Just asking your opinion please on the pedigree loss stat and its relevance as there was a theory you wanted to hit 26% in the mating you were considering

In your experience over time have you noticed a trend one way or the other
26 % like Brother fox or 8% like Aston rupee ? And or is between these two margins say 11% 20% a dead zone mating , mixed with a large chance of resulting in common types ?

I know there is no wrong , just preference, but for someone who does the procedure tenfold and results

Thought you might notice it factually

Cheers Ryan

The ancestry loss is a mathematical calculation whereby every gen you go back you lose half the % . So with any dog you have its parents that make up 50% of his ped each. A gen further back you have his parents parents who make up 25% of the dogs parents each(4 dogs). A gen further back you have 8 dogs so that's 12.5% each, and so on and so forth. I don't see that as being of any major relevance.

My percentages are different. You actually had it down pat in the 'Trends in Breeding' topic. So well done there.

Nathan Bendeich wrote:

grant thomas wrote: Does Poco Dorado's dam count as in this 'trend' Ryan...??? CLICK HERE I'm not sure on the %'s and how this 88% thing works or find it ? But I'm pretty sure it does grant CLICK HERE

So with what you were saying to Grant that coverage is actually 94% where the pedigrees of:

Brother Fox covers 8 of the 16 lines 50% in West Cape's ped;
Temlee covers 4 of the 16 lines 25% in West Cape's ped;
The Smoother covers 2 of the 16 lines 12.5% in West Cape's ped;
Spotted Lightning covers 1 of the 16 lines 6.25% in West Cape's ped.

So when you add those % up the total is 93.75%(15 of 16 lines) rounded off becomes 94%.

What this means is Cosmic Rumble's dam carries individuals that covers 94% West Cape's ped in the 5th gen, therefore I'm saying that Spiritual Rumble is re introducing an extremely high % of West Cape back into the the line that he was successful previously producing Paradox.

It's basically what Tesio did except I can't remember what % he was after if any. I last read the book over 20 yrs ago. He may have wanted say 3 horses the sire carried for example to make up the sire that was previously successful with the line. I think when we spoke last I may have said he may have needed 75% or less, hence where the 26% comes into play - I can't exactly remember. With dogs I always was after a minimum of 87.5% (14 of 16 lines in the 5th gen) coverage from the sire of choices dam which is far more specific and created much better intensity or vigour within the pedigree. As compared to if those different individuals were anywhere in the sires pedigree.

It's important to remember with racehorses they only have 1 foal where as with dogs there are many pups in a litter so the intensity you need with greyhound peds is far greater to try to breed a city conveyance.jmo.

I bought another 50% share in pup recently just before the litter were sent to break in along the same lines as above, the sire was Dyna Villa and his Dam Roxio Bale covered No Intent's pedigree at 88% https:/ CLICK HERE in the 5th gen . No Intent was the sire of the WA GOTY Foolish Girl, also from the same damline. The litter was also in the x path to Lemon Soda whose first 11 litters with this cross in Aus thru litterm8's Curryhill Brute/Fox on either side of the ped produced 6 individual city winners in 6 of those 11 litters, which is a strike rate of approx 55%. The owners graciously offered me a 50% share in one of them.

A pup in that Dyna Villa litter ran 15.68 first look at Richmond and another finished its breakin at McNamara's in 18.18 .........there's a long way to go for the litter as only 14mths of age and a lot can happen as you'd know, but if the nick works it can give you a real chance of competing at the highest level. Btw mine was over a second slower. lol.

Another point is Chloe Allen (Fernando Bale's dam) covers No Intent at 88%(14 of 16 lines) too https:/ CLICK HERE in the 5th gen and has worked with the same line previously producing a dog that won almost $250k but before going to Fernando the breeder may for example want to see if the broodie cld throw. So the objective was probably achieved at a lot less cost using Dyna Villa yet by going to the same well.

Now I'm in no way saying that Dyna Villa is a substitute for FB but in this case Dyna Villa may just have hopefully served his purpose.

Keep in mind tho this intensity/ vigour is achieved thru a nick and not on the front page of a ped.

Re 'the dead zone' I wldn't call it that as it's also a part of the ped. I prefer to call it a breeding parallel, which is vastly different to say copying a pedigree. Copying a pedigree of a champion dog will never get you better than that champion because the pedigree is different whereas going to the same well with a nick can create some terrific breeding parallels. Just a slight but very important distinction imo. Cheers and keep well.

Proven technique and very interesting to say the least , especially looking up old greats and how frequent it appears

Its great to see and discover , I think breeding 30-40 years ago were blessed to have such sires around to get such intense matings in the perfect placement

This topic came up over a coffee with an old head and it was great to listen how he remembered certain sires that were litter mates to champion broods back 5-8 generations without looking it up on data ! Very impressive

Last question lol

https:/ CLICK HERE
Is this mating 93 % saturation also , can it ever be 100%?

Yes we are aware graham, better to use a chance technique that has cause and effect then to shoot blindly I say

Cheers again Ryan , will be in contact soon

Nathan, re damline intensity at 100% - I can't remember seeing it producing a 500m type. That is of course assuming that's still a breeders objective.

So a linebreeding intensity like this https:/ CLICK HERE for example is what I'd call an 100% intensity, whereby Miss Mini Mouse carries individuals(New Tears,Chariot Supreme & Shining Light) whose peds cover the whole of Light of Fire's ped in the 5th generation.

Those old breeding books talk about allowing a pedigree to breathe, as there appears to be no outlet with this nick(dead zone as I believe you put it), may be a reason why the resultant pups in the actual litter were not 500m types. They were however still extremely fast.

So I look for at least one line in the nick in the 5th gen of the sire you want to replicate NOT covered, to allow that pedigree to breathe and therefore create that breeding parallel I was talking about previously.

Now with your example you have 2 doses of Ultravana. So going back to what Tesio said, he tries to recreate a sire that was previously successful with the line using different individuals. So Ultravana in the dams ped needs to be blanked out if you like, so the top half of the ped wld appear black as Ultravana comes thru the same (not different) individual that appears on both sides.

Then you need to recreate Ultravana thru the different individuals that are left in the dams ped. So there's another dose of Magic Gull, Eddy Barry and Temlee if you look at the Blood Quota table below whose peds cover 14 of the 16 lines (88%) in Ultravana's ped in the 5th gen.

Just duplicating Ultravana in full maybe classed as linebreeding by some but I don't think that's what Tesio had in mind when he said 'linbreeding through different individuals to recreate a sire that was prevously succesful with the line'. To me his idea wld have been to recreate another Ultravana or in this case as high a percentage of Ultravana as possible to create that breeding parallel and hopefully add some real vigour to the line when those 3 individuals, Magic Gull, Eddy Barry and Temlee combine again. Cheers.

Hi Nathan,

Just transferred your question back to this topic. Hope you don't mind.

There's no right or wrong m8 just what's there, and how you interpret it. I choose to look at a pedigree along Tesio's thought process.

Ultravana came to 88% for the reasons explained above through different individuals other than Ultravana himself. The duplication of Lansley Bale only comes to 75% thru different individuals i.e., as 4 of the 16 lines in the 5th gen aren't cross duplicated, those being the lines of Clonmannon Ivy, Darlin' Kim, Wild Port & Emiline Bale.

Again that's coming at it from a Tesio perspective. You may be looking at it differently and there's nothing wrong with that so long as it's logical and consistent. Cheers.

It was fantastic to see one of you're clients Quin the Derby last night,& I know he holds you in the highest Regard's.

Thanks again Ryan for your time , I thought I wouldve been slightly out
Didnt mean to come across right or wrong , meant same parallels to which your mating was even less room to breathe visually

But as always you know your stuff and its the other way around

Something I fear Ill never wrap my head around the finer percentages and who owns what ,lol
Oh well , thanks for your expertise bud
Cheers and congrats on your personal success and all connected

As for sharing of knowledge, I was told very early in the peace by Jim Meletios that was what this site is about, so I've always tried to adhere to Jim's mantra.

Besides I've learned so much from others on here too, so it's definitely a two way street. Graham Moscow's TSS theory I think has definite merit when I checked it out and added a great short cut to using a total outcross. Which brings me to you Nathan who pushed me to check out 100% intensity. I just chose to use Tesio's thought process to do it, which I understand can be complex, nonetheless I have you to thank for it. Jarrad Dale was another bloke who had a great idea re the known substituted studs and how to get around them when it came to tracing x path. All that comes from being on this site for almost 15 yrs now, and sharing info.

If I can add Nathan, what you are looking at there with Ultravana and Lansley Bale is extremely complex if you are trying to get your head around the percentages. If you can understand what you suggested to Grant(above) and understand how that figure came about, it'll only be a matter of time before it all starts to make sense. The percentages are all the same Tesio principle, converting his thoughts into numbers. The rest is just practise with peds, and you'll get there. As always feel free to call or pm. Cheers guys.

Hi Ted, sorry about the delay getting back.

Bit of a tricky nick with Worth Doing https:/ CLICK HERE . As you can see there's 2 doses of Worth Doing thru Pindari Express' dam Brook's Doll in the 6th gen behind Credibility & Little Denver, so we need to recreate another very high percentage nick to Worth Doing thru different individuals other than Worth Doing thru those 2 dogs to try to create some new vigour in the pedigree.

We can do that as Brook's Doll carries another set of individuals in Brother Fox, Waverley Supreme, Temlee & Zulu Moss (other than the ones in Worth Doing's ped), but the problem is these 4 dogs peds cover the whole of Worth Doing's ped within 5 gens. My experience with this results in short course types as it doesn't allow the pedigree to 'breathe', but keep in mind that's only if the ped nicks from a Worth Doing angle. Pindari Express' dams may well nick with another sire that was previously successful with the pedigree, but the whole point in looking at peds in this way (Tesio perspective), is to give the pedigree an opportunity to nick with what you want it to nick with. If that happens it can give the brood every opportunity to prove herself a decent matron and that's all you can do for her as her breeder.

Ted I can't do an overall appraisal of the mating as that can take hrs. It involves breaking down the damline looking for previously successful nicks just to start with. The first place I wld start tho wld be trying to recreate Friendly Flyer as he threw group dog & Tas GOTY Bomber's a Flyer. g/l with the litter they may still be decent types depending on who the mating nicks with. Cheers.