The Greyhound-Data Forum has been created to act as a platform for greyhound enthusiasts to share information on this magnificent animal called a greyhound.
Greyhound-Data reserve the right to remove any post that is off topic, advertisements or opinions they consider to be offensive.
If you answer then please try to stay on topic. It's absolutely okay to answer in a broader scope but don't hijack posts by switching to something off topic.
In case you see an insulting post: DO NOT REPLY TO IT!
Use the report button to inform the moderators so that we can delete it.
Dan Hollywood Australia (Verified User) Posts 6026 Dogs 28 / Races 32 20 Nov 2007 08:25
(0)
(0)
Veering away from the Best to Best thread, i would like to comment on some stud dogs and to get that of others also. In the past i have let it be known that i have support for the lesser stud dogs as i believe they can throw just as good a pup, if not better then their costly siblings. Firstly they have the same breeding yet some will say they dont carry the necessary genes to produce like their faster brother though had a similar performance on the track. They obviously never saw the females their best bro did yet some lesser sires can still produce quality type from the lesser brood. Why do those in the market for pups look at the big breeders and that top dollar will get them a top pup, when in some cases you buy a $500 dog to rear with the $5000 one and the lesser ends up the better of the 2. Looking at Elite State, won some top races and has plenty of pups on the ground. The data base says 1000, but he has over 1600 racing with 106 individual city winners. Firefly Boy has nowhere near those numbers 369 to 11 city winners. Elite State has produced the likes of Catunga Harry,Kostic Burns, Knocka Norris and co, while Firefly Boy has one called Bralyn Maisie and co. Bralyn Maisie being a pretty smart bitch indeed. You then have Lethal Weapon and Big Daddy Cool. Comments are that Big Daddy is the best bred dog in Aus, so where will that leave his bro. Yes, Lethal wouldnt match it with his Bro but with the limited opportunities he has had has thrown some smart pups in Rex the Weapon and Jessica Nimbus. For BDC we have Big Time Max, Cool Effort andPete's Conquest to name just 3 though he has well over 1000 pups racing where as Leathal has probably less then Firefly Boy. Lethal dont even rate in Razors stats yet has shown he can produce quality. Hallucinate and Where's Pedro, Axe Handle, Hot to Rumble and Rumble fire x Vintage Rumble shows what he can produce with only 400 odd pups racing to his bro's Miagi, Deception Bay and co. Hallucinate has 800 pups on the track and to me where's Pedro has thrown the better type. We hear all about the top priced sires yet so very little about there litter brothers and it is clear as, that they are producing when the other has received the top broodies. Maybe they are getting much more work now as people realise they are not second string and can actually produce the goods. Do you use these lesser sires because you cannot afford the best or because they too can produce you top quality pups. Do you think these lesser brothers are throwing a quality standard of pup compared to that of their star performing brothers. And i realise that their career will not have the start of the fast boys but gee, i think they may have thrown something a bit better.
Dave Sigalla Australia (Forum Access denied) Posts 141 Dogs 0 / Races 0 20 Nov 2007 08:29
(0)
(0)
Dusty Trail/Dusty Rapid...from what I've read Trail was the superior dog, but Rapid turned out the better sire.
Reece Jones Australia
Posts 81 Dogs 0 / Races 3 20 Nov 2007 09:18
(0)
(0)
slightly going off topic a bit, i dont like unraced dogs going to stud and because of their brothers or sisters going well on the track automatically people go to them not the preformed dog?, who cares what their siblings did? hense the chance to go to a dog thats preformed. how do you know the dog wasnt a non chaser or something along those lines.?
Dan Hollywood Australia (Verified User) Posts 6026 Dogs 28 / Races 32 20 Nov 2007 09:41
(0)
(0)
Reece i suppose it would depend greatly on who had the dog, reared it broke it and commented on how fast it was. People are like sheep sometimes.
Richard Vrckoff Australia (Verified User) Posts 2473 Dogs 1 / Races 0 20 Nov 2007 09:41
(1)
(0)
Hi Dan,
just to let you know Lethal Weapon has 40 named pups here on G/D & that would be about right. From those 40 he has produced, 6 individual city winners, 2 Group race finalists, 1 track record holder.
Richie
Dan Hollywood Australia (Verified User) Posts 6026 Dogs 28 / Races 32 20 Nov 2007 10:05
(0)
(0)
Not a bad effort there Rich, not sure if his bro could speak like that after his first 40 starters.
Leigh K Australia
Posts 21 Dogs 1 / Races 0 20 Nov 2007 10:28
(0)
(0)
Richard and Dan
looking at the greyhound database it shows leathal weapon having 14 different litters total of 40 pups with Jessica Nimbus and Rex The Weapon as his best two.
Looking at big daddy cool's first 8 litters only it shows he has left dogs like ...
BIG TIME MAX GRINGO MILWAUKEE IRON STAMPEDE ABBADALE AFFAIR KALDEN KOOL BATISTA FILDS OF FIRE SWANS OH FIVE FELICITY ZOE LEG ME UP LOCHINVAR ICE MOOVA COOL TEMPTATION
this above from only his first 8 litters let alone 14
i think BIG DADDY COOL is a class above his brother !!!
Jeff Holland Australia (Verified User) Posts 4831 Dogs 145 / Races 12 20 Nov 2007 10:41
(0)
(0)
Dan, any statistician knows that to avoid being influenced by rogue, or fluke results you should delete the top 5% and bottom 5% and then make an assessment. Add to this a basic statistical tool in deleting from the results anything likely to have an extraordinary influence on the results, like a champion breeder, than the results from using litter brothers are very poor.
For example, delete Brailyn Maise and the Northfields from the equation then Firefly Boy is an average sire at best.
Dan Hollywood Australia (Verified User) Posts 6026 Dogs 28 / Races 32 20 Nov 2007 10:45
(0)
(0)
i recall it took a while for Big dady Cool to get going, with his early litters rather average.
Leigh K Australia
Posts 21 Dogs 1 / Races 0 20 Nov 2007 10:50
(0)
(0)
Dan
What you recall is wrong
it's in the database for everyone to see
Big Time Max was his 7th litter and Gringo,Stampede ,Milwaukee Iron litter 8
Brett Nelson Australia (Verified User) Posts 4434 Dogs 8 / Races 6 20 Nov 2007 10:53
(0)
(0)
Hopefully his best is yet to come.
Dan Hollywood Australia (Verified User) Posts 6026 Dogs 28 / Races 32 20 Nov 2007 11:04
(0)
(0)
Jeff, i am looking at the pups they have and type they produce, and they are throwing nice types from limited numbers. Do you think they would've done much better if had the same quality and number of bitches. Leigh, Data base is not that precise.
Leigh K Australia
Posts 21 Dogs 1 / Races 0 20 Nov 2007 11:07
(0)
(0)
Dan
the Stud book is though.
Rob Tyler Australia (Verified User) Posts 5176 Dogs 64 / Races 113 20 Nov 2007 11:09
(0)
(0)
jeff holland wrote:
Dan, any statistician knows that to avoid being influenced by rogue, or fluke results you should delete the top 5% and bottom 5% and then make an assessment. Add to this a basic statistical tool in deleting from the results anything likely to have an extraordinary influence on the results, like a champion breeder, than the results from using litter brothers are very poor.
For example, delete Brailyn Maise and the Northfields from the equation then Firefly Boy is an average sire at best.
Jeff,You are absolutely right. The theory I have with using supposed class sires that have been around for a while is to leave out their Top 5 performers....if after those 5 the dog has still thrown top class then he will do me....statistics are great but you can be led astray on occasions....especially if the dog has thrown a top litter but hasn't thrown much else.It is not a be all and end all but I think over the years the theory is pretty close to the mark.I would doubt over the years that a lesser talented brother would outdo the "star".....probably because of the fact that he wouldn't get the numbers anyway.
Tom Flanagan Australia (Verified User) Posts 7250 Dogs 974 / Races 1022 20 Nov 2007 11:13
(0)
(0)
Leigh, the stud book is precise - but it shows what you said is incorrect. Big Time Max is out of litter 11.
PS Back in the 1960s Venetian Court was the lesser talented brother of NSW Greyhound of the year Roman Earl. Venetian Court topped the Victorian sires list for several years and left champions Black Diro and Gold Grotto. Their lesser talented sister was the granddam of Temlee.
Leigh K Australia
Posts 21 Dogs 1 / Races 0 20 Nov 2007 11:27
(0)
(0)
ok Tom
was only trying to show that LW first 10 to 15 litters were not of same class as BDC
unless you can show different ?
Mick Crowe Australia (Verified User) Posts 1232 Dogs 78 / Races 114 20 Nov 2007 11:57
(0)
(0)
Stud dogs are chosen also for the monetary value of the pups they produce. For that reason breeders will go with the more prominent stud dog of the litter. You can sell a Surf Lorian pup for 5 times what a Mr. Footprints pup would go for, that's why I'd use Surf Lorian for a brood of mine. However, I believe it's the strength of the brood's side that produces the pup so I would buy pups from a lesser known stud brother providing the dam is a good one. I don't think you can accurately assess stud dog stats as there's too many variables.
Dan Hollywood Australia (Verified User) Posts 6026 Dogs 28 / Races 32 20 Nov 2007 13:57
(0)
(0)
The dogs i mentioned, bar Where's Pedro were all group performers and we all know which sires get the cream of the crop. Yet the lesser boys still show us they can deliver the goods. All the top breeders that only use the best sires would disregard W"sP like a bad smell as would many here going by other threads. I have no interest in the stats other then to indicate the difference in popularity as to what type of pup they can throw. I dont believe you can bag Lethal Weapon with what Richie put up, that would be silly. He has 40 pups racing and look what he has done so far. Surely with the opportunity like that of his sibling he would fare much better. They will produce just like Venetian Court if on an equal playing field.
Jeff Holland Australia (Verified User) Posts 4831 Dogs 145 / Races 12 20 Nov 2007 20:02
(0)
(0)
Dan, YES, but the judgement to be made is would the overall quality be as high as the better brother, and the answer to that is no.
Using litter brothers is the same as using imports. Because they are slower than the best sires, even when they are prepotent, their progeny struggle against the best dogs.
Not a litter brother, but Lindale Blue is a good bread and butter sire, who when mated to a top bitch produced a champion litter, but because he was slower than the best dogs, the majority of his pups struggle when they rise in grade.
To sum up the lesser dogs really need the highest quality bitches to perform at the top level, and the other downside is that a bitch producing a V8 dog to a lesser dog, may have produced a V12 stud dog type to the best sire. ( remembering that most stud dogs that catch the publics eye are by the 'name' sires).
Gregg Daniels United Kingdom (Verified User) Posts 919 Dogs 20 / Races 0 20 Nov 2007 20:37
(0)
(1)
Dan, Big Daddy Cools litter brother over here (Balintore Brave)is throwing some very very nice types. he has thrown what looks to be a top drawer litter in the making. As well as a group winner in Gas Magee. Balintore Brave was the fastest pup ever to qualify in Cork at the time he qualified.
His offspring to say he's only had a few litters is looking very very good. Could well end up producing better than his illustrious brother given the numbers. CLICK HERE reads pretty well to me.
Do you have questions about breeding theories? 
