# Anti Lean Mac Breeding



## Gregg0211 (Feb 11, 2015)

I keep seeing posts from people that state, "no Lean Mac" in the lines. I realize he has been prolific in breeding, but why or what is the reasoning for not wanting him in the line?


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Ever see him run? I did, numerous times.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

A LOT of handlers of that era probably thought they saw him run too many times.....


----------



## Gregg0211 (Feb 11, 2015)

Marvin S said:


> Ever see him run? I did, numerous times.


No sir, I did not have that privilege. Ive only been messing with Labs for HT and lower level FT for about 8 years. There are a number of the older famous dogs that I would have loved to watch run, even on video. Actually had a conversation with an older FTer last weekend and the topic of Creeping came up and Cosmos was their example. Id love to sit with a group of long time FT handlers and just listen about the dogs that kinda shaped the modern AA dogs. If anyone reads this and wants to Share, Im all ears!


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

I am not sure where Marvin’s opinion comes from but Maxx was a great dog. He infused the breed with some genetic issues but make no mistake he was a generational dog and I have lived with a couple of generational dogs with N in front of their name.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

EdA said:


> I am not sure where Marvin’s opinion comes from but Maxx was a great dog. He infused the breed with some genetic issues but make no mistake he was a generational dog and I have lived with a couple of generational dogs with N in front of their name.


I have heard the genetic thing from many I respect their opinion. We had a very good 
Derby field on the coast when he ran, Code Blue among those, he was not outstanding. 
He developed a reputation that many judges favored. Rather than generational I would 
go with reputational, read the book Stud about horses to recognize how he was marketed. 

Anyone who favors a balanced dog would not have accepted his water blinds & at a 
couple of AA stakes I saw him come apart on big water. If you like a dog crabbing down 
to the water on a water blind he would be your dog & he threw that in his very expensive 
pups out of really good females.


----------



## Gregg0211 (Feb 11, 2015)

EdA said:


> I am not sure where Marvin’s opinion comes from but Maxx was a great dog. He infused the breed with some genetic issues but make no mistake he was a generational dog and I have lived with a couple of generational dogs with N in front of their name.


I was hoping you might answer. I guess the best dog that Ive ever seen in person was Ali. It blew me away. There are tons of dogs Id like to see now, maybe at the next NRC.


----------



## Gregg0211 (Feb 11, 2015)

Marvin S said:


> I have heard the genetic thing from many I respect their opinion. We had a very good
> Derby field on the coast when he ran, Code Blue among those, he was not outstanding.
> He developed a reputation that many judges favored. Rather than generational I would
> go with reputational, read the book Stud about horses to recognize how he was marketed.
> ...


So I have heard that Cosmo was a vocal, massive creeper, any reason he doesnt get the same opinion from you. Are there other famous dogs that you have negative feel for? They all have quirks, just wondering.


----------



## Daren Galloway (Jun 28, 2012)

Gregg0211 said:


> So I have heard that Cosmo was a vocal, massive creeper, any reason he doesnt get the same opinion from you. Are there other famous dogs that you have negative feel for? They all have quirks, just wondering.


Marvin has nothing but negative feelings judging by his RTF posts.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Marvin S said:


> I have heard the genetic thing from many I respect their opinion. So your mystery unidentified opinion "sources" cancel out the unprecednted accomplishments of LM both in the field and the breeding shed?  We had a very good
> Derby field on the coast when he ran, Code Blue among those, he was not outstanding. The ..."NOT OUTSTANDING"...LeanMac only managed to scratch out 120+ Derby points & was really exposed while running against that... "very good Derby field on the coast"
> He developed a reputation that many judges favored. Rather than generational I would
> go with reputational,  so there was a huge conspiracy amongst the hundreds of judges across two countries who awarded LM 100's of Derby points and AA points and awarded him 4 National Championships and allowed him to get called back in 125+ CONSECUTIVE National series. Gotcha Marv!!Gee, thanks Marv for pulling back the curtain & exposing the truth about that worthless cur, and all of the dishonest/stupid judges involved in this nefarious conspiracy read the book Stud about horses to recognize how he was marketed. Gotcha, so truly a case of...."All sizzle no steak"
> ...


Your insights are always entertaining

Have a nice day Marv.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Gregg0211 said:


> So I have heard that Cosmo was a vocal, massive creeper, any reason he doesnt get the same opinion from you. Are there other famous dogs that you have negative feel for? They all have quirks, just wondering.


Marv has some pretty strong opinions on Cosmo as well as Lean Mac.
.
Both Mr Olson the owner of Cosmo & Mr Scott the owner of Lean Mac were known not to suffer fools lightly.
Coincidence???


----------



## Gregg0211 (Feb 11, 2015)

mjh345 said:


> Marv has some pretty strong opinions on Cosmo as well as Lean Mac.
> .
> Both Mr Olson the owner of Cosmo & Mr Scott the owner of Lean Mac were known not to suffer fools lightly.
> Coincidence???


I like it. Id love to know the strengths and weaknesses of these great dogs, also why be negative about such accomplished dogs. Surely EVERY judge they ran under wasnt in the pocket of the owner!


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Marvin S said:


> I have heard the genetic thing from many I respect their opinion. We had a very good
> Derby field on the coast when he ran, Code Blue among those, he was not outstanding.
> He developed a reputation that many judges favored. Rather than generational I would
> go with reputational, read the book Stud about horses to recognize how he was marketed.
> ...


I’ll not waste time with a debate but having judged him a couple of times and run against him I never saw any of that. He did win two Nationals, one with Sherwin handling him. He sired some wonderfully talented dogs so count me in the positive on Maxx but not so on Cosmo whose behavior I found off putting. Lost in the Lean Mac discussions who give Lardy much of the credit fail to know or remember that he was NAFC before Mike ever touched him, for that you can credit Don Remien.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Gregg0211 said:


> I like it. Id love to know the strengths and weaknesses of these great dogs, also why be negative about such accomplished dogs. Surely EVERY judge they ran under wasnt in the pocket of the owner!


I would never dance on a dead person’s grave but Maxx did not win based on Sherwin’s likeability, Marvin’s recall notwithstanding he was a very talented dog.


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

"Pro-" Maxx-imum retro rocketship - top and bottom. Only "N" in front of her name so far would be for NASA-rated coefficient... And the test flights (training) are a joyride of epic proportion, land and water, marks and Exocet and (for Marv) torpedo blinds--










MG


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

Marc, I can't say for sure I remember the exact post and it may be a "rural rtf legend", but someone said that Marvin once posted that Maxx was so watershy he would crab to his bowl to drink and was administered I.V. fluid replacement twice a week to avoid dehydration. Does anyone remember that post?


----------



## Kyle Garris (Oct 27, 2005)

Gregg0211 said:


> I was hoping you might answer. I guess the best dog that Ive ever seen in person was Ali. It blew me away. There are tons of dogs Id like to see now, maybe at the next NRC.


Not to hijack the thread, so feel free to message me, but I would love to hear more about Ali. He’s one I always want to hear more about.
Thanks!


----------



## Bryan Parks (Aug 19, 2015)

I know some people just want something different. There seem to be a group of people looking for older lines and/or pedigrees that are just different

It doesn't take long to see the tremendous positive impact he had on the game with just a quick search. The amount of amazing dogs he produced directly or down the line from him is extremely impressive. 

I personally don't care if he's in my pedigrees and if you are buying nice FT breedings he's most likely going to be in there.


----------



## mjiorle (Mar 11, 2008)

I had the pleasure of pre-national training at I believe LM's last NRC in 2000 (Ardmore, OK) Which by the way was won by his son NFC "Prize". The dog I was running for a friend in pre-national training was also a LM bitch that had a pretty nice career with 95 AA points, a double header, and a derby win and Open 2nd in the same trial. Also open wins with multiple handlers. All Amateur trained and handled by someone who worked full time. I have owned a few sired by LM, and have been around many that he sired in training. Needless to say, I am in agreement with Dr Ed


----------



## Gregg0211 (Feb 11, 2015)

Kyle Garris said:


> Not to hijack the thread, so feel free to message me, but I would love to hear more about Ali. He’s one I always want to hear more about.
> Thanks!


What I saw from him was pure power and desire. The kind of dog that threw gravel on marks as well as blinds. He had that "IT" factor that folks talk about. When he walked to the line, he commanded attention. Just a wonderful animals to watch. I have a female out of him that I wouldnt take anything for.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

roseberry said:


> Marc, I can't say for sure I remember the exact post and it may be a "rural rtf legend", but someone said that Marvin once posted that Maxx was so watershy he would crab to his bowl to drink and was administered I.V. fluid replacement twice a week to avoid dehydration. Does anyone remember that post?


Marvin says lots of stuff....


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Gregg0211 said:


> I keep seeing posts from people that state, "no Lean Mac" in the lines. I realize he has been prolific in breeding, but why or what is the reasoning for not wanting him in the line?


From a breeders point of view, LeanMac was appearing many times in a pedigree because he had many talented sons and grandsons but personally i never found it troublesome genetically. Yes he was an EIC carrier but that could be managed, but at least with the lines I was using, nothing else reared it’s head, other than gay type tails. There were other individuals you really had to watch if you even doubled up on. I think that is where the “no LeanMac” came in. IMHO of course


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

EdA said:


> I’ll not waste time with a debate but having judged him a couple of times and run against him I never saw any of that. He did win two Nationals, one with Sherwin handling him. He sired some wonderfully talented dogs so count me in the positive on Maxx but not so on Cosmo whose behavior I found off putting. Lost in the Lean Mac discussions who give Lardy much of the credit fail to know or remember that he was NAFC before Mike ever touched him, for that you can credit Don Remien.


A little more history - LM was owned throughout his Junior/Derby years by Jock McLean, from around Vernon, BC & not a hotbed of retrieverdom.
LM received early training from Dennis Robbins, a local pro out of Vancouver, BC. Jock was new to the game & so winged a lot of what he did. He
also paid attention & was quick to pick up the basic stuff. Jock was a powder monkey so we talked a lot of bags of ANFO, primacord & shape charges.
The are around Vernon is a lot of granite so his trade was busy, Most of LM's Junior points came from Canada, 2 Juniors at each trial & lesser
competition unless the dogs from the states came up. As I said, when he came to the states he was one of several good Derby dogs. Anyone who has
been around the game awhile remembers that Lottie was just out of the Derby & many a reference was made about real Derby points. Sherwin Scott
had a habit of buying High Point dogs, my only contact with him until the LM purchase was at a trial I judged in ND where Marathon Man won a DH,
another story. I remember him crabbing his way to the Water Blind at the Sun Valley NA & when I talked to folks from where he was based they said that
was par for the course for him. I also witnessed a pup out of LM/Ferrucci bitch that did the same crab down to the water on a repeat blind. As I said, he
blew a lot of bubbles on the 3rd bird of a quad at Warm Springs, MT & never went for the 4th bird. I never judged LM, but I did witness the confab where
SS moved the dog to Lardy @ Sun Valley dress up night.

As for Cosmo, I day trained with Jim Gonia all through Cosmo's early days. Terry Olson & I conversed a lot at trials, his one comment about working
being his mistake of leaving his state surveyors job in a fit of anger & burning his bridges. He stuffed candy machines for a living & that probably went to
paying his training bills. He & Cathie worked very hard to keep the local RC going. We're having a conversation & the subject comes to young dogs. He
notes that I may have a good looking prospect & then it disappears & I tell him why. We're at the Boise Trial, Cosmo is 14 months & not quite ready but
he's entered. He goes out in the 2nd series, Terry starts grumbling & I tell him that if he wants to sell I would be interested. The conversation ended. I
later told Jim about that & how lucky I was to not have been taken up on my offer. Jim's reply "You would not have allowed that to happen." Terry could
not control the dog to run him, his AFC was achieved by a DH. You did not want to go into water marks with Cosmo even up as you would lose. I judged
Cosmo several times. It varied from not finding the go-bird to not making it to the 2nd series.

Now if some of you diaper clad wanna-be's want to weigh in have at it. That's what I saw.


----------



## rble7117 (Jul 23, 2020)

Lardy did mentioned in trt2 that he cleaned up LM with tune up drills. I think it was not LM itself that was the problem but past experiences that caused it.


----------



## Judd (Nov 29, 2012)

Marvin S said:


> A little more history - LM was owned throughout his Junior/Derby years by Jock McLean, from around Vernon, BC & not a hotbed of retrieverdom.
> LM received early training from Dennis Robbins, a local pro out of Vancouver, BC. Jock was new to the game & so winged a lot of what he did. He
> also paid attention & was quick to pick up the basic stuff. Jock was a powder monkey so we talked a lot of bags of ANFO, primacord & shape charges.
> The are around Vernon is a lot of granite so his trade was busy, Most of LM's Junior points came from Canada, 2 Juniors at each trial & lesser
> ...


Ever thought maybe Lean Mac’s blind attitude was man made through training?…..


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Judd said:


> Ever thought maybe Lean Mac’s blind attitude was man made through training?…..


If you want to look at it that way recognize that both trainers where the issue arose were acknowledged experts.


----------



## mjiorle (Mar 11, 2008)

Then surely in your tenure and wisdom, you can recognize that not every dog responds the same to every trainers methods. (Even some really good trainers)


----------



## birddogn_tc (Apr 24, 2015)

Marvin S said:


> Now if some of you diaper clad wanna-be's want to weigh in have at it. That's what I saw.


 So, if you were to buy a dog today, I guess you would only buy a dog with no Lean Mac in the pedigree?


----------



## Judd (Nov 29, 2012)

Marvin S said:


> If you want to look at it that way recognize that both trainers where the issue arose were acknowledged experts.


Acknowledged experts doesn’t mean anything to me. Anyone can screw a dog up especially on blinds especially when applying pressure. It isn’t cookie cutter.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

birddogn_tc said:


> So, if you were to buy a dog today, I guess you would only buy a dog with no Lean Mac in the pedigree?


The 1st thing I would do is watch a lot of dogs. I would talk to people who ran dogs that I liked. Then I would 
look at the pedigrees. Then I would see if I could get on the list. No dogs with yellow eyes!


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

mjiorle said:


> Then surely in your tenure and wisdom, you can recognize that not every dog responds the same to every trainers methods. (Even some really good trainers)


No quarrel with what you post. There is a standard of performance all dogs that play in the AA stakes need to meet. 
When they do not meet that they become someone's reclamation project. I am just posting that the folks that witnessed 
the issues were people who knew the standard requirement. In the AA stakes the standard is set by the best dog. One 
always likes to own that dog.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Marvin S said:


> A little more history - LM was owned throughout his Junior/Derby years by Jock McLean, from around Vernon, BC & not a hotbed of retrieverdom.
> LM received early training from Dennis Robbins, a local pro out of Vancouver, BC. Jock was new to the game & so winged a lot of what he did. He
> also paid attention & was quick to pick up the basic stuff. Jock was a powder monkey so we talked a lot of bags of ANFO, primacord & shape charges.
> The are around Vernon is a lot of granite so his trade was busy, Most of LM's Junior points came from Canada, 2 Juniors at each trial & lesser
> ...


So LM and Cosmo both had quality trainers but neither dog’s deficiencies were trainer related? Or was Maxx a result of over training and Cosmo under training? So Maxx perceived problems were inherent in his DNA but Cosmo’s were not? Having a bit of trouble following the logic.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

EdA said:


> So LM and Cosmo both had quality trainers but neither dog’s deficiencies were trainer related? Or was Maxx a result of over training and Cosmo under training? So Maxx perceived problems were inherent in his DNA but Cosmo’s were not? Having a bit of trouble following the logic.


I don't believe that's what I posted.


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

"They even had to turn his back to the water to make his picture!" - Marvin


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Deleted moved to appropriate post


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Marvin S said:


> I don't believe that's what I posted.


My cognitive abilities are still fairly good, you may not have used direct language but I think your implications were obvious. Cosmo won his first Derby under me, he was impressive but at the time I thought he didn’t need to run any more Derbys. LM’s Derby career was/is meaningless to me, I would love another run with FC-AFC Trumarc’s Lean Cuisine who won multiple Double Headers with different handlers and finished multiple Nationals while compiling 141 All Age points 19 All Age wins and all the while producing 12 titled offspring. Your Honor, I rest my case!


----------



## birddogn_tc (Apr 24, 2015)

EdA said:


> My cognitive abilities are still fairly good, you may not have used direct language but I think your implications were obvious. Cosmo won his first Derby under me, he was impressive but at the time I thought he didn’t need to run any more Derbys. LM’s Derby career was/is meaningless to me, I would love another run with FC-AFC Trumarc’s Lean Cuisine who won multiple Double Headers with different handlers and finished multiple Nationals while compiling 141 All Age points 19 All Age wins and all the while producing 12 titled offspring. Your Honor, I rest my case!


Not to mention multiple titled siblings


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

EdA said:


> you may not have used direct language but I think your implications were obvious.


One thing I have learned from politics is: if you make the post long enough you give everyone an 
opportunity to derive their own conclusion from the part they read.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Gregg0211 said:


> I keep seeing posts from people that state, "no Lean Mac" in the lines. I realize he has been prolific in breeding, *but why or what is the reasoning for not wanting him in the line?*


Highly entertaining responses .
It could be , that with prolific dogs ,those people who state "No x in the lines" ,may well already have that line in their pedigree and wish to avoid line breeding or avoid low COI ?


----------



## Gregg0211 (Feb 11, 2015)

EdA said:


> My cognitive abilities are still fairly good, you may not have used direct language but I think your implications were obvious. Cosmo won his first Derby under me, he was impressive but at the time I thought he didn’t need to run any more Derbys. LM’s Derby career was/is meaningless to me, I would love another run with FC-AFC Trumarc’s Lean Cuisine who won multiple Double Headers with different handlers and finished multiple Nationals while compiling 141 All Age points 19 All Age wins and all the while producing 12 titled offspring. Your Honor, I rest my case!


Id love to sit and hear stories about the history of the great dogs. I will never be more than a lower level Q/MH kinda guy, but the history of how it got here is amazing!


----------



## Gregg0211 (Feb 11, 2015)

polmaise said:


> Highly entertaining responses .
> It could be , that with prolific dogs ,those people who state "No x in the lines" ,may well already have that line in their pedigree and wish to avoid line breeding or avoid low COI ?


Its interesting to me to hear the stories from those who were there. Id never heard LM was crabby on blinds or water specifically. Cosmo is well know for creeping. Not that it matters to a novice like me, but Id love to know the perceived quirks of the greats. I hope this thread keeps evolving.


----------



## Flyntwt (Mar 1, 2021)

Ok, I’ve got one for EdA and Marvin and the other guys that will forget more than I’ll ever know….what dogs do you remember that were great dogs, but never got the titles or acclaim you think they deserved/were capable of getting?


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

Marvin, you know I love you, and I've posted twice to say nothing, which is what I know about this subject.

I do value your willingness to post your recollections and opinions candidly from the arena of that period in history just as I do the thoughts and opinions of others who saw things differently. 

I know you didn't take my attempts at bustin' on you seriously. Just know I aspire to your standard and am always inspired by you to continue to refine my own crochety old man schtick!


----------



## J. Marti (May 2, 2014)

polmaise said:


> Highly entertaining responses .
> It could be , that with prolific dogs ,those people who state "No x in the lines" ,may well already have that line in their pedigree and wish to avoid line breeding or avoid low COI ?


This can be so accurate and true in many breeds. In my breed (curly-coated retrievers) every single living dog IN THE WORLD goes back to a UK BIS winner from the 1980s. He is so prevalent in pedigrees, he sometimes has the blood percentage of nearly a parent in litters being born this year! Some litters are almost like breeding the dog to himself. That type of breeding just cannot sustain a breed with small numbers. There are frozen semen straws from 4 different dogs that do not have this dog in their pedigree--but any bitch available to breed to one of these 4 "frozen" dogs still has the prevalent dog in HER pedigree. So, you can understand the dilemma and perhaps understand why, as Polmaise said above, one of the reasons a breeder might try to avoid a dog in a pedigree is not any slam against the dog but a concern for the overall genetic diversity of an entire breed. For some of us in rarer breeds, that dilemma is very, very real and I think breeding into a huge loss of genetic diversity can occur without breeders realizing it is occurring.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

J. Marti said:


> This can be so accurate and true in many breeds. In my breed (curly-coated retrievers) every single living dog IN THE WORLD goes back to a UK BIS winner from the 1980s. He is so prevalent in pedigrees, he sometimes has the blood percentage of nearly a parent in litters being born this year! Some litters are almost like breeding the dog to himself. That type of breeding just cannot sustain a breed with small numbers. There are frozen semen straws from 4 different dogs that do not have this dog in their pedigree--but any bitch available to breed to one of these 4 "frozen" dogs still has the prevalent dog in HER pedigree. So, you can understand the dilemma and perhaps understand why, as Polmaise said above, one of the reasons a breeder might try to avoid a dog in a pedigree is not any slam against the dog but a concern for the overall genetic diversity of an entire breed. For some of us in rarer breeds, that dilemma is very, very real and I think breeding into a huge loss of genetic diversity can occur without breeders realizing it is occurring.


If the AKC was concerned about genetic diversity it should never have approved the breeding of bitches to males who had been dead for decades. Frozen semen is how you save a species from extinction or box yourself in genetically with a healthy population.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Flyntwt said:


> Ok, I’ve got one for EdA and Marvin and the other guys that will forget more than I’ll ever know….what dogs do you remember that were great dogs, but never got the titles or acclaim you think they deserved/were capable of getting?


Greatness is achieved in the field in competition, everything else is idle speculation. There have been some potentially great dogs whose careers were cut short by injury, disease, death, and owner circumstances. For your interest I can give you one very good example, Spring Farms Lucky, Super Chief’s brother the Belmonts bought. He was a powerhouse and Auggie could not run him so he gave him to Rex Carr. Judy got to run him in a few field trials and always recalls him as one of her all time favorites that includes her two National Champions.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

duplicate, deleted


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Flyntwt said:


> Ok, I’ve got one for EdA and Marvin and the other guys that will forget more than I’ll ever know….what dogs do you remember that were great dogs, but never got the titles or acclaim you think they deserved/were capable of getting?


You may have saw this more in the days before freeways & limited trials, 
not so much today. 


roseberry said:


> I do value your willingness to post your recollections and opinions candidly
> from the arena of that period in history just as I do the thoughts and opinions
> of others who saw things differently.


John, You need to recognize that the Dr Ed & I are from different circles in this sport. 
When you can walk through a crowd at a trial & not be noticed you have achieved
the ultimate in this sport. I can, EdA can't.


----------



## birddogn_tc (Apr 24, 2015)

Marvin S said:


> You may have saw this more in the days before freeways & limited trials,
> not so much today.
> 
> John, You need to recognize that the Dr Ed & I are from different circles in this sport.
> ...


You lost me.


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

I was at Ardmore ! I saw Mac fail the wb , I saw Prize win the National! Lean Mac is not the only great dog but if he’s not in your pedigree others have a better chance. Great dog ; not the only one but a great dog 
Let the debate continue!
Dk


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

birddogn_tc said:


> You lost me.


As Lanse Brown said of my wife & I: "What you see is what you see"


----------



## PalouseDogs (Mar 28, 2012)

There are people who avoid the popular sire of the day to avoid the future problems of a narrow gene pool. All dogs (and people and rabbits and cheetahs, etc.) carry some rare deleterious genes. They don't become a problem until they are so common they start showing up in a lot of puppies. If the sire was popular enough, by then, it's hard to avoid the bad genes he carried. If you are lucky, the problem will be a single gene defect with a genetic test. If the issue is a multi-gene trait with a probable environmental influence (like early-onset cancer or bloat or Addison's or any number of other problems), well, then...


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

polmaise said:


> Highly entertaining responses .
> It could be , that with prolific dogs ,those people who state "No x in the lines" ,may well already have that line in their pedigree and wish to avoid line breeding or avoid low COI ?


Thing is, Robert, they (LM progeny) were bred and born to run/win FTs. I'm still a relative newcomer (albeit per Marv a Depends diaper baby) compared to other eminence in this thread. But every Lean Mac offspring I've trained with (and that were trained by amateurs) over the last 15 years has been competitive in All Age stakes by two years old. I really had no choice, nor did I look a gift horse in the proverbial gob, in my getting "Secretariat Jr," she of the low COI. And I can tell you without qualm or irony, she was capable of running (and finishing) opens by six months old. Not because I pushed her, but because, my gosh, the talent level for these Lean Mac chill'uns doesn't have to be developed, it has to be tamed, almost domesticated, all over again. Yet I've not "gone into battle" with her because the taming, the "re-domesticating" continues. And what a Zen time to be had in training, which as you know, many of us Yanks are almost a cult in coming to it.

On the other hand, my yearling, the yell'un similar to y'orn (Goose?) on one side of the pedigree with the British Lean Mac (Bracken) from the frequent X'ing covering yall's bitches, got me a dual forecast (daily double to my fellow 'Mericans), with LM a couple generations back on bottom. And wow, training partners have marveled at how calmly she takes things, to and fro the line, like my 95% British gal recently passed, but with a ton of go and dime-dropping eyes for marking which comes from somewhere, and I'm betting it's LM (and Bracken-nick) affiliated.

Really, I think the disfavor with Lean Mac began about the time EIC arrived, and there was concern on that going forward. Plus, flavour of the month and all that hoopla, had carried on with LM breeding well into flavour of the decade for both FTs and hunt tests (and uh, World Obedience champion, for that matter at Crufts, which you will remember bedazzled the Brummies and other Lab aficionados who were spellbound at a wild-haired, supercharged 'Merican field-bred dog could do under handler's marching orders). So up to the present, Lean Mac's infusing pedigrees went to the back of the bus, usually 3-4 gens back. Flavour of the month, then decade, got diffuse and little used at that. Our Marv saw what he saw, no disputing, I saw what I saw - and have at hand, and it's got me over the moon for FTs










and hopefully for many moons to come.

And what an "inbred," in-house rivalry I've got going with a couple of 70-pound "cousinly" LM ladies--










Off to run 6 a.m. corn and bean field blinds 'fore my training partners get back from S'C'lina with the skinny* on the NRC--

MG

*Not skinny *water*, Marv - that's a judging faux pas on a blind, right?


----------



## Bryan Parks (Aug 19, 2015)

He only sired like 15 National Champions in Canada and the US, who would want one of those? Am I right...

Not to mention other dogs like Kweezy, who would want a dog like that? She only whelped a dozen or so FCs and a NFC...


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Bryan Parks said:


> He only sired like 15 National Champions in Canada and the US, who would want one of those? Am I right...
> 
> Not to mention other dogs like Kweezy, who would want a dog like that? She only whelped a dozen or so FCs and a NFC...


So you are saying he was bred a lot because his pups sold. 

If my memory serves me, the 1st year his pups appeared on the Derby list it was 19 with 18 different titled dams. 
Carroll's Black Velvet being among those dams & a very good dog in her own right. 

Your chart lists NFC twice.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

The No Lean Mac thing, at least when I'm researching has to do with how much he was bred; yes he has the most titled offspring but he also has the most offspring period. As with other highly used males (cosmo, and the next one I bet people will be staying away from Grady) It's not that there's anything overly wrong with the dogs just that they were used so much. So that if you go into the pedigree of different dogs, LM is bred to LM is bred to LM and that tree don't fork as they say. Now sometimes this can be good it allows for certain positive traits to get uniform in the population; but it also allows for bad traits to line up as well. Genetically speaking recessive traits tend to be negative when they are overly expressed EIC CNM etc. These diseases trace their roots back to these highly bred dogs, where the crossing back and forth of one sire resulted in overly used genetics. EIC CNM are not as bad anymore as we have a test for them, but that does leave one to wonder what other little recessives are waiting to line up, because of lack of genetic diversity. Another note if you have an out-bred dog and you'd like that dog to put more impact on the offspring; seems to be the case that if you breed to a stud that has a uniform lineage say LM to LM to LM, or Cosmo to Cosmo to Cosmo; Your outbred dogs genetics will oftentimes be overpowered, and you'll get more of the Stud. So as LM tends to be in a bunch of the FC type dogs, many people looking for more impact of their own dog in a breeding will stay away. Many yellow lineages with say Nitro etc. dogs were overpowered by LM or Cosmo crossing so they tended to stay away from them. In my experience most of the stay away from this sire or that revolved around yellow or brown genetics; however Grady is probably going to be different in that regard as he has pretty much took over yellow lineages today, and it is hard to find yellow genetics without him represented. I would bet the GRADY free, will be something of an advertisement in the future; he was bred a lot.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> The No Lean Mac thing, at least when I'm researching has to do with how much he was bred; yes he has the most titled offspring but he also has the most offspring period. As with other highly used males (cosmo, and the next one I bet people will be staying away from Grady) It's not that there's anything overly wrong with the dogs just that they were used so much. So that if you go into the pedigree of different dogs, LM is bred to LM is bred to LM and that tree don't fork as they say. Now sometimes this can be good it allows for certain positive traits to get uniform in the population; but it also allows for bad traits to line up as well. Genetically speaking recessive traits tend to be negative when they are overly expressed EIC CNM etc. These diseases trace their roots back to these highly bred dogs, where the crossing back and forth of one sire resulted in overly used genetics. EIC CNM are not as bad anymore as we have a test for them, but that does leave one to wonder what other little recessives are waiting to line up, because of lack of genetic diversity. Another note if you have an out-bred dog and you'd like that dog to put more impact on the offspring; seems to be the case that if you breed to a stud that has a uniform lineage say LM to LM to LM, or Cosmo to Cosmo to Cosmo; Your outbred dogs genetics will oftentimes be overpowered, and you'll get more of the Stud. So as LM tends to be in a bunch of the FC type dogs, many people looking for more impact of their own dog in a breeding will stay away. Many yellow lineages with say Nitro etc. dogs were overpowered by LM or Cosmo crossing so they tended to stay away from them. In my experience most of the stay away from this sire or that revolved around yellow or brown genetics; however Grady is probably going to be different in that regard as he has pretty much took over yellow lineages today, and it is hard to find yellow genetics without him represented. I would bet the GRADY free, will be something of an advertisement in the future; he was bred a lot.


Nice informative post.


----------



## birddogn_tc (Apr 24, 2015)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> The No Lean Mac thing, at least when I'm researching has to do with how much he was bred; yes he has the most titled offspring but he also has the most offspring period. As with other highly used males (cosmo, and the next one I bet people will be staying away from Grady) It's not that there's anything overly wrong with the dogs just that they were used so much. So that if you go into the pedigree of different dogs, LM is bred to LM is bred to LM and that tree don't fork as they say. Now sometimes this can be good it allows for certain positive traits to get uniform in the population; but it also allows for bad traits to line up as well. Genetically speaking recessive traits tend to be negative when they are overly expressed EIC CNM etc. These diseases trace their roots back to these highly bred dogs, where the crossing back and forth of one sire resulted in overly used genetics. EIC CNM are not as bad anymore as we have a test for them, but that does leave one to wonder what other little recessives are waiting to line up, because of lack of genetic diversity. Another note if you have an out-bred dog and you'd like that dog to put more impact on the offspring; seems to be the case that if you breed to a stud that has a uniform lineage say LM to LM to LM, or Cosmo to Cosmo to Cosmo; Your outbred dogs genetics will oftentimes be overpowered, and you'll get more of the Stud. So as LM tends to be in a bunch of the FC type dogs, many people looking for more impact of their own dog in a breeding will stay away. Many yellow lineages with say Nitro etc. dogs were overpowered by LM or Cosmo crossing so they tended to stay away from them. In my experience most of the stay away from this sire or that revolved around yellow or brown genetics; however Grady is probably going to be different in that regard as he has pretty much took over yellow lineages today, and it is hard to find yellow genetics without him represented. I would bet the GRADY free, will be something of an advertisement in the future; he was bred a lot.


According to Retriever Results, which only counts offspring if they entered an AKC field event…

Grady has 819 offspring (prob 1000+ more that never ran a test or trial)
Lean Mac has 621 offspring


----------



## Flyntwt (Mar 1, 2021)

Deleted because I thought I sounded smart, but I didn’t. 😜😂


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> The No Lean Mac thing, at least when I'm researching has to do with how much he was bred; yes he has the most titled offspring but he also has the most offspring period. As with other highly used males (cosmo, and the next one I bet people will be staying away from Grady) It's not that there's anything overly wrong with the dogs just that they were used so much. So that if you go into the pedigree of different dogs, LM is bred to LM is bred to LM and that tree don't fork as they say. Now sometimes this can be good it allows for certain positive traits to get uniform in the population; but it also allows for bad traits to line up as well. Genetically speaking recessive traits tend to be negative when they are overly expressed EIC CNM etc. These diseases trace their roots back to these highly bred dogs, where the crossing back and forth of one sire resulted in overly used genetics. EIC CNM are not as bad anymore as we have a test for them, but that does leave one to wonder what other little recessives are waiting to line up, because of lack of genetic diversity. Another note if you have an out-bred dog and you'd like that dog to put more impact on the offspring; seems to be the case that if you breed to a stud that has a uniform lineage say LM to LM to LM, or Cosmo to Cosmo to Cosmo; Your outbred dogs genetics will oftentimes be overpowered, and you'll get more of the Stud. So as LM tends to be in a bunch of the FC type dogs, many people looking for more impact of their own dog in a breeding will stay away. Many yellow lineages with say Nitro etc. dogs were overpowered by LM or Cosmo crossing so they tended to stay away from them. In my experience most of the stay away from this sire or that revolved around yellow or brown genetics; however Grady is probably going to be different in that regard as he has pretty much took over yellow lineages today, and it is hard to find yellow genetics without him represented. I would bet the GRADY free, will be something of an advertisement in the future; he was bred a lot.


Grady was perfect to cross with LM offspring and EIC clear which was needed


----------



## Flyntwt (Mar 1, 2021)

ErinsEdge said:


> Grady was perfect to cross with LM offspring and EIC clear which was needed



Can you elaborate on why, for the folks that are newer to this?


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

Marvin S said:


> Nice informative post.


Hmmmmmmm, you better elaborate Marvin or your interest/endorsement might inadvertently be interpreted as pointing a bitch owner away from a dog you loved way more than LM 😉


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

roseberry said:


> Hmmmmmmm, you better elaborate Marvin or your interest/endorsement might inadvertently be interpreted
> as pointing a bitch owner away from a dog you loved way more than LM 😉


Up early or late?


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

Marvin S said:


> Up early or late?


Young men stay up late.......the rest of us start early.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

roseberry said:


> Young men stay up late.......the rest of us start early.


and take an afternoon nap?


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

crackerd said:


> Thing is, Robert, they (LM progeny) were bred and born to run/win FTs. I'm still a relative newcomer (albeit per Marv a Depends diaper baby) compared to other eminence in this thread. But every Lean Mac offspring I've trained with (and that were trained by amateurs) over the last 15 years has been competitive in All Age stakes by two years old. I really had no choice, nor did I look a gift horse in the proverbial gob, in my getting "Secretariat Jr," she of the low COI. And I can tell you without qualm or irony, she was capable of running (and finishing) opens by six months old. Not because I pushed her, but because, my gosh, the talent level for these Lean Mac chill'uns doesn't have to be developed, it has to be tamed, almost domesticated, all over again. Yet I've not "gone into battle" with her because the taming, the "re-domesticating" continues. And what a Zen time to be had in training, which as you know, many of us Yanks are almost a cult in coming to it.
> 
> On the other hand, my yearling, the yell'un similar to y'orn (Goose?) on one side of the pedigree with the British Lean Mac (Bracken) from the frequent X'ing covering yall's bitches, got me a dual forecast (daily double to my fellow 'Mericans), with LM a couple generations back on bottom. And wow, training partners have marveled at how calmly she takes things, to and fro the line, like my 95% British gal recently passed, but with a ton of go and dime-dropping eyes for marking which comes from somewhere, and I'm betting it's LM (and Bracken-nick) affiliated.


That yella one of yours is more similar to 'Goose' than some would know. 
The (Bracken) reference is cross-pond Parallelism to LM. 
Some sycophant's can make sh*t look like sugar or the other way round. The 'Gene pool' dilution/concentration used to be labelled against line breeding , in argumentation of 'better for the breed'. FT globally (whatever your games) would be at a guess 0.01% of all labrador retrievers born , so I would say (by throwing ones hat in the ring) the FT successful titled dogs and bitches in that 0.01% of the breed have about zero impact on the genetics of the breed, but does require 'a wee bit more savvy' in the cartel . Must have been lucky with wee 'Goose' , now some 14 weeks old , his Sire attained ftch , and qualified for this years IGL Retriever Championships all after wee Goose was born . 
Michael, like them debates in a pub over a few pints , 'Who is the best Heavy weight boxer' . 
I, know one thing ..I know a good dog when I see it , and a greater dam .anyhow , If I wanted a dog like LM I would take a pup from the same sire and dam that bred it ,and give it the same nurture and training , even then ....it might just be a good dawg . lol . atb


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

ErinsEdge said:


> Grady was perfect to cross with LM offspring and EIC clear which was needed


I agree, it was a prefect storm. At the time there were very few EIC clear FT dogs, most all were carriers and many were EIC affected. Choices were very limited, and Grady was one. He also carried yellow which added him to that subset. But if we look at a condition like EIC we can ask Why it came along? because of overly used genetics; which while providing many good attributes also allowed the recessive condition to become prominent. I would hazard to say Grady's offspring are probably more or equal to LM. No one knows a real count of how many offspring LM had (only those that titled or were OFA) same is true of Grady. But if we were to guess that most offspring never title and don't do OFA's; I would think even our best estimated would be low. EIC was discovered because enough recessive genes lined up and dogs collapsed; what are we going to see when All these Grady lines cross back to each other in a few generations, and genes line up again? Hopefully it will be something as simple a EIC; but my feeling is we really lucked out on having a condition that only involved one gene. Frozen Semen is a double edge sword for sure; particular males can put so much impact on of generations of dogs. Where as females only get a defined number. Yet even with limited numbers particular females still make significant impact. Is that the better situation? Such is for the philosophers to argue I'm sure

My females were carriers I bred to Grady; don't regret it but I am watching my crosses back to him going fwd.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> I agree, it was a prefect storm. At the time there were very few EIC clear FT dogs, most all were carriers and many were EIC affected. Choices were very limited, and Grady was one. He also carried yellow which added him to that subset. But if we look at a condition like EIC we can ask Why it came along? because of overly used genetics; which while providing many good attributes also allowed the recessive condition to become prominent. I would hazard to say Grady's offspring are probably more or equal to LM. No one knows a real count of how many offspring LM had (only those that titled or were OFA) same is true of Grady. But if we were to guess that most offspring never title and don't do OFA's; I would think even our best estimated would be low. EIC was discovered because enough recessive genes lined up and dogs collapsed; what are we going to see when All these Grady lines cross back to each other in a few generations, and genes line up again? Hopefully it will be something as simple a EIC; but my feeling is we really lucked out on having a condition that only involved one gene. Frozen Semen is a double edge sword for sure; particular males can put so much impact on of generations of dogs. Where as females only get a defined number. Yet even with limited numbers particular females still make significant impact. Is that the better situation? Such is for the philosophers to argue I'm sure
> 
> My females were carriers I bred to Grady; don't regret it but I am watching my crosses back to him going fwd.


 At the time there were very few EIC clear FT dogs, most all were carriers and many were EIC affected. Choices were very limited
What facts do you have that support ^^^^ this ^^^^^statement you made?


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

mjh345 said:


> At the time there were very few EIC clear FT dogs, most all were carriers and many were EIC affected. Choices were very limited
> What facts do you have that support ^^^^ this ^^^^^statement you made?


The truth of the matter was we didn’t know much without the EIC test for many of those years. We only knew when parents produced affected pups. I believe EIC tests came around 2008 when LM was born in 1990, Grady 2004..


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

mjh345 said:


> At the time there were very few EIC clear FT dogs, most all were carriers and many were EIC affected. Choices were very limited
> What facts do you have that support ^^^^ this ^^^^^statement you made?


Personal observations from living through it. EIC was very in FT dogs; how do I know? I was running dogs and looking for studs when the test initially developed; and before when dogs were going down due to "heat stroke" with some frequency. Test came out all of mine came back carriers and most of my training mates did as well. There were several dogs running events that were affected and owners had to learn their "particular quirks" to stop dogs from going down. The test was developed because there were enough dogs going down with good frequency that University of Minnesota looked into. I know people who sent initial samples, by the time that testing was fully embraced, which took several years there were relatively few clear FC AFC type dogs. I know because I was looking for them to breed to.






AKC Canine Health Foundation | Groundbreaking discovery leads to genetic test for EIC in Labrador retrievers







www.akcchf.org


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Personal observations from living through it. EIC was very in FT dogs; how do I know? I was running dogs
> and looking for studs when the test initially developed; and before when dogs were going down due to
> "heat stroke" with some frequency.


Some time before that I had bought a pup from a sire that I had noticed other pups doing well
when I judged & ran against them. Pup arrived with all clearances, vet, pro & owner. Dog could not go
outside without having issues, Showed him to a vet that was also a researcher without saying anything.
The minute the pup stood on the tailgate the vet said "he had EIC & bad". Later was talked to by someone
who had influence on large funding & he agreed he would push for funding for research.

I was later told that it was common knowledge that this stud was a carrier. Apparently not, as I knew nothing
of it. I personally think that anyone who believes they are smart enough to deal with breeding known carriers 
& that they can manage that looks at a fool every time they look into a mirror.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

How is this all due to Lean Mac?

Thanks to exhaustive research which has made reliable testing of individuals which are to be used in a breeding program, it is now known and has been proven to be impossible to produce EIC *affected* dogs when the breeding is an EIC CARRIER to an EIC CLEAR.

To Marvin's point, the pup had to be the product of either a CARRIER to CARRIER, or CARRIER to AFFECTED breeding.-Paul


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

The breed is doomed.  Yet another National winner with Lean Mac in his Pedigree.....TOP and BOTTOM.


Vertical pedigree: NFC FC AFC Holland Cliffs Play It Again


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

paul young said:


> How is this all due to Lean Mac?





paul young said:


> The breed is doomed.  Yet another National winner with Lean Mac in his Pedigree.....TOP and BOTTOM.
> 
> 
> Vertical pedigree: NFC FC AFC Holland Cliffs Play It Again


You posted - Tell us something about the dogs in the pedigree from experience.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Marvin S said:


> You posted - Tell us something about the dogs in the pedigree from experience.


Typical Marvin Sundstrom post......


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

paul young said:


> Typical Marvin Sundstrom post......


Peltless Paul posts .


----------



## Ktyler2577 (Nov 30, 2018)

paul young said:


> The breed is doomed.  Yet another National winner with Lean Mac in his Pedigree.....TOP and BOTTOM.
> 
> 
> Vertical pedigree: NFC FC AFC Holland Cliffs Play It Again


And he's a fine looking animal to boot. I was able to meet and talk to Alvin and pet Luke after they ran the 10th before they were awarded the trophy.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Marvin S said:


> Peltless Paul posts .


And yet another. PFFFT, De Nada.

GMHR YOUNGHUNTER SARAH ANNE MH
GMHR HRCH CANTERBURY'S DAISY MAY MH QAA
GMHR MFR HRCH 500 POINT UH NORTHSTARS CANADIAN BEAUTY MH QAA
HRCH WHITECLIFF'S ALL AMERICAN GIRL SH

Yep, no pelts......


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Marvin S said:


> Some time before that I had bought a pup from a sire that I had noticed other pups doing well
> when I judged & ran against them. Pup arrived with all clearances, vet, pro & owner. Dog could not go
> outside without having issues, Showed him to a vet that was also a researcher without saying anything.
> The minute the pup stood on the tailgate the vet said "he had EIC & bad". Later was talked to by someone
> ...





Hunt'EmUp said:


> Personal observations from living through it. EIC was very in FT dogs; how do I know? I was running dogs and looking for studs when the test initially developed; and before when dogs were going down due to "heat stroke" with some frequency. Test came out all of mine came back carriers and most of my training mates did as well. There were several dogs running events that were affected and owners had to learn their "particular quirks" to stop dogs from going down. The test was developed because there were enough dogs going down with good frequency that University of Minnesota looked into. I know people who sent initial samples, by the time that testing was fully embraced, which took several years there were relatively few clear FC AFC type dogs. I know because I was looking for them to breed to.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So, thats kind of what I thought, no facts nothing but an anecdotal.SWAG.

Based on your anecdotal "evidence" you claimed that...."At the time there were very few EIC clear FT dogs, most all were carriers and many were EIC affected. Choices were very limited.

In reality the science showed the incidence to be more along the lines of;...

group’s estimate is that 3 to 5 percent of all Labrador retrievers are affected and carry two copies of the mutant dynamin 1 gene. Another 30 percent are carriers with just one bad gene.


From your article:

Their next step was to determine how prevalent EIC was in the breed. To do that, Minor traveled to field trials in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the Dakotas, and Taylor traveled to trials in Western and Central Canada throughout the summer of 2007, collecting DNA samples from the cheek of nearly every dog enrolled in the competitive events. "We went to seven field trials in the area and we swabbed almost every dog there," says Minor. "We also sent swabs to a national show dog competition, where DNA was collected from 200 conformation dogs." The group also tested dogs that exhibited signs of EIC that were seen at veterinary hospitals.

"That’s when we started getting a really strong idea of the frequency of this mutant gene in Labrador retrievers," says Mickelson. The group’s estimate is that 3 to 5 percent of all Labrador retrievers are affected and carry two copies of the mutant dynamin 1 gene. Another 30 percent are carriers with just one bad gene.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

paul young said:


> Yep, no pelts......


The day the National Retriever Club & the National Amateur Retriever Club consider 
what you posted as qualification for their Nationals you can consider them pelts!


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

so in order to be knowledgeable about the genetics of labrador retrievers, one must qualify their dog for both the national retriever championship AND the national amateur retriever championship?

That just narrowed our field of experts significantly.


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

Marvin, crochety is one thing, but dang.

What if we let our dogs say which pelt is a pelt? Take Saturday's Arkansas opener for instance, if he could talk, would NFC Luke say, "Alvin, you brought me over here for some 10th series scentless hen pheasants and let a stanky ol' deadgrass chessie sit on a tree stand with mallards landing and swimming around while more mallards were knocking acorns down coming through the limbs? Some friend you are!" I dunno?

One man's pelts can be another man's waste of time.


----------



## bjoiner (Feb 25, 2008)

roseberry said:


> Marvin, crochety is one thing, but dang.
> 
> What if we let our dogs say which pelt is a pelt? Take Saturday's Arkansas opener for instance, if he could talk, would NFC Luke say, "Alvin, you brought me over here for some 10th series scentless hen pheasants and let a stanky ol' deadgrass chessie sit on a tree stand with mallards landing and swimming around while more mallards were knocking acorns down coming through the limbs? Some friend you are!" I dunno?
> 
> ...


This makes me jealous. I was working the National and missed my first opener in probably 30 years.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

roseberry said:


> Marvin, crochety is one thing, but dang.
> 
> What if we let our dogs say which pelt is a pelt? Take Saturday's Arkansas opener for instance, if he could talk, would NFC Luke say, "Alvin, you brought me over here for some 10th series scentless hen pheasants and let a stanky ol' deadgrass chessie sit on a tree stand with mallards landing and swimming around while more mallards were knocking acorns down coming through the limbs? Some friend you are!" I dunno?
> 
> ...


You must consider the intention of my reply. Paul Young is typical of 
those hanging around the edges of the real Field Trial world hoping 
someone will consider them a player. I've seen too many of them. 

A day in the filed with one's dog is the ultimate in retrieverdom. 
On those days all dogs are champions!


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

so someone that pays a pro to train and run their dog in FT and potentially qualify for the national open is a 'player' but someone what has trained their own dogs to both hunt and successfully run retriever competitions AND judged quite possibly all 4 venues of retriever games in the US is not?


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Marvin S said:


> The day the National Retriever Club & the National Amateur Retriever Club consider
> what you posted as qualification for their Nationals you can consider them pelts!





Marvin S said:


> You must consider the intention of my reply. Paul Young is typical of
> those hanging around the edges of the real Field Trial world hoping
> someone will consider them a player. I've seen too many of them.
> 
> ...


Yes, I am on the edges , while you are a central figure in the Field Trial world.
Anyone who wishes to take a look at how central you are can do a search here on RTF . Just search *Marvin's List....*


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Tobias said:


> so someone that pays a pro to train and run their dog in FT and potentially qualify for the national open is a 'player'


I'm not opposed to it but will never understand it. Even more baffling is people paying a pro to train and run their dog in AKC junior or HRC started tests.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

roseberry said:


> Marvin, crochety is one thing, but dang.
> 
> What if we let our dogs say which pelt is a pelt? Take Saturday's Arkansas opener for instance, if he could talk, would NFC Luke say, "Alvin, you brought me over here for some 10th series scentless hen pheasants and let a stanky ol' deadgrass chessie sit on a tree stand with mallards landing and swimming around while more mallards were knocking acorns down coming through the limbs? Some friend you are!" I dunno?
> 
> ...


All those Greenheads and someone had to shoot a Susie? In my old crowd that was seriously frowned upon and brought scorn to the offender.


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

Doc there's always a couple of guys in a hurry to tag em up and get back to a bloody mary.....


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

roseberry said:


> Doc there's always a couple of guys in a hurry to tag em up and get back to a bloody mary.....


Some of the best times in the blind, late morning watching the big flights come in after everyone has limits of drakes. One of my favorite pictures was taken by a buddy in the flooded woods on such a day and I counted 57 Mallards on final approach


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

paul young said:


> Yes, I am on the edges , while you are a central figure in the Field Trial world.
> Anyone who wishes to take a look at how central you are can do a search here on RTF . Just search *Marvin's List....*


Your link doesn't work, Paul


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Its not a link. Anyone interested can do a search and the tread will come up.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Marvin S said:


> When you can walk through a crowd at a trial & not be noticed you have achieved
> the ultimate in this sport. I can, EdA can't.





mjh345 said:


> Your link doesn't work, Paul





paul young said:


> Its not a link.


HaHa - I beat you to it.


----------



## JMitchell (Dec 28, 2012)

I don’t have a dog in this fight as I am not a field trail hunt test guy. I did read all posts so that 10 minutes of my life I won’t get back. 😀 I am curious what Marvin’s dogs were that were AFC or FC and if he trained them? And what year did they win. I couldn’t find anything on the internet.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

mjh345 said:


> So, thats kind of what I thought, no facts nothing but an anecdotal.SWAG.


My response would be the stats aren't there because no one really looked at it; UoM looked into Labrador breed not subset. EIC was a "don't ask don't tell" disease, and labs are a huge population (PET, SHOW and FIELD). Still EIC was in the FT set, proof? It was the FT peeps that saw dogs collapse enough that someone looked into it FT peeps sent in the first samples. The article and University of M says Lab population includes all the subsets, pet, field and Show. The majority of the "lab"population are pet; not field-show. Testing wise Show labs have just as many if not more affected-carrier labs as the FT but show labs rarely if ever show the disease. Show labs don't have the intensity to collapse, field labs do. Pet labs, well their breeding is not as regulated they are more outbred, EIC= recessive gene with an outbred population genetically EIC should be 25% at most. But the article says 30% where is the extra 5% coming from? Inbred populations that have allowed the gene to be expressed. Field labs where the disease was discovered? Those who sent in the most samples. Why Because it was there..

I guess I could ask Were YOU looking for an EIC Clear FC AFC stud at the Time?" There were very few; a lot of people choose Grady because he was an FC AFC good match-lines and CLEAR, for carrier females. Now prehaps initially only a few agreed to test as many people had heads in the sand and oh this doesn't exist...but breeder did know lines-stud that tended to throw it. Just as people know today there are lines carrying other issues, (heart issues, young ccl issue, etc) that are not testable, but wait that is only anecdotal, better not take notes on that. When the testing became a requirement to have an EIC carrier stud was to be a pariah; unfortunate as those genetics were practically cut from the gene pool. Does EIC=LM not really (he is not the initial mutation tracing it mostly looks to be a show line. But LM had the gene, and the numerous breeding of him and then crossing back to LM over and over allowed EIC recessive genes lined up. Recessive EIC genes=affected offspring; basic genetics.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

With the test now available, would you still rule out Lean Mac decsendants for breeding purposes? If so, why?


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> My response would be the stats aren't there because no one really looked at it; UoM looked into Labrador breed not subset. EIC was a "don't ask don't tell" disease, and labs are a huge population


This is the biggest pile of GDG I’ve seen in a long time. EIC was the name resulting from the definitive testing that was being studied in Canada and later at the U of MN for over 16 years. As breeders we wanted to end the speculation and finger pointing, and as soon as the test was open to the public they were bombarded with test samples. Previously we kept lists of sires who were producing collapsing pups. Maybe you know individuals who were doing your don’t ask routine but that isn’t what was going on. Later U of MN divided it into field, show, pet but it was shown to be consistently all type of Labradors in all countries also. The 5% was the affected individuals.

I see no reason to avoid LeanMac as long as you don’t come up with “new problems” and follow clear to carrier breeding

Retriever Results is a handy subscription to sort out fact from GDG but it lists under real names not handles


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

ErinsEdge said:


> This is the biggest pile of GDG I’ve seen in a long time. EIC was the name resulting from the definitive testing that was being studied in Canada and later at the U of MN for over 16 years. As breeders we wanted to end the speculation and finger pointing, and as soon as the test was open to the public they were bombarded with test samples. Previously we kept lists of sires who were producing collapsing pups. Maybe you know individuals who were doing your don’t ask routine but that isn’t what was going on. Later U of MN divided it into field, show, pet but it was shown to be consistently all type of Labradors in all countries also. The 5% was the affected individuals.
> I see no reason to avoid LeanMac as long as you don’t come up with “new problems” and follow clear to carrier breeding


Hunt Em Up throws out garbage with some degree of regularity. We were desperately seeking the physiological mechanism while understanding that it was genetic and based on affected dogs probably autosomal recessive although the physiology of collapsing was elusive. People must be very bored to litigate an issue that science resolved years ago. Gene dilution is an ongoing process, the longer a dog has been dead and no longer a contributor to the gene pool the less influence he has genetically.


----------



## J. Marti (May 2, 2014)

Just wanted to point out:

The predicted inheritance probability of autosomal recessive genes isn't about the entire population and what percentage of a given population will inherit two recessives and thus be affected. Predicted probability is the probability that each individual dog will inherit two recessives.

One could breed a carrier to a carrier and say the litter produced 10 puppies. The predicted probability of 25 percent doesn't mean 2.5 of those 10 puppies will carry both genes. It means each puppy has a 25 percent chance of inheriting both EIC genes. That litter of 10 puppies could all be EIC affected--or none could be affected. A person could breed 10 carrier to carrier litters in a row and all puppies could inherit two EIC genes. That still doesn't affect the predicted probability that all Labrador puppies born after that will have a 25 percent chance of inheriting two EIC genes.

It's like a coin flip: it is always a 50 percent chance it will be heads. No matter how many times you flip that coin and it turns up heads, the chance it will be heads at the next flip is still 50 percent.

I'm posting this in response to the poster who asked why the inheritance percentage of an autosomal recessive gene in a population is 30 percent when it 'should be 25 percent' at most.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Personal observations from living through it. EIC was very in FT dogs; how do I know? I was running dogs and looking for studs when the test initially developed; and before when dogs were going down due to "heat stroke" with some frequency. .....The EIC gene was isolated in 2006. According to Entry Express you first started running dogs in 2008. By the time you put a MH on that dog and did a breeding with that dog it was 2012 and the test had been out for years and virtually all FT studs had been tested.... Test came out all of mine came back carriers ...  REALLY? Your dog Lakota's pedigree on Hunting Lab Pedigree gives this EIC clearance # *EIC: *FR42524605(Clear) and most of my training mates did as well. There were several dogs running events that were affected and owners had to learn their "particular quirks" to stop dogs from going down. The test was developed because there were enough dogs going down with good frequency that University of Minnesota looked into. I know people who sent initial samples, by the time that testing was fully embraced, which took several years there were relatively few clear FC AFC type dogs. I know because I was looking for them to breed to. ...You obviously didnt look very hard. So you decided to breed to Roux, who was a known carrier, to your dog Lakota, ,who you claimed was also a carrier? That would be the height of irresponsibility. Even more puzzling is why you bred to Frank Price;s Roux, a known carrier, that lived halfway accross the country from you. Why would someone claiming to only have EIC carriers and to be so concerned about EIC, go halfway accross the country to breed to EIC carrier FC AFC Roux when his Littermate Scott Spalding's FC AFC Drake was available, EIC clear, and located nearby to you?????
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Personal observations from living through it. EIC was very in FT dogs; how do I know? I was running dogs and looking for studs when the test initially developed; and before when dogs were going down due to "heat stroke" with some frequency. .....The EIC gene was isolated in 2006. According to Entry Express you first started running dogs in 2008. By the time you put a MH on that dog and did a breeding with that dog it was 2012 and the test had been out for years and virtually all FT studs had been tested.... Test came out all of mine came back carriers ... REALLY? Your dog Lakota's pedigree on Hunting Lab Pedigree gives this EIC clearance # *EIC: *FR42524605(Clear)  and most of my training mates did as well. There were several dogs running events that were affected and owners had to learn their "particular quirks" to stop dogs from going down. The test was developed because there were enough dogs going down with good frequency that University of Minnesota looked into. I know people who sent initial samples, by the time that testing was fully embraced, which took several years there were relatively few clear FC AFC type dogs. I know because I was looking for them to breed to. ...You obviously didnt look very hard. So you decided to breed to Roux, who was a known carrier, to your dog Lakota, ,who you claimed was also a carrier? That would be the height of irresponsibility. Even more puzzling is why you bred to Frank Price;s Roux, a known carrier, that lived halfway accross the country from you. Why would someone claiming to only have EIC carriers and to be so concerned about EIC, go halfway accross the country to breed to EIC carrier FC AFC Roux when his Littermate Scott Spalding's FC AFC Drake was available, EIC clear, and located nearby to you?????


----------



## David Maddox (Jan 12, 2004)

Dave Kress said:


> I was at Ardmore ! I saw Mac fail the wb , I saw Prize win the National! Lean Mac is not the only great dog but if he’s not in your pedigree others have a better chance. Great dog ; not the only one but a great dog
> Let the debate continue!
> Dk


I too was there. Several whistle refusals. It was actually sad to watch. 
Prize’s 9th series water marks were unbelievable!!!
Cold as hell that week😬


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

Yes it was cold “ really cold” at Ardmore ! Seeing the wb Mac failed u ll recall the shinny soda/ beer can under the bank Mac swam to! The sun was just right to make it real shinny. The blind was 20 yards or so to the left. 30 minutes later the can couldn’t be seen. talk about bad luck !!
it seems so long ago but I m still here so maybe not so long ago.

All - enjoy y


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Similar thing happened at our club trial this year. Sun glaring off a wet branch on the edge of the water took one dog out.
Before and after that dog ran it was not visible.


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

Gregg0211 said:


> I keep seeing posts from people that state, "no Lean Mac" in the lines. I realize he has been prolific in breeding, but why or what is the reasoning for not wanting him in the line?


If I were to guess it is because they have a female with multiple Lean Mac ancestors in her 4 generation pedigree.


----------



## BMitchell (Oct 8, 2017)

Maxx was an awesome animal, competitor, and a stellar producer of field trial progeny. The best advertisement EVER, was a full page, in the old RFTN; Maxx had won another one of his NAFCs. His national pic was at the center of the page, 5/6 of his progeny, finalists pics' arched around him, and another 20/25 of his progeny, national entrants pics', circled the center winner/finalists. No . . . that stud was not deceased and 3 decades in the grave; HE and HIS GET all competed against on another that June! WOW! That was impressive!

I've had the good fortune to train, stand next to, and breed some fine animals, some brown, and some black. Being a chesapeake aficionado has afforded me a different perspective on the breeding issue. With 150K+/- labs registered with the AKC each year, and only 5K +/- peakes registered with the AKC each year, when breeding peaks, genetic diversity is crucial. Chesapeake folks would/will "stampeed breed" to the next top FC/AFC/hot commodity, and since there are SO FEW, these sires can become quite influential within the breed, for better or worse. The least desirable pedigree is that of a "you might be a red neck, if your family tree goes STRAIGHT UP!" With that being said, conscientious breeding and genetic testing has afforded breeders the ability to breed away from genetic afflictions. 

Right now, brown dog readers are tuned in, . . . lab folks are wondering, where is this lengthy thread is going, and WHY is self proclaimed "Chesapeake aficionado" commenting in a thread on OUR beloved Maxx?!? 

Well I have blacks as well, and breed an occasional litter. I have had a Maxx son and I currently own a Grady bitch. However, when looking for a stud, I am of the "try to find something a little different/other than same variety" as the vast majority of competitive trial dogs have Maxx THROUGHOUT their pedigree. You can always come back in on Maxx and his lines, as their are so many options. Someone mentioned earlier about crossing to Grady; well Grady's grandsire is Maxx, do not misunderstand my point; BOTH ARE AWESOME COMPETITORS/PRODUCERS, BUT breeding (and Life) is about choices, and having options is ALWAYS GOOD. 

So my advise, in relationship to the future of the breed of Labrador Retrievers-subset- "American/Canadian Field Trial Retriever"- IS that we should not pigeon hole our breeding options. Create sound outcrosses, so as to create/leave options will only strengthen our wonderful breed, moving forward.


----------



## mjiorle (Mar 11, 2008)

David Maddox said:


> I too was there. Several whistle refusals. It was actually sad to watch.
> Prize’s 9th series water marks were unbelievable!!!
> Cold as hell that week😬


He was having problems hearing whistles. Several different types were used throughout pre national to try and find something that worked. It was not just the water like some others had mentioned. Just an old dog running his last National.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

mjiorle said:


> He was having problems hearing whistles. Several different types were used throughout pre national to try and find something that worked. It was not just the water like some others had mentioned. Just an old dog running his last National.


Same with these ones , just that they don't know .


----------

