Conformation

As we speak of conformation on another thread, I thought I'd start this one.
http://www.apbt.info/tiki-index.php?page=Origin+of+the+Standard

Grand Champion APBTs of History: The Origin of the Standard

By Scot E. Dowd Ph.D.

How and why is a standard Developed?

A standard is developed to maintain and preserve the characteristics of a breed that made it the most successful at the job for which it was bred.

I wrote this up based on an article I read a long while back but could never find again. I think it was originally on the ADBA website. I tried to memorize the article so forgive if there are "semblences". I hope this reference to the ADBA site serves as a reference/tribute.

We no longer fight our dogs, to earn breeding privilege. Now we earn Conformation titles, that say we are maintaining a functional working type for our breed, and working titles, that say our dogs have intelligence and drive. Preferably a quality breeder will earn both Conformation and working titles! Why? The heart and intelligence of the APBT is the most significant factor that made him a success at any task and the one which cannot be judged based upon conformation. It has been said that the closest we now have to measuring the heart and soul of an APBT may be weight pull competition. I don't know about that but, maintaining the functionality and look of a breeds proven working Conformation is what we should strive to produce and judge for. Above all we should not reinvent the standard to suit our mental imaging or the puppy buying public.

The UKC and ADBA standards were developed primarily based upon a handful of gladiators from the history of the breed that were the ideals of true performance. One dog with an ideal physique that was proven over and over to make a true and successful gladiator was STP's Grand Champion Buck ROM. His excellent Conformation was and will always be, a model for what a true APBT should look like. THIS DOG SETS THE STANDARD! (YES! he has faults which should be corrected in breeding, such as the flat and splayed feet, but the head structure and size, substance, the angulations and all the other components are the origins of the standard (This not a back yard breeder, puppy mill or Show Dog interpretation or exaggeration of one). Look at this dog and determine if you are breeding or Judging for dogs that are Standard or OVER DONE!!


STP's Grand Champion Buck ROM

Here is another Great Example of Working TYPE!!!!!

Tant's Grand Champion Yellow ROM

Tant's GR CH Yellow ROM is another Great Example of Working TYPE!!!!! Compare the physique of Yellow and Buck! Notice the Similarity? Notice that these dogs are not big and bulky? Notice that none of the features are exaggerated? Notice that there is an extreme layback to the shoulder? Notice the rear angulations are balanced? Notice the toplines and backlines? Notice the upper arms are balanced with the shoulders? If you are breeding for dogs that do not fit this mold you are not on the right track!

The following essay will provide information about how to judge Conformation in the APBT and provide historical perspectives about why this structure is important. This information is not meant to glorify dog fighting but to acknowledge that it is the breeds history and that as stewards of a breed, it is our duty to maintain that Conformation (the look, structure, and type of the APBT), which made the breed successful. What we should avoid at all costs is redefining the successful Conformation and structure, based upon what is winning currently in the show ring, what the puppy buying public is asking for, or what we think structure should be. If as a breeder you do not recognize this necessity, and you would rather own and create caricatures of the APBT, then you are not a true dog man!


Conformation and its relationship to the historical fighting dog!

 

The primary factor that contributed to the success of a dog was a proper height to weight ratio. Dogs back in history were contested only nearly identical weights. The general rule was that the bigger (not bulkier, not bigger head, but actually the dog with better height to weight ratio, which means the dog with more reach) a dog was at a given weight, the better were its chances. Big refers to the height of a dog more than the bulk. Always keep in mind that dogs were matched at nearly identical weights, so let’s consider an example to clarify the meaning. What this means is that a stocky dog with heavy shoulders, and too much substance, would typically lose to the taller, rangier opponents. Rangy does not mean fine boned and tall. Obviously a dog that was extremely tall and fine boned would not be too successful either, as they were likely to have legs broken for instance by a dog with a good terrier bite and shake. The dog with the good reach had so much advantage, for the same reason a human boxer with more reach typically has the advantage. They could hold off the opponent, stay out of reach of the opponent, and still do damage. The dog with better reach could grab the opponents stifle when his opponent gained a hold on his front leg, grab an ear to hold off a stocky short necked opponent, dig into the chest underneath when the other dog got an ear hold.

Take a 40 lbs dog that has a lot of substance, a large bowling ball head, is short and wide, similar to the fad breeding we are seeing these days. If we consider these factors, along with the prescribed weight, this dog would be about 16 inches tall. If (back in history) we matched this dog against “Yellow” at 40 lbs and 19 inches, lets take a look at the two dogs in comparison (see the image below). In this graphic Yellow’s opponent (blurred out) is a typical “short and wide” type dog that is so popular with modern fads. Much wider, with more bulky muscles, this dog actually looks so much smaller than “Yellow” when compared side-by-side and matched at the same relative weight. It should be apparent, to anyone with an unbiased eye, which dog would have the advantage in a wrestling match.



Look first at the overall profile of the dog. Ideally, he should be "Slightly longer than tall" when viewed from the side. That is, a bit longer from the point of the shoulder to the point of his hip than from the top of the shoulder, to the ground. Such a dog will still stand high, but when balanced in structure, will have maximum leverage for his weight. The dog will not be either high stationed, nor will they have a low center of gravity. The ideal will have a balanced moderate physique with exceptional depth of insertion for muscles (see the discussion on leverage). The ideal dog must be balanced in all aspects as too much of one attribute will rob him of another. Notice the graphic and how the wide chest and heavy shoulders, neck and head mean the dog is sacrificing reach, length of bone, and depth of muscle insertion. The viewer should first measure the dog using hip and shoulder as guides as depicted in the following graphic.


As noted the APBT, as an athlete can best be described in terms of that task for which they were originally developed. This same task created a strong, yet agile and fast dog. If we consider the task the true talent, at least that which we can related to Conformation, which typically defined the winner was endurance and wrestling ability. The best wrestler at a given weight must have optimized angulation, muscle insertion, and balance. Thus looking at the dog from the side, with the dog standing normally, with the hock straight (90 degrees to the ground) the dog's base, (where his feet are) will be longer than his height. The APBT must combine speed, power, agility and stamina. To give away agility for more power we find that the dog will also lack speed and stamina. To give away strength for stamina we find that the dog will be easily broken and lack ability to engage the wrestling opponent. It cannot be stated to many times that the APBT must be balanced in all directions. As noted in a phrase that has always stuck with me the APBT is not an entity formed by the hand and eye of man but by the multitudes of tasks for which they excelled. In his most winning form he is a perfect, balanced and blueprinted machine...a thing of beauty.

First let us consider the back end of the APBT. We must realize that even more important than the head we must have a powerful, well-structured hindquarters. The drive train of any four legged animal is where 80% of the work of wrestling occurs. The drive for any forward movement is based off of the hips and back legs. Thus, to maximize leverage a long sloping hip is most important. This is missing in so many of the modern dogs because the focus has been on the size of the head and width of the chest. By ignoring the most critical aspect of a 4 legged wrestlers physique the truly optimized Conformation is missing. The length of the hip is where the leverage is derived to efficiently contract and extend with the femur (thigh bone). A long hip will give the dog a slightly roach-backed appearance (this is a moderate roach rather than dramatic as all things again must be balanced). This does mean that the APBT will have a relatively low set on of tail. The hip, in addition to being long, should also be broad. This is vital as, in order for balance, the dog will also have a broad loin which permits a much larger surface area for the attachments of the gluteal and the biceps femoris muscles. These two muscles are absolutely the biggest drivers in the power train. Another aspect of optimizing the rear power train, which is contrary to what is “show and fad popular”, these days, is that the femur (thigh bone) should be moderately shorter than the tibia, or lower leg bone. The stifle joint will thus be in the upper one third of the hind leg. These days most of what we are seeng in the Conformation ring are dogs with a low stifle. This can often give the appearance of “good angulation” but it is misleading. The greatest tell is that the dogs typically appear very heavily, even impressively, muscled. This is because of the bigger head of the biceps femoris, and the longer tendon with its shallow insertion. Even though the musculature appears very impressive and powerful it is comparatively weak compared to a dog with adequately short femur and therefore the likelihood of much deeper muscle insertions and comparative ratio of muscle belly length to distance between attachment at the hip and insertion into the femur. The dogs with longer femur are comparatively weak and slow on their back legs, because of leverage lost by the long thigh.

 

When we mention that the femur is comparatively short it follows that what we are comparing to is a relatively longer tibia. This is most evident visually, in a dog structured in the way described, by what we know as a well bent stifle. Notice the comparison of “yellow” to the fad structured dog in the following graphic. This graphic demonstrates structurally what we are referring to. Notice that the shorter femur, longer tibia result in what is a well bent hock. Take careful note of the angle of the straight hock of the fad dog compared to the angle of the hock joint for “Yellow”. The stifle and hock are vital contributors to actual wrestling ability. Remember that that 80% of the work in a dog wrestling originates in the hindquarters. If this musculature is not optimized, then when such a dog finds itself being driven backward, they lack the natural springiness of the well bent hock and stifle to control his movement. As an experiment have someone grab you by the shoulders and push you backward while you keep your legs straight (even your ankles), then bend your knees and hips and ankles and have someone push you backward. Dogs with a straight stifle and hock can effectively wrestle effectively only as long as the muscle power can sustain them. Because they must then rely on a heavier bulkier muscle, which uses energy at a faster rate and does not efficiently convert the power to forward drive, they will tire in the back end much more quickly, while a dog with a well-turned stifle and hock, using the same amount of energy, can exert much more force or the same force for much longer duration. I realize that these concepts are especially difficult to conceptualize but if you have two dogs that get along and play well together (as I do) and one has excellent structures rear-end while the other is shallow hipped with long femur, with less turn to stifle and hocks. If you watch these dogs play-wrestling as they love to do you will notice that the well-structured dog always seems to have the advantage and eventually, if they play long enough, you will notice that the dog with the straight stifle will soon begin to work primarily with their front end, then soon they will begin dirt wreslting (rolling over while the other dog bounces around).



Now lets consider the most contrivesial topic. The head of the APBT for most show lines has become a charicature of what it once was in it’s most functional form. The APBT does have a relatively larger seeming head than most breeds as the head is where the primary contest takes place. Always keep in mind that 80% of the work begins in the hindquarters and the head is primarily a holding device. In general, a well structured head is wedge-shaped when viewed either from the top or side, round when viewed from the front. The head can vary a great deal in form, and as can be seen when comparing historical “winning” dogs the heads are the least uniform of any aspect of conformation. This is primarily because as noted the Conformation of the head has little to do with whether the dog wins or loses in a fight. There are key things to note: The primary factor that has been ignored in fad bred dogs is that a head that is too big, really only carries more weight and increases the chances of having to wrestle a bigger dog. On the opposite side of the coin a small head can be more easily punished and will often not have sufficient strength to maintain a hold. It has been said that in an otherwise well proportioned dog, the head will appear to be about two thirds the width of the shoulders and about 25% wider at the cheeks than the neck at the base of the skull. The APBT typically is seen to combine the traits of the bulldog and the terrier most in the head structure. This can be seen in the length of the back of the head to the stop, which to optimize aspects of strength and endurance (we are again talking about muscle attachment and insertion) should be about the same distance as from the stop to the tip of the nose. Although not boxlike as we see in modern day American Bulldogs, the bridge of the APBT nose is still well-developed this appears to make the head wider below the eyes, than at the base of the ears. If we are again considering muscle attachment and insertion then we must consider that from top of the head to the bottom of the jaw must be relatively deep to provide surface area for attachment and deep insertion of the musculature. The jaw is closed and held closed, by the Temporal Fossa muscle exerting pressure on the Coronoid process. The deeper the head is from the zygomatic arch to the angular process of the bottom jaw the more relative leverage the dog will have to close and keep closed it’s mouth. Although not a huge consideration in comparison the APBT should typically have a straight muzzle that is box-like in appearance with a well developed lower jaw. The opposite would be a pointy muzzle which could still have the important points of biting leverage but which could be more easily bitten and probably withstand less punishment."

The teeth of an APBT should typically meet in the front, with the most important aspect being that the canine teeth should slip tightly together. The upper canines mesh together tightly right behind the lower canines when the mouth is closed. There is a great deal of emphasis placed on scissor bites in the APBT show ring, but this is more of an aesthetic requirement, and one that is often over-judged, than a Conformation requirment that has anything to do with functional ability to bite.

 

When we look at the front end of the APBT we should not be reminded of the bulldog which is typically a broad stationed animal. The APBT must balance power and agility in the structure of the front end. The primary and most lacking of structural optimizations in modern fad dogs is that they have straight shoulders. In an optimized 4-footed wrestler the scapula (shoulder blade) would be almost laid back to a perfect 45 degree, or even slightly more than 45 degree, slope to the ground. Like the hip, the should must also be broad and flat to allow for optimization of attachment and insertion of the muscles. The reason why this is lacking so dramatically in modern dogs is that along with the sloping of the hip and short femur this means the dog will not have a perfectly smooth trotting gait in the show ring. The dog will be more-springy with much more flexing of the back to obtain the same reach and drive than a dog with straighter shoulders that also has balanced rear angulation. The dog with 45 degree layback of shoulder will also not appear to converge, nearly as much, as a dog with straight shoulders (see the discussion of angulation). Because judges rely so much and are so used to looking for that smooth gait, with the flat moving back, they are missing the fact that in an optimized machine the movement will be much more springy and the back more flexible. A truly optimized wrestler will not move as “pretty” as the dog with perfect show gait. When considering the front end and the length of bones, we note that in addition to the broad, sloping shoulder that he humerus should be at an equal angle in the opposite direction and long enough that the elbow comes below the bottom of the rib cage. This means that the upper arm (humerus) is typically slightly longer than the shoulder. The elbows should lie flat but never be tied in tight to the chest which means that the humerus is running almost parallel to the spine. While not heavy with overly thick bones the upper arm is relatively heavy at the shoulders. The front pasterns must also be considered as these are both a primary shock absorber but also must be strong to provide a solid foundation. Low pasterns provide no stability, short pasterns provide not shock absorption. Again moderation is the key in both length and flexibility. Remember that the power of any animal originates at the feet and this power must be transferred upward by balanced angulation to facilitate truly optimized leverage. Shoulders should be moderately wide but not too wide A dog with a narrow shoulder does not support adequate musculature and on the opposite side of the coin a dog with overly wide shoulders adds unnecessary weight, loses agility and overall does not provide any additional working benefits.

Finally, let’s consider the other aspect of Conformation that we can evaluate to some extent visually. This is the potential for stamina, or wind, which is the ability of the animal to efficiently move air in an out of the lungs at high volumes. To do this in an animal who moves on all 4 feet there must be room for the lungs to expand and contract. Remember this expansion of the lungs is not moving out (sideways) or backward (toward the tail) but the primary movement for lung expansion is directly downward. This means that the optimized chamber is not wide but instead is deep. What we are considering is the rib cage, which constrains the lungs and limits their movement. Thus, we have a rib cage that is well sprung at the top and tapering to the bottom. These results in a chest that is both deep and elliptical, appearing almost narrow compared to the round or barrel chested fad bred dogs we see these days. It has been said that the lungs are not storage tanks for oxygen but are high volume pumps that have to move air in and out with optimization of volume. Their efficiency is related to the difference in volume between contraction and expansion. A barrel chested dog has an air pump with a “short stroke”. This means that more breaths are required to match the volume of air derived from a dog with a elliptical chest that has room for a longer expansion and contraction stroke (effectively this means that the barrel chested dog has smaller lungs at the same weight).

 

Great thread, pp!

 

Excellent post !

 

Do i have permission to translate this into Spanish please? PM if needed.

 

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to purplepig again."

kudos. informative post.

 

Just as a note, Scot Dowd ,who wrote this article owns Matrix kennels. One of the best things I ever read on the Internet happened when some punk kid tried to feed Scott the line that "your dogs aren't real Bulldogs, they are just Am-Staffs" since Scotts dogs are dual registered with UKC and ADBA. Dr. Dowd ripped him a new one. Pretty funny.



Towards the end he hit on something that to me is VERY important. Wind. Without good wind, gameness (however you want to define it) is impossible. Whether they be human or animal any athlete that can't breath can't work

Great post.

 

What a great reference, thanks PP!

 

Good read pp...thanks for posting.

 

this dog is a 20x winner and its conformation looks like a typical english staffordshrie / bullterrier

 

one of the best posts that has ever been. Good job purple pig

 

Havent seen much[] huh? Just a FYI, when I was a young man, I have seen many times a dog without reach run in and grab stiffle, or neck holds, and the other dog with the reach reach down, while other dog has it in hold, and grab the lower part of a leg, break it, then go to the other, break it, and 9 out of 10 times the one with the reach won. You take the short stocky dog, and I'll take the one with a long neck, and a long back, and later you'd be scratching your head, and your empty pocket, IF this was back in the day, which of course it isnt.
BTW, I am sure there is a bull terrier site somewhere.

 

BRAVO BRAVO! i couldn't have said it better myself PP. if i hadn't just gave you rep i'd give you more! i don't know which part of this i liked the most! right down to the last sentence. :eek:

 

A couple other recent grand champions that also have great conformation are Gambler's GR CH Virgil and also Evolution Kennel's GR CH Mochobuck. Both those dogs from pics I have seen have real good conformation as well. I know Mochobuck took a Best in Show trophy when he was entered in a conformation show a couple years back.

 

First of all, great post.

Since I assume the reason you started this was to discuss the topic, I'll give my input. That being, proper conformation is something I see as a one-sided scale. It's hard for me to put in to words how I feel about the subject, but I will do my best. Basically, it can be roughly summed up with, I don't feel (good) conformation actually helps too awful much. Outside of blatant disabilities, conformation is a secondary thought in breeding succesful working animals. However, BAD conformation, can slowly chip away at a solid animal. The best structure in the world, isn't going to help a canine in the real world, if it is a peice of shit in every other aspect. Please excuse my forth-rightness.

Bad conformation, rarely affects the competition of a contest enough to change the outcome, in the days when matching was legal. I do believe it DOES affect said animals, but not in enough quantity to pass up breeding say a slightly shorter ace, over a conformationally beautiful, but wholely less impressive working animal.

These dogs are tough, and smart, they learn to adapt and work through problems. If that means adjusting their style a bit because they are not 100% perfect structurally, so be it. One example, that comes to mind, is a bitch I got from some other fellows who looked at her very hard, and broke both her front legs in the process. She could barely walk out of her kennel, but in the woods, she would run like a rocket when asked to, and command the show with scary precision. Obviously, two broken front legs is a major hinderance, much more so than cow-hocks, under/overbites, lacking angulation or chest depth! Instinctually, she adapted her style to a very defensive mode, in which she was not driving or dancing on broken legs if she didn't have to. If she can show so impressively, with those horrible set-backs, who cares about weak chests, or over-defined rears!

Major physical disabilities is not enough to stop good dogs. Minor faults, surely aren't going to play too much of a role in the match itself, as it is rarely that close.

We have two unrelated puppies with HD. Alot of people say it is not prevalent in gamebred dogs, they havent been around too many I'd say. Although I made up my mind to never breed a dog with blatantly bad hips, undoubtedly, others will and I know of many breedings to dogs with bad hips. Many mens reasoning is "so long as they can work, they deserve to be bred". Is this completely wrong? I won't continue it on, simply because it makes a mess outside the working environment (when they work through it). I don't want to see 8-9 year old dogs with shot rear ends and arthritic in pain, because I bred a male with bad hips. I don't want to see dogs struggling through a keep, because their hips bother them. In the woods, they may hunt like any other dog, but it's a general nuisance. The individual pups we have, will be given the exact same chance as all our non-HD dogs, outside possibility of the brood pen. That is my feelings on that particular disability, but do I have the right to tell people that is the "right" opinion? Does anyone?

Does minor structural faults really detract enough from a dogs worth, to make you avoid using it? If so, chances are you forgot why the standard was written, and the breed was created in the first place. It was a guideline for the perfect working dog. I have seen some beautiful, beautifully built canines, and yet, I've never seen "THE perfect dog". It is a goal to strive for, that's it. Similar to the old saying, "Shoot for the moon, and even if you fail, you will be pretty damn far!". The standard motivates us to avoid breeding genetic messes, but it should not be the sole basis for breeding. After all, it was modeled around a working dog, and without the working aspect, you don't have anything but a kit-car shell.

I ask you, "Which is closer to the breeds core?" :

1.) The dog who works like his ancestors, with some of the same physical flaws of his ancestors.

or

2.) The dog who looks the most like someones idea of a "how they should look" back in the day. When in all probability, they wouldn't of worked well enough to avoid culling before they ever got the chance to make it to a dog show!



Chase fictional standards, with dogs that would of been dead before being considered in this standard you strive for ???

 

I believe it is summed up pretty good in this statement:


"Preferably a quality breeder will earn both Conformation and working titles! "

I am no show dogger. Have never even visited one. I do however have an eye for a bulldog. I see no reason that a bulldog who has the heart(game) should not be conformationally correct. It is when we forget conformation that we begin to get the 120# mutts we see today.
If you could get your hands on a 120# blue dog that would pass any game test you threw at it, would you want this dog? What if it was one of the lowriders? Would you be willing to take a look at one? If you say no, why not? Because you cant see how something like that would work? HMM. So there must be some kind of conformation in your own mind as to what standard should be to you. Same with me. I dont see the standard locking into 1/4" tolerances, I see in (used to before they changed it) the weight a 20# swing, now there is no weight at all. But there is proportion.
Maybe I have a dog with some physical problems that occured after birth, yet she is shining like a diamond. What would she be doing if these defects were not there? I can only imagine.
Maybe I am a fool. I am always striving to improve, and I see no reason that a curr should be winning conformation shows at all. I like the total package myself.
Once again. I am not show dogger, and first an foremost I breed for the heart of the dog, then the temperment, then the structure, in that order. Always start with a yard of heart, then make sure they have the smarts to keep the heart controlled and acurate, then look good while they are doin it. Yea, that's how I like it.
To each his own.

 

If I was given a tremendously game and talented, 120 # blue "low-rider", I would probably feed it until it died, if I had room. I see no difference in explaining that, to explaining to others why we keep 2 pups around with bad hips, instead of culling them. Hell, your hypothetical dog, would have proved more than these pups, so theoretically, it should get the chainspot first. In reality though, if it comes down to 2 exactly similar (talented) dogs the one that most closely fit my needs (size, structure, and breeding) is the one I'll take to keep uniformity in my program.

As you said, "to each his own". Exactly right. It's a matter of personal preferance what works best for you, and what you think will be the best way to continue into the future. No one knows for absolute certain. All I know is I've just seen way too many fugly, faulted dogs that were phenomenal specimins in the overal goal, and too many beautiful dogs that werent worth the food in their bowl to believe conformation plays as much of a role as this article would suggest. "To each their own". We both agree working ability comes first. That's our opinion.