Breeding question.

I can tell you about Parsons since that is my breed.  Basic genetics: smooth and broken coats.  Broken is dominant, smooth is recessive.  That means, a smooth has two recessive genes and a broken can either have two dominant or one dominant and one recessive.

So, Smooth+Smooth=Smooth
      Smooth+Broken=Smooth or Broken

       That depends on if the Broken is a carrier for smooth.  Rose's dam, Ruby, was not a carrier and never had a smooth pup even when bred to smooths.  I don't think Rose is a carrier either since her mother wasn't, and when we bred her to a smooth, we got all broken. 

Our youngest litter was from Gilda(in my sig) and Will, both broken.  Both Gilda and Will carry the smooth gene, and that is why we got a few smooths in the litter. 

A good Parson breeding program will have smooths included even though they don't do well in the show ring.  Why?  Because a smooth has a perfectly tight coat.  It helps in improve coat quality in brokens that could use some help.  It is important to work on coats if you want a dog that is able to work as well as show.
 

They are of the same breed they are just differnet variations....I know it can be a bit confusing. Now while it is poor breeding practices to breed upon color it is entirely different with coat types at least with working dogs becasue the specific coats correlate with a specifc job or region the dog was working in. For example curly coated retrievers versus flat coat is NOT the same as a red nose pit versus a blue nose. The color serves no specific purpose. As for showing a blue nose and a red nose could compete against eachother but but they typically wouldnt judge a flat coat the same as a curly coat. Does that make any sense?

I think it depends on the breed.  For example, German Shorhaired and Wirehaired Pointers are two different breeds.  Chinese Crested have both hairless and powderpuffs in a litter, so I guess they can be bred to each other.  My folks bred their smooth JRT to their rough coated one, but, since I don't approve of their breeding practices, I can't be entirely sure if it was OK.

Whoa didnt even asnwer your question, lol. So it is ok to breed for coat type. Not ok to breed for color.

Cresteds SHOULD be bred to each other. Because the hairless is a semi-lethal gene, breeding hairless to hairless for very long will result in abnormalities (mostly related to lack of teeth, but supposedly there are other sorts too. Still, most of those 'world's ugliest dogs' type cresteds? Are probably the result of multiple generations of hairless to hairless breeding.)

In collies, it's different- there's no real rule for or against, since they're genetically the same except for that one factor. Many breeders prefer to breed only one of the two varieties- it's just preference. Mal's breeder does not breed smooths, but the best match for Delilah, Mal's mom, happened to be a smooth owned by Peggy Conger, who has bred both varieties FOREVER. So she got some smooths in the litter and picked the best rough girl to keep for herself. (Who happened to be the only SQ rough girl in the litter; there was 1 SQ boy who went to OK and then three SQ smooths- Peggy decided not to take one since the one she wanted failed his eye check, so he went to a pet home. I got the other male smooth and the female smooth went to a pet home since she didn't have another on the waiting list for a smooth show girl.)

Most people I know *don't* breed for coat, although they typically have a preference. Mal has a WONDERFUL dense coat that's a little longer than the homozygous smooths, but theirs aren't incorrect, so I don't think that's a factor in collies like it is in the JRTs/PRTs.

In the UK, however, rough and smooth collies are totally separate and not allowed to be interbred. 

Pwca

Cresteds SHOULD be bred to each other. Because the hairless is a semi-lethal gene, breeding hairless to hairless for very long will result in abnormalities (mostly related to lack of teeth, but supposedly there are other sorts too....

Aahh, you see, I learned something new.  :)  I knew about the lack of teeth with the hairless, but didn't know about the semi-lethal gene.  Never really looked too far into it, since I don't breed, and don't have a Crested (hopefully someday I will, tho :) ) 

...Still, most of those 'world's ugliest dogs' type cresteds? Are probably the result of multiple generations of hairless to hairless breeding.)...

Well that makes sense, then.  I knew all the hairless Cresteds I've seen weren't that ugly. 

I guess it depends on the breed.  In GSDs, long coated dogs (no undercoat) are not desirable and are a DQ.  Now, a breeding of two V-rated conformation dogs with great structure, conformation, and their working titles can and does produce coated dogs, but breeding actual coated dogs or trying to get coated dogs is not appropriate (but lots of people do it to make a buck).