I just came up on this video on here, but didn’t know it was about gamefowl. Good lesson in genetics and dominant and recessive genes. But to be honest, I disagree with questions like this. Not offense to the man who made the video or anyone else, but if you’re breeding gamefowl, you should be more concerned with cutting and gameness rather than color and comb type. When you start looking for different things to breed for like comb and color, tail and wing size, you lose sight of what they’re supposed to be. When a cocker starts breeding for phenotype in gamefowl, he’s already lost. Genotype is where the money is in gamefowl boys. Spangles are ok to look at I guess, but I rather be looking at a double barrel ace cock that I bred. The spangle color in most of these birds today wasn’t intentional, but rather a side effect. Now the infusion of whitehackle blood into these other strains was the intentional part. Back when it was legal here a man needed deep cutting, dead game fowl to compete and if yours didn’t have it, you better go and get it quick. Some looked for the old Hatch blood, some looked to infuse asils if he needed to add some cut into his birds. All the great breeders of the past may have chosen this blood or that for different reasons but they were all looking for the same result and that was winning fights. Whatever strain could get them there the quickest is what they were looking for. I tell you what they wasn’t looking for....what color he was or what kind of comb was on his head. Just saying.
A very thorough reply and no offense taken. I will say though that even in the legal days physical traits did play a part. Some men wanted uniform looking fowl, others wanted to camoflage a winning line to get better odds. Still some even believed that certain pit traits were tied to visual traits. An example would be if a man had a line that threw yellow and white legs, he may feel the white legs were faster and the yellows stronger. In any case I do agree that now that showing is on the rise there is the danger of being blinded by color and disregarding type and temperament.
Well all I know is the cockers I grew up knowing and learning from never bred for color. Outside of cutting and gamensss, they might’ve been looking for better station, higher break or ring savy or smarter birds but, again these were all done with the same goals in mind which were to improve their winnining percentage and breed some world beaters. Color was never one of those traits is my point.
I did the opposite . Since barred rocks were originally single comb Dominiques. I breed barred rocks to rose combs . I worked on it for 8 years .
Wow... Thank you so much for you sharing your knowledge...
You're welcome! Seen that pic you sent too, that's a nicely built bird!
Can You Still Make a Video about, Why Some Hens Have Spurs and Most Don't ?
ua-cam.com/video/r6DnEq9ke_w/v-deo.html talk about it a bit in this one I put up recently.
No pictures
What's The Difference Between Line Breeding and Breeding True ?
Line breeding is a breeding system. Breeding true simply means that they produce a uniform and consistent result.
All 4 My Kelsos Have The Spangled Gene
If you have more starting pairs you can achieve the result faster,
Very true, and it helps keep the gene pool wide.
I just came up on this video on here, but didn’t know it was about gamefowl. Good lesson in genetics and dominant and recessive genes. But to be honest, I disagree with questions like this. Not offense to the man who made the video or anyone else, but if you’re breeding gamefowl, you should be more concerned with cutting and gameness rather than color and comb type. When you start looking for different things to breed for like comb and color, tail and wing size, you lose sight of what they’re supposed to be. When a cocker starts breeding for phenotype in gamefowl, he’s already lost. Genotype is where the money is in gamefowl boys. Spangles are ok to look at I guess, but I rather be looking at a double barrel ace cock that I bred. The spangle color in most of these birds today wasn’t intentional, but rather a side effect. Now the infusion of whitehackle blood into these other strains was the intentional part. Back when it was legal here a man needed deep cutting, dead game fowl to compete and if yours didn’t have it, you better go and get it quick. Some looked for the old Hatch blood, some looked to infuse asils if he needed to add some cut into his birds. All the great breeders of the past may have chosen this blood or that for different reasons but they were all looking for the same result and that was winning fights. Whatever strain could get them there the quickest is what they were looking for. I tell you what they wasn’t looking for....what color he was or what kind of comb was on his head. Just saying.
A very thorough reply and no offense taken. I will say though that even in the legal days physical traits did play a part. Some men wanted uniform looking fowl, others wanted to camoflage a winning line to get better odds. Still some even believed that certain pit traits were tied to visual traits. An example would be if a man had a line that threw yellow and white legs, he may feel the white legs were faster and the yellows stronger. In any case I do agree that now that showing is on the rise there is the danger of being blinded by color and disregarding type and temperament.
Well all I know is the cockers I grew up knowing and learning from never bred for color. Outside of cutting and gamensss, they might’ve been looking for better station, higher break or ring savy or smarter birds but, again these were all done with the same goals in mind which were to improve their winnining percentage and breed some world beaters. Color was never one of those traits is my point.