Styles make fights!

BTW, to more fully cover your question, so as to give you an actual answer as to the crux of your question, I have also known people who bred dogs solely for trait WITHOUT prioritizing as I mentioned above. They weren't around long. There is a difference between saying "I want a head dog" and saying "I want GOOD dogs, and if they're good head dogs, I'll be very happy."

 

Tons of people have done it but there is no longevity in a breeding program based on a style. Tons of people have bred to a hard moth freak and they do not stay very long. Breeding for game dogs, with talent and ability, and durability, who happen to have this style is a far more consistent means of producing good dogs.
But to answer your question. Yes. Tons of people have bred dogs for certain traits and certain styles. They just do not last long or better said, the quality of their dogs do not last. S

 

I don't really think dog population has anything to do with someone or some people trying to create and/or attain some influx of a certain style. Yes, as answered by myself, and a couple of others here, it has been done and people still do it.
And again, I am sure others will agree with me that anyone with a decently successful, ongoing lineage of dogs, would never recommend such diversion from the main focus.........which are in kind to the type of dogs Slim mentioned.
So.........yes, some do it. Yes, some do LIKE certain styles, yet.....they don't divert a bit from their main focus. And, yes, some give it no import whatsoever.
I personally like a dog that does what it does better than the other dog does what IT does. Effective in what style of dog it is.
Not to make it semantic, but I personally, when I see a dog, know a dog etc. consider the dog to be a certain "type" or even "ilk" of dog. The reason I differentiate is that some dogs are good and effective without having a singular style. Some are smart, adjust to the competition well, opportunistic, durable and do their best work late in competition. Some will take what you give it, and some of THOSE will either work it fast or over a longer period of work. ILK, TYPE, yet no singular style.
These differentials are why you focus on the MAIN, IMPORTANT things which will keep a line, family, or nucleus/group of dogs ongoing and competitive. Therein, too, is surely the reason a common sense, knowledgeable breeder doesn't divert one iota from his priorities for the sake of any "style". What would you rather have? A _______ dog (insert style), or a dog that can overcome any style it's competing with because of the ability to adjust, smarts, and the other abilities and backbone to carry it through such task?
In any event, I think most angles have been chatted about as to whether people do what you alluded to, as well as why, in what ways, and why not. LOL

 

As I said....The ones who did this directly looking for traits never lasted long in the dogs. Not unless they forever bought dogs to their liking. The one fella who stands out to me who has been successful, and very much likes aggressive head dogs, and finishing dogs, I cannot name for obvious reasons. But, he is a good dogger and belongs in the category of having styles and traits he likes, but DOES NOT and WILL NOT breed in order to attain them, but for what comes along in his lineal scheme for him.
Bounty, things I mention as to whether I think they are the right way or not the right way isn't referring to anything YOU said. It's general and applies to the topic itself.
You asked how many generations did it take for the ones I knew who bred FOR styles to attain it. My answer has already been stated. They never lasted long enough to see. LOL
And I just told you of what favorite style and trait a friend of mine has, and that he DOES NOT breed FOR any of that.
A game dog has a place in any smart breeder's program, and it doesn't need to be accompanied by any certain style.
I never understood why , when someone says they keep a certain dog and it's in their breeding plans, that people so often take it to mean the dog is a plug. If one keeps a dog because of gameness, then they're keeping it for that reason, be it a yard check, game win or game loss in competition. Presumptuous. A dog being a plug has nothing to do with it. Dogs that ARE NOT game are sometimes plugs, too. So why the parallel? Erroneous.
One final note. There are no such thing as EXTRA priorities. A priority is a priority. Whatever other attributes you get, be it style, trait or whatever, you're just blessed to get. And, if your own nest of dogs holds their consistencies over time, you'll likely see then more than in someone's dogs that don't hold their consistencies well. Simple as that.

 

For a one word answer, yes, people have bred for styles. More than one word answer, people that have bred for a certain style did not experience long term success.

 

absolutely. Breeding done right should reap rewards. Let's say I like heard mouthed head dogs. Let's say I have one and I breed him because I like hard mouthed head dogs. I get one or two out of a litter of five. I breed those two and get more hard mouthed head dogs. Then all of a sudden, and it does happen all of a sudden, my dogs are not staying long enough for their style to be effective/win. Where do I go to fix this? Back to the drawing board? Switch lines? Try to find the game, durable, dogs with talent and ability and make some chicken salad out of chicken shit? This is the point where the diversion TDK spoke of leads to two things, one, people get out or they switch lines and go a different route.
There is nothing wrong with preferring a style. A person who breeds for game dogs with talent and ability who are durable and workable can then pick his preferred style from these dogs and in time he would have that style pop up more often than not. But as to the original question, if one were to breed for a certain style it would take only a generation or two to be on a slippery slope.

 

No. Mr. Kemmer bred for game and durable dogs. He chose to bring out the hard mouth chest and brisket dogs. His keep fitted these types of dogs better than the marathoners. His keep was based on the combination of speed and strength, which is power. He bred dogs that were game and durable, and of those dogs he brought out hard mouthed chest and back end dogs. Working a ear sucker for a fifty minute onslaught does not make a lot of sense. He brought out the dogs that had the style he liked, but he bred game durable dogs and chose from there. S

 

Well said ^^^. I was gonna post. no need to now.

 

NO. Eli dogs are not game but can bite. Redboy dogs are game but can't bite. Bolio dogs are smart but etc...etc... Been covered many times. LOL...Bounty check your PM. S