# New UKC Faults in APBT conformation



## GnarlyBlue (Aug 18, 2007)

Don't know if anyone saw this yet. But it would appear the UKC is getting a handle on the ovversize trend with such Very serious faults, as oversized heads, impaired breathing from short muzzle, disproportionate body type, short legs etc.

I guess thats new as of 11/08

United Kennel Club: American Pit Bull Terrier (Revised November 1, 2008)


----------



## BedlamBully (Jun 6, 2008)

I heard that this is not supposed to be public information yet, I'm not sure how it got leaked out. (unless they let it out  )
I didn't think they where changing it that quickly. I agree they need to get a handle on the overly huge dogs. The ABKC is in place now, register the dogs with them

I wonder if they will get a tighter rein on new registrations or not. Almost all bullies are registered with the UKC.


----------



## GnarlyBlue (Aug 18, 2007)

I guess technically speaking those were always faults but now it's in print.

That's straight off the UKC site.
I guess in a few years if you see a CH it will actually mean it's a standard specific apbt


----------



## BedlamBully (Jun 6, 2008)

Well they where sort of faults. The standard said something like between 40-60lbs though out of this weight range is not necissarily a fault, it was just kind of lax on its standard


----------



## MADBood (May 31, 2008)

I guess the UKC is trying to undo what they already did.

I still lost alot of trust in that registry. I just assume attend an AKC show or an ABKC BBQ..(I mean show) than a UKC sanctioned event. JMO


----------



## BedlamBully (Jun 6, 2008)

the ABKC shows are actually pretty cool, they're really chill. But even THEY are still working on a set standard, its hard because there are so many types of Bullies.


----------



## MADBood (May 31, 2008)

Well I see it as whenever a person tells me their dog is UKC...Im gonna be looking for that AmBully in the peds. Don't get me wrong, I have a 100% R.E. (stemming from Short Shot and Diamond) showhog and I love her but she WILL be ABKC registered as she is an AmBully. It's cool if you are true to the breed and not use the UKC APBT to sling pups. If your dog is registered with any registry...it should be able to meet their breed standards. Like you said Bedlam the ABKC can't even come up with a set standard....how can they? Some look like Sharpeis, some like English Bulldogs and others like Mastiffs.


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

I personally like the new changes, except for the minor changes to the ears and eyes portion. Those don't make any sense to me. But as said, the bully folks have their own registry.


----------



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

bahamutt99 said:


> I personally like the new changes, except for the minor changes to the ears and eyes portion. Those don't make any sense to me. But as said, the bully folks have their own registry.


 I agree! I think the UKC National club did a good job.


----------



## GnarlyBlue (Aug 18, 2007)

if you look at the list of standards all AmBul or "fad"ish characteristics are listed as "very serious fault":thumbsup:
good on the UKC

Btw not all UKC dogs are bullied out, Mine are 45 and 58 lbs. respectively they have good proportion, and fit the breed standard... but they are the exception


----------



## BedlamBully (Jun 6, 2008)

Sway and Lugz will probably come in around 60/65 so not too far out of the standard, luckily. But they aren't for conformation anyway. They are for WP.


----------



## Bully_Boy_Joe (Jul 7, 2008)

Well I think that the changes were needed and will clean up the UKC registry a bit.


----------



## NesOne (Feb 7, 2008)

Glad to see that they added those faults in there. Now the people that debate about their bullies being APBT's will have to come up with a different approach.


----------



## MADBood (May 31, 2008)

True guys but I think it will take some time for UKC to take out the trash, so to speak. There are so many AmBullies registered with them already that it will just keep those BYBs from ever showing their dogs at UKC shows but they will continue to keep registering the offspring of their AmBullies with the UKC. I've seen some R.E./Gottylines that are close to the conformation so they aren't gonna pull papers on every line that has those bloodlines in them either.

I'm just saying that people will are still gonna get duped and breeders are gonna keep getting paid by UKC registered mutts. Until people wise up, this isn't gonna change much.


----------



## NesOne (Feb 7, 2008)

Yeah, you're right, but the UKC is just trying to keep everyone happy, especially themselves with all the breeders that don't attend the shows selling dogs with their papers.


----------



## ARK_Kennel (Jun 5, 2008)

I like that they put "rangy" as a fault. Maybe now I wont see so many Greyhounds in the APBT ring...


----------



## money_killer (Apr 14, 2008)

bout time they got a handle on things.


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

GnarlyBlue said:


> btw not all UKC dogs are bullied out, Mine are 45 and 58 lbs. respectively they have good proportion, and fit the breed standard... but *they are the exception*


I disagree. I show UKC. All of my dogs are UKC. You will still see a lot of standard dogs showing over there. They may not be gamebred dogs, but they are standard. The few times I've seen true bully-style dogs, they haven't won.


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

ARK_Kennel said:


> I like that they put "rangy" as a fault. Maybe know I wont see so many Greyhounds in the APBT ring...


Do you have any examples of greyhound-style dogs in the UKC show ring?


----------



## ARK_Kennel (Jun 5, 2008)

on the left is Intl Ch. GR CH 'PR' Majestic's Maiden The USA, on the right is Intl Ch. GR CH 'PR' Powerhouse's Lil' Devil CGC TT

The dog on the left is leggy.


----------



## sw_df27 (Feb 16, 2007)

Well I don't show my dogs but I am glad they made the changes!!!


----------



## BlueBull (Dec 6, 2006)

And yet they will still register American bullies as APBTs.. the only thing this will change is how dogs in shows are viewed. I dont even know a bully breeder that goes to UKC shows, less known participates in them. 

the cahnges wont affect much of anything if they are going to still be registering the dogs as usual.


----------



## BedlamBully (Jun 6, 2008)

I agree Blue. I doubt they will revoke any registrations and I'm sure they will still take current registrations on new bully litters. You just won't be able to CH dogs in conformation but what about weight pull? I'm sure these bigger dogs will still show up for the wp events and earn titles there. *shrug* its nice of them to put an effort into it though.


----------



## pitking2 (Aug 26, 2008)

Thanks for the info!


----------



## GnarlyBlue (Aug 18, 2007)

The BYB's will still do what they do. It sends the right message though. The UKC isn't blind to what is being done to their registry, the next step would be to hunt down all the breeders who advertise UKC in their website, and if the dogs are out of standard revoke or transfer the registration... like that would ever happen 

It makes a little step in the right direction. In a few generations, APBT fancies will be able to purchase a CH bred dog and know what they're getting, a standard specific dog. But you can already do that if you've done your homework.

As for the weight pull, notice how the faults are worded, "impedes athletic ability".... I'm not going to make a blanket statement, but bigger is not NECESSARILY better. Those AmBull types, in general, lack the stamina and drive of the standard specific APBT. Not that they're not powerful but if I were a betting man my money would be on the smaller more athletic built dog.


----------



## GnarlyBlue (Aug 18, 2007)

bahamutt99 said:


> I disagree. I show UKC. All of my dogs are UKC. You will still see a lot of standard dogs showing over there. They may not be gamebred dogs, but they are standard. The few times I've seen true bully-style dogs, they haven't won.


I agree with you, don't get me wrong. I don't think it's a lost cause, show dogs aren't usually bullish

I do see a negative sentiment at times reflected in many posts here about UKC dogs. Which isn't without merit, sadly. In my area at least you don't see many standard specific dogs, outside of shows. the public(in my area) think the Ambull IS the standard, and if you look online..... 90% of breeder sites touting the UKC logo are BOASTING 100+lb dogs and 24" heads and other garbage.

I am Absolutly ecstatic to see ppl like are on this board with good tight ukc dogs makes me

although my girls do have at least 25% dual reg or adba in their ped that may have something to do with their size.*shrug*


----------



## BlueBull (Dec 6, 2006)

Weightpull doesnt require stamina... 60 seconds of hard pulling is all it takes.

a dog can be "un-athletic" and still weight pull. all that is really needed is a good level of drive and a little determination. They are not pure pits but they can still get a good portion of drive from thier foundation breed.


----------



## GnarlyBlue (Aug 18, 2007)

BlueBull said:


> Weightpull doesnt require stamina... 60 seconds of hard pulling is all it takes.
> 
> a dog can be "un-athletic" and still weight pull. all that is really needed is a good level of drive and a little determination. They are not pure pits but they can still get a good portion of drive from thier foundation breed.


depends on how long between rounds as far as stamina is concerned. we attend our local UKC weight pull and some dogs just refuse after a few rounds. obviously conditioned dogs do better. and there are exceptions to every rule. But just because a dog is bigger doesn't guarantee a good puller.


----------



## BedlamBully (Jun 6, 2008)

i didn't say he would be a GOOD puller. 
I have TWo bullies BTW a gotti/RE/Larum dog and A Gotti/York dog.
So far they both show great signs of being fantastic pullers. (would like to note they are not the short stalky squishy face bullies-which are still cute in their own right)

They will never be conformation dogs though as they don't really fit any standard with ukc/adba/ or ABKC right now, but I hope they will be great pulling dogs.


----------



## BlueBull (Dec 6, 2006)

GnarlyBlue said:


> depends on how long between rounds as far as stamina is concerned. we attend our local UKC weight pull and some dogs just refuse after a few rounds. obviously conditioned dogs do better. and there are exceptions to every rule. But just because a dog is bigger doesn't guarantee a good puller.


True. i agree completely, i know dogs that have the physical body but not the drive, and vice versa. i wouldnt say that you can look at a dog and say that a dog isnt capable of working though,and thats what the standard says. its still putting comformation ahead of performance. I understand why but at the same time i always think that is a bad idea. it really comes down to the dog in question regardless to its conformation, heart cant be underestimated.


----------



## GnarlyBlue (Aug 18, 2007)

:goodpost:


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

ARK_Kennel said:


> on the left is Intl Ch. GR CH 'PR' Majestic's Maiden The USA, on the right is Intl Ch. GR CH 'PR' Powerhouse's Lil' Devil CGC TT
> 
> The dog on the left is leggy.


And the dog on the right is bully. But I'd bet everything I have that Maiden is the better performer.


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

GnarlyBlue said:


> I do see a negative sentiment at times reflected in many posts here about UKC dogs. Which isn't without merit, sadly.


Yeah, that's just folks wanting to blame the registry for the breeders. Yet, go to an ADBA show down here, and you'll get the lowrider breeders putting business cards on your car. At some shows, those folks are showing their dogs because they have to in order to stay on the grounds and peddle their wares. The truth is, while neither registry rewards these dogs in the show ring, it is equally true to say that neither registry has done much for routing them out either. The ADBA was the origin of the Whopper line, so they're just as guilty as any other.

Just my two cents. Take it for what it's worth.


----------



## ARK_Kennel (Jun 5, 2008)

bahamutt99 said:


> And the dog on the right is bully. But I'd bet everything I have that Maiden is the better performer.


But we are not talking about performance, we are talking about the UKC show ring. We all know that just cause a dog can show doesn't mean it can preform. 
It all boils down to interpretation of the standard.

Look at the German Shepherd. My working bred shepherd would never place in a AKC show, just the same as a show shepherd would not do as good in dog sports.

Until the UKC says and shows people exactly what they think is a APBT we are still going to have this problem. IMO


----------



## bahamutt99 (May 14, 2008)

ARK_Kennel said:


> But we are not talking about performance, we are talking about the UKC show ring. We all know that just cause a dog can show doesn't mean it can preform.
> It all boils down to interpretation of the standard.


This is true. It's a shame that a standard written around a working breed doesn't really describe the ideal performance dog. I wish we had more judges who were themselves working dog people. It does bear repeating, though, that the leggier dog would most likely be the better performer, and we shouldn't scoff at them as though they were "greyhounds." I'm having a nice uphill battle showing my little girl, because although she could run circles around most dogs in the ring, she's not representative of the type that normally wins. She will be a CH one day, and a GRCH down the road a ways, because I know she's a nice dog. Just not the crem de la crem compared to those top 10 dogs.


----------



## DieselDawg (Jul 23, 2008)

ARK_Kennel said:


> on the left is Intl Ch. GR CH 'PR' Majestic's Maiden The USA, on the right is Intl Ch. GR CH 'PR' Powerhouse's Lil' Devil CGC TT
> 
> The dog on the left is leggy.


Funny, the dog on the left looks more APBT and that should be a good thing IMO. If that is considered "rangy", then I will glad to go "home on the range".


----------

