- Thread starter
- #71
Yes. Both Dutch and Bullseye were differentiates and genetics so I am comparing by same age. He definitely is bigger than Bullseye but we could all guess that with Bullseye being so tiny all year. He is structurally about the same as Dutch. He isn’t as filled in as Dutch at this point. I’m ok with that though since I’ve got all year to slowing work him up. He definitely has a lot more muscle than Dutch.Have you compared last year's pics to this year's?
Cool. I thought you'd be comparing them. I'd expect some differences with the different genetics, and Bullseye to me smaller given all you went through with him. I've done that with litters of puppies - being able to compare things is valuable.Yes. Both Dutch and Bullseye were differentiates and genetics so I am comparing by same age. He definitely is bigger than Bullseye but we could all guess that with Bullseye being so tiny all year. He is structurally about the same as Dutch. He isn’t as filled in as Dutch at this point. I’m ok with that though since I’ve got all year to slowing work him up. He definitely has a lot more muscle than Dutch.
Yeh I’m think Bullseye was maybe a true FD and really held on to the D gene. The D gene is the dwarf and they like breeding it in between it adds muscle and power. So that would be why he wasn’t as big and I had to do next to nothing for him to put on muscle not fat.Cool. I thought you'd be comparing them. I'd expect some differences with the different genetics, and Bullseye to me smaller given all you went through with him. I've done that with litters of puppies - being able to compare things is valuable.
He was definitely FD also him being a natty probably helped with that too some nattys just don't get fatYeh I’m think Bullseye was maybe a true FD and really held on to the D gene. The D gene is the dwarf and they like breeding it in between it adds muscle and power. So that would be why he wasn’t as big and I had to do next to nothing for him to put on muscle not fat.