# APBT vs. AMSTAFF



## MisterMatt (Oct 23, 2006)

can someone help me understand the major differences between the 2?
thanks


----------



## GSDBulldog (Dec 22, 2006)

Well, first off, one is recognized by the AKC (AmStaff) and the other is recognized by many registries (Most notably the UKC and ADBA).

The AmStaff was the AKC's answer to a pit bull show dog. While no other breed was used in it's creation, the modern AmStaff is quite different from the APBT.

It gets confusing because some dogs are dual-registered as both. The only time you will see a real big difference between the APBT and AST is when you are looking at completely opposite sides of the spectrum (Overdone AST vs. typical game-bred APBT)...

Example,









Very typical AKC AmStaff









Big Apple's Haunch, an example of a dog straight from working stock.


----------



## BCK (Nov 16, 2006)

So the AmStaff is a purebred dog? No other breeds were used for creating the AmStaff?


----------



## GSDBulldog (Dec 22, 2006)

BCK said:


> So the AmStaff is a purebred dog? No other breeds were used for creating the AmStaff?


Well, no. The AmStaff is an off-shoot of the APBT. No other breeds went into making it. It was basically an APBT under a different name. But 100 years of breeding for a different dog has created a different dog.


----------



## BCK (Nov 16, 2006)

GSDBulldog said:


> Well, no. The AmStaff is an off-shoot of the APBT. No other breeds went into making it. It was basically an APBT under a different name. But 100 years of breeding for a different dog has created a different dog.


Okay I see what you sayin. All these years of breeding the off-shoot apbt made the AmStaff of today its own breed in its own right..?


----------



## bradthepit (Jul 30, 2006)

I would at a guess imagine it to be selective breeding from APBT`s, i.e to get an Amstaffie maybe, nose colour height etc and breed with another with the same qualities. Also, i`ve heard Amstaff`s are less game, mainly for the show equivalent, but don`t quote me on that...


----------



## Crown Royal (Oct 20, 2006)

Short answer...Am Staffs and APBTs originated from the same blood. They share the same heritage and history. Due to selective breeding for different traits (game, show...registrees) for so long they're is a difference in the two "breeds". Many consider the Am Staff and APBT different breeds because they've been bred using different bloodlines for so long. I personally view them as the same breed (same blood back in the day) but bred for different reasons. Some Staffies can be very game as well as some APBTs can be very showy but not game. It all depends what the breeder was breeding for. BTW I've got a ADBA registered APBT that has lots of Am Staff in his pedigree. IMHO He's got the best qualities of both.

Cheers


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

the am staffs a show dog and the apbt is supposed to be a working dog.
the am staff was seperated from the apbt in the mid 1930's i believe and went off in its own show direction.There are amstaffs that are being worked also as well as irish staffordshire bull terriers in the u.k which are much closer to the true apbt than many of todays apbts in the usa,imho....


----------



## pantera2006 (Feb 25, 2006)

^^^^^ Good post... I think ya nailed it....


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

Although they are not perfect examples, could you say the same for these??
Amstaff









Game/working stock









Sorry, not the best pics..


----------



## Shadyw (Feb 21, 2006)

I have a Am.Staff that is game and can be hard headed SOB too. He is only 18 1/2" and 58 lbs.


----------



## chrisdgt04 (Dec 24, 2006)

cane76 said:


> the am staffs a show dog and the apbt is supposed to be a working dog.
> the am staff was seperated from the apbt in the mid 1930's i believe and went off in its own show direction.There are amstaffs that are being worked also as well as irish staffordshire bull terriers in the u.k which are much closer to the true apbt than many of todays apbts in the usa,imho....


CANE DID U GET THAT FROM THE APBT HANDBOOK? I JUST READ THAT PART OF IT?


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

chrisdgt04 said:


> CANE DID U GET THAT FROM THE APBT HANDBOOK? I JUST READ THAT PART OF IT?


Nah,its all up in my head from the 100's of books ive read on dogs,thats why it gets jumbled sometimes and i have to say"correct me if im wrong".lol..


----------



## quaterboy22 (Nov 12, 2006)

i have a AKC amstaff and a ADBA game-dog there different versons of the same dog, and im going to take my male amstaff to my female game-dog. i do get offended when people say that american bullys are AST's there not some have it in them as well as ADBA dogs and UKC dogs , and sometimes some outcrosses to other breeds. what im getting at is the amstaff and the pit are 2 different types of the same breed , and the american bully well i will let you decide 128lb blue pitbull...

with respect


----------



## GSDBulldog (Dec 22, 2006)

> I have a Am.Staff that is game


Really now? And how did you come to that conclusion?



> and im going to take my male amstaff to my female game-dog.


And you do realize the resulting offspring would be considered mutts by most, unless your "game dog" is dual-registered as an AmStaff. Then again, you can't take an APBT and register is at an AKC AmStaff. But, you can take an AKC AmStaff and register it as an APBT.

What would be the point of even making such a breeding? Most who have attemped that have failed miserably. Instead of getting a great litter of working show-type dogs, they have dogs at either end of the spectrum or dogs that are poor examples of both.


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

Was not the APBT derived from the AMSTAFF, or have a substanital amount in its background?


----------



## GSDBulldog (Dec 22, 2006)

OldFortKennels said:


> Was not the APBT derived from the AMSTAFF?


The other way around. The Amstaff was derived from the APBT.


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

Up until 1898 when the UKC was created were they not basically all grouped the same, and wasnt until then that the destinction was made?


Before it came to America and grew in popularity they were known as Staffordshire Terriers.


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

When people began to want to show the dogs instead of matching them thats when the Name was given to them and a line was drawn to distinguish the two. In 1936 they became known as Staffordshire Terriers so they could be registered with the AKC, because the AKC wouldnt allow APBTS under that name, but it was the same dog with a different name.

Currently the same dog can be registered with the UKC as a Staffy and Also the ADBA and it can be registered with the AKC if its parents were registered with the AKC.

Im not disagreing that the name AMERICAN STAFFORSHIRE came after the APBT, What I do believe is that ORIGINALLY they were basically the same dog, originally called Staffordshire Terriers, then APBT'S and then further broke down and branched off to AST.

I guess saying the APBT was derived from the AMSTAFF was not correct but should have simply been the STAFFY.


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

OldFortKennels said:


> Was not the APBT derived from the AMSTAFF, or have a substanital amount in its background?


i see it like this,the am staff is derived from the apbt and they both have a substantial amount of bulldog in them,jmho.......


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

Taken from Gamedogs.com on the origins of the APBT

Throughout the 19th century, these dogs were known by a variety of names. "Pit Terriers", "Pit Bull Terriers", "Half and Half's", "Staffordshire Fighting Dogs", "Old Family Dogs"(the Irish name), "Yankee Terriers"(the Northern name), and "Rebel Terriers"(the Southern name) to name a few. In 1898, a man by the name of Chauncy Bennet formed the United Kennel Club (UKC) for the sole purpose of registering "Pit Bull Terriers" as the American Kennel Club wanted nothing to do with them. Originally, he added the word "American" to the name and dropped "Pit". This didn't please all of the people so later the word "Pit" was added back to the name in parentheses as a compromise. The parentheses were then removed from the name about 15 years ago. All other breeds that are registered with UKC were accepted into the UKC after the APBT. Another registry of APBTs is the American Dog Breeders Association (ADBA) which was started in September, 1909 by Guy McCord, a close friend of John P. Colby. Now under the stewardship of the Greenwood family, the ADBA continues to register only APBTs and is more in tune with the APBT as a breed than the UKC. The ADBA does sponsor conformations shows, but more importantly, it sponsors weight pulling competitions which test a dogs strength, stamina, and heart. It also publishes a quarterly magazine dedicated to the APBT called the American Pit Bull Terrier Gazette (see the "References" section). The authors feel that the ADBA is now the flagship registry of APBT as it is doing more to preserve the original characteristics of the breed.

In 1936, thanks to "Pete the Pup" in the "Lil Rascals" and "Our Gang" who familiarized a wider audience with the APBT, the AKC jumped on the bandwagon and registered the breed as the "Staffordshire Terrier". This name was changed to "American Staffordshire Terrier" (AST) in 1972 to distinguish it from its smaller, "froggier", English cousin the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. In 1936, for all intents and purposes, the AKC, UKC, and ADBA version of the "Pit Bull" were identical since the original AKC stock came from pit fighting dogs, which were UKC and ADBA registered. During this time period, and the years that preceded it, the APBT was a well-liked dog in America. At this time the APBT was considered an ideal family pet. Because of his fun-loving, forgiving temperament, the breed was rightly considered an excellent dog for families with small children. Even if most of them couldn't identify the breed by name, kids of the Lil Rascals generation wanted a companion just like "Pete the Pup". During the First World War, there was an American propaganda poster that represented the rival European nations with their national dogs dressed in military uniforms; and in the center representing the United States was an APBT declaring in a caption below: "I'm neutral, but not afraid of any of them."

Since 1936, due to different breeding goals, the American Staffordshire Terrier and the American Pit Bull Terrier have diverged in both phenotype and spirit/temperament, although both, ideally, continue to have in common an easy-going, friendly disposition. [2] Some folks in the fancy feel that after 60 years of breeding for different goals, these two dogs are now entirely different breeds. Other people choose to view them as two different strains of the same breed (working and show). Either way, the gap continues to widen as breeders from both sides of the fence consider it undesirable to interbreed the two. To the untrained eye, ASTs may look more impressive and fearsome, with a larger and more blocky head, with bulging jaw muscles, a wider chest and thicker neck. In general, however, they aren't nearly as "game" or athletic as game-bred APBTs. Because of the standardization of their conformation for show purposes, ASTs tend to look alike, to a much greater degree than APBTs do. APBTs have a much wider phenotypical range, since the primary breeding goal, until fairly recently, has been not to produce a dog with a certain "look" but to produce one capable of winning pit contests, in which the looks of a dog counted for nothing. There are some game-bred APBTs that are practically indistinguishable from typical ASTs, but in general they are leaner, leggier, and lighter on their toes and have more stamina, agility, speed, and explosive power.


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

Now this on the AMSTAFF

http://www.bulldoginformation.com/american-staffordshire-terrier.html

or
The ancient ancestors of the Am Staff are the mastiff type dogs who appear in many breed histories. Although much of this information is lost in antiquity, we know from early art of the large, heavy-headed strong dogs who were used throughout history for their strength and guarding abilities. This early group of dogs has left genetic material for all the bulldog breeds and mastiff type dogs of today.

In earlier days in England, mastiff types were bred down to smaller size and some became bulldogs (actually bulldogs were named because they were used to hold on to bulls or cattle/oxen). Originally the dogs were butchers dogs or farmers dogs who helped move the cattle around and held them still for their owners. They kept them still literally by holding on to them, usually by the nose. It became a customary entertainment in England to watch as the butcher's dog caught the bull and held in while it was killed by the butcher. For some reason the common folk began to think that meat that had been harried by the dog before dying was tastier than the meat the had died peacefully. There was for a time an English law enacted that the butcher MUST bait the bull with a dog before butchering it ! The entertainment value was so great, that the Queen reportedly even forbid other butchers from killing their stock on the same day her royal butcher did, so that the commoners would watch her dogs work.

Eventually this sport gave way to some other type of meat tenderizer and the dogs were used on other "game". One of these uses was rat killing. The English seem to have had lots of rats and folks amused themselves by watching dogs put into "pits" (arenas) with hundreds of rats. OF course betting was done on how many could be dispatched how fast. This called for a smaller, faster dog so some of the now extinct English terriers were crossed with the bulldog. These were probably Black and Tan terriers (similar to today' Manchester) and the old White terrier. Rats were too easy, so these sporting souls were always thinking up new challenges for their dogs. These early bulldogs and now bull-and-terriers were used to fight bears, stage, badgers, and each other. Dogs were more easily come by than bears, which were probably getting kind of scarce in England, and dogs were probably easier to keep for a commoner than expensive cattle.

The bull-and-terriers evolved into three of our modern breeds: the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, the Bull Terrier, and the American Staffordshire Terrier.

The early bull-and-terrier came to America with immigrants from England and Ireland. Here some grew bigger and taller in response to their duties in a new and wilder country. Some stayed in cites and were kept by the same type of "sporting" owner as in England and Ireland. These were fought against each other around the pubs of New York, Chicago, and Boston (and other cities of course). A product of some of these dogs is the very American breed of Boston Bulldog, or Boston terrier as it is now known. These used to be 35-40 lb dogs, and except for the shorter bulldog face and screw tail were very similar to the early Am Staff (or Pit Bull, Bulldog, American Bulldog, Bull and Terrier, Yankee Terrier, some of the names these dogs were know under then).

The Larger bull-and-terrier was still a farm dog and stockman's dog. He followed the wagons west with the settlers and helped work stock and guarded the homestead. He was a general purpose homestead dog, much as the dog describe in the book and movie, Old Yeller. He ran with the hounds on hunting expeditions, exactly as depicted in the old movie, The Yearling, and although not as fleet or strong of nose as the hounds, he was still the "catch" dog who dispatched the animal when it turned at bay.

By the late 1800's a fighting dog registry was started in America to keep track of the prized pedigrees and publish the rules for fighting organization in the country. The United Kennel Club registered the dogs as American Pit Bull Terriers. Sometimes this was written as American (pit) Bull, or American Bull Terrier. Mostly they were known as bulldogs, or Pit Bulls.

Although it is this dog fighting background that is mostly remembered, only a relatively small number of the dogs were fought. Most of them went on being farmer's and general purpose countrymen's dogs, and still worked stock, penning and guarding and helping, just as they had done in their earliest days.

In the early 1930's a group of fanciers petitioned the American Kennel Club to accept their dogs into the registry. These dogs already registered with the United Kennel Club, but their owners had no interest in dog fighting. They wanted to promote their breed as family dogs and show dogs. They formed a national breed club and wrote a standard for the breed. Much agonizing was done over the proper name for the breed, and the American Kennel Club was not inclined to register them with the same name as the United Kennel Club did. Finally they were accepted with the name of Staffordshire Terrier in 1936. This was just a year after the English bull-and-terriers under the same name of the Staffordshire Bull Terriers were recognized with the Kennel Club of England. The standards of both the English and American breeds were written similarly, and even contained some identical phrases. The authors of both kept in touch with each other, working toward their common goad of acceptance by their kennel clubs. At that time , the dogs described were more similar in size and structure than the breeds appear today.

In the early 1970's the name of the Staffordshire terrier was changed to American Staffordshire terrier with the American Kennel Club recognized the Staffordshire Bull Terrier breed.

Even as the late as the 1960's, the AKC stud books were opened to permit United Kennel Club registered American Pit Bull Terrier to compete in AKC shows as American Staffordshire Terriers. Some exceptional dogs were brought into the AKC registry at the time, some even winning the Staffordshire Terrier Club of America National Speciality and an all-breed best in Show. Their influence is still strong in some breeder's lines today.

The American Staffordshire Terrier has an amazing identity problem. The same dog can still be registered the Untied Kennel Club (which is no longer a fighting dogs registry, but an all breed registry similar to the American Kennel Club), and/or with the American Dog Breeder's Association, as an American Pit Bull Terrier and if its parents were registered with the AKC, it can also be registered by the AKC under the name of the American Staffordshire Terrier.

Some of the breeders of both American Staffordshire Terriers and American Pit Bull Terriers will tell you that they are not the same breed and the "the other registry group" is ruining the breed. However, the only real difference between these dogs is their name and registry, and the individual breeder's selections and goals. There was no other breed of dog added to the bloodlines to create American Staffordshire Terriers.

This breed, under several of its names, along with the Staffordshire Bull Terrier has been under attack by anti-dog groups and has been wrongly maligned by the media. The generic name of "pit bull" has now become a term to denote a dog used for fighting, no matter what its genetic background, much like saying "bird dog" or "guard dog". Most of the dogs now called that, we would all call mixed breeds. However, there is still a Breed of dog called American Pit Bull Terrier, and many of them trace their pedigrees back to the 1800's. Many of them are still exactly where they have always been, working at their jobs and being faithful companions.

Taken from
http://littlejoe.ejourney.com/~cruisinkennel/origins_of_the_american_stafford.htm


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

damn,ofk,
its way to late for all that reading,lol....
Ive got a good question,
Is the apbt really a terrier or is this dog actually the old bulldog,now thats a real issue...
By the way,good posting....


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

I dont think its a terrier.

ter·ri·er [ térree ər ] (plural ter·ri·ers)

noun

Definition:

breed of small dog: a small lively dog belonging to any of the breeds originally developed to hunt animals living in underground burrows, but now common as pets. Examples include the Airedale, cairn, fox, Scottish, and West Highland terriers, and the schnauzer.


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

I think Stratton has something on that and I agree with his view of the dogs origin. I think I can find it................

Some authors, notably Richard Stratton, have theorized that the APBT is essentially the same breed as the Renaissiance bull-baiting dogs, largely unmixed with any other kind of dog, specifically terriers. These authors consider the present name, American Pit Bull Terrier, a double misnomer, since, in their view, the breed is not of American origin and is not a terrier. They explain the popular attribution of the breed's origin to a cross between bull-baiters and terriers as a retrospective confusion with the breeding history of the English Bull Terrier, which is a totally distinct breed that was never successful at pit fighting but whose origin is well-documented. Other authors who have researched the topic, such as Dr. Carl Semencic, argue that the APBT is indeed the product of a cross between bull-baiting dogs and terriers and that the breed simply did not exist in its current form during the Renaissance. They would argue that when we think of the terriers in the APBT's ancestry, we should not envision modern-day show dogs like Yorkshire Terriers, but instead working terriers (probably now extinct) that were bred for great tenacity in hunting. The problem of proof, which hangs over the discussion of any early breed history, is compounded in this case by the extreme secrecy of the breeders of pit dogs. In the 19th century pedigrees, if committed to paper at all, were not divulged, since every breeder feared letting his rivals in on the secrets of his success and replicating it. In any case, by no later than the mid-19th century, the breed had acquired all of the essential characteristics for which it is still prized today: its awesome athletic abilities, its peerless gameness, and its easy-going temperament.

*The way I understand it even back in the day when these dogs worked cattle, hogs, bear, or bulls they didnt hunt prey but rather were used as CATCH dogs*!


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

One of the things that I have found funny is that in researching the two breeds I have found sites claiming PETE THE PUT AND STUBBY WERE APBT"S while other sites claim they are AMSTAFFS.


----------



## GSDBulldog (Dec 22, 2006)

OldFortKennels said:


> One of the things that I have found funny is that in researching the two breeds I have found sites claiming PETE THE PUT AND STUBBY WERE APBT"S while other sites claim they are AMSTAFFS.


I can't vouch for Stubby, but I *believe* Pete was the first dual-registered dog? So he was both, technically. I think Stubby was just a "pit bull type" dog found on the streets, no?


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

stubby looked more boxer than pit IMO


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

Ive read stubby was a bull and terrier mix and i know for sure petty was one of the first 50 am staffs ever to be registered....


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

OldFortKennels said:


> I think Stratton has something on that and I agree with his view of the dogs origin. I think I can find it................
> 
> Some authors, notably Richard Stratton, have theorized that the APBT is essentially the same breed as the Renaissiance bull-baiting dogs, largely unmixed with any other kind of dog, specifically terriers. These authors consider the present name, American Pit Bull Terrier, a double misnomer, since, in their view, the breed is not of American origin and is not a terrier. They explain the popular attribution of the breed's origin to a cross between bull-baiters and terriers as a retrospective confusion with the breeding history of the English Bull Terrier, which is a totally distinct breed that was never successful at pit fighting but whose origin is well-documented. Other authors who have researched the topic, such as Dr. Carl Semencic, argue that the APBT is indeed the product of a cross between bull-baiting dogs and terriers and that the breed simply did not exist in its current form during the Renaissance. They would argue that when we think of the terriers in the APBT's ancestry, we should not envision modern-day show dogs like Yorkshire Terriers, but instead working terriers (probably now extinct) that were bred for great tenacity in hunting. The problem of proof, which hangs over the discussion of any early breed history, is compounded in this case by the extreme secrecy of the breeders of pit dogs. In the 19th century pedigrees, if committed to paper at all, were not divulged, since every breeder feared letting his rivals in on the secrets of his success and replicating it. In any case, by no later than the mid-19th century, the breed had acquired all of the essential characteristics for which it is still prized today: its awesome athletic abilities, its peerless gameness, and its easy-going temperament.
> 
> *The way I understand it even back in the day when these dogs worked cattle, hogs, bear, or bulls they didnt hunt prey but rather were used as CATCH dogs*!


its a popular way of thinking in the working apbt world to say that the dog is the original bulldog,but i dont know for sure of course, plus im way to hung over from my christmas night celebrating to think about it to hard,lol....Id have to say the performance bred american bulldog is the closest to the original bulldog from england but then again who knows....


----------



## bradthepit (Jul 30, 2006)

OldFortKennels said:


> I dont think its a terrier.
> 
> ter·ri·er [ térree ər ] (plural ter·ri·ers)
> 
> ...


yep, that sums it up pretty much.

Terrier means earth bound hunter.


----------



## quaterboy22 (Nov 12, 2006)

great post oldfort. i think that they are terriers 100%, the black and tan color that comes out in them is a terrier color. also i belevie that the staffordshire bull terrier is the same thing as the pitbull terrier and the american staffordshire terrier, they all came from the same dogs they are just different sizes. not starting an arugement thats just what i think. and to GSbulldog , my dogs will be dual reg with the UKC/adba as american pitbull terriers and i am hoping for a great catch dog. so i just wanted to explain myself.


----------



## Shadyw (Feb 21, 2006)

To GSDBulldog- Game is the determination that the dog has in his heart & soul that they will not give up no matter what what they are doing.


----------



## pantera2006 (Feb 25, 2006)

^^^^^^^ Yep, i second that :goodpost:


----------



## KingofthePIT (Dec 6, 2006)

Shadyw said:


> To GSDBulldog- Game is the determination that the dog has in his heart & soul that they will not give up no matter what what they are doing.


Um.. i guess u think that u can determine GAME by weight pull huh? Cause if that is true, then just about every breed can be game.
There is only ONE way to test a dog game, i will say it one more time, IN THE PIT.

Black and tan is not only a terrier color, and if it was, what about the Black and Tan Coonhound, Rott, Doberman, and other breeds??

The APBT&AST is far from 100% terrier. And far from being the same breed.


----------



## GSDBulldog (Dec 22, 2006)

Shadyw said:


> To GSDBulldog- Game is the determination that the dog has in his heart & soul that they will not give up no matter what what they are doing.


I know what gameness is.

But I will firmly stick by my beliefs and say that the only way to prove a dogs gameness is in the pit, under Cajun rules.

Those who think otherwise are cheating themselves, and the great game dogs of the past and present. For is it really fair to call the dog who scratched with 3 broken legs and the dog who pulled 67 times it's body weight one and the same?


----------



## Judy (Dec 12, 2005)

I've seen this topic many times on many boards. "Gameness" has many definitions as people see it, and many different POV's.


----------



## Judy (Dec 12, 2005)

I've seen this topic many times on many boards. "Gameness" has many definitions as people see it, and many different POV's as well.


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

I agree that "Gameness" as refered to by dogmen can only be proven in the [] but seeing as thats now illegal I guess that is a term that will die with the dogs of old, the true proven game dogs, unless you know something I dont the new APBT cant be called game.


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

gameness is dead,lets move on from it.Gameness isnt important for a good apbt any more,redirect your focus....


----------



## TashasLegend (Jun 7, 2006)

cane76 said:


> gameness is dead,lets move on from it.Gameness isnt important for a good apbt any more,redirect your focus....


:goodpost: I agree :clap:


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

That was the point Cane, thanks for reiterating it.


----------



## Crown Royal (Oct 20, 2006)

Can we agree that Drive has essentially replaced Game in today's pit?


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

Crown Royal said:


> Can we agree that Drive has essentially replaced Game in today's pit?


we can agree that it should,but thats just us,theres alot of dog fighters out there and litteraly thousands of wannabes who will state other wise...


----------



## GSDBulldog (Dec 22, 2006)

cane76 said:


> we can agree that it should,but thats just us,theres alot of dog fighters out there and litteraly thousands of wannabes who will state other wise...


But "drive" can and does describe so many different things. We should continue to breed dogs to the original standard, but allow modern day dog sports to replace the fighting and baiting of the past. We may loose the gameness (At least in areas where the "sport" is illegal and laws are enforced) but we will keep the breed and the heart it is known for.

I was merely bringing up the issue of gameness because someone called his AmStaff "game", and without PROVING it, I'm afraid there is no real way to tell.


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

GSDBulldog said:


> But "drive" can and does describe so many different things. We should continue to breed dogs to the original standard, but allow modern day dog sports to replace the fighting and baiting of the past. We may loose the gameness (At least in areas where the "sport" is illegal and laws are enforced) but we will keep the breed and the heart it is known for.
> 
> I was merely bringing up the issue of gameness because someone called his AmStaff "game", and without PROVING it, I'm afraid there is no real way to tell.


true,i say breed for extreme drive and standard in the apbt and seperate the mixes from the pure and "get r done",lol....


----------



## Crown Royal (Oct 20, 2006)

GSDBulldog said:


> But "drive" can and does describe so many different things. We should continue to breed dogs to the original standard, but allow modern day dog sports to replace the fighting and baiting of the past. We may loose the gameness (At least in areas where the "sport" is illegal and laws are enforced) but we will keep the breed and the heart it is known for.
> 
> I was merely bringing up the issue of gameness because someone called his AmStaff "game", and without PROVING it, I'm afraid there is no real way to tell.


SO true...breed to the standard. But if we want to channel and test the drive of today's dogs then we need to breed to the new sports. Weight pullers and catch dogs are going to need to be a different weight and size to be competitive and successful in the hunt.


----------



## bully (May 27, 2006)

I disagree Crown I think the dogs should stay true to standard they've excelled in catch work and weight pull for years.


----------



## Crown Royal (Oct 20, 2006)

If when you say standard as in ADBA or UKC then I agree. The standard doesn't stress weight only reference to weight vs. height and stresses athleticism. What I was trying to say was some dogs are going to be bigger than the fighters of old.


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

use catch weight dogs as catch dogs,thats how its always been.......


----------



## Crown Royal (Oct 20, 2006)

Cool...we agree to agree. That was too easy.


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

Crown Royal said:


> Cool...we agree to agree. That was too easy.


I also like bigger dogs for weight pull,and yes i know a smaller dog can pull more weight per pound.But for a big guy,i like weight pull and catch work and posably protection training,just my opinion........and yes,i know any apbt of any size that is functional can do any of these activitys.I just like bigger dogs..


----------



## Shadyw (Feb 21, 2006)

GSDBulldog said:


> But "drive" can and does describe so many different things. We should continue to breed dogs to the original standard, but allow modern day dog sports to replace the fighting and baiting of the past. We may loose the gameness (At least in areas where the "sport" is illegal and laws are enforced) but we will keep the breed and the heart it is known for.
> 
> I was merely bringing up the issue of gameness because someone called his AmStaff "game", and without PROVING it, I'm afraid there is no real way to tell.


Sorry for using the old term "game" when it came to my Am.Staff. I've been around these dogs for 35 yrs. and that was just the term that has always been used for a dog with drive and heart even without proving it in the pit. There are so many point of views on the subject, but I stand corrected and will use the politically correct word "drive" from now on. BTW, I'm a she up:


----------



## GSDBulldog (Dec 22, 2006)

Shadyw said:


> Sorry for using the old term "game" when it came to my Am.Staff. I've been around these dogs for 35 yrs. and that was just the term that has always been used for a dog with drive and heart even without proving it in the pit. There are so many point of views on the subject, but I stand corrected and will use the politically correct word "drive" from now on. BTW, I'm a she up:


Sorry for getting onto you about it.

-GSD


----------

