Tall Staffy

by jiestar1984 Fri Jul 13 2012, 19:03

Hi guys new to this site and have got to say possibly the greatest site ever Smile

I have loved checking the forums and seeing all your staffys they are all absolutly gorgeous, I used to have a staffy and she was the best dog ever unfortunatly due to work commitments and having to move into somewhere were dogs are not allowed i had to give her up, but she has got herself a new family and is being taken care of very well.

Now me and my friends were talking about staffys and I was talking about a tall blue staffy that i saw and he looked absolutly stunning but he was taller than most staffys i have seen. one of my friends told me that must have been a poorly bred staffy as they should only be about (i think he said) 18 inch or something like that but while i was talking to the owner of the tall staffy she had told me that staffys used to be tall and they were bred to be shorter in the 30's/40's not sure really about it all but i really did think that the tall staffy was cracking even though it was taller.

i just wanted to see what peoples opinions were on the tall staffy?

Again great site and keep the pics coming Smile

by Guest Fri Jul 13 2012, 19:06

Hello and welcome to the forum Big Grin

http://staffy-bull-terrier.co.uk/staffordshirebullterriertypes.html

by Guest Fri Jul 13 2012, 19:07

http://staffy-bull-terrier.co.uk/standardataglance.html

by **janey** Fri Jul 13 2012, 19:08

Hi &

Welcome to the staffordshire bull terrier niceboard. We are pleased you have decided to join us, and hope you enjoy your stay. We hope to see plenty of pictures of your staffordshire bull terriers or any other breed you may have in your household Smile

If you would like to enter your dog(s), puppy(s) or another pet(s) you may have into our Monthly Competition, voting starts on the 20th of every month, if you are lucky your dog maybe placed on our Hall Of Fame page on our website.

Just one last thing before you look around could you please just have a quick look At This Poll, we would love to know how you found us.

Here are some links that will get you started with the website:-

Tall Staffy Icon_arrow

Please read the Forum Rules before you start posting.
Tall Staffy Icon_arrow

Here are a List of Tutorial & FAQs that will help you around the forum.
Tall Staffy Icon_arrow

You can ask for Help here if you are having trouble doing something on the forum.
Tall Staffy Icon_arrow

How to update your Profile information
Tall Staffy Icon_arrow

If you have any ideas to improve the forum please let us know Your Feedback Here.
Tall Staffy Icon_arrow

We have a Website with alot of information if you would like to view it.
Tall Staffy Icon_arrow

Make a Donation to help us to keep improving our forum and website.

by **Kathy** Fri Jul 13 2012, 19:20

Hi and welcome to the forum from Rocky and me.

by Guest Fri Jul 13 2012, 19:56

Hi, welcome to the forum.

jiestar1984 wrote: one of my friends told me that must have been a poorly bred staffy as they should only be about (i think he said) 18 inch or something like that but while i was talking to the owner of the tall staffy she had told me that staffys used to be tall and they were bred to be shorter in the 30's/40's

Firstly, the top height for a stafford is 16" & it's been like that for a number of years. It was, in the early days, 17" I think, so even then an 18" staff was over sized. They're not meant to be 'big' dogs!

I'd agree, though, that the dog you saw was probably poorly bred if it was taller than 18"!! It was most likely a crossbreed.

by Guest Fri Jul 13 2012, 22:02

Hi and welcome from us and Suki

by dodge Fri Jul 13 2012, 22:33

Hi, so where is the measurments from for 16", is it floor to the dogs back?

by Guest Fri Jul 13 2012, 22:35

It's from the floor to the top of the withers (shoulder blades).

by dodge Fri Jul 13 2012, 22:55

Ah i see, mines already about 9" and he`s only 11 weeks tommorrow.

Oh and sorry for my rudeness, hi & welcome to the new member Big Grin

by **Steve** Fri Jul 13 2012, 22:59

http://staffy-bull-terrier.co.uk/howtomeasureyourstaffords.html

Big Grin

if grow all over 16" clearly you dont have a full staffy Wink

by Guest Fri Jul 13 2012, 23:12

dodge wrote:Ah i see, mines already about 9" and he`s only 11 weeks tommorrow.

Oh and sorry for my rudeness, hi & welcome to the new member

They all grow at different rates. He may or may not continue to grow upwards, beyond the 16" ideal height.

by Buster's_Mum Sat Jul 14 2012, 10:47

Steve wrote:http://staffy-bull-terrier.co.uk/howtomeasureyourstaffords.html

if grow all over 16" clearly you dont have a full staffy

Buster is about 17" when I last measured him (although he was trying to eat the tape measure so I need to try again) and he is KC reg so pure staffie. I agree that over 18" is most likely a crossbreed, but there are more people now breeding larger staffies so just because they are over 16" doesn't mean they're not full staff, IMO anyway.

by Guest Sat Jul 14 2012, 10:54

Buster's_Mum wrote:
Steve wrote:http://staffy-bull-terrier.co.uk/howtomeasureyourstaffords.html

if grow all over 16" clearly you dont have a full staffy

Buster is about 17" when I last measured him (although he was trying to eat the tape measure so I need to try again) and he is KC reg so pure staffie. I agree that over 18" is most likely a crossbreed, but there are more people now breeding larger staffies so just because they are over 16" doesn't mean they're not full staff, IMO anyway.

Bandit was also 17" and pure staff with loads of champions in his pedigree. But yes, 18" is very tall.

It's strange that you say people are breeding them bigger, because round here it's quite the opposite. The amount of (to me) tiny staffords round here is amazing. Also, at Crufts this year, most of the staffs were, to my mind, too small.

by Buster's_Mum Sat Jul 14 2012, 11:02

Caryll wrote:
Buster's_Mum wrote:
Steve wrote:http://staffy-bull-terrier.co.uk/howtomeasureyourstaffords.html

if grow all over 16" clearly you dont have a full staffy

Buster is about 17" when I last measured him (although he was trying to eat the tape measure so I need to try again) and he is KC reg so pure staffie. I agree that over 18" is most likely a crossbreed, but there are more people now breeding larger staffies so just because they are over 16" doesn't mean they're not full staff, IMO anyway.

Bandit was also 17" and pure staff with loads of champions in his pedigree. But yes, 18" is very tall.

It's strange that you say people are breeding them bigger, because round here it's quite the opposite. The amount of (to me) tiny staffords round here is amazing. Also, at Crufts this year, most of the staffs were, to my mind, too small.

I have seen alot of shorter staffies, but only a few tiny ones round here. When I was looking for another staffy alot of the adverts seemed to be for taller leggier staffs (I was looking for an older pup, not a young one so I don't know what type they were) Most of them were not KC reg though.

by Guest Sat Jul 14 2012, 11:03

Round here, they're not just short legged. They're actually all over small.

by Buster's_Mum Sat Jul 14 2012, 11:10

I have seen a few like that, they wouldn't of been much taller - if at all - than LuLu (although obviously alot bigger built) and she is a toy breed! I cannot see how it can be healthy to breed them so small though. People seem to have a thing for small dogs, look at teacup chihauhau's (sp?) which is just a scam for breeders to get more money, but they have problems and usually need c sections to have pups. It is not healthy for any dog Sad

by Guest Sat Jul 14 2012, 11:12

I don't understand at all. If you like a certain breed, why try to change it all the time? Silly. But as you say, it's usually down to £££s.

by jiestar1984 Sat Jul 14 2012, 14:04

well thanks for all your help guys i will be hoping to be moving soon and once i do i will be getting myself a staffy i just need to do my research only looking for reputable breeders. but i thought one of the points in breeding a specific breed was to improve on it correct me if im wrong but i thought that was it, the lady did tell me it was a full staffy just bred taller i wish i had got a picture to put up to let you guys see it because it was an absolute gorgeous dog. i honestly dont know why you see people crossing the street to get away from these dogs because they are just the best breed i have ever owed Smile

by **Steve** Sat Jul 14 2012, 18:00

yea to improve BUT keep it in the standard.... anything 18" or over will be class as a pitbull type....

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/HomeAndCommunity/InYourHome/AnimalsAndPets/DG_180098

by Guest Sat Jul 14 2012, 18:05

jiestar1984 wrote:one of the points in breeding a specific breed was to improve on it correct me if im wrong but i thought that was it,

Yes, but to improve whilst still keeping within the breed standard.

by Floyd1138 Sat Jul 14 2012, 18:18

if the so called improving continues, staffs will go the way of the bulldog. Many say they have started showing the signs.. vast majority of show ring dogs come from a limited gene pool

by Guest Sat Jul 14 2012, 18:20

Floyd1138 wrote:if the so called improving continues, staffs will go the way of the bulldog. Many say they have started showing the signs.. vast majority of show ring dogs come from a limited gene pool

There is a huge gene pool out there. The only thing that limits it is the lack of imagination of certain breeders.

I really don't see how you can say that the staff will go the same way as the Bulldog - in what way?

by **Steve** Sat Jul 14 2012, 18:25

Floyd1138 wrote:if the so called improving continues, staffs will go the way of the bulldog. Many say they have started showing the signs.. vast majority of show ring dogs come from a limited gene pool

dont talk silly!!

by Floyd1138 Sat Jul 14 2012, 18:43

Then why so much inbreeding? mans vain attempt to try and make something he thinks is better. You just have to look at certain lines to see the extent of inbreeding.

by **Steve** Sat Jul 14 2012, 18:47

look at dave new pup line!!

do you know anything about your dog lines without papers?

by **Steve** Sat Jul 14 2012, 18:48

Denise is a breeder she got great line without inbreding in it

by **Steve** Sat Jul 14 2012, 18:54

http://www.champdogs.co.uk/litter/24379
http://www.champdogs.co.uk/litter/25455
http://www.champdogs.co.uk/litter/24783

^^ good line i could go on all day but i got food to cook Wink

by Guest Sat Jul 14 2012, 18:56

Steve wrote:look at dave new pup line!!

do you know anything about your dog lines without papers?

by Floyd1138 Sat Jul 14 2012, 18:59

im curious to know your opinion on the thousands of bull and terriers /pit dogs, or what ever you want to call them from 1934 that had nothing to do with any line from staffordshire. Do you class them as not being SBT's? In your opinion do all staffys come from the lines in staffordshire?

by **Steve** Sat Jul 14 2012, 19:01

we had this convo already Floyd1138 Rolling Eyes

by **Steve** Sat Jul 14 2012, 19:04

i just show u 3 line that dont have any inbreding i could show you 100s more i just cant be bothered....

do you know your dog history?

by Floyd1138 Sat Jul 14 2012, 19:07

i dont recall any such previous convo

by **Steve** Sat Jul 14 2012, 19:13

cant you remember you trying to tell me about the history of the staffy?

by Floyd1138 Sat Jul 14 2012, 19:16

ah ok, im not talking about 1800s in this instance, i mean all the dogs that were alive outside staffordshire when the club was was founded and name given.... are they not 'real' staffs?

by **Steve** Sat Jul 14 2012, 19:19

only thing that has change from 1935 is 2" of their heights which i'm glad they did because if breeder was breeding staffy 18" they would of been banned with the pitbull and american staffordshire terrier that is a FACT

by Floyd1138 Sat Jul 14 2012, 19:25

so the dogs that were alive pre formation of the club which were not 1935 standard shouldnt be classed as staffs? and any dogs alive now from anywhere outside the stafford lines are not staffs?

by **Steve** Sat Jul 14 2012, 19:27

i don't know what you are talking about at all i dont know

you carrying on like all staffy was the size of pitbulls which is wrong!! they changed the height to stop some breeders breeding them to tall

by Guest Sat Jul 14 2012, 19:31

Floyd1138 wrote:Then why so much inbreeding? mans vain attempt to try and make something he thinks is better. You just have to look at certain lines to see the extent of inbreeding.

Floyd1138 wrote:im curious to know your opinion on the thousands of bull and terriers /pit dogs, or what ever you want to call them from 1934 that had nothing to do with any line from staffordshire. Do you class them as not being SBT's? In your opinion do all staffys come from the lines in staffordshire?

Floyd1138 wrote:ah ok, im not talking about 1800s in this instance, i mean all the dogs that were alive outside staffordshire when the club was was founded and name given.... are they not 'real' staffs?

This is getting silly.
1. Good breeders are moving away from linebreeding to a great extent, and have already moved away from close inbreeding
2. The dog wasn't named because they all came from Staffordshire - the people who drew up the standards & started the first breed club came from Staffordshire & as the Bull Terrier had already been registered they called the new breed the Staffordshire Bull Terrier.
3. Just answered no. 3 above.

You really ought to learn your history properly if you're going to get into arguments about it.

by Floyd1138 Sat Jul 14 2012, 19:42

lol No one is arguing, its a discussion, a debate. Im asking your opinion. Im suggesting that many different types of bull and terrier dogs existed, meaning some had been some crossed with certain breeds, others not. some were bigger than others due to breeding with larger more powerful types.
I believe it was joe dunn who stated that in the 30's peoples pit dogs from 10 miles down the road were very different to the ones he was used to seeing as a child and later owning and breeding.
So given these facts im curious to know..... what happened to the other dogs which were outwith the standard in 1935, these pit dogs, were they not classed as SBT'S?

by Floyd1138 Sat Jul 14 2012, 19:56

caryll, i am ASKING not telling !!!!!!!!!!!! i do not think for one minute that they all came form staffordshire, hence why im asking about the pit dogs from outside this region who were larger and not within the standard brought in, in 35.
I probably know the exact same information on the club formation and how and when it was formed as you do, we have read the same books on it probably.

So please do not try and belittle me with facts i know about, clearly you have misunderstood what i meant, perhaps its the way i worded it, if so i apologise for poor grammar or wording.

by Guest Sat Jul 14 2012, 20:05

Enough debating, nothing will come of it.

None of this has to do with the OP so i think this should be locked now.

by Guest Sat Jul 14 2012, 21:53

Ok the standard changed by 2" but did any one tell mother nature oooppss!

The biguns are out there and are as pure in stafford blood as the 16 inch ones.
They never went away, their not seen as much now as though years of breeding for the now standard of 16" the top size dogs are few and far between, and maybe in a way thats a good thing with the black cloud of the DDA looming over our heads.

by Guest Sun Jul 15 2012, 00:28

Floyd1138 wrote:lol No one is arguing, its a discussion, a debate. Im asking your opinion. Im suggesting that many different types of bull and terrier dogs existed, meaning some had been some crossed with certain breeds, others not. some were bigger than others due to breeding with larger more powerful types.
I believe it was joe dunn who stated that in the 30's peoples pit dogs from 10 miles down the road were very different to the ones he was used to seeing as a child and later owning and breeding.
So given these facts im curious to know..... what happened to the other dogs which were outwith the standard in 1935, these pit dogs, were they not classed as SBT'S?

My point is that the region of Staffordshire has nothing to do with which dogs were staffords and which weren't. If the dog down the road looked like the standard they'd drawn up then it was a stafford, if it didn't then it wasn't. So to answer your question, dogs that didn't fit the standard weren't Staffordshire Bull Terriers. Self evident.

I'm sorry if you think I was trying to belittle you - I wasn't, but your statements were silly. As with any new breed, if a dog doesn't look like the standard then it isn't that breed.

by Guest Sun Jul 15 2012, 00:42

Floyd1138 wrote:caryll, i am ASKING not telling !!!!!!!!!!!! i do not think for one minute that they all came form staffordshire, hence why im asking about the pit dogs from outside this region who were larger and not within the standard brought in, in 35.
I probably know the exact same information on the club formation and how and when it was formed as you do, we have read the same books on it probably.

So please do not try and belittle me with facts i know about, clearly you have misunderstood what i meant, perhaps its the way i worded it, if so i apologise for poor grammar or wording.

FLOYD1138 just one question do you only come on the forum to aurgue as im yet to see a factual sencible post come from you .
sorry i may be mile off but you come across as know nothing loudmouth
and im getting rather bored with it angry

rant over

by Guest Sun Jul 15 2012, 00:55

Floyd1138 wrote:I probably know the exact same information on the club formation and how and when it was formed as you do, we have read the same books on it probably.

I daresay you have read some of the same books as me, but have you also spoken to the guys who knew the guys who set up the breed? Well I have. My information & opinions come from a wider range than just books (although I'm not running down books - I love them & read voraciously).

by Guest Sun Jul 15 2012, 01:03

Floyd1138 wrote:so the dogs that were alive pre formation of the club which were not 1935 standard shouldnt be classed as staffs? and any dogs alive now from anywhere outside the stafford lines are not staffs?

Before 1935 there were officially no staffordshire bull terriers, although there were enough dogs around of the 'type' to warrant them being recognised by the kc. So pre-1935 they weren't staffs, no.

I don't know what you mean by 'stafford lines'? If a dog is unregistered and you don't know its parentage then it may well be a cross breed. However, most people will call it a staff if it looks like a staff.

by Sponsored content