What makes you think that you have the real deal!

Post pictures to prove your case and people please no bashing this post will be close as soon as it happens.

As far as I know, I do not have the real deal.

me neither lol

I have the real deal.....They eat alot, poop alot, cost me a fortune, and love me to no end. That is the real deal TO ME........

real deal what? fighter or puller or pretty dog that just stands in the show ring?

jeremy @ aftershockennels wrote:

real deal what? fighter or puller or pretty dog that just stands in the show ring?

Looks like we have established some rules. The real deal can't be a pretty show dog, right? I guess that rules out handicap assistance dogs, seeing eye dogs, house pets, and simple companions. I've never owned a fighter or a puller, so I'm out.

is this linked to another post? i guess i missed something,... real deal in what aspect?

I think this was simply meant to be a test for us. Just to see what we would do with it.

Everyone is going to have their own opinion on what 'real deal' means.
You could have the most ADBA/AADR/UCK pointed dog in history and someone is going to think that dog is crap. You could have the dog that had pulled the most weight in the history of the world and someone else is going to think that dog is crap.

I personally feel that if your dog does what you want and need it to do..then that makes it the real deal to you and that is all that matters.

i guess one idea of the real deal is a dog that doesnt have mastiff or e. bulldog or something like that when you go a couple gens back,... yet still argue its pure when you know the truth!
so in that regard - i have the real deal

wmssh, I think we see eye to eye. This is the reason I have had trouble finding a pit. Seems like everything around here is 100 lbs.+ and blue. My pits were around 45 pounds, fast and agile. Nothing against big blue dogs, but to me they should not be in the majority.

yes, very possible.... i dont have anything against blue per say but thats only as long as it is bred true to the breed and not a mutt like most seem to be these days,.. all my dogs run between 35 and 50 lbs with a variety in color from buckskin to black brindle.... when and if i breed then i place temperment first not color or size

pitmamma u hit it on the head girl ppl get all up in a up roar about really nothing most of the time me personally a good bulldog is 30 to 50 and not any bigger good temperment and working ability no color is important. im not fond of blue cuz of health issue not all but it is a trait that carrys bad health problems. but i dont have a problem with them as long as it was honest. as for me i wouldnt breed a blue dog ever if one of my dogs produces one. just like i wouldnt breed one with blue eyes or to long or any deform problems peroid all it does is weaken the breed in all aspects i know most breeders if a good breeder will not breed the dog if agressvise to humans so i see that the same thing as breeding a dog that is not what the breed standards are. i have a dog that has a pretty paper but i will never breed that dog to many problems. and im sure ill get some grief on this so try to kept your thoughts to yourself unless it is and educated answer... thanks

basically also what i was saying mike

I agree, but I don't think blue color is a trait that carries health problems. I think the health problems in blue dogs are a result of breeding solely for color. These dogs have other problems as well.

have you ever seen a blue dog that has skin problems? white dogs can have them to explain better not all blue dogs does have health issue and not all white dogs have skin problems either it just runs in them more often
and yes they do have more problems(blue) not just skin but i have been being doing this awhile and i have notice something i have never seen a blue dogs ped that didnt have alot of blue dogs in it. so that tells me that ppl has bred for color for a long time now if someone has a dog here that dont have a bunch of blue dogs in the first i dont know 5 gen in there peds please let me see that . most blue dogs are bred for color just by looking at ppl peds. but im just one guy in the midwest

well i will say this about this touchy subject 99 % of blue dogs were bred for color and there have been some good ones that were blue good as in game now i know alot of you on here dont breed for gameness or for that matter get dogs that are game bred.there has been a few dogs that just popped out blue as it is a dilute black gene so black dogs can throw blue once in a great while.Now as for these days alot ppl are breeding and buying blues just for there color which is fine but know that these are not game bred dogs 99% of the time they might had a few game dogs in 7 gens but so do amstaffs which i can guarantee can not compete even close to a true game dog also a good bulldog really has no size or color factor when being bred it only has 1 very special thing gameness and that my freinds is hard to pass even with 2 game parents so take that to heart if you didnt already know.

well i know u probley know way more then i know but i do know that taking 2 game dogs doesnt mean game pups period now better chance but not always and guess i have seen 2 chilled out dogs that was bred like crap produce a game pup or 2 just to let you know

i do have a simple question what if you had a dog that pulled really hard and did awsome and did everything that was expected in the sport.

What if that dog had everything rong with it as far as major underbite size and other problems

Would you consider Breeding that dog.

Keep in mind that this dog excelled at everything that you wanted it to.

Would you consider that breeding stock.

as you may know i,m refering to baron which i consider a hell of a pull dog.

Roger....for me it would just depend on how many problems the dog had and if they were are purely cosmetic...If you were breeding for the purpose of producing pull dogs, then maybe...
Back in the day...a long long time ago....dogs were bred for go and not for show. Didn't matter how pretty or ugly the dog was...as that was not its intended purpose. Now if you were talking health problems or bow legs and stuff like that..then no way, no how...

well no i will not bred him he has alot of problems and he is not breeding stock to me
if we dont have a standard then all we have is mutts

I think if you were breeding a dog with a lot of flaws who could really pull you would have to make sure they go to pull homes. I know of a few people with very faulty looking dogs who bred them and then sold them to random people and I don't think that's right. For all you know, that person is going to say to their friend "Hey I have a Pit Bull and you have a Pit Bull, let's have some puppies" and then there's tons of effed up looking dogs going around, having puppies and making more flawed pups.

good post prison blues
pitmamma to give you a good example of things in the past... form always follows function the dogs of old was breed to do a job now i know that some of the dogs didnt looked the same but for the fighting aspect the dog needed to be a certain way have the body form and body struture to do the job thats how we got a standard. the reg that are old and knows what theses dogs did have a standard that they took from the winners of the dogs that were very successful at that time. now im sure there were dogs thats didnt fit withend the standard and they were successful but they use the dogs that were more consisted victors. my personally opinion and pull dog will be a better pull dog if they have the right bone, muscles and drive to do the job. in this case bigger aint always better. jmo!!!

Mike I totally agree...