# The Colby AmStaff relation



## reddoggy (Jan 31, 2008)

Odd... There;s no mention of Colby in here : (
http://www.akc.org/breeds/american_staffordshire_terrier/history.cfm

Check out the Colby site
http://www.colbypitbull.com/
look in history
I'm starting to get more and more confused as to what the differences are between the APBT and the AmStaff are. Are we just talking head size and weight? AKC requires the AmStaff to be a little smaller than the UKC requires the APBT to be... I always thought it was the other way around. I can see how people are always mistaking the two breeds, they pretty much look the same and have a history in the ring. I deffinately don't wanna disrespect the Colby fam, but I wanted to point out that even they use the name pit bull as a general term.:hammer:

The Colby family posted some old pics and next to BobTails pic it said:
Colby's Bobtail Bob 
Whelped: 1895
Sire: Colby's Nick
Dam: Colby's Wasp

Reputed to have won 20 battles, which may have been a record. He was bred to more than 20 bitches and some of his offspring were A.K.C. registered.


----------



## Phoenix (May 3, 2008)

I used to show my dual-registered APBT/AMStaff in the AKC show venue. The AKC maintains that the APBT is not a breed,that it dosen't exist, even though the first AmStaff registered was Lucenay's Peter, a UKC registered APBT. John Hadley pushed for AKC recognition of the APBT.
Since the (English) Bull Terrier was already registered, they felt that the name American Pit Bull Terrier would pose a problem of mistaken identity between the two breeds. Yankee Terrier & American (Pit) Bull Terrier were two suggestions that didn't set well with all parties, so eventually they settled on Staffordshire Terrier-named for Staffordshire,England,where AKC says the dogs originated.
"American" was added to the name later to distinguish the AmStaff from the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. 
All in all, I have found AKC breed standards and history to be a mix of 40 percent fact and 60 percent imagination. Take the Bulldog for example.The standard states that b/c of its conformation this dog can bring down a bull.The truth is these dogs can't breathe or whelp right,let alone fight bulls.


----------



## Phoenix (May 3, 2008)

The Colby dogs' conformation was considered the ideal for the early AmStaffs.
John Hadley and John P.Colby were Both involved with the APBT in the 1900's ( AmStaff was registered in 1936). 
There is a book on the Colby dogs. I need to get it again myself since someone stole my copy.
From my experience,you won't hear mention of Colby in Amstaff circles. AKC tried to distance themselves from the APBT because of its being a fighting dog. Some Amstaff show-people still deny the kinship between the APBT and Amstaffs even now. 

I don't get it -Pete the Pup(Lucenay's Peter) was the first registered, was an APBT, but yet they will say the APBT doesn't exist??? Only a very few will concede to the history,and they usually have dual-registered dogs.I could not talk old history with the people I knew,it was treated like some big secret that no one should talk about.On the other hand,APBT folk will talk lineage all day!:woof:


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

It would be my opinion that the AST was created in the same way theat the AMbully was created. By breeding for asthetic appeal rather that ability. It's been said many times before, but the show ring ruined the breed. The AST does have a fighting history, but it's ancient history for the majority of them. The pit created the APBT, and the show ring created the AST. Different strokes for different folks. I'm glad they deny the existence of the APBT. I think the bully guys should do the same.


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

This topic is very interesting to me. It brings up the age old question are the two breeds different dogs or one in the same. I have some information on this but am at work right now. I will post some up later tonight.


----------



## Midwest Bully (May 10, 2006)

*My opinion might sound kinda confusing and is hard to explain. But i'll give it a try and hope that i makes sence to everyone or at least some...lol 
Here goes...

Back in the 'old days' I would concider them the same. But as of now in the present, its like night and day. They are nothing alike and i wouldn't concider them the same. 
I know they come from the same background, but as stated before, the ring and the pit seperated the two. The true APBT is still the true APBT and the Am Staff is an Am Staff. They just have totally differant looks, and totally differant purposes. You couldn't pit and Am Staff now a days. Maybe you could have 100 years ago.
They have changed so much through out the years they just aren't the same anymore. 
Ok... i'm not having an easy to explaining this so i'm gonna stop trying before i have eveyone cofused...lmao!*


----------



## Sydney (Aug 14, 2007)

:stupid: No worries man...I think I caught your drift...I have been reading "The Working Pit Bull" and from that I see Diane Jessup has the same views...

That the AKC opened it's books to the Pit Bull but wanted it to have no relation to the fighting world...and wanted it renamed, but UKC allows AKC AmStaff's to be known as Pit Bulls...but Pit Bulls can no longer be registered as AmStaffs unless already done so...

So what the AKC has made in my opinion is a show version of the Pit Bull-sure there are still some that will not fit this mold but a majority do...Or at least if I have understood this correctly-that is what I have gathered

I am interested in what you have OFK. Cane you too----I also like this topic I like learning more about the past


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

Sydney said:


> I am interested in what you have OFK. Cane you too----I also like this topic I like learning more about the past


I think that some amstaffs[ruffian,white rock]are more apbt than alot of duel rgistered ukc/akc bobble heads pit/staffs like "gaff" and that "york" crap.
Tacoma dogs were real nice,known to work and now extinct,ive kinda been doing alittle research[just a bit]on ruffian,white rock x-pert and tacoma bred dogs.Theres good info out there on ruffian[kinda good,kinda vauge]and x-pert
lines,not so much on tacoma,i guees x-pert and tacoma were asimulated into the current ruffian line and no longer exist in pure form,white rock is just a off shoot of ruffian from what i gather,maybe someone better versed in the a.k.c show world could shed beeter light on this...
lastly,
it is my belief that, although the a.k.c has based it's history on lie's,myth and fairy tales[possably the breed specific registrys fault more than the a.k.c]
They manage there breeds, in this case the "amstaff",way more responsably than the u.k.c for sure.You could probbaly get better represinitive of the apbt breed by aquiring a akc amstaff rather than a ukc,duel registered,linebred,possably mixed breed dog or over bully gaff,york abomination,jmo..............


----------



## Sydney (Aug 14, 2007)

I have seen some of the Tacoma dogs(old pics)...they always seem highly regarded. From what I have seen they look to be on the larger "rugged" side-good looking dogs


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

this site has good info on the tacoma bred dogs,early corvino stock was used as a foundation..
http://lil.amstaff.free.fr/tacoma.htm


----------



## reddoggy (Jan 31, 2008)

Everybody has good info and good insite on this one and I'm agreeing with midwest so far...
Although the new school AmStaff doesn't have any fight history the records that I'm finding on the subject are stating that the "Americanized" version of the staffy was indeed fought. These dogs were hand in hand with APBTs. They were small and agile and very game! I think that the records are in accordance with the dogmen that were in it during the days of the naming controversy. When I think AST I think of a pit but larger with broader chests and thicker domes. In fact, the AKC standard for the AST calls for a dog that is a bit smaller than the APBT (UKC/ADBA standard). I'm interested to see what OFK has to say...


----------

