UKC Forums Pages (2): « 1 [2]
Show all 39 posts from this thread on one page

UKC Forums (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/index.php)
- (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=)
-- Dual-registering AKC AmStaffs as UKC APBTs (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?threadid=338780)


Posted by KYASHI on 03-08-2010 05:26 PM:

Thank you Laurie for clearing that up. I now understand. Wow. I am glad my breed is just one breed. It is bad enough when I have to look at a litter and decide which will do better in AKC or UKC. The standard is the same. But the type preference is different. AKC likes smaller more southern Japan size/type. UKC is more larger northern Japan size/type. Both are correct. Would be nice if we could just hit a happy medium. lol I guess it really is the same in any breed. Thank you for helping me to understand your breed a little better. Very interesting.


Posted by Howardpit1 on 03-08-2010 08:05 PM:

I agree with a lot of Mike's posts. Other than I don't really see the point of a separate class for the rednoses. If they make several varieties , there will hardly be any dogs to compete against. I have shown in all 3 registries, and to me it really does not matter. A dog that is put together right can do well in ADBA and UKC both, with different conditioning.

When I got into the UKC showring (1990's), there were already many UKC/AKC dogs there. Tons of pitterstaffs too. When I realized that most of the dogs were amstaff crosses showing , I decided to go with AKC dogs, so If I wanted to do more, I could. To this day I have several real apbts, one pitterstaff, and several pure AKC amstaffs. I just don't see the point of changing all of this now.

I have one dog she is a UKC Champion, AKC pointed, and has 85 points ADBA. So, you take a good amstaff, lean it down, and do well ADBA, where they prefer the real pit bulls.

I am aware that some people are worried about the UKC becoming watered down with AKC dogs, but it has already happened (20 years ago). I am more worried about the mutts from other registries that are giants, or 100 pound dwarfs. Or even the bullies which are already registered UKC.

If I want to show my old style dogs, I can go with ADBA or AADR.


Posted by Sarah on 03-08-2010 08:10 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by KYASHI
Trying to understand about this rednose thing. Is it just a color issue? As the standard states that black nose is preferred than it is a color thing. But what I do not understand is if the dog itself is of red coloring than the nose is of the same. Which does happen. It isnt an actual different breed. Just a color. So why would anyone want to make it another breed. It still is an APBT. Still learning about this remarkable breed.


The UKC standard does not give preference to any nose color.

__________________
UACH UWPCH UCDX CH MACH DayDream London Calling CDX RAE OF AD PD2 CL3-R CL3-H CL3-S CGC TC TT
UWP UAGII AKC/UKC CH Flyin DayDream Londons Burning CD MX MXJ OF AAD CGC TT
Flyin The Jolly Roger


Posted by KYASHI on 03-08-2010 08:34 PM:

From the 1936 APBT STANDARD: nose, black preferred.


This is where I saw that the black nose is preferred. Sorry if that is not correct. I am just trying to understand the bluenose, rednose that is in the breed. I had been reading the other posts and this was what I saw. I didnt realize that it was dated back in 1936. I need to stop reading these when I get home from work. Brain isnt working as well then. lol My goof.


Posted by AnkhuIGs on 03-08-2010 09:06 PM:

you have to understand colour genetics to understand nose colour.

Certain coat colours preclude a black nose...PERIOD, because the colour has a genetic modifier that also affects the nose colour.

Hence...the term "self coloured nose" meaning, the nose pigment and eye rim pigment generally are of the same muted tone as the coat.

You also get breeds with "self coloured eyes"...i myself have had 2 IG's with self coloured eyes. Not a fault, but not the dark expressive eye everyone is expecting.

__________________
Serena Galloway
www.ankhu.com

Home of Multi-BIS U-GrCh, Multi Group Winning/Placing AKC Bronze GCh, MBIS/MRBIS Int'l Ch, CKC Ch. Pineridge-Anji's St. Cecilia

Home of BIS/MRBIS U-GrCh., MBPIG CKC Ch., Int'l Ch, AKC GCh. Ankhu's Steamy Windows

No part of this message may be forwarded without permission


Posted by VintageKennel on 03-08-2010 09:46 PM:

Amen Steph, Kim, Mike, Howard

this is a really hard argument and I can see both sides. I have owned all three types and have won with all three in UKC under the APBT standard. My "real" APBT was never finished (very closely related to Karen's dogs) because she was spayed when I moved to MN. All of my others both POS and AmStaff did quite well! Why? Because they fit the UKC standard! My POS and AmStaffs are in the preffered weight and height range. The breeders of my AmStaffs will not allow them to be bred UKC but I could probably convince them if I really wanted to breed. I respect their views that they are different breeds and they respect my belief that they are not. Regardless if UKC seperated them or not, I am not concerned. I have good standard dogs who will continue to do well no matter what they are called!

Red nosed APBTs are just that. A color. I think they are just a style. I would love to own one but find the AmStaff better fits what I want for an all around working dog.

__________________
Vintage Kennel - Defining the Total Dog
Promoting Responsible and Respectable Dog Ownership by Example
Home of:
Multi-BAIMBS Multi-BISV RBISV Int'l Ch UWPCH 'PR' Arkay's Vintage Dream On CGC TT 1/21/94-5/17/09

Multi BIMBS Multi RBIMBS Multi TD Int'l Ch Nat'l Ch Ehren Ch in Bronze URO3 FO UWPS UGWPC1 UGRACH UCD GRCH 'PR' Marauders Klickitat of Vintage TT CGC TDI
**UKC's first triple Grand Champion in events open to all breeds**

Multi BIMBS Multi RBIMS Multi TDMulti BAIMBS AKC Ch Int'l Ch RATM UGNJCH CAX URO3 UAG11 FO UCD UWPS UGWPC1 GRCH Alpine's Vintage Power Trip RN CD RATI RATM ROH CGCA TDI TT
***UKC's second triple Grand Champion in events open to all breeds.

AKC Ch Multi BIMBS RATN GRCH Alpine's Brownie Bottom Sundae RATI RATN

Multi BIMBS Multi RBIMBS Multi TD Multi 2 X Gateway RBTDIS RATO GNJCH USRCH URO1 UWPO UFRCH CAX UGWPCH GRCH 5Star VNTG History In The Makin CGC RATI RATO
*****UKC's 3rd triple Grand Champion in events open to all breeds******


Multi TD UWPV UWPCH GRCH WMK Little Oak's Kodyak@VNTG CGCA

Multi TD BIMBS CH UWP Alpine's Hearts On Fire CGCA

Multi BIMBS RBIMBS Multi TD UWPS UWPCHX GRCH 'PR' Miakodas Vintage MDNT Marauder DNA-P CGC TT

Multi TD UWPS GRCH UWPCHX 'PR' Miakodas AboveNBeyond of JoLib CGC TDI


Multi BIMBS Multi RBIMBS AKC Ch GRCH Alpine's CoCo Chanel

AKC Ch RATN CH Alpine's Jaimaca Me Crazy RN CGC RATN

Multi BIS BISS AKC GCh Multi TD Multi BIMBS Multi RBIMBS PT1 UNJ UWPV RATM UWPCH GRCH Alpine's Ring of Fire CGCA RATI RATM
**** Winner of the 2013 Top Ten Invitational Premier 2014*********
+++++++Winner of the 2014 Premier Best Total Dog In Show++++++++

MULTI BIS MULTI BISS AKC GCh RATN Alpine's Highwayman CGC RATI RATN

BIMBS AKC Ch UWP GRCH Hilltop's King Cobra CGC TT CD ROH

*Disclaimer: All AKC Ch are owned in AKC by or with Karen and Ed Thomason


Posted by bahamutt99 on 03-13-2010 01:49 AM:

Okay, so the 1936 standard, was it re-written at the same time as the AmStaff became its own breed? What did the standard in 1898 read, or was there none at the time?

I disagree on rednose dogs being a different "type." If they were, there would be no rednose dogs in the UKC top 10, which favors POS-type. There are rednose dogs that are the old-school style and rednose dogs who look just like AmStaffs of a different color. But I digress, and I find the whole rednose sub-topic to be an attempt to both attack the messenger and derail the subject at hand.

Howard said: "If I want to show my old style dogs, I can go with ADBA or AADR."

Eloquent in its simplicity. If you own a "real Pit Bull," the UKC isn't the place for you. Don't you find that a little bit depressing? An old-style dog should still represent the APBT no matter where he is registered, and without the extra 10+ pounds needed to even get a fair look.

There obviously are people who like the idea of AmStaffs being AmStaffs and APBTs being APBTs, and people who would show their AmStaffs in the UKC if there was a breed ring expressly for them. And there are people with "real Pit Bulls" and real AmStaffs who are avoiding the UKC ring because they don't like the whole melting pot thing. So why would this (ie, AmStaffs recognized as their own breed) be a bad thing? Heck, once the AmBully folks get their act together I would be in favor of them being recognized as their own breed by the UKC as well!

Correct me if I'm wrong, doesn't the IABCA recognize AST and APBT as separate breeds? The AKC obviously thinks they're separate breeds.

__________________
Lindsay D.
--
Gravity APBTs


Posted by bahamutt99 on 03-13-2010 01:55 AM:

Oh yeah. I should add that the condensed version of that chart is incomplete. Somebody put all the pictures together for whatever reason, and they only used 9 of the 10 sets of pictures. Here is the original work, since it somewhat pertains to the matter at hand:

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/bahamutt99/web_dogpics/top10resized/Top10s1.png
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/bahamutt99/web_dogpics/top10resized/Top10s2.png
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/bahamutt99/web_dogpics/top10resized/Top10s3.png
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/bahamutt99/web_dogpics/top10resized/Top10s4.png
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/bahamutt99/web_dogpics/top10resized/Top10s5.png
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/bahamutt99/web_dogpics/top10resized/Top10s6.png
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/bahamutt99/web_dogpics/top10resized/Top10s7.png
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/bahamutt99/web_dogpics/top10resized/Top10s8.png
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/bahamutt99/web_dogpics/top10resized/Top10s9.png
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/bahamutt99/web_dogpics/top10resized/Top10s10.png

I only wish it'd been easier to find consistently stacked pictures of these dogs from similar angles.

__________________
Lindsay D.
--
Gravity APBTs


Posted by Lucky Rock APBT on 03-13-2010 03:09 AM:

Lindsay, you said The AKC obviously thinks they're separate breeds.

They did this to SEPARATE themselves from dog fighting. They also continued to Dual Register back then ....


You say:

Eloquent in its simplicity. If you own a "real Pit Bull," the UKC isn't the place for you. Don't you find that a little bit depressing? An old-style dog should still represent the APBT no matter where he is registered, and without the extra 10+ pounds needed to even get a fair look.


My APBT is as much APBT as YOURS, as are everyone else's that are registered UKC, AKC, ADBA..

__________________
Michael Davis
www.luckyrockapbts.com



Home to:
UWP, URO3, GRCH LUCKY ROCK'S LITTLE WARRIOR, CGC ~ ACHILLES

UWPV, URO1, USJCH, UWPCH, GRCH Lucky Rock's Lil' Orphan Annie

CH Blu Prints Found a Lucky Rock


Posted by Howardpit1 on 03-13-2010 03:25 PM:

Gravity APBTs: "Howard said: "If I want to show my old style dogs, I can go with ADBA or AADR."

Eloquent in its simplicity. If you own a "real Pit Bull," the UKC isn't the place for you. Don't you find that a little bit depressing? An old-style dog should still represent the APBT no matter where he is registered, and without the extra 10+ pounds needed to even get a fair look."


Lindsay,
Your dog's do not even look , nor are they bred old school. In that chart you keep posting, the UKC dogs and AKC dogs look way more a like than the ADBA ones. Also, if you look at your dog's pedigrees, all the way back your dogs relatives look like rednose amstaffs, not gamebred adba dogs.

When UKC shows started getting popular for the APBTs, the UKC dogs went the way of the AKC amstaffs, and started to breed only for the show lines. To me, when someone mentions the pure apbts UKC rednose line, I think of them just like a AKC amstaff, because they were strictly bred for the showring for almost 20-30 years now.

Also, I hate the fat dogs too, that jiggle when they walk. I see a lot of them in the UKC show ring, and even more AKC (LOL). However, the opposite can be said of ADBA where many dogs are below pit weight, and that is not a natural state for the dog either, to maintain all year long.

Most of the people that show UKC would not want a real true apbt, they may like the pretty pedigree, but the dogs themselves, would not fit them. Too much energy, too rangy and maybe too much dog. Everybody wants to own the ultimate pitbull, but sometimes it is not all it's cracked up to be.


Posted by rottgrl on 03-15-2010 02:35 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by bahamutt99
The AKC obviously thinks they're separate breeds.


That is not correct. The AKC does not recognize the American Pit Bull Terrier in any form or fashion. In fact, you cannot even get an ILP number for performance events if your dog is registered with another registry as any breed the AKC does not recognize.


Posted by sunrisekennels on 03-20-2010 06:11 PM:

I don't think my opinion will be very popular, but I do respect the opinions of the people on this board even thought they may not be my own.
When I look at the pedigrees of the ukc dogs...
and you actually go all the way back, they are 80% Amstaff origin and maybe 20% ADBA/Game Lines.
For us to say let's separate the breeds is kind of impossible...the start of UKC was a duel registered AKC/UKC dog.
So is this not going against the intent of the founder?
Just look at the Current and Historical Top Producing American Pit Bull Terrier Males http://www.ukcdogs.com/WebSite.nsf/...2112009121301PM
Every SINGLE ONE of these dogs has AKC amstaff in their pedigree AND One of them IS A AKC AMSTAFF!!!
In the Historical Producers List 4 out of 10 of the dogs are AKC AMSTAFFS.
So ? Trying to separate the breeds is impossible without doing a great injustice to the current bloodlines and successful breeders out there.Another point, what does this say about the UKC/AKC dogs?
I mean they are the ones in the Top Producers,right?
Out of all these Dogs,One of them is A ADBA type dog.One that I greatly admire and really deserves to be on this list by the way.I hear a lot of people talking about the "real pit bull' now I have to say that just because my dogs are not of ADBA lines/type, I don't think that they are any less pit bulls.The ADBA is a registry that seeks to preserve the fighting heritage/lines of the APBT.The other registries try to move away from it.Do I respect and fully understand our breed's heritage..YES BUT do I feel there is a purpose for it going forward in a civilized world? NO,Do I feel our UKC dogs should go back toward a ADBA game type..NO
I do not believe that was the intent of the UKC APBT.Even back in historical times (evidenced by Petey)there was a non ADBA type of dog that I feel is the True Pit Bull and the pit bull of the future.One that has a heavier focus on the traits of Family Protector and your "do it all"dog rather then their fighting prowess.I think that the ADBA calls for a Very structurally correct dog..but the conditioning is a little extreme and not what I want to see in the ring, I will not keep my dogs pit weight, even thought my dogs are much leaner then most UKC Dogs.We can ALL learn from what the ADBA standard calls for..
Now what I see in the UKC ring is not what I want to see..
FAT, NO PIGMENT sometimes even SLOPPY.
The fault is with the Judges and being a Breeder-Judge I am shocked by the fact that new judges feel that breed type is connected to Size and being bulked up....THIS IS TOTALLY WRONG!Number ONE our breed needs to be athletic and in the 30-60 pound range....I don't think that truly athletic conditioned dogs that are a little larger should be penalized in any way, but the 80 pound monsters that can't make it around the ring without phanting and are still being placed is outrageous!!
The very essence of this breed is athleticism and so should it remain.
Until we improve the judging there will be no progress in improving the breed type..AND ATTENTION UKC BREEDERS AND JUDGES....Let's Look at that chart again..WHY DO AKC AMSTAFFS HAVE MORE PIGMENT THEN OUR UKC DOGS DO??
The Blue Fawn Parade needs to stop!!! (I personally own Blue Fawns) a healthy breed does not have all Blue Pigment and our breed should have Brindle, Red,Black etc.


Posted by brat pack on 03-21-2010 02:07 AM:

I am no expert, by any means, but.....isn't there a whole lot MORE Rear angulation in the Adba dogs pictured? I know it is hard to judge by one picture, but that is what I see.

__________________
"Lets close the circle folks, these dogs aren't for everybody."


Posted by Lilac Hill APBT on 03-23-2010 12:59 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by sunrisekennels
I don't think my opinion will be very popular, but I do respect the opinions of the people on this board even thought they may not be my own.
When I look at the pedigrees of the ukc dogs...
and you actually go all the way back, they are 80% Amstaff origin and maybe 20% ADBA/Game Lines.
For us to say let's separate the breeds is kind of impossible...the start of UKC was a duel registered AKC/UKC dog.
So is this not going against the intent of the founder?
Just look at the Current and Historical Top Producing American Pit Bull Terrier Males http://www.ukcdogs.com/WebSite.nsf/...2112009121301PM
Every SINGLE ONE of these dogs has AKC amstaff in their pedigree AND One of them IS A AKC AMSTAFF!!!
In the Historical Producers List 4 out of 10 of the dogs are AKC AMSTAFFS.
So ? Trying to separate the breeds is impossible without doing a great injustice to the current bloodlines and successful breeders out there.Another point, what does this say about the UKC/AKC dogs?
I mean they are the ones in the Top Producers,right?
Out of all these Dogs,One of them is A ADBA type dog.One that I greatly admire and really deserves to be on this list by the way.I hear a lot of people talking about the "real pit bull' now I have to say that just because my dogs are not of ADBA lines/type, I don't think that they are any less pit bulls.The ADBA is a registry that seeks to preserve the fighting heritage/lines of the APBT.The other registries try to move away from it.Do I respect and fully understand our breed's heritage..YES BUT do I feel there is a purpose for it going forward in a civilized world? NO,Do I feel our UKC dogs should go back toward a ADBA game type..NO
I do not believe that was the intent of the UKC APBT.Even back in historical times (evidenced by Petey)there was a non ADBA type of dog that I feel is the True Pit Bull and the pit bull of the future.One that has a heavier focus on the traits of Family Protector and your "do it all"dog rather then their fighting prowess.I think that the ADBA calls for a Very structurally correct dog..but the conditioning is a little extreme and not what I want to see in the ring, I will not keep my dogs pit weight, even thought my dogs are much leaner then most UKC Dogs.We can ALL learn from what the ADBA standard calls for..
Now what I see in the UKC ring is not what I want to see..
FAT, NO PIGMENT sometimes even SLOPPY.
The fault is with the Judges and being a Breeder-Judge I am shocked by the fact that new judges feel that breed type is connected to Size and being bulked up....THIS IS TOTALLY WRONG!Number ONE our breed needs to be athletic and in the 30-60 pound range....I don't think that truly athletic conditioned dogs that are a little larger should be penalized in any way, but the 80 pound monsters that can't make it around the ring without phanting and are still being placed is outrageous!!
The very essence of this breed is athleticism and so should it remain.
Until we improve the judging there will be no progress in improving the breed type..AND ATTENTION UKC BREEDERS AND JUDGES....Let's Look at that chart again..WHY DO AKC AMSTAFFS HAVE MORE PIGMENT THEN OUR UKC DOGS DO??
The Blue Fawn Parade needs to stop!!! (I personally own Blue Fawns) a healthy breed does not have all Blue Pigment and our breed should have Brindle, Red,Black etc.



Deanna you have it backwards. The UKC is older than the AKC accepting Staffordshire Terriers in 1936 so your post has AKC where UKC needs to be and vice versa. That is my point they have been separate in AKC since basically 1936 so split them UKC and go from there.

As to the lack of pigment, people breed to what wins and in the ring it is the blue fawns and so they keep making more. In AKC a nice rich brindle or a black masked red can win and does win so that is what they are going with. It is the flavor of the moment.

__________________
Karen Frenette & Lilac Hill American Pit Bull Terriers
CH UWPCH PR Arkay's Pink Cadillac
CH UWP PR Arkay's Rawhide Rowdy Yates
PR Lilac Hill's Hello Darlin
PR Lilac Hill's Big Iron
PR Lilac Hill's A White Sport Coat
PR Lilac Hills walk The Line
Still with one nutty Ibizan
UWP CH Special Acres Just a Figment
Now a Rattie
PR Arkay's Double Deck Pinochle


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:29 PM. Pages (2): « 1 [2]
Show all 39 posts from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.3.0
Copyright © Jelsoft Enterprises Limited 2000 - 2002.
Copyright 2003-2020, United Kennel Club