B
Boxer Rick
Guest
German or American, which standard is producing the best Boxers and why?
- Status
JulieM
Boxer Insane
I think this needs to be defined a little more....first of all, the standards aren't producing anything, it is the breeders who do the producing 
Breeders who breed to the "German" (FCI) Standard are probably producing dogs that are best meeting the FCI Standard. Breeders who breed to the American (AKC) Standard are probably producing dogs that are best meeting the AKC Standard. Although in reality, the Standards are not all that different once you get past the semantics.
You are asking about the "best" Boxer. "Best" at what? Best temperament? Best working ability? Best structure? Best health? Best attitude? There are so many variables....and most people in the US have no personal knowledge of German or other Boxers (except perhaps Canadian), so would have no way to intelligently make this determination.
I'm sorry if this is a bit harsh, but I can see where this might be heading and I've been there, done that too recently to get into it again.....
I don't think it is truly possible to say that breeding to a certain Standard automatically produces dogs that are "better" than those bred to other Standards - the individual dogs and the focus of the breeders have far more to do with it than any Standard.
Breeders who breed to the "German" (FCI) Standard are probably producing dogs that are best meeting the FCI Standard. Breeders who breed to the American (AKC) Standard are probably producing dogs that are best meeting the AKC Standard. Although in reality, the Standards are not all that different once you get past the semantics.You are asking about the "best" Boxer. "Best" at what? Best temperament? Best working ability? Best structure? Best health? Best attitude? There are so many variables....and most people in the US have no personal knowledge of German or other Boxers (except perhaps Canadian), so would have no way to intelligently make this determination.
I'm sorry if this is a bit harsh, but I can see where this might be heading and I've been there, done that too recently to get into it again.....
I don't think it is truly possible to say that breeding to a certain Standard automatically produces dogs that are "better" than those bred to other Standards - the individual dogs and the focus of the breeders have far more to do with it than any Standard.
B
Boxer Rick
Guest
Originally posted by JulieM
I think this needs to be defined a little more....first of all, the standards aren't producing anything, it is the breeders who do the producing
Why should there be 2 standards? It is a German dog why have and "American" standard? It is a working dog breed it to work.
You are asking about the "best" Boxer. "Best" at what? Best temperament? Best working ability? Best structure? Best health? Best attitude? There are so many variables....
Since the Boxer is a working dog shouldn't all these things be important? Should it matter what country your dog comes from to expect a healthy dog with a good working temperament? Does the AKC require health testing before breeding? Does the AKC require temperament testing before breeding? Does the AKC require working titles to be a Champion? Can the Boxers health, temperament, structure and working ability be judged acurately by the short visual examination of the AKC show ring? Is the Boxer being bred true to its form and purpose here in the USA? Can American Boxers compete on the same level in the traditional working areas the Boxer was originaly bred for? If yes please explaine, if no why? Does that define it better?
JulieM
Boxer Insane
Because I'd venture to say most Americans cannot read German....
No - just as it should not automatically be assumed that a dog from a certain country is *not* a healthy dog with a good working temperament.
The ones that meet the Standard are, inasmuch as they can be.
No - neither can the German Boxers. Bull baiting and dog fighting is outlawed, it is impossible to compete in these areas (which the Boxer was originally bred for).
There is an old saying in the dog show world, "Form follows function." This means that the Standard was written to describe a dog that will be able to perform its intended function (or, the closest fascimile thereof in the case of dogs where the original function is no longer viable, as in Boxers). If the dog meets the breed Standard, it will be able to perform the job for which it was intended. Certainly, health, temperament, conformation and working ability are all important to the breed and they are all addressed by responsible breeders....again, it is not the country that may be lacking in one area or another but the individual dogs, or the irresponsible breeders who focus so completely on one area that they overlook the others (or who don't focus on any area except the profit margin).
What I think you're really asking is which breeding/conformation system is better. That certainly is a personal opinion - are the 5 UDX Boxers or the 2 OTCh Boxers not "good breeding stock" simply because they haven't finished in the conformation ring (and some of them may have, actually)? Are Sunchase Boxers, quite likely the most titled Boxers in the country, not worthy to reproduce just because they haven't done Sch? (Just an example, this is Sunchase's bitch, Chili's, full name with titles:
U-ATCH, U-AGI, U-AGII, U-CD, U-CDX, U-CH, AM/CN/BDA Ch. Sunchase's Suicide Blonde AM/CN/BDA CD, CDX, CGC, TDI, NA, NAJ, TT, TDI, VCC, VCCX, VO, BH, AD
These are American dogs from American lines - American "SHOW" lines. Just because a Boxer does not compete in working areas, that doesn't mean that he cannot.
As I said before, this discussion has come up several times, a search of the forums for working ability or function (or any post by Jason) will bring them up. If after reading these discussions, you have anything new to add, please do so. If not, I just am not inclined to get into the same old argument again at this time.
B
Boxer Rick
Guest
Originally posted by JulieM
Because I'd venture to say most Americans cannot read German....
Now you are just waxing wise
Standards can be translated without changing the standard.
No - just as it should not automatically be assumed that a dog from a certain country is *not* a healthy dog with a good working temperament.
Well then answer the question. Are American dogs as healthy, sound of temperament, structraly as sound and as able to work based on actual numbers and not emotion?
No - neither can the German Boxers. Bull baiting and dog fighting is outlawed, it is impossible to compete in these areas (which the Boxer was originally bred for).
Bull baiting and dog fighting were outlawed befor the Boxer became a breed. Boxers were bred to be hunters, cattle dogs and one of the 7 original Schutzhund breeds. Are Americans breeding dogs sound enough for these original activities?
There is an old saying in the dog show world, "Form follows function." This means that the Standard was written to describe a dog that will be able to perform its intended function (or, the closest fascimile thereof in the case of dogs where the original function is no longer viable, as in Boxers). If the dog meets the breed Standard, it will be able to perform the job for which it was intended. Certainly, health, temperament, conformation and working ability are all important to the breed and they are all addressed by responsible breeders....again, it is not the country that may be lacking in one area or another but the individual dogs, or the irresponsible breeders who focus so completely on one area that they overlook the others (or who don't focus on any area except the profit margin).
I agree that form should follow functiion. What do American breeders do to insure that their dogs form is following the original function? Certainly generations of show dogs can not assure that the dog can herd cattle, catch hogs or perform protection duties.
What I think you're really asking is which breeding/conformation system is better. That certainly is a personal opinion - are the 5 UDX Boxers or the 2 OTCh Boxers not "good breeding stock" simply because they haven't finished in the conformation ring (and some of them may have, actually)? Are Sunchase Boxers, quite likely the most titled Boxers in the country, not worthy to reproduce just because they haven't done Sch? (Just an example, this is Sunchase's bitch, Chili's, full name with titles:
U-ATCH, U-AGI, U-AGII, U-CD, U-CDX, U-CH, AM/CN/BDA Ch. Sunchase's Suicide Blonde AM/CN/BDA CD, CDX, CGC, TDI, NA, NAJ, TT, TDI, VCC, VCCX, VO, BH, AD
How do these 5 dogs compare to the number of duel champions (working/conformation) in Germany?
As I said before, this discussion has come up several times, a search of the forums for working ability or function (or any post by Jason) will bring them up. If after reading these discussions, you have anything new to add, please do so. If not, I just am not inclined to get into the same old argument again at this time.
I am sorry I am new to the board. I guess that if this subject has come up before it must be important to some people. If you were concerned about the working capabilities of the American Boxer I guess it wouldn't bore you.
ninersneal
Super Boxer
Rick:
I don't think anyone is bored of the subject, but as Julie stated there have been many discussions on this subject. Please read those threads and if you have something new and insightful to add, please feel free to share.
JulieM
Boxer Insane
Rick, I am not bored of the subject, I just get tired of beating my head against the wall. It seems that those who prefer "German" Boxers refuse to see any working ability in North American dogs no matter what proof is presented to them, you apparently are no different.
The Standard *has* been translated without changing the Standard, there has been a point-by-point comparison between the two in the past that you can look up if you take the time.
It is absolutely false that bull baiting and dog fighting were outlawed before the Boxer became a breed, please provide your reference for this statement (there are several supporting mine in the other discussions).
What "form follows function" means is that, as I said before, if the dog meets the breed Standard, it will be able to perform the job for which it was intended. *Why* do you feel that generations of show dogs can not assure that the dog can herd cattle, catch hogs or perform protection duties? These dogs meet the breed Standard, which was created to describe a dog that would meet these duties (well, not really, but a dog that would meet the duties for which it was bred). Why would they not be able to meet them? Just because people who show their Boxers do not take them on wild boar hunts does NOT mean that the dogs are incapable - it simply means that the people feel they have better things to do with their time and money, that are far less risky to their dogs.
As for the 5 UDX dogs, that was one number. There are, of course, many other titled Boxers, many of them dual-titled. Why is a dual-titled German Boxer (one working title, one conformation title) better than Chili, who has 24 titles?
The subject has come up before and is important to basically One person. I suggest you look up Jason and work with him on his "Super Boxer" ABPT/AB hybrid, since the two of you seem to both feel American dogs are "inferior" - but do NOT presume to know what importance I - or the rest of the Boxer breeders in America - may or may not place on working ability!
The Standard *has* been translated without changing the Standard, there has been a point-by-point comparison between the two in the past that you can look up if you take the time.
It is absolutely false that bull baiting and dog fighting were outlawed before the Boxer became a breed, please provide your reference for this statement (there are several supporting mine in the other discussions).
What "form follows function" means is that, as I said before, if the dog meets the breed Standard, it will be able to perform the job for which it was intended. *Why* do you feel that generations of show dogs can not assure that the dog can herd cattle, catch hogs or perform protection duties? These dogs meet the breed Standard, which was created to describe a dog that would meet these duties (well, not really, but a dog that would meet the duties for which it was bred). Why would they not be able to meet them? Just because people who show their Boxers do not take them on wild boar hunts does NOT mean that the dogs are incapable - it simply means that the people feel they have better things to do with their time and money, that are far less risky to their dogs.
As for the 5 UDX dogs, that was one number. There are, of course, many other titled Boxers, many of them dual-titled. Why is a dual-titled German Boxer (one working title, one conformation title) better than Chili, who has 24 titles?
The subject has come up before and is important to basically One person. I suggest you look up Jason and work with him on his "Super Boxer" ABPT/AB hybrid, since the two of you seem to both feel American dogs are "inferior" - but do NOT presume to know what importance I - or the rest of the Boxer breeders in America - may or may not place on working ability!
B
Boxer Rick
Guest
[
It is absolutely false that bull baiting and dog fighting were outlawed before the Boxer became a breed, please provide your reference for this statement (there are several supporting mine in the other discussions).
The first German Boxer club was formed in 1896. The first German Boxer standard was not adopted until 1902. The first Boxer stud book was in 1904. refrence The Boxer by Gordon
Parliament passed a law prohibiting any form of animal fighting in 1835. The History of Fighting Dogs by Dr. Fleig
By my math animal fighting was outlawed at leat 61 years before the Boxer was a recognized breed
- Status