 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christian_Kennels
Puppy
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 30
Location: USA
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:09 pm Post subject: |
  |
|
Ok If you want to go there, I can play this game with you...So lets start the question and answer session.
| Quote: |
| The dog must give you the impression of an Amstaff at first glance, |
| Lea wrote: |
| But what do you mean by "at first glance"? The head, the bulkyness? What exactly? |
At first glance the dog’s physical appearance must be of correct size and proportions for correct breed type. And by first glance impression I mean Physical Appearance, and yes that means all of the above, from its tail, coat length and color, body height to body length proportions, and also “the head” and “the bullyness” they must all be in correct proportions for proper breed type. And I will also stir the pot and state the head is one of the most important factors for proper breed type and to give the approperate first glance impression the dog must have a good head, an amstaff which lacks a fair to good head, IMO lacks breed type.
| Quote: |
| The Amstaff was only developed to function as a show dog. |
| Lea wrote: |
| Well, AST standard disagrees with this statement. |
Its does? Where in the standard does it state the function of the dog? Just b/c you disagree doesn’t mean my view of how the breed was created is incorrect. If you subscribe to the school of thought that the pit bull and the amstaff are NOT one and the same, and then you should know the AKC Show ring is the sole reason the Amstaff was Created/Developed? Now for clarity if there were no Show Ring and NO AKC then there would be No Amstaff - seems simple enough
| Quote: |
| Now on the contrary the Pit Bull was created solely on function. It didn’t matter what the dogs looked like if it could win in the pit then it was chosen as better breeding stock and edited their existing standard with personal preferences and then put that in place for all breeders and judges to base the dogs merit on. |
| Lea wrote: |
| Which is exactly why we have a standard today. |
Now see if you really believe that the pit bull standard is what keeps and maintains the pit bull then you truly don’t know what made a Pit Bull a –Pit Bull-
There are plenty of people out here today with a Cur Shell of a Pit Bull who think they have the real thing just b/c they have a well conditioned dog with lots of drive..lol. But truth be told the PIT is what made and maintained the breed and there is only one way to tell if you have a real pit bull - and no weight pull competition will tell you, nor will an agility test, no 12 mile runs, no bite work, no protection work, no conformation event and certainly no piece of paper with physical description can do it.
About the only legal thing that comes close is hog catching and that’s still not the same. So if you believe something written on a piece of paper can prove the merit of a true “Pit Bull” then you don’t know one thing about the breed. And same goes for the "APBT's" as some like to call them |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sagebrush
Omega Dog
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
Posts: 146
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've always wondered why a show dog would need "proverbial courage".
Wouldn't "Keenly alive to his surroudings" be plenty for a dog developed as a show dog?
I mean the whole courage thing is a bit of overkill for a dog developed only to be a show dog..
Certainly you can't test for it in the show ring...WHY would it be put there? What the HECK is it referring to?
Carla |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lea
Puppy
Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| The Amstaff was only developed to function as a show dog. |
| Lea wrote: |
| Well, AST standard disagrees with this statement. |
Its does? Where in the standard does it state the function of the dog? |
Let me repeat myself:
Here is where:
"great strength for his size"
"Slight sloping from withers to rump with gentle short slope at rump to base of tail. Loins slightly tucked."
"Well-sprung ribs"
"The front legs should be straight, large or round bones, pastern upright. "
"let down at hocks"
"A height of about 18 to 19 inches at shoulders" |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Meadowbrooks
Alpha Dog
Joined: 12 Dec 2007
Posts: 1475
Location: va
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
((jumped in and out of the back of Larry’s Redneck Mobile effortlessly..lol)))
I did catch that jab. LOL Far from a redneck Pickup.. You and your dogs didn't have a problem being carted around in it. LOL
I agree with what was said.. When people have certain beliefs or don't agree with something, it doesn't make it untrue. It just means you don't agree with it.. IMO AKC Show.. You can't change that.. AKC AMSTAFF different from APBT.. You can't change that.. Two different standards. You can't change that.. JMO |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Skylar
Pack Members
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 333
Location: Everywhere
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lea wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The dog must give you the impression of an Amstaff at first glance, |
But what do you mean by "at first glance"? The head, the bulkyness? |
at first glance meaning, you know it is Amstaff and not ABPT. I think the breeders and long term AST owner would be able to tell at first glance. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lea
Puppy
Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Skylar wrote: |
| Lea wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The dog must give you the impression of an Amstaff at first glance, |
But what do you mean by "at first glance"? The head, the bulkyness? |
at first glance meaning, you know it is Amstaff and not ABPT. I think the breeders and long term AST owner would be able to tell at first glance. |
You are missing the point. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lea
Puppy
Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sagebrush wrote: |
I've always wondered why a show dog would need "proverbial courage".
Wouldn't "Keenly alive to his surroudings" be plenty for a dog developed as a show dog?
I mean the whole courage thing is a bit of overkill for a dog developed only to be a show dog..
Certainly you can't test for it in the show ring...WHY would it be put there? What the HECK is it referring to?
Carla |
Good point! |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Skylar
Pack Members
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 333
Location: Everywhere
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ok if you says so Lea. (referring to the "missing the point)
Last edited by Skylar on Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:17 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Skylar
Pack Members
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 333
Location: Everywhere
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sagebrush wrote: |
I've always wondered why a show dog would need "proverbial courage".
Wouldn't "Keenly alive to his surroudings" be plenty for a dog developed as a show dog?
I mean the whole courage thing is a bit of overkill for a dog developed only to be a show dog..
Certainly you can't test for it in the show ring...WHY would it be put there? What the HECK is it referring to?
Carla |
Ok... what you said.. i think i understand why you think differently.. but then again they are a show dog.. it is what they want to see on the show.. the personality, attidude. They don't want to see Amstaff whimpering with his/her tail between the legs, walking shaking around the ring.. they want to see overly comfident Amstaff strudding around the ring looking beautiful. It is all about look, IMO "the whole courage thing" "keenly alive to his surrounding""provebial courage" helped Amstaff to look the part.
truth is any breed can do sport/game even Toy dog can. But there is limitation for every breed. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lea
Puppy
Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Skylar wrote: |
| Ok if you says so Lea. |
I didnt mean to be rude by saying that, but I think you really did miss the point of why I asked that. We have to follow standard to tell us what amstaff should look like. As you can see from this discussion, long term breeders and amstaff owners cant agree on the basics of this same standard. That is why I asked, what the author wanted to say by "at first glance it should look like amstaff".
| Quote: |
| They don't want to see Amstaff whimpering with his/her tail between the legs, walking shaking around the ring.. |
Proverbial courage isnt the same as stable temperament in a show ring. You will see most other breeds that dont have "proverbial courage" in their standard being the most normal, happy, not shy, show dogs. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Skylar
Pack Members
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 333
Location: Everywhere
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hey Lea it is cool, i knew what you meant...
should have explain clearer.. I am referring to Long term breeders/owners - Some. Not all do i understand as i can see from this forum.
yeah there are some Amstaff that doesn't have any of this but then there are some that does.
it is all about preferred. Because those that doesn't meet "preferred" would end up as pet dog
Proverbial courage... again those without it can be happy, normal dog but you wouldn't be seeing dog looking alert at any danger or confrontation attidude.. it is all about the personality look/body language.. Of course we know what that mean when they are not being control but then it is what the judge/standard wanted them to act/look like in the show ring..
it is all about look on AST standard. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lea
Puppy
Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Posts: 82
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
I am referring to Long term breeders/owners - Some. Not all do i understand as i can see from this forum.
|
Do you think you are qualified to make this statement? Do you think that you understand? We all think we understand, that is why this has been going on for 10 pages...
I guess what goes against what you guys are saying isnt me contradicting your statements, its the words written in the standard. If anyone can show me where in the standard it says that structure of these dogs is for showing rather than physical work, THEN we can discuss how amstaffs were created as a breed supposedly very different to APBT.... |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christian_Kennels
Puppy
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 30
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lea wrote: |
| Quote: |
I am referring to Long term breeders/owners - Some. Not all do i understand as i can see from this forum.
|
Do you think you are qualified to make this statement? Do you think that you understand? We all think we understand, that is why this has been going on for 10 pages...
I guess what goes against what you guys are saying isnt me contradicting your statements, its the words written in the standard. If anyone can show me where in the standard it says that structure of these dogs is for showing rather than physical work, THEN we can discuss how amstaffs were created as a breed supposedly very different to APBT.... |
I never spent too much time talking to the slow kids in school and even less in college why should I start now?
I posted enough about that already. Like I said before - I love this breed and the people who are Responsible caretakers of the breed so I wish you nothing but the best with what ever it is that you would like to do in the breed. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Skylar
Pack Members
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 333
Location: Everywhere
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lea...
qualified and opinion is two completely different thing.. maybe not at your end.. but it is at my end. Also we don't need to be qualified to know how genes works (well you do... i use to study at vet school so in my case i think i understand how genetic works).
Their lines have been seperate for long time so it made them two different breed. But also i have research this and i have not find one that says they are the same breed even though they share the same name in one kennel club. But i did find that they say that APBT and AST and SBT are similar.
http://www.americanhistoryx.it/Amstaffstory.html
"In these beginning years we must notice the will of the managers of the Staffordshire Terrier club of America to make a selection, to remove the dog bet fighting passionate. Despite this line towards beauty competitions and obedience tests, confirmed by the publication of two precious yearbook in 1940 and 1942, until the fifty years there were dogs both in exposure and in fighting.
Coming out on the scene of post-war new breeders drove on people’s mind a dog's modern vision, particularly this kind of dogs, for the way its attitude could be used for.
Staffordshire Terrier club of America long chairman William Mt.. Whitaker (1948-1964) decided the expulsion of all those partners, and relative dogs, that worked in the circuits of fighting or that provided dogs for such a use. This settled position is fundamental in the correct interpretation of the American Staffordshire and took the race to a further and brief separation from the pit bull and all those who were reading these dogs under the bloody animals' profile."
http://www.nyx.net/~mbur/apbtfaqover.html
"Since 1936, due to different breeding goals, the American Staffordshire Terrier and the American Pit Bull Terrier have diverged in both phenotype and spirit/temperament, although both, ideally, continue to have in common an easy-going, friendly disposition. [2] Some folks in the fancy feel that after 60 years of breeding for different goals, these two dogs are now entirely different breeds. Other people choose to view them as two different strains of the same breed (working and show). Either way, the gap continues to widen as breeders from both sides of the fence consider it undesirable to interbreed the two. To the untrained eye, ASTs may look more impressive and fearsome, with a larger and more blocky head, with bulging jaw muscles, a wider chest and thicker neck. In general, however, they aren't nearly as "game" or athletic as game-bred APBTs. Because of the standardization of their conformation for show purposes, ASTs tend to look alike, to a much greater degree than APBTs do. APBTs have a much wider phenotypical range, since the primary breeding goal, until fairly recently, has been not to produce a dog with a certain "look" but to produce one capable of winning pit contests, in which the looks of a dog counted for nothing. There are some game-bred APBTs that are practically indistinguishable from typical ASTs, but in general they are leaner, leggier, and lighter on their toes and have more stamina, agility, speed, and explosive power."
"[2]- Through out this document, unless otherwise noted, when we refer to the American Pit Bull Terrier(APBT), we are referring to the ADBA version which is more likely to be bred to the traditional APBT breeding standards. In general, the UKC version of the APBT is now being bred mostly for looks alone, and thus has much in common with the AKC AST."
http://www.pbrc.net/faq.html
The American Staffordshire Terrier (AST or Amstaff)
The AST or Amstaff used to be the same dog as the APBT but was taken out of the pit in the mid 1930s. AKC opened its stud books to a few APBTs that fit a standard they had chosen, and came up with the name Staffordshire Terrier. In early 1970s the name was changed to American Staffordshire Terrier, to avoid any confusion with a breed called "Staffordshire Bull Terrier" from England that was also recognized by the AKC.
Amstaffs are now primarily bred for conformation and temperament. They have a set height standard and usually weigh between 50 to 80 lbs. They may be a little stockier than the APBT, but not always.
Red noses are considered a fault with in the AST breed standard and this physical trait has been bred out of most AST lines. Red nose dogs are common in APBT lines, however. This may help you differentiate between the breeds. If the dog has a red nose, it is more likely to be an APBT lineage than an AST.
http://www.k9rescueltd.org/history_m.htm
"In 1898, the United Kennel Club was formed to provide registration and fighting guidelines for the APBT. Later, the fanciers that wished to distance themselves from the fighting aspect of the breed petitioned the American Kennel Club for recognition. After concessions to different breed clubs, they were granted recognition in 1936. However, since the name was so close to the Bull Terrier, they were required to change the name. They were recognized as Staffordshire (for the province in England where they originated) Terriers. This made them eligible to compete in the AKC competition events. When the breed gained acceptance, many people dual registered their dogs with both AKC and UKC (a practice that many still follow today). In fact, Pete the Pup, officially known as Lucenay’s Peter, was among some of the first dogs dual registered.
The AKC eventually closed its studbooks to the APBT and only allowed those dogs born to registered “Staffordshire Terrier” to be admitted. For a brief period in the 1970s, they did reopen their studbooks to American Pit Bull Terriers. Then, in 1973, the prefix American was added to the Staffordshire Terrier’s name. This was in an effort to further distinguish it from the newly recognized Staffordshire Bull Terrier"
http://www.astao.org/
"Breed information: While similar in appearance, the APBT and AST are not the same breed of dog. Initially coming from the same lines, The American Kennel Club (AKC) created the AmStaff from The United Kennel Club's American Pit Bull Terrier. They are bred with some slight differences, and AKC has closed the studbooks to new lines at this time. The AKC is the only major breed registry in the US to register the American Staffordshire Terrier. " |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Skylar
Pack Members
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 333
Location: Everywhere
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh and Lea... from what i can see... Did you mention about the history being important part of the standard to be able to understand the standard... from what you're saying.. it does seem to come across that you haven't paid any or much attention to the history... for a start... why was AKC AST created? How did it start? There are so many information in those 10 pages so i am not going to go over it again, And also i like to debate when it need challenge 
I have copied some of the quotes that i find all over the site and pasted it into this topic with their links. Not just for you Lea but for anybody to see if any of you can disagree with it? |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
