Standard types

GSDNanny · Post by **GSDNanny** » Tue Feb 08, 2011 4:36 pm

Okay, I hesitated to open this thread because I realize I am opening up a HUGE can of worms but here it goes anyway. I have read the DS standard so far as structure and have seen photos of many 'types' online on several forums. My question is this, is the typical DS in Holland (not in the states) more heavy boned with head structure similar to a GSD than what I see in the states to be more akin to their fawn/blonde cousin type? Has the spectrum of types become so wide as to compare to what has happened to the GSD? My DS looks like a brindle Mal, not anything like my GSDs but I have seen recent posts of DSs in Holland who do favor GSDs. Not trying to start anything heated, just askin'......

Marjolein · Post by **Marjolein** » Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:53 pm

They should definately NOT look like a GSD :dswink" The mali is it's "cousin" so in body, they should look similar. The ones that look like GSD in Holland, are usually mixes. Anything brindle with standing ears will be called "Hollander" overhere, but most don't have papers. (most) Pedigree DS don't look like that.
Could you show us some pictures to show what you mean more clearly, we don't need names so we don't offend anybody.
I will show you a pic of my own dog, not to brag, I did not breed this guy, just bought him :dswink" But he is, according to many breed-specialized Dutch judges, what a DS should look like:

mind the shorter tail, strait back, smaller ears

you can see more pics of him here (cannot post them, too big for forum) http://www.streepjes.com/efotos.html

You will also find more pics there of my other dog, Ivil is a bit too long, body should be 9:10 (height, length) and has a pulled up belly, this should be a bit more straight, but that's detail. Also her "butt" is a bit too round, it's sloping towards the tail, should be straight.

Here's a pic of a near perfect female DS:

Cindy vd 's-Gravenschans

Ow, and I don't see a can of worms, just an opportunity to learn stuff :dssmile:

Bummer you don't understand Dutch, but the Dutch forum is very straight forward, I'm guessing DS people in general are very open, clear, and to the point.

GSDNanny · Post by **GSDNanny** » Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:10 pm

Thanks so much for the clarity on this subject. I would post the referenced photo of the papered DS in Holland, that looks more GSD IMHO (in structure of the head and nose particularly) than DS but I would not want to offend anyone so I will just leave it at that and not post it. My inquiry is after all sincere in the quest for knowledge. I have been in the realm of GSDs for nearly 50 years and gosh everyone knows how wide that spectrum of types is. That's a total 'nother issue. Your dogs are downright awesome, by the way. Thanks for sharing.

GSDNanny · Post by **GSDNanny** » Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:27 pm

You mention the ears, size and set. Do you have photos of what that should look like from the front? Also, the back should not be straight, but slightly dipped and a short croup for the tail set, right? And no deep chest, more straight belly also?

Ok, well my Zip definitely will NOT conform to standard but then again she is DS/MalX and conforms more to what I believe to be Malinois standards. And she is a nonpapered rescue. I have recent pictures I just took of her during the ice storm that I will try to post this evening. I would welcome critiques just for the fun of it. But from your description, I do know she is deep chested, longer croup and she does have plenty of 'junk in her trunk.'

You know what would really be cool is if one day a large variety of us could get together with our DSs to meet and get to see first hand, like the group did a few years back.

I have regressed from my day job long enough......back to the grindmill.

Marjolein · Post by **Marjolein** » Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:30 pm

There has been an experiment with DS x GSD because there was so litlle bloodlines left. They could not seem to get rid of the GSD looks though, and this line was not continued. There still are not-typical dogs now, as in all breeds.Some lines have this more than others

Marjolein · Post by **Marjolein** » Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:40 pm

GSDNanny wrote:You mention the ears, size and set. Do you have photos of what that should look like from the front? Also, the back should not be straight, but slightly dipped and a short croup for the tail set, right? And no deep chest, more straight belly also?

you're right, with straight back I meant not sloped, like in GSD's

We already had some ear pics somewhere in the board... But hey, I've got plenty

Did you check out the link to my site? plenty of ears :dsdoubt:

Here's 2 I took yesterday:

Ivil (ears ok, could be smaller)

Dingo (bit too big, well placed)

GSDNanny wrote:You know what would really be cool is if one day a large variety of us could get together with our DSs to meet and get to see first hand, like the group did a few years back.

I have regressed from my day job long enough......back to the grindmill.

likewise, I would love to come over to you guys and look! We plan to go to France this year, where they breed a more working type dog than overhere, I'm really interested in those

Have fun working, I'm off to bed

vneerland · Post by **vneerland** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 4:37 pm

Love the question Denise.
I think a lot of our (mine included) mentality is that, if it works....(it's gorgeous)
I would not want to own a beautiful dog that does not have the contents that *I* think a DS should have. On the other hand though, I do plead guilty to favoring a correct look. I do not aim to win any shows (though the 2009 UKC first place DS was mine)

but I do prefer to have a dog that fits my interpretation of the standard.

I just got a pup, that shows a lot of promise, but her tail is way too long, her nose is too wide, her back is long and her bone is huge (40 lbs at 5 months) and she is just not fitting in my picture of what a DS should look like, she is certainly more GSD like. That being said: for law enforcement purposes, I truly like bigger dog, so the size does not bother me as much as the other obvious faults. If she proved to be a candidate for breeding (let me see some solid work first) I would select a much more correct male for her, if I could find one.

I would gladly offer my stock for open criticism, so we all can learn. Let me first see if I can get some officionado's to offer their services.

leih merigian · Post by **leih merigian** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 4:47 pm

Denise, very interesting stuff! I am learning so much from this post...and of course, comparing it all to my Geyser.

She's still a pup, tho, at 8.5 months, but I can already see that her tail is longer than what Marjolein posted as correct. I think her tummy is tucked with a deep chest, too. (As I love the way she looks, I don't much care, but it is cool to be able to know what the standard really is.) I am so curious to see if she grows into her ears one day

Marjolein · Post by **Marjolein** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 8:42 pm

Just to be clear, looks are definately not the most important aspect! But like Judith, I do think some breeders might want to put a tiny bit more time into reading the standard

I've just decided on buying a way less typical looking pup in a year from now, to get some working blood overhere. I then have ton's of male to choose from, where now, almost all Dutch males are related to my Ivil... And, she has plenty of drive, loves to work, but lacks that extra bit of courage

These are also faults, according to the standard!

Judith, come on with those pics! I can maybe post some from my A-litter. Other pics will be hard because of privacy etc. Bummer, I have some real clear pics of what is NOT so typical, but might offend the owners :dsdoubt:

GSDNanny · Post by **GSDNanny** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 9:51 pm

Leih, you are right, it has turned to be an interesting topic, IMHO.
Now Judith, that would be a hoot to have someone give those interested in posting photos of their DSs a kind critique on DS standard. I also agree with you and Marj that to me personally what is between the ears and in the heart outweighs looks hands-down as long as structure does not compromise functionality. With my GSDs, I chose those who could function in any sport venue. We competed in a large variety of dog sports because I wanted to prove to myself mostly (and to the naysayers) what a versatile breed the GSD indeed is. Sound physical structure was paramount but so was sound temperament and intelligence.

I really do want to learn more and eventually get accustomed to which DSs have a combo of both physical and temperament assets as well as those who are stronger in one or the other of these assets.

Marj, I would love for you to post pictures of the dogs when you make your trip to France, if you would indeed share those as a learning tool for me and others interested.

We are supposed to have another ice storm this evening so I hope to post pictures of my DS, Zip, to get some critique.

GSDNanny · Post by **GSDNanny** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 9:59 pm

Oh and with all that said above, an old dog training buddy many many years ago did tell me something when I was researching to purchase my first working line GSD. I told her that looks didnt matter, I just wanted function, sound temperament. She told me to remember I would have to be looking at the dog constantly in training and at home, and a nice looking dog sure makes it all easier. And over the many years since, I have seen some downright homely butt-ugly GSDs especially during my rescue years.

She was pretty much right on.
I havent seen many DSs in person, but so far, none fall into this category, thank goodness.

leih merigian · Post by **leih merigian** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:09 am

GSDNanny wrote:...She told me to remember I would have to be looking at the dog constantly in training and at home, and a nice looking dog sure makes it all easier...

Oh, boy, do I agree with that! But, I'd also add that what appeals to me may not appeal to another. It is so important for your own dog to really appeal to you IM very HO

For me, the face is just critical. I really, really have to love the face. And, for me, I've seen plenty of pictures of DS faces that I would never want to own for myself! Of course, all puppies are cute, so you sure don't know from how the puppy's face looks. But, I figure, take a very good look at the parents, you'll get a good idea, and that worked for me with Geyser, for sure. Were looks the main thing I was looking for? No way. But, they are important, no denying it (at least, to me).

I checked G's tail this evening, and it reaches waaaay down, almost to the floor! Do they grow into their tails, as they tend to their ears, or will it always be relatively long? (Again, I don't care one way or the other...I like the way she looks a lot, but just curious...)

vneerland · Post by **vneerland** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:17 am

Long tails will remain long. Big ears will always be big (though proportionally less so than the puppy stage)
If there are people interested in it, let's try to get some official critiques for those who want/dare. While we all tend to agree that looks don't work, I don't think we can improve a look (if we so desired) as long as we have to wonder what is, and what is not correct according to the standard.

turnnburn52984 · Post by **turnnburn52984** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:12 am

I have not had much time online lately, and I'm missing out on a great discussion! My Koenig is FAR from ideal. I'd be happy to post a pic for people to critique, although most of you have seen him many times.

He's big. 85lbs and still under 2yrs. Big bone, thick. Big, GSD like head. Right now we've got giraffe neck, I'm hoping he'll outgrow/grow into it. (I know another DS owner just went thorough this stage, but her boy is younger then mine) He's long in the back, with a very deep chest and tucked up tummy. Tail is set on the low side, with a sloping croup. Tail is long, and CURVED!!!!!!! Ears are ridiculously huge.
All that said, he's an intense dog, with a crazy work ethic, who is amazingly patient with my family (young kids) All his conformation faults aside, he's a great example of what the breed should be, IMO.

Anything major I missed?

turnnburn52984 · Post by **turnnburn52984** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:21 am

Head shot

Ears, anyone? We've got size to spare...

He seemed to look more 'dutch'... more correct, when he was younger. These 2 pics were just a few weeks after I got him. He'd gained weight, but still had a crappy coat from eating Alpo. He was just over 1 yr in these 2 pics.

(his tail set looks MUCH nicer right here!)

FG167 · Post by **FG167** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:59 am

I also know that Madix is conformationally incorrect. His tail set is low and tail is curved (gay tail) and long I think. He has a tuck up and a neat little waist. His ears are also large but I think the set is ok. His face is much more narrow than the GSDs in my Schutzhund club but not sure where that falls as far as correct. He's quite leggy but also may be due to the fact that I neutered very young. He's also fairly light, he only weighs 65 lbs. I think his facial expression is fantastic and I fall for that sweet gaze every time.

Temperament: He's reactive to people and dogs although I have heard that is common in shepherds as a whole and may also be due to age. He's extremely biddable, handler sensitive (NOT handler soft by any means), can take a hard correction though, very drivey and very bright. He's managed to do well in numerous sports (the training, we haven't trialed) with out a hitch in the learning. He's also very affectionate with the people in his "group" and rather demanding about it lol. He expects fairness so unfair corrections are pointless and his thresholds for just about everything are extremely low. Very high prey drive, not sure if we'll get defense drive as he matures or not - will have to wait and see. He's also very mouthy - meaning not that he touches me with his mouth - but that he barks about EVERYTHING and moans and groans and growls and in general holds frequent, long conversations with me

Anyway I don't have any really nice stacked photos but here are some shots:

This one is from a year ago:

Head shot:

Expression:

vneerland · Post by **vneerland** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 2:56 pm

Great job ladies!

Those are some nice pictures. I am not going to pass my judgement, but we are trying to rustle up some Dutch officionado's.
Hang in there!

GSDNanny · Post by **GSDNanny** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:05 pm

vneerland wrote: If there are people interested in it, let's try to get some official critiques for those who want/dare. While we all tend to agree that looks don't work, I don't think we can improve a look (if we so desired) as long as we have to wonder what is, and what is not correct according to the standard.

Oh yeh, I definitely want/dare so count me in. Intended to post pics last night but had a house full of folks over for supper so do plan on posting this evening. I am just really curious and it would be awesome to have official critiques.

GSDNanny · Post by **GSDNanny** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:16 pm

Kelly, that is funny about the ears. In fact, the first thing I thought of was when the wolf told Red Riding Hood, "the better to hear you with my dear!" Personally, I like those sized ears.

Oh and Falon, I just get chill bumps with every picture I see of Madix that shows that distinct brindling so well in the photos. My Zip is very dark and her brindle coloring is golden-red so it isnt very visible.

Leih, I am not so sure about DSs but I do know with my GSDs that as they mature there is a process we refer to as the head opening up where the skull broadens and catches up with the ears and nose.

Marjolein · Post by **Marjolein** » Thu Feb 10, 2011 8:22 pm

I too will hold my tongue! Working on getting an expert in :dswink"

Dutch Shepherd Forum

Standard types

Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types

Re: Standard types