The linebred Boyles dogs had pretty pathetic percentages of game dogs almost from the inception. They were always rough as hell and athletic, but when your broke through the helacious mouth and offense, they most often would quit. This is a matter of fact, and I have seen the dogs from just about every well known source of these dogs there was in the middle to late 90's, including showing dogs right from Ronald's yard myself. My very good friend wrapped up over $100K in trying to obtain the best of this bloodline and really had nothing to show for it other than a lot of heartache, and a few very special animals from select breedings that were worth feeding and breeding.Originally Posted by Pistol
I don't know what you've seen big guy, but I beg to differ; as I've seen a very high percentage in this line. You speak of "getting pass the helacious mouth", but very few "that I've seen" were able to do that. And the ones that did, didn't always win either; it went about 50/50. And even a greater percentage of those were lost afterwards. You have good & bad in every line, but from a percentage stand point, I love where I stand with this family of dogs. I started running this line of dogs back in 1989, and did so because I got tired of losing to them. And once I started filling chain spots with them, I gradually started clearing out the other dogs I had on the yard, from various bloodlines, to make more room for them! I guess its all about what you're looking for in your dogs; and of course, you are entitled to your own opinion. But the drive, roughness, ability, crunch, and finish in these dogs far exceed whatever faults they may have. Although, just because I didn't mention gameness, don't take it as if these dogs don't have that. Some have more than others, of course, depending on the angle or arm of this family that the individual dog comes from. The ones down from ANDY CAPP, and the ones with a good percentage of BUCK blood in them, are usually as game as any; at least the ones I've had. And put through the right keep, can run just as fast, and just as long as most. So, when you blend them to the other arms of this same family thats more known to bite a "car motor in half", you get dogs that are as close to the "total package" as one can be!The linebred Boyles dogs had pretty pathetic percentages of game dogs almost from the inception. They were always rough as hell and athletic, but when your broke through the helacious mouth and offense, they most often would quit. This is a matter of fact, and I have seen the dogs from just about every well known source of these dogs there was in the middle to late 90's, including showing dogs right from Ronald's yard myself. My very good friend wrapped up over $100K in trying to obtain the best of this bloodline and really had nothing to show for it other than a lot of heartache, and a few very special animals from select breedings that were worth feeding and breeding.
I know TFX and he is probably more brutal and exacting in his expectations of "gameness" than most, and has a family of dogs that you pretty much have to kill to beat. I also know a few other people who have had multiple Boyles dogs, and I have personally evaluated my own dogs against many of the more famous Boyles-type dogs, and I would have to agree that they are a very rough, very competitive, but (ultimately) not a very high-percentage game bloodline. Of course, I can't speak for your experience SwampDweller, and I trust what you're saying, but I can only speak from my own observations and reports. Naturally, I would never say some Boyles' dogs aren't very game, nor am I trying to say that all of mine are game, etc., but the key principle that we're talking about is percentages, not isolated instances (either way).
Now then, what I am going to give here is my honest, opinion on the gameness issue ... as a man who has seen (and whose stock has gone into -- even been crossed with) multiple instances of these dogs. Some of my opinions here are going to be unfavorable, but that is not the same thing as "talking trash." I do not want this thread to degenerate, so let us clear the air of the very important distinction between "talking trash" and giving honest opinions that might not be favorable (in some cases) but which are favorable in other cases. Let us strive to keep this discussion on a mature level, even in areas where we might not always agree, because all of us should be willing to concede the fact that "we have NOT seen them all," so all of us can only talk about what we have personally seen with our own eyes, or of instances we know are proven historical facts.
[center:1gsd0sqr](Note: To open links below in a new tab or window, right-click and then select "New Tab/Window")[/center:1gsd0sqr]
That said, I have seen multiple Ch Emmitt dogs go, and while they are rough (if you're not faster than they are), if you are faster than they are, and can control them, I wouldn't feed a single one that I saw (which says alot, considering I had the standing offer to breed to him for nearly 2 years, but never bothered to, despite the fact he was :15 down the road from me). Why? Every single one that I personally rolled into, was picked up to my inbred Poncho dogs, including 2 in a row brought by Super Cracker himself. Now I did know dogmen that I respected who though the world of the GR CH Sparky dog, who by all accounts was a deeply-game dog, and so I did breed to Sparky one time (with Screamer) and the bitch I got out of that (Pantera) was a truly badass bitch. In the meantime, I have also seen plenty of Andy Capp dogs, Nevada dogs, Right Hand Man dogs, High Class Red Johnny Dogs, etc. ... and really never thought much of any of them. Some were rough, but most were not very athletic (by my standards) almost none of them were game (by my standards). Of the lot of them, I liked the High Class Red Johnny dogs myself.
Now, just to show that what I am claiming to have seen "in private" is true, let me also point out the fact that my dogs have gone into plenty of Boyles dogs as well, and not just palookas either, but into some of the very best of these animals. Let me use the record of my dogs versus the Andy Capp dogs for example, in high-level shin-digs. Missy's son (and Silverback's half-brother), for instance, Latino Family's Energizer went into Wonderboy's Ch Pup Pup (a candidate for Dog of the Year), so the dog I bred didn't just go into just "any" Boyles' dog, he went into one of the premier Boyles' dogs of his day, sired by one of the very best of all time in Andy Capp. Ch Pup Pup had killed Strickly Business' Ch Smokin' Joe in :53 and he waxed a 2xW HOE brought in :32. Yet in going 2:45 with the great Pup Pup, Missy's 20-month-old son went more than twice as long as BOTH of those other dogs did, put together. The young Energizer didn't win that one, but what he DID do was lose 100% DG to one of the very best Boyles dogs of his era. To show the level of gameness "I" am talking about, most people thought Energizer was done by :50 ... and yet by 1:35 he pulled even with Pup Pup, and it went back-and-forth for another hour. Unfortunately, while Energizer was an average dog biting with an average mouth, Pup Pup was an exceptional dog biting with a freak mouth, and despite the incredible toughness Energizer had that was light years better than the other two dogs that lost to Pup Pup ... by ~2:30 Energizer had pretty much bled out. And so, at about 2:45, Energizer couldn't beat the clock ... but he flopped, he rolled, he did basically everything he could possibly do to get there ... but he just couldn't. Yet Energizer displayed such an uncommon level of gameness, I had at least 10 dogmen call me back in 1996 when it happened (Latino Ray, LaFonze, Brooklyn Knights, etc.) and tell me that Missy's son was "the gamest dog they ever saw in their life." (As a matter of fact, there was actually a poll that was done on the old Vietnam Messageboard in the late 1990s, entitled "Gamest Dog of the 90s" and Missy's son Energizer was listed as #1.)
Now then, that is how one of my dogs "lost" to one of the best Boyles dogs of our time ... how about when we WON? ... How did the Boyles dogs handle it when they faced some of my other dogs and couldn't get the best of them? Well, let's take a look. When Poncho's son KB &SSB's Mister faced Breakemdown's Jadakiss (I don't think Jadakiss is on Peds, but he was off a son of Andy Capp out of a daughter of Banjo), Jadakiss trashed Mister on the face: I mean crushed his muzzle, totally controlled the deal for more than an hour straight. SSB's Bobby told me (10 years ago), "Jack I been in dogs 15 years and I've seen a lot of shit, and I would have understood if Mister would have cried it was so bad ... but he didn't make a peep." And so, finally, Mister (who had a devastating mouth of his own) got ahold of Jadakiss by about the hour mark, and broke his shoulder so bad the bone was sticking out ... and by 1:20 Jadakiss didn't seem to like to take what he was dishing out .. and he hung it up and quit. In another instance, another half-brother to Silverback, Ch Vengence, faced GDI's Ch Soldier, a highly-regarded son of SDJ Cover Dog Ch Comanche, and thought to be a shoe-in to make Grand Champion himself. That is, until he met Ch Vengence. Well, in this case, the dog from me was an ace, and he absolutely decimated the heavy-Boyles-bred Ch Soldier, totally controlling the dog from start to finish, and Ch Soldier had never been done like that before, and when he was on the wrong end of a brutal beating himself, he flat-out quit in :42.
The Gameness Results
If looked at under the microscope, the first dog from me went out 100% DG and could stand being behind for almost 3 hours straight into a devastating dog, all the way until the last bit of blood ran out of him. The second dog from me, Mister, took being behind (to a brutal face chewing that ruined his career) for over an hour ... and he came back to win. Meanwhile the other two Boyles dogs, who lost to my dogs, BOTH QUIT, and if you really want to examine the "gameness" issue closely, the Jadakiss dog was not willing to take being bit by a devastating mouth for more than :20, and the Ch Soldier dog was not willing take a total ass-kicing for :40. And remember, here again, these were all top-level matches into top level Boyles dogs. Therefore, to those who really do have a SEVERE gameness expectation, as I know TFX does too, I am sorry, but that just doesn't cut it IMO. And, remember, this is at the highest level, against some of the very best dogs of one of the very best representatives of the Boyles family. I promise you, at the lower "roll" level, against lesser-bred dogs, the percentages have been even worse for these dogs. This is just my honest opinion, based upon what I have seen, yet I humbly admit I have not seen them all.
With respect, but telling it like it is from my experience,
Jack
Swamp Dweller, there is no need to get your feelings hurt over a differing opinion, especially when that opinion is based on first hand experience with a veritable multitude of animals, with absolutely no expense spared to acquire them.
I have seen dozens upon dozens of the Boyles dogs from just about every notable kennel who bred them in the 1990's, including many from the man himself. The bottom line is they are not in general a line of high percentage game dogs. I remember well a SDJ in the late 80's in the "Rappin With The White Castle Kid" section where he was talking about the various popular lines of the day. About the Boyles dogs he said " Rough cur dogs that are mean as snakes". It would take a few more years until I would see a bunch of them myself, but I never forgot that. It proved to be a deadly accurate assesment from my own experience.
Now, with that said, I realize there are some game pockets of the Boyles dogs, and some game individuals. For example, we showed a Handicapp son (T-Boy stuff) who lost brutally honest in 1:47. He was the pure truth. We had a little Tobacco Road daughter who was real good. Above all, the two sisters by Red Johnny x Rick's Missy were phenomenal animals one of which; Roto, became our premier brood matron. However, I believe Roto and Precious were rock solid in spite of their topside, not because of it. You see, they come from a string of winning and game females themselves in Hollingsworth's Ruby (2X), Garner's Cal Cat (1X), and Rick's Missy. Of those two Missy daughters, only Roto was proven in the brood pen, and she produced game dogs in very high percentages. Likewise, I have seen a number of the Garner dogs direct from Tom. I don't like them much better than the Boyles dogs, they are rough, low percentage dogs. The best of them in y opinion have the ultra-game Hollingsworth blood like Missy, CH Rebel Yell, GR CH Spikey etc. did. The fact that I had a breeding program based around a Garner female and a Boyles sire only serves to show that I am not biased against either line. I recognize the value and contribution that both breeders made to the breed. It was Tom himself who said "I am Wal-Mart". In general, I don't shop for my clothes at Wal-Mart, but they do carry a few quality brands like Dickies. So it is with the "Wal-Mart" dog breeders, it isn't all bad! On the other hand, it damn sure isn't all good either. If a fancier gets something of high quality from a high percentage game pocket out of that type of breeding program, they would do well to stop and begin to breed upon it. Buying dogs out of a low percentage program is a good way to go broke unless you have very deep pockets like my friend who fooled with the blood. Before he got out of dogs in 1998, he ended up getting some traditional old Patrick (Bolio-Clouse-Tombstone) dogs and even some from the Carolina Kitten which were much more satsifactory overall in the gameness department.
That is a well bred animal. I would beg to differ that this dog falls into the "Pure Boyles Dog" category that spurred this thread however. There is a sprinkling of Boyles blood in the far reaches of the pedigee. From my vantage point, that dog is a DAISY dog, who really should be considered on her own merits this far down the line.
How about this for another side of the coin?
Let's use the original Hollingsworth dogs as an example. They were an exceptionally-high-percentage family of dogs ... but how many multiple-Champion pure Lady In Red dogs were there? The foundation dog, Lady In Red, threw tons of game dogs, but many of them couldn't survive passed the first match?
This sport isn't only about gameness, it is about winning, is it not?
Take a look at this dog right here as an example: Gr Ch Wacko.
Okay, so the dog lost and quit his last time out ... but, DAMN!, he was a 6xW and beat 2 Champions 8-)
Surely this has some value, if not MORE value, than a game plug who can barely make it passed 1 show?
In other words, while it may be true that some of these dogs aren't exceptionally game, if pressed hard enough, it is also true that they repeatedly and consistently produce Champions, multiple winning Champions, and you simply have to take your hat off to them for that.
Jack
some of them walker's tboy dogs are game as hell.
TFX, it takes a lot more than a difference of opinion to get me in my feelings big guy. We're just having a gentlmen's discussion; that's it. Your opinion differs from mine, but I can't argue with what you saw or experienced; no more than you can agrue about my opinion. These dogs are what they are! Most are rough, with above average mouth, although, they are also a good percentage of the ones I have, and others I've seen that are just as game as any; put in the right shape, of course. I'm not saying all of them are, but I doubt if anyone can claim that all of the dogs they bred & raised are "as dead-game as a live one can be". With the mouth that these dogs have, coupled with the drive to finish, most won't ever get their "oil" checked to see. And that suits me just fine, cause honestly, when I was active (years ago) I wasn't trying to be in there all night anyway. However, I did get pushed to the limit with a few; one being my BULL dog, who went to a 2:02 game lose against Nail'Em Down's MAGIC 2xw; but we were awarded GIS honors after completing a courtesy that would make the hair on the back of your neck stand up! BULL was a son of the BAM BAM dog that Sand Pitt had years ago, bred to the old RAFFLE bitch that Maywalt had, who was bred down from a Lonzo Pratt/Howard Heinzl bloodline. Then there was our HAMMER dog, that won in 2:31 against The Deacon & Rodgers' charge; also winning GIS honors that night. HAMMER was a son of WILD BILL CODY, bred to a bitch Grave Yard Boyz got from STP. These are dogs I owned & campaigned myself (years ago). There are others that I can list that were "pushed to the limit", and still showed "true to the game". Dogs like, CH. SEEKA, CH. INDIO, CH. PUP PUP (as you mentioned Jack), GR.CH. SPARKY, CH. KING JOKER, etc., etc. And I can go on and on, but there is also a list just as long of those that quit. I have had success with them, and I wouldn't trade them for any other. These dogs will always be the foundation of my yard, however, I have, and will continue to cross into other lines that I think will add to their ability in some way. So TFX & Jack, I do respect both of you, as well as your opinions, but I still beg to differ. I like the ones that win; and if they can go in there and do it, where their gameness is never tested, than thats cool by me! Just as long as they win against first-class competition.....
Swamp
Jack flipped the coin and presented the same basic viewpoint that you are Swamp, and that is "if they win who cares if they are game?" For a sheer performance dog I would agree. However, when breeding, I believe mating dogs who may only be pit game is a tremendous liability. I would take those old game plug Hollingsworth dogs any day as my brood stock over a bunch of dogs who won in :16, :24: 07 etc. I can add the ability to a game dogs, but one will have the challenge of a lifetime adding gameness to a line when it is not ever present to begin with.
For the record, Indio was not really a 3X winner. This is evidenced by the fact that in his owner's own stud ad in the same issue of the SDJ that his CHship certificate was printed, they acknowledge his 2nd was a draw. Now he was a pretty good dog that went something like 2:39 and then the dogs stood to each other in a no contest draw. Shortly thereafter he won another in relatively short order. Apparently, since they were so close to having a Champion they sent in the thing as a win. I guess they forgot they sent in the stud ad with the same show listed as a draw! Oops! Anyhow, by the time Fricchione knew about it the magazine was shut down, and now 10 years later nobody is the wiser- except the people who had a firsthand account of the show and/or read the stud advertisement. With that said, they bred a daughter of his to my old Batters dog and the offspring are simply unreal in ability. Hopefully they are game too, but at least I know on the top side of their pedigree that have a lot of deep gameness in the genetics, and even old Indio went the distance too despite getting counted out. There is hardly anything as sad as being ahead the entire show only to have the dog not make that last scratch. That is where the Boyles dogs left us one too many times. Most of them never even made it past the schooling phase.
Now, in my original post I acknowledged that there were "game pockets", dogs that carry significant Boyles blood and do have consistent deep gameness. That is what you are describing about your own dogs, and that is great.
What it "boils" (pun intended) down to for me is "what does it take to be satisfied?" If a fellow purchased 10 dogs from a breeder, how many of them should be able to pass a reasonable game test for the line to qualify as "high percentage" or even "reasonably game" percentage wise? I think I am being very generous when I say at least 5 or 6 of them should be reasonably game to be deemed acceptable. By that same standard, if a kennel won 50-60% of his shows we certainly would not consider them having a "high win percentage". Generally, that kind of statement is reserved for 70% or greater. So it is with dogs from a breeders yard. Now, what happens when a guy quits 8 or 9 out of 10 dogs in a line all before the 20 minute mark? Certainly they can't be regarded as game despite the amount of wins in the immediate ancestry. It is a real shame to see a high dollar dog who has famous siblings pack it in to a very average dog, but these experiences are the typical results that the Boyles dogs demonstrated out here.
I personally have abandoned the segments of our line that produce below an acceptable level of turnout, and I have always strived to breed from the higher end of the line. Case in point. A well known fancier who has had his hand in many famous dogs approached us 8 or 9 years ago wanting to breed to our Homer III dog. In exchange, he offered his hot shot stud dog of the era in an stud exchange. We were not so keen on doing it, but as a gesture of goodwill we agreed to do so. He got the good end of the deal, with several winners coming from the breeding including one BIS in a 13 card show. We got 6 pups from his sire, 5 that we kept and one that we sold. As my luck historically has been, the one we let go to a fellow for a few hundred bucks made Champion in pretty fast company. All 5 that we kept were very rank curs. Now, while I am pleased that one made Champion, that doesn't tell the whole story does it? At least not from a breeder's perspective. The fellow later sold that CH bitch, and naturally we could have bought her. The fact is that you couldn't pay me to breed to her, as she came out of a very poor litter. Most fanciers don't know the nuances of a line, they only look at the one small nugget in the gold pan, a title like CH or GRCH. The reality of it is when a fellow is mining, the occasional small nuggets will never add up to the weight of lots and lots of flakes in every pan. Consistency is everything!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote