Re: [PyrNet-L] Giant Breed?

[JGentzel@aol.com]

In a message dated 12/4/99 12:37:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
bluebonnet_72@yahoo.com writes:

<<  I
 > think the posters comment 
 > was relative guarding abilities. 
 
    How many ways can I say, that is not what I meant?  >>


I think this is the post that gave me the impression that you did not think 
the 27" dog could not guard effectively.  

<<> 
> Are you saying that a 27 inch dog weighing about 100
> pounds cannot guard and 
> that you don't think it is typical?
> 
> Joe
> 
>    I honestly, don't know if a dog that small would
be an effective guardian, partly would depend on the
character of the dog, and what it was guarding
against. Local coyotes probably wouldn't be a problem.
   I don't think it is typical because I never see
males that small.  
                     Brandy  >>

I guess your point is more a theoretical bell curve point relative the 
incidence of size and weight in dogs, with several assumed facts and 
circumstances.  I cannot find any reason to disagree with you on your 
theoretical assumed set of circumstances and would feel that basically you 
are correct in the assumption that there are less smaller dogs at the 27 inch 
level than say 28 or 29 inches.  Not sure that the bell curve of 14.99% fall 
below the 27 inch level.  This is a lot and I do not think the breed suffers 
about 15% being below the minimum height standard.  

<<Paul Strang's book says,
"Larger dogs will often weigh much more, even as much
as 150 pounds for a 32 inches male."  (Strang, p. 76) >>

Paul's book contains his opinions and he is certainly qualified to offer them 
by experience and study.  My opinion is that the choice of the word "often" 
above is an unfortunate one and would not bear up under much objective data 
analysis.  I guess we would have to define "often", but to me it means a high 
percentage.  The dictionary defines often as follows:

"of*ten (adverb)

[Middle English, alteration of oft]

First appeared 14th Century

 : many times : FREQUENTLY"

So did Paul mean to say that a very high percentage of dogs weigh 150 pounds 
for a 32 inch dog?  Maybe, but in my experience that is high, when the 
standard says that it should be less and that should be the term applied to 
the word often.  "Occasionally" or "sometimes seen" seem more accurate a 
description of the actual occurrence of these very heavy dogs.  

The breed needs to be fast enough to generate fast sprints over several 
hundred yards or two or three American football fields or more.  That is a 
lot for a heavy dog to be swift and quick.

Every interpretation of the breed standard must be considered in its context 
of the breeds centuries duties of being a very effective guard dog of animals 
with its origins being in the mountains.  A large ponderous dogs simply is 
not typical of the breed.  I have to interpret a 32 inch dog over 150 pounds 
as possibly falling into that category and thus would not be as effective a 
guardian as it slimmer and "yes" smaller breed representatives.  That's the 
only reason I take any exception to Paul's opinion and it is simply mine as 
well. 

Joe