Gameness is either there or not, you can add wind....how about ability?

[SteelyDan]

How honest a dog is IMO, is a constant. In other words a dogs gameness is absolute. It must manifest though and of course the handler plays a roll in that. Different variables and intensity of those variables will show you the cur. Some folks are better at avoiding or nullifying those variables.

As for the physical attributes. Everything can be refined but the more you refine something the increments become exponentially smaller. Like previously mentioned, some folks whet the blade better than others.

Something must be seen in order for it to manifest. At the same time other things need to stay unseen. It's always interesting to see one mans dogs in another good mans hands. Everyone has a different gauntlet with different variables and intensities.

[Officially Retired]

How honest a dog is IMO, is a constant. In other words a dogs gameness is absolute. It must manifest though and of course the handler plays a roll in that. Different variables and intensity of those variables will show you the cur. Some folks are better at avoiding or nullifying those variables.
As for the physical attributes. Everything can be refined but the more you refine something the increments become exponentially smaller. Like previously mentioned, some folks whet the blade better than others.
Something must be seen in order for it to manifest. At the same time other things need to stay unseen. It's always interesting to see one mans dogs in another good mans hands. Everyone has a different gauntlet with different variables and intensities.

Totally disagree with you and believe your opinion to be the great blunder in thinking of most dogmen: the game/cur mentality (as if there aren't degrees of gameness).

Gameness = the will to win. And the will to win does vary within the individual and *is* influenced by many factors (age, condition, health, level/style of opponent, etc.).

Anyone who thinks that a dog is either "dead game" or "a rank cur" ... and that there aren't an infinite degrees of gameness (desires to win) inbetween these two extremes ... again suffers from the greatest mental block and lack of understanding in these dogs.

Jack

[CrazyRed]

Totally disagree with you and believe your opinion to be the great blunder in thinking of most dogmen: the game/cur mentality (as if there aren't degrees of gameness).

Gameness = the will to win. And the will to win does vary within the individual and *is* influenced by many factors (age, condition, health, level/style of opponent, etc.).

Anyone who thinks that a dog is either "dead game" or "a rank cur" ... and that there aren't an infinite degrees of gameness (desires to win) inbetween these two extremes ... again suffers from the greatest mental block and lack of understanding in these dogs.

Jack

I agree with you on this here Jack 100% like most things. Me and a group of friends have this argument about every 2 weeks over a beer, because they believe it to be absolute but at the same time will say "this dog is gamer than this one." How when you say either he game or isn't we all agree that its levels to gameness.

There is no true definition of "gameness" Like in basketball, to be considered a great Free Throw shooter you have to avg over 90% of made attempts. We dont have a universal, "yup that's gameness right there." Because I've seen many times a dog go well over 2 hours and folks hoot and holler how deeply game he is and I'm thinking, he is game to a degree for having the will to go, definitely has some pit game because he went that long, but one thing I've always was taught and seen with my own experiences, is that a dog will show you gameness quicker from being tired then he will in pain. The dog that went 2 hours dont mean he is deep deep game and will take his death bed.

For instance last one i seen go 1:47, they said that dog about deep game as a live dog can be. I said not really, he went 50 mins before he took his first breath and with his condition was able to control and lay the whammy on his opponent that was trying to keep pace and defend himself. With doing so shot his load and took his first breath around 20 and was trying to catch his pace for the next 30 while getting the whammy. By time the winner took his breath at 50, he took so much out of his opponent that even though he was taking a breather and trying to get past the wall, the other didnt have nothing to hurt him with. So that's why after taking a breather and bottom for about 4 mins he came right back up top with his 2nd win and was able to dominate.. Not that he wasn't deep game or that he wont prove someday that he will take his bed on his belly trying, but it sure dont mean because he passed 1 hour he is absolutely some dog that will belly whop all the way across dying while giving his effort.

[SteelyDan]

Totally disagree with you and believe your opinion to be the great blunder in thinking of most dogmen: the game/cur mentality (as if there aren't degrees of gameness).

Gameness = the will to win. And the will to win does vary within the individual and *is* influenced by many factors (age, condition, health, level/style of opponent, etc.).

Anyone who thinks that a dog is either "dead game" or "a rank cur" ... and that there aren't an infinite degrees of gameness (desires to win) inbetween these two extremes ... again suffers from the greatest mental block and lack of understanding in these dogs.

Jack

Jack the blunder here is you thinking a dog knows what winning and losing is. That's you pushing your ideas and vocabulary onto the dog. There are no degrees of gameness. Anything short of the final degree is left unknown. That's why originally said how honest a dog is. You can say hey that dog took a beatin and kept coming he's pretty honest, so long as he is alive he can live to quit another day. So long as a dogs living there has got to be a shadow of a doubt that there is cur in its ass. To assume anything less, would be another blunder. Degrees of gameness can just as easily be called degrees of cur using your line of thinking. Any degree short of death is that much more degree of cur to be questioned.

[Officially Retired]

Jack the blunder here is you thinking a dog knows what winning and losing is. That's you pushing your ideas and vocabulary onto the dog.

A dog does not have a human definition of winning, true, but he damned sure knows (in his own terms) that he wants to vanquish his foe or not.

What you're doing is quibbling over 'human definitions' as a mask for actually discussing the issue, because (for that matter) a dog doesn't know what gameness is either.

There are no degrees of gameness. Anything short of the final degree is left unknown.

You are confusing DEAD gameness with the mere presence of gameness. Dead gameness is what you're talking about, which means that the dog has so much gameness it will run out of its own life before it runs out of the will to keep fighting.

That's why originally said how honest a dog is. You can say hey that dog took a beatin and kept coming he's pretty honest, so long as he is alive he can live to quit another day.

I find it laughable that you just substituted the word "honest" for gameness here. Again, a dog doesn't know what "honest" means either (), so it serves no purpose for you to change terminology to say the same thing.

Re-naming a proven degree of gameness as "honest" (to try to confuse things) is no way to form an argument, because I am still calling what you describe a certain amount of proven gameness. I can just as easily say, "This dog has shown to be pretty game," as you say 'honest' and we're both saying the same thing--and the dog can still quit another day.

So long as a dogs living there has got to be a shadow of a doubt that there is cur in its ass.

Here comes the "macho talk" that is always joined with this kind of unaware extremism

The correct view is that, so long as a dog is alive, he hasn't shown DEAD gameness ... true (and DUH!) ... but if he came from way back, after getting nearly killed in a 2-hour blood bath, I will happily call that dog, "Very game," or "Game as a live one can be," or some such, and be correct in my terminology.

To assume anything less, would be another blunder.

Wrong. Confusing DEAD gameness with mere 'gameness' is your blunder

Degrees of gameness can just as easily be called degrees of cur using your line of thinking.

This is factually inaccurate, and yet another blunder on your part

Take the existence of HEAT and the concept of TEMPERATURE for example. What we commonly call "hot" and "cold" are actually degrees of HEAT (molecular motion) only ... there IS NO SUCH THING as "degrees of cold" ... and, quite similarly, we also speak of degrees here

Scientifically-speaking, there ARE NO "degrees of cold" there are ONLY degrees of heat (molecular motion)

Therefore, what we call "hot" is something with a high degree of molecular motion, and what we call "cold" is something with a low degree of molecular motion, and it is all based on HOW MUCH HEAT (motion) is going on in the object.

Now then, if we take this same analogy to the dogs, and if gameness is the desire to fight/win, then "how game" a dog is can be viewed in the same fashion as "how hot" an object is, which likewise comes in an infinite variety of degrees

There is never "the presence of cold" in an object; there is only the presence (or absence) of HEAT (molecular motion)
There is never "the presence of cur" in a dog, either; there is only the presence (or absence) of GAMENESS (the will to fight/win)

So, again, you have your entire understanding of everything bass-ackwards ...

Any degree short of death is that much more degree of cur to be questioned.

Wrong and again exactly backwards.

Any kind of will to fight at all is SOME degree of GAMENESS ... short of a dog that won't hit a lick or take one hold ... which is why we call these dogs COLD ... which would be the same as "Absolute Zero" in terms of temperature (no gameness at all / no motion at all)

Be enlightened now

Jack