# views on mixed dogs reg. as pits



## quaterboy22 (Nov 12, 2006)

what is everyones thought on apbt lines that have been outcrossed and or linebred to other breeds? i have a huge problem with it when there red. as apbts , call them bandogs . what are yalls thoughts


----------



## texpitbull2 (Aug 13, 2007)

quaterboy22 said:


> what is everyones thought on apbt lines that have been outcrossed and or linebred to other breeds? i have a huge problem with it when there red. as apbts , call them bandogs . what are yalls thoughts


I dont care for it when they bred out and hang the papers ,, now if they call them bandogs I dont mind it at all . don't guess I know what you mean by linebred to other breeds . can you explane a lil more on this .


----------



## MY MIKADO (Apr 7, 2006)

As long as the cross isn't called a APBT and called what it is be a Am Bully or a Bandog I don't care. I just hope that the people taking these dogs know what they are getting into so we don't have anymore bad press.


----------



## Marine1 (Oct 10, 2007)

The problem with this is that it has to be proven the dog is mixed. Just like anything, if somebody can fiqure out how to"hang" papers, they will. You have to consider that anyone that purposely mixes a pure bloodline with a totally different breed of dog in order to achieve the lastest look, or fad has no respect for the breed. They only respect what they can gain from the breed...mainly noteriety, and money. These people feed on those that dont know any better. If they know they can register a mixed breed as a pitbull, and people will still buy it, why would they stop? They are not worried about staying "true" to the breed.If these people were to post a litter of mixed pitbull puppies as "registered pitbulls for sale", as opposed to "registered bandogs for sale", which do you think whould get the most attention, and end up selling the puppies. I definetly dont agree with this, but whenever greed, and profit is involved, doing the righteous thing is the last thing on their mind. The problem with people registering their dog as American Bully, instead of APBT, or AST is that their is no proof that the AB is mixed. There is speculation, but that is not enough to totally change the name of the breed. The only people that register their dogs as American Bully, are those that want there breed to be seperate, and do so through the ABKC. The word "bully" is used more as a way to describe the conformation, and build of the pitbull, instead of it(AB) being used to describe a totally different breed. Their are many of people that know what a "true "APBT is,and would argue that these types are dogs are not pitbulls, and should be registered as a different breed. Until there is documented evidence of the mixing of APBT, people that want this change to happen are fighting a battle that perhaps...cant be won.


----------



## showoffpits (Mar 6, 2008)

I dont care for it to much....I think its wrong and you should watch out for the major kennels and check them out before buying a dog....Some breeders are in it for the money even though they say its to breed good tempermant dogs but yet they breed there female every 3-4 months when she comes in heat and sell them soon as they are 6 weeks old....just watch out for certain things like that....


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

ambully folks would be well advised to stay away from the name bandog before they turn a term and type that is truely ancient in form into something basically as generic as what theyve already created,a stupid purposeless bulldog with all the structural and temperment faults that accompany the modern bulldog...........


----------



## MetalGirl30 (Apr 15, 2008)

I know this might sound stupid, but what is a "bandog"?


----------



## NesOne (Feb 7, 2008)

MetalGirl30 said:


> I know this might sound stupid, but what is a "bandog"?


It doesn't sound stupid, back in the day I took it as a dog that was a mix between a pitbull and another bulldog type breed, basically a pitbull/mix, but here's a wikipedia description (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandog):

_The term Bandog (also known as Bandogge) originated around 1250-1300 in Middle England, referring to a mastiff type dog that was bound by a chain during the daytime and was released at night to guard against intruders. In 1576 Johannes Caius published a book called Of English Dogs in which he described Bandog as vast, stubborn, ugly, eager dog of heavy body._

and also...(later in the text)

*Modern breed description*
_A notable developer of working class Bandogs is Joe Lucero. Lucero refers to his dogs as American Bandogge Mastiff. There are other bandog strains in existence under different names, but the Lucero lines are the most famous celebrated for their stable temperaments and outstanding working qualities. Many people believe these dogs to be the perfect protection and working class guard dogs.

Many programs have used American Pit Bull Terrier (American Staffordshire Terrier) and Neapolitan Mastiff crosses, as has been the case with the Lucero program. A few programs have also used other bully type breeds as well as other mastiff type breeds. Regardless however of which program a breeder selected, if they were breeding dogs true to guarding purposes it has been essential to select dogs suitable for such work. Dogs were bred from strains that have temperament, phenotype, to do home guardian or personal protection. The Bandog is a rugged dog, heavily boned and muscled, intimidating when seen and is ferocious when provoked. The Bandog, any variety, is strictly a working breed and should be a result of serious and dedicated planning, starting from careful selection of parent breeds and more importantly, appropriate representatives of those breeds, with the health and temperament testing being on the top of the list of priorities, while the uniformity in appearance is the last of the breeders' concerns. The intention in each case is to combine the courage and tenacity of an American Pit Bull Terrier with the large size and guarding instinct of a Mastiff.

Broad skull, strong muzzle that is medium to long muzzle depending on the strain, wide shoulder, powerful chest, great agility, intelligence and very well controlled dog._


----------



## CaSk (Aug 18, 2006)

cane76 said:


> ambully folks would be well advised to stay away from the name bandog before they turn a term and type that is truely ancient in form into something basically as generic as what theyve already created,a stupid purposeless bulldog with all the structural and temperment faults that accompany the modern bulldog...........


*Yup, also there are other people that are in the same boat as us. There are true american bulldog,bandog,old english bulldogee, that are in the same situation there are people getting there hands on these breeds and making them overdone way to big like the ambully and selling them as such as. APBT are not the only breed over the years that are being bred as bigger is better and destroying alot of good foundation blood and so on that ancestors and fellow dog people took years to create. It is BS and in my eye's will never stop till something new comes along. It it doesn't help when you got wanna be registers that will register anything for that purpose of money and help promote the byb's. Now there are some kennels that will register there dogs with wannabe registers to perform in there shows but no real kennel will just stick with one register that is know for mutts and that will register any dog based on pictures. JMO*


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

MetalGirl30 said:


> I know this might sound stupid, but what is a "bandog"?


*here are some examples of bandogges,large "working" bull and mastiff dogs are what makes a bandogge*
swinfords "bantu",created by swinford dvm and dogman "jack kelly...








joe luceros billy








thunderdomes lucho.








luceros curly,the dog from the "hulk" movie and "fear factor"








and luceros jaws of life the dog featured in carl semencic gladiator dogs and the movie dogs that protect,my personal favorite bandogge..








so as you see in every case the specimens presented are lare mastiffs,therefore i believe it incorrect to call ambullys bandogges,they really have nothing at all in common,
although i do believe there are bandogges being registered as apbt,these dogs fall under the blood lines of whopper, chevy,dagger,and eddington.It also must be said that some of the old gray line stuff shows definte mastiff qualitys,but if its not being worked i wouldnt call that strain bandogge.
Some breeders of the big red nose stuff have actually took a step away from the apbt lable calling there dogs oaklahoma bulldogs due to there area of origion and the fact that they are not apbts...


----------



## MetalGirl30 (Apr 15, 2008)

Thank you guys..... they almost look like Cane Corso's in a way. Pretty dogs though and mean looking.
So these bandogs are pretty well their own breed, with their own breed standards right?


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

Why does every one turn to the term "bandog" for anything that is pit or bulldog mix? Bandogs ARE NOT just any bully bred mix.


Cane has put up the bandog info so I will not get into it .

They do not need to be called any thing other than mixes. 
Not ambully or anything else they are mixes and should be labeled as so and not labeled as ANY breed.

No reason they should be labeled as any breed if they are not.


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

*bandog is a name that describes there function as much as a lable
bandog"dog that is bound by chain during the day and let loose at night to guard,a close quarter combat dog designed specificaly for battle against man
*the bandog has no standard or offical standard although ceartin breeders do have there "own" standards but these generally are not open to the public
and generally the dogs are not offered to your average Joe wanting a dog..
The concept of the bandog is form following function and its concept goes against everything a show breeder stands for...
As for them looking like corsos,there is a reason,a corso/presa etc are line bred bandogs..


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

american_pit13 said:


> Why does every one turn to the term "bandog" for anything that is pit or bulldog mix?.


Because people in the apbt community want to lable anything that is a possable mix as a bandog so the dogs are not labled as apbts,also ive heard individuals say the next time a apbt bites somebody they shoulsd call it a bandog,because thats what it was.
The truth is that the bandog is not a scape goat for the apbt or its fanciers and is infact very rare indeed.Also there are pure bred bandog's bred for generations and generations"working class kennels".The concept of bandog's has been in existance as long as the idea of the domestic dog..


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

What are my views? I think it sucks. It degrades the quality and reputation of the breed. I feel the same way about Whopper dogs, bandogs, and (sorry folks) American bullies. Call them what they are, and appreciate them on their own merits, but don't sit on the coattails of the APBT to gain recognition through infamy. If you're doing it right, you'll be able to pimp your own accomplishments, and your own breed, and let the APBT get back to where it should be.


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

bahamutt99 said:


> What are my views? I think it sucks. It degrades the quality and reputation of the breed. I feel the same way about Whopper dogs, *bandogs,*and (sorry folks) American bullies.Call them what they are, and appreciate them on their own merits, but don't sit on the coattails of the APBT to gain recognition through infamy. If you're doing it right, you'll be able to pimp your own accomplishments, and your own breed, and let the APBT get back to where it should be.





cane76 said:


> Because people in the apbt community want to lable anything that is a possable mix as a bandog so the dogs are not labled as apbts,also ive heard individuals say the next time a apbt bites somebody they shoulsd call it a bandog,because thats what it was.
> The truth is that the bandog is not a scape goat for the apbt or its fanciers and is infact very rare indeed.Also there are pure bred bandog's bred for generations and generations"working class kennels".The concept of bandog's has been in existance as long as the idea of the domestic dog..


This is a great example of exactly what i said in the prior post.
see as how bahamutt99 a very wise and also acomplished member of the apbt community use's the bandog as a scape goat for the horrable managment/preservation of the apbt breed...
You havd to look no further the dogmen "ed grim" and "jack kelly" and "martin lieberman" for the creation and promotion of the "swinford bandog".
Look to the "adba"for the registration and promotion of the whopper dogs,a
dog they knew was a cross,it wasnt a secret,[whopper dogs are bandogs and should not be registered as apbts]so this is a money issue,if you dont like that the adba registers whopper dogs or that the ukc registers bully's why do you continue to support them?Its clear there motivation is all about the money and not about the breed..[for the record i also believe bullys should be booted out of the u.k.c]....


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

cane76 said:


> The truth is that the bandog is not a scape goat for the apbt or its fanciers and is infact very rare indeed.Also there are pure bred bandog's bred for generations and generations"working class kennels".The concept of bandog's has been in existance as long as the idea of the domestic dog..


I was going to go into this but I thought you had said it but I didn't read thru everything you posted. But yes this was what I was going to say that Bandogs are a "group" or breed of their own not just a random mixing of dogs or just any mix of bulls.


----------



## los44 (Jun 1, 2008)

why do people put down other breeds rather mixed breeds as if they are no good or of no use regardless of what you call it? the apbt started out as a mixed dog didnt it?(bulldog and some type of terrier if im not mistaken someone correct me if im wrong) mama always said dont throw stones if you live in a glass house. i began to read up on apbt and staffys because i plan to purchase one within a year or 2. i have owned apbt in the past, i had her till she was about 2.5 and because i had to move i gave her to a loving family upstate with alot of land. just didnt feel right keeping her couped up in an apt. all day. call me dumb or whatever but in my eyes every breed today started somewhere. i wonder if this is how people reacted back when the apbt was created.


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

los44 said:


> why do people put down other breeds rather mixed breeds as if they are no good or of no use regardless of what you call it? the apbt started out as a mixed dog didnt it?(bulldog and some type of terrier if im not mistaken someone correct me if im wrong) mama always said dont throw stones if you live in a glass house.


*the problem is with registering mix breed as pure breed with one of the apbt registry's.
The apbt is a pure bred dog,if it is used to improve another suffering breed,thats fine[with me,lol]but the dog should not be allowed to recieve a pure bred pedigree,called paper hanging,it's just straight up lieing,misleading and creates confusion.....*


american_pit13 said:


> I was going to go into this but I thought you had said it but I didn't read thru everything you posted. But yes this was what I was going to say that Bandogs are a "group" or breed of their own not just a random mixing of dogs or just any mix of bulls.


This is one of the best quotes i have heard in while quoted from a guy
named Dan Balderson[danuk]this dude is really well versed on the subject..
fro the bandog banter board....................
*Bandogge is a functional reference, not some designer appendage as some fools and BYBers would try to have folks believe. As such they are inherently driven, active dogs and so need outlets for this. 
*
I like the discription.
Bandog is not a designer breed,it's a rustic working type of antiquity,And should not be registered as apbt,but if it is,its the fault of nobody but ceartin folks within the apbt's own community


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

los44 said:


> why do people put down other breeds rather mixed breeds as if they are no good or of no use regardless of what you call it? the apbt started out as a mixed dog didnt it?


Yeah. 100 years ago. They've been registered since what, 1898? They're no more mutts today than any other breed. And I don't put down any breed. But would you call a Doberman/Shepherd cross a Rottweiler? Would you call a goat a horse? Why should a mix be called an APBT? Call a duck a duck and don't disrespect the hard work that goes into creating a pure breed by letting pretenders be called pure.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

los44 said:


> i wonder if this is how people reacted back when the apbt was created.


I wasn't there but I would imagine that people were awestruck when they saw what had been created by mixing mere dogs. You'd be hard pressed to find a fancier of any working breed who would not admit admiration for the pit dog.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

cane76 said:


> And should not be registered as apbt,but if it is,its the fault of nobody but ceartin folks within the apbt's own community


I don't know.. I guess it would all depend on what you call the APBT community. The registries don't speak for the community IMO, Not anymore anyway.


----------



## los44 (Jun 1, 2008)

bahamutt99 said:


> Yeah. 100 years ago. They've been registered since what, 1898? They're no more mutts today than any other breed. And I don't put down any breed. But would you call a Doberman/Shepherd cross a Rottweiler? Would you call a goat a horse? Why should a mix be called an APBT? Call a duck a duck and don't disrespect the hard work that goes into creating a pure breed by letting pretenders be called pure.


 they've been registered by the akc since 1936 i believe apbt was created in late 1870's so it took roughly 60 or so years to become recognized by the akc. do goats look like horses? NO> could a mixed pit look like an apbt? ABSOLUTELY!!!! in fact in all honestly one might not even know the difference. hence people want pedigrees and bloodlines ect. that is also funny cause back in the day breeders never gave out their bloodlines. as far as disrespecting the TRUTH is the TRUTH. apbts come from a mixed bloodline, they were created by mating different dogs.


----------



## los44 (Jun 1, 2008)

buz i woul like to think your right about people being awestruck. i dont know if anyone here has seen this but i thought it was interesting to say the least.


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

los44 said:


> they've been registered by the akc since 1936 i believe apbt was created in late 1870's so it took roughly 60 or so years to become recognized by the akc. do goats look like horses? NO> could a mixed pit look like an apbt? ABSOFUKINGLUTELY!!!! in fact in all honestly one might not even know the difference. hence people want pedigrees and bloodlines ect. that is also funny cause back in the day breeders never gave out their bloodlines. as far as disrespecting the TRUTH is the TRUTH. apbts come from a mixed bloodline, they were created by mating different dogs.


No it did not take 60 years because the APBT WAS NEVER recognized by the AKC

ALL DOG WHERE CREATED FROM MIXING DIFFERENT DOGS DUH!!!!!!:stick:


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

los44 said:


> buz i woul like to think your right about people being awestruck. i dont know if anyone here has seen this but i thought it was interesting to say the least.


This just proves that DNA testing is bull nothing to do with a dog actually being pure or not.


----------



## los44 (Jun 1, 2008)

american_pit13 said:


> No it did not take 60 years because the APBT WAS NEVER recognized by the AKC
> 
> ALL DOG WHERE CREATED FROM MIXING DIFFERENT DOGS DUH!!!!!!:stick:


excuse me staffys i forget the akc doesnt accept apbt. ALL DOGS WERE CREATED FROM MIXING DOGS YEAH DUHHHH!!!!! SO WHY DO PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD CONTINUOUSLY ON MIXED BREEDS? I JUST DONT GET IT! this is the thing that pisses me off. i personally love apbt/staffys but i will not spew on mixed breeds or any other breed. but hey thats just me


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

los44 said:


> excuse me staffys i forget the akc doesnt accept apbt. ALL DOGS WERE CREATED FROM MIXING DOGS YEAH DUHHHH!!!!! SO WHY DO PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD CONTINUOUSLY SHI ON MIXED BREEDS? I JUST DONT GET IT! this is the thing that pisses me off. i personally love apbt/staffys but i will not spew on mixed breeds or any other breed. but hey thats just me


staffys and amstaff are 2 different breeds.

No one on mixed breeds. We sh on mixed breeds being called APBT or any breed that they are not.A mix is a mix and a pure is a pure. We call it as we see it.

Do you really not understand the difference between a mix and a breed of dog that has been established from the original mixing of dogs?


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

The reason IMO that it is such a difficult concept to grasp for many many "pit bull" lovers is all the different ways the APBTs worth can be proven. I'm sure it was not this confusing back in the day when reputable men bred dogs they could be proud of and there was one way to prove the dog to be worthy of the name. Nowadays anyone can find a reason to call their dog a pit bull.Those who want to know the truth will seek it out and accept it. Those who only like the name but don't understand the dog will always find a loophole afforded them by money hungry registries and BYBs. When I was younger and just getting started we called EVERY pup "willy" - Willy be a pit bull when he grows up? No matter how cool he looked...


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

american_pit13 said:


> ALL DOG WHERE CREATED FROM MIXING DIFFERENT DOGS DUH!!!!!!:stick:


Good one!!!!


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

> they've been registered by the akc since 1936 i believe apbt was created in late 1870's so it took roughly 60 or so years to become recognized by the akc. do goats look like horses? NO> could a mixed pit look like an apbt? ABSOFUKINGLUTELY!!!! in fact in all honestly one might not even know the difference. hence people want pedigrees and bloodlines ect. that is also funny cause back in the day breeders never gave out their bloodlines. as far as disrespecting the TRUTH is the TRUTH. apbts come from a mixed bloodline, they were created by mating different dogs.


AKC registered them in 1936, but the UKC started registering them in 1898, and the ADBA in 1909. Honestly, who cares what a mixed breed _looks like_? It doesn't make them pure. They sure wont produce the same as a dog who's been purebred for a century. If I could cross a Dane and a Boxer and call the offspring Dogo Argentinos, that is a big smack in the face to the brothers who worked for years to create and perfect that breed.

Look at the Doberman. Started out by mixing a number of dogs and the type got set very quickly, and they've been breeding true for a long time. Do you consider that breed a mutt? If I bred a Samoyed with an Akita and got a litter of dogs that resembled Chow Chows, should I go register the offspring as such? What about when those offspring are bred, and start showing traits that are clearly not Chow Chow?

These dogs are a pure breed, and anybody who has any love for them would want to see them preserved as such. When you start breeding in whatever you think looks right, don't call them APBTs anymore.


----------



## los44 (Jun 1, 2008)

YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT, EVERY DOG HAS BEEN A MUT @ 1 POINT! in all this i have become very curious. each bloodline carries their own traits yet they are considered pure? is it based on common ancestry? what makes it purebred? these questions are not me trying to be a smart ass, this is me trying to understand. the more i think the more i question the system. it seems to me that the system is deeply flawed.


----------



## los44 (Jun 1, 2008)

american_pit13 said:


> staffys and amstaff are 2 different breeds.
> 
> No one shits on mixed breeds. We shit on mixed breeds being called APBT or any breed that they are not.A mix is a mix and a pure is a pure. We call it as we see it.
> 
> Do you really not understand the difference between a mix and a breed of dog that has been established from the original mixing of dogs?


what makes it pure? im doing my research as well trying to understand. 
oh and i think your an a-hole for mentioning the staffy thing. you know what i meant. that was a cheap shot.


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

los44 said:


> is it based on common ancestry? what makes it purebred? these questions are not me trying to be a smart ass, this is me trying to understand. the more i think the more i question the system. it seems to me that the system is deeply flawed.


Pure bred dog is established through line/inbreeding,It should take about 10 generations for the dogs to breed true to type [i believe] with no outside breeds added,all these dogs would share the same ancestory.
Now you can take represnitives of a pure bred dog,line/inbreed for specific traits and then select the pups with the disiered traits you disiered and create a diffrent line within the breed that is still 100% pure breed,but has it's own traits that are common to only itself.Breeding of the pure bred dog comes down to line and inbreeding out crossing and selection,its really complex,but once you've grasped thant much youll understand,you cant take a pure bred dog,add in another breed and just have the pups of this breeding labled or registered honestly as a pure bred,theyll be mixes....


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

los44 said:


> what makes it pure? im doing my research as well trying to understand.
> oh and i think your an a-hole for mentioning the staffy thing. you know what i meant. that was a cheap shot.


We are trying to help more than just you learn and a lot of other people could read this and not know what you mean. I will correct your mis information.

Grow up .


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

los44 said:


> each bloodline carries their own traits yet they are considered pure? is it based on common ancestry? what makes it purebred? these questions are not me trying to be a smart ass, this is me trying to understand. the more i think the more i question the system. it seems to me that the system is deeply flawed.


Bloodlines can carry their own traits, yes, but they're still supposed to meet the breed standard. For example, if the standard says round or almond eyes allowed, and line A is more known for almond eyes while line B is more known for round eyes, they're both still representative of the same breed. If line A is predominantly rednose dogs while line B is mostly brindle, they're both still APBTs because both colors are allowed in the standard. Does that make sense?

A purebred is a purebred based on generations of reproducing the same consistent type. Breeders don't introduce new blood after a certain point -- unless their up-and-coming breed is starting to lack in some area -- because that will throw new genes into the hopper and disrupt the consistency of what they've been breeding. Look at Basenjis. Basenji breeders went to Africa to pick up some new stock for whatever reason, and the introduction of new blood brought in stuff they weren't expecting. (Namely, brindle coloring.) Hopefully it corrected whatever they wanted to correct, but ultimately the breed standard had to be changed to accomodate the new colors.

Honestly, the system is only flawed because so many people are trying to find a way to circumvent it.


----------



## Sydney (Aug 14, 2007)

los44 said:


> YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT, EVERY DOG HAS BEEN A MUT @ 1 POINT! in all this i have become very curious. each bloodline carries their own traits yet they are considered pure? is it based on common ancestry? what makes it purebred? these questions are not me trying to be a smart ass, this is me trying to understand. the more i think the more i question the system. it seems to me that the system is deeply flawed.


Yes all dogs were "mutts" at one point and you make breeds from other breeds...but the problem with today's "breeds" is they lack form and function. People no longer have regard for the "best interest" or "future" we are in "The Day of the Designer Dog" they even have a Designer Dog Magazine...the best part of this is they call the dogs what they are...Maltese+Poodle=Malti-Poo
Cocker+Poodle=Cocka-Poo whether they fancy one or the other...these dogs no longer "serve a purpose" they are pets...we are trying to preserve the "working dog" aspect of this bred. They were bred for a purpose, and this is our effort in the historical preservation of the dog we love and connect with.

I work in cars so I like to compare them to cars...I like to think the APBT represents the Ferrari of the canine world...They are fast, agile, powerful, and have incredible body lines, they are not intended to be a daily driver, they are all or nothing "balls to the wall" sort of car, but they are not for everyone...Imagine it's your Ferrari (bloodline) that you have maintained and preserved...lovingly waxed and polished...you know the rpm range by the sound of the engine alone. 



Grand Champion UWP 'PR' Matrix's Trinity of Braveheart, CGC, DNA-VIP

You want to share your love of Ferraris with those you think share your love...so you meet with a people who say they have the best Ferrari money can buy, the fastest most beautiful Ferraris in the world, so you meet with these people only to find they don't have a Ferrari. What they have is a sorry excuse for a car, but yet that is what they are passing it off for, and "educating" people on... you look at it and to you its a monstrosity the farthest thing from a Ferrari, why don't they just call it what it is??Do they even know what it is???



Looks sorta like a cow to me...

Ultimately it no longer even resembles a car, it is a total train wreck with costly damage that may never be corrected...





Those are both serious problems...you can't fix, why do people have to be stupid and ruin a good thing??

I dunno this maybe only makes sense to me...:hammer:


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

When I read this post, something seems to ALWAYS happen. People get confused and mix terms and ideas.


Quote:
YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT, EVERY DOG HAS BEEN A MUT @ 1 POINT! in all this i have become very curious. each bloodline carries their own traits yet they are considered pure? is it based on common ancestry? what makes it purebred? these questions are not me trying to be a smart ass, this is me trying to understand. the more i think the more i question the system. it seems to me that the system is deeply flawed. 


1. Establish the problem.--The problem is not the dogs, pure or mixed. That makes no difference whatsoever. Each dog is good in its own right. THE PROBLEM is what people are lableing these dogs. Purebred owners of ANY breed hate to see mixed dogs called by their breed name. So is the ambully a bad dog? Is the Bandog a bad dog? Is the MUTT a bad dog? NO but CALL IT WHAT IT IS. Dont call a Bully an APBT, dont call a Bandog an ABPT and vice versa! By the way, if they will be consistent in their breedings the AMBULLY can easily become its own breed, its how we got the Labradoodle!!

2.
Quote:
each bloodline carries their own traits yet they are considered pure? is it based on common ancestry? what makes it purebred? 


Of course they all have common ancestory but what makes a dog a purebred is when it CONSISTENTLY produces dogs of the same GENETIC PHENO and GENOTYPE!

Quote:
Main Entry: pure·bred 
Pronunciation: \-ˈbred, -ˌbred\ 
Function: adjective 
Date: 1852 
: bred from members of a recognized breed, strain, or kind without admixture of other blood over many generations 



most of your bully and bandogs dont do this. As Cane stated there is not a STANDARD for the bulldog. There is a general consensus but no standard. Just look at the RE dogs. The first dogs look nothing like the dogs now, there is no consistency in the breeding.


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

Sydney, you forgot the comparison about gutting out the Ferrari and putting a Mack truck engine in it. Both serve their purpose, but just aren't the same, no matter how you tune them.


----------



## los44 (Jun 1, 2008)

ive searched the net for what is considered pure bred and everywhere i go it seems to me that it is based on looks(standards/physical presentation) and basically the word of the breeder. i find this disturbing that there are people that have what they think is pure breed but in actualty they might not have a pure breed.

i found this great page with alot of info www.breedingbetterdogs.com/articles. i find it interesting that mendels findings can be applied to dog breeding(i wouldve never crossed my mind)

could the american bully have a recesive trait? or are people sure its an outcross?
should'nt dna testing be manditory by the clubs/shows?

i understand the pure breed concept in THEORY, but how can one ever be sure with out dna testing. a leap of faith i guess


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

It has already been explained but I will try to put it into simpler terms. ALL dogs are almost identical, genetically speaking. Even the Shi-tzu is identical to the English Mastiff, genetically speaking. What seperates the breeds is basically asthetics and ability acheived by breeding FOR specific traits. Once these charcteristics and traits have been established and consistantly bred for, it becomes a seperate breed. At any time new blood is introduced, it automatically becomes a mutt. No ifs ands or buts. In the case of the APBT, the fundamental trait and goal was gameness. If you want to see a "pure bred" APBT, look outside the US where it is legal to continue the quest for game dogs. Here in the states most breed for a close second by proving their dogs in other legal sports. Respectable programs nonetheless. These breeders are deserately trying to preserve the breed while staying within the lines of the law. Anyone who knows these dogs can see them a mile away. Anyone who does not understand the orignal dog will have trouble trying to distinguish between pure and mixed. It's an "eye of the beholder" type thing. I don't care what studies have been done, only true fanciers of the breed can appreciate the real deal. No papers, pedigrees, opinions, or dna tests can accurately dub any dog a pit bull. Only those who know.


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

los44 said:


> i understand the pure breed concept in THEORY, but how can one ever be sure with out dna testing. a leap of faith i guess


Lots of reputable breeders do DNA test their stock to prove that it is from the parents they've put down on paper. As for DNA testing to prove "purebredness," that's a fallacy. Its the most inaccurate waste of $200 I've ever seen. If anybody wants that done, just send me the $200 and I'll tell you what your dog is. LOL!

At any rate, if you buy a dog from a BYB, or get it from the shelter, you'll never know, and most people are fine with that. If you buy a dog from a reputable breeder, you've got a reasonable assurance that your dog is purebred. Going any further than that is really just splitting hairs.

Oh yeah, and our breed's standard was based on performance, and the look of the dog _should_ reflect the best worker. Standards also address what temperament a dog should have. They're not just based on look.


----------



## los44 (Jun 1, 2008)

now that ive read and read and read some more i kind of understand what you all are trying to say but @ the same time i feel the same way as i felt before. i have come to a conclusion that there is no correct way to gauge an apbt. i think you would have to study the breed for years in order to tell the difference just by observation. for those of you who can or think you can i admire you because i cannot. because of this thread i am planning on doing more research on the dna of dogs, i thank the starter of this thread & those who have contributed along the way.

los


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

los44 said:


> i have come to a conclusion that there is no correct way to gauge an apbt.
> los


Sure there is but it's now illegal. The one true test for a dogs worth as breeding stock has been removed from the selection process which opens the door to all kinds of what -ifs and maybes. That's why it is so confusing to the new guy, and how the registries get away with the BS they are capitalizing on. You'll get a much better education by reading about dogs from the past than you will ever get by reading a scientist's viewpoint.


----------



## NesOne (Feb 7, 2008)

buzhunter said:


> Sure there is but it's now illegal.


And no one wants to do anything illegal, right :angel: HAHAHAHAHA.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Well, that's up to each individual. You'll never catch me on the wrong side of the law. I've got too much to lose.


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

los44 said:


> now that ive read and read and read some more i kind of understand what you all are trying to say but @ the same time i feel the same way as i felt before. i have come to a conclusion that there is no correct way to gauge an apbt. i think you would have to study the breed for years in order to tell the difference just by observation. for those of you who can or think you can i admire you because i cannot. because of this thread i am planning on doing more research on the dna of dogs, i thank the starter of this thread & those who have contributed along the way.
> 
> los


The best way to judge a dogs linage is by studing its pedigree,
If a dog has nothing but gamebred dogs in its ped,its a pure bred apbt,or if it has alot of game dogs and a few correct am staffs its pretty much pure also,but that could be debated also.
When you get to the gotti/whopper bred dogs,o.g gray line[what ever],the pedigrees start to get real hazy,missing dogs,dogs that look to be half mastiff,or full mastiff,bulldog looking dogs,then you know something dis/honest is happening.If you aquire a pit bull that looks like a mastiff and acts like a bulldog,theres a great chance thats what it is,no matter what your papers say......................


----------



## Sydney (Aug 14, 2007)

too bad too many people believe whats fed into them instead of researching it...


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

cane76 said:


> The best way to judge a dogs linage is by studing its pedigree,


You are right, but only if you can trust the breeder. I know a guy who sells papers, subsequently lots of owners have totally fake pedigrees on their dogs.


----------

