# Sticky  Visual Comparison of the top-winning UKC, AKC & ADBA dogs



## bahamutt99

I thought I'd posted this here, but couldn't find it in a search. My bad.

~~~~~~~~~~

This was something that I've always kinda wanted to see done. There are people who insist that the APBT and the AmStaff are the same dog, and that if you slim down an AmStaff, you'll get an ADBA-ready APBT. And there are others (myself admittedly included) who feel like although both breeds come from common heritage, the last 70+ years have caused them to diverge. And then there is the sticky situation that is the UKC ring, where AmStaffs are registered as APBTs and are more prevalent than dogs resembling the old gladiators.

Anyway. I went through and located as many pictures as I could of the top-winning dogs from each of the big 3 registries. (Disclaimer: The comparisons are not exact -- ie, while I'm pretty sure the first set are all #1 dogs, the 2nd set might not all be #2s, and so on. The UKC only gives a top 10, and when I couldn't find one of them, I had to use a winning dog from 2007.) I think the comparison is really interesting to see. Conditioning and ring training versus type? Also note the color bias. The ADBA dogs are varied in color (and the only registry with rednose represented in the top numbers), whereas blue fawn seems to be the big thing in UKC, and fawn or brindle in the AKC. Also interesting to note that all the UKC/AKC dogs are cropped, while the ADBA dogs are largely natural.

(Bear with the load times. I wanted to keep the pics as clear as possible, so I used PNG format, which is larger.)


----------



## performanceknls

this sparked a big discussion, here is the thread where this was posted

http://www.gopitbull.com/general-discussion/14845-interesting-info.html


----------



## los44

great post, i agree b99 selective breeding has made them into 2 different breeds. beautiful dogs none the less.:goodpost::goodpost::goodpost::goodpost:


----------



## bahamutt99

Yeah, saw that thread. But I figured since it was my work, I should post it officially. Thought I had, but I guess not.


----------



## Chavezpits

Funny thing about this post is that some of the UKC dogs lead right back to amstaff's. I am sure you already knew that though,


----------



## bahamutt99

There's a little (or a lot of) AmStaff in most of the top-winning UKC dogs. Which is why some of us are against dual-registering AKC/UKC. But its not a popular stance to take, so I doubt that the continued introduction of AKC blood into APBT lines will cease.


----------



## BLUE PIT BULL MAN

Chavezpits said:


> Funny thing about this post is that some of the UKC dogs lead right back to amstaff's. I am sure you already knew that though,


funny thing is alot of ukc and adba dogs lead back to akc am staff dogs.


----------



## Chavezpits

The pictures I was referring to it is 1st generation and maybe 5th or 6 generations back.
The pictures I would think that would be better used would be the one's on the national board under National Grands and Champions
they have pictures from every year going back to _____

funny thing is alot of ukc and adba dogs lead back to akc am staff dogs. 
Breaks this down
UKC back to Amstaffs
well this is true in the true what you want to call "APBT's" many generations back you would find some amstaff but I would think more likely you would trace back to ADBA-game

ADBA back to Amstaffs
well I don't know about this one because the 1st AKC stud books were from the ADBA -game dogs
ADBA was 1st 
next AKC (opened stud books for APBT's in 1936 I beleive and then one more time not sure of the year)
then UKC
(I don't know th exact dates it's late)

here is some stuff from the site

*National American Pit Bull Terrier Association*

NAPBTA Archives - PAST 
National Grands by Year 
National Champion Winners by Year 
National Stud Dog & Brood Bitch Winners 
Handler Of The Year Awards 
Top 20 producing APBT sires 2001 
Top 20 producing APBT dams 2001 
Top 20 producing APBT sires 2004 
Top 20 producing APBT dams 2004 
Top 20 producing APBT sires 2006 
Top 20 producing APBT dams 2006


----------



## BLUE PIT BULL MAN

good post i noticed alot of grch ast from ukc in my dogs ped and just a few ch from akc and one international gr ch from akc but i was not thinking that far back thanks for making me think out side the box!


----------



## pitbullgirl22

I've met Matthew, Bronson and Oz in person. Those pics barely do them justice. I have alot of pics of those dogs. Matthew and Bronson are in the same age group and before they were Ch. we all showed against each other.


----------



## bahamutt99

Pitbullgirl, 'twas quite hard to find pics of most of the ADBA dogs especially.


----------



## Firehazard

Yeah,, just underlined the reason I love game dogs....


----------



## coppermare

Ok, learning here so bare with me. From what I'm seeing here the APBT or ADBA seems to be the "game bred" dog. And forgive me if I get this wording wrong. These dogs seem to have a smaller head still box shaped but longer muzzle. Are more leaner built and tall. 
The UKC dogs or as some are calling them the show type, look almost like an amstaff with the shorter muzzle and boxier head, yet taller than the amstaffs. Is this what is referred to as a bully?
The amstaffs are a breed recognized by the AKC period.
The ambully or staff bully or whatever I've heard some refer to look to me to be the same as the amstaffs, but I do see a big difference in their eyes. They are rounder and a bit more prominent than other types when they have a lot of amstaff in them.
The bullies that some are referring to are very short legged, very big headed, wide dogs. And then they are suppose to come in small and extra large?
Wow this is a lot to take in!!
Some pics I look at seem to say the game type dog is the APBT and the Bully is just the show version of it. I don't see a huge difference in those two.
Somebody HELP HERE????


----------



## coppermare

Maybe someone can post a pic of eacy "type"?

PS for the duel registering portion of this. Again, I come from the horse world and in the Arabian horse registry you have a full Arabian or a half arabian registry. People there do the same. They will have a full arabian and register it as a half and show against half arabs. It's really not fair but it happens. The American Paint horse association had a bit of a problem with some registered paints coming out colored and some solid. Both are registered but it was very hard to show a solid horse against a loud colored horse. They solved the problem by having two distinct showing classes. They made another class called breed stock classes which are for solid horse only.


----------



## money_killer

i like the ADBA verison


----------



## AussiePit

My dog looks like the ADBA style.
From what I've heard on here they are one of the not so good regestries?
Does that compromise the dogs breeding/bloodlines at all?
Although they look to have more gameness like the origanal APBT?


----------



## American_Pit13

AussiePit said:


> My dog looks like the ADBA style.
> From what I've heard on here they are one of the not so good regestries?
> Does that compromise the dogs breeding/bloodlines at all?
> Although they look to have more gameness like the origanal APBT?


The ADBA is an excellent registry. All my dogs are UKC/ADBA


----------



## Patch-O-Pits

AussiePit said:


> My dog looks like the ADBA style.
> From what I've heard on here they are one of the not so good regestries?
> Does that compromise the dogs breeding/bloodlines at all?
> Although they look to have more gameness like the origanal APBT?


Hi and welcome to the site.

UKC and ADBA are the reputable APBT orgs, so I'm not sure where you got your info. That being said the breeder you got you dog from would be where you'd want to research more as the papers and bloodline are only as good not only as the registry but the person you got the dog from. I say that because not all breeders are equal by any means. I hope that helps to clear it up.

Also, you can not look at a picture and see gameness or anything else about the dog except for the structure.


----------



## Angie

The AKC dogs look a leetle tubby


----------



## aus_staffy

Angie said:


> The AKC dogs look a leetle tubby


The AKC dogs are by definition, Amstaffs. And yes a lot of them are shown out of condition even over here.


----------



## coppermare

I think that would be a matter of opinion. Depends on what you would call tubby or out of condition. Some may not like the dog to look like a starved greyhound. Personally I think Anna Nicole (in the beginning days) looked way better than some of the skinny models of today. While condition to one may mean anorexic to others. Compare a body builder to a swimmer. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"


----------



## Hanover Pits

I think they all are great looking dogs.


----------



## APASA

coppermare said:


> Ok, learning here so bare with me. From what I'm seeing here the APBT or ADBA seems to be the "game bred" dog. And forgive me if I get this wording wrong. These dogs seem to have a smaller head still box shaped but longer muzzle. Are more leaner built and tall.
> The UKC dogs or as some are calling them the show type, look almost like an amstaff with the shorter muzzle and boxier head, yet taller than the amstaffs. Is this what is referred to as a bully?
> The amstaffs are a breed recognized by the AKC period.
> The ambully or staff bully or whatever I've heard some refer to look to me to be the same as the amstaffs, but I do see a big difference in their eyes. They are rounder and a bit more prominent than other types when they have a lot of amstaff in them.
> The bullies that some are referring to are very short legged, very big headed, wide dogs. And then they are suppose to come in small and extra large?
> Wow this is a lot to take in!!
> Some pics I look at seem to say the game type dog is the APBT and the Bully is just the show version of it. I don't see a huge difference in those two.
> Somebody HELP HERE????


The bully may be a show off version, but there is a huge difference, and it comes from something you can't "physically" see..


----------

