This is one of the most inaccurate arguments made about dog breeds. For those that prefer to be "underground", it is easy to think that the AKC somehow "ruins" breeds, but that is just not the case. Breeders breed dogs, AKC provides paperwork. The exposure that comes with being an AKC breed can appear detrimental, in the sense that an influx of inexperienced breeders rush to the scene. Experienced, accomplished breeders are still doing what they've always done. My breed (Cane Corso) went AKC in 2010 and I will be the first to tell you that there are more newbies than ever. The thing is, most of the newbies coming on now have previous experience with other breeds. In the "rare breed" era, the newbies were completely new to dogs and came with little or no knowledge of competing and breeding.
Truth be told, Bullmastiffs are currently enjoying excellent health and temperament, which is why I recommended the breed to Laura. There are crap dogs to be found in any breed, but for those that are willing to do their homework (as did Laura), there are great dogs available in most breeds. Some have been sacrificed for the sake of winning, but the breeders are the ones doing the damage, not the AKC. I don't subscribe to the "win at all cost" philosophy.
rupe":a7zvmva9 said:
Beautiful pup!!! I love Bull Mastiffs but they will try your patience without a doubt. They are very slow to mature...about 3 years before they "grow up" (mentally, not physically...she will get big, fast!), and can have numerous health issues. Another case where the AKC has effectively ruined a great breed by focusing on conformation rather than health and working ability (I despise the AKC and how they've ruined breed after breed...making it much more difficult to get a "good", functional dog).
Congrats and good luck...she's a beauty!
