Terrier or not

[frank]

Jan 2, 2010 23:10:33 GMT @quinlent said:

taking a airdale terrier or an irish terrier as an example i don't think hight / size is an issue specifically. what differs a terrier from a retriever or a pointer or a husky mainly is its character.

Think the same.

it is not the trimmed down dog that is the natural lets say fighting dog it is the cannot be fed fat dog that is the natural fighting dog.

Can not say I agree, but see your point. But also elasticity plays a big part, and having seen a 40 KG Dogo almost taking with ease a 2m high fence, and spinning round for 360 degrees I can not say that the lightweigts are always the better ones in this part. Thats also a thing a lot of dogs lack, elasticity.

the size of the dog is of no importance as size will bring a weight and the weight decides a match to happen and not the size. when speed is required the bigger dog is in huge disadvantage towards a smaller specimen of the same type when the space is limited. and that was mainly the case.

This is a part that maybe truth if we talk greyhound size, but not if we talk pitdogs. The best Pitdogs these days have percentage wise longer legs then our Staffords/Bull terriers, just because they function better in a fight. Know of Pitdog man who cull the small heavy dogs already at a early age. This because their aim is winning, not collecting game dogs. Look at the pics from Charley Loyd and his Paddy and his other pics, light dogs with a lot of leg under them. And we can be sure that these where the typs our Staffords came from.


the understanding of the SBT starts with understanding what has happened to the bull terrier. we should learn our lessons as today there is a big agression problem among EBT. The developpement of the Bulldog is of no importance to the Stafford or the Bull terrier that is a freak show on it's own.

MY guess is that the modern Bull Terrier had too much Dalmation influence in its character or it must come from the English White Terrier. They can be more stubborn than almost any Stafford or even Pit we have ever seen. My opinion is also, backed up by some of the early Pitbull books, that there is a big amount of EBT blood in the Pitbull. Will look for the book tomorrow.

In my believes the Stafford was created out of the English White terrier and the Bulldog

Not in mine, as there was no point about breeding for colour in the fightingdogs. Hinks liked them white and selected mainly on that, just as with the Dogo, but here it really had a function. The fightingdog only had one thing to do and that was win!


Cheers Marco

Will answer the rest tomorrow as I am shaking from flue now!

[quinlent]

Jan 2, 2010 23:29:59 GMT max said:

I had cheese on toast for brekkie this morning and very nice it was to.. spinach pizza whats that about Marco?? must be a dutch thing

i have no idea it was made by the factory of dr Oetker and tasted great ;D

i had spicey meatballs for breakfast but i prefer Kirsty's english breakfast man that was absolutely delicious when i stayed in there place.

Cheers - Marco

[hiphoplyricalrobot]

I believe one book that describes there being alot of EBT blood inthe pibull is 'The sporting Bull terrier', by Eugine Glass. I too go along with this theory.

[max]

Jan 2, 2010 23:38:20 GMT @quinlent said:

Jan 2, 2010 23:29:59 GMT max said:

I had cheese on toast for brekkie this morning and very nice it was to.. spinach pizza whats that about Marco?? must be a dutch thing

i have no idea it was made by the factory of dr Oetker and tasted great ;D

i had spicey meatballs for breakfast but i prefer Kirsty's english breakfast man that was absolutely delicious when i stayed in there place.

Cheers - Marco

ahh okay, dr Oetker Ive had them before actually and they are nice - so thats what the green stuff is on them lol Ill know in future.. cheers

[quinlent]

Jan 2, 2010 23:34:49 GMT frank said:

Jan 2, 2010 23:10:33 GMT @quinlent said:

taking a airdale terrier or an irish terrier as an example i don't think hight / size is an issue specifically. what differs a terrier from a retriever or a pointer or a husky mainly is its character.

Think the same.

it is not the trimmed down dog that is the natural lets say fighting dog it is the cannot be fed fat dog that is the natural fighting dog.

Can not say I agree, but see your point. But also elasticity plays a big part, and having seen a 40 KG Dogo almost taking with ease a 2m high fence, and spinning round for 360 degrees I can not say that the lightweigts are always the better ones in this part. Thats also a thing a lot of dogs lack, elasticity.
I agree about the elasticity and the function show me a fat english bulldog with the same characteristics you won't find them jumping over a two meter fence is some achieving i had a small pitbull Terrier twenty years back grabbed every cat that walked the fence of two meters high without a problem only this dog was 49 cm high and had the weight of 22 kilo's to do the same your dogo would have weight 81 kilo's and had the size of 98 cm so in fact the lightweight does it better. in the DSA we have bono he jumps about 4.5 times his body height we also have a tygo to do the same he must jump 256.5 cm and he will never ever do so! i think your Tequila is up to that but compared she is much lighter leaner and has indeed more flexibillity compared to Tygo again proof of advantage

the size of the dog is of no importance as size will bring a weight and the weight decides a match to happen and not the size. when speed is required the bigger dog is in huge disadvantage towards a smaller specimen of the same type when the space is limited. and that was mainly the case.

This is a part that maybe truth if we talk greyhound size, but not if we talk pitdogs. The best Pitdogs these days have percentage wise longer legs then our Staffords/Bull terriers, just because they function better in a fight. Know of Pitdog man who cull the small heavy dogs already at a early age. This because their aim is winning, not collecting game dogs. Look at the pics from Charley Loyd and his Paddy and his other pics, light dogs with a lot of leg under them. And we can be sure that these where the typs our Staffords came from.

Can you point out where i have said that shorter legs where an advance? it is at least clear that you agree that the lighter dog must have an advantage somewhere
the understanding of the SBT starts with understanding what has happened to the bull terrier. we should learn our lessons as today there is a big agression problem among EBT. The developpement of the Bulldog is of no importance to the Stafford or the Bull terrier that is a freak show on it's own.

MY guess is that the modern Bull Terrier had too much Dalmation influence in its character or it must come from the English White Terrier. They can be more stubborn than almost any Stafford or even Pit we have ever seen. My opinion is also, backed up by some of the early Pitbull books, that there is a big amount of EBT blood in the Pitbull. Will look for the book tomorrow.
i think they just are the same and that the stubbarn behaviour i have also whitnessed in Bull terriers are the same exagerations like obisety roman nose and over barrelled body's due to misunderstanding of breedtype and not due to other breeds used. i also think that the agression in Bull Terriers today is due to the lack of attention towards character instead of it being characteristic on its own.

In my believes the Stafford was created out of the English White terrier and the Bulldog

Not in mine, as there was no point about breeding for colour in the fightingdogs. Hinks liked them white and selected mainly on that, just as with the Dogo, but here it really had a function. The fightingdog only had one thing to do and that was win!

As well as the dogo as the white bull terrier suffer deafness i am sure this was also the case with the english white terrier. it has been proven that red animals in general are the strongest, was on National geographics not so long back. brindles are red dogs with the resessive br attached the originals where mainly brindles and clear reds this in combination with white. so it might have been that colour play's a part i remember the story of red cockers do you? they where the thoughest most spirited. Why are most cattle bred for meat red or white? meat is muscle muscle means strength some french red cow breeds are known as very agressive. The thing about colour is much more important then people think and also to win it has been recorded in Stafford history and why is Black an tan not wanted when breeding a winner is the main concern. I can tell you some side effects in black and tan breeds as Dobermanns and there illnesses etc etc. poor man had no money for an animal doctor colour kept deafness away

Cheers Marco

Will answer the rest tomorrow as I am shaking from flue now!

i will hike ten miles tomorrow but i hope you recover fast

Cheers mate - Marco

[hiphoplyricalrobot]

love the info on colour Marco, i look into that thanks

[frank]

Jan 2, 2010 23:40:38 GMT @hiphoplyricalrobot said:

I believe one book that describes there being alot of EBT blood inthe pibull is 'The sporting Bull terrier', by Eugine Glass. I too go along with this theory.

Your right m8. Could not come up with the title.

If you look in this book you see a lot of dogs with obvious Bull Terrier influence. Also in the Stratton books you see dogs like that.

[frank]

Jan 3, 2010 0:29:07 GMT @quinlent said:

Can you point out where i have said that shorter legs where an advance? it is at least clear that you agree that the lighter dog must have an advantage somewhere
Cheers mate - Marco

[/color][/quote]Yes and no. The lighter dog for it's height! But also to certain limits.

[frank]

Jan 3, 2010 0:29:07 GMT @quinlent said:

i think they just are the same and that the stubbarn behaviour i have also whitnessed in Bull terriers are the same exagerations like obisety roman nose and over barrelled body's due to misunderstanding of breedtype and not due to other breeds used. i also think that the agression in Bull Terriers today is due to the lack of attention towards character instead of it being characteristic on its own.

I do not think it is because the exageration part, maybe to some degree, but the base for this characteristic must be somewhere in their genetical make up.

I think we can see it the same as the overly friendly behavior of the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. The base for this was always somewhere in their make up, but inbreeding and selecting for this trait has given us Staffordshire Bull Terriers with a anoying request for human attention sometimes.

[frank]

Jan 3, 2010 0:29:07 GMT @quinlent said:

As well as the dogo as the white bull terrier suffer deafness i am sure this was also the case with the english white terrier. it has been proven that red animals in general are the strongest, was on National geographics not so long back. brindles are red dogs with the resessive br attached the originals where mainly brindles and clear reds this in combination with white. so it might have been that colour play's a part i remember the story of red cockers do you? they where the thoughest most spirited. Why are most cattle bred for meat red or white? meat is muscle muscle means strength some french red cow breeds are known as very agressive. The thing about colour is much more important then people think and also to win it has been recorded in Stafford history and why is Black an tan not wanted when breeding a winner is the main concern. I can tell you some side effects in black and tan breeds as Dobermanns and there illnesses etc etc. poor man had no money for an animal doctor colour kept deafness away

But still where does this indicate that the Stafford came from this cross? Still do not see this. My opinion is that the Bull & Terrier is created like the Patterdale. Crossed with whatever needed if Terrier in it at all!

I have to agree with you on the importance to e certain degree of colour.

And if we talk cattle and meat I only think one colour as I see in the farmers city my brother lives in............Belgium Blue!

[bullmatt]

Jan 3, 2010 10:05:16 GMT frank said:

Jan 3, 2010 0:29:07 GMT @quinlent said:

i think they just are the same and that the stubbarn behaviour i have also whitnessed in Bull terriers are the same exagerations like obisety roman nose and over barrelled body's due to misunderstanding of breedtype and not due to other breeds used. i also think that the agression in Bull Terriers today is due to the lack of attention towards character instead of it being characteristic on its own.

I do not think it is because the exageration part, maybe to some degree, but the base for this characteristic must be somewhere in their genetical make up.

I think we can see it the same as the overly friendly behavior of the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. The base for this was always somewhere in their make up, but inbreeding and selecting for this trait has given us Staffordshire Bull Terriers with a anoying request for human attention sometimes.

human freindly to the point where my old bitch stafford haze run across the road to see the local kids and got run over by a car (she wasnt hurt, she was a tough old bird)

[frank]

Jan 3, 2010 10:17:07 GMT bullmatt said:

Jan 3, 2010 10:05:16 GMT frank said:

I do not think it is because the exageration part, maybe to some degree, but the base for this characteristic must be somewhere in their genetical make up.

I think we can see it the same as the overly friendly behavior of the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. The base for this was always somewhere in their make up, but inbreeding and selecting for this trait has given us Staffordshire Bull Terriers with a anoying request for human attention sometimes.

human freindly to the point where my old bitch stafford haze run across the road to see the local kids and got run over by a car (she wasnt hurt, she was a tough old bird)

Yes, to that point.....LOLstupid dogs ;D

[bullmatt]

Jan 2, 2010 23:43:21 GMT max said:

Jan 2, 2010 23:38:20 GMT @quinlent said:

i have no idea it was made by the factory of dr Oetker and tasted great ;D

i had spicey meatballs for breakfast but i prefer Kirsty's english breakfast man that was absolutely delicious when i stayed in there place.

Cheers - Marco

ahh okay, dr Oetker Ive had them before actually and they are nice - so thats what the green stuff is on them lol Ill know in future.. cheers

i think you two strayed away from topic here,lol, terrier or not,not spinach or not,

[max]

Jan 3, 2010 12:02:44 GMT bullmatt said:

Jan 2, 2010 23:43:21 GMT max said:

ahh okay, dr Oetker Ive had them before actually and they are nice - so thats what the green stuff is on them lol Ill know in future.. cheers

i think you two strayed away from topic here,lol, terrier or not,not spinach or not,

LOL slightly off topic....

[quinlent]

Jan 3, 2010 9:54:35 GMT frank said:

Jan 3, 2010 0:29:07 GMT @quinlent said:

Can you point out where i have said that shorter legs where an advance? it is at least clear that you agree that the lighter dog must have an advantage somewhere
Cheers mate - Marco

[/color][/quote]Yes and no. The lighter dog for it's height! But also to certain limits. [/quote]

everything is a bit up to certain limits isn't it to light can't function but i think we both know where the borders of function are established.

[quinlent]

Jan 3, 2010 10:05:16 GMT frank said:

Jan 3, 2010 0:29:07 GMT @quinlent said:

i think they just are the same and that the stubbarn behaviour i have also whitnessed in Bull terriers are the same exagerations like obisety roman nose and over barrelled body's due to misunderstanding of breedtype and not due to other breeds used. i also think that the agression in Bull Terriers today is due to the lack of attention towards character instead of it being characteristic on its own.

I do not think it is because the exageration part, maybe to some degree, but the base for this characteristic must be somewhere in their genetical make up.

I think we can see it the same as the overly friendly behavior of the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. The base for this was always somewhere in their make up, but inbreeding and selecting for this trait has given us Staffordshire Bull Terriers with a anoying request for human attention sometimes.

I agree but mutations can occur everywhere serious inbreeding has taken place also in behaviour.
when a nose can't be more straight as straight means the exageration of the trait is the today's roman nose it isn't straight anymore but came from distinct stop ancestors. Selection is very important in developing certain traits in dogs and when stubbarn dogs where easy show dogs my point is clearly made. Showing has no historical value and is developped when the breed was allready reckognised. and stubbarn behaviour is present in every living creature so is not breed or type related but has its origin in the origin of all mammals.

[quinlent]

Jan 3, 2010 10:12:35 GMT frank said:

Jan 3, 2010 0:29:07 GMT @quinlent said:

As well as the dogo as the white bull terrier suffer deafness i am sure this was also the case with the english white terrier. it has been proven that red animals in general are the strongest, was on National geographics not so long back. brindles are red dogs with the resessive br attached the originals where mainly brindles and clear reds this in combination with white. so it might have been that colour play's a part i remember the story of red cockers do you? they where the thoughest most spirited. Why are most cattle bred for meat red or white? meat is muscle muscle means strength some french red cow breeds are known as very agressive. The thing about colour is much more important then people think and also to win it has been recorded in Stafford history and why is Black an tan not wanted when breeding a winner is the main concern. I can tell you some side effects in black and tan breeds as Dobermanns and there illnesses etc etc. poor man had no money for an animal doctor colour kept deafness away

But still where does this indicate that the Stafford came from this cross? Still do not see this. My opinion is that the Bull & Terrier is created like the Patterdale. Crossed with whatever needed if Terrier in it at all!

I have to agree with you on the importance to e certain degree of colour.

And if we talk cattle and meat I only think one colour as I see in the farmers city my brother lives in............Belgium Blue!

Might be it is not written down but in those days certain and different types of bulldogs where used in a lot of breeding programms of other breeds and i can imagine the english white suffer certain ilnesses related to the recessive pool of the si gene causing extreme piebalds as are dogos and are white bull terriers. Bringing back colour in be it from bulldogs or not but at least that is the story.

my refference towards cattle was based on normal cattle and not those inbred to myostatin disorder as those blues in the town of yer brother the colour blue has no effect on this disorder.

[quinlent]

Jan 3, 2010 12:08:32 GMT max said:

Jan 3, 2010 12:02:44 GMT bullmatt said:

i think you two strayed away from topic here,lol, terrier or not,not spinach or not,

LOL slightly off topic....

but how deliscious off topic can be

[stefan]

Jan 2, 2010 22:46:43 GMT frank said:

Jan 2, 2010 22:39:53 GMT bullmatt said:

yeah but the point of the cross wasnt to get an earth dog it was to get a fighting/baiting dog, of diferant sizes to suit.

Have to agree that that is our generall thought yes, also mine.

I have once in a discussion on Bullbreeds online written a whole fictious idea about the existense of the Fightingdogs. Do not come there anymore because of lack of time and the speed of the discussions day and night, but maybe somebody can look it up for me? And let me know what you all think ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Do you mean this post:

I think both partys are right in some way.

Mirror the situation to today, this is the best way to get the truth I think.

What oldtimer with a pure line would make such a cross?
NONE is my guess.

But on the other hand, lets say some terrier men got interested in dogfighting.
They bought a dog from a well known bulldog breeder.
This dog turned out to be very good, and accidentally they had a very game terrier.
Some friends who had that terrier seen working said, if you breed that dog to your bulldog, I would like to get a pup out of it, as I think this would be a very good combi.
As it was a very cheap mating for the owner, and his dog/terrier is very game and tough, he thought it would be worth to take the gamble.
If it does not work out I do a breeding to a bulldog next time.

Some dogs from this breeding turned out to be very good terriers, and some where more of the bulldog type, but still different.
They where good for working the bigger animals, and they gave it a try as a fightingdog.

They got a ace out of this combi.
They did some more crosses, some good and some bad.
But still, the ones that turned out to be good where better than the best bulldogs for dogfighting.
So more people made this cross, kept the percentage of bulldog blood bigger than the terrier blood, but different lines of bull&terriers where formed by the new enthousiasts.
The new enthousiasts as most oldtimers would keep there lines pure.

I believe this is actually happened on this way(or close), I do not believe in a pure bullbreed for the Stafford.

It would have been a nice thought, but I am afraid it is just wisfull thinking.

View full topic

[hiphoplyricalrobot]

like it but im not sure they would have kept the more Bulldog type as i believe it should be a blend after all terrier can be as game as any Bulldog, far quicker a shakes like a mofo! Far more entertaining for the dog fighting man

[cadgi]

i was allway's led to believe that the old timer's preffered their bull terrier's with more terrier than bull in them.make's them more agile,quicker. A.T.B........

[frank]

Jan 3, 2010 19:49:28 GMT @quinlent said:

Jan 3, 2010 10:05:16 GMT frank said:

I do not think it is because the exageration part, maybe to some degree, but the base for this characteristic must be somewhere in their genetical make up.

I think we can see it the same as the overly friendly behavior of the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. The base for this was always somewhere in their make up, but inbreeding and selecting for this trait has given us Staffordshire Bull Terriers with a anoying request for human attention sometimes.

I agree but mutations can occur everywhere serious inbreeding has taken place also in behaviour.
when a nose can't be more straight as straight means the exageration of the trait is the today's roman nose it isn't straight anymore but came from distinct stop ancestors. Selection is very important in developing certain traits in dogs and when stubbarn dogs where easy show dogs my point is clearly made. Showing has no historical value and is developped when the breed was allready reckognised. and stubbarn behaviour is present in every living creature so is not breed or type related but has its origin in the origin of all mammals.

I do not think that that stubbornness is a exageration, but something that just came with the character of one of the dogs used as a fundation ingredient.

In the Dogo we find this also back(also a big EBT influence, together with a shipload of other breeds, where the main error deafness is directly the fault of the EBT), the stubbornness. But this stubborn, don't fucking care character also gives them a lot to work with. For this breed I see it as a asset.

And no Marco, I can not say that I can see every dogbreed as a stubborn breed.

[frank]

Jan 3, 2010 20:04:00 GMT @quinlent said:

Jan 3, 2010 10:12:35 GMT frank said:

But still where does this indicate that the Stafford came from this cross? Still do not see this. My opinion is that the Bull & Terrier is created like the Patterdale. Crossed with whatever needed if Terrier in it at all!

I have to agree with you on the importance to e certain degree of colour.

And if we talk cattle and meat I only think one colour as I see in the farmers city my brother lives in............Belgium Blue!

Might be it is not written down but in those days certain and different types of bulldogs where used in a lot of breeding programms of other breeds and i can imagine the english white suffer certain ilnesses related to the recessive pool of the si gene causing extreme piebalds as are dogos and are white bull terriers. Bringing back colour in be it from bulldogs or not but at least that is the story.

my refference towards cattle was based on normal cattle and not those inbred to myostatin disorder as those blues in the town of yer brother the colour blue has no effect on this disorder.

Back to basics as I loose you somewhere. Yes we can assume the English White Terrier in the EBT, and as there is EBT in the Dogo we can assume also this breed beein into the make up of the Dogo. But again, where do you get the idea that the Stafford is also a product of crossing the English White Terrier with the Bulldog?

I never found this proof anywhere, except that a lot speak about terriers from different types, and the knowing that certain showbreeders in the early 1900's crossed EBT''s into the Stafford to get there wanted " Substance" for showing!?

Below was your quote:
In my believes the Stafford was created out of the English White terrier and the Bulldog

[frank]

Jan 4, 2010 10:10:54 GMT stefan said:

Jan 2, 2010 22:46:43 GMT frank said:

Have to agree that that is our generall thought yes, also mine.

I have once in a discussion on Bullbreeds online written a whole fictious idea about the existense of the Fightingdogs. Do not come there anymore because of lack of time and the speed of the discussions day and night, but maybe somebody can look it up for me? And let me know what you all think ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Do you mean this post:

I think both partys are right in some way.

Mirror the situation to today, this is the best way to get the truth I think.

What oldtimer with a pure line would make such a cross?
NONE is my guess.

But on the other hand, lets say some terrier men got interested in dogfighting.
They bought a dog from a well known bulldog breeder.
This dog turned out to be very good, and accidentally they had a very game terrier.
Some friends who had that terrier seen working said, if you breed that dog to your bulldog, I would like to get a pup out of it, as I think this would be a very good combi.
As it was a very cheap mating for the owner, and his dog/terrier is very game and tough, he thought it would be worth to take the gamble.
If it does not work out I do a breeding to a bulldog next time.

Some dogs from this breeding turned out to be very good terriers, and some where more of the bulldog type, but still different.
They where good for working the bigger animals, and they gave it a try as a fightingdog.

They got a ace out of this combi.
They did some more crosses, some good and some bad.
But still, the ones that turned out to be good where better than the best bulldogs for dogfighting.
So more people made this cross, kept the percentage of bulldog blood bigger than the terrier blood, but different lines of bull&terriers where formed by the new enthousiasts.
The new enthousiasts as most oldtimers would keep there lines pure.

I believe this is actually happened on this way(or close), I do not believe in a pure bullbreed for the Stafford.

It would have been a nice thought, but I am afraid it is just wisfull thinking.

View full topic

No, lol but even forgot this one. If there is any Terrier used to create a better fightingdog, I can imagine that this happened, at least one possible scenario, another one could have been a accedental mating with somebody who owned both breeds.

[frank]

Jan 4, 2010 12:12:06 GMT @hiphoplyricalrobot said:

like it but im not sure they would have kept the more Bulldog type as i believe it should be a blend after all terrier can be as game as any Bulldog, far quicker a shakes like a mofo! Far more entertaining for the dog fighting man

That is our generations knowledge you are speaking now, but do not forget that untill those first crosses the Bulldog ruled supreme in dogfighting circles, and that a bigger percentage would have given them a better feeling(more sure) about the dog(right or wrong, perception is difficult to beat).

[frank]

Jan 4, 2010 12:53:37 GMT cadgi said:

i was allway's led to believe that the old timer's preffered their bull terrier's with more terrier than bull in them.make's them more agile,quicker. A.T.B........

About what old timers are you talking? The ones we have most information from? The ones between 1900 and 1945?

Then the question will be did they even know the percentages of the cross? I bet that they didn't know, guesed maybe, but no certainty. So they just prefered a lighter type of dog that they thought had less Bulldog in them. But who can be sure that this was the case? As also the Bulldog had small animals amongst their ranks. Hence the idea of the Yanks of beeing the Pitbull the only breed worthy of the name Bulldog.

We will never know, but keeping an open mind will give us the oportunity to learn..... and make it much more difficult for ourselfs ;D ;D

[stefan]

Jan 4, 2010 15:07:16 GMT frank said:

Jan 4, 2010 10:10:54 GMT stefan said:

Do you mean this post:

I think both partys are right in some way.

Mirror the situation to today, this is the best way to get the truth I think.

What oldtimer with a pure line would make such a cross?
NONE is my guess.

But on the other hand, lets say some terrier men got interested in dogfighting.
They bought a dog from a well known bulldog breeder.
This dog turned out to be very good, and accidentally they had a very game terrier.
Some friends who had that terrier seen working said, if you breed that dog to your bulldog, I would like to get a pup out of it, as I think this would be a very good combi.
As it was a very cheap mating for the owner, and his dog/terrier is very game and tough, he thought it would be worth to take the gamble.
If it does not work out I do a breeding to a bulldog next time.

Some dogs from this breeding turned out to be very good terriers, and some where more of the bulldog type, but still different.
They where good for working the bigger animals, and they gave it a try as a fightingdog.

They got a ace out of this combi.
They did some more crosses, some good and some bad.
But still, the ones that turned out to be good where better than the best bulldogs for dogfighting.
So more people made this cross, kept the percentage of bulldog blood bigger than the terrier blood, but different lines of bull&terriers where formed by the new enthousiasts.
The new enthousiasts as most oldtimers would keep there lines pure.

I believe this is actually happened on this way(or close), I do not believe in a pure bullbreed for the Stafford.

It would have been a nice thought, but I am afraid it is just wisfull thinking.

View full topic

No, lol but even forgot this one. If there is any Terrier used to create a better fightingdog, I can imagine that this happened, at least one possible scenario, another one could have been a accedental mating with somebody who owned both breeds.

This one:

I wished I had more time to read all the topic. But nice debate. Wrote a little piece when traveling for this topic(without reading everything here) so if already covered, please forget this post.



There are loads of opinions on this matter. The question for a lot of people would be what would have been the point of including Terrier in the Bulldog? With all the risks that come with it, and the most important one of these is losing gameness. And yes, these concerns are valid. But we all look at it now with eyes of a purist, but was that the fact with the workman in the 17th, 18 and 19th century or even today? Or did they breed to what they had in reach? I am sure that for the right money a Bulldog owner was willing to let his dog stud a good Terrier bitch. Maybe even in the beginning to gain something for the working purposses of the Terrier. But it is not unthinkable that some of these matings also produced good fighting dogs when tried. Yes, they where no pure Bulldogs anymore, but that was not the concern of the dogfighter, his concern was winning. Even gameness would have been less important if the dog in question could finish the job before he had to show his gameness. If he could win, and was able to earn his keep, this dog would also be worth breeding in their eyes. Pure Bulldog or not.

I want to point again to the point of us being purists, this makes it for us much more difficult to understand why certain crosses where made. But if we place ourselfs in the mind of the dogman who’s only criteria is that his dog can earn his money, so that means winning in a dogfight, or hunt without getting to wounded himself.

If we look only to the Terrier men who still hunt with their dogs, a lot of them also couldn’t care less what breed they have, or what cross they are using, to them the dogs are mostly nothing more than “tools” to get the job done. And if this is better done with a cross they go for that.

There are examples enough in history that show that crosses can work The Irish crossed in recent history different breeds for their working dogs and sometimes with good results. A cross between two not so close related dogs, or even two different breeds can produce very good dogs. Sometimes even better than the top of both crossed breeds.

It is true that most of the times those crosses did not produce as good as they where themselfs, but sometimes they can produce good dogs. And when bred back to their originall breed, in this case the Bulldog, they could have blended in very well. The influence of these dogs was maybe not very big, but for certain they have left their traces in our breed.

Completely denying the influence of the Terrier in our breed as some authors do is a bit silly, as we where not there and even the people who lived in the times that those “Bull & Terriers” where worked did not refer to them as only Bulldogs, but also as Bull & Terriers

That the name Bulldog sounds much more ferocious and speaks more to the imagination than the Terrier is a fact, and this may be also one of the reasons why people rather refer to them as being pure Bulldogs today then a cross.

That there was much tought about the crossing and that before they did those early crosses thought deeply about it I doubt. I do not think that they thought about the length of teeth etc as a normal set of teeth can do the job more then well.

I think that one of the earlier crosses was successful, and that that made it a trend for a while to crossbreed them. Just like at this time, if something looks to somebody being successful with their dog with a extra big head/big teeth/ long or short legs they also want that fashionable trait. And some of those crosses could have made a separate strain.

About the percentage of Terrier in those crosses in the end, and the percentage that got left after a few generations breeding we can argue, this may be very low.

Frank

View full topic

[frank]

Jan 4, 2010 15:46:55 GMT stefan said:

Jan 4, 2010 15:07:16 GMT frank said:

No, lol but even forgot this one. If there is any Terrier used to create a better fightingdog, I can imagine that this happened, at least one possible scenario, another one could have been a accedental mating with somebody who owned both breeds.

This one:

I wished I had more time to read all the topic. But nice debate. Wrote a little piece when traveling for this topic(without reading everything here) so if already covered, please forget this post.



There are loads of opinions on this matter. The question for a lot of people would be what would have been the point of including Terrier in the Bulldog? With all the risks that come with it, and the most important one of these is losing gameness. And yes, these concerns are valid. But we all look at it now with eyes of a purist, but was that the fact with the workman in the 17th, 18 and 19th century or even today? Or did they breed to what they had in reach? I am sure that for the right money a Bulldog owner was willing to let his dog stud a good Terrier bitch. Maybe even in the beginning to gain something for the working purposses of the Terrier. But it is not unthinkable that some of these matings also produced good fighting dogs when tried. Yes, they where no pure Bulldogs anymore, but that was not the concern of the dogfighter, his concern was winning. Even gameness would have been less important if the dog in question could finish the job before he had to show his gameness. If he could win, and was able to earn his keep, this dog would also be worth breeding in their eyes. Pure Bulldog or not.

I want to point again to the point of us being purists, this makes it for us much more difficult to understand why certain crosses where made. But if we place ourselfs in the mind of the dogman who’s only criteria is that his dog can earn his money, so that means winning in a dogfight, or hunt without getting to wounded himself.

If we look only to the Terrier men who still hunt with their dogs, a lot of them also couldn’t care less what breed they have, or what cross they are using, to them the dogs are mostly nothing more than “tools” to get the job done. And if this is better done with a cross they go for that.

There are examples enough in history that show that crosses can work The Irish crossed in recent history different breeds for their working dogs and sometimes with good results. A cross between two not so close related dogs, or even two different breeds can produce very good dogs. Sometimes even better than the top of both crossed breeds.

It is true that most of the times those crosses did not produce as good as they where themselfs, but sometimes they can produce good dogs. And when bred back to their originall breed, in this case the Bulldog, they could have blended in very well. The influence of these dogs was maybe not very big, but for certain they have left their traces in our breed.

Completely denying the influence of the Terrier in our breed as some authors do is a bit silly, as we where not there and even the people who lived in the times that those “Bull & Terriers” where worked did not refer to them as only Bulldogs, but also as Bull & Terriers

That the name Bulldog sounds much more ferocious and speaks more to the imagination than the Terrier is a fact, and this may be also one of the reasons why people rather refer to them as being pure Bulldogs today then a cross.

That there was much tought about the crossing and that before they did those early crosses thought deeply about it I doubt. I do not think that they thought about the length of teeth etc as a normal set of teeth can do the job more then well.

I think that one of the earlier crosses was successful, and that that made it a trend for a while to crossbreed them. Just like at this time, if something looks to somebody being successful with their dog with a extra big head/big teeth/ long or short legs they also want that fashionable trait. And some of those crosses could have made a separate strain.

About the percentage of Terrier in those crosses in the end, and the percentage that got left after a few generations breeding we can argue, this may be very low.

Frank

View full topic

LOL, still not the one I meant, but this looks valid in this topic.

[frank]

The following was a reply on some questions I got regarding the part above:


We will never know the real truth.
But if I only look at the Patterdale, we see it as a terrier, but I know of a lot of these dogs that carry Stafford(Bull) blood. What if those crosses(made to better the terrier) also walked around in the past, and they crossed this back to the Bulldog? I know for sure that we would call it a BULL & TERRIER cross. Thats also why I said that we could argue about the percentages, this can/could be small.

I also think that a lot of breedings where made only because a certain dog was available. Look at most people now if they want to do a breeding, how many are willing to travel one or two days for a good stud? Or even half a day? Most people take what is available, and do not put in too much thought.

I think we give the people in those days too much credit if we think that they all put in just as much effort as we (can) do these days. Most did not have time, most had to work 6 to seven days a week only to have food. I like to think the romantic view that is made is true, that the crosses where made for long teeth, speed etc, but I think its not that complicated. Availability and maybe even affordability?!!(if this is even a word )

[quinlent]

Jan 4, 2010 14:52:50 GMT frank said:

Jan 3, 2010 19:49:28 GMT @quinlent said:

I agree but mutations can occur everywhere serious inbreeding has taken place also in behaviour.
when a nose can't be more straight as straight means the exageration of the trait is the today's roman nose it isn't straight anymore but came from distinct stop ancestors. Selection is very important in developing certain traits in dogs and when stubbarn dogs where easy show dogs my point is clearly made. Showing has no historical value and is developped when the breed was allready reckognised. and stubbarn behaviour is present in every living creature so is not breed or type related but has its origin in the origin of all mammals.

I do not think that that stubbornness is a exageration, but something that just came with the character of one of the dogs used as a fundation ingredient.

In the Dogo we find this also back(also a big EBT influence, together with a shipload of other breeds, where the main error deafness is directly the fault of the EBT), the stubbornness. But this stubborn, don't fucking care character also gives them a lot to work with. For this breed I see it as a asset.

And no Marco, I can not say that I can see every dogbreed as a stubborn breed.

i did not say every dogbreed to be stubbarn but i said every linving Mammal has some stubbarness to some level.