# Show N Go's



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

bahamutt99 said:


> I used to be really partial to Lar-San dogs, because they mostly represented what I wanted: versatile, UKC type without being so overdone they can't do ADBA, largely rednose, medium size females (males are a smidge too big IMO), not a whole gob of health problems. The more I mess around with Terra, I really like the show-n-go cross of Lar-San with Jeep/Redboy. I like the drive, leg, terrier-like qualities, and lighter build that she brings to the table. I'd like to work with more bred like her in the future.


i have been hearing a lot of people say they like the "show n Go " i was just wondering why? I dont see what a show dog could bring to a working dog besides conformation and dilluted drive. im not saying all show dogs have no drive but the vast majority couldnt work its way out of a wet paper bag with a razor knife.


----------



## Rock Creek Kennels (Oct 25, 2006)

wheezie said:


> i have been hearing a lot of people say they like the "show n Go " i was just wondering why? I dont see what a show dog could bring to a working dog besides conformation and dilluted drive. im not saying all show dogs have no drive but the vast majority couldnt work its way out of a wet paper bag with a razor knife.


The reason I like "show n go" dogs is because you get the complete package. You get a dog that will work hard on the track and win in the show ring. We defiently dont get a dilluted drive with our dogs, but I can't speak for others.


----------



## ForPits&Giggles (Oct 21, 2008)

Rock Creek Kennels said:


> The reason I like "show n go" dogs is because you get the complete package. You get a dog that will work hard on the track and win in the show ring. We defiently dont get a dilluted drive with our dogs, but I can't speak for others.


I agree, alot of "show n go" dogs are great! You get a great drive with the added plus of good looks, great conformity, good conformation. Its like getting a beautiful woman with brains!! Its AWESOME!!


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

wheezie said:


> i have been hearing a lot of people say they like the "show n Go " i was just wondering why? I dont see what a show dog could bring to a working dog besides conformation and dilluted drive. im not saying all show dogs have no drive but the vast majority couldnt work its way out of a wet paper bag with a razor knife.


What the show part brings to the table depends on the individual dog and how it's bred. Obviously, show-n-go breedings only work well if they're well-planned. In my case...

Show:








GRCH UWP 'PR' Matrix's Trinity of Braveheart CGC OFA

plus Go:








CH Knowles' Buckhide

equals Show-n-Go:








Gravity's Digital Rain Matrix
I'm pleased as punch with this dog. Still young, but got some legs and some points. We'll see how she does in the ADBA show ring next year, maybe nab a few low-level pull titles and a CGC. And don't talk to Terra about no drive.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

rock creek: i can see what you are saying but i dont see what is importnant about getting show titles. structue is deffinitly a key factor in helping a dog carry out its phsical tasks... but to me thats where it stops. if you start breeding for "pretty looks" i dont see the point.. get an am staff thats what they are for. 

is it possible that people like show n gos because you still get some great working ability wraped in a pretty bow? Could people also like it because the show lines may baug down some of the less desirable traits that people have with this breed such as DA and make for a easier and more managable pet/show/working dog?

im not directing this towards any one person or trying to be rude. I am just speaking in general terms. everyones input would be great


----------



## Sydney (Aug 14, 2007)

I personally don't have a problem with some of the pit-or-staff from a working stand point I have seen some well bred working AmStaffs like the Tacoma dogs and I like what Howard has going on...
I really don't know how Syd was bred, but I also personally like the fact that she has not displayed any DA it does make her much easier to manage for what I need her for, and I think it allows her to really focus more on the task at hand in Schutzhund (not saying she won't ever, but at this point) DA is part of the breed it is what it is, and it is ok with me, but I don't need me a "GAME" dog to make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. 

I don't think a working dog benifits any from being "pretty" (or from being DA) but the fact that I think she is beautiful is just a plus for me!  Honestly it is her structure I find stunning, and I still think that structure is of utmost importance in the working dog JMO 

**Wheezie clean out your inbox!


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

i agree with you. howard does have a great prgram going on. but i believe (i will have to check)his APBT are just that... APBT not staff crosses. a working dog is a working dog to me i dont care how it is bred as long as it gets the job done. look forward to hearing more replys


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

wheezie said:


> if you start breeding for "pretty looks" i dont see the point.. get an am staff thats what they are for.


So anyone who is concerned about looks should just get an AmStaff? Seems kind of judgmental. I guess we should define breeding for looks. By that do you mean breeding dogs to meet the standard? Worrying about correcting gay tails, ugly ears, and so on?



> is it possible that people like show n gos because you still get some great working ability wraped in a pretty bow?


It would be possible. But not necessarily likely. You start doing outcrosses like that, you're going to lose the consistency, so I don't think anyone would say a show-n-go breeding is based on looks. I think it's more likely a cross that's done to help restore fading traits to a show line.



> Could people also like it because the show lines may baug down some of the less desirable traits that people have with this breed such as DA and make for a easier and more managable pet/show/working dog?


In my experience with show-n-gos, unlikely. Considering some show blood -- Lar-San being one of them -- is still quite hot, mixing it with game blood only gives you more of the same. Priest is all what you would consider "show," and he's the most outwardly "hot" dog I own. Terra (my show-n-go) is not a big bluffer, but she'll get that look -- something kinda like a cross between a tiger and a cobra -- when she's ready to explore the "go" side of her history. Her show blood has not lessened her DA at all. Anyone who's met her mom would understand. 



wheezie said:


> a working dog is a working dog to me i dont care how it is bred as long as it gets the job done.


Extend that love to the show-n-gos and we'll be in agreement.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Never have been able to understand the logic behind breeding any dog of any breed specifically for the showring. Especially working breeds.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

i think any one that puts looks on par or above working ability should look into an am staff. things that will deter a dog from working should definitly get niped in the butt, but a slight over bite.. a gaye tale???? i dont care as long as the dog works but hey thats just me... and most other working dog enthusiast 

It would be possible. But not necessarily likely. You start doing outcrosses like that, you're going to lose the consistency, so I don't think anyone would say a show-n-go breeding is based on looks. I think it's more likely a cross that's done to help restore fading traits to a show line.


this is what i wsa thinking also. it helps maintain the strong drive and working ability.. but what does the show side have to offer besides correcting minor faults that could help it win in a SHOW ring???

Extend that love to the show-n-gos and we'll be in agreement.

i have no problem with show and go. hell i almost got a dog off of ofk (which is TNT blood) but couldnt due to financial issues. i just wanted to get some opinions on and think its a great topic to discuss and explore more


----------



## Sydney (Aug 14, 2007)

wheezie said:


> i agree with you. howard does have a great prgram going on. but i believe (i will have to check)his APBT are just that... APBT not staff crosses. a working dog is a working dog to me i dont care how it is bred as long as it gets the job done. look forward to hearing more replys


They are actually pretty heavy AmStaff and AmStaff/APBT but kinda old school, and highly functional



wheezie said:


> a slight over bite.. a gaye tale???? i dont care as long as the dog works but hey thats just me... and most other working dog enthusiast


Agreed.

I think when one area becomes over emphasized in any breeding program you must give something up. I think I would like a "Go" dog that could possibly also "show" but in that order, not the other way around.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

syd.. i was talking about howards dog flame.. i dont think there is any am staff in her ped but like i said i have to check. i know he has a tacoma dog and a pure am staff that he put the most titles on.

i mean really, think about it. If i went up to one of my buddies that trains GSD's or dobermans and told him he should mix in some show blood in there they would look at me like i have lost my damn mind.


----------



## Sydney (Aug 14, 2007)

You are right she is Wilder/Hemphill I guess I was just thinking of Magnus and Annie :hammer:


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

I guess I am neutral .... I bought ember from ofk who is off tnt lines which I guess would be a show and go line whom I might add is not lacking in the drive dept or working ability .. and than I have sadie and simba who come from game lines . I like both and I think folks like baha have proved that show in go's can work so honestly I don't see what the big deal is if the dog works it works regardless if it's a show dog or not who ever said a show dog can't work? I don't see any reason why they couldn't I think it just depends on how the dog was bred.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

no one is saying all show dogs cant work...... where did any one say all show dogs cant work? This is all for sake of seeing others points of views on the subject. there are a lot of people out there that object to these kinds of breeding and others that swear by them. I am here to get others opinions on what the advantages are and what the disadvantages are.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

wheezie said:


> no one is saying all show dogs cant work...... where did any one say all show dogs cant work? This is all for sake of seeing others points of views on the subject. there are a lot of people out there that object to these kinds of breeding and others that swear by them. I am here to get others opinions on what the advantages are and what the disadvantages are.


I get the point of the thread ... I have seen this same topic discussed several times on other boards some people will never believe or get the concept that a show dog can still work or you will have some who think that anything outcrossed with show/game lines is nothing more a diluted amstaff I have heard people say this a thousand times and I tend to disagree it depends on how the dog was bred... I am just giving my opinions to the thread just like everyone else ...


----------



## Sydney (Aug 14, 2007)

I thought it was exciting to finally have a good discussion going on.


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

wheezie said:


> ...a slight over bite.. a gaye tale???? i dont care as long as the dog works but hey thats just me... and most other working dog enthusiast


But it still means you have room to improve upon those things. Say you've got your great working dog with a gay tail and an overbite. So when you go to breed that dog, you say "Hey, I'm going to to produce more of the same while improving upon those faults." That's the nature of preservational/improvement breeding. To breed for the *total package*. Working ability, health, looks, temperament.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

bahamutt99 said:


> But it still means you have room to improve upon those things. Say you've got your great working dog with a gay tail and an overbite. So when you go to breed that dog, you say "Hey, I'm going to to produce more of the same while improving upon those faults." That's the nature of preservational/improvement breeding. To breed for the *total package*. Working ability, health, looks, temperament.


you can still improve upon these minor imperfections... while not having to jump ship and breed to show dogs. Prove to me what a show line has that can improve a working line and i will agree 100% admit that it makes sense.

again... lets try to keep this into a debate and not get heated


----------



## ForPits&Giggles (Oct 21, 2008)

But if you breed out those imperfections havent you made a "show n go" dog? A dog that looks good as well as is a good worker. Or has the "show n go" concept gone over my head?

Edit: Not being a smartass, Im just makin sure I got down what "show n go" means.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

thats a great point!! anohter topic could be ADBA dogs that are really just... fo fo show dogs lol.

what im really talking about is mixing in staff show blood.


----------



## ForPits&Giggles (Oct 21, 2008)

wheezie said:


> thats a great point!! anohter topic could be ADBA dogs that are really just... fo fo show dogs lol.
> 
> what im really talking about is mixing in staff show blood.


Ah, I see. Well then in that aspect I have no desire to go. Am staff are great Am staffs, but I dont want an Am staff, I want an APBT. I would much rather sacrifice good looks before I sacrificed drive/working ability. I probably feel the same way as you, when you add in am staff to a working line apbt then your just diluting it and IMO thats never a good thing.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

The thing is that if you're more worried about aesthetics than substance, you've missed the point of the dog. The true beauty of the APBT is in his will not his appearance.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

that whats i thought to buzz



> To breed for the total package. Working ability, health, looks, temperament


when did looks become become important and even have the right to be in the same sentence with breeding for function?


----------



## reddoggy (Jan 31, 2008)

ForPits&Giggles said:


> Ah, I see. Well then in that aspect I have no desire to go. Am staff are great Am staffs, but I dont want an Am staff, I want an APBT. I would much rather sacrifice good looks before I sacrificed drive/working ability. I probably feel the same way as you, when you add in am staff to a working line apbt then your just diluting it and IMO thats never a good thing.


I don't understand why so many folks think that AmStaffs have little or no drive. Lugz is a high %age AmStaff and has drive for days.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Hell, to be honest, there are probably a million and one versions of the "total dog" when it comes to APBTs. I always thought "total dog" meant game dog lol.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

not saying they dont have drive but all the am staffs i have seen pale in comparison to a working APBT, its a show breed that occasionaly gets worked 

whats does a show dog have to offer a working dog?????? it just dont make any sense to me


----------



## Patch-O-Pits (Jan 12, 2008)

I don't agree for breeding just for show nor do I agree for discounting everything else and just looking at working drive alone.

To me the total package means the below...
they should meet the standard (in no specific order) in:
Structure/good overall proportions and balanced
Health
temperament (rock solid enough to be a therapy dog)
determination/intelligence
workability/drive for agility weight pull and other performance events

Form follows function and that is what the standard is based on. It was created for a reason. 

Actually at the ADBA Nationals this year the conformation judge was really cool and sat there after the show explaining how and why parts of the standard where originally developed. He did this while giving individual critiques to the dogs he judged as he had written notes on each one.

Structure is quite important in my eyes and I've gone over this in more threads than I can count on this forum and others...

So just a quick example of why I feel that way:
given two dogs with equal workability and drive, but the one has straight stifles, flat splayed feet and upright shoulders who do you think would work better and for longer???? I'd certainly take the one with better structure... 

This doesn't mean a good working dog can't have faults no dog is perfect, and some faults effect working ability less than others do.

My question is... Why settle for sub par dogs period when you can have all the puzzle pieces together to make better dogs.

When looking at dogs you need to look at the whole picture no matter the bloodline, there is good and bad in every single line. Some of course have way more good than others while others have mostly what I'd consider crapola to put it nicely. 

Just because a dog looks good or is even "pretty" doesn't automatically mean it wasn't bred to work and has no drive. On the flip side just because a dog was bred from working stock doesn't mean it will also be a great working dog. Good dogs are where you find them. 

Just my 2 cents on the topic


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

great post patch!!!

So just a quick example of why I feel that way:
given two dogs with equal workability and drive, but the one has straight stifles, flat splayed feet and upright shoulders who do you think would work better and for longer???? I'd certainly take the one with better structure...

my question is why tap into a show amstaff line to fix a problem like this when it can be fixed with another working APBT????


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

Im going to take a wild guess and say that people who show their dogs want a pretty dog outwardly for conformation mixed in with all the drive and determination that the working apbt has for things like weight pull ect adding some staff blood helps achieve that TOTAL package for folks who want to show their dogs ... Game bred dogs were never bred for apperance and I am not saying that game bred dogs are lacking in the looks dept but they def were not bred as pretty outwardly as the show in go's are with the exception of a few you can see the obvious differences in game bred apbt's and show type apbt's ... I would say the show dog offers the working dog a prettier package if your breeding for all the right things and not just one specific thing alone I don't see how it would be a problem to add good looks to the package so long as its not the only reason for the breeding ...

Example Typical game bred bulldog Not the prettiest dog on the block but I am sure this dog serves a great deal of purpose










And than your show type outwardly a good looking dog with working ability as some would call the total package drive working ability and than good looks ... BTW I dont know this dog I am just using this as a senario


----------



## Patch-O-Pits (Jan 12, 2008)

There are plenty of strictly working dogs and old time ADBA dogs that I find quite good looking. There are also some show dogs that I think are pretty ugly LOL.

It comes down to not everyone has the same goals for the breeding programs and even the same taste. Not everyone interprets the standards the same way or even bothers to use the standard. 

Usually there is no reason to go to other lines if you can find what you want within your own. Going to other lines and outcrossing is usually done with a specific goal in mind such as when issues can't be fixed within the line or if someone is looking to bring in other desired traits not being expressed in their line. To know what a breeder is thinking you'd have to address it case by case.

Fixing specific undesired genetic traits is not always a cut and dry situation. 
Breeding the best to the best doesn't even always work out the way you hope.
So breeding to better what you have may or may not produce what you are looking for in the first generation of trying. 

Add in other factors like finding dogs that are health tested and truly have proper temperament which make even more variables to consider.

I've seen first hand a couple of very good working dogs who have really awful temperament & the same with show dogs. 
To me I don't care how good a dog's structure is or how good it can work it is has a funky temperament it shouldn't be in the breeding pool period. An APBT needs a rock solid stable temperamnt


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

Patch-O-Pits said:


> There are plenty of strictly working dogs and old time ADBA dogs that I find quite good looking. There are also some show dogs that I think are pretty ugly LOL.
> 
> It comes down to not everyone has the same goals for the breeding programs and even the same taste. Not everyone interprets the standards the same way or even bothers to use the standard.
> 
> ...


Good Posting Patch :clap:


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

good post patch!!! but i still havent had anyone answer my question.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

wheezie said:


> great post patch!!!
> 
> So just a quick example of why I feel that way:
> given two dogs with equal workability and drive, but the one has straight stifles, flat splayed feet and upright shoulders who do you think would work better and for longer???? I'd certainly take the one with better structure...
> ...


IMO the show dog offers the working dog a prettier package outwardly ... you breed staff blood into a working line you get a prettier dog with working potential and drive I think it would depend a great deal on the breeder and if they knew what they were actually doing this is just how I see it working dogs were never bred for looks as many of the show dogs are it's important for a show dog to look good in the ring . This is the only logical explanation I can think of without sugar coating anything. On a lighter note I don't want an ugly dog lol Of couse I wouldn't want to put looks above all those other important aspects of a working dog but if your breeding for the right reasons temperment, drive, sound conformation, working ability, ect to begin with nothing wrong with adding good looks to the package as long as it's not the sole purpose of the breeding.


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

wheezie said:


> you can still improve upon these minor imperfections... while not having to jump ship and breed to show dogs. Prove to me what a show line has that can improve a working line and i will agree 100% admit that it makes sense.
> 
> again... lets try to keep this into a debate and not get heated


I'm not getting heated. And I never said you had to "jump ship" and breed to a show dog. Actually what I've said is that the show-n-go breedings seem to be to restore traits lost to show lines, not vice versa. People into gamebred dogs don't typically want show stuff introduced into their lines, although examples can be cited of show-line dogs who've proven themselves in the pit. However, if a person has a show line and they want to increase the drive, get better angulation, etc., why not outcross to a gamebred line? Clearly, it works when done correctly.



> But if you breed out those imperfections havent you made a "show n go" dog? A dog that looks good as well as is a good worker. Or has the "show n go" concept gone over my head?


Show-n-go for our purposes means a show-type line crossed with a game-bred line.



> what im really talking about is mixing in staff show blood.


Then that's another thing entirely from what I'm talking about. I wouldn't see the point of breeding an ADBA dog to an AKC dog, especially since there'd be no improvement to the AmStaffs since the offspring would have to be registered as UKC or ADBA dogs. Unless you're one of those that considers all non-gamebred dogs "Staffs," in which case I've never understood that argument, and can't debate with you further.



> when did looks become become important and even have the right to be in the same sentence with breeding for function?


Why the hell shouldn't it be? TOTAL package. TOTAL. ie, the whole thing. Looks are part of that. If I had two dogs with equal strengths and one looked like a coonhound, I'd rather breed the dog that looks like an APBT. We call that "type" in the show world. 



> Hell, to be honest, there are probably a million and one versions of the "total dog" when it comes to APBTs. I always thought "total dog" meant game dog lol.


Would you consider a game plug who couldn't bite and had no pit intelligence the total package?



> Good dogs are where you find them.


:clap:


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

What I mean is that IMO, a guy breeding for the "total dog" would be striving to produce game offspring. A game dog that can't bite or fight is still a game dog and a better example of the true APBT than 90% of the trophy winners out there.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

bahamutt99 said:


> Show-n-go for our purposes means a show-type line crossed with a game-bred line.
> 
> Then that's another thing entirely from what I'm talking about. I wouldn't see the point of breeding an ADBA dog to an AKC dog, especially since there'd be no improvement to the AmStaffs since the offspring would have to be registered as UKC or ADBA dogs. Unless you're one of those that considers all non-gamebred dogs "Staffs," in which case I've never understood that argument, and can't debate with you further.


This is what I think he is getting at that if its not a gamebred dog it's a show dog with mostly staff blood therefore not really a working dog ...At least that is the way I am taking it.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

buzhunter said:


> What I mean is that IMO, a guy breeding for the "total dog" would be striving to produce game offspring. A game dog that can't bite or fight is still a game dog and a better example of the true APBT than 90% of the trophy winners out there.


Ouch ... .... ...


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

Baha99 would you say that most show lines have staff blood mixed in the pedigree? Is this typically what you will see in a show dog? Because I always thought that if you go back in any apbt pedigree game-bred or not your going to find staff blood in there somewhere so does that not make these dogs working dogs because they have staff blood somewhere down the line ? That does not make any sense to me.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

SadieBlues said:


> Ouch ... .... ...


:rofl:LMAO - did that hurt??


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

buzhunter said:


> :rofl:LMAO - did that hurt??


Nah !! I dont have any use for a game dog I am content with my kids call em staffs game bred whatever I could care less they serve a purpose to me and that's all that matters... but for those folks who show you may have hurt their feelings


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Well, you know what they say - the truth hurts lol.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

when i say staff show bred dogs im talking aboout lines like tnt and other lines that either have a lot of staff blood in the foundation or in the line itslef. 

we are in agreement that the show line has much to benifit from breding some working blood into it... but what does the working side have to benifit from breeding show lines into it???? if you sa it can benifit from a better structure all i have to say is you can still improve on strutcure with other working dog lines. 

and the heated coment was not directed towards you or any one in paticular it was for any and all in this discussion..

im not saying show n go's cant or do not work im just wondering why anyone would want to try it and cross the two??? if you want a show dog get a show dog if you want a working dog get a working dog.... you dont have to cross the two to get a a good looking up to standard working dog. every working dog enthusiast i know wouldnt even think about crossing "show" blood into there working dog program. and this is coming from talking to people that fancy many differnt breeds not just APBT.

im thinkning this thread has run its course lol. i keep asking what the working side has to gain and no one will answer me. i don mind getting proven wrong and i am open to all opinions.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

SadieBlues said:


> Baha99 would you say that most show lines have staff blood mixed in the pedigree? Is this typically what you will see in a show dog? Because I always thought that if you go back in any apbt pedigree game-bred or not your going to find staff blood in there somewhere so does that not make these dogs working dogs because they have staff blood somewhere down the line ? That does not make any sense to me.


you have it backwards. and just becasue a dog comes from working lines i wouldnt autmoatically call it a working dog, it need to show and display that it is a working dog to be considered such. jmo


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

I guess I am lost now I think your question has been answered several times and your your not agreeing with the answers you have gotten. I understand your question but what I don't understand is what more of an answer are you trying to get? 

Wheezie what would you define as a show dog? 

What do you define as a working dog? 

Andy has TNT dogs and they are working dogs even with the TNT foundation being heavy staff blood so why is it a bad thing to mix show/working lines if they can still perform and adhere to the standard? What does it really matter as long as your not taking anything away from either line but adding benifit accross the board to work for you and the dog ?


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

wheezie said:


> you have it backwards. and just becasue a dog comes from working lines i wouldnt autmoatically call it a working dog, it need to show and display that it is a working dog to be considered such. jmo


Really ? Well what would you consider colbys dogs ? One of the oldest and purest bloodlines around ? I didn't say the staff came before the apbt I said that if you go back in most apbt pedigrees you will surely find staff blood... If a game dog who curs out can still be considered a game dog why would a dog from working lines not be considered a working dog if it was bred from working lines ?

I'd still like to know what you consider to be a working dog? What would the dog have to do IYO to be considered a working dog besides how it was bred?


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

a game dog would not cur... because it is game....... a game bred dog may cur ...... because not every game bred dog is game. does that make sense? either way the dog has to prove itself. if you have a gsd from german working lines but never work it i dont see why it would be considered a working dog.... it comes from working lines of course but what has it done to prove its own worth as a working dog??


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

wheezie said:


> a game dog would not cur... because it is game....... a game bred dog may cur ...... because not every game bred dog is game. does that make sense? either way the dog has to prove itself. if you have a gsd from german working lines but never work it i dont see why it would be considered a working dog.... it comes from working lines of course but what has it done to prove its own worth as a working dog??


Well I have been told if a game dog quits it's a cur ... but it would still be considered a game dog even though it quit during a roll or a match. If I am wrong this is what I have been told. Second I understand a working dog should be able to proove him/herself as a working dog but I would still call the dog a working dog if it's bred from working lines. Just like I would say a dog from game lines is game bred even if the dog was not matched or proven in the box


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

i guess we just have a differnce in opinion, if i had a dog bred from working lines and it didint work i wouldnt call it a working dog i would call it a dissapointment lol


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

wheezie said:


> i guess we just have a differnce in opinion, if i had a dog bred from working lines and it didint work i wouldnt call it a working dog i would call it a dissapointment lol


Well technically I understand this .. I mean why have a working dog if your not going to work it LOL.. But I guess I am looking at bloodline if it's bred to work it should be considered a working dog.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

i see what your saying but i just think a dog needs to prove itself to earn the right to be called a working dog ... hell i think a dog needs to earn the right to be called a show dog also lol.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

wheezie said:


> i see what your saying but i just think a dog needs to prove itself to earn the right to be called a working dog ... hell i think a dog needs to earn the right to be called a show dog also lol.


Yeah I see what your saying and in many aspects your correct.


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

SadieBlues said:


> Baha99 would you say that most show lines have staff blood mixed in the pedigree? Is this typically what you will see in a show dog? Because I always thought that if you go back in any apbt pedigree game-bred or not your going to find staff blood in there somewhere so does that not make these dogs working dogs because they have staff blood somewhere down the line ? That does not make any sense to me.


I really don't know. I'm not a pedigree master. I'm sure a lot of winning show lines have AmStaff mixed in, since that's what's being favored by an irritating amount of UKC judges nowadays. In other lines, probably not so much. Some lines will have AmStaff way back there, but if we're going back 20 generations to find AmStaff, I don't see the point. Yes, you can find AmStaff in some gamebred lines as well. I don't remember what those are off the top of my head, but I've seen them posted elsewhere.



> im not saying show n go's cant or do not work im just wondering why anyone would want to try it and cross the two???


And my answer would be why not? What do you stand to lose? As has been stated (ad nauseum) it works, so why not try it? As to your question about what a working line would stand to gain from a show line, who knows? Maybe find someone taking a show-n-go and crossing it back into game stuff and ask them? In my experience, it's been the opposite. Like a discussion on another board "where did the angulation go?" Well, you typically need look no further than a nice ADBA-style dog to find it. So that would be one example where a show-n-go cross would be helpful to the show side.



wheezie said:


> a game dog would not cur... because it is game.......


That depends. They're animals, not machines. It's been said by people more knowledgeable than myself that "they'll all quit, some sooner than others."


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

bahamutt99 said:


> I really don't know. I'm not a pedigree master. I'm sure a lot of winning show lines have AmStaff mixed in, since that's what's being favored by an irritating amount of UKC judges nowadays. In other lines, probably not so much. Some lines will have AmStaff way back there, but if we're going back 20 generations to find AmStaff, I don't see the point. Yes, you can find AmStaff in some gamebred lines as well. I don't remember what those are off the top of my head, but I've seen them posted elsewhere.
> 
> And my answer would be why not? What do you stand to lose? As has been stated (ad nauseum) it works, so why not try it? As to your question about what a working line would stand to gain from a show line, who knows? Maybe find someone taking a show-n-go and crossing it back into game stuff and ask them? In my experience, it's been the opposite. Like a discussion on another board "where did the angulation go?" Well, you typically need look no further than a nice ADBA-style dog to find it. So that would be one example where a show-n-go cross would be helpful to the show side.


LOL @ irritating Ukc Judges ... Thanks for answering my question


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

That depends. They're animals, not machines. It's been said by people more knowledgeable than myself that "they'll all quit, some sooner than others." 

i was trying to say there s a differnce between a game breed dog and a dog being game. just because a dog is off of game lines dose not make it game just like a GSD off of working lines does not make it a working dog... these things must be proven. I guess i will take your advice have to ask someone in the working dog world what they would have to gain with breeding to show lines... hope the nausea passes and you didint make any messes on the key board or monitor


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

Working on Making this a new thread Bare with me while I do this LOL


----------



## Marty (Dec 10, 2005)

Have you been drinking tonight?


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

Marty said:


> Have you been drinking tonight?


lmfao no Marty this was a deabte that was mixed in with another thread because it became such a hot topic I figured it needed a place of it's own.. I was just trying to figure out how to do it... And I have :roll:lol


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

i wouldnt really call it a debate, i asked what the working dog has to gain from show lines and baha said she does not know and no one else has chimed in, just waiting on people to get over there hang overs so we can have more opinions lol


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

well hopefully it will get more exposure now because it has a place of it's own... now maybe you'll get more input on your question from other folks who deal with both lines hope this helped


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

ok I'll try to post again ... Maybe I've been drinking. 
If you bred show dogs for gameness certainly you'd have good looking game lines. Show n goes right? If your doing selective breeding and working and testing your dogs through the years I don't see what the difference is? 
What is a show dog anyways? Pitbulls are so diverse in appearance especially older pit champs. You short faces like the galtoe bitch you got fat necks like jimmy boots I always thought the great one jeep looked kinds funny too. But I would consider everyone of those dogs beaitful.
I guess what I'm asking us where do you draw the line is it show , go, or both? 
Please school me.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

SadieBlues said:


> well hopefully it will get more exposure now because it has a place of it's own... now maybe you'll get more input on your question from other folks who deal with both lines hope this helped


you little cpu whiz you... now it has its own place to shine


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

wheezie said:


> you little cpu whiz you... now it has its own place to shine


I try I am an undercover computer geek lmao ... :roll:


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

dan'sgrizz said:


> ok I'll try to post again ... Maybe I've been drinking.
> If you bred show dogs for gameness certainly you'd have good looking game lines. Show n goes right? If your doing selective breeding and working and testing your dogs through the years I don't see what the difference is?
> What is a show dog anyways? Pitbulls are so diverse in appearance especially older pit champs. You short faces like the galtoe bitch you got fat necks like jimmy boots I always thought the great one jeep looked kinds funny too. But I would consider everyone of those dogs beaitful.
> I guess what I'm asking us where do you draw the line is it show , go, or both?
> Please school me.


Ok back up LOL now we both must be drinking JK Show dogs are not bred for gameness.... They are bred for show ... A show dog is bred for the show ring ... A gamebred dog or a dog bred off game/ working lines is bred for working ability ... What wheezie was asking is why would you take a working dog and breed it to a show dog? What is the point and what does a show line with staff blood offer a working line/gameline. Some breeder's do this to accomplish what they believe to be the complete and total package when you mix the two game lines and show lines you create the ultimate package you get looks, drive, working ability, show ability, good temperment, and conformation all together. Working dogs were never bred to be pretty or for show they were bred to serve one purpose and that's to work or back when it was legal the box. Good breeder's have proven when selectively and carefully bred you can breed these two lines working/show lines together with great results . This is what you call the show and go dog. A dog who is bred from show and game lines. Some people do not approve of this many of the gamedog fancier's prefer not to mix show and game lines together ... I am neutral I don't mind a dog having some staff/show blood mixed with game blood as long as your not taking away from either lines or going outside the standard of the breed. On the other side of the fence you have working dogs bred 100% off working/game lines who are show dogs the adba is full of them these dogs are working dogs because of how they were bred but still being shown  Hope this helped


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

So check this out... If a pitbull is a dog tHat form equals function rule then following that line of thinking incorporating aesthetic values into your stock would possibly increase your physical potential. Conformation standard were set for the purpose of defining the ideal pitbull. I would think that these traits ate valued equally by dogmen and show folk alike. Square head for a strong bite but also for beautiful appearance on the other hand. A medium length snout for good air but also good grip at the same time it's a beautiful profile. Wide chest that is deep for good breath and a very impressive appearance in the show ring. The leg joints being equally proportioned for maximum leverage it also gives the dog his nice march. All of the qualities deemed valuable in a show dog are good physical attributes. If you bred amstaffs ling enough I guarntee you'll throw a game one. It's to inbred into there instincts to just have it disappear over a couple decades , if that in most cases. I bet it's be a damn gorgeous game dog too. Aslong as you breed for all the good qualities a pitbull should have mental and physical you are bound to make the breed better whether it's a game or show bred dog. I feel if you breed for one particular attribute such as gameness or show your dog would lack in the other area. I think you must breed for both qualities to achieve a well rounded apbt.


----------



## Bully_Boy_Joe (Jul 7, 2008)

So grizz I get where you are coming from. Your sayiing that the game lines are not crossed withe show for the sake of a "pretty" dog, but for one that is structurally sound. Because when it comes down to it the standard was set with the ideal function of the dog in mind, right?


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

yes exactly and if truely game dogs are so rare it won't decrease your chances much by incorporating some good physique into your blood. If your breeding for gameness only in a short period of time you will limit yourself greatly. Besides the gamest dogs are dead game and those aren't very good for breeding LOL. Aslong as you breed for higher standard your tempermant will improve and I think more dogs would show the desired trait of gameness.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

there are a few folks that run and breed these kinds of dogs on this site. they have much more insight into this topic than us, i look forward dto what they have to throw into the topic


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

I figured since i think i own one of these dogs i would pitch in my cent and a half (half a cent short) lol. My breeder has incorporated large amounts of gaff into his line maximillion being a big contributor and even some old school bully notorious juan gotti shoing up 2x in the 4th gen. His dogs are beautiful. He utilizes them as catch dogs on his ranch and works them constantly as herders and other odd jobs. He breeds good looking dogs for there working ability. Show n Goes in my opinion whizzle.


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

I've pretty much said what I have to say, but I wanted to add one more thing. There is a big difference between using a show line that is still bred to be moderate, athletic, etc., and using a line like Gaff, Gotti, RE, and so on as the basis of the show half of a show-n-go breeding. I would think you'd get more reliable results with the former.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

bahamutt99 said:


> I've pretty much said what I have to say, but I wanted to add one more thing. There is a big difference between using a show line that is still bred to be moderate, athletic, etc., and using a line like Gaff, Gotti, RE, and so on as the basis of the show half of a show-n-go breeding. I would think you'd get more reliable results with the former.


Lindsay what show lines would you consider to still be bred to moderate and athletic standards .. I know lar-sans is one but could you throw me a few more PLEASEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE :roll: LOL


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

I don't really know too many there, Sadie. Lar-San would definitely be one of them, depending nowadays upon who's breeding it. Larum, whether ya like her or not, would be another line that seems to still be fairly moderate. The Victorino dogs are pretty nice. And then the show lines that have been bred mainly for the ADBA ring of course.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

bahamutt99 said:


> I don't really know too many there, Sadie. Lar-San would definitely be one of them, depending nowadays upon who's breeding it. Larum, whether ya like her or not, would be another line that seems to still be fairly moderate. The Victorino dogs are pretty nice. And then the show lines that have been bred mainly for the ADBA ring of course.


Thanks for that ... I don't know that much about show lines so I am trying to get some more info on them. I'd like to know what lines are most commonly bred show lines in show in go dogs what about boogieman blood ? Is that a show line ?


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

I believe thsmst Nevada kennels used mostly gaff to start there kennel. They have a little bitch talks like a man that pulled 138x her body weight. Is that not working enough? My breeder utilizes sorrels for his go part of his line. He's still working on it tip it's debut I just got a sneak peak pup LOL. His also introducing some pure colby blood to finish things off. I think gaff dogs are a great base to use as the show part they are structurally sound, strong, of good size, gorgeous coloring, great temperment, and I would think they are one of the closer amstaffs to apbt blood. Larums apbt are quite nice also. Would castillos Cali pits be show n go or just one of those two?


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

Sadie: Well, I guess I should clarify that I don't know anything about show n go *lines*. My experience has been with an individual show n go *breeding*, and how well that one has worked out. With regard to Boogieman, do you mean the Cold Steel Pits dogs?  I don't know what you'd consider them. They gamebred, but I think the kennel focused on breeding them for show (and they did some hog catching, too). So that's a matter of opinion, I'd wager.

ETA: Dan'sgrizz, I've seen Lola pull. She's a nice little dog. But that's not what we're talking about here. A line based on Gaff wouldn't be a show n go line unless you were talking about, say, Gaff + Redboy. Show = a show line, Go = gamebred stuff. That's why Castillo doesn't really qualify either, IMO. They don't show their dogs (at least not anymore), and I don't see any "go" in those pedigrees.

ETA ETA: I think you give the Gaff line a little too much credit, but that's JMO.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

bahamutt99 said:


> Well, I guess I should clarify that I don't know anything about show n go *lines*. My experience has been with an individual show n go *breeding*, and how well that one has worked out. With regard to Boogieman, do you mean the Cold Steel Pits dogs? I don't know what you'd consider them. They gamebred, but I think the kennel focused on breeding them for show (and they did some hog catching, too). So that's a matter of opinion, I'd wager.
> 
> ETA: Dan'sgrizz, I've seen Lola pull. She's a nice little dog. But that's not what we're talking about here. A line based on Gaff wouldn't be a show n go line unless you were talking about, say, Gaff + Redboy. Show = a show line, Go = gamebred stuff. That's why Castillo doesn't really qualify either, IMO. They don't show their dogs (at least not anymore), and I don't see any "go" in those pedigrees.


Yeah that's it !! I know You know boogieman from game-dog and a few other forums ? Aren't his dogs bred off boogieman blood? I know he shows his dogs in the adba and does well with them so I wanted to ask about the line if it was a show line or game line was not too sure or if his dogs are even associated with this line . Someone told me he started the boogieman bloodline LOL .... So I was kinda confused about it.


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

right on baha. Ive seen gaff in action i give credit where credit is rightly deserved. Cali pits is Wallace hemphill though. Isn't that oldschool go lines. A large base of ofrn dogs today? Why aren't they considered go lines? In your opinion.

Lola lives out there in Oklahoma huh? Lucky you. I love seeing a good dog work.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

Gaff has been watered down in american bully breedings it's not as pure as it once was .. I am sure you have some pure gaff still out there but it's one of those lines that has taken a different direction.


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

I'm not arguing gaff I know gaff blood can produce good wrestling game dogs. Why is a hemphill/ Wallace bloodline not considered a "go" line? I.e. Calipits


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

I'd love to see a couple of those game Gaff dogs.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

dan'sgrizz said:


> I'm not arguing gaff I know gaff blood can produce good wrestling game dogs. Why is a hemphill/ Wallace bloodline not considered a "go" line? I.e. Calipits


Gaff is not a game line never was never has been it was traditionally an amstaff show line .... It has become an american bully line for the most part. We don't have to argue but this is the truth.


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

I'm sure alot of people would. I just don't get what a go line is? Someone who once tested with a box? Currently uses these methods? Or just titles there dogs in working events instead of conformation? In this day and age I would almost be scared to have a dog that was truely from game lines the Feds would probly take him. If it is considered a go line you can't prove it I guess unless you want to do some time. So in today society really someone tell me the difference between a bred to perfect stabdards amd working ability show line and a go line bred for the same standard? Gameness isn't a hereditary trait so what are you trying to preserve with this keeping to go lines or to show lines?


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

dan'sgrizz said:


> I'm sure alot of people would. I just don't get what a go line is? Someone who once tested with a box? Currently uses these methods? Or just titles there dogs in working events instead of conformation? In this day and age I would almost be scared to have a dog that was truely from game lines the Feds would probly take him.


go line is another term for = game line ... a game line is a line that was created for the BOX its a fighting line/ working line this is the true orgin of the breed this is where the true apbt stems from gamebred lines. Game lines are just game lines. Fighting dogs is illegal now you have some out there who still do it to preserve the gameness of their lines. But a game dog is a dog who was tested actually rolled or fought. A game bred dog is a dog who is bred off game lines but not actually tested themselves by tested I mean actually fought. But game bred dogs should stem back to tested/game dogs in their pedigree you will see a whole bunch of dogs who proved themselves in the box or were fought and lost but they still were matched.


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

all apbt lines were tested at some point in the history. It doesn't really matter unless you have a true champ within three generations of your dog. Apbt are just that pit terriers all of them are bred for the pit fighting standard. As these pit champs get farther back in the pedigrees like 4th gen and beyond it doesn't matter what bloodline your dog was or is because it's not being bred for the box anymore so it can't still be considered a go line still. I know the difference between game bred game lines and game. I'm trying to be a student here. If game lines aren't currently being tested then they aren't game bred or game lines IMO.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

Here is Plumber's Alligator Pedigree you see all the 3xw / 1xl in this pedigree within the first 4 generations ? These number's mean indicate the dog was fought xw means = win xl = loose ....

ONLINE PEDIGREES :: [380] :: PLUMBER'S ALLIGATOR

And here is a show dogs pedigree No Fighting dogs within the last 4 generations Ch and gRCH titles were obtained in the show ring not the box

LARUM APBT KENNELS Saffire's Pedigree


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

dan'sgrizz said:


> all apbt lines were tested at some point in the history. It doesn't really matter unless you have a true champ within three generations of your dog. Apbt are just that pit terriers all of them are bred for the pit fighting standard. As these pit champs get farther back in the pedigrees like 4th gen and beyond it doesn't matter what bloodline your dog was or is because it's not being bred for the box anymore so it can't still be considered a go line still. I know the difference between game bred game lines and game. I'm trying to be a student here. If game lines aren't currently being tested then they aren't game bred or game lines IMO.


NOT SHOW LINES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Show lines were never tested in the box that's why they are called show lines and not game lines .... And you are very wrong if a dog is bred from game lines it's a game bred dog that does not change just because the dog itself was not fought you will see dogs who were fought back in the last 4 generations. Just like a dog bred for the show ring is bred from show lines. Is it a show dog? No but it does not change the blood it comes from the dog would still be a dog who stems from show lines . Just like a game bred dog if the dog has several game proven dogs within the last 4 generations of the pedigree it's a gamebred dog or a dog bred from gamelines.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

dan'sgrizz said:


> I'm not arguing gaff I know gaff blood can produce good wrestling game dogs. Why is a hemphill/ Wallace bloodline not considered a "go" line? I.e. Calipits


how do you know this???? unless your talking about some kind of WWE wrestling what you are refering to is illegal lol,and i wouldnt post something like that in a public forum but thats jmo


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

SadieBlues said:


> NOT SHOW LINES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Show lines were never tested in the box that's why they are called show lines and not game lines .... And you are very wrong if a dog is bred from game lines it's a game bred dog that does not change just because the dog itself was not fought you will see dogs who were fought back in the last 4 generations. Just like a dog bred for the show ring is bred from show lines. Is it a show dog? No but it does not change the blood it comes from the dog would still be a dog who stems from show lines . Just like a game bred dog if the dog has several game proven dogs within the last 4 generations of the pedigree it's a gamebred dog or a dog bred from gamelines.


If you can find me a gaff pedigree with xl and xw all through it I stand corrected ... But I promise you gaff is not a fighting line therefore you are going to have a hell of a time trying to proove this to me or anyone else.

And let me clarify I don't mean gaff mixed in with game blood. I mean a pure gaff dog with nothing but fighting dogs.


----------



## Rock Creek Kennels (Oct 25, 2006)

wheezie said:


> rock creek: i can see what you are saying but i dont see what is importnant about getting show titles. structue is deffinitly a key factor in helping a dog carry out its phsical tasks... but to me thats where it stops. if you start breeding for "pretty looks" i dont see the point.. get an am staff thats what they are for.
> 
> is it possible that people like show n gos because you still get some great working ability wraped in a pretty bow? Could people also like it because the show lines may baug down some of the less desirable traits that people have with this breed such as DA and make for a easier and more managable pet/show/working dog?
> 
> im not directing this towards any one person or trying to be rude. I am just speaking in general terms. everyones input would be great


Thats why you breed for good looks & structure as well as working ability. Thats why I mentioned "the complete package". There's nothing wrong with getting everything you want all in one dog.

Here's a show n go dog for ya. Ace/CH Spurgeons Lil' Tinkerbelle. Ranked #7 in the nation and has pulled over 10,000 lbs at 52 lbs. She championed in 5 shows and aced in 6. Nothing dilluted about this girls drive!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

so since day one show lines were seperate from game lines? Or just since the day colbys primo jr. Became the show standard? Or maybe when the ukc started accepting the breed to show in the first place? Before that game dogs were bred to game dogs and being a pitbull or amstaff there is potential for gameness there.

To truely be breeding gamelines you must have two consecutive generations proven game within your first 3 generations. If not your breeding dog that might be kinds sorts maybe but there no way of knowing game. Which is just like breeding a show dog except a showdog you can srevthe dominant trait your breeding for. Either way it's a crap shoot for gameness. Without testing ( the []) there is no gameline and every generation must be tested, then a select dog(s) will be chosen to reproduce. Without testing in gamelines you have no way of determining there worth. Maybe you should call them working lines or even bandogges. They aren't gamebred anymore or even gamelines cuz you don't know who's game.

This is just my opinion.


----------



## MADBood (May 31, 2008)

dan'sgrizz said:


> I'm not arguing gaff I know gaff blood can produce good wrestling game dogs. Why is a hemphill/ Wallace bloodline not considered a "go" line? I.e. Calipits


They never started as gamelines, go to thier site. You'll see that Gaff dogs come off of AKC/UKC showlines.


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

I know gaffs history I'm just saying a dog with good physical ability and a potential for gameness bred in the very beginning from apbt which had pit stock in them has the ability if used to be a game dog. Doesn't make them gamelines or game bred it just means that one particular dog is game... And it came from show lines.


----------



## MADBood (May 31, 2008)

dan'sgrizz said:


> so since day one show lines were seperate from game lines?


No. The APBT was originally a pit dog. Gamedogs came first...then the AKC showdogs spun off of them and started selecting for particular traits, hence creating showdogs. Older ASTs had a higher % of gamebreds but through the years gameness was washed out...not a desirable quality when showing dogs.


----------



## MADBood (May 31, 2008)

Each individual dog is different. There are some showdogs are fiery than others. If you started with a fiery showdog and bred it to a gamedog...sure you could produce potential gamedogs but I don't see the point. Just buy a gamebred for all that. It really doesn't matter as most of us have no use for gamedogs, just working dogs that perform well in legal sporting events.


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

can 50 years really wash out 1000+ years of instinct?I would imagine there's still gameness there. I hear Tacoma asts were quite fiery those are fairly recent dogs. I can't find any examples of them today though. the way apbt are being bred today for working ability and not for gameness is the same thing. They aren't being bred fir the pit therefore they are not gamebred or gamelines anymore.


----------



## MADBood (May 31, 2008)

dan'sgrizz said:


> can 50 years really wash out 1000+ years of instinct?


Sure it can. It only takes a few bad breedings to destroy a lifetime of work. It didn't take long for people to ruin the Razor's Edge dogs. They started as show n go dogs but look at the majority of them now.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

nce dog RCK!!! im not saying there is anything wrong with breeding for the ultimate dog. but cant you still do that without breeding to show lines??????? By the way, bailey is one of my all time fav dogs and im ready to take her any time andy is ready to let her go lol.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

Yep madbood is correct 100% !!! Also SOME of colby's dogs were registered as akc stafforshire terriers show dogs when the AKC first introduced the amstaff into their regsitry. The AKC is what broke the ties to the game world the amstaff went it's own way as a show dog no longer a pit dog the gameness was bred out of these dogs for many many years starting in 1936 to be exact as this was the year the AKC first recognized the amstaff into the registry and the AKC amstaff became a show dog and breeding for gameness was know longer a desirable trait for the amstaff to have obviously because gameness serves one sole purpose and that is for the PIT. Make NO mistake about it you can breed in and out unwanted and undesirable traits through selective breeding and it does not take 1,000 years to accomplish this. Game dog breeder's breed for gameness ... Show Breeder's breed for all the desirable show qualities a good show dog should possess. And dogfighting is not illegal everywhere you still have parts of the world where fighting dogs is still legal ... you also have people who still breed and macth their dogs illegally of course to preserve gameness in their lines.


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

right on everyone. Thanks for the schoolin madbood, sadiesblues, wheezi Wayne, others. What would be a good cross for a new show n go and why?


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

dan'sgrizz said:


> right on everyone. Thanks for the schoolin madbood, sadiesblues, wheezi Wayne, others. What would be a good cross for a new show n go and why?


That is what I was getting at with baha99 earlier I think and I am not a breeder so I am just speculating you would want to breed a solid show line that has not been watered down or gone away from the standard of the apbt like lar-sans with a game line AKA a go line that is still pretty pure and has not been watered down such as Bordeaux .... I am sure there is more to it than that but my point is you want to make sure both lines your using are still pretty pure in it's original form not taking away anything from either line when crossing the 2 together and than you have to look at the selected dogs individually from these 2 lines and decide if they are breeding worthy and will they make a good fit for the breeding to create a success.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

what does a show line have to offer a working line???? This is the original question that keeps getting tip toed around. i dont care about breeding for the ultimate dog. You can still have the Ultimate dog from only breeding working lines.. its obvious what the show side has to gain.... again what does the working line have to gain????


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

if you cant think of anything just say you dont know. I have gone over the question all day and i cant see one positve thing a working line would achieve from a show n go breeding.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

I am still standing firm on the looks dept I am a huge fan of game dogs but I don't find them outwardly that attractive the way I do a show dog ... I love them for what they represent inwardly and their endless abilities as a working dog. But I think show dogs offer the working line better looks outwardly all together. J.M.O. because working dogs were never bred to be pretty on the outside so they are not as well put together in the looks dept. they have a more ruff and rugged look to them ... Is it bad to say that? LOL


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

I think I said this already but sound build. Clean up the conformation. I think it could be used as a medium so your working dogs keep good structure that will aid them to work better. I wouldn't use them as an outcross but more as picking select show dogs from the beginning and using them in conjunction with game/working lines to build towards a goal. I wouldn't think you would need to incorporate any more show dogs after the first generation if your foundation was large enough. You would definitly have to incorporate show from day one IMO to work towards this goal properly.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

i love this breed for its working ability first and foremost... i have no use for a pretty dog. Hell when i talked to andy about getting a dog i said i dont care what it looks like as long as it has good structure strong nerves and great drive. IMO you can still get a good looking dog from working lines. Once "outward apperance" becomes a concern that is even close or on par with working ability and temperment then you have really gone astray IMO.


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

I dont think a show dog has anything to offer a working dog ON A WORKING LEVEL. I only see a show dog helping in the conformation area.

That being said I don't consider my dogs to be show-n-go. Matter of fact I hate that term. The dogs I breed from day one to eternity are performance based and bred dogs. HOWEVER my goal in breeding, and it says it on our homepage, is to breed CONFORMATIONALLY CORRECT WORKING DOGS. I will not sacrifice conformation to get a better working dog. ON the same note, I will not breed just for conformation alone. I want a sound, structurally correct working dog. Now if my working dog has great conformation, then show it, but Im not breeding to show. I may be ambitious but my goal is the best of both worlds. Now are they all going to be that? NO, Bailey is no show dog but one heck of a working dog. Rebel got both, but IMO he is a little leggy, somewhat taller than MY IDEAL. So we are going to take him to Bailey at some point and see what we get. When we bred Rebel to Gracie I got some taller dogs. They work great and are doing good on the track but I was not 100% pleased with the breeding and so it wont be done again, ever. Switch and Gracie turned a nice litter, again a little taller than I wanted but very good drive and heart. Gracie will not be used again for us. My next planned breeding is Rebel x Bailey and then Switch x Remi (not for atleast 2 years). We will see what we get out of that, but rest assured I breed for performance first, but conformation is EQUALLY important.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

dan dont you think another working dog could "clean up the conformation" i dont think you need or have to go to a show line to breed a better structured dog. If what im saying is true i dont see anything else a showline could improve upon


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

wheezie said:


> i love this breed for its working ability first and foremost... i have no use for a pretty dog. Hell when i talked to andy about getting a dog i said i dont care what it looks like as long as it has good structure strong nerves and great drive. IMO you can still get a good looking dog from working lines. Once "outward apperance" becomes a concern that is even close or on par with working ability and temperment then you have really gone astray IMO.


It shouldn't be the foremost thing I agree but this is the ONLY thing I can think of that the show dog offer's the working dog IMO good looks and maybe a calmer temperment? ... I am just throwing out possibles you know because in this case we can only give opinions ...


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

i have been waiting for your input ofk... by the way how is my girl bailey doing


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

She is fat and sassy!!


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

OldFortKennels said:


> I dont think a show dog has anything to offer a working dog ON A WORKING LEVEL. I only see a show dog helping in the conformation area.
> 
> That being said I don't consider my dogs to be show-n-go. Matter of fact I hate that term. The dogs I breed from day one to eternity are performance based and bred dogs. HOWEVER my goal in breeding, and it says it on our homepage, is to breed CONFORMATIONALLY CORRECT WORKING DOGS. I will not sacrifice conformation to get a better working dog. ON the same note, I will not breed just for conformation alone. I want a sound, structurally correct working dog. Now if my working dog has great conformation, then show it, but Im not breeding to show. I may be ambitious but my goal is the best of both worlds. Now are they all going to be that? NO, Bailey is no show dog but one heck of a working dog. Rebel got both, but IMO he is a little leggy, somewhat taller than MY IDEAL. So we are going to take him to Bailey at some point and see what we get. When we bred Rebel to Gracie I got some taller dogs. They work great and are doing good on the track but I was not 100% pleased with the breeding and so it wont be done again, ever. Switch and Gracie turned a nice litter, again a little taller than I wanted but very good drive and heart. Gracie will not be used again for us. My next planned breeding is Rebel x Bailey and then Switch x Remi (not for atleast 2 years). We will see what we get out of that, but rest assured I breed for performance first, but conformation is EQUALLY important.


Thank You Andy !!!:clap:


----------



## dan'sgrizz (Oct 22, 2008)

wonder of through breeder your chest has narrowed highlighting agility over long wind. I think when you focus too much on working your ugly dogs will start stackin up on you and your physical ability would suffer.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

i think a calmer temperment just means watered down drive, less DA and an all around easier and more managable pet. which would make perfect sense with people that want a "pit bull" but dont want a dog that they cant controll as easily....... JMO


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

now andy.. hypothetically if you had started the TNT line would you have breed blu trouble as the foundation or found something else besides a staff line? asides from the controversy surrounding this dog... lets say his wins were legit when dealing with this hypothetical scenario


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

wheezie said:


> i think a calmer temperment just means watered down drive, less DA and an all around easier and more managable pet. which would make perfect sense with people that want a "pit bull" but dont want a dog that they cant controll as easily....... JMO


Sounds right ... But I am just guessing these are the only things I could think of as to why someone who cross the two. But I am sure each breeding case is very different. Without breeding and being able to see it first hand it's kind of hard to say for sure.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

dan'sgrizz said:


> wonder of through breeder your chest has narrowed highlighting agility over long wind. I think when you focus too much on working your ugly dogs will start stackin up on you and your physical ability would suffer.


i have no idea what the first sentence means....


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

Me personally, I would not have used a staff dog.


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

I'm about 2-3 pages back and catching up, so bear with me here. :roll:



SadieBlues said:


> Yeah that's it !! I know You know boogieman from game-dog and a few other forums ? Aren't his dogs bred off boogieman blood?


No, Boogie didn't start the Boogieman line. Boogieman would be Caldwell's GRCH Boogieman from Cold Steel Pits, a dog who passed away last year. And yes, I know Boogie. He comes down to our shows in OK. And I know his dog Bronson is descended from Boogieman. I think his girl Lizzie is, too.



dan'sgrizz said:


> Cali pits is Wallace hemphill though. Isn't that oldschool go lines. A large base of ofrn dogs today? Why aren't they considered go lines? In your opinion.
> 
> Lola lives out there in Oklahoma huh? Lucky you. I love seeing a good dog work.


When you say Cali I'm asssuming you're referring to the Castillo dogs we were talking about. I'd imagine you have to go back more than a few generations before you find Hemphill and anybody game-testing the dogs to establish the "go" of them. So no, they aren't show-n-go. Yeah, Lola lives near OKC with Mike Hansen. We see them pull in TX from time to time since there really isn't any weight pull up here except for ADBA, and we pull UKC.

As for the rest of this thread, I feel like I'm on a hampster wheel. It's fun, but we're just going in circles and not getting anywhere. I'm going to exit myself by re-iterating how I feel on the subject in general:

Show-n-go is a breeding that combines show blood with gamebred blood. Done well, it produces some fine animals. Done poorly, no doubt it's a waste of time. I love my pretty dogs, but I am very pleased with my girl off a show-n-go breeding, and that's what I plan on working with in the future. If you want to ask me what I love about my particular dog, I can answer that readily. But I'm not going to continue and explain what one side brings to the other. It is what it is, and I like it.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

why wouldnt you use a am staff dog?


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

why mix breeds (or versions of a given breed) and have all the controversy, just fine a good specimen in the breed you have!


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

OldFortKennels said:


> why mix breeds (or versions of a given breed) and have all the controversy, just fine a good specimen in the breed you have!


You know I can respect this statement it makes a great deal of logical sense if your breeding.


----------



## Salt9 (Oct 10, 2008)

beautiful dogs


----------



## shadyridgekennels (Oct 14, 2005)

Heres my show n go gamedog.. more go then show....with her 1st place ADBA Nat trophy and 3rd place best cond female.


----------



## ForPits&Giggles (Oct 21, 2008)

Gorgeous bitch!! She is beautiful, how much does she weigh at show-time, versus how much she weighs chain-weight?


----------



## shadyridgekennels (Oct 14, 2005)

ForPits&Giggles said:


> Gorgeous bitch!! She is beautiful, how much does she weigh at show-time, versus how much she weighs chain-weight?


thanks!! show weight is about 29-30 chain is 30ish


----------



## ForPits&Giggles (Oct 21, 2008)

She sure is a beauty, what lines does she stem from?


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

I know I've seen her ped before but I can't recall it. What's on the show side Erin?


----------



## shadyridgekennels (Oct 14, 2005)

buzhunter said:


> I know I've seen her ped before but I can't recall it. What's on the show side Erin?


teeeheh ok you sitting down for this?!..............

there is no freakin 'show' side she is pure 'go'.:rofl::hammer:

here her ped:
ONLINE PEDIGREES :: [116551] :: SHADY LADYS MISS RAGE


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Perfect. That's where the trophies belong.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

Well since we are posting go dogs that show I request Marty's lil bit be put up here that's one fine GO show dog ... Marty where's she at?


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

buzhunter said:


> Perfect. That's where the trophies belong.


Well you know even if they are bred to go ... If they show they are still show dogs buz regardless of how they are bred


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Right, right, but there's a big difference in taking a dog to the show and breeding a dog for the show. Not saying there shouldn't be dog shows. Just saying that the best examples of the breed should be getting the recognition and a "go" dog would be that best example.


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

buzhunter said:


> Right, right, but there's a big difference in taking a dog to the show and breeding a dog for the show. Not saying there shouldn't be dog shows. Just saying that the best examples of the breed should be getting the recognition and a "go" dog would be that best example.


Gotcha just wanted to clarify .... I personally think the go dog represents the breed to it's truest form because of how they were bred. But you know a lot of these go dogs are pretty much bred for show nowadays anyway because many of them are not proving themselves the traditional way outside the show arena and in the box.


----------



## shadyridgekennels (Oct 14, 2005)

I think that 'show' and 'go' dogs shouldt be mixed.Plus i think you can get good conformation ect on 'go' dogs without mixing 'show' dogs example Rage as wel as alot of other dogs i could post.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Yeah, it's about priorities. That's for sure. Sometimes the breeder and the judge have their priorities back-asswards. It's like doggie affirmative action. lol


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

Good conformation is in the eye of the beholder. I don't think it's anybody's place to judge the direction that people choose to go in their programs, really. (Within reason, of course.)


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Unless they are putting 100lb Boudreaux dogs out there lol. Somebody should put a stop to that.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

i have noticed that people that own show and go dogs get very offended and defensive when you bring up the am staff blood in there dogs, but these same people blast AM bully owners for having dogs that are not APBT. We constantly bash on people and talk about its a whole stigma thing of owning a "pit bull" seems to me even educated APBT enthusiast hold on to this stigma and hate to talk about the am staff in there dogs.

this is not directed at anyone in paticular, saidde and i had this conversation in a PM the other day. 

and before anyone says AM bully and show n gos are apples and oranges.... i know they are. but they both have staff in them and both sides of the fence seem to hate to admit to it......


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

buzhunter said:


> Unless they are putting 100lb Boudreaux dogs out there lol. Somebody should put a stop to that.


ROTFLMFAO ... Seriously that spolied kool-aide needs to be flushed and fast:clap:


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

buzhunter said:


> Unless they are putting 100lb Boudreaux dogs out there lol. Somebody should put a stop to that.


Shush. LOL! I was going to say that, but you know... Gotta behave myself. :roll:


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

wheezie said:


> i have noticed that people that own show and go dogs get very offended and defensive when you bring up the am staff blood in there dogs, but these same people blast AM bully owners for having dogs that are not APBT. We constantly bash on people and talk about its a whole stigma thing of owning a "pit bull" seems to me even educated APBT enthusiast hold on to this stigma and hate to talk about the am staff in there dogs.
> 
> this is not directed at anyone in paticular, saidde and i had this conversation in a PM the other day.
> 
> and before anyone says AM bully and show n gos are apples and oranges.... i know they are. but they both have staff in them and both sides of the fence seem to hate to admit to it......


Also These game bred owner's get mad when you point out that even though there dogs were bred to go they are still show dogs any damn way so how can you get offended by dogs bred for show when you got a dog bred to go and your showing and breeding it for show ... :hammer: Even if you have a game bred dog if it's not prooving itself in the box it's a show dog or petbull


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

I have to believe that all this "pit bull" identification controversy didn't exist 50 years ago. I wonder if they have all this confusion in other parts of the world.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

SadieBlues said:


> Also These game bred owner's get mad when you point out that even though there dogs were bred to go they are still show dogs any damn way so how can you get offended by dogs bred for show when you got a dog bred to go and your showing and breeding it for show ... :hammer: Even if you have a game bred dog if it's not prooving itself in the box it's a show dog or petbull


yep yep, there are enough LEGAL working venues for a show or a go dog to prove its working ability


----------



## Marty (Dec 10, 2005)

SadieBlues said:


> Well since we are posting go dogs that show I request Marty's lil bit be put up here that's one fine GO show dog ... Marty where's she at?


Lilbit's ped and pic...

ONLINE PEDIGREES :: [206097] :: GAME-DOG'S LILBIT


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

There's my girl thanks for posting her she is a beautiful specimen


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

show and go is talked about so much on this site because a large percentage of the members own tnt dogs,and they are called that,at least thats were i herd the term from or about,Ive heard them called anything under the sun,including game or classified as game as well as show dogs.
Personaly for me breeding for anything other than temperment and working ability is useless,everything will fall into place after that as form does follow function,jmo.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

short and to the point nice post keith


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

Marty said:


> Lilbit's ped and pic...
> 
> ONLINE PEDIGREES :: [206097] :: GAME-DOG'S LILBIT


Growl... *beats peds online with a stick* I can't see it right now, dangit. But I loves me some Lil' Bit.



> Personaly for me breeding for anything other than temperment and working ability is useless,everything will fall into place after that as form does follow function,jmo.


Yes and no. It really depends. Form does follow function, I agree. But in terms of dogs who have faults but work through them, I think it's always preferable to try and improve upon those. Example: Terra is a sweet little mover and shaker with some flat feet. You would never think that her fault holds her back. However, if she had the springy arched toes that she's supposed to have, could she be that much better? Maybe.

Another way to look at it is just how many people are breeding for weight pull nowadays. There are some hot performing dogs on the weight pull track that once you get them out of harness, you're not really sure what you're looking at. Some lines that are generally held in high regard, watch them standing there and notice they have slipping hocks. In other words, as strong as they are on the track, they could be that much stronger if they had a sound rear. Others, you can see that they're down on their pasterns and have flat feet, and so on. Perhaps that gives them traction -- who knows -- but I'd bet it takes away from the durability of their fronts and causes greater wear over time.

I guess we have to evaluate what we're asking these dogs to do before we can decide how deeply it tests them. These dogs have the heart to battle anything, even their own faulty bodies. But if we're going to improve them, we need to look at the entire package.


----------



## nittpitt (Dec 13, 2008)

*Show while they go*

These dogs are a result of a long planned out attempt that spans back 30yrs.I took Conformation/Drive/loyality/Courage/Genetics. Results: No job that they can't and will not do including show stuff. Smart/Loyal/Hard/Drive and that goes for man are dog.


----------



## wheezie (Aug 4, 2006)

what are you working the dogs in to display there working ability?


----------



## los44 (Jun 1, 2008)

imo this is a question that can only be answered by the perception of whom ever is posting, in other words there is no right or wrong answer.

Go dogs, imo means fighting dogs and as far as i know they are no longer being bred in the USA, legally atleast. so the term show and go is nothing more than that a "term"! imo there is no work an apbt could do that would make me consider it a go dog besides being put in a box to test its will.

what can a working dog gain by being bred with a show dog? structure, corrected faults ect. could a breeder achieve this within the working line? maybe/possibly, i really dont know. But a good breeder who knows his blood could incorporate show blood in his line and through selective breeding not compromise workability, all the while achieving the desired structural/fault corrections.(JMO)

i think it was OFK who said he breeds for the best of both worlds but would not sacrifice workability for the sake of a purtier apbt(not necessarily in those exact words, but along those lines) and imo thats all you can ask for, i mean thats the kind of breeder i would want!


----------



## pimpidypimp (Dec 30, 2008)

Opinions on this dog?









Can anyone tell by just lookin?
Show? 
Go?
Or Show and go?


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Beautiful dog but nobody can tell by looking.


----------



## pimpidypimp (Dec 30, 2008)

ONLINE PEDIGREES :: [181037] :: B-nuts DIESEL
100% OLD SCHOOL TRUTH!!!!!!!!
U can get your show dogs from go dogs, Just not as consistantly! Thats just my own opinion, But then again I dont show, so I dont really know!


----------



## Sadie (Jun 18, 2008)

pimpidypimp said:


> ONLINE PEDIGREES :: [181037] :: B-nuts DIESEL
> 100% OLD SCHOOL TRUTH!!!!!!!!
> U can get your show dogs from go dogs, Just not as consistantly! Thats just my own opinion, But then again I dont show, so I dont really know!


You have one great looking boy ! I pretty much saw a game bred dog. He looks great my kind of dog!


----------



## thaim (Feb 6, 2009)

very nice dog i hope my dog gets to look like that when hes full grown =) they have the same mask it looks like haha


----------



## cane76 (Aug 16, 2006)

bahamutt99 said:


> Another way to look at it is just how many people are breeding for weight pull nowadays. There are some hot performing dogs on the weight pull track that once you get them out of harness, you're not really sure what you're looking at. Some lines that are generally held in high regard, watch them standing there and notice they have slipping hocks. In other words, as strong as they are on the track, they could be that much stronger if they had a sound rear. Others, you can see that they're down on their pasterns and have flat feet, and so on. Perhaps that gives them traction -- who knows -- but I'd bet it takes away from the durability of their fronts and causes greater wear .


Possibly these weight pull dogs are showing weak rear ends because they are showing the mastiff influence that was bred into them in prior years,as dogs bred for great size suffer from health issues associated with size such as hip dysplasia and other issues mentioned.
And we must also take into mind that for me,a balanced dog is what matters,not a linear standard based on confirmation.
keith.


----------

