Hypothetical Question

Would the dominate female of three female dogs living in the wild also be the winner in the "box" if they were all tested against each other? I am against dog fighting, its a question of dominance vs. gameness. I do not think it the same myself.

 

they dont tie together just because a dog is hott doesnt mean its game by any means necessary

 

a wild dog and pit dogs are like oranges and apples the ones in the wild do not fight until death and usually will not fight until they are injured so you cannot really use this as an example but lets say you have 3 yard dogs and 1 is more dominant that doesn't mean that it will always cur the others out it is just a show of respect for an elder dog the majority of the time

 

This can get interesting.

The answer to your question is NO. Many dominate dogs have quit on top once they think they've dominated the other dog. This is why there are rules..."scratch to win."

Most good bulldogs aren't submissive, however. Just because they may be on the bottom doesn't mean they are submitting. Just because they submit around the house or yard in certain instances doesn't mean they will submit once engaged in a fight.

I have dogs that are passive, but not submissive. As a matter of fact, Gr Ch Amboss was very passive.

~Mr Mark

 

Slightly off topic, but since you mentioned it, why are you against dogfighting?

~Mr Mark

 

This could be an interesting thread about dominance over gameness. Lets keep it on topic and within forum rules. Thanks

 

Agree on all points and also interested in why OP is against dog fighting.

 

Dog fighting is a felony in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a fine of $250,000 due to the 2007 Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act. The federal Animal Welfare Act prohibits the interstate transportation of dogs for fighting purposes.


DISCLAIMER
The views herein expressed in this forum do not necessarily reflect those of the posters or the forum owners and should be viewed strictly as entertainment and for historical purposes only. The posters nor the forum owners either promote or condone any violations of the "Animal Welfare Act of 1976", or any other Local, State and/or Federal Laws. Again, this post/thread should be viewed strictly as entertainment and/or for historical purposes only!

 

I dont think so either. sooner or later one of the other two has to take over will it or would it be due to game im not sure. Animals in the wild cant afford to get hurt so I think serious injury just has to deter them leaving no way to determine game. NO TO DOG FIGHTING YES TO LEGAL POSITIVE WAYS TO PROVE SUPREMACY.[video]http://youtu.be/5LIqAqualMU[/video]

 

Even with humans a dominant male is not necessarily the toughest.

 

Back in 73 the year I was born my father owned a little brindle bitch. This little brindle dog was as passive as the day is long unless confronted, she would walk the yard loose and never once started a fight. At the age of 3 1/2 years old she was working the springpole next to the lake and an older female who was twice her size managed to get out the front door and ran to the pole looking to play as well, and she was a docile but dominant dog. Well the bigger bitch went for the moosehide on the springpole and the little bitch had something to say about it, she locked onto the head of the bigger dog and shook her hold eyes wide open driving uphill as hard as she could until she found herself on bottom taking the worst of it. My father who was dealing with this wreck alone drug the dogs to the lake and threw them in figuring that they would let go and he could get them seperated. After a couple of long long minutes he realized that these 2 were not going to let go just because they were drowning, lol, he waded into the 5 feet of water and drug them back on shore caughing and gagging but still in holds! As he told me later it took another 30 minutes to seperate the 2 by himself as he didn't want to grab one and let the other take advantage.

Moral of this story is, even if your smaller, even if your passive, even if you can't win, Prove them wrong!!!!

A dogs nature is best seen under adversity

 

I have heard ch.Physco fought with his tail between his legs and seemingly some of his offspring aswell not exactly dominent
body language............

 

Nice story shows why you should have a breakstick on you at all times as well lolol
sounds like some good dogs none the less

 

being the most dominate doesn't make it the best but it doesn't disqualify it from being the best either. it is what it is, dominance and gameness are not mutually exclusive.

 

Supremacy you say all i saw were very agile dogs,dont get it twisted

 

Those dogs aren't "supreme" over game-tested and proven dogs. Only one way to know the best of the best... But of course it's illegal so legal avenues are the next best thing.

 

Dibo was Docile and very passive. His Dam was cold, and both produced passive dogs that went on to become winners.

 

I think game has an advantage over dominance. Seems like any male dog with nuts abover two years old trys to be the dominate male, so they may feel like they are more dominate till they get hit by that mouth of a game dog.

 

Lol, a breaking stick is of little use when your by yourself trying to separate two fighting dogs, i know this all too well, just a couple days ago i was by myself and had to separate 2 neo mastiff x pitbull dogs @ 95lb each and while trying to separate them one of them collar slipped off, thank God i know what to do, and it didnt turn to bad.

 

Thanks for the input everyone.
I am against current dog fighting. After I wrote that I know it was like writing, "I like staying warm by a fire, but I hate fires"LOL

I was to young when it was legal.
I respect it (how our dogs got here) 100%
I have no problem with people out of the US,etc keeping it real. I am as you guys would say a "puppy peddler" - I sell dogs now and then - mine are not tested and are sold as house dogs. That is all.