Talk about turnout etc by Kate & Joanna got me wondering what Lizzie's front TRULY looks like these days. I mean, I know it was really nice when she was a puppy. And I know that day-to-day it looks nice. But photographs are always interesting.
So here is Lizzie's fitted, wrapped front at 4 months old:
And here she is today, at 2.5 years old and just getting blown dry in the garage for our show weekend. Please ignore the expression, as she was most disappointed that I didn't have cheese. Here it is stacked:
and unstacked:
and unstacked:
You can see that she turns out a bit more on her right foot than on her left (and I actually think the way she's leaning and turning in this photo makes it look a little more so than it really is). That definitely wasn't there, even in casual everyday life, when she was a puppy. I suspect that most Cardis don't have exactly even fronts?
10 comments:
several of my cardis have more turnout on their front right foots also. Coincidence?
What a truly lovely puppy front, and not stinkin' bad as an adult :).
Clue turns out more on the right; Bronte on the left. The reason I think it's very interesting to analyze is that the turn-out is always accompanied by an increased "break" in the crook, which is what would happen if the ligaments that hold the radius to the "hand" were stretched. I don't think it's that the radius or ulna has grown too much; that's more what happens when they "knuckle over" (I need to get my hands on more knuckled-over legs, but from feeling Shiner's it feels to me like it's the ulna that's sticking out, meaning that the radius is the one that grew too little).
The other thing that says ligaments to me is that, at least in my dogs, when the dogs relax and don't bear weight on the joint--when they're lifting the leg to trot forward or when they're lying down--the leg with too much turnout is the same as its pair. It doesn't seem to be something skeletal.
Do you see that in Lizzie or am I just looking at my own dogs FAR too much :)?
I think way too many people interpret the turnout at "1:30" as the two middle toes, and therefore, think that the correct front is a more turned front. IMO, the toes themselves should look nearly like they are "screwed onto the foot itself straight forward." I think the actual turnout is mostly from the shape of the front and the way the entire foot fits, not just toes pointing out to the side. The other thing I notice is the turnout that starts at the pastern (anyone seen my Gizzer from the front?? wowee!), and not just turnout at the foot. But I see loads of Cardigans that people think have fantastic fronts, and the turnout starts at the pastern, and perpetuates through to a foot that's WAY too turned out. at the toes.
So when I look at Lizzie's front now, the toes are going forward, but the shape of the foot itself turns to about 1:30, and not just the toes and foot twisted and pointing out. The online Illustrated Standard shows it very clearly.
Syd's front, well, I love it. I don't care that I'm biased, she's got a beautiful front and I wouldn't trade it for anything, not even a second white stocking, haa.
Bree, well, I have now learned about growth plate injury, and sometimes I wonder when I see feet turned out in a specific, weird way, could these dogs have a growth plate issue. Bree at 18 weeks had a lovely front. Around 7 months, I noticed the turnout starting in the right foot. Not gradually, like it started as a pup, but all of a sudden. X-rays revealed that my 1/2 Cardigan, 1/2 Mountain Goat Bree had injured her growth plate, likely when she opted to LAUNCH off the back of the sofa just because it looked like fun.
But Bree's turnout in the right and the dogs with growth plate issues looks different (at least to me) than dogs that just plain have too much turnout, without growth plate issues.
I hope that genetics perpetuate through the years for Syd, as grandma Maggie, at 17 years old, could still win any challenge that includes fronts.
JMHO, and timely, Jeri, since I was going to post about fronts soon, also. But my post will be about shoulder placement, and some great stuff that Norma taught me about what I'm looking at and what I'm looking FOR in a Cardigan profile. :-)
I think mismatched turn out is often a growth plate thing...one may close just slightly before the other, etc... Not up to writing a novel about it tonight but having seen dogs with major growth plate issues and minor (I think our Julie had slight premature GPC) those fronts have extreme turn and knuckling.
Actually (as some of you know) fronts and shoulders are my kill all so I love seeing and talking about good ones.
Lizzie's front looks very nice :)
I do think that it might well be tendon-related rather than bone, as when she lays down her feet are even. Her unevenness is pretty mild though.
I'm a little surprised by the pictures at how much her stacked front really looks quite a bit like it did as a puppy.
Sarah - from the pictures I've seen, Syd has a GORGEOUS front. :o)
Syd DOES have a gorgeous front (and, actually, I've been meaning to ask you about whether you've ever thought about her undesired behavior as being a "finishing" malfunction, the way Ian Dunbar and Jean Donaldson define predatory drift, but in her case it's punishment and not predation... hmmm, I should post that on YOUR blog, not this one).
I think that one element of the correct front that can be overlooked is that it must have a short "hand." The metacarpal area, which is our palm and in their feet is the line from the crook to the foot proper, has to be very short to be stable, because the entire assembly is somewhat offset or twisted by the achondroplasia. (as an aside, that's why, I'm convinced, the push toward short legs and round bone is actually protective and sound, and would be entirely in line with what the founding breeders would have wanted.)
To illustrate, if you take two chopsticks and put them points-together but keep them both straight, you and a partner can push the chopsticks against each other quite hard and nothing would happen. That's a greyhound front leg, long bones but they're aligned very vertically. On the other hand, if you take the chopsticks and offset one tip from the other just slightly, and then push them together, it will take almost no force to "break" the joint or even break the chopsticks.
Now imagine taking two child's blocks and offsetting them just slightly. You can put a great deal of weight on that offset joint before it deforms and breaks. Because the dwarfism twists and offsets the way the bones come together, the bones have to be both short AND thick, and as vertical as possible after cupping the ribcage, to form a joint that can carry a proportionally heavy dog without breaking down.
You have to have all three--short and thin will break down faster. Short, thick, but the front looks like >*< will break down faster.
And where I think the ligaments come in, why we probably have to really examine growth rates and weight-bearing in puppies, is that once a joint begins to deform (and here I mean it like in engineering, that it is buckling or breaking) it will continue to do so. A small deformation leads to increased strain on the joint leads to more deformation and even more strain on the joint, etc. The only thing that holds the Cardigan's front legs together is ligaments; the bones don't fit into sockets and there's no solid bone-in-bone joint like there is in the hip. If the ligaments begin to stretch, the whole thing will buckle.
Somewhere, I have about 35 shots JUST of fronts from one of the NY shows in 2004. I think most of them are even labeled. It'd be interesting to see how those dogs who are still around are at this age. :)
Indy's front is evenly turned out and right where I *think* it is supposed to be, but he could use a little more wrap. (I'm debating bringing him out as a neutered veteran JUST for fun- I think he'd like it.)
Good point about the length of pastern, Joanna. I agree. And while it may not be something that many think about when making breeding plans, it's a BIGGIE for me. When shopping around for Syd, several dogs were off the list simply because their offspring I have seen have longer pasterns. Jake, bless his heart, has ONLY produced long pasterns and not so much substance, and that "hourglass" turn from the pastern, almost C-shaped front in any pups I've seen. Except in our litter, and I think that's ONLY because this was a Tight, Tight linebreeding on Maggie. If it had been any other btch, I feel sure we would have had long pasterns and that "curve at the pasterns" front. One of our pups got longer pasterns, not exaggerated, but not my style. She has nice round bone, so it doesn't seem so bad. When Jacque and I first started discussing boyfriends for Syd, my two criteria that I thought were the most essential were improvement in rear, and SHORT pastern producer. I think if we don't take that into consideration, it could come back to bite us with long pasterns. It may be there waiting to pop out! Even in future generations, that long, curvy pastern has perpetuated in his progeny, with a litter that was very similar in pedigree to our Jake x Josie litter, even a short-pasterned, round-boned, heavy substance sire couldn't overcome that front, and the difference in pups from that litter and ours is like night and day. And for that reason, I say thank DOG for Maggie's influence in our litter in the Front department! And it's always in the back of my mind that I have to be mindful of it for future generations.
Fronts are important to me, not only from the front, but from a shoulder placement perspective, upper arm, etc. Almost 8 years ago, I was naive and fell for the "I have show pups and performance pups" bit, and I only wanted a performance dog. Well, you imagine what I got, and poor Kane's heart is with me in performance, but his shoulders have no ability to absorb the brunt of jumps at all. He trialed ONCE in agility, and I pulled him from the sport because I could see his expression while jumping. He'd jump and land on hot coals or broken glass if I asked him to, without complaining. But I could see it so we stopped agility. Even in obedience, with heads-up heeling, his poor shoulder placement causes him to need a chiropractor to keep him tuned up.
So Jeri, are you going to compile all the comments and make them into a new post? :-)
I meant to say also that I'll try to get some photos of Bree's front if I can find someone to help snap the photos. Her left front foot looks lovely, fitted to the front, round fat feet I could just eat with a spoon, and the cutest short pasterns. Since I know that her right side was due to injury, and I'm to blame for not catching her in her "base jumping" adventures, I don't rule her out for breeding. If she had an injury from normal, every day activities, then I might reconsider. But keeping this puppy off of ledges was nearly impossible. Norma did puppy daycare for Bree a few times, and she's the one who dubbed her 1/2 mountain goat. She said she's never seen a Cardigan quite so cat-like in climbing!
Thanks, Jeri. Good subject and post. I just posted pictures of all the dogs in my house for comparison.
Post a Comment