This Forum is brought to you by The Mastiff Sweet Spot and Friends of the Forum.
Sign up Calendar
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 7 of 12     «   Prev   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   Next   »
Grant

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 890
Reply with quote  #301 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveOifer

Similarly, a case can be made for the pied, in that we see ancient illustrations and they do exist today!
The illustrations, may or may not be related to our breed, other than that they are dogs, so cannot be counted !! So do we erace ALL Mastiff types from the historical record and assume the breed dropped from the sky when the standard was officially formed?
Our breed was formed, by picking dogs that best matched the standard, from the multiple cross types, that had formed over the century's. Therefor the illustrations are still an important part of the mastiff evolution, but only the traits colors and type picked at the forming of the standard are relevant to our present breed !

It's true that in the past many large dogs were called Mastiff, it's even true today, as we see in newspaper headlines!
Our breed took the name of Mastiff at the time of the drawing of the standard, from the name that was given to, any large powerful dog before the writers decided on what the actual breed should look like!!  Not entirely correct, as Boar hounds and Wolf hounds, were also large, but not always referred to as Mastiffs!
These other pedigreed breeds took other traits colors and type from the past crosses !!


The present standard sets the bar for type, but the standard is a living document, that has been changed before and will be again!
You have said before, many times, that to change the standard even to make it clearer, would not be an easy task, so to put a stick in the spokes of an already problematical breed, is not going to happen !! Perhaps true. Or, perhaps exceptions get made, if enough pressure is exerted!
Not in this case because, if the pied was inserted, then the part about excessive white would have to be removed, which then leaves the present colors open to be mixed with the pied, effectively wiping out what the original standard was all about !!    

Whether pieds become part of that standard remains to be seen, but there is ample evidence to demonstrate the historical color, even if not the purity of the breed! I might add, that the present purity of the breed cannot be designated by DNA for any color!
The historical color of dogs with no proof of origin ! Same holds true for standard colors!
The present dogs, if to the color stated on the standard, have little chance of being tested, compared to other colors !! Not sure of what you mean!
The present dogs that have standard colors and type, are in with the flow by keeping to what was written, pieds or other faulted dogs whether the genes are from before standard or after inbreeding's, are likely to be DNA tested to try and find the reasons for the fault !

__________________
Grant
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #302 
Similarly, a case can be made for the pied, in that we see ancient illustrations and they do exist today!
The illustrations, may or may not be related to our breed, other than that they are dogs, so cannot be counted !! So do we erace ALL Mastiff types from the historical record and assume the breed dropped from the sky when the standard was officially formed?
Our breed was formed, by picking dogs that best matched the standard, from the multiple cross types, that had formed over the century's. Therefor the illustrations are still an important part of the mastiff evolution, but only the traits colors and type picked at the forming of the standard are relevant to our present breed ! No doubting that, as it relates to the official standard, but you were arguing the relevance of purity as it reflected to real Mastiffs, based on color! Early forms were not uniform and one could easily make the argument, that it was due to impurity. Therefore, traits, colors & type were a variable, at the forming of the standard, even though the pied color was excluded.

It's true that in the past many large dogs were called Mastiff, it's even true today, as we see in newspaper headlines!
Our breed took the name of Mastiff at the time of the drawing of the standard, from the name that was given to, any large powerful dog before the writers decided on what the actual breed should look like!! Not entirely correct, as Boar hounds and Wolf hounds, were also large, but not always referred to as Mastiffs!
These other pedigreed breeds took other traits colors and type from the past crosses !! Yet they were not called Mastiffs! Therefore, the pieds must have had characteristics, other than coloration, which enabled them to be considered Mastiffs!


The present standard sets the bar for type, but the standard is a living document, that has been changed before and will be again!
You have said before, many times, that to change the standard even to make it clearer, would not be an easy task, so to put a stick in the spokes of an already problematical breed, is not going to happen !! Perhaps true. Or, perhaps exceptions get made, if enough pressure is exerted!
Not in this case because, if the pied was inserted, then the part about excessive white would have to be removed, which then leaves the present colors open to be mixed with the pied, effectively wiping out what the original standard was all about !! If there is a test for pieds, this could be controlled. I also raised the issue of mantling, but that's another story.

Whether pieds become part of that standard remains to be seen, but there is ample evidence to demonstrate the historical color, even if not the purity of the breed! I might add, that the present purity of the breed cannot be designated by DNA for any color!
The historical color of dogs with no proof of origin ! Same holds true for standard colors!
The present dogs, if to the color stated on the standard, have little chance of being tested, compared to other colors !! Not sure of what you mean!
The present dogs that have standard colors and type, are in with the flow by keeping to what was written, pieds or other faulted dogs whether the genes are from before standard or after inbreeding's, are likely to be DNA tested to try and find the reasons for the fault !
Still not sure what you are saying. But if a test for pieds is available, it will only test for color not Mastiff purity! It's possible that a pied may be just as pure as any other Mastiff, with only a color anomaly. That's not to say that all standard colored Mastiffs are equal in past crossed influences.

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
brindlelove

Registered:
Posts: 278
Reply with quote  #303 
Grant; Steve actually agrees with you and he is just playing devils advocate to help those would be cheer leaders to feel better about their position. Notice how we have turned from THEY ARE NOT ENGLISH MASTIFFS to THEY ARE MASTIFFS LOL. What a way to weasel out of an argument people. Gammonwood was clear with their intent to label and sell these as English Mastiff not just big dogs called Mastiffs. Also notice how easily some will just throw the standard out the window to suit their needs (Crufts crybabies and this thread are all the proof anyone needs for that). Given enough time and peoples true nature will eventually come to light. How anyone can CLAIM to be a defender of the breed and then be O.K. with this is ... well.. sad really. The facts is the standard was formed and worded to OMIT PIEDS FROM THE BREED PERIOD. The comments about white markings proof positive of that. All of those pics while they look like English Mastiffs were NOT ENGLISH MASTIFFS since the breed didn't even exist at those time so there is NO HISTORICAL PROOF OF PIEDS IN THE ENGLISH MASTIFF LINE ANYWHERE EVER DATING BACK THE BEGINNING OF THE BREED!!!!! This is plain and simple and though some on here are trying to distort the facts a simple look at a calender and will show them for the charlatans they are.
__________________
You know you own a mastiff when youre dog weighs more than your wife!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #304 
Grant has said a lot of things and I certainly don't agree with everything he's said!

As I stated earlier, this is not a black & white case. No Mastiff was ever defined by it's coloration, until the standard was put into play. Standards change and old views can be amended.

http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?view=image;size=100;id=uc1.b277186;page=root;seq=237;num=221

From M.B. Wynn's book on the breed.

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #305 
The above, was Wynn's standard, which was accepted by those breeding Mastiffs at the time prior to the club's organized birth. The official standard adopted by the club, did not include pieds. But we should not totally discount Wynn's standard, or make believe that it is not historically relevant in this debate!
__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #306 
Now, to play Devil's advocate...........

I will say, that the founder's of the club may have seen white, as something they could not control and therefore, tried to minimize it's expression by banning pieds.

We must remember, that we are dealing with 19th century perceptions, based on 19th century science & knowledge.

Many old fanciers believed that brindle was needed to add pigment in mask & ears. They believed that brindle was the original color of the breed. That reds were a sign of cross breeding. That brindles were a recessive. Some very ancient thoughts declared the brindle a cross between the dog & tiger!

Why would we be surprised to think that they might have believed that the pied was a sign of crossbreeding, or that it meant a dog jumped a fence? It was so rare, as a recessive, that they logically thought it was bad breeding, instead of a genuine genetic anomaly. It is certainly understandable, given the period in time under review.

Today, we should be looking at this issue through 21st century eyes!

It's still possible/probable, that the modern pied is the result of a more recent cross and not a genetic remnant, or vestige, of ancient heritage & folk lore. But, it's still possible, no matter how improbable, that it just might be!

With the advent of a 21st century test for the anomaly, we should not be as concerned as the founders were about contamination. We can be concerned about added costs for testing, if the gene goes into the general pool by sanctioning the color in the standard, and there are questions of type & aesthetics being affected, as some pieds can be seen by some as too Saintly, in some pied color variations.

But the bottom line, is that it is not recognized at present in any recognized modern standard.

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 959
Reply with quote  #307 
I also believe it is interesting and relevant that in the Silver Fox project, it appears that one of the first colour variants was spotted/pied  coats.
__________________
Karen
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #308 
http://www.ratbehavior.org/CoatColor.htm
__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
kcornel4

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 959
Reply with quote  #309 
My comment was not related to the genetic causal relationship to aggression debate, which I will hopefully return to tomorrow. Extrapolating from the Fox study, it would appear that early domesticated breeds tend to express pied/spotted colouring. Hence, one inference, supported by Wynn's standard is that early Mastiff type colouration included pieds.
__________________
Karen
brindlelove

Registered:
Posts: 278
Reply with quote  #310 
For those that don't like to read Steve's kindly worded posts here is cheat sheet -NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH MASTIFF HAS THERE EVER BEEN EXAMPLES OF PIEDS NOR HAVE THEY EVER BEEN ACCEPTED AS A DISTANT LINEAGE OR PART OF THE STANDARD THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR OVER 127 YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!! Get it now people!!!!!
Every example PREDATES THE STANDARD so they are automatically DQ since there were no English mastiffs in existence. Now the one example that Steve brought to my attention was from someone that was prominent in the dog world PRE-Standard BUT HIS VIEWS WERE NOT CONSIDERED FOR THE STANDARD AND THUS HIS IDEA'S HOLD NO MERIT WHAT SO EVER!!!! He played the political game in the dog world and lost so with his failure goes his opinion right down the toilet!!! Seems like all of the pro pieds arguments are exactly what I said ... lets all ban together and force the powers that be to recognize a non standard color NOT for the betterment of the breed but for our bottom line. That's not looking out for the breed that called padding your wallet!!!!Keep em coming guys ass at this point I'm just having fun pointing out all of the flaws in your reasoning.

__________________
You know you own a mastiff when youre dog weighs more than your wife!
Holmesy

Registered:
Posts: 9
Reply with quote  #311 
I don't know why i'm bothering to reply to anything that brindlelove says, since everything that he says seems to be be aimed at being offensive and provocative rather than objective. Since you are being semantic about the wording of the breed, Here is a link for your viewing pleasure:

http://www.ankc.org.au/Breeds.aspx?gid=6

This is the national body for Australia. If you look at group 6 utility, we have a breed called a Mastiff. I don't see any breed called the English mastiff on the ANKC website at all. If you look at Gammonwood's website, they are called Gammonwood Mastiffs, NOT Gammonwood English Mastiffs. All of your ranting about English Mastiffs are null and void here in Australia.

SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #312 
Quote:
 BUT HIS VIEWS WERE NOT CONSIDERED FOR THE STANDARD AND THUS HIS IDEA'S HOLD NO MERIT WHAT SO EVER!!!!


Actually, if you read Wynn's standard, you will see that many of his views and wording, were indeed used in the OEMC standard! The official standard!

If they believed that Wynn's ideas held little merit, they would not have used his wording in so many parts!

The omission of pied coloring from their official standard, was probably due more to a consensus concern, for the control of white blending into the other colors, due to their antediluvian thinking about color inheritance, rather than their admonition of Wynn's belief, that pied was a Mastiff color!

So, before we flush Wynn down a toilet, it's best first to understand the history! He was well regarded in Mastiff circles, even if he eventually decided to leave the circle of founders.

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #313 
Obviously there were MASTIFFS pre standard Brindlelove, why the hell would someone start a club for something that did not exist.
Quote from MR E G Oliver in his booklet The MASTIFF, "There are many pictures of MASTIFFS by well-known painters such as Velasquez, Sir Antonio More, Titian, Vandyke, Sawrey Gilpin, Bewick, Landseer, Reinagle, etc., and the older MASTIFFS had a great deal more white on them than any we have known in recent times.  Subject to this, fawn and brindle seem to have been the regular colours, as is still the case".
Nora Dicken wrote about Bevis, the MASTIFF who saved his masters life from a disgruntled servant. "After this occurrence, Sir Henry's affection for his dog was such the he caused a full-lenght portrait of himself with Bevis at his side, to be painted, with the words, more faithful than favoured.  The picture is a fine one, and Bevis is shown as a very large dog of MASTIFF type, with with white on the nose and neck as MASTIFFS very often had in those days".
Now I will quote Betty Baxter and her thoughts on MY pied MASTIFF.  Dated 18/3/05 and published in Our Dogs Newspaper.
My friend from Australia, Janine Morffew, brought over with her photos of her latest Mastiff puppy, and these have caused utter amazement; the reason is that the puppy is a pied-marked just like a Landseer Newfoundland.  Some people have said that there must have been a miss mating, but his is not the case.  Apparently there is a puppy on the Continent with the same markings, which is completely unrelated.  Of course, now under the new colours approved by the KC, it could, if it lived here, be registered as "non-standard". 
One must remember when considering a case like this, just what breeds have gone into the Mastiff over the past 200 years.  To begin with in the 1800's there was the Regency Bulldog, and the Alpine Mastiff (Saint Bernard).  After the First World War use was again made of Saints, with Cleveland Leopold reputedly having a Smooth Saint Bernard mother.  But then of course after the last world war the outcrossing became more widespread.  It is no secret that Mrs Scherboom of the Havengore used a Saint Bernard; Tawny Dion a Bullmastiff was also used, as was reputedly, a Great Dane.  However, as far as this latest coloured puppy is concerned, I have always thought that there was a very strong likelihood that there was also Newfoundland blood in there too.  Two of the early post-war breeders bred both Newfies and Mastiffs, and if you look at pictures of Ch Threebees Frian you will see a lovely big, strong, fawn dog that was unbeatable in his day (the 60's) but with a typical Newfoundland head.  So if you get a suitable mating carrying specific genes, you could most certainly come up with some very unusual colours.  They won't normally be quite as outstanding as this baby, but never be amazed at what can be thrown up.  But do not fret!  The pure blood does indeed go back to the revival in 1800, even if it is by now a little diluted....".
Betty again in the Breed Notes dated 15/4/05 and printed in Our Dogs.
Two bits of interest from overseas first.  I have just received my Australian newsletter & lo & behold on the front page were two big pictures of the pied Mastiffs.  The one at the top is the one belonging to my friend Janine, & the one beneath is the one which belongs to Carl van Bael in Belgium.  The Australian pup, Dozer, is white with brindle patches; the Belgian one is white with fawn patches.
Both are authentic Mastiffs with impeccable pedigrees & the Australian newsletter says "these two puppies have created huge interest & have set tongues waging.  In the next edition colour inheritance will be featured".  The editor asks for any pictures or information about unusual colours.  Of course now that the word "non standard" appears in the Mastiff standard, these pups could theoretically be shown and bred from!  The pups are 10 & 9 weeks old respectively, in the photos". 
A point I would like to make here is that after both world wars there was a STANDARD in place, and I believe many pied pups were dropped in the bucket.  All of the above were written when the Standard was in place and these people, who actually know what they are talking about, refer to the coloured dogs as MASTIFFS.
Now, the name, go to the OEMC website and read the front page, it is quite adamant that the correct name for this breed is MASTIFF.  And not once, in any of the quotes above do any of the writers call them English Mastiff.  The other club in the UK is called The Mastiff Association, Mastiff Club of America and so on.
Janine. 

Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #314 

This is the reply I got from Col. Hancock when I sent him the photo of Dozer.

Thank you for your note to Dogs Monthly and for the images of Dozer. 
 
There is nothing in his coat colour that isn't entirely justifiable and predictable.  Pied Mastiffs were once common here.  In Dozer you can see the influence of Alpine Mastiff blood (smooth St Bernard) from the 19th century breeding in England.  It is foolish to frown on coat colours which crop up with genetic authenticity in a breed.  The long coats come from Tibetan Mastiff infusions, the longer muzzles from Great Dane crosses and the ever-lengthening ears from Bloodhound blood.
 
Every pedigree breed's gene pool should be celebrated, not hidden when it doesn't suit a falsely-limited breed standard.
 
Dozer looks a great dog in every sense;  be proud of him.
 
Regards,
 
David Hancock.

For you to discredit Rev Wynn in the manner in which you did, to say his opinion means nothing and belongs in the toilet shows how little you do know and how closed your mind is.  I actually find that quite deplorable, therefore, if you wish to say "keep em coming guys" as you are having fun pointing out the flaws.  I say to you ditto.
Janine,
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #315 
I was just reading another old article, this one by Mr. W. K. Taunton in 1903.
Not about pied, but blues.
"The recognised colours of the present day are apricot or silver fawns and dark brindles; the red, which was to be met with some years ago, having apparently died out.  Black is also spoken of as a Mastiff colour of bygone days, whilst blue-brindles are occasionally to be met with in litters.  It is a colour not be be encouraged from a show point of view; but the breeder will be wise in not destroying puppies of this colour too hastily, for some of our best dark brindles have been bred from bitches of this colour.  It is difficult to say whence this blue-brindle comes, but it has generally occured in litters of puppies whose parentage traces back to Mr. Lindoe's Druid.  The puppies when whelped are of a blue or slate colour and the brindle markings do not appear till later.  These dogs almost invariably possess light-coloured eyes.
Janine.
Grant

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 890
Reply with quote  #316 
Janine
Wynn did often refer to the Mastiff as English Mastiff !!!

Poets and Painters are often the unintentional historians of their age and the following pages will disclose that they have handed down to us much history of the mastiff. The great Poet of the age, our Visionary Laureate has been very silent about the English mastiff. To me this is a little grief as with his powers of weaving semi-historical semi-mystical romances, he could compose a poem on the breed that would eclipse what Gay, Shakespeare and even Virgil have left us. M. B. WYNN,
 It is no doubt a character- istic of the English bulldog to have very small ears, and the English mastiff is all the better for approaching its smaller relation in character generally, but its other congener the pug dog, is often spoilt according to fanciers ideas, through having the round, thick ear, which generally grows to larger dimension than the pointed or commonly termed V shape usually does, although the former is equally or even more typical.

__________________
Grant
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #317 
Well,  I guess Rev Wynn and Brindlelove have something in common lol.  He may want to think twice now about sending Rev Wynns opinions down the loo.
Janine.
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #318 
The Mastiff in England is an English Mastiff, just as the Mastiff in America is an American Mastiff, Australian Mastiff, etc!

The proper name for the breed is simply ....Mastiff!

When authors refer to the breed, some will erroneously say English Mastiff, others just denoting the area in which the Mastiff resides. I guess the Mastiff in England might be more appropriate, but poetic license should not influence our argument as to historical correctness regarding designated labels!

The Old English Mastiff Club is the culprit! The wording confused the proper name of the breed, since the club's wording was to isolate itself from an earlier British Mastiff club. This resulted in many authors referring to the breed as the Old English Mastiff, or English Mastiff!

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
brindlelove

Registered:
Posts: 278
Reply with quote  #319 
Steve this is B.S. "The Mastiff in England is an English Mastiff, just as the Mastiff in America is an American Mastiff, Australian Mastiff, etc" as we now have a registered AMERICAN MASTIFF which looks different for the English Mastiff. Old English Mastiff. You know better. Using your verbage I could post a pic of a bull mastiff and say that it is an english mastiff since it is a mastiff after all. Lets not play gramatical pocket pool as at this point we all understand what we are talking about. Also In all of these poorly thought out responses to me the one thing that keeps poping up and none of you have cought it is this little gem "In Dozer you can see the influence of Alpine Mastiff blood (smooth St Bernard) from the 19th century breeding in England." which clearly states the CROSS BREEDING OF ST. Bernards which is where the white more than likely came from. So thanks once again for proving the opposite of your argument. NEVER HAS THERE BEEN  PIED MOLD ENGLISH / ENGLISH MASTIFF EVER!!!! Just because you call something a mastiff doesn't make it an english / old english mastiff it just maker it a big dog. Now please keep posting guys because the more facts you post do the less research I have to do to prove your wrong. Thanks to all those who inadvertantly proved my point!!!!!!!! Smooth St. Brenards calling them mastiffs LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Now I understand why people can't seem to get this right.

__________________
You know you own a mastiff when youre dog weighs more than your wife!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #320 
My daughter's soccer team was called the Marlboro Mustangs!

I don't believe it meant that all Mustangs come from Marlboro NJ.

Detroit Tigers and Cleveland Indians are also not representative of specific types of native Americans, or felines!

Way before there was a fake breed, called the American Mastiff, there was the Mastiff in America, which had a club called the American Mastiff Club!

The breed represented by the club was the Mastiff! Not the English, or Old English, just the Mastiff!

But due to generalities, club names and country of origin, many refer to the Mastiff by other erroneous handles.

The Bullmastiff, has basically escaped this confusion, since it is rarely referred to as the English Bullmastiff.

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #321 
Brindlelove, I feel like I am hitting my head against a brick wall with you.
It has been stated over and over again about the crossing that went on after the war.  Post standard too I might add.
It is documented, in print, there for all to read.  I have pedigrees here of mastiffs with bulldog, bullmastiff behind them.  But after both world wars most of the crossing was done behind closed doors and pedigrees falsified.  This is in the history of the Mastiff, have you ever read it???  Later crossing also took place, only as far back as the early 80's I know of Bullmastiff thrown in the mix in Australia, Saint in the States and God knows what else. It has happened around the world. We cannot change the past but it does explain why sometimes things crop up in breedings that we cant explain!  It is no ones fault, as I stated before, none of the breeders with pied pups that I know ever bred to get pied pups. By showing off these pups it allows other breeders to see what lines have thrown it and also tell them that this can happen to anyone.  Now with the DNA test hopefully becoming available we will get a better idea of how many dogs actually carry this gene.   But I personally love them, as do many others.  Would I like to see them accepted YES.  Is it going to happen, NO.  These pups, like mine will be pet only, placed in loving homes and end of story. 
Having said that, the romantic in me always believed that my boy was a throw back to the dogs referred to by Oliver and Dicken and all those painters from the past.  Because it was there pre standard and man decided to take it out, NOT THE DOGS.  The practical side always said it came from the post war crossing, so you are not screaming out anything new Brindlelove. 
Janine.
Gammonwood

Avatar / Picture

Gammonwood
Registered:
Posts: 256
Reply with quote  #322 

The origins and history of the Mastiff may not be important to some but to others it is immensely important and special.  These were the glory days of the Mastiff that have filled our lives with so much interest and wonder.
The artwork, artefacts, writings and folklore are amazing pieces of work to behold. There are breed enthusiasts around the world who spend a fortune amassing vast collections of Mastiff memorabilia pre-dating the modern
breed standard.....don’t ask Steve how much he’s spent over the years, it would be an obscene amount!

 

The modern Mastiff did not just appear 127 years ago. The breed has been  evolving for centuries yet all the while retaining a definite broad mouthed type. 
The Mastiff, Bullmastiff and Bulldog are the three broad mouthed breeds of England and they all share a common ancestry (and gene-pool!). 
Many believe the Mastiff to be of more Alaunt origin than Molossian and later crosses may well have combined both types.  The Molossian type is perhaps more evident in today’s German Running Mastiffs also known as  Great Danes.

 

For anybody wanting to embark on the journey to understanding the history of the Mastiff,   M.B. Wynn’s book ‘The History of the Mastiff’ published in 1886 is a must-have and every page of it is worth reading. 
No one preceding  Rev. Wynn had ever written a more comprehensive study of Mastiffs. He is so highly regarded and just cannot be simply negated. Most of our current breed standard we owe to his research and blueprint for the breed.

 

We all know our Mastiff is the English variety but if there is no regard for the breed pre the modern standard, the breed should only officially be referred to as the Mastiff.

We know pied coloured, broad mouthed dogs existed in England and yet we hold no room for them in the present Mastiff breed standard.

We don’t have an issue with anyone referring to the Mastiff as an English Mastiff. Just as we hope no one resents us for calling our pied coloured Mastiffs,  Mastiffs.

 

Cheers to everyone for your excellent and worthy input.

It is such a wonderful gift that you provide to the Mastiff community at large and our wonderful dogs.

As long as we continue to debate the issues that need addressing and not shy away from the hard discussions our breed has a very bright future.

 

Much Love

Si and Jen

SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #323 
File:Molossian Hound, British Museum.jpg

Jennings Dog

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Jump to: navigation, search
Jennings Dog, on display in the British Museum.

The Jennings Dog (also known as The Duncombe Dog or The Dog of Alcibiades) is a Roman sculpture of a dog with a docked tail. It is named after its first modern owner Henry Constantine Jennings. It is a 2nd century AD Roman copy of a Hellenistic bronze original.[1] The original was probably of the 2nd century BC. It is 1.05 metres (3 ft 5 in) high; its leonine muzzle and one leg have been repaired since its rediscovery. Though it is one of only a few animal sculptures surviving from antiquity, a pair of similar marble mastiffs of the same model can be seen in the Belvedere Court of the Vatican Museums.[2]

 

Contents

 "Molossian" dog

It is identified at the British Museum[1] as a Molossian guard dog. The Molossian breed was native to Epirus in northwestern Greece, which was sacked by Rome in 168 BC,[3] so it is assumed to have been associated with some civic monument in Epirus, and to have been brought to Rome. Pliny[4] mentions a highly-valued bronze dog surviving in Rome into his lifetime, before being lost in 69 AD:

"...our own generation saw on the Capitol, before it went up in flames burnt at the hands of the adherents of Vitellius, in the shrine of Juno, a bronze figure of a hound licking its wound, the miraculous excellence and absolute truth to life of which is shown not only by the fact of its dedication in that place but also by the method taken for insuring it; for as no sum of money seemed to equal its value, the government enacted that its custodians should be answerable for its safety with their lives".[5]

[edit] Discovery and purchase

The stone sculpture was discovered at Monte Cagnuolo, near the ancient Lanuvium, the site of an imperial villa of Antoninus Pius, 32 km southeast of Rome,[6] where it was probably made; its first modern owner was the sculptor, restorer and dealer in antiquities Bartolomeo Cavaceppi.[1] Henry Constantine Jennings saw it in a pile of rubble in Cavaceppi's workshop in Rome between 1753 and 1756, bought it from him for 400 scudi, and took it back to Britain.

The sculpture became famous on its arrival in Britain, praisedby Horace Walpole among a scant handful of masterly Roman sculptures of animals,[7] with replicas that were thought to make "a most noble appearance in a gentleman's hall", in Dr Johnson's words.

[edit] "The Dog of Alcibiades"

A story in Plutarch's life of Alcibiades[8]tells of the statesman owning a large, handsome dog whose tail Alcibiades cut off so as to invoke pity from the Athenians and distract them from his worse deeds.[9] The broken tail of this sculpture led Jennings to link it to this story, calling it "the dog of Alcibiades";[10] under this title a pair of copies[11] in Portland stone were installed by Robert Adam at Newby Hall, Yorkshire, about 1780, and in the later 19th century a pair in cast stone were set in the gardens at Basildon Park, Bedfordshire.[12] A 19th century pair carved in serpentine were sold by Bonham's, London, in 2005.[13]

[edit] "Duncombe's Dog"

In settlement of his gambling debts in 1778, Jennings was forced to sell the sculpture, stating "A fine dog it was, and a lucky dog was I to purchase it". The dog was soon afterwards sold at Phillips for £1000 to the Rt Hon Charles Duncombe. James Boswell records a conversation between Johnson and other members of the Literary Club, around the time of the statue's sale, in which Edmund Burke exclaimed "A thousand guineas! The representation of no animal whatever is worth so much", to which Dr Johnson replied "Sir, it is not the worth of the thing, but the skill in forming it, which is so highly estimated. Every thing that enlarges the sphere of human powers, that shews man he can do what he thought he could not do, is valuable."[14]

For 150 years the sculpture stood guard in the entrance hall of Duncombe Park, the family mansion in Yorkshire; it was enthusiastically described there in 1859: "Among the statues in this apartment is particularly noticed an excellent antique sculpture, representing the Dog of Alcibiades, said to be the work of Myron, a Grecian sculptor".[15] It remained there, away from public view, until 1925. In that year, inheritance taxes forced the Duncombes to rent out the hall to Queen Mary's School for Girls, whose pupils were rumoured to feed the dog unwanted Marmite sandwiches.

[edit] The British Museum

It was finally sold by Thomas Duncombe's descendent Charles Anthony Peter Duncombe, 6th Baron Feversham, in 2001. Initially the Houston Museum, Texas, USA attempted to purchase it (the sculpture had been shown in the US in the 1980s), at the price of $950,000, but the granting of an export licence was deferred by the UK government. The Heritage Lottery Fund, National Art Collections Fund, British Museum Friends, Duthie Fund, Ready Bequest, Caryatid Fund, Mrs Barbara G. Fleischman, Mr Frank A. Ladd and the Ready Bequest had already pledged funds to help "save it for the nation". With the sculpture on temporary display in its Great Court, the delay on the export allowed the British Museum enough time to raise the remaining £662,297 through a public appeal, and thus to acquire it permanently. It is now on permanent display in gallery 22 of the Museum, B. 2001.1010.1.[1]


__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #324 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennings_Dog

Site for the above....

Quote:
don’t ask Steve how much he’s spent over the years, it would be an obscene amount!


And every penny worth the effort!
The purchase of art can be costly, especially if one builds a serious collection.
The rewards can be great and the journey fulfilling, as many of these items & objects require hunting, time, more time and even more time still!

The cash transaction is the easy part, the difficult part, are the years dedicated to the task & subject matter in unearthing information, which can lead to a find.  What I have personally enjoyed, is the broader knowledge & flavor, that you acquire about the subject, as you trsnsverse the varied terrain along the journey.
Books are important, but limiting, since they only impart views of others who wrote down their subjective experiences, which may not have been the most accurate & objective interpretations of their experiences.

A personal journey, not based, or anchored in a specific dogma, or schooling, can enable the observer to form fresh thoughts on a topic, thoughts that may have stagnated, due to old beliefs set in type.

As a collection is forming, one can absorb many independent elements, that comes to hand & eye, and thus rejuvenates youthful concepts to offset preconceived fixations of prior subject matter, pertaining to the object in question.
Whether it be collecting Mastiff art & memorabilia, or coins & stamps, makes no difference. Just as long as you are passionate about the subject & the process along the journey!

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #325 
1846...... The Bewick & Buffon imagery, appears to have been used in a number of other impressions, which use the basic image of the pied Mastiff superimposed over various different backgrounds. This may have been done to avoid copyright laws, or to give a unique & fresh view of the work. We see this in images of Wolsey as well, as his image appears in Belgium, Britain and the Netherlands superimposed over various backgrounds.


__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #326 
An example of a pied image with a Mastiff designation, most likely due to the size of the dog rather than type.




__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #327 
Antique Print-DOG-CHIEN-HUND-MASTIFF-Buffon-1822

Yet, if we do more exploration, we see the prior posted image of the "Mastiff" now showing in the upper image of this double image, with the Dogue de Forte Race (Mastiff) appearing under the previous named "Mastiff"!

Therefore, grains of salt must be always used in interpreting exactitude, through old images by authors & artists, that may have been skewed due to not being familiar with the subject matter. Or, through erroneous identifications, due to close proximities of other breed types. Many 17th & 18th century images, are just not accurate in their verbal identifications of certain breed types. In part, due to no standard, but also due to mere ignorance of the subject.

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #328 
I must also add, that the person setting the plates for the images to be printed could also be the culprit, as many hands were used before an image was set on paper and therefore, many possible ways to screw up the plates!
__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Olga

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,656
Reply with quote  #329 
Ran into this cute standard poodle at the Canadian Specialty, both parents were " normal" coloring...

Olga

Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: pied_standart_poodle.jpg, Views: 33, Size: 714.87 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: PIED_POODLE.jpg, Views: 12, Size: 699.05 KB 

GinaG

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 3,433
Reply with quote  #330 
Veeeeeery interesting...
__________________
gina anelli
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #331 
That is interesting, almost like a Springer.
Janine.
Olga

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,656
Reply with quote  #332 
I know, Jeannine and Gina, but she is definitely a poodle!!
Olga
brindlelove

Registered:
Posts: 278
Reply with quote  #333 
So Gammonwood themselves AGREES WITH ME on the type of dog (see Steve even they see through that sad attempt at word play) we are talking about the ENGLISH MASTIFF. Now they are also playing the same verbal game by calling the pieds mastiffs only. If by that they mean a large dog that does NOT meet the ENGLISH MASTIFF standard then fine BUT they are trying to pass these off as ENGLISH MASTIFFS that meet THEIR standard.
Steve you have just shot yourself in the foot by playing devils advocate by posting pics of those dogs call MASTIFFS even though they look nothing like and ENGLISH MASTIFF!!!! Most on here are trying to use those pics to PROVE PIEDS IN THE BREED when you just explained that they should be taken with a grain of salt (goo look at those pics again people LOLOLOLOLOLOL. Better yet the pic of the pied saint that had so many fooled in here). Now Steve we have spoken about what is really going on and your position and I have no problem with it but I just wish that some wouldn't be so blind. I really don't want to start cross posting where pieds came up and the idea of them was CRUSHED but I'll let people do their own homework. Anyone else care to try to debate this with something other than nonsense cheer leading and pics that ONLY SHOW LARGE DOGS CALLED MASTIFFS NOT ENGLISH MASTIFFS which is what is in question here. REMEMBER THAT THE ENGLISH MASTIFF DIDN'T EXIST BEFORE THE STANDARD PERIOD!!!! There were large pied color dogs that were called mastiffs before the breed but they were NOT ENGLISH MASTIFFS!!!!!! Steve's posts, pics and Gammonwoods very own video's state this and make it very clear. ANY large dog before the standard was called a mastiff so Steve my bull mastiff comment holds true since there was no standard to speak of. Ohh and lets not forget that the standard was created to CLEARLY DEFINE THE DOGS IN EACH GROUP!!!!!! It's how we know what to call the dogs of today. If not for That then we would still be calling ALL LARGE DOGS MASTIFFS (again go watch Gammonwoods video's.
Now lets talk about how some are all O.K. with the supposed cross breeding and thus the INTRODUCTION of pieds into the English mastiff. You all seem to state that fact (which again throws Gammonwoods stance right down the toilette) and the pretend as if we didn't realize that you just agreed that the reason for the pieds is because of the CROSS BREEDING!!!! Some of pay a little more attention than other I suppose. Again if ANYONE can SHOW ME ONE CASE OF PIEDS IN ENGLISH MASTIFFS SINCE THE INTRODUCTION OF THE WORLD OLDEST PURE BREED I WILL EAT MY WORDS OPENLY ON HERE. Challenge presented any takers? Please lets not waste time with re posting the info Steve posted since we have already PROVEN that that all PREDATES the standard and thus hold 0 NO NONE NATHA Merritt in this discussion.
Ohh and because I'm Puertorican and Italian I suppose I am part moore and Inca right (sorry my decendents came from spain). Lets go even further down this silly tree and talk about about adam and eve since we could all trace man kinds origins to them (that is unless you know who Lillith is). That means there are no race differences just different coloration due to climate. You all starting to see just how ridiculous this argument is and how much fun I could really have with this if I wanted to. Even better since at some point there had to be ONE DOG that started it all so lets just abolish all breeds since they all share a common relative. I mean why discriminate? They ALL share the same ancestor right? Had enough yet? Who ever said we should just start calling them Mastaints understood just what I was talking about but it seemed to miss most of you.

__________________
You know you own a mastiff when youre dog weighs more than your wife!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #334 
I'm not certain as to what you're attempting to get at, since many of these issues are author dependent.

If one author is speaking about indigenous breeds of Great Britain, they won't say English Mastiff, since Mastiff is sufficient. Other early authors might not be referring to the German Mastiff A/K/A Great Dane, or the Dutch Mastiff A/K/A Pug, so they might use English to further clarify their meaning, even though the term Mastiff was the correct usage.

Therefore, the pictures of pieds with the designate of Mastiff, or Dogue de Forte Race, etc., were also author dependent and did not just refer to any large breed.

The usage of Ban Dog, Tie Dog, & Mastiff, were typically used by the general population in very early pre standardized descriptions. These miscellaneous designations, should not be used broad spectrum to define your premise!

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
brindlelove

Registered:
Posts: 278
Reply with quote  #335 
Steve you just reworded my post. Let me recap --- we are talking about what is UNIVERSALLY KNOWN AS AN ENGLISH MASTIFF. Those who own an English mastiff understand that a mastiff means AN ENGLISH MASTIFF (and thus the reason for my stance) or to some an OLD ENGLISH MASTIFF. The rest of the universe has no idea what a mastiff is and more times than not will ask WHAT KIND OF MASTIFF!!!! Don't make the mistake in thinking that those outside of this HIGHLY BIAS GROUP even remotely depicts the general populous. Even Gammonwood picked up on and agreed to that basic point. They are NOT trying to sell a big dog called a mastiff but an ENGLISH MASTIFF!!!!!  
__________________
You know you own a mastiff when youre dog weighs more than your wife!
brindlelove

Registered:
Posts: 278
Reply with quote  #336 
Let me restate this again as it seems to have been lost. I have no problems with Gammonwood CREATING (as is their stated intention and are even excited about the D.N.A. testing to make CREATING PIEDS EASIER) and designer pied English Mastiff. My problem is them claiming that it meets the standard and selling it as such. The reality is that as of now and for close to 200 years there has NEVER BEEN A PIED ENGLISH MASTIFF EVER!!!!!! If Gammonwood changed it's practice than I would have nothing to say but they are doing everything on their power to WATER DOWN THE HERITAGE and DESTROY the standard and coming from them that is inexcusable. They are supposed to be a beacon and representative of what the STANDARD IS NOT WHAT THEY WANT TO SELL.
__________________
You know you own a mastiff when youre dog weighs more than your wife!
Teresa

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 4,137
Reply with quote  #337 
Okay, I've stayed out of this for several pages and I don't know who you are brindlelove, but I honestly think you are a complete jerk about how you've approached this. THERE IS NOT ONE MASTIFF ALIVE THAT FITS THE STANDARD COMPLETELY! Otherwise, some miracle worker has created the perfect Mastiff and if they have, I haven't seen him/her. We get as close as possible, but ever Mastiff has "some" fault. I just believe any fault is a matter of degree. To me, a pied Mastiff is no more of a fault than a fluffy, a "too short" of a coat, bad head, bad angles etc. It's SOOO much easier to fix the cosmetic faults than the structural faults. Do you have any idea how many generations it takes to fix front assembly? Do you know how many generations it takes to fix pieds or fluffies? Give me a structurally, temperamentally sound and healthy pied or fluffy ANY DAY over some of the train wrecks I've seen in the ring lately and I'll BET you I can come up with a very nice example of the breed in ONE generation!!!!! Do I purposefully want to breed for pieds or fluffies? Not me personally but that's MY choice. Futhermore, if I had to decide between having a great litter that "might" throw pieds or fluffies in order to get a great Mastiff, I'd definitely take that risk.
__________________
http://www.oasismastiffs.com
http://www.mastiffchat.com
Align yourself with those with kind hearts, gentle spirits and honest intentions. Be a good friend and let good friends know how much they are valued! Live every day with the intention of doing what is right...
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #338 
http://forum.mastiffclub.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=261
__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Grant

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 890
Reply with quote  #339 
I wonder where the Kennel Club got there info, to dictate the name.
__________________
Grant
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #340 
The name has always been Mastiff, nothing more!
__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Holmesy

Registered:
Posts: 9
Reply with quote  #341 
Do you have any further pics to show of this gorgeous litter, Si & Jen? Would love to see how these little bundles of joy are progressing.

Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #342 
Well Brindlelove, you better contact the KC and tell them the breed did not exist prior to the standard.  The Old English Mastiff Club came into existance in 1883 and the standard was drawn up.
YET, I have Kennel Club Stud Book Records from 1859 with MASTIFFS listed and Kennel Club Breed Record Supplements for MASTIFFS from 1880 until today.  So, I better throw them out according to you, they dont mean anything.  THEY DIDN'T EXIST. 
As proof, here are the first listings.
Kennel Club Stub Book  1859-1874  Class XIX - MASTIFFS.
2280-Anlaf - Mr Ralph O. Yearsley's Sutton Bonnington, near Loughborough: breeder, owner, born 1870, colour fawn.
Pedigree:  By Mr M. B. Wynn's Monarch (No. 2317) out of Mr Yearsley's Chloe, by champion Turk (No. 2349) our of Di, by Bill George's Tiger (No. 2345) our of Lukey's Nell, by Nelson out of Lukey's Bounty, by Lukey's Bruce 11 out of his Duchess. 
Chief Performances:  Birmingham, 2nd prize, 1872:  Nottingham, 1st prize, 1872.
THAT BRINDLELOVE IS THE FIRST STUD BOOK ENTRY.  I HAVE MANY MORE.
The Kennel Gazette  December 1880 MASTIFFS
Baroness of Rossendale, b, Mr. J. Kenyon's by Salisbury - Albani, Feb 5 1880
King Turk, d, Mr. W. Watson's, by Lord Stanley - Kona, Mar 15 1879
Meurice, b, Mr. J. G. Atkin's, by Tiger - Ate, May 27 1880
Othello, d, Dr. L.S. Forbes Winslow's, by The Boss - Bijou, Oct 1878
Rossendale, d, Mr. J. Kenyon's, by Salisbury - Albani, Feb 5 1880

Look at the dog in my avatar Brindlelove, see with your own eyes, a PIED MASTIFF, and guess what, he was registered as a MASTIFF by The Australian Kennel Club.
Janine.
Janine

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 1,524
Reply with quote  #343 
Damn edit button, should read OUT not OUR twice, have to cut my nails lol
Janine.
Grant

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 890
Reply with quote  #344 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teresa
Okay, I've stayed out of this for several pages and I don't know who you are brindlelove, but I honestly think you are a complete jerk about how you've approached this. THERE IS NOT ONE MASTIFF ALIVE THAT FITS THE STANDARD COMPLETELY! Otherwise, some miracle worker has created the perfect Mastiff and if they have, I haven't seen him/her. We get as close as possible, but ever Mastiff has "some" fault. I just believe any fault is a matter of degree. To me, a pied Mastiff is no more of a fault than a fluffy, a "too short" of a coat, bad head, bad angles etc. It's SOOO much easier to fix the cosmetic faults than the structural faults. Do you have any idea how many generations it takes to fix front assembly? Do you know how many generations it takes to fix pieds or fluffies? Give me a structurally, temperamentally sound and healthy pied or fluffy ANY DAY over some of the train wrecks I've seen in the ring lately and I'll BET you I can come up with a very nice example of the breed in ONE generation!!!!! Do I purposefully want to breed for pieds or fluffies? Not me personally but that's MY choice. Futhermore, if I had to decide between having a great litter that "might" throw pieds or fluffies in order to get a great Mastiff, I'd definitely take that risk.

Teresa
This discussion is not to do with our  personal opinions on what we think should be or not, it is about the facts of the matter and whether pied's were part of our present breed, or should be introduced into our present standard !!
You are also comparing fluffs and pied's, as if they are of equal status in the faults table, which is not the case, as the standard from both sides of the water is very clear about the fact of excessive white being a serious fault and not allowed. We can trim and change the look of a fluff, but we cannot in the rules change the natural color of a dog to be shown !!!
UK Color
Apricot, fawn or brindle. In any case, muzzle, ears and nose should be black with black around eye rims, and extending upwards between them. Excessive white on body, chest or feet is unacceptable. 
US Color
Fawn, apricot, or brindle. Brindle should have fawn or apricot as a background color which should be completely covered with very dark stripes. Muzzle, ears, and nose must be dark in color, the blacker the better, with similar color tone around the eye orbits and extending upward between them. A small patch of white on the chest is permittedFaults-Excessive white on the chest or white on any other part of the body. Mask, ears, or nose lacking dark pigment. 

The US color description is permitting a small patch of white on chest only !!! Conclusion; the pied Mastiff is not permitted in our breed !!!

__________________
Grant
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #345 
Quote:
Conclusion; the pied Mastiff is not permitted in our breed !!!
__________________
Grant


The pied color is not permitted in our breed!

The pied Mastiff can be shown and would be considered a fault in color!

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Grant

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 890
Reply with quote  #346 
Steve
Any fault in a dog, that changes type to the extent that the pied color does, is a major fault which should call for disqualification !!
There has been discussions in other breeds on color for various reasons, but in our case there would be no good to come of adding pied to our standard !!   If you like them, get into Saints as your breed !!!
A given coat color may be acceptable, it may be preferred, it may be the only acceptable colour, or it may be a fault. Sometimes these colours change over time, often after much in-fighting and bitterness. For many years, the only acceptable coat pattern in a Dalmatian was white with black spots, very recently liver spots have been accepted as a variant, but black still appears to be the preference of most. A black German Shepherd Dog is penalized; a white GSD is disqualified, as the color is believed to be linked to deafness and other serious health problems. Many GSD fanciers like the white colour and continue to breed for the white coat; some lobby for its acceptance into the breed standard, others argue for the creation of a new breed. In the future, genetic testing may show which of these variants in color are actually linked to health problems and which are not, which may lead to modification of the breed standards

__________________
Grant
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #347 
Quote:
Steve
Any fault in a dog, that changes type to the extent that the pied color does, is a major fault which should call for disqualification !!


The standard does not state this!

Therefore, although I may not disagree with your general premise, if we follow the standard, we shouldn't make up new rules, no matter how strongly we may feel about an issue either way!

In other words, coat values are left up to the judge to decide, as to how severe a fault may be. Since the demise of the point system, it is presently a subjective call, which may still utilize the old pointed system as precident for a judge's personal valuation.

But a judge would be hard pressed to disqualify a pied, or full fluff, if presented to him/her for evaluation!

__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
SteveOifer

Avatar / Picture

POWER POSTER
Registered:
Posts: 25,881
Reply with quote  #348 
Precedent....typo
__________________
For the betterment of the breed!

"Above all, a uniform type should be aimed at by breeders and uniformity of type can only exist in a proportionate ratio in the purity and distinctiveness in any breed"!.........M. Moore
"If breeds did not adhere to a specific shape, form, and colour range, or if breeders disregarded this blueprint, the breed would degenerate to the point that it would hardly resemble the breed at all. Selective breeding does not just create breeds- it preserves them as well. Breeding purebred dogs inherently means accepting limitations on your freedom to just breed anything"...Catherine McMillan
" A reinforced consolidation of the American and British standards could be the basis for restoring our breed to the gladiatorial glory of its ancient past, in capability if not in usage".....Norman Howard Carp-Gordon
"I can live with doubt, or not knowing, rather than to have answers that might be wrong"...Richard Feynman
TEST YOUR DOGS!
Teresa

Avatar / Picture

~ POWER POSTER ~
Registered:
Posts: 4,137
Reply with quote  #349 
Grant, first, my biggest point was the way brindlelove had presented his opinion.

But, Steve is right, and that was my point on pieds, fluffs etc, there are no disqualifying features.

__________________
http://www.oasismastiffs.com
http://www.mastiffchat.com
Align yourself with those with kind hearts, gentle spirits and honest intentions. Be a good friend and let good friends know how much they are valued! Live every day with the intention of doing what is right...
brindlelove

Registered:
Posts: 278
Reply with quote  #350 
Again with the word games. I agreed to the Mastiff definition as I stated in my previous post. Grant Teresa is just cheer leading and that's the reason that her and EVERYONE ELSE has NOT posted any proof to contradict anything I wrote. I really is just blind cheer leading. Oh and how may can a dog be registered BEFORE THE BREED EXISTED? Mastiff was ANY BIG DOG BEFORE THE STANDARD. Love how you all think that I am that stupid and that I can not read. I am not arguing what a mastiff was before the standard existed. How about you pull off the cheer skirt and try to actually address any of the points I brought up with something based in fact and that actually supports your thought.
OH and if any of you actually think that I give a rats A$$ about how you feel you are sadly mistaken. I am an adult and do not play to the crowd nor do I care for "clicks". I am all about the TRUTH AND POINT OF FACT. Peoples feelings are way down on my list (maybe why I was so good at consulting). I have a VERY short fuse for HYPOCRISY and B.S. Unlike MOST of you I live in reality and the deal with the hear and now. In all of this NOT ONE OF YOU has been able to post NOT ONE SINGLE FACT TO SUPPORT YOUR POSITION  ... NOT ONE!!!!! Don't like me ... Don't care. Want to shut me up come at me with facts to support your position and we can discuss them but all I am getting is a lot of bruised ego's and really pitiful retorts that do more to disprove the opposing views than were intended (which really makes me laugh). Not one of you have taken me up on my offer NOT ONE OF YOU. Could it be because you can not and thus have to resort to silly word games and posting things that have NOTHING to do with the topic. Steve has IM'd me several times and we have spoken to. I can be very reasonable when a well thought out opposing view is presented WITH SUPPORTING FACTS. Problem is that NOT ONE OF HAS DONE THAT!!!! Like I said lots of cheer leaders that seem to gloss over the points and only comment about their feelings. Go hug your dog look in the mirror and tell yourself someone loves you than when you are feeling better about yourself come back here and answer any one of the questions or post a fact to disprove my stance. Emotions are for the bedroom. I am all about saving the integrity of the breed I love and can not believe that some SUPPOSED champions of the breed are so blatantly being anything but. Again here is your chance to prove me wrong with FACT.

__________________
You know you own a mastiff when youre dog weighs more than your wife!
Print
Reply

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.