

I don't know how much it counts for but the lil guy in my avatar and sign. line is a great grandson to Lean Mac on both sides. On top of the rest of his pedigree is really nice. But talk about a dog who loves what he is doing  














This is him at 1 year. Once in a lifetime pup on the first try and tryin not to mess it up


----------



## Bubba (Jan 3, 2003)

Zackly what I was thinking Cory

Between runs regards

Bubba


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

Back in the day, it seemed there were two go-to breeding lines. River Oaks Corky and Raider/Super Chief. If Lean Mac is the dominant line now, is there another equally powerful complementary gene pool?


----------



## labsforme (Oct 31, 2003)

Hmmm.Let's see.There's a "minor" line called, I think Honcho.Produced a few dogs that had a little influence. Trumarc Zip Code, Super Tanker, Tanks A Lot.

Jeff

PS Dr Ed please,chapt 3 of Honcho's story.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Lean Mac who?

/Paul


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

1tulip said:


> Back in the day, it seemed there were two go-to breeding lines. River Oaks Corky and Raider/Super Chief. If Lean Mac is the dominant line now, is there another equally powerful complementary gene pool?


Back in the day there were more than two.....and one of those was the NAFC FC Ray's Rascal line of dogs...Rascal is the great-grandsire of Lean Mac



and Raider and Super Chief have only NFC AFC Cork of Oakwood Lane in common, so putting them together is like six degrees of separation


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

1tulip said:


> Back in the day, it seemed there were two go-to breeding lines. River Oaks Corky and Raider/Super Chief. If Lean Mac is the dominant line now, is there another equally powerful complementary gene pool?


Actually - back in the day - people bred to the best local dogs & were very successful with that. That is - prior to frozen semen & airplane flights all over - I personally think the way it used to be done was better for the breed - there were more quality dogs in the gene pool - no dog was overbred as is the case today - 

BTW - I ran many weekends against Lean Mac - most of us who did can tell you his strengths & weaknesses - His reputation, along with poor prepared judging got him many uindeserved placings, not an uncommon thing with dogs that have a lot of hype - I do not consider that a detraction, he threw many of his serious faults in his pups - IMO the best dog running in this part of the country at that time was the dog that is the sire & grandsire of Chad Baker's NAFC's - The major difference is in the management of the dogs - as I've said before on these threads - read "Horse of a Different Color" & "Stud" & compare it to the many dogs SS had which were advertised extensively in the FT News - Lean Mac's 1st breeding was to FC-AFC Carroll's Black Velvet, a really good bitch, who disappeared from any talk after the breeding - There is more BS about breeding & overrating dogs in this sport, including this thread than the average newby should be exposed to - Caveat Emptor .


----------



## Dave Farrar (Mar 16, 2012)

Marvin, please tell his strengths and weaknesses. I am curious to see them.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

And were his weaknesses as genetically dominant as his strengths?


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Dave Farrar said:


> Marvin, please tell his strengths and weaknesses. I am curious to see them.


I saw them - you can just talk about it 



Marvin S said:


> BTW - I ran many weekends against Lean Mac - most of us who did can tell you his strengths & weaknesses - Caveat Emptor .


Nothing was said about will tell 



1tulip said:


> And were his weaknesses as genetically dominant as his strengths?


This has been discussed on this forum - having a complete dog vs one that may excel at one part of the requirement to be a big dog. I never had a lot of interest in him as he was not IMM the type of dog appearance wise I wanted to exhibit. As one watched his various performances over the years - both good & bad - you realized that you had made a wise choice. 

When you play the game at the highest competitive level, one dog at a time, you do your best to cut your losses early. In this case, by never owning a pup of this breeding as the flaws are hard to conceal . Some of us are just not that good a trainer that we can work around those things - we need top flight raw material - the question you need to ask is - are you that good a trainer? Many were not .


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

I saw Maxx run at the first trial Mike Lardy ran him in when he first got him. He was
all over the map when he came out the holding blind kinda loose. Took Mike by surprise I think.
I judged him in a open about 6 or 8 months later. He won the trial hands down. What a difference in behavior.
He was truly a great dog no matter the critics in my opinion. The humor was Sherwin always needling Mary about Maxx had greater number of derby points then Lottie. Lottie had all American points and of course Maxx points were mostly junior points or the Canadian version of the derby.


----------



## Charles C. (Nov 5, 2004)

Marvin, a dog doesn't win 4 nationals with many "serious faults."


----------



## Dave Farrar (Mar 16, 2012)

Charles C. said:


> Marvin, a dog doesn't win 4 nationals with many "serious faults."


The Pittsburgh Steelers of the '70's had some serious faults also. The Vikings, Cowboys and the Rams all know them...


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

Charles C. said:


> Marvin, a dog doesn't win 4 nationals with many "serious faults."


I guess those faults that were passed down really hurt his offspring. What's that current titled offspring count again??


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

Jacob, try to remember, Marv more than likely never saw him run a trial after he aged out of the Derby.



Jacob Hawkes said:


> I guess those faults that were passed down really hurt his offspring. What's that current titled offspring count again??


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Criquetpas said:


> I saw Maxx run at the first trial Mike Lardy ran him in when he first got him. He was
> all over the map when he came out the holding blind kinda loose. Took Mike by surprise I think.
> I judged him in a open about 6 or 8 months later. He won the trial hands down. What a difference in behavior.
> He was truly a great dog no matter the critics in my opinion. The humor was Sherwin always needling Mary about Maxx had greater number of derby points then Lottie. Lottie had all American points and of course Maxx points were mostly junior points or the Canadian version of the derby.


Some of LM's Juniors were small as were some of Lottie's - LM was tough to beat in Canada in the Junior but he was beatable .

As an AA dog his Water Blinds at Sun Valley NARC were both out & out failures though he ended up with the Blue ribbon. I have no doubt that you saw what you say but by then Remien had worked him for 3 years (both titles & the NARC) & Lardy got him after his NARC win. Sherwin used to come back into the Mountain circuit after he had moved LM to Lardy. I remember a Water Quad at Warm Springs where LM blew bubbles on the memory bird & was a pickup. Of the 9 finishers any one could have gotten the Blue, the work was that close, so on that day he was really common. Enough from me on this subject, any one can buy all the LM pups they want, it's instant recognition to say you have a pup out of so & so. But like having a college education you have to prove that means something. I saw several $2500 LM pups here that showed his faults - not pretty. Someone I know who has pretty impressive credentials said "I can go to the pound, pick out a black dog, breed it to a lot of good bitches & some of the pups will turn out to be competitors". I do not doubt his observation. Note that other than Ed, yourself & me - no one else responding to this thread even knows what a pelt is .


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Marvin S said:


> Some of LM's Juniors were small as were some of Lottie's - LM was tough to beat in Canada in the Junior but he was beatable .
> 
> As an AA dog his Water Blinds at Sun Valley NARC were both out & out failures though he ended up with the Blue ribbon. I have no doubt that you saw what you say but by then Remien had worked him for 3 years (both titles & the NARC) & Lardy got him after his NARC win. Sherwin used to come back into the Mountain circuit after he had moved LM to Lardy. *I remember a Water Quad at Warm Springs where LM blew bubbles on the memory bird & was a pickup. Of the 9 finishers any one could have gotten the Blue, the work was that close, so on that day he was really common.* Enough from me on this subject, any one can buy all the LM pups they want, it's instant recognition to say you have a pup out of so & so. But like having a college education you have to prove that means something. I saw several $2500 LM pups here that showed his faults - not pretty. Someone I know who has pretty impressive credentials said "I can go to the pound, pick out a black dog, breed it to a lot of good bitches & some of the pups will turn out to be competitors". I do not doubt his observation. Note that other than Ed, yourself & me - no one else responding to this thread even knows what a pelt is .


If you're talking about the Warm Springs Open in 1997, that was my first judging assignment, I was judging with Alan Madsen, a very good mentor. I assume by "blowing bubbles" you mean he was piggish which I don't remember. On that day he didn't place, but he placed and won enough to prove his worth. Our first series worked well, we were a little light on our land blind, water blind was tough with a scented point, and an "out-to-sea" bird on a rat trap, but more dogs did it than we envisioned, then a very tough quad. Maybe Max didn't turn heads that day, but he was a very nice dog, and a very consistent performer. I also had the pleasure of training hundreds of days with two Max progeny FC-AFC DB's Cracker of Club Mead and FC-AFC Max's Lone Ranger. Both dogs had control issues that could drive you crazy, Ritz in particular, but they were both hugely talented, unbelievable markers, could line very tough blinds at high speed, stylish and super water dogs, I would kill to have such a dog even with the issues. Ritz either blew up completely or won, he was the Purina high point amateur dog the year Don passed away from cancer. I can see Marv's point about Max progeny are not for everybody, but if can hold on for a wild ride, they are very-very nice.

John


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

John Robinson said:


> 1)I assume by "blowing bubbles" you mean he was piggish which I don't remember. 2) water blind was tough with a scented point, and an "out-to-sea" bird on a rat trap, but more dogs did it than we envisioned, then a very tough quad. 3) Ritz in particular, but they were both hugely talented, unbelievable markers, could line very tough blinds at high speed, stylish and super water dogs,
> John


1) not my term but one I heard in training to describe a dog swimming in circles as they do not have a clue where the mark is. Big Water does that . I thought the last series to be a very good test but as many of the contestants showed, not undoable in a winning fashion. You actually needed another series but slow setups had taken that time from the equation. 

2) consensus from the knowledgeable in the gallery is the blind did not have anything up front with a square entry 10' from the water. It did spook some dogs as they must have felt they were being set up .

3) Shortly after I started in this sport Paul Shoemaker was fresh off his 1964 NC win with Dagne. Paul was a good interview & dispensed a lot of knowledge to those of us barely informed in the sport over a can or more of refreshment. Of the many things he dispensed was the comment about making his dogs well mannered while the folks with the unmannered dogs walked away with the hardware. Over the years I recognized that the odds would be an ill mannered dog would lack bottom as they looked for the easy way to do things. I learned to have at the least, one test in a trial that measured bottom, surprising how many of the famous dogs go home early & how your placements reflect dogs that have staying power. Unfortunately, not many folks know how to set tests such as that, nor do they know how to judge the results. My observations only, I do not like gutless dogs. Local folks comment about how well mannered from the norm our little mini pinscher is, from what I've seen on the dog circuit that would also be the case. Not all dogs are fully trained. 

My answers on this thread has generated multiple PM's which I'm not sure I can answer. How do you condense 50 years of observation into anything short of a book?


----------



## Dave Farrar (Mar 16, 2012)

Marvin, thanks for your observations. Now, I have a better understanding of the term "bottom."


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Marvin S said:


> 1) How do you condense 50 years of observation into anything short of a book?


A book on the different famous FT dogs, from 50 years of observations, Might be some money in that  Time has a way of inflating reputations, giving particular individuals hero like status. It's nice and refreshing to be reminded that no matter how great a certain individual accomplishments might have been or what their records have produced. They were just dogs, dogs with both strength and weaknesses, both of which were passed on. When a sire is bred a bunch he's more likely to pass on traits and have a larger impact on a population. I've always found that a little LM goes a long way, and needs to be balanced. As generations keep coming, it is getting harder to find the balance as he's in most everything. The dog has made his mark, no doubt on that.


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

The only thing wrong with my LM grandson, is that he should have been my third dog instead of my first! Equally true, my non LM boy would have been easy to train for anyone who made an effort, but at his best he will never give me the thrills and chills. Oh the things I have learned from both!


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

2tall said:


> The only thing wrong with my LM grandson, is that he should have been my third dog instead of my first! Equally true, my non LM boy would have been easy to train for anyone who made an effort, but at his best he will never give me the thrills and chills. Oh the things I have learned from both!


Uh, the adults are talking.

/Paul


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Uh, the adults are talking.
> 
> /Paul


How would you know what that sounds like? Though stated lightheartedly, and certainly without the sanctimony of other posters, my comments agreed that the Lean Mac dogs generally need a more experienced, knowledgeable trainer than most newbies can achieve. On the other hand, if you do have the training skills, the dogs can be phenomenal. If I were to start over, I'd take one in a heartbeat.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

2tall said:


> How would you know what that sounds like? Though stated lightheartedly, and certainly without the sanctimony of other posters, my comments agreed that the Lean Mac dogs generally need a more experienced, knowledgeable trainer than most newbies can achieve. On the other hand, if you do have the training skills, the dogs can be phenomenal. If I were to start over, I'd take one in a heartbeat.


I disagree. Lean Mac dogs are no harder to train than others. As you stated "experienced, knowledgeable trainer" is required. Not every post needs a reply outlining a self incriminating declaration of innocence....

/Paul


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

2tall said:


> How would you know what that sounds like? Though stated lightheartedly, and certainly without the sanctimony of other posters, my comments agreed that the Lean Mac dogs generally need a more experienced, knowledgeable trainer than most newbies can achieve. On the other hand, if you do have the training skills, the dogs can be phenomenal. If I were to start over, I'd take one in a heartbeat.


I would disagree you need to be "more experienced, knowledgeable trainer than most newbies" to have a Lean Mac offspring...come on, Indy and Bullet have the same sire, I know numerous "grandsons" of Lean Mac that are steady as rocks, tractable and good all around dogs...just cause Indy was allowed to be a wild Indian does not mean Lean Mac offspring are wild Indians. So unless you are implying that it's the dam that throws the OB issues, you may need to rethink your logic.

Edit: I should add, I know Bullet's dam was a little wild  but hey Bullet isn't


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

I know there must be some LM offspring that came from the factory with milder dispositions. I have yet to actually see one trained successfully by a beginner without pro or experienced help. And even then, some could not be reined in without drastic measures. Not my case at all, but the fact is mine was too much for me then, would not be now and all the good outweighs the other. How is this not germane to the conversation?


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

2tall said:


> I know there must be some LM offspring that came from the factory with milder dispositions. I have yet to actually see one trained successfully by a beginner without pro or experienced help. And even then, some could not be reined in without drastic measures. Not my case at all, but the fact is mine was too much for me then, would not be now and all the good outweighs the other. How is this not germane to the conversation?


Because you are making generalizations about a very potent sire based on very limited knowledge...now if someone like Dr. Ed said such things, I'd make a mental note of it...but you dilute the conversation with dribble, which is mostly about how Indy could of been an FC/AFC if this or that...yeah, yeah...come on, the broken record gets old....


----------



## rbr (Jan 14, 2004)

2tall said:


> I know there must be some LM offspring that came from the factory with milder dispositions. I have yet to actually see one trained successfully by a beginner without pro or experienced help. And even then, some could not be reined in without drastic measures. Not my case at all, but the fact is mine was too much for me then, would not be now and all the good outweighs the other. How is this not germane to the conversation?


From what sample size do you make this observation?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

2tall said:


> How would you know what that sounds like? Though stated lightheartedly, and certainly without the sanctimony of other posters, my comments agreed that the Lean Mac dogs generally need a more experienced, knowledgeable trainer than most newbies can achieve. On the other hand, if you do have the training skills, the dogs can be phenomenal. If I were to start over, I'd take one in a heartbeat.


Carol

I think that the comment that you responded to was inappropriate.
Nevertheless, I think that you get into trouble when you make generalizations that are very broad in their scope.

I have seen Lean Mac dogs that were very good. I have seen LM dogs that were very bad (my pro washed out one of mine after two weeks)
I have seen LM dogs that were easy to train. I have seen LM dogs that were difficult to train.
So many things go into the mix - dam, socialization, puppy training ....
The list goes on and on

Ted


----------



## jeff evans (Jun 9, 2008)

2tall said:


> How would you know what that sounds like? Though stated lightheartedly, and certainly without the sanctimony of other posters, my comments agreed that the *Lean Mac dogs generally need a more experienced, knowledgeable trainer than most newbies can achieve. On the other hand, if you do have the training skills, the dogs can be phenomenal. If I were to start over, I'd take one in a heartbeat*.





2tall said:


> *I know there must be some LM offspring that came from the factory with milder dispositions. I have yet to actually see one trained successfully by a beginner without pro or experienced help. And even then, some could not be reined in without drastic measures.* Not my case at all, but the fact is mine was too much for me then, would not be now and all the good outweighs the other. How is this not germane to the conversation?



What you are describing is true of ANY/ALL field trial bred Labradors regardless of sire or dam. The generality you describe is a bit humorous if you read what your are saying . Have you actually seen/trained a pup directly sired by LM?


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

I have trained owned and sold as started dogs more then a few LM grandsons most became FC and Or AFC. One a FC/AFC now about 13 is owned by a couple of my training partners, all amateur trained. I did the basics on her. The only negative thing I have ever heard, a little humor, is as young dogs they were "Dirty" . Most the dogs as mentioned were out of Prize and from the same bitch. In fact there were a bunch on the Derby list before Sherwin even realized it. Now having said all that in basics I found them a little noisy, but, not bad, they were excellent water dogs, very tractable, without a lot of issues. Jim VanEgen had a dozen or so at one time in his young dog program, no complaints. Of course the bitch contributes a significant part, so there could have been breedings that didn't click. Here in the middle west there were many, many pups from Prize and LM. Just my thoughts on it.


----------



## mjiorle (Mar 11, 2008)

The youngest handler to win a licensed trial won it with a LM sired dog. Caitlyn Mitchell was the handler and the the dog was FC Pike Of Castlebay. It was while he was still in the derby. May be irrelevant, but interesting nonetheless. 
Mike


----------



## Jamee Strange (Jul 24, 2010)

I have had 2 bitches with him as a grandsire, both with identical top line (One was Jamie, the other Zoom- Jamie's full brother from a repeat breeding 4 years later). One passed this January and the other is my current FT (formerly HT) dog. I loved/love both of them. Both were/are quite a bit to handle, but had/have desire coming out of their ears!! They were/are REALLY fun and exciting to watch. Star was a lot of fun to train, especially when we were on the same page. She breezed through basics and was the first dog I EVER trained (I was 16 at the time). I still regret to this day that I never got to run her . Kali is very similar in many ways and is very smart. She trains pretty well for the most part, although she is stubborn as can be sometimes. However, when she is working with me she is SOOOO MUCH FUN TO TRAIN/RUN!!!! Judges always tell me that she will never get points off for lack of style. She has so much desire it often gets her in trouble, but I think most of them can be like that sometimes. 

For some reason, I seem to gravitate to Lean Mac dogs because well, I just like em!  That being said, there are traits I like about them and things I don't (true with any dog I believe). My new pup has Lean Mac in there too, but it's farther back (4th generation). We'll see if he is similar to the girls. So far though, he seems to be a bit more laid back and more biddable, but has LOTS of desire. Just hopefully in a more controlled package lol.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Carol
> 
> I think that the comment that you responded to was inappropriate.
> Nevertheless, I think that you get into trouble when you make generalizations that are very broad in their scope.
> ...


which one. The one where she added no value and focused on herself again? And I do mean again...

/Paul


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> which one. The one where she added no value and focused on herself again? And I do mean again...
> 
> /Paul


You ever been to a trial and had someone ask how your dog did and as soon as you start to answer they cut you off and give you a 10 minute story about what their dog did?

My point is everyone in the game does it.

You guys all ganging up on Carol for expressing her opinion... But there were others on this thread you didn't go after quite so vigorously... What's they difference? If everyone here quits talking about themselves and their own experiences, this will be one quiet forum... JMHO


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

huntinman said:


> You ever been to a trial and had someone ask how your dog did and as soon as you start to answer they cut you off and give you a 10 minute story about what their dog did?
> 
> My point is everyone in the game does it.
> 
> You guys all ganging up on Carol for expressing her opinion... But there were others on this thread you didn't go after quite so vigorously... What's they difference? If everyone here quits talking about themselves and their own experiences, this will be one quiet forum... JMHO


Don't disagree, however, some never make a comment that doesn't involve them and their dogs. Opinions are like @&#^$&*@, everybodys got one and they all stink. Some people just like to show theirs every time they post. Not limited to Carol


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

huntinman said:


> You ever been to a trial and had someone ask how your dog did and as soon as you start to answer they cut you off and give you a 10 minute story about what their dog did?
> 
> My point is everyone in the game does it.
> 
> You guys all ganging up on Carol for expressing her opinion... But there were others on this thread you didn't go after quite so vigorously... What's they difference? If everyone here quits talking about themselves and their own experiences, this will be one quiet forum... JMHO


The other posters actually have seen lean Mac run, run against him or have successfully trained one of his offspring. If the contribution to what is good or bad to him and his line is "I can't train a dog" then it might be best to sit this one out. There are 10 years worth of message threads for noobs to post on, they don't have to post the same thing on every one

/Paul


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Also Marvin "saw" him when he was young and before he received Lardy/Dave Smith training. According to Smith, LM's best trait was his great desire to get the birds. According to Dave this stood out more than any other trait, yet he had many strong traits most good & some required work. And he is the most prolific producer of titled dogs by a wide margin with 157 titled offspring & counting. Honcho has 76, Trumarc's Zip Code 62 (Honcho progeny), Harley has 51, Super Tanker 51 (Honcho progeny), Cosmo 45, Chavez (a LM progeny) has 41, Super Chief 38, Trumarc's Hot Pursuit 36,Creek Robber 31, Chopper 28, Ray's Rascal 27, Code Blue 26, Shadow 26 (LM progeny), Patton 22, Carbon 20. These totals according to Good Dog Info or RFTN Performance Books. If I left out a great producer, my apologies.

And by the way, we seem to hear much more of San Joaquin Honcho than we do of Trumarc's Zip Code yet Cody had 444 AA pts! And to me the total AA points may be a better indicator of the greatness of a dog than winning a national, certainly the dog's consistency and longevity are proven with AA points.

Edited to add Cosmo with 45 titled offspring.......


----------



## Gunssmoke3217 (Feb 12, 2013)

I have an offspring of lean mac. And just like the first poster said. she is all go and nothing no.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Granddaddy said:


> And by the way, we seem to hear much more of San Joaquin Honcho than we do of Trumarc's Zip Code yet Cody had 444 AA pts! And to me the total AA points may be a better indicator of the greatness of a dog than winning a national, certainly the dog's consistency and longevity are proven with AA points.


Honcho's career ended shortly after he turned six yet he still won a National, a National finalist 2 other times, and won two Double Headers. Given good health and a normal competitive career I have no doubt that he would have won another National and exceeded 300 all-age points. Both Cody and Percy had their stud careers impacted by Honcho who was still producing puppies at 14.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Uh, the adults are talking.
> 
> /Paul


​I think comments like the above are unnecessary.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Granddaddy said:


> And he is the most prolific producer of titled dogs by a wide margin with 157 titled offspring & counting. Honcho has 76, Trumarc's Zip Code 62 (Honcho progeny), Harley has 51, Super Tanker 51 (Honcho progeny), Chavez (a LM progeny) has 41, Super Chief 38, Trumarc's Hot Pursuit 36,Creek Robber 31, Chopper 28, Ray's Rascal 27, Code Blue 26, Shadow 26 (LM progeny), Patton 22, Carbon 20. These totals according to Good Dog Info or RFTN Performance Books. If I left out a great producer, my apologies..


All good producing dogs. My only question when you look at producing sires, and titled offspring, is how many out of how many. I'm not sure you can rate a dog as the best producer, simply because he has the most preforming offspring without taking into account how many puppies he produced total. Some studs are bred a lot more, when your bred a lot more your going to have more preforming offspring, than a stud that isn't bred as much. I prefer a percentage when looking at studs, seems to equalize the field better.

So 157/ (total pups) x%, How many total offspring does LM even have, is there a count?


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> All good producing dogs. My only question when you look at producing sires, and titled offspring, is how many out of how many. I'm not sure you can rate a dog as the best producer, simply because he has the most preforming offspring without taking into account how many puppies he produced total. Some studs are bred a lot more, when your bred a lot more your going to have more preforming offspring, than a stud that isn't bred as much. I prefer a percentage when looking at studs, seems to equalize the field better.
> 
> So 157/ (total pups) x%, How many total offspring does LM even have, is there a count?


I have no idea what the total count was, and you're probably right about him being bred more than the others, but the numbers are so off the charts, that I don't think you can undervalue Lean Mac's contribution to the breed. It would be nice to know that percentage just for fun.

John


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Maxx sired twice the number of FC and/or AFC that Honcho sired but with the benefit of frozen semen which allowed him to be bred many more times and to many more FC-AFC titled bitches. It is not possible to compare stud records to pre semen freezing when the male met each and every female and breedings were limited by distance and weather averse to shipping bitches. Honcho lived much of his life in North Central Texas and few bitches were shipped in and out for 2-3 months each year. The highest number of breedings he ever had in one year was 35 which produced 33 litters.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> ​I think comments like the above are unnecessary.


I appreciate your opinion. Have a nice day.

/Paul


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Granddaddy said:


> Also Marvin "saw" him when he was young and before he received Lardy/Dave Smith training. According to Smith, LM's best trait was his great desire to get the birds. According to Dave this stood out more than any other trait, yet he had many strong traits most good & some required work.


Actually I saw a lot of him in the Derby & Junior - saw very little of him when he was with Remien, but got a lot of reports from folks closer to him than we were - & after the NARC, though transferred to Lardy, he came to MT twice a year to run @ Warm Springs where John judged & Nine Pipes, so saw a lot of him - when a dog repects their handler you do not see the visual expression of desire that you do from a dog that only respects themselves - to me he was just another of many very talented dogs running those trials, & not without his faults - before TSRC quit having the Labor day trial a person had an opportunity to go to MT & run some of the nicest grounds in the country @ Warm Springs & WMRC @ Nine Pipes - the thing that made them unique was no one was allowed to train on those grounds at the time - so all dogs started without a built in advantage - 



> And he is the most prolific producer of titled dogs by a wide margin with 157 titled offspring & counting. Honcho has 76, Trumarc's Zip Code 62 (Honcho progeny), Harley has 51, Super Tanker 51 (Honcho progeny), Chavez (a LM progeny) has 41, Super Chief 38, Trumarc's Hot Pursuit 36,Creek Robber 31, Chopper 28, Ray's Rascal 27, Code Blue 26, Shadow 26 (LM progeny), Patton 22, Carbon 20. These totals according to Good Dog Info or RFTN Performance Books. If I left out a great producer, my apologies.
> 
> And by the way, we seem to hear much more of San Joaquin Honcho than we do of Trumarc's Zip Code yet Cody had 444 AA pts! And to me the total AA points may be a better indicator of the greatness of a dog than winning a national, certainly the dog's consistency and longevity are proven with AA points.


Thanks for the info - 

I don't see River Oaks Corky nor Paha Sapa Chief on that list but do know that Code Blue's owner was not enamored with the stud scene so was very particular about who CB was bred to, at least Chad doesn't have to worry about a lot of CB pups out there . I do know that Honcho pups were very consistent, & some were much better than others. When you got one you had the potential of having what some on here call the "Complete Dog" which would include being able to do credible blinds pleasing to the eye  - When I was looking after losing a dog Honcho pups were no longer available & I was advised to look at his son Pursy as the stud - ended up with a Rippin Blue Thunder dog I liked a lot & enjoyed a level of success - again an owner who would not breed to just any dog so RBT was underbred -

IMO - the overbreeding of any dog does not contribute to the improvement of the breed - I believe the sport was better off before frozen semen - If for no other reason than their was greater choice in what one desired in a dog - A lot of good dogs deserving of a few pairings get overlooked in the process to breed & sell pups & hope some will turn out - We had relatively few FC-AFC combo's in MT when I started but seemed to have lots of reward in the AA stakes for a bunch of folks whose main interest was hunting, getting a quad jump shooting honkers on the Madison is as big a thrill as walking away with the blue in an AA stake - The 67 & 73 NC's originated there from what would be called backyard breedings - though the dogs had great backgrounds they will never be on any list of potent sires or dams though they were, look up Macushla of Rockmont as a potent dam -


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> All good producing dogs. My only question when you look at producing sires, and titled offspring, is how many out of how many. I'm not sure you can rate a dog as the best producer, simply because he has the most preforming offspring without taking into account how many puppies he produced total. Some studs are bred a lot more, when your bred a lot more your going to have more preforming offspring, than a stud that isn't bred as much. I prefer a percentage when looking at studs, seems to equalize the field better.
> 
> So 157/ (total pups) x%, How many total offspring does LM even have, is there a count?


This is not an answer to your question but the 1st year LM had pups on the derby list it was 18 or 19 with every bitch but one with a title either in front of or behind their name. There were no duplicate bitches which is ing.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> All good producing dogs. My only question when you look at producing sires, and titled offspring, is how many out of how many. I'm not sure you can rate a dog as the best producer, simply because he has the most preforming offspring without taking into account how many puppies he produced total. Some studs are bred a lot more, when your bred a lot more your going to have more preforming offspring, than a stud that isn't bred as much.* I prefer a percentage when looking at studs, seems to equalize the field better.*
> 
> So 157/ (total pups) x%, How many total offspring does LM even have, is there a count?


Good idea, but you'll likely never get those %'s on any stud, so I'm not sure how you'd be able to come from that angle when considering a stud. It is done on bitches because most performing bitches only have 2-3 litters at most but who knows how many times a good performing male is used as a stud. One thing for sure, the dog that wins a nat'l is very popular for a few years & if he produces champs then it carries on for a number of years, like LM popularity has. In that regard, I have been amazed at the leading sire of dogs entered in each of the Nat'l and Nat'l Am each year over the last 10 yrs. I believe that LM has been the leading sire of dogs entered in the nat'ls for every year since 2004 until last year - a rather amazing stat. BTW, I'm very familiar with one of those producing bitches, Tequila Sunrise IX. She had 100 AA pts and had 3 litters with titled dogs in each litter by a different sire each time - with 4 titled dogs in her last litter by Chopper and 10 titled offspring in all (1/2 of her offspring in total), with several more QAA. Now that is a producer!


----------



## Julie R. (Jan 13, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> All good producing dogs. My only question when you look at producing sires, and titled offspring, is how many out of how many. I'm not sure you can rate a dog as the best producer, simply because he has the most preforming offspring without taking into account how many puppies he produced total. Some studs are bred a lot more, when your bred a lot more your going to have more preforming offspring, than a stud that isn't bred as much. I prefer a percentage when looking at studs, seems to equalize the field better.
> 
> So 157/ (total pups) x%, How many total offspring does LM even have, is there a count?


I'm surprised there isn't any way to track stats on this for top producing retriever sires, the way they're done on thoroughbreds (racing TBs). They do leading sire lists for stallions and include the number of named foals/percentage of starters; percent winners from starters, percent graded stakes winners, etc. Maybe the AKC should study how the Jockey Club organizes and makes available its registration/recordation data.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Marvin S said:


> ....
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info -
> ...


Corky had 28 titled progeny (sorry, he should have been on the list with 20 or more), Paha Sapa Chief less than 20....and Macushla of Rockmont had 1 titled offspring according to GDI (but that's going way back, Marvin.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Julie R. said:


> I'm surprised there isn't any way to track stats on this for top producing retriever sires, the way they're done on thoroughbreds (racing TBs). They do leading sire lists for stallions and include the number of named foals/percentage of starters; percent winners from starters, percent graded stakes winners, etc. Maybe the AKC should study how the Jockey Club organizes and makes available its registration/recordation data.


For Labs someone could go look up & count the listing of all the progeny of LM, as an example, on GDI. But even doing that, it probably doesn't list all the pups. I have had talks with AKC officials to allow access to their stud book data and you'd have thought I was asking to sleep with someone'd daughter. But if the AKC would offer such data - even for $$, it would make them more money than just holding it so tightly.


----------



## Mark Littlejohn (Jun 16, 2006)

FWIW (and hardly scientific), but using OFA records, there were 228 litters sired by Maxx, with 863 dogs identified. Obviously not all pups were OFA registered and perhaps not all litters represented, that said these numbers suggest an average litter size of 3.78 dogs. If you assume that the average litter size was 5, then he sired 1140 pups; translating to approx 13% of his offspring titled. 

His first OFA-registered litter was born on 5/31/93 (x Candlewoods High Dollar Dana) and lists: Dust Devils Megabucks Maxine, Dust Devil's Shoot the Moon and FTHRNCH Slew to Slough.
The last was our own JollyDog's Gracie litter on 6/7/11.

Comparatively (using the same dubious OFA assumptions), Cody sired 163 litters x 5/litter = 815 pups (364 reg'd on OFA) = 7.6% titled offspring. 

Disclaimers to these numbers abound....


----------



## Charles C. (Nov 5, 2004)

Mark Littlejohn said:


> FWIW (and hardly scientific), but using OFA records, there were 228 litters sired by Maxx, with 863 dogs identified. Obviously not all pups were OFA registered and perhaps not all litters represented, that said these numbers suggest an average litter size of 3.78 dogs. If you assume that the average litter size was 5, then he sired 1140 pups; translating to approx 13% of his offspring titled.
> 
> His first OFA-registered litter was born on 5/31/93 (x Candlewoods High Dollar Dana) and lists: Dust Devils Megabucks Maxine, Dust Devil's Shoot the Moon and FTHRNCH Slew to Slough.
> The last was our own JollyDog's Gracie litter on 6/7/11.
> ...


I can't find the post, but I did a similar analysis a few years ago relating to the number of offspring in the OFA database compared to the number of titled offspring. Lean Mac's percentage was still actually very good (compared to other famous and contemporary studs) even when you consider the number of pups he produced. The notion that he only produced because of the number of times he was bred is pure hogwash.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Julie R. said:


> I'm surprised there isn't any way to track stats on this for top producing retriever sires,


It is strange because UKC keeps and publishes it's data (HRC-UKC titles (event with title break down) vs. # of UKC registered pups) on their top producing Studs and Dam yearly, and keeps a historical record on all their highest producers, all based on percentage. Seems like the AKC would as well particularly in their competitive events.

The kennel club would have to do it, they are the only ones that have the litter records and litter #'s, per sire or dam etc. Only a certain type of dog gets OFA results, they are skewed toward the higher performing dogs. Most OFA result are @ 2 years, many dogs would be washed out, most puppies are sold to nonpreformance home would never be bred and never get OFA results, if they weren't preforming. Heck go far enough back and no-one has OFA results.

I have no wish to under-rate studs, when it's obvious they have made an impact, but I don't wish to over-rate them either


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

prior to his passing, i corresponded several times with Mr. Scott via email about dogs sired by maxx. he was always insightful and "to the point" with all his thoughts and comments to me. i don't think Mr. Scott would mind me sharing with y'all the last email i recieved from him regarding maxx' progeny in its *entirety*:

"I'm pleased your pup is doing well! Be very judicious in your use of pressure.

Sherwin Scott"

i don't know if this is helpful, if it may represent a bit of what marvin references or if it adds any value to the discussion. but i will now retreat and allow the ongoing adult discussion to continue.;-)


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> ​I think comments like the above are unnecessary.


 I TOTALLY agree


----------



## coachmo (Apr 23, 2009)

It seems to me that anyone would be hard pressed to downplay the impact that Lean Mac had on the retriever world. He produced dogs that not only performed but he produced dogs that produced as well. There's a reason he was bred as much as he was.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

OK... a redirect from the OP, here... Thank you all. I have tried to read everything here (related to the issue at hand). My purpose in posting was not really idle curiosity. I will be getting a pup, money isn't a consideration, but I want to do as much of the training and handling as possible. Because of time constraints I've always had to rely heavily on pros. Now, (upon retirement) at last, I'll have the time, I still have my health and I have enough money to indulge myself a bit. 

So many of the breedings I've perused have Lean Mac in them. It seems to be just a matter of degree... whether there's a lot, a little, or something in between. I'm trying to figure out how much of a good thing I can manage. 

Maybe this is counter-intuitive but as a rank amateur I'm thinking I need a dog with lots of drive. The way I see it, I'm going to make some mistakes and confuse the dog from time to time. (Before you ask... I have a great training circle which includes a very good pro. Even so...) A dog that has any indifference in him will quit on me. 

Where am I going wrong? And would you recommend I stay away from this lineage or embrace it?


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

Embrace it. Absolutely embrace it. But look at both sides of the pedigree. And remember, once you've got that pup, whatever it is...or isn't...depends on you from that point forward. Too often, people are quick to blame pedigree for issues that were caused by poor handling/training.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

1tulip said:


> OK... a redirect from the OP, here... Thank you all. I have tried to read everything here (related to the issue at hand). My purpose in posting was not really idle curiosity. I will be getting a pup, money isn't a consideration, but I want to do as much of the training and handling as possible. Because of time constraints I've always had to rely heavily on pros. Now, (upon retirement) at last, I'll have the time, I still have my health and I have enough money to indulge myself a bit.
> 
> So many of the breedings I've perused have Lean Mac in them. It seems to be just a matter of degree... whether there's a lot, a little, or something in between. I'm trying to figure out how much of a good thing I can manage.
> 
> ...


Buy a puppy not a pedigree and from the best female you can find and/or afford.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

Well... I can afford a pretty good sum 'cause as anyone will tell you, the cost of the puppy is amortized over the next 10 to 12 years. And to Sharon's point, there is no washing this dog out... he/she/it is going to be my boon or bane (weal or woe, for better or for worse) for a long time. I won't really know whether the female is any good except on paper. And again... most of them have Lean Mac in their pedigree.

So Lean Mac and his progeny have a lot of drive. But do they readily fold. To use a term that's appeared here already... do they tend to have bottom?


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

You may be over thinking this, it is much less precise than investing in equities.


----------



## Socks (Nov 13, 2008)

My dog is like a fourth gen from LM so I don't know if he'd be considered progeny. He's got a lot of bottom, loves to train, lots of drive but has a great on/off switch. He's my first dog and used a trainer for the basics/transition and took over the training after his HR title. A fault might be that if he doesn't think you know what you're doing he'll become self employed. It took a lot of cold blinds for us to get that team work thing down pat for good blinds. We lined the last water blind for his HRCH title and went 6 for 6 for his MH. When I first took over the reins I couldn't even touch him or show any affection on test day otherwise he'd think he was in charge. Towards the end I could touch him to calm him down to let him know we were in it together. I don't know if that's in my head or reality, but that's the way I saw it. Sorry, but we don't run FT's, but this is what I see.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

You can take it out of them but can't put it in them. If you don't understand that, you haven't trained many dogs.

/Paul


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

I DID stipulate I'd not solo raised/trained/handled any dog from the get-go to title. And mentioned how much I'd be working with a great training circle which included a very successful pro. AND within the many training groups I've worked around over the last 40 years, I've seen one dog after another get off the truck and work their way through the day's assignment with varying degrees of enthusiasm or resistance. Among dogs trained by the same pro from basic through transition... some get to the line wanting the retrieve more than anything, and others stand there trying to figure out how to stay out of trouble. I want the former not the latter


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

Buy a good pup, from parents that have the traits you like, and then let the pup mature at its own rate. If your expectations are too strict, you may well be disappointed....give it time, let the pup mature, and don't be afraid to adapt as needed for the individual dog.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

EdA said:


> Buy a puppy not a pedigree and from the *best female *you can find and/or afford.


This; studs get around and get bred to everything. Good Females get bred very few times, they make the difference, in determining the great and good pups from a particular stud. It's good to look at who's in the pedigree, who provides drive and who provides balance. But that's all paper, better to buy a pup because of the dam, and what she actually is; because more often than not that is what will show up in the pup, regardless of what was on paper.

LM produced 157 out of 1000+
Hattie McBunn produced 7 FC out of 10-11


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

EdA said:


> Honcho's career ended shortly after he turned six yet he still won a National, a National finalist 2 other times, and won two Double Headers. Given good health and a normal competitive career I have no doubt that he would have won another National and exceeded 300 all-age points. Both Cody and Percy had their stud careers impacted by Honcho who was still producing puppies at 14.


Don't miss understand me. Honcho deserves all the credit he gets but seems Cody gets a little less than he earned.....can you imagine 444 AA point, wow!


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Granddaddy said:


> seems Cody gets a little less than he earned.....can you imagine 444 AA point, wow!


Perhaps there aren't enough people left who saw him and how unbelieveably consistent he was, he certainly had plenty of admirers in his day. That 444 and Judy did not run 20+ field trials a year and later in his career she became infatuated with cutting horses. He was very very smart, Judy often said that he understood field trials, he just had a sense of where the birds were and he was blessed with a great build and good health. His last field trial was in the Fall when he was 11 1/2, he was 2nd in the Open and won the Amateur and completed his career having qualified for every National for which he was eligible since he was 2, a total of 21. He also won 5 Double Headers and was a National Finalist 5 times in addtion to his NAFC in 1984. He was also High Point Open dog twice.


----------



## bjoiner (Feb 25, 2008)

Granddaddy said:


> Don't miss understand me. Honcho deserves all the credit he gets but seems Cody gets a little less than he earned.....can you imagine 444 AA point, wow!


If all the points at 5 point wins, that's over 11 wins per year over an eight year career. Unbelievable.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

EdA said:


> Perhaps there aren't enough people left who saw him and how unbelieveably consistent he was, he certainly had plenty of admirers in his day. That 444 and Judy did not run 20+ field trials a year and later in his career she became infatuated with cutting horses. He was very very smart, Judy often said that he understood field trials, he just had a sense of where the birds were and he was blessed with a great build and good health. His last field trial was in the Fall when he was 11 1/2, he was 2nd in the Open and won the Amateur and completed his career having qualified for every National for which he was eligible since he was 2, a total of 21. He also won 5 Double Headers and was a National Finalist 5 times in addtion to his NAFC in 1984. He was also High Point Open dog twice.


That is simply amazing. 

Great dog + great handler + no injuries = Great record

Ted


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

And for a more recent dog, take a look at Creek Robber. Auggie had 400+ All Age points and missed plenty of time with injuries. Especially later in his career.


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

and then there is Corky.....505.5


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

My experience is the Lean Mac offspring are just a tab bit more tractable than the Cosmo kids. 

/Paul


----------



## Purpledawg (Jul 16, 2006)

*the key to your best success*



EdA said:


> Buy a puppy not a pedigree and from the best female you can find and/or afford.


as in everything experience speaks volumes...

since you have time...do test drives... observe those bitch lines and see if they are dogs you can live with...as an amateur...


----------



## helencalif (Feb 2, 2004)

huntinman said:


> And for a more recent dog, take a look at Creek Robber. Auggie had 400+ All Age points and missed plenty of time with injuries. Especially later in his career.


Add to that... Auggie and Carbon competed in the Open and the Amateur at many same trials. Then Chopper started running in the same all age stakes. At the same time was Fargo and some darn good bitches who took blue ribbons home, too. Auggie's all age points are simply amazing. If he didn't win, he placed. Remarkable, remarkable record.


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

Wish my Auggie puppy who was out of a Hattie McBunn daughter woulda worked out more betta.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

helencalif said:


> Add to that... Auggie and Carbon competed in the Open and the Amateur at many same trials. Then Chopper started running in the same all age stakes. At the same time was Fargo and some darn good bitches who took blue ribbons home, too. Auggie's all age points are simply amazing. If he didn't win, he placed. Remarkable, remarkable record.


There is significant competition every weekend in every part of the country. That you happen to know the local dogs at that time in no way diminishes the accomplishments of those that you did not know or never saw.


----------



## cakaiser (Jul 12, 2007)

EdA said:


> There is significant competition every weekend in every part of the country. That you happen to know the local dogs at that time in no way diminishes the accomplishments of those that you did not know or never saw.


How nice. Someone finally said it.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

EdA said:


> There is significant competition every weekend in every part of the country. That you happen to know the local dogs at that time in no way diminishes the accomplishments of those that you did not know or never saw.


Ed, I didn't see the part in Helen's post that diminished any other dogs??


----------



## Paul Frey (Jun 15, 2012)

I found out this weekend that Lean Mac is my 11 month old BLF's great great grandfather. There are other really good dogs in her pedigree (Hattie Mc Bunn, High Tec CEO). I will never trial this dog, but I enjoy looking at lineage and pedigrees. You could have knocked me over with a feather when I saw Lean Mac in her pedigree.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

huntinman said:


> Ed, I didn't see the part in Helen's post that diminished any other dogs??


Neither did I. I think it's total appropriate to brag a bit about dogs you admire from running against them over a period of time. Some of my old favorites from our circuit are Shooter, Maxx, Ritz, Carbon, Chopper and of course Auggie. I'm sure if I lived in another area there are dogs their that I would love to acknowledge. It's kind of like a Bulls fan bragging on Michael Jordan, a Lakers fan can still point out how good Magic Johnson was without putting down Jordan.


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

It might be harder to find a field pedigree that does not have Lean Mac


----------



## helencalif (Feb 2, 2004)

EdA said:


> There is significant competition every weekend in every part of the country. That you happen to know the local dogs at that time in no way diminishes the accomplishments of those that you did not know or never saw.


I know there is significant competition every weekend in every part of the country. The subject of Auggie's record was mentioned and I just added my 2-cents to it. Nothing I said was meant to diminish any dog any where. It was my good fortune to attend the trials on the west coast in which Carbon, Auggie, Chopper, Fargo, some good bitches, and others also dominated.


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

John Robinson said:


> Neither did I. I think it's total appropriate to brag a bit about dogs you admire from running against them over a period of time. Some of my old favorites from our circuit are Shooter, Maxx, Ritz, Carbon, Chopper and of course Auggie. I'm sure if I lived in another area there are dogs their that I would love to acknowledge. It's kind of like a Bulls fan bragging on Michael Jordan, a Lakers fan can still point out how good Magic Johnson was without putting down Jordan.


I like that analogy. I am not familiar with any of the West Coast or Western States dogs, although I have read their records. Here in the Mid west and Upper Midwest there are many who don't venture far from home, but, do winter in the South. We can brag on Lottie, Tank, etc., but a truly great dog was Don Wolf's Stormy or Mickey and Linden Strandberg
Danny or Mitch Patterson's Desi the Anderson's Mindy all national caliber dogs, some finalists, some double header winners, mostly forgotten out of the MidWest. Many 100 plus dogs, but, Not National title winners.


----------



## metalone67 (Apr 3, 2009)

Hence the reason for so many titled offspring. I do believe that if you were to move Honcho and Super Tanker into the now with the number of people running HT and FT they would have as many if not more titled offspring than Lean Mac.

How many of you would be all over a Honcho or Tank pup if they where still with us? 
I know I would.


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

metalone67 said:


> Hence the reason for so many titled offspring. I do believe that if you were to move Honcho and Super Tanker into the now with the number of people running HT and FT they would have as many if not more titled offspring than Lean Mac.
> 
> How many of you would be all over a Honcho or Tank pup if they where still with us?
> I know I would.


No Maxx in the bunch I mentioned and with the exception of one all amateur trained and handled!


----------

