Should Showing EXTREME GAMENESS be Part of DOY Candidacy?

[Officially Retired]

And here's another question:

Should showing EXTREME GAMENESS qualify a dog for DOY Candidacy?


VOTE HERE! :-bd

Or forever hold your peace :censored:

[S_B]

Being an extremely game dog is what every bulldog should possess. Being extremely game and talented and facing the same adversaries is stepping it up to an elite level.

Extremely game dogs already have an award system in place GIS.

I think to carry the prestigious title of "Dog of the Year" that dog should be the exception to the rule. That dog should do what no other dog within that same calendar year has done. They aren't all going to be GR CH's who beat other GR CH DOY'S like GR CH TITERE. So IMO to truly be considered the DOY they should stand out in front of the rest of the candidates.

S_B

[Nut]

Why not. But I could never vote for showing gameness that I didn't witness.

[S_B]

Why not. But I could never vote for showing gameness that I didn't witness.

Exactly, that is why imo the performance record is what speaks to the quality of a DOY.

[Officially Retired]

Why not. But I could never vote for showing gameness that I didn't witness.

If you're not going to trust others' opinions on gameness, how can you trust their opinions on ability?

If people have produced better, winninger dogs than you ... might their opinions carry more weight than yours?

If 30 people at a huge convention ALL give a dog accolades for its extreme gameness, do you think this carries more weight than "your" opinion on extreme gameness?

Jack

[Officially Retired]

Extremely game dogs already have an award system in place GIS.

I think to carry the prestigious title of "Dog of the Year" that dog should be the exception to the rule. That dog should do what no other dog within that same calendar year has done. They aren't all going to be GR CH's who beat other GR CH DOY'S like GR CH TITERE. So IMO to truly be considered the DOY they should stand out in front of the rest of the candidates.

S_B

High ability dogs also have titles in place (BIS/CH/GR CH) ... yet they get DOY consideration too ... so why shouldn't the exceptionially-game dogs of our sport also have a title for their "over and above" displays of extreme gameness?

Yes, Titere did beat a 6xW/DOY ... but did he belly-crawl, after being a mile behind for 3 hours, losing half his blood supply, on two broken legs? :shocked:

There are dogs who did these things ... don't you think they deserve Extraordinary Consideration also?

Jack

[Macker]

Jack I never mentioned this in the previous topic for DOY but the way I'd like to see it done is every year we vote amongst ourselves for these three categories and three prizes are given out (usually a small trophy), each year it is the job of the previous years category winner to provide the prize for the new winner but that bits not important.

We have :
The dog of the year award (the outright most awesome DOY)
Gamest dog of the year award (for a dog that showed to be deep deep game, usually dead game)
Kennels of the year (the kennels that showed and achieved a lot within the year)

The last one would be the hardest to come up with I think as a lot won't want to divulge too much and understandably so.

[MISTER]

Gameness is something we all want our dogs to have but many times a dog that shows extreme gameness is on the losing side of the contest. Some do show that gameness and come out the winner and either case are awarded GIS. Doy is reserved to that special animal who shows that ability to not really get put behind and win convincingly in each and every contest such as the Titere's, The Awesome Beasts, the Barracudas. Doy is reserved for those truly special animals who IMO don't have to show extreme gameness

[Officially Retired]

Jack I never mentioned this in the previous topic for DOY but the way I'd like to see it done is every year we vote amongst ourselves for these three categories and three prizes are given out (usually a small trophy), each year it is the job of the previous years category winner to provide the prize for the new winner but that bits not important.

We have :
The dog of the year award (the outright most awesome DOY)
Gamest dog of the year award (for a dog that showed to be deep deep game, usually dead game)
Kennels of the year (the kennels that showed and achieved a lot within the year)

The last one would be the hardest to come up with I think as a lot won't want to divulge too much and understandably so.

Another good idea, Macker.

I will amend the names and suggest we have the following:


Dog of the Year
Game Dog of the Year
Kennel of the Year

There has never been any designation for our gamest-of-game dogs, which (if this is the essence of the breed) is a travesty, really.

I guess this distinction can best be shown (IMO) by the fact that, yeah, Jeep beat Homer, but I would have walk passed Jeep (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=406) every time my bitch came in heat and bred to Homer (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=2944) :idea:

Jack

[Pit Bull Committed]

I vote No but to me, extreme gameness is only one of the factors that could make a dog DOY. Also the title DOY should not be based on only performance but who were the opponents they went up against and maybe even who the person that's behind the dogs that they went up against.

[S_B]

High ability dogs also have titles in place (BIS/CH/GR CH) ... yet they get DOY consideration too ... so why shouldn't the exceptionially-game dogs of our sport also have a title for their "over and above" displays of extreme gameness?

Yes, Titere did beat a 6xW/DOY ... but did he belly-crawl, after being a mile behind for 3 hours, losing half his blood supply, on two broken legs? :shocked:

There are dogs who did these things ... don't you think they deserve Extraordinary Consideration also?

Jack

They have a title of their own Jack, GIS. Like Mister said some of the gamest dogs to ever crawl didn't' have the ability to win. Often times when a dog shows extremely game they either were outclassed ability wise or they were neutralized by an equal opponent.

S_B

[S_B]

I'll add to what I previously stated...a DOY title should be an elite animal, one who possess ALL of the things that make up a great animal.

Performance (beating equally titled dogs)
Ability and Smarts
&
Gameness!

S_B

[Officially Retired]

Gameness is something we all want our dogs to have but many times a dog that shows extreme gameness is on the losing side of the contest. Some do show that gameness and come out the winner and either case are awarded GIS. Doy is reserved to that special animal who shows that ability to not really get put behind and win convincingly in each and every contest such as the Titere's, The Awesome Beasts, the Barracudas. Doy is reserved for those truly special animals who IMO don't have to show extreme gameness


They have a title of their own Jack, GIS. Like Mister said some of the gamest dogs to ever crawl didn't' have the ability to win. Often times when a dog shows extremely game they either were outclassed ability wise or they were neutralized by an equal opponent.

S_B


I guess no one actrually read what I said, so, once again, we already have titles for "ability" also: do not the titles of BIS / Ch / Gr Ch already reward ability?

So, following your logic, why do we even need DOY?

Isn't Dog of the Year to separate the best-of-the-best?

If we're going to go over and above the already-existing titles of BIS/CH/GR CH, and add another title (Dog of the Year) ... for ability ... why don't we *also* give some extra title to the extremest of extreme game dogs for all the GIS winners?

Also, to say that just because a dog lost, "it doesn't have the ability to win," is a pretty far stretch.

Ozzie's Homer didn't have the ability to win, against Jeep, at 2 lb below his best weight, C/H by Stepps (as opposed to fighting at his best weight 44 lb, in Ozzie's hands), but that doesn't mean Ch Homer "didn't have the ability to win" ... AT ALL ... Homer just didn't have it that day, at that weight, in those hands. But his gameness was so extreme as to be remembered, historically, more than 99.99% of any Gr Ch ever.

So let me say this again: we already have titles for ability: CH/Gr Ch/BIS ... and DOY ... that is 4 different ways to confer glory to winners ... and yet we only have ONE way to confer glory to our GAME dogs :-O :-q

That sucks IMO.

Why shouldn't there be equal consideration given to the extremest of game dogs of our sport?

The more I think about it, the more the title of Game Dog of the Year is a title that is long, long, long overdue :-? :-bd

Jack

[Pit Bull Committed]

I'll add to what I previously stated...a DOY title should be an elite animal, one who possess ALL of the things that make up a great animal.

Performance (beating equally titled dogs)
Ability and Smarts
&
Gameness!

S_B
Agreed.

[Hushman]

my bad jack I sent you a pm...most definitely after all these are gamedogs...that it is the number one trait we should all be looking for to begin with!!!

[Pit Bull Committed]

Focus on the fact that Homer did lost. Can't just assumed that he would've could've won if he was in different hands and at the correct weight. Not saying you don't have a point. All I'm saying is that the fact is that Homer did lost.

[ragedog10]

For gamest dog of year I'll go with CH.Lotto he showed what a game dog is suppose to be. Or even CH.Texas damn it I'm rambling now lol

[Officially Retired]

my bad jack I sent you a pm...most definitely after all these are gamedogs...that it is the number one trait we should all be looking for to begin with!!!

Yeah, I could swear another name these dogs go by is GAME Dogs (not "ability" dogs).

Again, what Titere did is remarkable ... but, again, would he take a killing, and belly-crawl at the 3-hr mark, on two broken legs, losing half his blood supply.

IMO, the GAME dogs who have done things like this are no less remarkable ... and they deserve our highest HONORS also ... not just a "footnote" :idea:

Jack

[Officially Retired]

Focus on the fact that Homer did lost. Can't just assumed that he would've could've won if he was in different hands and at the correct weight. Not saying you don't have a point. All I'm saying is that the fact is that Homer did lost.

I don't need your help in what to focus on, son.

And we all know Homer lost, so you're repeating the obvious, non-thinking facts.

I am not responsible if you don't know enough to realize what a different weight, and a different keep, can bring out in a dog :idea:

[Officially Retired]

For gamest dog of year I'll go with CH.Lotto he showed what a game dog is suppose to be. Or even CH.Texas damn it I'm rambling now lol

Did he lose in 2014?

[Pit Bull Committed]

For gamest dog of year I'll go with CH.Lotto he showed what a game dog is suppose to be. Or even CH.Texas damn it I'm rambling now lol
Yup I agree, for "gamest DOY" but not for over all best DOY.

[Hushman]

"GAME DOG OF THE YEAR" that's what up!!!I have a buddy up North and they had a bad ass little dog who was killing his opponents in rolls.he never made it to the Big Dance because he would not scratch.he was a killer but would not scratch.they did the right thing and culled him,and moved on.Gotta B GAME

[S_B]

I do agree Jack an exceptionally game dog deserves recognition. If it is a matter of another prestigious title being awarded to an animal that goes beyond what most consider game, then of course I'm all for it.

But I was under the impression you were strictly speaking about DOY?

S_B

[Pit Bull Committed]

I don't need your help in what to focus on, son.

And we all know Homer lost, so you're repeating the obvious, non-thinking facts.

I am not responsible if you don't know enough to realize what a different weight, and a different keep, can bring out in a dog :idea:

Again, not saying it doesn't matter...it does. But we can't guarantee that the results will be different either can we? :-)

[ragedog10]

Texas just lost to CH.Reno and Lotto lost to Titere on Titere 6th so yes 2014. My take is let's do it separate DOY is about performance we all should know if our dogs are game before showing, we are banking on ability,mouth and such when it comes to the show. now if it goes deep we all want to win on gameness.

[Officially Retired]

I do agree Jack an exceptionally game dog deserves recognition. If it is a matter of another prestigious title being awarded to an animal that goes beyond what most consider game, then of course I'm all for it.

But I was under the impression you were strictly speaking about DOY?

S_B


Well, originally, my thought was ... "is ability all there is to greatness?"

Is beating 3 mediocre Champions, where you're never really behind, a "greater accomplishment" than beating ONE devastating Champion, suffering incredible punishment, taking it all, and coming from WAY BACK to win on a huge HEART + Ability?

Beating 3 Champions can mean a dog only has great ability, but yet never had to show HEART.

Doesn't true greatness imply HEART also?

Isn't the display of awesome heart the distinction between a front-runner and a legend?

Maybe the idea of a second title, for gameness, is the best way to go ... but my original thought was, "Okay X dog may not have won 6x, but he did display a level of gameness that the 6xW Y never showed ..."

Is true greatness only about # of wins?

Jack

[Pit Bull Committed]

"GAME DOG OF THE YEAR" that's what up!!!I have a buddy up North and they had a bad ass little dog who was killing his opponents in rolls.he never made it to the Big Dance because he would not scratch.he was a killer but would not scratch.they did the right thing and culled him,and moved on.Gotta B GAME
I would also cull one that is game to the bone but lacks mouth, ability, stamina, intelligent, etc.

[S_B]

True greatness should encompass all of the accolades we are speaking of here.

That is why it is my opinion a DOY should be the cream of the crop.

The "Gamest" dog of the year only needs his/her gameness to be a consideration.

A truly great thought provoking topic as usual Jack!

S_B

[S_B]

I would also cull one that is game to the bone but lacks mouth, ability, stamina, intelligent, etc.
:-O

[Pit Bull Committed]

A truly elite dog may never be put in the situation where it had to show heart...so I believe having two separate titles would be best.

[ragedog10]

Well, originally, my thought was ... "is ability all there is to greatness?"

Is beating 3 mediocre Champions, where you're never really behind, a "greater accomplishment" than beating ONE devastating Champion, suffering incredible punishment, taking it all, and coming from WAY BACK to win on a huge HEART + Ability?

Beating 3 Champions can mean a dog only has great ability, but yet never had to show HEART.

Doesn't true greatness imply HEART also?

Isn't the display of awesome heart the distinction between a front-runner and a legend?

Maybe the idea of a second title, for gameness, is the best way to go ... but my original thought was, "Okay X dog may not have won 6x, but he did display a level of gameness that the 6xW Y never showed ..."

Is true greatness only about # of wins?

Jack
True greatness could be a dog who won one show but showed gameness in coming back and beating a bad ass dog. Beating mediocre dogs mean nothing to be honest, I guess it comes down to who and what a said dog accomplishments.

[Pit Bull Committed]

:-O
S_B don't get me wrong here...gameness is the base but it doesn't have to end there.

[Officially Retired]

True greatness should encompass all of the accolades we are speaking of here.

That is why it is my opinion a DOY should be the cream of the crop.

The "Gamest" dog of the year only needs his/her gameness to be a consideration.

A truly great thought provoking topic as usual Jack!

S_B


True greatness could be a dog who won one show but showed gameness in coming back and beating a bad ass dog. Beating mediocre dogs mean nothing to be honest, I guess it comes down to who and what a said dog accomplishments.


There is something sorely lacking in a system that doesn't recognize the SPIRIT in these dogs.

The title DOY implies "Greatness" ... and part of greatness is ability/quality of opposition, etc., ... but part of greatness is ALSO unbelievable heart.

Sure, a game plug might get GIS, and we can admire his spirit, but he isn't really a great dog. I understand that.

However, some dogs *are* high ability animals, that also show incredible heart, and overcome incredible adversity, to win over some incredible opponents.

This begs the question, would every Grand Champion take its death .. or be able to overcome the same abuse?

Maybe Dog X can't win 6, and Dog Y can ... but yet Dog X did show incredible heart ... whereas Dog Y has not.

I guess I am just thinking out loud :lol:

[MISTER]

Yeah, I could swear another name these dogs go by is GAME Dogs (not "ability" dogs).

Again, what Titere did is remarkable ... but, again, would he take a killing, and belly-crawl at the 3-hr mark, on two broken legs, losing half his blood supply.

IMO, the GAME dogs who have done things like this are no less remarkable ... and they deserve our highest HONORS also ... not just a "footnote" :idea:

Jack

They should get an award but, who wants to have a yard full of belly crawlers? The way youre thinking is or at least im gathering is that bc an animal is so good to not get wrecked but can wreck his opposition he's less important than a belly crawler? Ive had a truly deep game animal nd at the time there was a BONA FIDE BAD ASS around nd I chose not to run with him bc I felt deep in my gut i wouldve gotten bit down before the belly crawling game scratches could begin.... The name of the breed is Game Dogs, and reason for matching dogs is to Win not out game the other...

I fully agree there should be a gamest award just as there's a doy award and the deep game dogs do deserve the nod to what theyve achieved or tried too... Would Titere belly crawl? Idk 7 TRIED AND 7 FAILED end of story lol

[Officially Retired]

They should get an award but, who wants to have a yard full of belly crawlers? The way youre thinking is or at least im gathering is that bc an animal is so good to not get wrecked but can wreck his opposition he's less important than a belly crawler? Ive had a truly deep game animal nd at the time there was a BONA FIDE BAD ASS around nd I chose not to run with him bc I felt deep in my gut i wouldve gotten bit down before the belly crawling game scratches could begin.... The name of the breed is Game Dogs, and reason for matching dogs is to Win not out game the other...

I fully agree there should be a gamest award just as there's a doy award and the deep game dogs do deserve the nod to what theyve achieved or tried too... Would Titere belly crawl? Idk 7 TRIED AND 7 FAILED end of story lol

:lol:

I understand what you're saying ...

[ragedog10]

I hear you and understand what you mean! Most 6xw won't show game most aren't breeding game dogs that's why most shows are over in before 45. I prefer a game dog, one of the gamest I ever seen Showtime's CH.Roscoe (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=16699). came from way behind to beat a monster he was the definition of Gameness

[ragedog10]

Titere was in a cast before #5 , he over came a lot heart worms and such.

[Officially Retired]

I hear you and understand what you mean! Most 6xw won't show game most aren't breeding game dogs that's why most shows are over in before 45. I prefer a game dog, one of the gamest I ever seen Showtime's CH.Roscoe (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=16699). came from way behind to beat a monster he was the definition of Gameness

Who did he beat?

[ragedog10]

On his last he beat 315 Boys Burner (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=45935) who was a monster I'll have to think back this was a few years back.

[MISTER]

:lol:

I understand what you're saying ...

Now with all that said, I think BLACKROCK'S EL NAZI (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=827) is prolly the gamest SOB of the DECADE LOL and if an award is given out he should be noted as a top canadite...

[Black Hand]

I voted No. It certainly could add to a dogs resume to have to show his heart but is not necessary.
We should not fault a dog for being superior to his opponent.

[BULLDOG ANONYMOUS]

How could anyone Vote against a "True Game Dog" as "D.O.Y"?? Animal's such as BlackRocks' "NAZI" (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=827), Not only should been a D.O.Y in his era. He's a dog of a "LIFETIME"! I.M.O ...G.I.S and lose,, im not going to vote...but, but the a dog who go past the boundaries of there ability, and pull out a win should NOT be ignored.

[MISTER]

How could anyone Vote against a "True Game Dog" as "D.O.Y"?? Animal's such as BlackRocks' "NAZI" (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=827), Not only should been a D.O.Y in his era. He's a dog of a "LIFETIME"! I.M.O ...G.I.S and lose,, im not going to vote...but, but the a dog who go past the boundaries of there ability, and pull out a win should NOT be ignored.

Man when I was just looking thru some peds I came across him being bred nd couldnt believe what I saw. I said Damn how's he even alive let alone being bred lol... Dogs that display extreme gameness win or lose should not be overlooked let alone forgotten....

[Officially Retired]

Man when I was just looking thru some peds I came across him being bred nd couldnt believe what I saw. I said Damn how's he even alive let alone being bred lol... Dogs that display extreme gameness win or lose should not be overlooked let alone forgotten....

Exactly.

Why we don't honor dogs that show exceptional gameness is a travesty to me.

As mentioned, we actually have 5 ways, not 4, to honor ability (BIS, 1x/2x, Ch, Gr Ch ... and, at the end of the year, DOY) ... while we only have 1 way to honor gameness (GIS) which can't even be awarded on a 1-card show (while wins/Ch/Gr Ch/DOY can).

It is time to have yearly accolades for the truly game dogs of our sport ... and that time is now :)

Jack

[MISTER]

Exactly.

Why we don't honor dogs that show exceptional gameness is a travesty to me.

As mentioned, we actually have 5 ways, not 4, to honor ability (BIS, 1x/2x, Ch, Gr Ch ... and, at the end of the year, DOY) ... while we only have 1 way to honor gameness (GIS) which can't even be awarded on a 1-card show (while wins/Ch/Gr Ch/DOY can).

It is time to have yearly accolades for the truly game dogs of our sport ... and that time is now :)

Jack

I guess since this is the best database I say Let's Take The Bull By The Horns and start honoring them brave, great animals. I also agree with you Jack, I'd walked past Jeep and went straight to Homer if I had a bitch in heat.

[ragedog10]

I think we start a new award for Gameness here! Cause to me there is nothing more beautiful than a dog showing deep gameness.

[Hushman]

Ch MC Bulldog's Jorge 5xw 1xlg 1xd (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=45940) is a great example...so is Dirttowns(Ablizins) Chavis (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=37122)

[Officially Retired]

Okay, let's keep it going for gamest dog of 2014.

The Nazi dog Redrum bred can't be counted, as he went a couple years ago, but I am going to toss in one of mine Wildschild's Prime Ape (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=25429) who won a tough one in 1:43. Was a natural finisher who was never behind and couldn't find an opponent because of this ... then someone brought what they thought was "the dog" to beat him. Prime Ape swarmed this dog, but got hurt severely at :19, and then tried to hold the dog out for over an hour, injured. This dog finally got through Prime Ape's defense, flipped him, and hit him in the ass-end, and that is usually where the fat lady starts to sing ... when the defensive dog is down, and getting killed, deep in the trenches.

Well, Prime Ape was not finished, and he managed to get up, with the dog still in his ass end, but Prime Ape couldn't reach his nose ... so he just grabbed a shoulder, and shook, and shook, and shook ... until the other dog came out ... and Prime Ape, injured more now, once again re-established control and stopped the dog a little while later.

I admit my bias, lol, but I honestly don't care how the dog was bred, any dog that is a down dog getting rooted in the guts/ass-end, after having its defenses breached that deep into a deal ... but still makes a comeback like that ... shows uncommon resolve and determination to win IMO :)

He is not my official vote, but I do believe his effort is worthy of consideration.

The Chavis (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=37122) dog Hushman mentioned sounds like an incredible animal also :exclamation:

Jack

[ragedog10]

I'll go with CH.Lotto (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=45768) he took what most would not and would of been then all night long.

[stopem]

I always thought that gameness was the name of the game but if he look at it in this sense then Hallie Berry (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=31342) should've been considered

[Officially Retired]

I'll go with CH.Lotto (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=45768) he took what most would not and would of been then all night long.

Was that in 2014?

[Officially Retired]

I always thought that gameness was the name of the game but if he look at it in this sense then Hallie Berry (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=31342) should've been considered

Who did she beat/time?

[bahayafresh]

Extreme Gameness should qualify a dog for DOY status, due to the trickery. One should also add more titles so that the level of honesty is balanced as well. If not a lot of key things will continue to go unnoticed.

[Officially Retired]

Split dead even at 13/13

[MWA]

I would also cull one that is game to the bone but lacks mouth, ability, stamina, intelligent, etc.

Never would I do such a thing. If a dog shows the will to never quit, regardless of what happens to him. He deserves to live in my book. JMO

GLOBAL

[MWA]

A truly elite dog may never be put in the situation where it had to show heart...so I believe having two separate titles would be best.

I agree 100%

GLOBAL

[Officially Retired]

Never would I do such a thing. If a dog shows the will to never quit, regardless of what happens to him. He deserves to live in my book. JMO

GLOBAL

Yeah, this guy Pit Bull Committed needs to be committed.

He speaks about breeding top quality animals "through culling" ... but I'm not sure if he's ever actually bred a top quality, Champion-defeating animal =;

As best as I can tell, hard-culling produces nothing ... only breeding decisions produce dogs.

No one that I know of, who actually has bred top-quality animals, culls exceptionally-game dogs.

That is the mark of an idiot/dog-butcher, but not a dogman.

I do agree that ability is certainly important, of course it's important, but dogmen treasure gameness above all else ... you don't kill exceptionally-game dogs.

Jack

[EGK]

I agree 100%

GLOBAL

I'm with this also and if gameness comes into account with elite dogs on the grand stage with eachother. We all still will be looking more at the Grand stage.

[ragedog10]

Was that in 2014?

Yes it was.

[MISTER]

I'll go with CH.Lotto (http://www.thepitbullbible.com/forum/bulldog_profile.php?dog_id=45768) he took what most would not and would of been then all night long.

Gets my vote too

[EWO]

I voted NO. I think DOY is a performance title. I would like to think it means for the period of that year a certain dog won over the stiffest of competition. I do not know a lot about this year's odds on favorite (PBB DOY) but the fact he won as many as he did and beat a dog who had won just about as many as he did would get my vote for DOY.

If one of the dog's he totally outclassed yet made those chin scraping, legs broken scratches were on the ballot I would not vote him for DOY. But if there was a category for GameDog of the Year that dog that showed that gameness would get my vote, and the winner/loser would not factor in.

I consider DOY as the best total package dog for that given year. I think it was in a previous post, but the gamest dogs find themselves on the 'losing' side of the bracket, simply by running into a more talented/higher ability dog. And, unfortunately, and I do not agree, that 'losing game dog' often ends up seen as a plug. If that same dog did the exact same thing, yet won, for whatever reason, his gameness is deemed more valuable.

I like the idea of having multiple year end titles. I like the idea of Kennel of the Year, and maybe even Producer of the Year as well. No other 'organization' has just one year end award. I mean at 9PM the Oscars come on, they make one award announcement, and then its if off by 9:04.

I would love to see another category "Gamest DOY". For me, and it is my personal opinion, GDOY would be more impressive than DOY. EWO

[S_B]

I voted NO. I think DOY is a performance title. I would like to think it means for the period of that year a certain dog won over the stiffest of competition. I do not know a lot about this year's odds on favorite (PBB DOY) but the fact he won as many as he did and beat a dog who had won just about as many as he did would get my vote for DOY.

If one of the dog's he totally outclassed yet made those chin scraping, legs broken scratches were on the ballot I would not vote him for DOY. But if there was a category for GameDog of the Year that dog that showed that gameness would get my vote, and the winner/loser would not factor in.

I consider DOY as the best total package dog for that given year. I think it was in a previous post, but the gamest dogs find themselves on the 'losing' side of the bracket, simply by running into a more talented/higher ability dog. And, unfortunately, and I do not agree, that 'losing game dog' often ends up seen as a plug. If that same dog did the exact same thing, yet won, for whatever reason, his gameness is deemed more valuable.

I like the idea of having multiple year end titles. I like the idea of Kennel of the Year, and maybe even Producer of the Year as well. No other 'organization' has just one year end award. I mean at 9PM the Oscars come on, they make one award announcement, and then its if off by 9:04.

I would love to see another category "Gamest DOY". For me, and it is my personal opinion, GDOY would be more impressive than DOY. EWO

:appl:

[MISTER]

I would also cull one that is game to the bone but lacks mouth, ability, stamina, intelligent, etc.

What are smoking? My 2xw was a game dog, little below average mouth, average ability but rocket scratches. he won his first in 247, won his 2nd in 2hrs(which I should've retired him nd built a dynasty around him) and lost his 3rd into a tough 1xw who had recently beaten a highly regarded CH. I knew what this dog was ”a game dog” on his best day but he won 2 and lost extremely game in his 3rd, are you telling me this dog should've been culled after schooling? No he deserved to live and do what he was bred to do. The only mistake that was made was by me not retiring him. Game dogs very much deserve to live and should revered by those who witness them or own them

[S_B]

Yes Mister game dogs are the epitome of what these dogs are hence the name.

I know where Pit Bull Committed is coming from though. I've known many dogmen who would also cull a game plug in search of a match dog. Typically these men have no interests in breeding stock so that type of animal has no value to them.

I certainly would never cull a dog who never stopped trying, I think it is backwards thinking. If you don't want to continue with them send them to someone who will. These are the dogs who possess the foundation to build upon.

S_B

[Black Hand]

Mister, most people can't win with a dog like that. They need all kinds of mouth, ability, and all the strengths to pull out a win. There are some guys who don't have the balls to let it ride and give one the chance unless they feel like they are a heavy favorite. Nobody likes to lose, but some are terrified by it. A good durable game dog is as hard as any to beat.

[Officially Retired]

Typically these men have no interests in breeding stock so that type of animal has no value to them.

Like I said, dog butchers, not dogmen.

And they seldom have really good records either.

Jack

[Officially Retired]

I voted NO. I think DOY is a performance title. I would like to think it means for the period of that year a certain dog won over the stiffest of competition. I do not know a lot about this year's odds on favorite (PBB DOY) but the fact he won as many as he did and beat a dog who had won just about as many as he did would get my vote for DOY.

If one of the dog's he totally outclassed yet made those chin scraping, legs broken scratches were on the ballot I would not vote him for DOY. But if there was a category for GameDog of the Year that dog that showed that gameness would get my vote, and the winner/loser would not factor in.

I consider DOY as the best total package dog for that given year. I think it was in a previous post, but the gamest dogs find themselves on the 'losing' side of the bracket, simply by running into a more talented/higher ability dog. And, unfortunately, and I do not agree, that 'losing game dog' often ends up seen as a plug. If that same dog did the exact same thing, yet won, for whatever reason, his gameness is deemed more valuable.

I like the idea of having multiple year end titles. I like the idea of Kennel of the Year, and maybe even Producer of the Year as well. No other 'organization' has just one year end award. I mean at 9PM the Oscars come on, they make one award announcement, and then its if off by 9:04.

I would love to see another category "Gamest DOY". For me, and it is my personal opinion, GDOY would be more impressive than DOY. EWO


:appl:

+1 Well said.

[DUKE_CITY]

I like that ewo

[DUKE_CITY]

A game dog always has a spot on my yard.

[DUKE_CITY]

Gamest dog of the year should get titled. I'm all for a gdoy.

That would shake the game up.

[Macker]

Gameness is the foundation that all these once in a lifetime world beaters where built on, if the men that laid these foundations had the same cull cull cull attitude that some guys have, these animals would have never been born.

We have a saying and that's that you'll get no luck for killing a gamedog, an old dog or a pup.

A gamedog has done all within his ability and still wants to do more, an old dog has obviously been a loyal servant and just because he or she can't produce pups anymore they've earned the right to live their days out in peace and a pup, if you don't have space for them then don't bring them into the world, it's not their fault we get greedy.

I'm not religious but I believe we still need a bit of luck in this game, truth be know we need a lot lol

Don't get me wrong, no body wants a yard full of game plugs but if you find yourself with a yard full of them, don't question the dogs, question the way you've bred them. Because More than likely your breeding methods have given you a yard full of rubbish.

[bulldoghistorian]

Dunno the longer I am in these dogs gameness has a limit
I doubt any dog could just go on and on , I mean if a dog would have to show gameness on and on , the tear on his body
he probably wouldn't even make it to nr 5
I have seen quite a few and seen those that would show extreme gameness only to be brought out again and quit in short time

[No Quarter Kennel]

A truly elite dog may never be put in the situation where it had to show heart...so I believe having two separate titles would be best.

I agree with this.
Simply b/c a dog has never had to display heart to win doesn't mean the heart isn't there.
DOY is about performance and there is a lot to consider. More than all the different abilities, keeps, handling and gameness. There's a ton to consider. So, b/c there are so many ways to win and so many ways to lose, DOY accolades should not consider one component over the other, but rather sum of all components.

Gene Stallings went to Bear Bryant about a recruit for football one time. He was super excited. Kept pointing out how, no matter how many times this young man got knocked down, he would always get back up and keep coming back for more. Showed Coach Bryant countless examples of how this young man would always come back for more, no matter what happened to him. He finally asked Coach Bryant, "So what do you think". Coach Bryant didn't hesitate. He simply said, "I want the guy that keeps knocking him down"

Winning is about winning. Doesn't matter how, especially in a sport where there are so many ways to lose. One freak "Fear Bite" from a cur that is losing drastically from the bottom can end a fight or even the life of a truly great animal.

So no, I don't think gameness should carry more weight in selecting a DOY candidate than other components. I think it is definitely a consideration, but no more than a lot of other components.

[No Quarter Kennel]

I voted NO. I think DOY is a performance title. I would like to think it means for the period of that year a certain dog won over the stiffest of competition. I do not know a lot about this year's odds on favorite (PBB DOY) but the fact he won as many as he did and beat a dog who had won just about as many as he did would get my vote for DOY.

If one of the dog's he totally outclassed yet made those chin scraping, legs broken scratches were on the ballot I would not vote him for DOY. But if there was a category for GameDog of the Year that dog that showed that gameness would get my vote, and the winner/loser would not factor in.

I consider DOY as the best total package dog for that given year. I think it was in a previous post, but the gamest dogs find themselves on the 'losing' side of the bracket, simply by running into a more talented/higher ability dog. And, unfortunately, and I do not agree, that 'losing game dog' often ends up seen as a plug. If that same dog did the exact same thing, yet won, for whatever reason, his gameness is deemed more valuable.

I like the idea of having multiple year end titles. I like the idea of Kennel of the Year, and maybe even Producer of the Year as well. No other 'organization' has just one year end award. I mean at 9PM the Oscars come on, they make one award announcement, and then its if off by 9:04.

I would love to see another category "Gamest DOY". For me, and it is my personal opinion, GDOY would be more impressive than DOY. EWO

As usual - well said

[No Quarter Kennel]

Like I said, dog butchers, not dogmen.

And they seldom have really good records either.

Jack

Jack, I get where you are coming from, but there are a lot of good dogmen in the area that I'm in, who have no interest in breeding. They are actually humane, but on the same hand, do not have any use for a dog who cannot win in dominant fashion. Their win/loss records are as good as anyone on the planet. Simply b/c they have no use for a dog that is ONLY game does not mean they murder/cull/or destroy the animals, it only means they have no use for them. Me? Sure, I'll feed and breed a game dog, but again, I'm not doing what they are doing and not on their level.

I'm not taking a 205lb guy who can take a beating and never stop but can do nothing else, to fight Jon Jones. It's not a smart business decision.

[No Quarter Kennel]

Gameness is the foundation that all these once in a lifetime world beaters where built on, if the men that laid these foundations had the same cull cull cull attitude that some guys have, these animals would have never been born.

We have a saying and that's that you'll get no luck for killing a gamedog, an old dog or a pup.

A gamedog has done all within his ability and still wants to do more, an old dog has obviously been a loyal servant and just because he or she can't produce pups anymore they've earned the right to live their days out in peace and a pup, if you don't have space for them then don't bring them into the world, it's not their fault we get greedy.

I'm not religious but I believe we still need a bit of luck in this game, truth be know we need a lot lol

Don't get me wrong, no body wants a yard full of game plugs but if you find yourself with a yard full of them, don't question the dogs, question the way you've bred them. Because More than likely your breeding methods have given you a yard full of rubbish.

You just said if you have a yard full of game dogs, then you have rubbish????

[No Quarter Kennel]

Dunno the longer I am in these dogs gameness has a limit
I doubt any dog could just go on and on , I mean if a dog would have to show gameness on and on , the tear on his body
he probably wouldn't even make it to nr 5
I have seen quite a few and seen those that would show extreme gameness only to be brought out again and quit in short time

Honestly - I think like you do.
I think that every single one will quit and they all have a clock that is ticking. The more damage they take, the faster the clock ticks. Less recovery they get, the faster the clock is ticking. It goes on and on.

Any dog and every dog born CAN BE STOPPED!

[Macker]

I just said a lot things, if that's how you read it then so be it. Let me lay it out a bit simpler.

Take gameness as the most solid foundation to build upon, if you have a solid family of game dogs you can build upon it in your breeding choices, if you constantly get game plug after game plug, ask yourself where your going wrong.

If you wanna twist what I say to make out something else but I take gameness as the single most important factor when breeding dogs.

[S_B]

I just said a lot things, if that's how you read it then so be it. Let me lay it out a bit simpler.

Take gameness as the most solid foundation to build upon, if you have a solid family of game dogs you can build upon it in your breeding choices, if you constantly get game plug after game plug, ask yourself where your going wrong.

If you wanna twist what I say to make out something else but I take gameness as the single most important factor when breeding dogs.

I got where you were coming from Macker. It is the truth! Gameness should come first in foundation dogs and you build from there. The idea is the total package animal that can win with the least amount of damage or if needed can be there all night long.

I think No Quarter might have just focused on that small part of what you wrote instead of the whole?

I see we are holding pretty steady at a tie. I'm kind of confused as to why anyone would vote yes after reading all of these pages of good information. We can't all agree and that's what keeps us honest and interested but I would like to hear more from the "yes" voters!

S_B

[Macker]

I voted no, I'd like to see the separate categories, it just makes it a hole lot more interesting every year when we're voting and debating. Look at the mileage we're getting from this sure lol

[S_B]

No was my vote and a separate award for GDOY is an awesome title! :-bd

[MISTER]

Mouth, ability, structure, and wind can be added, the only thing that can't be added is gameness. When building a yard that should be priority 1 then concentrate on everything else. I think there should be DOY and GDOY also....

[Officially Retired]

Yep.

All the hardware in the world isn't worth much if there's no will to use it.

I understand the premise of elite dogs sometimes never being tested ... and how DOY is more about the "most decorated" dog versus the gamest.

Still what turns a fighter from "front runner" to "legend" is having to display depth of heart in the trenches.

We all knew Ali was great, talent-wise, but it was only through his life & death wars with Frazier/Foreman, etc. that Ali earned his immortality.

If you watch the Ali/Frazier wars, and compare them to today's heavyweights, makes you want to shut your tv off to today's fighters ... after you've seen that level of heavyweight matchup.

Buck had his legendary war ... Jeep had his legendary war ... and the camp with Titere has gone to war ... but it seems like Titere is just too good for what's out there for there to be the same kind of war.

Not trying to take away from Titere at all (far from it, he has my vote) ... but (conceptually) I am raising the question of shouldn't a fighter have to overcome extreme adversity ... in a legendary fight at some point ... to become a legend ... or are some dogs just so good that no one can truly check their oil?

Jack

[Officially Retired]

Damn it's neck-and-neck ...


32 Yes
34 No

This is the closest Poll I have ever run ...

Jack

[MISTER]

Yep.

All the hardware in the world isn't worth much if there's no will to use it.

I understand the premise of elite dogs sometimes never being tested ... and how DOY is more about the "most decorated" dog versus the gamest.

Still what turns a fighter from "front runner" to "legend" is having to display depth of heart in the trenches.

We all knew Ali was great, talent-wise, but it was only through his life & death wars with Frazier/Foreman, etc. that Ali earned his immortality.

If you watch the Ali/Frazier wars, and compare them to today's heavyweights, makes you want to shut your tv off to today's fighters ... after you've seen that level of heavyweight matchup.

Buck had his legendary war ... Jeep had his legendary war ... and the camp with Titere has gone to war ... but it seems like Titere is just too good for what's out there for there to be the same kind of war.

Not trying to take away from Titere at all (far from it, he has my vote) ... but (conceptually) I am raising the question of shouldn't a fighter have to overcome extreme adversity ... in a legendary fight at some point ... to become a legend ... or are some dogs just so good that no one can truly check their oil?

Jack


Check that Thrilla In Manila my friend Ali quit on his stool. Eddie Futch picked Frazier up being Frazier good eye was closed which rendered him blind. All Frazier had to do was answer the bell which he wanted too... Sorry for getting off topic lol.

Hey Jack I believe some are just that good where they never get tested. Here's one for ya, would CH Bad Rosemary would've gotten challenged if Ablizin didn't bring her out in horrible shape? I think not nd feel the same bout titere to find out if he's game he'd have to be handicapped which nobody in their right mind would do...

[Officially Retired]

Check that Thrilla In Manila my friend Ali quit on his stool. Eddie Futch picked Frazier up being Frazier good eye was closed which rendered him blind. All Frazier had to do was answer the bell which he wanted too... Sorry for getting off topic lol.

Hey Jack I believe some are just that good where they never get tested. Here's one for ya, would CH Bad Rosemary would've gotten challenged if Ablizin didn't bring her out in horrible shape? I think not nd feel the same bout titere to find out if he's game he'd have to be handicapped which nobody in their right mind would do...

Sorry to continue the digression ... thought Ali wanted to quit against Henry Cooper, for shit being in his eye.

Do not remember Ali quitting on the Thrilla ...

EDIT: You were right ... Dundee had to "bump him with his leg" :lol:

[MWA]

Yep.

All the hardware in the world isn't worth much if there's no will to use it.

I understand the premise of elite dogs sometimes never being tested ... and how DOY is more about the "most decorated" dog versus the gamest.

Still what turns a fighter from "front runner" to "legend" is having to display depth of heart in the trenches.

We all knew Ali was great, talent-wise, but it was only through his life & death wars with Frazier/Foreman, etc. that Ali earned his immortality.

If you watch the Ali/Frazier wars, and compare them to today's heavyweights, makes you want to shut your tv off to today's fighters ... after you've seen that level of heavyweight matchup.

Buck had his legendary war ... Jeep had his legendary war ... and the camp with Titere has gone to war ... but it seems like Titere is just too good for what's out there for there to be the same kind of war.

Not trying to take away from Titere at all (far from it, he has my vote) ... but (conceptually) I am raising the question of shouldn't a fighter have to overcome extreme adversity ... in a legendary fight at some point ... to become a legend ... or are some dogs just so good that no one can truly check their oil?

Jack

Ali wasn't game like smoking joe, he was ready to quit. And would have quit that fight had Joes corner not threw in the towel. However it was one hell've battle.

GLOBAL

[No Quarter Kennel]

I just said a lot things, if that's how you read it then so be it. Let me lay it out a bit simpler.

Take gameness as the most solid foundation to build upon, if you have a solid family of game dogs you can build upon it in your breeding choices, if you constantly get game plug after game plug, ask yourself where your going wrong.

If you wanna twist what I say to make out something else but I take gameness as the single most important factor when breeding dogs.

Wasn't twisting anything, you said if you had ONLY all game plugs then you didn't have much. I agree. I also know what you MEANT. Just pointed out that you did say that and I agree. I also agree with what you say here. Gameness is #1, but it won't stand alone these days. Nothing will. You have to have a total package.

It makes me question some of these breedings off of frozen semen that are throw backs from 20+ years back. In 20 years, these dogs have evolved drastically in ability. There are a lot of dogs that would destroy some of the legends of yesterday. Why would anyone really want to breed to that older stuff? I know there are exceptions and I would do it myself to the right stud or straw, but it's just something to consider and think about.

And by the way, I don't agree you don't "Have Much" if all you have is game. Said that wrong. I just mean, you can't consistently win with gameness alone.

For the record, my vote was no

[MISTER]

I must admit I really enjoy these threads. Folks can disagree without it becoming a pissing war, I'VE FOUND MY NEW HOME LOL

[Officially Retired]

Ali wasn't game like smoking joe, he was ready to quit. And would have quit that fight had Joes corner not threw in the towel. However it was one hell've battle.

GLOBAL


It would be hard for any fighter to be gamer than Frazier.

He basically committed suicide when he faced Foremen the first time, and put that kind of relentless pressure on a devastating puncher like that ... although it looked like he almost turned and tried to jump for a split second there after like his 5th knockdown (was hard to tell if he had his faculties or not).

On the second fight, Frazier tried to be cute (turned boxer) ... he had enough of pressure-fighting Foremen ... and, though he gave a good effort and made it to Round 5, when he got floored again and Foreman started finding him, he sure wasn't protesting that stoppage ;)

Jack

[Officially Retired]

I must admit I really enjoy these threads. Folks can disagree without it becoming a pissing war, I'VE FOUND MY NEW HOME LOL

:pirate:

[MISTER]

It would be hard for any fighter to be gamer than Frazier.

He basically committed suicide when he faced Foremen the first time, and put that kind of relentless pressure on a devastating puncher like that ... although it looked like he almost turned and tried to jump for a split second there after like his 5th knockdown (was hard to tell if he had his faculties or not).

On the second fight, Frazier tried to be cute (turned boxer) ... he had enough of pressure-fighting Foremen ... and, though he gave a good effort and made it to Round 5, when he got floored again and Foreman started finding him, he sure wasn't protesting that stoppage ;)

Jack

That's when fighters were fighters, To be the best you had to beat the best. Frazier didn't have to fight Ali the first time as Ali was still exiled from boxing. Frazier helped Ali get his license back to fight him to prove he deserved the crown. It's not like that anymore in boxing or dogs, folks skirt around quality opposition to maintain their status that's why the dogs on the PBB DOY list are so respected along with their camps, they go after the best to prove they're the best. Even the camps and dogs who came up short have the upmost respect for giving it an honest go

[Officially Retired]

Very well said. These guys truly were fighters.

Was watching both Frazier/Foreman fights again, and the way they were seriously trying to KO each other (not "last the round" and "win on points") made me miss those days of boxing.

Boxing has no sense of history anymore. It's no longer about boxers fighting for the prestigious 8 titles ... it's 60 different titles, 5 different divisions, with every boxer thinking "he" is the big deal rather than the title.

Scroll back and watch Sugar Ray Robinson, the work ethic and level of comp, and boxing has lost anything close to that now.

They fought for a living ... multiple times every year ... they didn't only fight once/twice per year ...

Jack

[TALLMAN]

It has to be performance, in which gameness is its most unique and defining component.

[STA8541]

There are a lot of dogs that would destroy some of the legends of yesterday.

And there are a lot of the legends of yesterday that would destroy some of the dogs of today.

Don't kid yourself: good dogs are where you find em. When you find em's got nothin to do w/it.

[Officially Retired]

I agree. Dogs are dogs.

The dogs of today are no better than the dogs of yesterday.

Jack

[Officially Retired]

The desire to see deep Gameness in this Honorary DOY Title is now taking the lead ...


Yes: 35
No: 34

Again, this is the closest Poll ever run here in the 3+ years we've been online ...

Jack

[MISTER]

I agree. Dogs are dogs.

The dogs of today are no better than the dogs of yesterday.

Jack

I too agree with this, dogs are dogs however the knowledge of how to feed, maintain, and put a dog thru a keep using vitamins, supplements etc. are far greater then the methods of the past. I wonder how much better the dogs of the past would've performed if their owners had access to the information we do today

[BROWNING]

I agree. Dogs are dogs.

The dogs of today are no better than the dogs of yesterday.

Jack

I AGREE

[S_B]

It makes me question some of these breedings off of frozen semen that are throw backs from 20+ years back. In 20 years, these dogs have evolved drastically in ability. There are a lot of dogs that would destroy some of the legends of yesterday. Why would anyone really want to breed to that older stuff?

I disagree here...a lot of those truly greats would still be at the top of the food chain. Imagine the same men with the access to nutrition and aftercare because that is what has evolved!


And there are a lot of the legends of yesterday that would destroy some of the dogs of today.

Don't kid yourself: good dogs are where you find em. When you find em's got nothin to do w/it.


I agree. Dogs are dogs.

The dogs of today are no better than the dogs of yesterday.

Jack

:-bd

[S_B]

I too agree with this, dogs are dogs however the knowledge of how to feed, maintain, and put a dog thru a keep using vitamins, supplements etc. are far greater then the methods of the past. I wonder how much better the dogs of the past would've performed if their owners had access to the information we do today
;)

[No Quarter Kennel]

I agree. Dogs are dogs.

The dogs of today are no better than the dogs of yesterday.

Jack

Jack I think this totally contradicts what seems to be your breeding practices and by no means do I assume to know what you believe, but one would think, according to all you have written and posted, that you would get better dogs over time from selective breeding that what you started with.

If this is halfway accurate, then over the course of 100 years of competition and breeding (selectively) then the breed would improve.

Mouth alone is something that has improved. The dogs with the ability to end a fight in one bite are many more now than they use to be. If this is true, and it is, then other abilities have improved as well.

I will respectfully disagree yourself and Sta8541. I believe the top tier of bulldogs today are better than the top tier of times long gone. More importantly, I believe the average bulldog today is in a faster lane than the average dogs of long ago.

JMO - great topic and quality discussion.

[No Quarter Kennel]

And there are a lot of the legends of yesterday that would destroy some of the dogs of today.

Don't kid yourself: good dogs are where you find em. When you find em's got nothin to do w/it.

I'm not kidding anyone, much less myself. You are right about "legends" of yesterday destroying "some dogs of today". However, there are just "some dogs" that could beat "legends" of yesterday. I know good ones are where you find them. Learned that in my first Stratton book years ago. However, there are better today than yesterday. My opinion.

You know, Jessie Owens is a legend of yesterday.He ran in the 10.3's.
I routinely see High School Kids of today run in the sub 10.5's EVERY year and about every other year, I see multiple 10.3's at the State Meet. Multiple High School BOYS that would routinely beat a WORLD CLASS LEGEND. The examples and proof is everywhere.

[Officially Retired]

Jack I think this totally contradicts what seems to be your breeding practices and by no means do I assume to know what you believe, but one would think, according to all you have written and posted, that you would get better dogs over time from selective breeding that what you started with.

If this is halfway accurate, then over the course of 100 years of competition and breeding (selectively) then the breed would improve.

Mouth alone is something that has improved. The dogs with the ability to end a fight in one bite are many more now than they use to be. If this is true, and it is, then other abilities have improved as well.

I will respectfully disagree yourself and Sta8541. I believe the top tier of bulldogs today are better than the top tier of times long gone. More importantly, I believe the average bulldog today is in a faster lane than the average dogs of long ago.

JMO - great topic and quality discussion.

Hey No Quarter, I can see why you'd say that, so let me clarify what I mean.

My linebreeding practices aren't making "better dogs today" than what I had yesterday ... what they're doing is creating what I like in a dog to be able to replicate itself reliably and consistently.

All of this work I have done hasn't created "way better dogs" than the best dogs I had, what isolating my gene pool has done is ensure my ability to get that kind of ability, again and again.

Freak ability is something that comes and goes.

There has never been an ace that only produces aces.

There has never been a "consistently ace" bloodline.

There are aces that come out of nowhere (shit) on a RARE occasion ... and there are aces that come out of "general excellence" on a more frequent (but still not every) occasion.

My linebreeding efforts have not created "otherworldy" dogs that are better than yesterday's dogs ... my efforts have simply created reliable and consistent excellence, that will be more dependable than from a hodgepodge of unrelated shit.

Hope this clarifies :)

Jack

[Officially Retired]

I'm not kidding anyone, much less myself. You are right about "legends" of yesterday destroying "some dogs of today". However, there are just "some dogs" that could beat "legends" of yesterday. I know good ones are where you find them. Learned that in my first Stratton book years ago. However, there are better today than yesterday. My opinion.

You know, Jessie Owens is a legend of yesterday.He ran in the 10.3's.
I routinely see High School Kids of today run in the sub 10.5's EVERY year and about every other year, I see multiple 10.3's at the State Meet. Multiple High School BOYS that would routinely beat a WORLD CLASS LEGEND. The examples and proof is everywhere.

These kids also start younger, have better training, better nutrition, better shoes, better track, etc. ... (e.g., I believe Jesse Owens ran his time on cinders ...)

[STA8541]

These kids also start younger, have better training, better nutrition, better shoes, better track, etc. ... (e.g., I believe Jesse Owens ran his time on cinders ...)

:-bd

I love these arguments where kids try to "prove" that today's athletes (2 footed or 4 footed) are "better" than the legends of yesteryear. Such a thing can never, ever be truly proven to a certainty. All that has improved, as has been stated, is nutrition, training methods, etc. But the basic genetic material? No. So of course it begs the question what would Jesse Owens or whoever do w/today's technology? Again, impossible to state, but if you're a betting man (& I am)...

Damn sure I bet Jesse Owens would smoke those "routine High School kids" all day every day till he got bored of doing it.

[STA8541]

There are just "some dogs" that could beat "legends" of yesterday...there are better today than yesterday. My opinion.

You said that. And I said that there are just some "legends" of yesterday that could beat "some dogs" of today. There are better yesterday than today too. You're entitled to your opinion. I am also entitled to mine. Aces are aces, period. Era doesn't matter a whit.


You know, Jessie Owens is a legend of yesterday.He ran in the 10.3's.
I routinely see High School Kids of today run in the sub 10.5's EVERY year and about every other year, I see multiple 10.3's at the State Meet. Multiple High School BOYS that would routinely beat a WORLD CLASS LEGEND. The examples and proof is everywhere.

And if I gave Jesse Owens the exact same shoes, track surfaces, nutrition, coaching, & training methods, then turned him loose on your high schoolers, he would leave them a shambles in his wake. You are giving all those edges to the youngsters, none of which have a whit to do w/ability. Cite whatever examples & alleged "proof" you like & the response is always & forever the same. Legends are legends & can beat anything at any time; that's why they're legends. You shouldn't punish an athlete for the era he/she played or fought in. Your opinion is your own; mine is mine.

[Macker]

Are we doing a separate poll for kennels of the year? We get a few nominations goin.

[No Quarter Kennel]

Jack, point noted. And for the record, I do agree with that. Great clarification.
To clarify my point, to a further extent, I believe there is more ability in dogs of today than yesterday. Specifically mouth. There are dogs out there taking the entire face off of hogs and it is a more frequent occurrence than it ever was before. Dogs taking the entire front legs off of hogs. This happens frequently while I don't hear too much about that kind of thing going on in the past. To be consistent, I believe there are more curs now than ever before as well due to specificity to breeding to ability too much (mouth specifically).

But your point, noted, appreciated and I agree.

Cite whatever examples & alleged "proof" you like & the response is always & forever the same. Legends are legends & can beat anything at any time; that's why they're legends. You shouldn't punish an athlete for the era he/she played or fought in. Your opinion is your own; mine is mine.

Look at what you said above Sta8. You said that "legends can beat anything at any time; that's why they're legends" and then you go on to state "you shouldn't punish an athlete for the era he/she played or fought in"

Which is it? Can they beat anyone any time or just the ones they competed against in their era? Personally, I get your "legend" qualification. I get that they are a legend b/c of what they did in the time they did it in. However, that does not guarantee they would make the starting line up TODAY or in another era. I won't hold their era against them but I won't say they could have done the same in a different era. If we can all agree a dog could not or would not make the same strides in different hands, keep, a different weight, etc. then how in the world do we qualify that animal as making the grade in a completely different day and age?

Legends truly are legends b/c of what they did, against who they did it against and how and when they did it. However, as magnificent as they are/were in their era, nothing guarantees they would do the same against a different opponent in a different day and age.

Honestly, I think we are all on about 9 out of 10 the same pages, but just a few critical differences. Oh yeah, I ain't no fucking kid either pops! ;)

[Rschag]

I think every dogman thrives for gameness in their bulldogs genes. also to base DOY on just performance would be quite unfair due to the fact that some of the gamest bulldogs get over looked on a regular basis.

[STA8541]

Sta8, ou said that "legends can beat anything at any time; that's why they're legends" and then you go on to state "you shouldn't punish an athlete for the era he/she played or fought in"

Which is it? Can they beat anyone any time or just the ones they competed against in their era?

Legends can beat anyone at any time (note: this is NOT the same thing as saying they will win...but they surely can, no matter the era the dog they are facing hails from) I don't know why you are having trouble w/this concept. There is NO guarantee that any dog from this era (I don't care how great he is) could beat one from days gone by, surely not one of the old aces. It's just that simple. It's why they call it gambling, son.


I get that they are a legend b/c of what they did in the time they did it in. However, that does not guarantee they would make the starting line up TODAY or in another era. I won't hold their era against them but I won't say they could have done the same in a different era.

Nothing guarantees any starting lineup (whatever that is) to any dog from any era. Just b/c a dog is a modern day legend does not guarantee they would make the "starting lineup" IN ANOTHER ERA. To put it another way: whoever your personal choice of "ace of aces" is this year is NOT guaranteed to beat any one of the old timey aces. He might win, sure...but then again, he might not. You pays your $ & you takes your chances. There is no "proof" of anything you have alleged about "new being better than old." Good ones & bad ones are where you find em. In any year.

And I won't hold today's dogs era against them, but I won't say they could have done the same in days gone by. We are even there.


If we can all agree a dog could not or would not make the same strides in different hands, keep, a different weight, etc. then how in the world do we qualify that animal as making the grade in a completely different day and age?

The only guy who is trying to "qualify that animal as making the grade in a completely different day & age" here is you. My point was that you have no idea about whether or not a dog of today could whip a dog of yesterday. You'd need to level the weights, erase the years, put em in a keep, then set em down (for $$$). And since no one can do that, all you are doing is speculating. I'll say it again: aces are aces.


Legends truly are legends b/c of what they did, against who they did it against and how and when they did it. However, as magnificent as they are/were in their era, nothing guarantees they would do the same against a different opponent in a different day and age.

Today's great dogs are great b/c of what they did against who they did it against & how & when they did it. However, as magnificent as they are in their day (today), nothing guarantees they would do the same against a different opponent in a different day & age. Again, we are even here.


Oh yeah, I ain't no fucking kid either pops! ;)

Anybody who makes an inane argument like "an athlete of today is, by that very reason of "today," superior to LEGENDS of days gone by" hasn't demonstrated the maturity not to be called a kid! ;) Every time I've heard the argument made (on behalf of various 4 footed & 2 footed athletes) it has been by a guy who is just a kid, & doesn't know enough to know when he's said something factually untenable.

[No Quarter Kennel]

Look dude, first of all, you really need to drop all the "son" and "kid" bullshit. The only time I see a guy contradict himself within two sentences, it's usually a moron but you don't see me calling you a moron b/c I can't understand your point

Second and most important, you take a good long time getting around to a point. You first said, if you look up and have a yard full of game plugs, you essentially don't have anything and yet you want to argue gameness is paramount. That is without a question, a contradiction.

Third, you are now saying "an ace is an ace". This I agree with. It doesn't qualify him to be anything other than what he is, when he was, against who he did it and how he did it. You are the one speculating b/c you say they can beat anyone, anywhere, anytime, etc.

Lastly, I never said aces then are not on the same level as aces. This has been you point of emphasis b/c it is easier to prove your point. I simply said that dogs, as whole, are better today than yesterday. That's my opinion and it won't change.

I'm done arguing with you b/c this is exactly how a great thread like this gets all screwed up. You know, a guy calling names and talking in circles. So, I will NOT respond to you about this any further.

Have a great day sir!

[EWO]

It's a tough argument. I think the difference is the feed, nutrition, supplementation, that has changed. Merely opinion, but I do not think they have evolved enough, even through selective breeding, to say they (as a whole) are biting any harder than they did 10-20-30-40-50 years ago.

I think what it is now is thru better feed, better nutrition/supplementation and readily available bloodwork to make changes, the dog bites the same as he did many moons ago. Todays dog may be able to stay in hold longer with a more violent shake.

EWO

[Officially Retired]

Anybody who makes an inane argument like "an athlete of today is, by that very reason of "today," superior to LEGENDS of days gone by" hasn't demonstrated the maturity not to be called a kid! ;) Every time I've heard the argument made (on behalf of various 4 footed & 2 footed athletes) it has been by a guy who is just a kid, & doesn't know enough to know when he's said something factually untenable.

Let's be cool.

I actually agree with you that today's dogs are no better than yesterday's dogs ... but NQK is not a kid ... and he is entitled to have his own opinion on a subject.

I believe that today's dogs simply have better nutrition/conditioning knowledge behind them but are ultimately are no different/better than yesterday's dogs, in general.

Jack

[Macker]

I see the yes vote is slightly pulling ahead, does that mean there won't be a desperate category for gamest dog of the year?

[No Quarter Kennel]

So I'm not getting off track, I do want to clarify, I would be all for Game Dog of Year, but not that Gameness be a requirement any higher than any other in terms of DOY.

Now, back to arguing. If we can selectively breed for better air and to an extent, style, then why could the ability to bite harder not be enhanced through selective breeding? Furthermore, if it can, has there not been a heavier emphasis on breeding for mouth in the past 30 years compared to the previous 50 before that?

I may need to start a new poll. I feel like I'm in the minority here, but where I come from, this is pretty common thinking. Who knows?

Cheerios

[S_B]

The yes vote is pulling ahead slightly and re-reading the poll questions I can see why folks would cast that yes vote. To me the options are a bit tricky. Sure anyone attracted to these dogs wants gameness to be a prerequisite for any award given. But an award that is going out to a single individual in an entire calendar year should be based on more than just an extremely game bulldog.

Take for instance DBL GR CH Tornado...I've only had the pleasure of viewing some of her contests via recordings. There have been discussions among friends questioning her gameness. Here's what I have to say about that. Judging by what I have seen Tornado was an Ace, she may not have looked to some as being a brutal dog. But she would adapt to any style and bite you down. She did this all while making it look easy and did not take much damage getting there.

Was Tornado game? I say she absolutely was. Any dog that takes 10 keeps and faces 10 opponents is nothing less than game IMO. Now I don't know for sure if DBL GR CH TORNADO received DOY, I'd imagine she did...but I guarantee her gameness isn't what qualified her for that :idea:

The point I'm making using Tornado as an example is...maybe to some she wasn't game. But there is no denying that was one truly bad ass bitch who faced all comers and whipped them in convincing fashion! That is what set her apart from all others. That is what an award like DOY of the year means to me. :)

S_B
(Voted No)

[STA8541]

Look dude, first of all, you really need to drop all the "son" and "kid" bullshit. The only time I see a guy contradict himself within two sentences, it's usually a moron but you don't see me calling you a moron b/c I can't understand your point

Look dude, I never contradicted myself.


Second and most important, you take a good long time getting around to a point. You first said, if you look up and have a yard full of game plugs, you essentially don't have anything and yet you want to argue gameness is paramount. That is without a question, a contradiction.

This is most important, b/c I never said a word about game plugs. You got your signals crossed.


Third, you are now saying "an ace is an ace". This I agree with. It doesn't qualify him to be anything other than what he is, when he was, against who he did it and how he did it. You are the one speculating b/c you say they can beat anyone, anywhere, anytime, etc.

No: you are the one who said today's dogs are better than those of yesterday. I never said it. All I did was show your statement was factually inaccurate & unprovable.


Lastly, I never said aces then are not on the same level as aces. This has been you point of emphasis b/c it is easier to prove your point. I simply said that dogs, as whole, are better today than yesterday. That's my opinion and it won't change.

Dogs, as a whole, are no better today than yesterday. The genes are exactly the same. That's my opinion & it won't change.


I'm done arguing with you b/c this is exactly how a great thread like this gets all screwed up. You know, a guy calling names and talking in circles. So, I will NOT respond to you about this any further.

Have a great day sir!

I'm glad you're done; I am too. I never called you any names; you started w/the profanity.

Take care, sir.

[STA8541]

Let's be cool.

I actually agree with you that today's dogs are no better than yesterday's dogs ... but NQK is not a kid ... and he is entitled to have his own opinion on a subject.

I believe that today's dogs simply have better nutrition/conditioning knowledge behind them but are ultimately are no different/better than yesterday's dogs, in general.

Jack

Never wasn't cool, Jack. He was the guy who started using profanity. I was simply defending a position. From a fellow that made it clear he had his opinion...so I simply stated mine.

And thank you for agreeing w/me, I appreciate that.

I apologize for any consternation or trouble I may have caused. Not my intent. Only wanted to get my point across, & it seems I have.

S'a nice thread too, by the by.

[ragedog10]

The yes vote is pulling ahead slightly and re-reading the poll questions I can see why folks would cast that yes vote. To me the options are a bit tricky. Sure anyone attracted to these dogs wants gameness to be a prerequisite for any award given. But an award that is going out to a single individual in an entire calendar year should be based on more than just an extremely game bulldog.

Take for instance DBL GR CH Tornado...I've only had the pleasure of viewing some of her contests via recordings. There have been discussions among friends questioning her gameness. Here's what I have to say about that. Judging by what I have seen Tornado was an Ace, she may not have looked to some as being a brutal dog. But she would adapt to any style and bite you down. She did this all while making it look easy and did not take much damage getting there.

Was Tornado game? I say she absolutely was. Any dog that takes 10 keeps and faces 10 opponents is nothing less than game IMO. Now I don't know for sure if DBL GR CH TORNADO received DOY, I'd imagine she did...but I guarantee her gameness isn't what qualified her for that :idea:

The point I'm making using Tornado as an example is...maybe to some she wasn't game. But there is no denying that was one truly bad ass bitch who faced all comers and whipped them in convincing fashion! That is what set her apart from all others. That is what an award like DOY of the year means to me. :)

S_B
(Voted No)
Here's my thing on the gameness of any match dog. Before he or she has been hooked he or she went thru schooling right? Now that final test is called what?" A GAME TEST" now with that only beinging 30 plus mins ( a rule edge in stone by yester year) then every dog match has show to be GAME! The level of ones gameness is whats to be displayed on party night if you ask me.
Using the thread " picking up game in 10-20 mins" if what most have said, showing the willingness to keep pressing, is showing that you have some level of gameness,Maybe just lacked in abilty that night.

And anyone that has a fighting backround should have the up most respect for a DEEP GAME DOG as we know no matter how much you condition yourself 5-12 three min rounds is LOOONG and if your heart is not in it its night,night! Lol

If you think about it some dogs are game and never have to show how DEEP GAME they are because they have so much ability example GRCH shady Lady five shows with a total time of 37 plus mins she had to have had more time on her in schooling! Now was she a game dog in my mind yes. She past her 30 min game test. Now how deep was her LEVEL of gameness who can ever say unless they seen her pushed to the max.

Now some my disagree with this but if we have a super ability dog who never get put on his back or put behind in schooling with dogs his size then we get something a lilttle bit bigger and super ruff on him or her. Reason being is I want to see his or hers LEVEL of gameness once they are not in control! Im not going to leave them down till they lose a limb as i plan on matching him or her but I wanna see if your a TRUE GAME DOG one that thinks they can win even tho they are getting put behind. Then your corner, if the more he or she gets put behind by this bigger class mate and we get u back to said corner and the all thing they want to do is go back to work because in his or her mind they are going to win!!! Now that there put chills up and down my spain!

[Officially Retired]

Have to disagree.

There are a gazillion dogs that were "game tested" before a match ... who failed to show game in their matches.

Just because a dog had some kind of game test in school is NOT the same thing as a dog showing extraordinary gameness in a match ... anymore than a dog doing well in school is the same thing as winning a match :idea:

To say, "My dog should be considered 'a game match dog' because he was tested in school," can't possibly be taken seriously.

Do you honestly think Ozzie's Homer was "tested as hard in school" as what he had to show in his match? :shocked:

Ummmmm, no.

Again, the minor level what many dogs are willing to go through "in school" does not in any way approach what they might have to face for real in a match ...

Jack

[ragedog10]

Have to disagree.

There are a gazillion dogs that were "game tested" before a match ... who failed to show game in their matches.

Just because a dog had some kind of game test in school is NOT the same thing as a dog showing extraordinary gameness in a match ... anymore than a dog doing well in school is the same thing as winning a match :idea:

To say, "My dog should be considered 'a game match dog' because he was tested in school," can't possibly be taken seriously.

Do you honestly think Ozzie's Homer was "tested as hard in school" as what he had to show in his match? :shocked:

Ummmmm, no.

Again, the minor level what many dogs are willing to go through "in school" does not in any way approach what they might have to face for real in a match ...

Jack
Very true, but as a whole everyone that says that they game test we as a whole think (30 mins) Is that not a game dog that will then be matched depending on his or her level of ability.

Homer displayed DEEP DEEP GAMENESS
Just as so many have showned to be DEAD GAME.
BSK Money bags beat a 4Xw his first time up in under 13mins killed him and popped his shoulder out and lost his next in almost 2hr and lost half his face doing so! That to me is a GAME DOG. Shows very high ability to finish and heart that say your going to have to finish me to win!

Maybe its time to change some of the mind sets that have been taught by the greats of yester year .(with no disrespect) Example the definition of a game dog should be looked at in depth such as we are doing
Example:
GAME DOG- one who shows no quit
DEEP GAME DOG-one who has went past what most matches are over with be it win or lose.
DEAD GAME DOG-one who takes his or hers death trying to win or one who has come close to death trying to win be it in 30 mins or 4hrs but it almost cost them their life.

Its hard to say one is not game just because he or she never had to go three or four hours.I would only be able to say," I dont know how game he or she is but they are a good one".
Also in no way is schooling or a game test going to deem one game or a match dog(in my eyes)but your eyes might tell you he or she is worth a match and in someone else eyes he or she might not be!
I'm merely stating that with the definition in todays and yesterdays of a GAME DOG its any dog that is bred for and or took to the box. (Not in my mind)
Example I remember going to a old timers who happen to be family house and seeing my first bulldog as a child I asked what kinda of dog is that and he answered a GAME DOG, now this dog was never matched and was his sons hunting buddy. Now was he not a game dog, by their definition of that time every bulldog was a GAME DOG and as time went on you heard more or it's GAME BRED.
One more definition that would have to be looked into deeply.

Just as you have stated most pass schooling and a game test only to pull up on show night. Just as some would show their ass off going a hour plus in a tuff roll only to have enough in 30 when its show time.
I say we here look into what we deem as a GAME DOG,GAME PLUG,DEAD GAME DOG,GAME BRED.

[BULLDOG ANONYMOUS]

What a pole race,huh! Great topic Jack.

[No Quarter Kennel]

Here's my thing on the gameness of any match dog. Before he or she has been hooked he or she went thru schooling right? Now that final test is called what?" A GAME TEST" now with that only beinging 30 plus mins ( a rule edge in stone by yester year) then every dog match has show to be GAME! The level of ones gameness is whats to be displayed on party night if you ask me.
Using the thread " picking up game in 10-20 mins" if what most have said, showing the willingness to keep pressing, is showing that you have some level of gameness,Maybe just lacked in abilty that night.

And anyone that has a fighting backround should have the up most respect for a DEEP GAME DOG as we know no matter how much you condition yourself 5-12 three min rounds is LOOONG and if your heart is not in it its night,night! Lol

If you think about it some dogs are game and never have to show how DEEP GAME they are because they have so much ability example GRCH shady Lady five shows with a total time of 37 plus mins she had to have had more time on her in schooling! Now was she a game dog in my mind yes. She past her 30 min game test. Now how deep was her LEVEL of gameness who can ever say unless they seen her pushed to the max.

Now some my disagree with this but if we have a super ability dog who never get put on his back or put behind in schooling with dogs his size then we get something a lilttle bit bigger and super ruff on him or her. Reason being is I want to see his or hers LEVEL of gameness once they are not in control! Im not going to leave them down till they lose a limb as i plan on matching him or her but I wanna see if your a TRUE GAME DOG one that thinks they can win even tho they are getting put behind. Then your corner, if the more he or she gets put behind by this bigger class mate and we get u back to said corner and the all thing they want to do is go back to work because in his or her mind they are going to win!!! Now that there put chills up and down my spain!

If the objective is to win and you know you have a winner, why "game test" the dog?
Why not just go win.

Heard a guy that is no doubt one of the top 10 of all time say, "I'm not there to find out how game my dog is. I'm here to find out how game yours is."

From a competitive perspective, I get that.

To win is to be game to an extent. To be deep game is something all together different than that. What do you trade? Would you rather win or be game? And yeah, I get it, you'll win more with gameness, but it's a spin on things and something to think about.

[Officially Retired]

Very true, but as a whole everyone that says that they game test we as a whole think (30 mins) Is that not a game dog that will then be matched depending on his or her level of ability.

Homer displayed DEEP DEEP GAMENESS
Just as so many have showned to be DEAD GAME.
BSK Money bags beat a 4Xw his first time up in under 13mins killed him and popped his shoulder out and lost his next in almost 2hr and lost half his face doing so! That to me is a GAME DOG. Shows very high ability to finish and heart that say your going to have to finish me to win!

Maybe its time to change some of the mind sets that have been taught by the greats of yester year .(with no disrespect) Example the definition of a game dog should be looked at in depth such as we are doing
Example:
GAME DOG- one who shows no quit
DEEP GAME DOG-one who has went past what most matches are over with be it win or lose.
DEAD GAME DOG-one who takes his or hers death trying to win or one who has come close to death trying to win be it in 30 mins or 4hrs but it almost cost them their life.

Its hard to say one is not game just because he or she never had to go three or four hours.I would only be able to say," I dont know how game he or she is but they are a good one".
Also in no way is schooling or a game test going to deem one game or a match dog(in my eyes)but your eyes might tell you he or she is worth a match and in someone else eyes he or she might not be!
I'm merely stating that with the definition in todays and yesterdays of a GAME DOG its any dog that is bred for and or took to the box. (Not in my mind)
Example I remember going to a old timers who happen to be family house and seeing my first bulldog as a child I asked what kinda of dog is that and he answered a GAME DOG, now this dog was never matched and was his sons hunting buddy. Now was he not a game dog, by their definition of that time every bulldog was a GAME DOG and as time went on you heard more or it's GAME BRED.
One more definition that would have to be looked into deeply.

Just as you have stated most pass schooling and a game test only to pull up on show night. Just as some would show their ass off going a hour plus in a tuff roll only to have enough in 30 when its show time.
I say we here look into what we deem as a GAME DOG,GAME PLUG,DEAD GAME DOG,GAME BRED.


I would say Homer displayed dead gameness, way beyond deep gameness, and would have stopped 99.9999999% of all dogs on earth his weight.

I also think the refusal to die is a form of gameness :idea:

Some dogs (and strains of dog) go into shock easier than others ... or "lay down" to severe injury and die easier than others ... whereas some dogs just WILL NOT YIELD ... even if hopelessly behind, hopelessly outclassed, hopelessly injured ... they just will not be denied.

That is a form of greatness, over and above mere "athletic ability" ... it is intangible, it is hard to measure ... but WHEN YOU SEE IT ... dogs that do not have this kind of spirit just won't do :idea:

And, very often, dogs like this will "scare the quit out of" most higher-ability (front-running) athletes ...

And it is this spirit which is (and should be) the essence of our breed.

Jack

[arsuffi@att.net]

I would say Homer displayed dead gameness, way beyond deep gameness, and would have stopped 99.9999999% of all dogs on earth his weight.

I also think the refusal to die is a form of gameness :idea:

Some dogs (and strains of dog) go into shock easier than others ... or "lay down" to severe injury and die easier than others ... whereas some dogs just WILL NOT YIELD ... even if hopelessly behind, hopelessly outclassed, hopelessly injured ... they just will not be denied.

That is a form of greatness, over and above mere "athletic ability" ... it is intangible, it is hard to measure ... but WHEN YOU SEE IT ... dogs that do not have this kind of spirit just won't do :idea:

And, very often, dogs like this will "scare the quit out of" most higher-ability (front-running) athletes ...

And it is this spirit which is (and should be) the essence of our breed.

Jack
Jack you wrote what I have been thinking since this discussion started and HOMER was one of the most put up bulldogs I had the pleasure of seeing Oscar just lived 30 min from me. Johnny

[EWO]

I see the YES votes are piling up and creating a little separation. Great topic and a great string of posts.

I voted NO and after reading all the views and thinking a little more on the topic I am still on the NO side of the fence.

Homer and Jeep are great examples. Many have said Jeep could not have taken what he put on Homer. Many have said if it were done at Homer's weight he would have dispatched the great Jeep dog. Some have even said that the actual Jeep dog died that night and the owners stood one in to cash in on the 4 hour-plus history making match.

Those are all assumptions based on hear say and personal opinion. Not seeing the match but reading the reports and accounts I would say Homer was the gamer of the two dogs, and that would be opinion as well. I think the DOY should be about facts and little about perception and the fact is Jeep beat Homer. Regardless of whose camp one sides with, or which dog you would rather breed to, the fact remains one dog won and one dog did not. The winning dog gets the vote for DOY because DOY is about being the best dog for that given time.

The probable PBB DOY by all accounts basically dominated what was put in front of him for the given period of time. The entire big picture of the dog world should not be factored in as it is simply a performance title. Being crossed will he produce? We will see but it does not matter. Is he from a family of performers? Does not matter unless one of them pulled off 7 and is on the ballot as well. Is he a game dog? I would say yes, but on match night it does not matter if he has enough of everything else to win.

Matching dogs is about winning not answering 'gameness' questions. (With maybe the exception of using the first match as a game check so basically it is not 30-45-60 minutes of time that will not count, but that is a different topic altogether). I have seen several dogs I would bet on but would not breed to. I have seen several dogs I would breed to but would not bet on. People that receive "Gamest in Show' titles never left home with that goal in mind. They left home with the intentions of winning. And if they leave home 6-7-8 times and win, they are then candidates for DOY. EWO

[S_B]

EWO, excellent post and I completely see eye to eye with you.

Especially the part about what you would bet on verses what you would breed to. That statement is one to live by in my book :bookworthy:

S_B
(Voted No ;) )

[Officially Retired]

That was well said.

However, I am not sure I can agree that Homer wouldn't get votes for Dog of the Year ... I absolutely think he would (if not even Decade/Lifetime) by the people who saw him go (as well as a general consensus in the fraternity) :idea:

In fact, what if we changed the title to BULLDOG of the Year ... does the word Bulldog not carry the implication of tenacity/deep gameness with it??

Jack

[Officially Retired]

What a pole race,huh! Great topic Jack.

Thank you ... final votes coming soon 8)

[Officially Retired]

What does it mean if, when we go out onto our yard of 20-30 dags, we say .... This one here is a BULLDOG!

Are we saying, This dog is a super-high-ability dog ... only?

Or are we saying, This one here WILL NOT STOP ... or is a WARHORSE ... with an outstanding combination of ability + proven resolve/gameness?

[S_B]

That was well said.

However, I am not sure I can agree that Homer wouldn't get votes for Dog of the Year ... I absolutely think he would (if not even Decade/Lifetime) by the people who saw him go.

Also, what if we changed the title to BULLDOG of the Year ... does the word Bulldog not carry the implication of tenacity/deep gameness with it??

Jack

Jack,

No denying Homer and his gameness. But on that day the better dog won, circumstances, excuses, conditioners, weight aside. Jeep was the dog that beat one of the best during that calendar year. For that accomplishment Jeep would be considered the best.

I think it is a matter of what DOY has meant throughout the years as we all who were subscribers of the SDJ were conditioned to believe. Which was who was the most accomplished dog to be recognized in that calendar year. Or which dog Jack Kelly fancied most. And at that time the gamest dog during each show was awarded GIS.

According to this poll it is a matter of feelings or interpretation. One may feel the dog who displays what the epitome of this breed means, gameness is the best. While another may feel one who can out perform the best at the current time is the best.

I feel the addition of a "Gamest Dog of the Year" award is a good thing. But I think the performance record of the opponent would need to be a consideration which may or may not be fair. As two first time out dogs realistically could display deeper gameness.

Giving this more thought, what would be a determining factor to achieve this award? If you go on time at nearly 4 hours of action who's to say Homer was actually more game than Jeep? Because he was behind, and not brought in correctly? Or could Jeep have been determined more game because of his dominating and winning? It gets down to splitting hairs and what one interprets vs. another.

Something to think about...

S_B

[Officially Retired]

I disagree completely that "the better dog won" between Jeep and Homer ...

I can think of a lot of great dogs who lost only because their weight wasn't right, they were brought in underweight/bad condition, etc.

That said, I very much do agree with the general idea of DOY being a title of Most Accomplished dog of the year ...

However, isn't showing extreme, 100% dead gameness an "accomplishment" ... arguably even the most important accomplishment?

Is winning/losing the only relevant criteria?

Jack

PS: You didn't answer my question about the title BULLDOG of the Year ... if that has an added implication of "proven gameness" to it?

[arsuffi@att.net]

I disagree completely that "the better dog won" between Jeep and Homer ...

I can think of a lot of great dogs who lost only because their weight wasn't right, they were brought in underweight/bad condition, etc.

That said, I very much do agree with the general idea of DOY being a title of Most Accomplished dog of the year ... however, isn't showing extreme, 100% dead gameness an accomplishment ... arguably even the most important accomplishment?

Jack
yes

[Officially Retired]

Let me put it another way:

Which is the most difficult/important thing for any dog to prove it can do:

1) Win a match where the animal is more physically gifted than its foe?

or

2) Fight a toe-to-toe, back-and-forth fight, with 100% determination, until the last breath of life escapes it?

To which scenario should our highest honors be given to a bulldog?

Jack

[loot]

Gameness is something we all want our dogs to have but many times a dog that shows extreme gameness is on the losing side of the contest. Some do show that gameness and come out the winner and either case are awarded GIS. Doy is reserved to that special animal who shows that ability to not really get put behind and win convincingly in each and every contest such as the Titere's, The Awesome Beasts, the Barracudas. Doy is reserved for those truly special animals who IMO don't have to show extreme gameness


Well said Mister

[S_B]

I disagree completely that "the better dog won" between Jeep and Homer ...

I can think of a lot of great dogs who lost only because their weight wasn't right, they were brought in underweight/bad condition, etc.

That said, I very much do agree with the general idea of DOY being a title of Most Accomplished dog of the year ...

However, isn't showing extreme, 100% dead gameness an "accomplishment" ... arguably even the most important accomplishment?

Is winning/losing the only relevant criteria?

Jack

PS: You didn't answer my question about the title BULLDOG of the Year ... if that has an added implication of "proven gameness" to it?

Homer should have never met Jeep, but he did and he lost.

That is another argument in of itself, managers of fighters making poor decisions.

As far as extreme gameness being an accomplishment, I don't know if I'd say that necessarily as an accomplishment is defined as a performance. Does one perform gameness or display it?

To answer the question of "Bulldog" of the year...I'll say it's splitting hairs or playing into ones interpretation vs. anothers.

I believe we are both right in our own minds, I don't think there is an absolute answer therfore it is all subjective.

S_B

[S_B]

Let me put it another way:

Which is the most difficult/important thing for any dog to prove it can do:

1) Win a match where the animal is more physically gifted than its foe?

or

2) Fight a toe-to-toe, back-and-forth fight, with 100% determination, until the last breath of life escapes it?

To which scenario should our highest honors be given to a bulldog?

Jack

Put this way #2 all day everyday!

[loot]

What about a dog who does just enough to win in each show? Meaning the better it's opponent is the better they are?

[Officially Retired]

I believe we are both right in our own minds, I don't think there is an absolute answer therfore it is all subjective.
S_B

I think you're right too ... for the reasons you state ...




Put this way #2 all day everyday!

However, this is also right ... and therein lies The Paradox of Truth :lol:

[S_B]

But that is what is important to an individual Jack.

When you had a magazine devoted to the sport of dog fighting. One which reported shows and awarded certificates to the accomplishments of its winners. And created the DOY award it was those principles and accomplishments which were taken into consideration. Not which dog was #2 on that list.

How can we even begin to change what this award means? These dogs are bred to do #2, many of them do this. It is the elite few who accomplish what GR CH TITERE 7XW did who truly go above and beyond. There is no denying he won 7 and beat 7 other highly accomplished challengers.

Explain to me how one can determine who displayed the utter most gameness in a single show during a single year when so many other bulldogs were likely to take their death as well?

S_B

[S_B]

I think you're right too ... for the reasons you state ...





However, this is also right ... and therein lies The Paradox of Truth :lol:

Damn...I should have quoted this in my last post! Haha

[S_B]

I would like to say that this has been one of the most thought provoking threads to date on this board that I feel lucky to participate in. I don't believe there is a right or wrong answer to this poll how it was worded and presented by Jack. In a mere 6 days it has been viewed over 1,500 times with over 140 replies, that's incredible.

Everyone who contributed really put thought into their answers and that is what sets the members apart here verses other places. This is a community of folks who are obviously dedicated to this breed and it shows. We will never all agree but when we can come together and put our thoughts out there for all to see and criticize and agree to disagree without name calling and fights, that is a good thing.

Jack I'm proud of you for all the life long accomplishments you have achieved both on the scene and off the scene with these dogs. This database is becoming a front runner for you imo. I don't know you personally, and although you can be difficult at times ;) your dedication can not be denied. That deserves an award in itself.


:cheers:
S_B

[Officially Retired]

LMAO well, first of all, I think stubbornness is a pervasive trait in a legit dogman :D

But thank you for your opinion ... I definitely got bit to the bone by "the bulldog bug" :lol:

I also have never stopped in my quest for trying to understand/appreciate all aspects of these dogs, for which this Database was yet another attempt to improve on already-existing strengths of one site, and upgrade them to a new level.

I also think that, if we work out the kinks, and continue to streamline this place, that (over time) it will prove to be the ultimate online resource for bulldog owners worldwide, I really do :idea:

Cheers back :cheers: