Poll: Most overrated Dog breed used in matchups?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Caucasian Shepherd Dog
0%
0 0%
American Pitbull Terrier
75.00%
3 75.00%
Dogo Argentino
0%
0 0%
Jagdterrier
0%
0 0%
Tibetan Mastiff
0%
0 0%
Kangal
25.00%
1 25.00%
German Shepherd
0%
0 0%
Rottweiler
0%
0 0%
Other breed (please specify)
0%
0 0%
They are all overrated.
0%
0 0%
Total 4 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Most overrated Dog breed used in matchups?
#16
Most Tibetan mastiffs found in the west are horribly inbred and have terrible stamina. This account is no more meaningful than a wolf killing a Labrador, maybe even less so

"Dogs are not a deterrent for leopards. In fact, they are preferred prey. A leopard will easily kill a large dog such as a Rottweiler or Boerboel and carry it away. Another indicator of a leopard in the area is when many dogs go missing within a relatively short time."

This is the original story you posted earlier and it doesn't mention a specific account. Leopards are also which predators, I'm not saying that every dog killed by a leopard was ambushed, but you can't ignore the fact that this is their nature and it's how they take on their prey on a regular basis. I would also favor a boerboel over a brown hyena most of the time, just like I would favor a Kangal over a caracal or any similar sized cat.

It's easy to think that a bigger dog is tougher, and the certainly ain't the case. Most of the western large breeds have a terrible genotype, and are lacking on many fronts, including stamina, agility, mentality, and durability. Of course size is an advantage, but only when it's not coupled with a much worse health.
[Image: giphy.gif]
Reply
#17
(07-10-2019, 09:07 AM)Mustang Wrote: Most Tibetan mastiffs found in the west are horribly inbred and have terrible stamina. This account is no more meaningful than a wolf killing a Labrador, maybe even less so

"Dogs are not a deterrent for leopards. In fact, they are preferred prey. A leopard will easily kill a large dog such as a Rottweiler or Boerboel and carry it away. Another indicator of a leopard in the area is when many dogs go missing within a relatively short time."

This is the original story you posted earlier and it doesn't mention a specific account. Leopards are also which predators, I'm not saying that every dog killed by a leopard was ambushed, but you can't ignore the fact that this is their nature and it's how they take on their prey on a regular basis. I would also favor a boerboel over a brown hyena most of the time, just like I would favor a Kangal over a caracal or any similar sized cat.

It's easy to think that a bigger dog is tougher, and the certainly ain't the case. Most of the western large breeds have a terrible genotype, and are lacking on many fronts, including stamina, agility, mentality, and durability. Of course size is an advantage, but only when it's not coupled with a much worse health.

1. Fair point, but wolves  have still killed various LGDs.

2. Not a story. Just a fact by an actual vet. He implied that it was not that uncommon for Leopards to predate on the breeds, since he was giving basic tips and warnings.

I am not sure about beating a brown hyena, but I agree that a Kangal would beat a significantly smaller cat.
My point was that a wild predator with good agility and great use of its front and hind paws can counteract the dogs attacks and cause serious injury.
A large LGD will be able to easily kill a human or another dog, but will not be a great fighter compared to many competent or semi-competent carnivores.

3. Depends on the breed. 

From what I could search up, the Tibetan Mastiff is considered to be in usually good condition:


Quote:Because the Tibetan Mastiff is, as a breed, slow to mature not only emotionally, but also physically, it has a longer life expectancy than many of the other larger breeds, averaging between 10 and 14 years old.  They are relatively healthy dogs but all breeds have health issues that are specific to their type, and the Tibetan Mastiff is no different.

^ of course, I could be wrong about the breed.
Reply
#18
LGDs are overrated. They have no obligation to be capable of killing things and are designed to be a deterrent or disrupter. Part of that is LOOKING big and impressive, but performance is very much not required. They are "big dogs" and can be as capable as a "big dog" can be, sometimes this can mean quite capable indeed. But there is no consistency with combative performance because it's not a requirement for their role.

Pet dogs, of all breeds, are also overrated. At least, their consistency is overestimated. The idea they're representatives of their working counterparts is exactly the same as expecting tame zoo lions to be representative of their wild counterparts.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Dale Earnfart's post:
  • K9Bite
Reply
#19
(07-10-2019, 04:59 AM)ApexBoy Wrote:
(07-09-2019, 01:56 PM)Bloodborne Wrote:
(07-08-2019, 02:34 PM)ApexBoy Wrote: or a Wolf that easily killed off a Tibetan Mastiff
What are you refering to?


Quote: Wrote:The location of the injuries, the paired canine puncture spacing, severity of trauma, and wolf tracks on the property show that this animal was attacked by a wolf

https://dfw.state.or.us/Wolves/docs/dep_...180925.pdf


^ This was a confirmation on the lone wolf defeating the Tibetan Mastiff
25 puncture wounds sounds like multiple animals could of been involved.
Reply
#20
They say "a wolf" but it's not clear whether that is very intentional precise phrasing based on specific evidence to indicate only one wolf, or they're just saying that the evidence suggests the perpetrator species was wolf. In general it's WAY more likely to be multiple wolves peppering a livestock guardian with 25 bites.

If one lone wolf truly committed to killing a dog that size by itself it must have strongly felt that particular dog was an entirely useless sack of crap. Which is possible. Wolves are extremely good at determining these things and very careful not to risk getting it wrong. They masterfully target weakness.

It's very peculiar for a serious livestock producer to use a Tibetan mastiff as a livestock guardian.

Even if it was a pack of wolves they obviously saw a special amount of vulnerability in the dog.
Reply
#21
The Nepalese Tibetan mastiff is a healthy breed indeed but those seldom weigh over 70kg and most are 55-60, but the ones common in the west are praised for their size, usually 80-90 kg and are terrible:

[Image: Tibetan-Mastiff-photo.png]

Meanwhile, this is a proper Tibetan mastiff from Nepalese working stock:

[Image: 11781685-1626871517581807-3776070190444297416-n.png]

[Image: 12122524-10207125615591219-4981822398917541725-n.jpg]

[Image: 734932-10206574764820294-7346121702410024064-n.jpg]

As you can see, the ones common in the west are mostly Chinese show stock, with far more mastiff influence (as in English mastiff) while the real working stock is leaner and with more lupish features.
[Image: giphy.gif]
Reply
#22
None are good at fighting, and even less good at predatory tasks like attacking and killing wild predators.
They're bottom of the dog barrel. An Irish wolfhound or great Dane would be a huge improvement, and still obviously not ideal due to being pets. At least they're loosely in the ball park of contenders.
Reply
#23
I taste some strong, zesty irony here, regarding the defense of the case with the death of the tibetan mastiff...
Didn't see the fight, reported by a local, amount of described injury to the unfortunately deceased, doesn't seem like pictures were involved...

Now where have I seen that before, and why is it only now such an account is determined legitimate?

Curiouser and curiouser, cried Alice.

Oh, don't mind me, I just feel a tad bit more argumentative than usual.
Carry on, carry on!
[img=0x0]http://i68.tinypic.com/5u3d6w.jpg[/img]
[-] The following 1 user Likes zergthe's post:
  • Mustang
Reply
#24
(07-12-2019, 04:45 PM)Dale Earnfart Wrote: None are good at fighting, and even less good at predatory tasks like attacking and killing wild predators.
They're bottom of the dog barrel. An Irish wolfhound or great Dane would be a huge improvement, and still obviously not ideal due to being pets. At least they're loosely in the ball park of contenders.
Someone is pulling a Grazier over here. Saying LGDs, especially the ones now being used as guard dogs, are bottom tier dogs, sounds more like random spite for the sake of complaining of something, rather than have any logical reason to do so. Competent LGDs have multiple good traits that puts them high on the ranking of competent dogs, ignoring the likes of Great Pyrs and such.
Reply
#25
They're top tier livestock guardians, but bottom tier "animal attack dogs". Not only not a valuable analog for catch dogs (whether lead in catch dogs like apbts or running catch dogs like dogos), but as far opposite as is possible on the dog spectrum.
If the point is deterring something from attacking sheep, cool, if the point is attacking something, not cool. Then they absolutely are "bottom tier". I have a very "logical reason to do so", they're uniquely not predatory, out of all dogs they're the only non-predatory, anti-predatory dogs. Even retrievers and cocker spaniels are killers in their own mind, LGDs are not. Their offense is actively subdued and dulled to zero. Even toy breeds have just had their offense be allowed to deteriorate, not intentionally actively diminished like LGDs.

"None are good at fighting" is maybe in hindsight a little misleading. Defensively thwarting an attack is a form of fighting and they're fine at that. But what I meant by that statement is still true, that is they are terrible at fighting in a "carnivora forums" context. We talk about a specific contest here, and LGDs are entirely fishes out of water in that contest. A border collie understands killing an animal far far far better than a livestock guardian does. That's the truth. Every single other kind of dog that isn't an LGD does. No other dog has that predatory instinct removed like an LGD. The closest might be scenthounds, who have their courage to commit to an engagement diminished, but even they yearn to kill their prey, and once they break through that mental wall making them fear going for the kill, they do it with gusto.
LGDs are uniquely lacking in killer instinct and killing desire.
They're very big, they're very strong, they're extremely durable, they're great defenders and protecters and they can get rough in their endeavour to provide these services, but they aren't predators, and that makes a big difference. If you're only one foot in, one foot out, of a combative engagement, you're essentially handicapping yourself from competing at a high level. LGDs are an extremely niche specialised dog, they should only ever reflect on "lgds", not "dogs", that's ludicrous. Quite seriously all other dogs that aren't LGDs have a lot more in common with wolves than they do LGDs. LGDs are their own special animal and that should always be remembered.
Reply
#26
Some LGDs have been used to hunt Boars. Some of them are used by Russians as prison guard dogs, Bear hunters and whatnot, exactly like other breeds are, except they are superior in many aspects. I have seen Shepherds and some sites a long time ago state, that some of these dogs needs to grow up with the livestock, so they will not hunt and kill them. Feral Tibetan mastiffs are claimed to have gone on a large livestock killing spree when they began losing popularity in China.

The rest is wrong. Some people seem to believe you are Grazier, since you are also Australian, but Grazier actually ended up agreeing with me that LGDs were good at fighting.
LGDs are often semi primitive dogs. You will find almost no, if any breed their size, that can live as long, be rid of so many health issues, and still be as agile and a fast they are. They are generally better in the jaw department, mant of them have large skulls and larger fangs more comparable to Wolves than catch dogs.
And they know how to kill. We have seen from some of the staged fights, where LGDs of more aggressive caliber actually bothers to fight, they do stuff similar to Wolves and Coyotes. In the staged vid with the Wolf, the dog body slammed it, and when it could not bite the Wolf without getting bitten back, it actually used a sense of tactic and sat on the dang things head, and then began tearing at the hind limb to render it off balance. It then went for a solid and aggressive throat hold with violent shaking.
The only other breeds I have seen doing something like this, is old Spitz breeds, who may also body slam and go for solid neck holds when serious, they more rarely may even target the nose and skull.

Then add in the more aggressive LGDs were bred by some as pure aggressive guard dogs. So even if you were correct about them being poor killers, which you are not, then are basically still larger, more superior Rottweilers. LGDs have killed predators before, more often than I have heard of any cattle/sheep and Retriever dog doing so. No Labrador, not even a Formel1 who is indeed a good hunter by rep I hear, would charge a Jaguar and actually fight it, I doubt it would even attack a Jackal unless it is under specific circumstances.
LGDs have killed and injured predators before, alone and in a pack. We have seen them seize other animals by the throat, then lay down on their chest to put all weight down on the neck and make sure it is broken, and sometimes shake violently too. Some go for the hind legs.

Border Collies could be argued to be better hunters, but they are not better fighters. They are less adapted in the skull category for confrontation, are not as aggressive and does not have as good of a know-how.
Reply
#27
(07-12-2019, 04:45 PM)Dale Earnfart Wrote: None are good at fighting, and even less good at predatory tasks like attacking and killing wild predators.
They're bottom of the dog barrel. An Irish wolfhound or great Dane would be a huge improvement, and still obviously not ideal due to being pets. At least they're loosely in the ball park of contenders.

What a pile of horse crap.

Neither the IW nor the modern great dane are working breeds no more, with no working or non-show stock in the west that I'm aware of. Even if we assume we're comparing working animals, it would depend on the particular individuals way more than the breed, as neither of these 2 has anything that would put them in a level significantly above a TM or any working LGD. Size alone (I'm willing to bet that size is what attracts you to the IW and the GD) is meaningless in dogs and often size in the way 14 year olds lust after is a bunch of hereditary diseases and genetic problems

Oh course, I'm not denying that size is an advantage, and some large dogs are quite impressive indeed:

[Image: 1888440-1498483393752493-3754969564502270206-n.jpg]

The size in this case didn't prevent the dog from being quite energetic and more importantly, the proportions are good. Same here:

[Image: 14088668-10207536241543913-6924959510900862644-n.jpg]

[Image: 12890973-10153735456702885-1478004801863638059-o.jpg]

So I have no problem with large dogs, the problems begin when you're selecting for size, ie when size becomes the end not the means. You see dogs that can barely keep their eyes open, that have sacks of fat and loose skin, and that look like it be a hassle for them to even take a piss. Neither do stories of the breed having originally been used to hunt boars bears or lions (which might or might not be true btw) mean anything in a fight
[Image: giphy.gif]
Reply
#28
(07-13-2019, 02:39 AM)Ryo Wrote: Some LGDs have been used to hunt Boars. Some of them are used by Russians as prison guard dogs, Bear hunters and whatnot, exactly like other breeds are, except they are superior in many aspects. I have seen Shepherds and some sites a long time ago state, that some of these dogs needs to grow up with the livestock, so they will not hunt and kill them. Feral Tibetan mastiffs are claimed to have gone on a large livestock killing spree when they began losing popularity in China.
I could show you hundreds of photos of labradors and border collies hunting boars too. Practically any dog CAN be used, every dog retains some semblance of basic "dog" instincts, and dogs are carnivoran predators. LGDs retain among the least of any dog, the most dulled predatory instincts, but yes still some.
Turning an LGD into an LGD is still finished during their upbringing, and without that finish, they might end up killing sheep. I understand this.

However that role they're adapted to do is the least predatory of any dog. They retain some generic dog predator instincts DESPITE their role, and every generation those instincts dull further. They're evolving away from being a predator.
Collies ARE much better hunters, it's not close, and it's not because some people use them to hunt (although they do), it's because the actual job they've evolved to do for thousands of years - moving sheep- IS a variant of hunting. (of all the dogs outside of primitive spitz breeds I believe they're most like wolves, instinctually, collies and herders... they're wired in the brain just like wolves).

Ofcourse an LGD can kill a border collie, it's way way bigger, way way stronger, way huger skull, way heavier bones and etc etc etc. It's no contest at all, BUT if I was breeding dogs to hunt and kill wolves I'd consider using collie in the cross (with sighthound, mastiff, bull terrier...), I wouldn't consider using LGD, and no one who knew what they were doing would. It would be counter productive.
As I said. LGDs are very niche, very specialised and can't be used to represent "dogs" because they're far too unique.

More than arguing over whether they're better or worse, it just needs to be understood they're different. They're even genetically extremely distant. Collies and labradors are literally much much closer related to gripping dogs than livestock guardians are. I don't understand this boards obsession with trying to put them in the same category as dogos. They're totally different animals. You literally might as well show me a raccoon killing a cocker spaniel and tell me it doesn't bode well for the dogo in a fight with a raccoon.
Equally anything good LGDs accomplish does not reflect positively on gripping dogs either, they're their own animal. They're far more different than gripping dogs than wolves are, but for some reason (for the most part, with some exceptions) people manage to keep gripping dogs and wolves separate.

Quote:The rest is wrong. Some people seem to believe you are Grazier, since you are also Australian, but Grazier actually ended up agreeing with me that LGDs were good at fighting.
I am definitely Grazier aka Gun Bullety and wasn't trying to hide it. Beyond perhaps being let in, but I even used the same email to register so my deception skills are sorely lacking. I was in truth expecting to not get in but thought I'd try. I figure I won't be allowed to stay long, if history is anything to go by. Whatever will be will be...

Here's the thing - LGDs ARE extremely big, extremely strong, extremely durable, and they're dogs. This is enough to make them formidable, I put them in the same "class" of competitors which includes - Leopards, dogos/RCDs, wolves, bullmastiffs/bandogs, hyenas, bulldogs/bullterriers, cougars... LGDs are there, with these animals, as another one of the worthy participants. However, they aren't cougars. They aren't wolves. They aren't leopards, and they aren't dogos. They are their own thing.
If someone said "a leopard beats a wolf!" and then someone is like "not so fast, look at this video of a wolf killing a caucasian ovcharka", the leopard guy would rightfully be like "what the hell? Leopards aren't ovcharkas though, irrelevant". That's all I'm doing. LGDs are their own thing.
I think they're worthy to be included in these debates, but I don't support them. They don't represent me any more than leopards or wolves or hyenas do.
As a combative philosophy I don't like their approach. Same as I don't like the approach of felines. For me felines are too focussed on everything going well, spectacular killers, but what if it doesn't work out perfectly? Which is possible in an ambush hunt, but all the more possible, even likely in a face to face fight. Their ability to endure hardship, roll with the punches, stay calm under pressure and persist to prevail etc etc... I don't believe in it. It doesn't instill me with confidence so I don't support them.
With LGDs it's a different issue, too defense oriented. I think offense is the best defense, so the least offense oriented dog in the whole world of dogs is not my kind of dog. And it's an entirely unrelated lineage of dogs, I have no obligation to weather the storm of LGDs being punished by wild wolves and mountain lions when I already believed and felt like their defensive strategy was a bad one. That's unreasonable, I know, I knew, so it's not my problem. They aren't my animal.

The animals I support are intense committed offense from the outset, and this is a huge part of why they are successful. That's why I emphasise predatory dogs that are not thinking about protecting, but rather persecuting. Wild animals hate them as well, it completely throws them off balance psychologically to be persecuted.
LGDs stand there barking and threatening and the predator can circle around them, size them up, think about it, formulate a plan. Wade in and test them, retreat and regroup, etc etc. It gives the wild animal a big advantage.

I like dogs that simply run straight at their target with full unwavering intent to take them out. I believe this will yield the best results. If the target is a wolf or a mountain lion it immediately is on the backfoot, it has to quickly decide whether to flee as fast and far as it can or assume a defensive position. Neither is a particularly good way to start a fight. Again, offense is the best defense. Especially against something like a big cat which is so dangerous if you let it take it's time to plot an offensive assault (I think this is a big part of the reason the wolf does poorly against big cats, it is too tentative).
Much better to get scratched with some claws than grabbed with those claws and held still while long canines are driven into your neck vertebrae. Clearly an intense immediate offense with minimal hesitation, is the best way to nullify any chance of that spectacular feline kill sequence being initiated.

Quote:LGDs are often semi primitive dogs. You will find almost no, if any breed their size, that can live as long, be rid of so many health issues, and still be as agile and a fast they are. They are generally better in the jaw department, mant of them have large skulls and larger fangs more comparable to Wolves than catch dogs.
The only thing they have comparable to wolves is size, and by that I mean height and length more so than weight. Having these dimensions also does indeed result in large skulls and big teeth for both wolves and LGDs. Being so huge is an advantage. And that's an advantage I have to concede to LGDs and wolves. Weight especially with LGDs, but even just height and the large jaws and teeth that come with height are advantageous for both wolves and LGDs.

None of these animals have all the advantages, each has a set of strengths and a set of weaknesses. That goes for LGDs, cougars, leopards, wolves, hyenas, catch dogs, etc. I go with the catch dog's set of strengths and weaknesses.

Quote:And they know how to kill. We have seen from some of the staged fights, where LGDs of more aggressive caliber actually bothers to fight, they do stuff similar to Wolves and Coyotes. In the staged vid with the Wolf, the dog body slammed it, and when it could not bite the Wolf without getting bitten back, it actually used a sense of tactic and sat on the dang things head, and then began tearing at the hind limb to render it off balance. It then went for a solid and aggressive throat hold with violent shaking.
The only other breeds I have seen doing something like this, is old Spitz breeds, who may also body slam and go for solid neck holds when serious, they more rarely may even target the nose and skull.
Yes, again they retain some basic generic "dog" predatory instincts, which would logically mirror the default generic set of predatory behaviours which would be most evident in wolves and spitz breeds. But they are diminished somewhat, and when you're talking about bullbreeds, sighthounds and terriers you have advanced improved predatory performance. There's a reason a 25 lbs staffordshire bull terrier will completely control and dominate a 100 + lbs malamute or akita (and better control a boar than both), a reason why a scottish deerhound can swiftly kill a deer with a throat bite that a norweigan elkhound (actually a misnamed spitz) will struggle with, messily injuring, for an hour and then maybe lose it anyway, and a reason why a terrier can catch and kill 100 rats in 100 seconds while maybe a shiba could catch and kill 2 in the same space of time.

To deny excellence in the ranks of domestic dogs is just ignorance. Being spitz or wolf like is not the height of predatory aptitude.

Quote:Then add in the more aggressive LGDs were bred by some as pure aggressive guard dogs. So even if you were correct about them being poor killers, which you are not, then are basically still larger, more superior Rottweilers. LGDs have killed predators before, more often than I have heard of any cattle/sheep and Retriever dog doing so. No Labrador, not even a Formel1 who is indeed a good hunter by rep I hear, would charge a Jaguar and actually fight it, I doubt it would even attack a Jackal unless it is under specific circumstances.
LGDs have killed and injured predators before, alone and in a pack. We have seen them seize other animals by the throat, then lay down on their chest to put all weight down on the neck and make sure it is broken, and sometimes shake violently too. Some go for the hind legs.

Border Collies could be argued to be better hunters, but they are not better fighters. They are less adapted in the skull category for confrontation, are not as aggressive and does not have as good of a know-how.
Yeah I'm not saying collies and retrievers can actually beat LGDs, obviously (I thought). Just that they're more predatory. That diminished predatory status IS a weakness for combat, but ofcourse being huge and powerful makes up for that a lot. It doesn't make up for it enough for LGDs to be the best contender dogs can provide for these matchups, and above all else it's just very very very important to understand they're a unique different animal and can't be used as evidence, positive or negative, that reflects on dogos or similar dogs.
Reply
#29
What in the world makes you talk about comparisons between gripping dogs and LGDs and Wolves? Most of what you say, in terms of the more aggressive LGDs, is still wrong. We have it on screen that it is wrong. We have seen their fights to prove it is wrong. A Border Collie may be above in hunting, but even for its size, it is not above in fighting. It is not above in aggression, nor does it seem to carry the same old primitive instincts as that of the LGD, nor has it been breed to be even more aggressive before as a Russian Guard Dog. And don't even get me started on Labs.

As long as the CO is competent, it is certainly a relevant feat for a Leopard to kill one. They are large, strong, durable, actually agile and healthy for their size with jaws most likely superior to that of a Dogo.
You say it is not "your dog anymore than a Hyena is your species" but what you are doing, is taking a Hyena, and making a large Aardwolf of it. If you are Grazier, you will maybe or maybe not remember that I specifically changed your view on LGDs. You once thought they were all sh*t fighters, then ended up saying the more aggressive LGDs were good fighters, but not as good in protecting livestock. You even went as far as saying that you could probably have a 80kg functional Alabai. It would be almost impossible to find another line of breeds that can get above 60kg and still be fast, agile, semi long living, functional and be able to actually jump.
https://youtu.be/mMwRGVLuq1Y?t=19
Look at how tall these dogs actually jump, and most of them are certainly above 50kg at a minimum. 60kg for many of the males. They are in shape, almost just tankier Wolves in comparison to that of Molosser dogs of the same size.

And most catch dogs have the weakness for example, that they have relatively small teeth for their size. Likely similar to most breeds of dogs. Many LGDs actually compared to their skull, have larger teeth than most dogs.
As for Labs and Collies. See of they will even bother go up against a Bear passing by, or if they will run into their house. Compare that hunting instinct with some of the LGDs guarding instinct.

It is said that sometimes you also have the bully breeds being swiftly killed by the dogs that actually has Wolf like killing instincts, unless the Bully manages to grap on and begin to wear it out. Most of these you mentioned, are just more hyperactive, more drive, more pain tolerance, more relentless, but safe for the Terrier, the Bullies and Sighthounds kill just like any other ordinary dog. The Bully does it catch thing and the Sighthound does what a Lab would but more intensely. There is no actual tactic, there is no body slamming, it is just intense biting and drive.

I am not denying that the LGDs have traits that makes them unique from hunting dogs. Apparently, if what you say is true, it just shows how stupidly aggressive they are to the extent that they can afford being anti-hunters. They are said to be more puppy like, maturing over 3 years while most dogs take 2. Wolves take like 5 or 6 years to stop growing and getting beefier, so this slower growth rate could be the reason why they are still functional at those weights.
Of course I have wondered what would happen if you let impressive LGDs keep their bad temper, but exchanged their livestock instincts with that of intense hunting drive, and basically mixed that with their bad tempers and aggressive primitive fighting styles and see what you would get out of that. They would be the largest working dogs, because again, nothing really comes closer to their functionality at their weight,
Besides, in most of these Carnivora fights, we won't be using those specimens that just stood around doing nothing, just like we are not using Leopards and Cougars being treed.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)