CHAMPIONS, SECRETS, FADS AND THEORIES

by Leo Turley, Perth, Australia,

The pigeon racing industry is awash with notions of secrets, fads and theories that somehow enable champion pigeons and champion pigeon fanciers to excel above others. The true measure of champions, in my opinion, is not the height of their accomplishments, but the length of time such excellence can endure.  Every region has its champion pigeon fancier and yet all look to be ordinary everyday people.  How can they gain success, apparently so easily, when others find it almost impossible?  We often point to favorable positions in a federation or union and certainly there are localities where winds and geographic contours ensure large volumes of race pigeons will always pass over lofts to make champions look even better.  True champions, however, are those that can be transplanted into areas, which are long acknowledged as “dead spots” for winning pigeon races and continue to win.  There is something different about a champion pigeon fancier and it is the same for exceptional people in all industrial and commercial occupations and in every sport.  Behind extraordinary skill, will be found a person with purpose, patience and the will to succeed. A champion swimmer starts with a deep affinity for swimming, as the primary driving force. There is a level of self-satisfaction, as the primary force is fuelled by success and drives the person on to even greater success. Dedication to the primary force brings forth a willingness to endure sacrifice from otherwise normal and healthy diversions of life. 

An exceptional trades-person has an eye for detail and a perception of quality that needs to be achieved to satisfy a personal need.  This inner need for perfection is quite separate to the quality specifications of the trade and extends to the care and maintenance of tools and the cultivation of discipline and the exercise of patience.  A master trades-person simply provides that which any other trades-person can provide, but does it with more thought, more care, and more dedication than his peers.  In the same vein, a champion pigeon fancier does not harbor special secrets, beyond the knowledge available to any pigeon fancier. There is only the will and the dedication to succeed, through employing ordinary and every day husbandry techniques that are known to all.  The path to success is well worn and any substantial departure from the beaten track is a recipe for disaster. There is a new word ‘Psychomotor’ which attempts to address excellence in sporting champions. It defines champions as being challenged by difficulty, exhibits precision, enjoys participation, excels in motor skills, is well coordinated, and has good manipulative skills and a high energy level.  This definition may well apply to champions in all activities.

No Secrets

There are no secret feed formula or special drinking potions employed by champion pigeon fanciers, even though some would have the novice believe otherwise. There is only careful management of pigeons, coupled with an eye for quality, the cultivation of discipline and the employment of patience.  Indeed, today, there is even more reason to strongly emphasize the point, lest there be unfounded dispersions cast on reputations.  Perhaps we have been a trifle too liberal with our praise of recent time, and too quick to confer greatness.  I think it is even more important, today, to hold in reserve the title of champion for those exemplary few whose excellence stands above and outlasts their critics.  There are no shortcuts to becoming a champion and if there were we would all know about it.  There is truth in the saying that “Two pigeon fanciers can keep a secret when one of them is dead!”

The skill of a pigeon fancier is far more important than the pigeons. A champion pays attention to detail and analyses defeat even more so than success.  Knowing why certain events went wrong provides major advantage for the future and is an exercise in lateral thinking. A champion, in any occupation, exercises lateral thinking as part of the daily discipline and practices patience as an art. Impatience is the undoing of many and is not well recognized.  As I have indicated, elsewhere, discipline extends to working to a timetable. A prime example, and like most sports, rising early in the morning is a trait of champions. To rise early, one must retire early. Having the pigeons out exercising, before other pigeon fancier neighbors, in the morning, ensures that the birds will join these later groups and fly longer and become stronger than their adversaries. A minor detail, but when put together with the many other minor details, becomes the formidable ‘secrets’ of champions.  The oft used phrase, “Genius is 5% inspiration and 95% perspiration” might well be applied to this situation.  Perhaps to reinforce the template of a champion we need to understand the order of perfection.  There is self-perfection, for all the husbandry and training requirements necessary, and there is perfection of the loft.  Having become absolutely satisfied that these requirements are truly perfected and the performance is still not quite up to expectation, then, and only then, would the case arise to introduce different pigeons.

Theory

It would seem a relatively common occurrence for the icons of pigeon racing to theorize. The dictionary defines a theory, in part, as a doctrine, or scheme of things, resting merely on speculation, contemplation, supposition, or conjecture. Pigeon racing theories are destructive for a number of reasons.  They create a diversion away from energetically pursuing other more important husbandry techniques; they provide a false sense of security, in terms of quality selection, and they miss potential racing and breeding excellence that may have been discovered, using more scientifically controlled methods.  There is some form of mysticism about champions attempting to model what their pigeons possess, in terms of physical attributes, by delving into intangible properties.   It is difficult to understand why they do it and it may be linked with the sale aspects of pigeons, or a book they wish to promote and so on.  If we try to model, or theorize, the physical attributes of a champion pigeon fancier, we cannot, because they come in all shapes and sizes.  We do know that all champions have a common trait, which is loosely termed ‘attitude’ and this ‘attitude’ has already been described elsewhere.  More than anyone else, champions are people who are most likely to create their own theories.  In fact, it is encouraged by the journalists and the sport’s article writers and becomes one of those perennial questions “What do you look for in a pigeon?” and almost invariably, the answer confirms a previous theory, or creates a new one.  It is almost an expected outcome from an interview. Champions are individuals, not given to blindly following others and the propensity here is to create and theorize. Their capacity for all the right and normal attributes, necessary to be the best in the sport, spills over into an, otherwise, harmless pastime and I often wondered whether this was purely a symptom of champions being unable to credit themselves for their own success. Whatever it is, far too many have this capacity for theorizing and create these occupational anomalies.  I purposely use the word ‘anomaly’ to mean a deviation from the normal. As I wrote earlier, it is this deviating effect, which provides the most damaging aspects for new fanciers, when attempting to emulate the success of champions.  Invariably, the emphasis is placed firmly on the pigeon and more intensified by the theories.  There is a complete loss of focus away from the champion and his husbandry methods, which are more important, and becomes a major downside in the theory conundrum.  It is a debilitating period for a new fancier, when he or she elects to tread the theory path. In doing so there is a major tendency to become narrow focused and neglect performance-based skills.

The list of fads and theories is virtually endless and all of them are quite easy to create.  The most damaging theory has been the inordinate focus on Eye Sign, with its ebb and flow over such a long period of time. Far too many excellent pigeons have been condemned in this fruitless search for perfection, not to mention the demoralization of many good pigeon fanciers. There is a vast disparity between admiring a normal healthy eye, configured on the bird’s reptilian ancestry, and the delving into the performance indicator ‘meanings’ of the various muscle patterns that make up the eye.  It is a confusing waste of energy and resource that a practical pigeon fancier can do well to recognize.

The ever popular Wing Theory also covers a full range of sub theories, based on lay notions of aerodynamic principles and includes the large ‘step’ and plenty of ‘air’ between primary flights; the uniform length of the last four primaries, size of the back-wing, using a thumb for measurement, the extended length of the finger feathers and so on.  A certain degree of naive arrogance presents here, as humanity questions that which nature has perfected. There is a myriad of performance based scientific principles, wrapped up in one single primary flight feather on a pigeon’s wing that we failed to recognize for thousands of years and continue to be overlooked now.  Professor Alfred Newton (not Isaac) counted 650 barbs on the inner web of the vane, each of which has along its length several hundred pairs of barbules.  These barbules are located along the filament on the side nearest the feather tip and act as a complex zip fastener.  There are approximately three-quarters of a million barbules on the inner web alone.  The vane, or central mid-rib structure, follows aerodynamic anti-stress principles denoted by, tubular, concave and convex, hollow and box type structures and even the crinkled tip denotes the at-rest position of the feather and is a marvel of nature’s engineering.  The notion that a pigeon’s wing might not be perfectly configured to sound aerodynamic principles points to some loss of perspective and is fanciful. Alternatively, proper classification of a pigeon, as a complete entity, in terms of suitability for certain events, could well be a worthwhile study, but this has not been undertaken.

Moving on to more theories. In the lesser category, we have the rump theory, throat theory, eye care theory, left and right tail feather theory, buoyancy theory, balance theory, and the list remains open-ended.  It is typical of champions to question and ponder their own success, but, in reality, most remain quiet achievers and only a few try to look beyond their own personal motivational powers for physical signs of success.  When champions look at their birds, all of them see a colony of perfection, but, thankfully, only a few look for common physical attributes in an attempt to justify the symptoms of a wider cause, which, truthfully, is a result of their own husbandry skill.  The vast majority of champion pigeon fanciers remain satisfied that the quality of their colony was built from their own effort and dedication, and this sorely needs to be emulated by others on the road to success.  Only a few, for whatever reason, attribute their success to some physical similarity that appears to be present in the colony. The inference here is that any person who discovers similar traits in pigeons, elsewhere, will find success, the same as the champion.  A theory is created and a diversion put in place that will distract the unwary fancier from the golden path to success. Unfortunately, many will remain blinded from these distractions and may never find the path again.  True success is based on excellent husbandry practice, with careful attention to detail and planning.

Modeling of theories

We only have to look at Olympic class track and distance runners to gain a fairly broad understanding of our bird’s physical capabilities. These are very easily recognized in human athletics. The short distance runner is seen to be of solid build, muscular, and strong. On the other hand, distance runners are generally fine boned, having minimal body fat, and an outwardly frail appearance, which actually belies the true situation.  We can further model these various attributes for both broad categories of short and long distance runners.  For example, length of arm, legs, neck, pectoral muscles, triceps, biceps and so on.  We could take these idealistic models and go out into the general community and identify the broad categories of short and long distance running potential and discard those that do not fit the basic templates.  Having sorted the population into the respective categories, and refined them down to absolute replicas of Olympic runners, what have we got?  We have people who look the part, but some will not like running.  Some will want to do something else.  Perhaps we can take a whip out and make them run, but the results will not be forthcoming, because their mental outlook is to do or be something else.  Why?  What is missing?  It is quite simple, their attitude or desire for running is missing!  We simply cannot model attitude, or theorize attitude. We can only see it when it appears as performance. Everything, within our being, has to want to do something well, or we will be destined to mediocrity.

Analysis and questions

Has any pigeon racing selection model worked yet? The answer is no!  How do I know that?  Well, pigeon fanciers are not as naïve as one would want to believe.  If a selection model worked, even for fifty percent of the time, every pigeon fancier would beat a path to the discoverer’s door.  Theories are purely fads, until they can be successfully modeled to repeat the process, without fail.  We know that pigeons with tails like fantails cannot race, pouters cannot race, Modenas cannot race, but Mother Nature knows that too.  True feral pigeons look very much like our own racing pigeons, or vice versa.  Mother nature has modeled our birds into the shape that has the greater chance of success in what it does best and that is to fly in an enduring manner.  We actually take those specimens and sift them further, based on attitude and the will to win, and thankfully, for most of the time, much less on how they outwardly appear.  The show homer is a classic example of human intervention in nature.  It is easy to breed what we think is the ultimate racer.  We only need to put in our order and the skill of the show homer breeder will replicate what we need in a few generations. Whether they race is determined by whether they still have the attitude and the desire to do so and we probably need to include physical ability into the mix as well.

A divining Rod?

The question is often raised. How can a pigeon fancier go into another fancier's loft and pick his winners? This is not hard to do and there are many telltale signs and advantages in not being mentally cluttered with pedigrees and past performances.  Observing fitness, unimpeded by other extraneous information, is an advantage. Listening to the fancier he is also a clue, when one is finally asked to make a selection. Fanciers often talk about their good birds, without realizing it. I personally find I am better able to point out race-fit pigeons, and I mean pigeons ready to race, in another fancier’s loft.  One needs to make a conscious effort to see race fitness, without cluttering our mind by what else is known about a bird.  Good fanciers can do this. A well-known and successful fancier in my area made a hobby of visually detecting race fitness and he was phenomenal with his results.  One year I asked him to grade all my youngsters, the same as he had done for himself and others at various times.  I purposely kept and raced all my youngsters and discovered he was substantially wide of the mark.  The reason is elementary, he simply stepped outside his ability to see race fitness and commenced to theorize.  He was looking for something else and it did not work and does not work, because one cannot see ‘attitude’, and attitude comes in all shapes and sizes.

The proof

Whenever we are faced with a sure-fire method of detecting, or producing champion pigeons, and no matter how appealing it becomes, it still needs to stand up to certain criteria.  We need to ask ourselves the all-embracing question. Has it been tested in a scientific manner and where are the results to support the facts?  If there are no scientifically accepted data, then the method is a theory and needs to be observed with a good deal of caution.  I mentioned that developing a theory is relatively easy and to illustrate the point I have created one now for the purpose.  It took twenty-five minutes to conduct a series of measurements and a further hour to calculate figures and write up the description and hey-presto, we have developed our own hypothesis for determining “good” pigeons. It is based on a nine year racing span, dealing with fifty-four candidates, including Federation Winners, Best in Federation, Federation Bird of the Year from 30,000 pigeons (Hall of Fame equivalent) first runner-up Federation Bird of the Year from 30,000 pigeons and other high performed birds at Federation level.

The Theory.

Take any pigeon, hen or cock, and a metric rule.

a) Measure the length of the bird’s right middle toe, excluding the toe nail, by placing the rule firmly at the ball of the foot and noting the full extended length of the toe, in millimeters, to the point where the toe nail is attached, but not including the toe nail.

b) Next, measure the length of the bird’s tail.  The measurement is taken by moving the thumb down the hard skeletal region of the birds back to the end of the bone, precisely where the soft area of the tail attachment begins.  Hold the thumb in that position and place the rule hard against the thumb and flatten it along the tail, noting the measurement from thumb to the extreme tip of the tail.

c) Lastly, divide the tail measurement by the toe measurement and note that the ratio of toe length versus tail length is generally found to be between the value 4 and 5.

Findings. An inordinate number of exceptional performed pigeons will be noted to be of the ratio 4.3 and this particularly applies to hens of the short to middle distance variety, and having a maximum success range of 800 kilometers. The emphasis on short to middle distance specialization is even greater for those birds with a ratio range between 4.0 and 4.3, but certainly not below the ratio 4, from which findings show that birds below this range are poor performers.  The true successful long distance pigeon (i.e. 800 kilometers plus) is found to have the ratio 4.5, or greater, and particularly applies to hens.  It is important to note that the ratio 5, and above, is indicative of an exceptional racing pigeon capable of performing well at any distance.

This is a valid theory and if applied to a general flock of racing pigeons we will find that it works fairly well. But, in essence, do I believe that it fits in all circumstances? The answer here, I would have to say, be No!  It then draws the question, why? The simple answer is I have not tested sufficient candidates to draw a proper scientific conclusion.  There is a need to validate the method over the vast range of racing pigeons available, and this is where all pigeon theories fall short, because they are not scientifically tested. While the hypothesis might hold good for a majority of cases, we would need to test virtually every racing pigeon in Australia (approximately 360,000) to gain the necessary level of confidence that the premise holds good, under all circumstances.  Of course, the theory developed here has significantly more chance of being scientifically accepted, versus all other theories that are currently about, because it incorporates the first principle for any budding ‘fact’ - measurable indices. There is also a further advantage, because the indices can be compared with factual records of pigeon performance and is a major feature that is absent in the current popular hypotheses.

The results of the theory application points to long caste (and therefore light boned) pigeons being more suitable for the distance (and elsewhere for that matter).  As a theory, it is wonderful and applies to a study of fifty-four successful pigeons in one established environment, of at least six climatic environments, between latitudes 15 and 45 degrees South.  If we were to investigate the characteristics of the better performed pigeons in Australia, possibly 10% of the total estimated 360,000 held, the sample, fifty-four, is only .015% of a total sample of 36,000 and the r² (statistical reliability) is less than 10 of a required certainty factor of 80.  In other words, the remaining unexamined candidates (99.985%) could blow the theory out of the water in as little as the next 54 candidates.  Nevertheless, this methodology has more chance of being scientifically accepted, because it is based on first principles of measurable indices.

The wash-up

All theories scuttle along the muddy bottom of scientific flow, simply because they cannot be physically verified. Examination of 36,000 pigeons, Australia-wide, is a physical impossibility, even given that a majority of quality pigeons are concentrated in a lesser number of successful lofts, the less-than-successful lofts have to be surveyed also to validate the finding.  Because of the measurable elements binding this theory, it has less chance of being discredited than others, which have no boundaries at all.  From a dispassionate view, which theory is more meaningful?  In practical terms, it would have to be this one, the triple 'T' theory (tail and toe theory) because it can be proved or disproved from its present acknowledged position as un-proven, based on insufficient number of observations.  Does TTT have value?  Answer has to be yes!  It has measurable elements and therefore does not require a resident 'expert' to interpret the master's expertise for a pet theory, as in, for example, Eye Sign.  The advantage of the TTT theory is that simple measurements (while adhering to the measuring instructions provided for the theory) can be taken, by anyone, and then dispatched to a central point for collation. If sufficient measurements were taken, ideally 36,000, and there was an 80% (R²) confirmation of the original finding, then this larval stage of a theory might shed its shell and fly free as a fact.  Until that survey has been done, however, it, unfortunately, remains as baseless as every other theory that has been put forward over the past fifty years.

Copyright by Leo Turley, Perth, Austrlia, all rights reserved (used by permission)