Maybe not an outright disqualification, but the standards in most countries stipulate that deviations from the standard (and that includes excess height) should be penalised in exact proportion to the extent of the deviation. So a 29 inch tall boxer should be severely penalised, much in the same way as a boxer more than 1/3 white.deesboxers said:I also agree that while there is nothing to disquallify a boxer due to height, it is not a practice that I want to see. The standards are all fairly close, and should remain that way.
Outstanding observation appicon An over or undersized boxer - deliberately bred, that is - isn't a whole lot different in concept to the cockapoo's and other designer trends of the moment. IMO if you want a dog that's larger than the boxer is supposed to be, take a pass on the bastardised versions and buy a bullmastiff instead. Just like a boxer, only biggerBesides aren't there other breeds such as bull and standard mastiffs that already exist?

Debbie Magon said:Why are so many BW members so keen to see their boxers attain mamoth proportions?:eek:
The boxer is a MEDIUM sized dog.
Medium = not large, not small.
One of the boxers biggest enemies is people who try to breed boxers, outside of the breed standard.
It is extremely damaging to the breed overall, size issues, being no exception.
Be content if your boxer falls somewhere inside the breed standards height and weight requirements as this is CORRECT.