Whilst searching german shepherd puppies I've come across a new (to me) hip and elbow scoring of :- a, a fast and s.  How long has this been in? Maybe a good idea if a lay person like me could understand it.  I don't mind change but....

Think you are looking at scores from Germany. :)

This might help with comparing different scoring systems. http://www.dogsworldwide.com/news/contributions/rf3.htm

Thankfully elbow scores are internationally the same.

Actually that chart is incorrect for the US data.  here is the one on the US OFA website: http://www.offa.org/hd_grades.html

Also it mentions the old style Swedish scoring, which was abandoned years ago. Sweden now uses A, B etc like most other countries on the continent.

I also think its either German or some other European country but in Germany they still use letters with a number after the letter, to give the scores -

I did not understand this bit you wrote - "a fast and s" - is that the way its written on the pedigree?

Below is an example of a German pedigree & the hip scores -he's my own dogs sire & the hip & eye test results are immediately below the moving script at the top, as far as I know they still use the letters with a number after the letter in Germany, I am unaware of any international changes

HD-1, PHTVL/PHPV-frei,

http://www.dobermann.com/rueden/stevinhage_wanja/wanja.htm
.

I have seen "fast" used -I believe it means something like "almost" in German.

Heathspaw wrote-"they still use the letters with a number after the letter in Germany"

Badly written - I meant they still use the letters HD with a number after it.
.

I have seen "fast" used -I believe it means something like "almost" in German.

Sort of strange really, a west german language was the language used here until the french invaded, Alfred the great would have been German speaking & despite that film 'Braveheart' Edward 1st & the peasant population would have spoken the Norman language - no wonder Willi Wallace was peed off!
.

Found this to explain the wording

Dogs with unsatisfactory scores cannot be bred from. The three pass grades are (1) 'a' or 'normal', (2) 'fast normal' or 'almost normal' and (3) 'noch zugelassen' or 'still acceptable'. The other grades are fail grades and dogs with such grades cannot enter a breed survey

The site below is a dutch site & they are using high case letters - see HD-A (non dysplastic)

http://www.wantijdobermann.nl/breeding_bitches.htm

I dont understand the written UK scores, someone on one site, maybe this, said that a HD score of 16 was average for either Rots or Labs (cant remember for sure) - so what does that mean in terms of dysplastic or not??
.

A dog that has a score of more that 0 has HD, surely that is obvious ? The higher the score the worse the HD, the old Certificate, breeders letter & fail had the limits of 4 for the certificate(no more than 2 on either side), 8 for a breeders letter(no more than 4 on either side) & 9 & above were classed as fails. This is why the GSD league developed the hip scoring scheme  with the BVA, which was limited to GSDs at first & later adopted(just as the first hip assessment scheme had been adopted from the GSD only scheme earlier)by the KC

The BVA site has a full explanation of the scheme

>A dog that has a score of more that 0 has HD, surely that is obvious ? The higher the score the worse the HD

"The average dog" (a score taken as an average of all dogs scored under the BVA?KC scheme) has a score of 19. Anything under 25 is functionally normal.

A dog that has a score of more that 0 has HD, surely that is obvious ?

It would have been if I were looking on a german site but i have never heard of anything like that high number i think the highest they are allowed under german dobe club rules is HD-2, if its higher they would not be allowed a breeding licence & the pups could not be registered as pedigree dogs, same applies throughout Europe with dobes, so its hardly 'obvious' to me cause i never heard of any such high scores there.
.

Hethspaw, 0 isn't a high number - it's the lowest score possible, and indicates totally perfect hips!

The scoring in the UK, as far as I understand it is a grading from 0 (lowest) to ???    and both sides would be scored eg RH (right hand) 3/LH (left hand) 5, total 8.   I imagine the A, B and C seen elsewhere would mean scores would come within each range.

Obviously the higher the score, the more that animal should NOT be bred from.

From the KCSB Records "The lower the score the less the degree of HD (the maximum possible score is RH53/LH 53  Total 106."

Elbows - "Each elbow is graded from 0 - 3 but only the highest value (right or left) is used as the overall grade.   The lower the overall grade, the less the degree of ED"

As far as I can see in the UK, there is no 'must not be bred from'.   That's left up to the breeder!!

I might be overstepping the line here so I hope Admin reads this and deletes what I mustn't write.  I found this scoring on Champdogs Breeders under puppies in East Sussex.

   I imagine the A, B and C seen elsewhere would mean scores would come within each range.


Which is why the UK scheme is SO much better. We know an exact score for not only each part of the hip, but also for each hip.

Just looked on that litter and if you click on the health results it's not showing as the best results, it's a choice of three and this dog has the middle result.

Hethspaw, 0 isn't a high number - it's the lowest score possible, and indicates totally perfect hips!

Again in Europe I would have understood that straight away as well as A & B in europe, but, I did not know that the HD 16 scores I read on a UK forum at some point & which read as a 'no hassle this is the norm here' type of way.

It was because of the way it was written (no hassle this is normal) I assumed that here they must be doing a different kind of measuring system than what I am used to in Europe.

Just to clarify, I do not have UK bloodline dobes, the only one which probably did was a rescue bitch in 1976, since then I have avoided the UK gene pool, so that figure '16' I have simply never heared of, or anything like it.

Yes I do know >IN EUROPE< that 0 is the lowest score and indicates perfect hips but I am used to those kinds of results, its not at all unusual in Europe for Dobes to have what you call 'totaly perfect' hips - take into account that over there, as far as Dobes go, they have carrying out mandatory hip scoring for around 40 years, if it goes above the permitted 1 or 2 then thats the end of possibilities for the dog.

Below is an Austrian mating pair, both dogs are HD free (0).

Austrian Breeder
http://bit.ly/1mdln8N

You also see about 3 other tests at the side of the HD scores - I mean all this stuff is just perfectly normal procedure in Europe.
.

I imagine the A, B and C seen elsewhere would mean scores would come within each range.

Yes, if they were not no would allow the dog in a mating - Im talking Euro Dobes only, I dont know about the rest.
.

>Again in Europe I would have understood that straight away as well as A & B in europe, but, I did not know that the HD 16 scores I read on a UK forum

The UK system of scoring actually gives more information that the other methods, because it describes each hip, not just both in total; in Europe a dog could have very unbalanced hips and you wouldn't know.

>a HD score of 16 was average for either Rots or Labs (cant remember for sure) - so what does that mean in terms of dysplastic or not??

Labradors have a BMS of 14; Rottweilers have a BMS of 12. These would be a B (transitional) under the FCI scoring system. A score of between 0 and 10 would be designated 'A' - no HD.

"The average dog" (a score taken as an average of all dogs scored under the BVA?KC scheme) has a score of 19. Anything under 25 is functionally normal

However dogs should be bred with the view of producing the perfect hips(& elbows) & not the "average" nor functionally normal & of course the scores should be even on both hips & not 25 on one side & 0 on the other nor 19 on one & 0 on the other as both these scenarios would not be good for the dog & in fact for GSDs the median is 12(not 18 which is the BMS(mean score))& it is this that should be used when selecting breeding dogs & bitches

The 5 year mean score is actually 16 & therefore using a benchmark of 19 or 25 as OK to breed from is totally wrong

Hethspaw, this comparison chart will help you.

The UK system of scoring actually gives more information that the other methods, because it describes each hip, not just both in total; in Europe a dog could have very unbalanced hips and you wouldn't know.

As far as I have ever understood the scores are for both hips, but the way they written they are simple enough to put on a pedigree, they dont put an entire medical record on a pedigree or on their representations on the net, if you go to collect a pup you get the lot of original documentation put in front of you to go through with the breeder, if you wish, they all do it as routine the tests are mandatory.

What you dont seem to take into account of is that some dogs fail some part of the whole fit for purpose test, thats the whole point of the test throughout mainland Europe, its only here in UK there no mandatory tests for all working breeds & pedigree dogs exposed illustrated the consequences loud and clear.
.

As far as I have ever understood the scores are for both hips, but the way they written they are simple enough to put on a pedigree, they dont put an entire medical record on a pedigree or on their representations on the net,

Incorrect. All you need to do is go to MyKC and look up a dog and you will see the score for EACH hip. Much, much more use than the European system where A could mean one hip is 0 and one 8 for instance, but you'd never know.

pedigree dogs exposed illustrated the consequences loud and clear.

Really but the 2 GSDs that were vilified were actually Germany imports who had all their health & working qualifications !!!!!!!!!! from Germany so what did that prove about GSDs in the UK ???????

As for GSD breeders doing only mandatory health testing here in the UK there are NO mandatory health tests for BYB, pet breeders & puppy farmers(same all over the world BTW-you can get cheap GSDs in on the continent from non health tested parents), the only mandatory health testing is for ABS members, because unlike on the continent the UK KC is a private club that holds pedigree dog records, not the same as the FCI or SV

Some breeders do MORE health testing that is mandatory in any country & some do exactly the same testing as is done on the continent.

Before making sweeping statements Dennis, you should do your research & some continental dogs are not "fit for purpose" despite having passed all the health & aptitude tests

Really but the 2 GSDs that were vilified were actually Germany

Yes your right, I saw them & they looked a mess.

I know there were problems big time with GSDs in Germany & the last I heard of it (appx 2006ish) the German club had asked Herr Helmut Raiser to become the equivilant of head breed warden in Germany & help get the breed right again, whats happened since then I have no idea, its not my breed so I did not follow what happened if he accepted.

I was told by someone here that Herr Raiser would have wanted to bring it back to the working conformations & whatever else he thought was needed but whats happened I have no idea, I had no reason to follow it. The best footage of how they should be conformation wise are the Hitler clips with Blondie, authentic, non posed footage of that dog & how they used to be, theres plenty of that dog on youtube.

I hope you can give us some info on whats happened since they decided to do something about the breed? its been around 13 years since I heard anything about it in germany

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLnPamdtI1A
.

you should do your research & some continental dogs are not "fit for purpose" despite having passed all the health & aptitude tests

If I wanted a different breed of euro lines I would research it thoroughly.
.

Rubbish 0 is radiographic perfection.

In my breed which is generally sound and healthy in hips has only ever had two score 0 in this country.

My 14years and 8 month old bitch is still sound and still goes out for 40 - 60 minute brisk road walks each day, her hip score is 14, and her very sound 11 year old daughters is 15, I have lower scoring ones (8 - 12) but the 14 scorer is probably still one of the best movers.

Under grading systems a score below 18 in USA would be normal, 18 - 25 borderline and only over 25 would be in the dysplastic ranges from mild, moderate, to severe.

>However dogs should be bred with the view of producing the perfect hips(& elbows) & not the "average" nor functionally normal

Wrong that's called throwing the baby out with the bathwater but concentrating on if you like the 'extreme' of perfection you are limiting the gene pool, which is the major cause of health issues becoming prevalent, 

A dog is more than a pair of hips.

If you go to the Kennel club website and read the health reports done each year over the last few years you will see that taking rolling mean shows that most breeds have improved in hip status, especially where there were formerly rather high scores, but in breeds that scored pretty well the differences are negligible.

We need dogs to be functionally normal, with good temperaments, good sight, and be typical of their breed with the traits required for work where applicable.

Edit: re elbows since last year the KC has issued advice that only 0 elbows are bred from, as ED has been found to be very strongly heritable.

The old Swedish system (from when I lived there) went Utmärkt, UA, 1,2,3,4 and 5. That clearly differentiated between perfect hips (I believe the comparison given with Utmärkt is 0 to 4) and those without any problems but not perfect. "Utmärkt" basically means excellent, whereas UA stands for "Utan Anmärkning" = without remark, meaning there was nothing to complain about, the hip is CLEAR of HD, but not as perfect as an Utmärkt. Back then you would only breed from Utmärkt or UA so what most breeders strived for was to get UA on all their dogs. I believe UA equalled scores up to 18. 1 to 5 indicated some form of HD with 5 being the most severe.

Wrong that's called throwing the baby out with the bathwater but concentrating on if you like the 'extreme' of perfection you are limiting the gene pool, which is the major cause of health issues becoming prevalent,

A dog is more than a pair of hips.

Indeed, a perfect pair of hips is no good on a dog with a bad heart or poor temperament or anything else similar. I certainly would not ever deliberately breed from a high hip score but everything has to be taken into consideration. The dog I had with a hip score of 96 lived a pretty normal and certainly happy life until he was 13. Had he not been hip scored we'd just have assumed he got arthritis in his old age. My foundation bitch died just before 14 when her legs simply would no longer obey her. She had a hip score of 11 and was genetically clear of CDM (DNA tested), and still it was her legs that ended her life.

Rubbish 0 is radiographic perfection.

What is rubbish?
.

That anything above 0 is dysplastic. 

It's like saying anyone whose sight isn't 20/20 (or whatever the current perfect measure is) is blind.

Now I am registered blind, but I do have some sight, about 20% in my best eye.

25 may be functional but ONLY if the score is balanced, 25:0=25 which means the dog has half a hip on one side & from bitter experience that is definitely not function for a working dog for a full active life of quality,

Surely the ideal of dog breeding should be to produce perfection in ALL things not just external or internal, I am well aware that the most beautiful dog stood can be the ugliest dog moving or working, agreed hips aren't everything, and I rate character, tractability and health equally, IMHO it is not throwing the baby out with the bathwater if the breed has a wide & available genetic pool & the poorest hips/elbows/character/tractability are disregarded. One cannot breed just to produce a beautiful static dog

Wrong analogy Barbara, you can have a sight defect without any possibility of being considered blind. Visual acuity (VA) is acuteness or clearness of vision & interestingly most humans have better than 20/20 vision-this is an average(not median), if you have simple Myopia or Hyperopia it can be corrected to 20/20(or better)by lens & have no blindness rating, if you have diabetic retinopathy,  for example,  this is not correctable by lens & could result in rateable blindness

Brainless That anything above 0 is dysplastic. 

It's like saying anyone whose sight isn't 20/20 (or whatever the current perfect measure is) is blind.

Now I am registered blind, but I do have some sight, about 20% in my best eye.

I suppose it has to start from a number point - to much subjective analogies that dont mean anything really.
.

25 may be functional but ONLY if the score is balanced, 25:0=25 which means the dog has half a hip on one side & from bitter experience that is definitely not function for a working dog for a full active life of quality,

Which is why the UK scoring system is of so much more value.

There was that recent article by a US vet claiming all cases of unilateral HD in her opinion/experience were caused by injury and not genetics.

Sadly not in my experience 3 siblings all with same score all fed differently & brought up differently

Just out of interest, how high was the score on the bad hip?

I rate character, tractability and health equally,

As far as Dobes here goes Nikita is the one who knows about them, she gave horrendus % figs for CM but if she reads this maybe she would give a wider view of other things with the breed here, Ive only seen 3 in this past 18 months & only 2 of those I was able to have a quick chat with the owners.
.

>25 may be functional but ONLY if the score is balanced, 25:0=25

We are talking selection from breeding.  HD has been proven to be inherited as a bilateral condition, it is hereditary by around 30%, and the rest of the score is likely to be influenced by environment.

Malcolm Willis stated that he would expect anything more than the odd couple of points difference to be down to non hereditary environmental factors, so not good for that dogs individual hip, but not something to affect how it would breed.

In my breed several littermates were scored, scores were 3/3, 6/6, 7/5, and 19/3,  His advice was to breed from the one sided bitch as he'd expect her to breed like the lower side.

She produced hips similar to her brother and sister.

In my breed several littermates were scored, scores were 3/3, 6/6, 7/5, and 19/3,  His advice was to breed from the one sided bitch as he'd expect her to breed like the lower side.

She produced hips similar to her brother and sister.

Interesting indeed. This is very much on my mind at the moment as I am awaiting hip scores and have been told one side did not look as good as the other. I have read up on it and came to much the same conclusion -although I suppose a LOT will hinge on just how high the score will end up.  I have a male dog that has a score of 2/6 so one side is 3 times higher than the other, but really you still can't moan about 6! Not a bad hip by any means. Anyway I'd say that in this day and age my main worry would be would anyone buy pups where one parent had a higher than average score due to one side being higher than the other?! Be awful to breed a nice litter only to find nobody was willing to buy the pups.

Malcolm Willis stated that he would expect anything more than the odd couple of points difference to be down to non hereditary environmental factors, so not good for that dogs individual hip, but not something to affect how it would breed.

Dr Willis before he died went to court & stated in court that he considered ALL HD to be inherited(3 puppy owners were trying to sue a stud dog owner over their dogs poor(for the breed)hip scores)I have seen the court transcripts so I know this is not hearsay. He was the expert witness for the 3 plaintiffs & they lost the case. The dogs were not actually affected by the HD the severity was not enough to stop the dogs working or having a normal quality of life. the stud dog had a lower than median score for the breed & was a known hip improver from the statistics of his offspring.

Dr Willis was very adamant in court that he considered HD to be totally genetic & therefore the stud owner was at fault ! The defendant had better experts on his side(include 2 professors one of canine genetics & the other canine orthopaedics)& they produced evidence to disprove Dr Willis' statements.

Dr Willis obviously changed his stance from multi causal HD to purely genetics

The bottom line is that perfection should be aimed for in all things for the dogs that are bred to have the best quality of life & in a breed with a wide gene pool(which is NOT the case with your breed I understand)than only the very best should be bred from

Just out of interest, how high was the score on the bad hip?

Bad hips plural, mine was 20:4=24, litter sister was 21:4 7 litter brother 19:6. All had the same side high score as the parent with the uneven score. All 3 eventually needed surgical intervention before their 3rd birthday All had the 2 elements score 5 (worse than the parent), despite the other parent having even very very low scored parent, who usually produced better scored off spring than the other parent & as low as itself or better. So if it wasn't genetical what caused it ?

Very interesting Tommee -and what a shame.

> in a breed with a wide gene pool

According to population geneticists no breed has a wide enough gene pool to exclude the majority of animals from breeding which aiming for 'perfect' anything will do.

Aim for status quo, where the situation is within acceptable norms, or improvement if the overall situation is not good, but to aim for perfection in any one area is foolish.

>Just out of interest, how high was the score on the bad hip?

See above all four littermates scores given, hers worst side was 19 to the other 3.

According to population geneticists no breed has a wide enough gene pool to exclude the majority of animals from breeding which aiming for 'perfect' anything will do.

Aim for status quo, where the situation is within acceptable norms, or improvement if the overall situation is not good, but to aim for perfection in any one area is foolish.

It would have to be a spectacular dog/bitch with working ability no other dog/bitch had to be included in the gene pool for breeding in my breed. There is a huge gene pool available more than any KC restricted breed & my breed is all about working ability, health, character & tractability, appearance means nothing, there is no such thing as a dog of the wrong colour, coat type etc which restrict dogs that are assessed mainly or totally by their phenotype