# gamebred



## game_bred (Jan 3, 2008)

I have my own opinion on gambred dogs,but do u guys only consider a pup gamebred if both of its parents were game tested,or do u think it can be gamebred if its from a legitmate game line.when i say gamebred i mean a dog that has a good chance of possesing some gameness.Please no arguing.


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

Yes, I think the parents would had to of been tested in order to be considered game bred. Reason being not all offspring are game so how would you know if your producing game dogs..Without testing the fundamentals could be lost..
:goodpost:


----------



## game_bred (Jan 3, 2008)

ok thanks,im just wondering what some opinions are on the board.


----------



## smokey_joe (Oct 14, 2005)

ericschevy said:


> Yes, I think the parents would had to of been tested in order to be considered game bred. Reason being not all offspring are game so how would you know if your producing game dogs..Without testing the fundamentals could be lost..
> :goodpost:


I agree. :clap:


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Wow, that's a really good question. If a pup was born to a sire and dam who were both proven or at least tested then I would definitely consider him to be "game bred" wether he was game himself or not. On the other hand, I would also consider a pup from a litter bred by a knowledgeable breeder specifically for preservation of the original dog to be "game bred". I guess what I am saying is that if the right guy is breeding the right lines I would not need him to come right out and tell me that they have been tested in recent generations. If a breeder will tell you that the dogs are proven then either he knows you very well or he's very stupid,lol! We see a lot of the latter all over the net.


----------



## Old_Blood (Jan 10, 2008)

No I don't exactly think both parents have to be game tested. A lot of older timers might not have tested a bitch lots of them were tested and some were CH themselves but not always. They were still considered gamebred because they were bred for that. Also some dogmen bred cold dogs who would never be tested and wouldn't fight back anyway, they were still called gamebred and some cold dogs became ROM.


----------



## game_bred (Jan 3, 2008)

buzhunter said:


> Wow, that's a really good question. If a pup was born to a sire and dam who were both proven or at least tested then I would definitely consider him to be "game bred" wether he was game himself or not. On the other hand, I would also consider a pup from a litter bred by a knowledgeable breeder specifically for preservation of the original dog to be "game bred". I guess what I am saying is that if the right guy is breeding the right lines I would not need him to come right out and tell me that they have been tested in recent generations. If a breeder will tell you that the dogs are proven then either he knows you very well or he's very stupid,lol! We see a lot of the latter all over the net.


wow u have a good point!


----------



## game_bred (Jan 3, 2008)

I honestly wouldent keep anything but a gamebred dog.they are the real deal,although i do not fight dogs,its awesome to own a piece of history.


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

So basically you're saying a dog does not have to be GAME in order to be gamebred??


----------



## over_thaedge (Feb 4, 2008)

i believe a game bred dog is as it says. With every breeding there are gonna be some pups that wont share the gameness of both sire and dam. As stated before there are sometimes cold dogs that produce some of the best dogs out there. You could have the 2 hottest dogs in the world and when bred together it could throw nothing but cold dogs. The pups were bred to be game but it might not end up that way.


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

I guess I can see as to where untested dogs can be continuously bred for generations and still be "considered" gamebred, but isn't the very essence of a gamebred dog that of being game? I always thought so, and if the offspring of the original gamebred dogs are not tested and just thought to be game is it not likely that the lineage of the originals was lost somewhere down the line?


----------



## over_thaedge (Feb 4, 2008)

agreed it more then likely could be lost after generation after generation. But if you have 2 proven parents and they throw a cold pup/dog is that pup game bred or is it just another dog?


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

I see where you're going with this but where do you draw the line?
If you breed a terrier to a bloodhound and then back to a terrier do you have a terrier or a bloodhound or something else?? I hate to answer a question with a question but that's the only way I know how to get my point across..LOL


----------



## over_thaedge (Feb 4, 2008)

you have a mutt! lol but regardless your right with time a line has to be drawn but when that first generation sports a non game dog from proven parents do u consider that dog game bred .. if bred back to a proven sire or dam and he or she produces game dogs where is line at? game bred or not?


----------



## over_thaedge (Feb 4, 2008)

gotta love the friendly debates


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

That first generation surely but to me after that it begins to get a little cloudy. You've really got me thinking now..lol


----------



## over_thaedge (Feb 4, 2008)

well thing is some dogs turn on later then others so if they are bred before they turn on adn thought to be cold what happens if after that dog is bred say 2 times and they he/she turns on would the first litter b game bred or not game bred ... lol 

it could go both ways and i see your point totally with each generation it does become cloudy a lil of the traits are washed away u might say. but they are still there and bred to the right male/female they might resurface.

jmo

but it doesnt really matter at all any more since the only way to find out true gameness is illegal its hard to tell and kinda pointless lol


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

I'll resume play tomorrow it's to late for this much brain racking..LOL


----------



## over_thaedge (Feb 4, 2008)

lmao


ok man u have a good one


----------



## cerberus (Apr 20, 2007)

why not change the term from game bred to game lines?some people would say the term game bred has purpose


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Old_Blood said:


> No I don't exactly think both parents have to be game tested. A lot of older timers might not have tested a bitch lots of them were tested and some were CH themselves but not always. They were still considered gamebred because they were bred for that. Also some dogmen bred cold dogs who would never be tested and wouldn't fight back anyway, they were still called gamebred and some cold dogs became ROM.


I like this answer. IMO it has to do with the intention of the breeder and the knowledge of the breeder. I beleive that both have to come into play for the pups to be considered game bred. I'm sure you could find a game show quality dog if you look deep enough but he wouldn't be game bred, only game. There are plenty of curs and cold dogs who were bred for gameness but never made the cut. They would be considered game bred even if they aren't game or ever even rolled.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

cerberus said:


> why not change the term from game bred to game lines?some people would say the term game bred has purpose


It does have a purpose, LOL. But it's illegal and we are only speaking hypothetically.:thumbsup:


----------



## Old_Blood (Jan 10, 2008)

buzhunter said:


> I like this answer. IMO it has to do with the intention of the breeder and the knowledge of the breeder. I beleive that both have to come into play for the pups to be considered game bred. I'm sure you could find a game show quality dog if you look deep enough but he wouldn't be game bred, only game. There are plenty of curs and cold dogs who were bred for gameness but never made the cut. They would be considered game bred even if they aren't game or ever even rolled.


Thanks. What you just said also sums it up. If one breeds a gamebred female to a game male and is striving to produce game dogs then they'd say they are gamebred. However if the breeder wants show quality and breeds the same breeding they wouldn't say gamebred litter, they'd still say show prospects.

I also totally agree with the 2nd part of your post and was thinking about something similar to that just earlier. You can have a game dog that isn't gamebred. Just wanted some thoughts on this. I knew a male that was bred like "crap" as game dogs go, actually as conformation or true APBT type/lines go. He had the big name dogs with rumors surrounding them in his pedigree. Yet he proved to be game. He also placed in conformation events. I don't remember his exact weight, I'm thinking 70lbs or so chain weight, at one time he was like 80-85lbs horribly fat and looked like total crap, when I saw him conditioned I couldn't believe it was the same dog. So how do these things happen, throwback, exception to the rule, retaining some genetics from somewhere? I've also seen dogs with AST in the pedigree produce game. Its obvious that breeding proven dogs no matter the breed or job is likely to yield higher percentages but even a cur can produce well on genetics.

I also knew of 2 littermates that were gamebred and bought with the intention of being match dogs. The female quit in short order. The male was proven but then when it came to be put out quit. He had already been bred since he was tested and had produced winners with both females he was bred too (neither of which had impressive pedigrees themselves if I remember right).

There are also littermates in which one dog is the higher caliber pit dog but doesn't produce too well, the less impressive pit dog out produces with high percentages. Why is this?

Things can get a little tricky. We can't know a dogs genes for certain, what genes the dog will pass on, but breeders must try to breed best to best. I'm not saying game dogs nor am I advocating that I'm saying whatever the person is breeding for whether that be herding, protection, ect. Just know that "mother nature" can surprise you.


----------



## over_thaedge (Feb 4, 2008)

both of yall are making the points i was trying to make and making it sound better lol ... goes back to reading my pitology 101 study book lmao


----------



## game_bred (Jan 3, 2008)

buzhunter said:


> I like this answer. IMO it has to do with the intention of the breeder and the knowledge of the breeder. I beleive that both have to come into play for the pups to be considered game bred. I'm sure you could find a game show quality dog if you look deep enough but he wouldn't be game bred, only game. There are plenty of curs and cold dogs who were bred for gameness but never made the cut. They would be considered game bred even if they aren't game or ever even rolled.


i agree.i like how u described that


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

game_bred said:


> i agree.i like how u described that


Thanks, man. It's JMO.

Old_blood : I have been told in the past (and believe it to be true) that the APBT is the most "made" of all the dog breeds. You can breed for looks, size, temperment, and so on with little protest from mother nature but when we try to breed out the most basic of all traits, being the will to survive, I think it becomes a battle of wills between the breeder and mother nature. I think that a dog who will not go or one who will quit is only displaying a stronger will to survive. A dog who is just downright game, IMO, is maybe the most unnatural of all dogs. When attempting to trump mother nature I'm sure that the traits we cannot see on the surface are the hardest ones to attain as we have to have an instinct for them and it takes a very knowledgeable breeder to accomplish gameness. I know little about genetics but my theory would be that no matter how long dogs are bred for gameness, we will always have to accept the fact that mother nature will trump us at least some of the time. Not only that but breeders inadvertantly breed in traits that they are not necessarily striving for by "taking the bad with the good", so to speak. If we did somehow come to the point where we could produce litter after litter of completely game pups, I have a feeling that they would eventually have the same types of genetic defects somewhere in their DNA as dogs bred specifically for any trait such as blue, white, or size. Someone quoted one of the standards the other day about "too much of one thing robbing him of another" and I would think that too much gameness in a bloodline could possibly rob him of something else. Maybe his sanity! I've said it before and I'll say it again - I have to question the intelligence of a dog who won't save his own life. LOL


----------



## Old_Blood (Jan 10, 2008)

buzhunter said:


> Thanks, man. It's JMO.
> 
> Old_blood : I have been told in the past (and believe it to be true) that the APBT is the most "made" of all the dog breeds. You can breed for looks, size, temperment, and so on with little protest from mother nature but when we try to breed out the most basic of all traits, being the will to survive, I think it becomes a battle of wills between the breeder and mother nature. I think that a dog who will not go or one who will quit is only displaying a stronger will to survive. A dog who is just downright game, IMO, is maybe the most unnatural of all dogs. When attempting to trump mother nature I'm sure that the traits we cannot see on the surface are the hardest ones to attain as we have to have an instinct for them and it takes a very knowledgeable breeder to accomplish gameness. I know little about genetics but my theory would be that no matter how long dogs are bred for gameness, we will always have to accept the fact that mother nature will trump us at least some of the time. Not only that but breeders inadvertantly breed in traits that they are not necessarily striving for by "taking the bad with the good", so to speak. If we did somehow come to the point where we could produce litter after litter of completely game pups, I have a feeling that they would eventually have the same types of genetic defects somewhere in their DNA as dogs bred specifically for any trait such as blue, white, or size. Someone quoted one of the standards the other day about "too much of one thing robbing him of another" and I would think that too much gameness in a bloodline could possibly rob him of something else. Maybe his sanity! I've said it before and I'll say it again - I have to question the intelligence of a dog who won't save his own life. LOL


This is like you are right inside my head. I have said before that a game dog is just one who has zero self preservation which is totally unnatural in the canine world. It is against nature for the dog to have this bred out, but thats what has been accomplished.

I don't think that we could ever come to the point of producing all game litters, but if we did I'm not sure there would be a serious issue. It would likely depend on the breeder. Manipulating phenotype is much easier then breeding for working ability, drives, ect. Those breedings wouldn't be "bad" if done right, the problem is people breed for *only* those things and ignore health, temperament, intelligence, athletic ability, ect. If I wanted a litter or line of buckskin dogs and I choose good compatible dogs for my foundation that carry that color I could get whole litters of dogs that looked the way I like AND had everything else they needed. The fad breeders of today just continually breed for color/size where everything else gets lost. If I just bred whatever dogs were the same color irregardless of all else then I'd probably be in trouble. Phenotype is one of the easier things to manipulate without ill effects if done correctly. Some breeds are cookie cutter breeds unlike the APBT but they are not missing anything (and some are too). I think its more about the breeder.

If the person is breeding for gameness only and is blinded to all other traits then I would agree that you're going to get some bad things. There are pretty good examples out there now of this (even if the entire litter wasn't game) when breeders are breeding for gameness/winners only and don't care about anything else. I like gamebred dogs but not anything like that. The dogs come out dense/retarded (the lack of intelligence is very obvious), unable to settle (I'm not saying a high strung dog, these dogs can't do anything other then run around foaming, screaming and jumping at nothing - maybe some type of neurological problem could cause this?), others scream, nip and act downright annoying and crazy and for what - nothing, redirected aggression hopefully not at humans but at other items - inanimate objects (if they can't get to a dog/cat whatever they see they will attack their bowl, house, whatever is closest to them), excited biters are just as much a problem and I have seen them go after their handlers when they wanted another dog, piece of hide, ect which isn't acceptable IMO, some are very shy and skittish, they might be good in the box but have a crap temperament, then deformities, I understand gamebred dogs are not bred for looks/conformation but when you sacrifice a physically sound structure you're creating unhealthy dogs, I'm not talking about a dog that has a fault like snippy muzzle, big feet, I'm talking truly unsound structure or even a physical deformity, these dogs are worthless for anything else besides the box. They don't have focus (for anything other then another dog), they are not good house dogs, they don't have intelligence, they can't seem to learn (they are not stubborn/hard to train but actually missing a few parts up there), can't be used for anything else really, are not a good rep PR wise either, you can't take them in public.

I see that people try to breed out DA, which might sound good but sometimes they seem to loose something else. They want the drives for legit work without the fight drive but eliminating the fight drive has caused them to loose everything else that they wanted to keep, then the dogs are worthless for any type of work/sport. A careful breeder could probably do it, it just seems hard to maintain one trait while culling another trait. You'd have to find the right dogs to begin with that have low levels of DA but still love to work.


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

Well said..:clap:


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

I agree, that was a great post. One thing that I have gone over and over in my head is that last part. I have thought about it for years on end. The very fundamentals that draw the line between a true gamebred pit dog and the rest of the canine world are not cut and dried traits that can just be eliminated without essentially creating a spin-off breed. IMO. I've asked several people about this and I seem to get different answers but in the same nutshell - "it's illegal so we have to just accept it and settle for a close second". I myself absolutely hate the thought of the most amazing breed ever created becoming extinct over a "law". I don't believe for one minute that gameness, DA, drive, or any other trait can be removed from the dog without ruining the dog. Like Heinzl said: "we might as well call them staffords because that's all they will be in a couple of generations".


----------



## game_bred (Jan 3, 2008)

i agree:clap:


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

Well said Buz:clap:


----------



## woody d (Feb 7, 2008)

this is an interesting question, and i guess ive never really thought about it. heck, i introduced myself and declared Riot as gamebred, and that wasnt what he was bred for, he simply has a ped full of dogs with ALOT of history, so maybe i 'll have to find a new way to describe him.


----------



## woody d (Feb 7, 2008)

*Gamebred?*

4 GENERATION PEDIGREE
ADAMS' QUIET RIOT

BREEDER: KIRK ADAMS
OWNER: WOODY D.
REGISTRATION #: ADBA
SEX: MALE
COLOR: BLACK BRINDLE
POSTED: 2007-12-11
LAST MODIFIED: 2007-12-11
No OF VIEWS: 57 times

Fat Bill X pistol(Jeep, Redboy, Rascal)

Generations in Pedigree 
First Second Third Fourth 
(Sire) ADAMS / O'DONOVANS ZACK FAT BILLS RICKSON FAT BILL'S TWO EYES (2XW) ROM MOUNTAIN MAN'S BANDIT (2XW)(1XL) POR 
CH (FAT BILL'S BOLERO) BUZZSAW'S PATCHES 
FAT BILL'S MALLOREY ROM GR CH DENNY & DIXIE LINE CONNECTION'S BO (5XW) 
FAT BILL'S CRYSTAL 
O'DONOVANS FLEA CH KRUNCH KENNEL'S MIESTER KELLY'S YOUNG CHINA BOY 
MOAK'S MABALLINE 
FAT BILL'S MALLOREY ROM GR CH DENNY & DIXIE LINE CONNECTION'S BO (5XW) 
FAT BILL'S CRYSTAL 
(Dam) O'DONOVAN'S EMMA LOU CH MASS COMBINE'S PISTOL (WCC'S) KITTEN'S DEVIL DEACON (ROM) BAILEY'S BINGO (1XW) 
(KITTEN'S) MARLOWE'S PEACHES (POR) 
MASS COMBINE'S LIL CRICKET GARRETT'S FLOYD (2XW) ROM 
SHADY HILL KENNEL'S CRICKET 
O'DONOVAN'S ELLIE MAE CH MASS COMBINE'S PISTOL (WCC'S) KITTEN'S DEVIL DEACON (ROM) 
MASS COMBINE'S LIL CRICKET 
FAT BILL'S MALLOREY ROM GR CH DENNY & DIXIE LINE CONNECTION'S BO (5XW) 
FAT BILL'S CRYSTAL

This information is stored in and generated by apbt pedigrees online.


----------



## Old_Blood (Jan 10, 2008)

woody d said:


> this is an interesting question, and i guess ive never really thought about it. heck, i introduced myself and declared Riot as gamebred, and that wasnt what he was bred for, he simply has a ped full of dogs with ALOT of history, so maybe i 'll have to find a new way to describe him.


He is from game lines. That is the simplest way to put it and isn't incorrect so you could just say that.

He is Black Brindle?

That is a pretty nice pedigree.


----------



## GSDBulldog (Dec 22, 2006)

Old_Blood, that was a fabulous post. Too often, breeders on both sides of the fence fail to recognize the total dog. Because, for me, it's the versatility of the bulldog that makes it so great.

"Too much of one thing robs him of another."
-ADBA breed standard.


----------



## Old_Blood (Jan 10, 2008)

GSDBulldog said:


> Old_Blood, that was a fabulous post. Too often, breeders on both sides of the fence fail to recognize the total dog. Because, for me, it's the versatility of the bulldog that makes it so great.
> 
> "Too much of one thing robs him of another."
> -ADBA breed standard.


Thanks. I totally agree. I like the versatility and they must have a good temperament and intelligence to be versatile and capable of work other then something illegal. I like dogs of game lines but not those which are useless for legal purposes. Same with show breeders, some breed only for show and some of the dogs conformation inhibits smooth working ability. Others have no drive or will to work. All depending on the breeder of course.


----------



## woody d (Feb 7, 2008)

"versatility" is the word of the day. actually that is the best single-worded description of an APBT...versatile


----------

