Am I Missing Something?

I'm not sure why this was posted in the whelping section, but okay...

My issue with blue dogs is not really with the dogs themselves. I showed last weekend, and there were some very nice blue dogs tearing up the pull track. Some of them are dogs that I would take home with me. Others were not. But that doesn't change the fact that they were still very nice dogs, and it had nothing to do with their color. And when it came down to it, they had the same strengths and faults as other dogs of other colors would have.

So here we've got blue dogs, and we've got BLUE dogs. We've got dogs that were bred to meet the standard, and they happen to be blue. And we've got dogs that were bred to be BLUE, and someone started backpeddling afterwards and trying to figure out where these dogs are also Pit Bulls. I happen to love blue as a color of the APBT. But I gave up my search many years ago for a reputable breeder who gets blue dogs regularly. Reputable breeders just aren't specializing in the blue color, probably because a.) its wrong to move color up to the top few things you breed for, and b.) there are a lot of people wrecking the BLUE dogs, and they don't want to be associated with that.

I think my main issue how with the whole "blue thing" is that it's taken on a life of its own. You don't see people having this debate about buckskin or brindle dogs. A dog is either a BLUE or a dog. And people keep trying to reinvent the blues as something else. Something spectactular, something different, something unique, yet something more talented than a game dog and prettier than a show dog. I think if people paid as much notice to the coloring of a blue puppy as they paid to any other color, we'd be a lot better off. It's a color, treat it as such, and then evaluate the dog on its own merits which have nothing to do with color.

At any rate, until the hysteria and greed surrounding the blue color dies down and they can go back to being APBTs just in another color, I think the debate will continue ad nauseum. Unfortunately, by the time that does happen, I'm sure we'll see the same thing we're seeing now: blue APBTs and BLUE dogs. Maybe by then the people pimping BLUE dogs will have embraced the ABKC. I think we'd all be better off, because there'd be no more argument about APBT vs AmBully. And then the blue dogs bred to standard can go back to being APBTs.

Anyway, that's just my "I have a dream" moment...

 

Ok question..... I too like the blue APBT when bred to standard. Now if some one were to find a few blue APBT that met the standard to a T and had proven himslef worthy of being bred. Would it be wrong to add color to the top of the priority list in a breading program? If sucsessfull would that not be in the best interest of the breed? to distance from the "BLUE pits". Not planing on doing it but would it be wrong? I'm not saying making it the only or even the top priority of the program but one of the top few.

Vic

 

I feel it is VERY wrong to "add color to the top of the priority list in a BREEDING program" ...... If a dog is worthy, it's worthy. That part I agree. But the adding color to the top priority list notion I totally disagree with.

 

As far as i could remember which it has been about 13-14 yrs now. Of all the dog's I've seen blue dogs have yet to diffine it's self as a
GAME BRED DOG OR GAME DOG! With all do respect to the animal,show quaility bred dog's wether it be a Blue "PitBull", Rottwieler,Poodle or even a Jack Russell can't match up to it's ORIGINAL ANCESTORY as like a REAL BULLDOG. Show breeder's in my Opinion have killed the breed as a whole in what ever breed they have gotten their hands on! Original traits are IMPORTANT to me and the True Pitbull is where it's AT!

 

Blue mutts, and bully's arn't rare. TRUE BLUE APBT'S, NOW THAT'S RARE.

 

I'm not going to lie and say that I didn't pick my dogs partly on their color. But color selection came into play after I'd picked the right breeder, after I decided which breeding I wanted pups from, after I looked at puppy structure and temperament. If someone had some dogs that exemplified type, structure, temperament, drive, and so on, and they also happened to be a preferred color, more power to them. But if color creeps into the top 10 priorities, then no, not in the best interest of the breed. If a person can include color preference into their breeding program without becoming kennel blind to other things that are vastly more important, then I have no problem with that.

 

is this a pit bull?

 

Thanks for the responces .

 

So that dog IS blue huh? Man, I stared at that pic in another thread for a long time trying to figure out if he was blue or black with bad lighting, lmao. That right there is a nice conditioned dog!

 

http://www.apbt.online-pedigrees.com/modules.php?name=Public&file=printPedigree&dog_id=231848

A GR CH BLUE.

 

yeah like black poison orca... was a beautiful dog. hence the name..one of the reason he was picked was cos of his looks.. i said ONE lol


seperated lol

 

they said if they kept him with his litter mates he would kill them all thats why he was seperated

 

This conversation is an interesting one to say the least because in one breath there are thoughts that indicate the blue colored DOG is NOT a Pit Bull while another says that there is an exception to a degree "IF".

Sad reality is that we all have different flavors in this breed that is a huge melting pot of varied opinions to start out with. I mean, if the breed as we know it (regardless of YOUR flavor) is THE APBT as we know it, then why soooo many different bloodlines/strains or whatever one so wishes to describe it? Check out the ADBA standard, section on page 1 sub-titled PRESENTATION. It clearly states that a DOG CAN be animal aggressive but unruly behavior causes a conflict on the judges ability to PROPERLY examine that DOG for CONFORMATION. So...IF everyone so happens to breed to the standard, then who all falls short by letting their dogs scratch/leap/pull/blah/blah/blah while the judge is TRYING to see if this DOG is to the standard as written for GAME DOGS. Hardly able to do so effectively under the way the dogs are shown now a days. Now...Lets glide over to AADR....Same situation. Slide a lil further into UKC...And you will see dogs that don't APPEAR to be as hot as ADBA/AADR flavors...Yet IF you drop the leash you may very well be suprised.

So my point is this....The standard doesn't say anything about blues not being a APBT or just as game as any other color APBT. If color be the case....Is a black dog more Pit Bull than a red one? Afterall F.Boudreaux stated that the "Blacker the better". Wouldn't THAT statement conflict with the Old Family Reds? Would Colby be eliminated from ADBA linages as he prefered a Tri colored, and his stock is known to be a lil thicker (bully)? I mean are there NOT some awesome hot GAME dogs offa them breeding programs as well? STANDARD does look down on Merles tho! So in all.....Why the discrimination of color in GENERAL. Okay...Because the American Bullie fad? That is an issue all it's own, and unfortunately BLUE is the only color these American Bullie assholes know of, that is why BLUE is so populated in that fad genre as being the biggest. When there are bully ADBA/UKC dogs that are the standard just slightly thicker than the standard calls for.

Did I miss the part where the standard as written for "game dogs" stated that they had to be a specific weight or height. Generally they are known for a general look. But does HEIGHT to WEIGHT RATIO not play a huge part here? I mean my 27 pound chocolate rednose Boyles bitch...Is she more APBT than my 51 pound seal Dangerzone bitch or my 44 pound reverse blue brindle UKC bitch? IF I buy a pup from a KNOWN roller who sells only quality GAME BRED offspring, and I DO NOT roll that pup/dog....Will my dog be any less of a Pit Bull? Will it NOT be a GAME DOG now? When it is posted on boards do I tell them the blue pups parents are titled fighting stock but my purchase from that breeding is a cur blue dog? (smile)

Are there NOT blue dogs that will rip the face off another dog if THAT is what that owner opts to do with their yard? DON'T get me wrong!!!!! I do not encourage the battle of dogs as that SPORT is now illegal. I DO love me a DOG that will display the attributes that the APBT is known for, but at the same time, MY flavor is a traditional style that is disciplined in a show lead. I will let my dogs act out if I see that a Judge wants to see that. BUT when it is MY dogs turn to be examined....It's all business and the GAMENESS is now turned to a statute like pose so that MY dog can be seen for whatever he may be worth to THAT persons comprehended OPINION of the standard.

As far as that dark blue/seal GrCh dog up top...CONGRATS!

As far as what one looks for in their colored dog...EACH THEIR OWN.

Let me ask you all this...Any of you ever feel the desire to show UKC? There is NOTHING that states a hot dog can't be shown there! (lol) I have a PR UKC bitch that lacks 2 Majors for her CH in UKC. My ADBA/AADR/UKC boy lacks 5 points for his CH in UKC. Now.....Does anyone know the funny comments I hear for showing my TERRIERS in a BULLY (referring to thicker correct dogs NOT bullIES who are overdone and poorly bred!) styled atmosphere? Does anyone know that the same dogs do well in ADBA when shown there in weight pull and confo? Are they NOT game cause she is seal and he is rednosed choclate? Are they NOT GAME?

Does fighting ability sets the Standard of Conformation in the APBT....I will NEVER know, and have never read it there. So to assume that a specific color is cold or hot...It's a matter of opinion! And should be void! After all....For people who ONLY breed a specific strain that just so happens to be a specific color, do they not end up with throw back colors or tris occassionally? Are them parents now currs because they produced ones undesired taste in color? (lol)

IF we take the colors out in general....What would matter then? The most popular name in a ped will determine who's bred better?

In the end...They are all APBT!

Just MY "Opinion"

Yourn In Show

 

a few well known gamedog breeders have told me that a dalmation was secretly bred into an amstaff to get the negetive color gene factor hence the spotty skin on most dominantly white blues. personaly after seeing soo many that carry the spotty skin on the chst beneath the coat i dont have a doubt about it! I wont own one no matter how good the dog may appear to be I DONT BELIEVE THE DOGS ARE BRED AS SAID!!!!!

 

^ so how do you explain the same exact ticking on gamebred dogs?

 

Like this one? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uit1Ll0aWcg

Not saying it's Game-Bred, but the coloring is nice.

 

Not all game bred dogs are bred exactly as said either

 

right off the top of my head- i dont think JP Colby was breeding GSP's and Dalmations into his stock, or nayhting else for that matter.
ticking occurs naturally in all terriers- there is no need to bring outside blood in, and he who believes that is just an easily misguided fool.

to read more about coat (and underlying) colors pick up the book "the gentics of dog" by Ruvinsky and Sampson

 

these so called am blues arent true pbt the pitbull terrier was bourt to american via irish people and from there was bred up i am thankfull that theres some game dog keepers in america i am from uk and see alot staff cross so one these blues are fakee ..

 

Pure Colby dogs are known to often times have a lot of white showing and will have ticking under the skin.

I own a white female with brindle markings. She is bulkier than my other dogs. .

she is Colby linebred and all the older game dog people I've met who have seen her have guessed that and said "because of the ticking"

That Dalmatian line I think is crap for the most part. . .esp. because a dalmatian has SPOTTED FUR not spotted Skin.