Blue is the hot color?

[pitbullpassion]

Nov 5, 2010 11:17:51 GMT -5 RealPitBull said:

Nov 5, 2010 10:56:39 GMT -5 mhaze said:

We can learn things from history without admiring it.

That is a great way of putting it. Thanks, Mike!

Agree.

[catstina]

Here's a new one "breeders used to feed them blue ink to make them blue and that the ink gives them cancer and all blue staffs have cancer and they only live for 6 years."

[RealPitBull]

^ What. The. WHAAAA??

<---- 13.5 yo BLUE AmStaff.

[catstina]

You're very lucky, Mary, he dodged the blue ink cancer!!

[RealPitBull]

May 10, 2011 9:36:54 GMT -5 catstina said:

You're very lucky, Mary, he dodged the blue ink cancer!!

[bluetrees]

Christina, where in the world did you hear that one??? Crazy!

[catstina]

Pretty crazy, indeed! My brother said that he heard it from a friend who just got a blue dog. The friend said that he was worried about his dog's future because he didn't want it to get cancer and when my brother asked why, that was his response... I just imagine a guy sitting there and breaking open a bunch of blue ballpoints to feed to his dogs.

[patchopits]

Don't forget too that chocolate dogs nurse their pups with chocolate milk. Didn't you know???? That is why they are chocolate.
I think the blue dogs must have eaten that special candy Willy Wonka has that makes them turn into blue berries... Violet you are turning violet. LOL

On another note, in all seriousness now, cancer is something bully breeds are prone too along with many other breeds no matter the color they are...

[suziriot]

May 22, 2011 13:34:10 GMT -5 patchopits said:

Don't forget too that chocolate dogs nurse their pups with chocolate milk. Didn't you know???? That is why they are chocolate.
I think the blue dogs must have eaten that special candy Willy Wonka has that makes them turn into blue berries... Violet you are turning violet. LOL

LMAO!

[chuteboxe]

the trend for blue dogs simply $ its a crying shame. i have nothing against them as my girlfriend has one and is a nice dog with a good temperment. but would not breed her simply because i dont understand her breeding nor did the breeder.

but simply going for colour is a no no to breed you must understand a good breeding programme illiminating traits that are'nt disired.
to me number 1 trait i cull, is man aggression. which i dont worry as i understand my dogs ped and the dogs in his/her background.

i also wouldnt call amstaff's APBT's either they may be related somewhat. but 80+ years of breeding for completely different characteristics would class them very distant from each other. may look similar but not same.

[catstina]

I think the fact that there are many dogs dual registered as AmStaffs in the AKC and APBTs in the UKC says that there are more similarities then there are differences between the breeds.

[mhaze]

It's an interesting topic. The following is my opinion, as I am no expert whatsoever: I have no doubt that blue dogs were rare in the old days. There is evidence that they existed before the AKC opened their books for American Pit Bull Terriers to be registered as American Staffordshire Terriers. Since that moment, the dogs in the AKC conformation rings definitely started to look more alike (my opinion), as conformation focuses more on the physical appearance as a standard. The APBT of old had more variety as far as physical appearance due to being bred for gameness; a trait that didn't have anything to do with colors, or physical traits.

I might be wrong here, but even the APBT lines seem to be growing further apart between the ADBA dogs (more typical of game bred dogs) and the UKC dogs (more emphasis on conformation). Then there's the crazy so called American Bullies showing up with pedigrees from the UKC and or ADBA that are obviously not pure APBT, or in the least they're very poorly bred dogs.

All that said, I think there are still breed traits that AST's and APBT's do share. And to bring it back to topic, blue dogs burst on to the scene as a way for puppy peddlers and back yard breeders to offer something new (color being one of the easiest things to breed for) for people that simply wanted these dogs for their look, and a fad is born.

[emilys]

Blue has always existed in the "pit bull" and its precursors. There's general agreement that the semi-mysterious "Blue poll/paul" actually did have this color.

I hold very strongly to my belief that the UKC APBT and the AKC AmStaff are the same breed. I am not so convinced about the ADBA APBT.. to me there's plenty of evidence that exactly because of what Mike says: they were always bred much more for dogfighting than the AKC/UKC dogs especially after the UKC disavowed dogfighting in the 1970's.... AND for that reason their pedigrees are not so pure. (the sheer numbers of ADBA dogs registered... supposedly hundreds of thousands/year... suggests that).

I'm not a fan of the appearance/encouraged behavior of most of today's ADBA dogs. And there's NO evidence that the original fighting dogs of the late 19th/early 20th century had that lean, rangy, ripped appearance. Quite the contrary, actually. That look is, as far as I can tell, an entirely post WWII phenomenon.

I entirely agree with Mike that AmBullies are not purebred APBTs, and I don't care WHAT pedigrees they have.

[mhaze]

Oct 15, 2011 11:29:57 GMT -5 emilys said:

Blue has always existed in the "pit bull" and its precursors. There's general agreement that the semi-mysterious "Blue poll/paul" actually did have this color.

I hold very strongly to my belief that the UKC APBT and the AKC AmStaff are the same breed. I am not so convinced about the ADBA APBT.. to me there's plenty of evidence that exactly because of what Mike says: they were always bred much more for dogfighting than the AKC/UKC dogs especially after the UKC disavowed dogfighting in the 1970's.... AND for that reason their pedigrees are not so pure. (the sheer numbers of ADBA dogs registered... supposedly hundreds of thousands/year... suggests that).

I'm not a fan of the appearance/encouraged behavior of most of today's ADBA dogs. And there's NO evidence that the original fighting dogs of the late 19th/early 20th century had that lean, rangy, ripped appearance. Quite the contrary, actually. That look is, as far as I can tell, an entirely post WWII phenomenon.

I entirely agree with Mike that AmBullies are not purebred APBTs, and I don't care WHAT pedigrees they have.

It is suspect that the AmBully types and those Whippet looking dogs can have peds that say APBT in the ADBA isn't it. Not to mention the Merle thing.

[chuteboxe]

emily are you serious? the colby line dogs in the 1800s had that rangy look, ripped apperance.

the bulldogs of the middle ages had this ripped rangy appearance. do you honestly believe that a pitbull before ww2 who have gone the distance in the pit being hogfat! you got to be kidding.
imagine you going into a ring with many pacquiao expecting to do 10rounds fat. you would be exuasted dizzy and be pumbled within the 1st round.

what makes you think that??
theres hundreds of pictures showing APBT before WW2 being athletic in conformation because thats what they are athletic! haha

and also the APBT never had anything to do with conformation. its a performance animal!

and to say the amstaff and the apbt are the same because of appearance is ridiculous.

i seen a english staff x labrodor yesterday that look similar toAPBT & AMSTAFF. and i would not consider them APBT/AST simply on there appearance because its NOT.

il tell you this the APBT is rangy and ripped becuase its a performance animal body is created to perform for long periods of time. (you see marathon runner s in the same physical form)

and the AMSTAFF with there completely different look bulky figure and big heads are created for the trend of the show ring obviosly. remember big muscles create lactic acid cuase bulky dogs to tire and also cuases alot of strain on the heart. so these dogs would not do well in the pit pre WW2 or also be placed in any breeding programme so it would be filtered out that line to better the dogs of the next.

i could go on all day. but hope this helps to understand

[emilys]

Oct 16, 2011 12:34:13 GMT -5 chuteboxe said:

emily are you serious? the colby line dogs in the 1800s had that rangy look, ripped apperance.

...

First of all, no one can have much of an idea of what dogs in the middle ages looked like, as the drawings/illustrations/tapestries of the time are NOT highly representational. As for photographs, that did not become common until the late 19th century, and there are virtually no photographs of dogs in the 1800s until the end of the century.

And no, the colby dogs did NOT have that rangy appearance. They look like small versions of UKC dogs, not small versions of ADBA dogs. If you have a photograph of a pre 1900 Colby dog that looks like an ADBA dog, please share it.

The ripped steroidal look is an entirely modern phenomenon in human fighters as well as fighting dogs. Go look at photos of boxers from 40-50 years ago. You won't find a "sixpack" generally speaking.

Do not lecture me on the alleged glories of the socalled game bred dogs, or the alleged failings of the "show bred" or pet bred dog. Where did you get the notion that the APBT was "never" a show dog? You'd better tell that to the UKC, especially in the last 40 years since they disavowed dogfighting ... and even the ADBA which finally produced a standard by which dogs are to be judged (if the handlers can stop encouraging them to act out at each other long enough for a judge to assess the dogs)

Or I shall start lecturing you on the irresponsibility of socalled dogmen and gamedog acolytes in refusing to healthtest, or even acknowledge that dogs should be tested.

The notion that the only authentic APBT is one that looks like an underfed ADBA dog is just as wrong as the notion that an APBT should look like a fat waddling pig. And as wrong as the notion that every AmStaff does look like a fat waddling pig.

Finally, the notion that our dogs today should look like they could fight for hours in the pit is not just retrograde, it makes my skin crawl.

[catstina]

Oct 16, 2011 12:34:13 GMT -5 chuteboxe said:

and to say the amstaff and the apbt are the same because of appearance is ridiculous.

I said that the APBT and AmStaff are the same breed because there are many dogs dual registered as APBTs in the UKC and AmStaffs in the AKC. Not because of their similar appearances, but because many have identical bloodlines.



Also, the breed is called the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, not "English Staff" or "English Staffordshire Terrier." Sorry to be nit picky, but it is one of my pet peeves.

[chuteboxe]

you know what, hears my opinion i beleive that the problem is that people who breed dogs for looks are what makes these people aggressive K9s, hip displasia and other problems not knowing what you are genetically putting into your breeding is dangerous (not saying all show people) these days everything has to look good not like back when dogs were breed for work anyfualts would not be placed in a breeding programme.

i beleive knowledge in the dogs geneology and phsychology is very helpfull and to be a must. especially with APBT types. i can garantee you that the dogs i produce would not show any signs of people aggression what so ever.

emily you seem to be one sided individual who doesnt take in any other peoples opinion bar people who think the same way.

im not going to continue conversating with you as i know its falling on def ears. i put my opinions accross you can give me yours. i will leave it at that. thank you.

colbys twister, colbys tige are two for you. also look at the tudor line dogs. also the photographs taken were of dogs not condition but you would've known that lol.

[fureverywhere]

Nov 2, 2010 21:04:38 GMT -5 Dave said:

Just a side note... I seem to gravitate to the needy dogs. Or is it the needy ones are attracted to me? Who knows...

Because alot of people are attracted to the dogs with the big cojones. The reservation is full of them, the bad butt dogs that march over other dogs and their owners too. But the needy dogs are the ones who we patient people cheer for. It feels so incredible to watch any creature take them baby steps from trembling and pancaking to becoming social in their own way.

[RealPitBull]

Oct 16, 2011 13:55:03 GMT -5 emilys said:

Oct 16, 2011 12:34:13 GMT -5 chuteboxe said:

emily are you serious? the colby line dogs in the 1800s had that rangy look, ripped apperance.

...

The notion that the only authentic APBT is one that looks like an underfed ADBA dog is just as wrong as the notion that an APBT should look like a fat waddling pig. And as wrong as the notion that every AmStaff does look like a fat waddling pig.

Finally, the notion that our dogs today should look like they could fight for hours in the pit is not just retrograde, it makes my skin crawl.

Well said!!!

And chuteboxe, I think you'll find that Emily is pretty educated on all aspects regarding Pit Bulls.....I think you two might actually have more to agree on than argue about; there may be some misinterpretation going on in this thread.