Full bred possibility?

maninthebox · #1 12-02-2008, 01:12 AM

My Tyson is a little over a year old. He has a long snout and no underbite. He is fawn with white markings and skinny for a boxer but weighs about 90 lbs. I'm 5'9" and he can put his paws on my shoulders. He really has some Mastiff qualities and I was wondering since boxers long ago had mastiffs in the bloodline if it is possible that those genes just came out. I have no papers but supposedly both parents were AKC registered. When Tyson lays on his side and I look at his head it's the most he ever looks like a full blood boxer to me. Was just wondering if anyone else had a purebred boxer like this? Would there be a way to register Tyson if he was indeed full blood? Not looking to breed him but would his qualities come out if bred with a boxer of breed standard? He is a great pet. Ornery but affectionate.
I joke he is half mountain goat because he loves to climb on top of things.

**gmacleod** · #2 12-02-2008, 04:36 AM

Yes, he would pass his genes to any offspring - both good points and poor (incorrect) ones. From your description above, he doesn't really sound as though he's a purebred boxer (not just the size, but the construction). That would seem a more plausible explanation than the sudden reappearance of genes/features from 100 years ago

Actually, boxers do not have mastiffs as an ancestor. Rather, they are two breeds (amongst many others) that have evolved from a group of dogs known as bullenbeisers. The smallest of the bullenbeisers is the main ancestor of the boxer (but FAR from the only one). It is one of the larger types of bullenbeiser that is the ancestor of mastiffs (and some other breeds). So rather than mastiffs being an ancestor - they're more of a very distant cousin. But you're still going back over 100 years to find that distant relationship (which isn't long in evolutionary terms, the boxer is still a very young breed - but it is long when you're considering an individual).

TwoDogs · #3 12-04-2008, 11:25 PM

I have always been of the impression that there are two kinds of Boxers: purebred and well bred. All well bred Boxers are purebreds, but not all purebreds are well bred. This is true in every breed. Breeders that breed registered but not-to-standard dogs will produce litters that are registerable but are atypical of the breed. I've heard it said that the first thing to go in Boxers as a result of poor breeding (or cross breeding) is the head type and muzzle length.

calicoray · #4 12-08-2008, 01:53 PM

I agree with the "pure-bred/well-bred" concept. I myself have two beautiful babies and one is pure-bred AND well-bred (from a very reputable breeder) and the other is pure-bred and not as well-bred (from a byb) but still has all of the traits and characteristics one would expect in a boxer.

My Princess, on the other hand, who went to the bridge in August, was a pure-bred but definitely not well-bred at all. She had several of the characteristics that you have described with Tyson. She was skinny and had much longer legs than most boxers and her head did not "stack" ( it was not square and box-like) but there was no doubt she was all boxer. Every character trait she had (ie kidney beaning, the woo-woo song, being extremely rambunctious, etc) was exactly how a boxer would act, she just didnt look quite right. Nevertheless, she was my beautiful baby and I wouldnt have traded her for a "well-bred" boxer for anything in the world.

Bottom line to me is this, unless your a breeder (and by breeder I mean someone who breeds boxers for quality and conformation not quantity and money) wether your boxer is well-bred or not shouldnt really matter too much. I know from experience that a non-well-bred boxer has a higher chance of health problems and they might not look quite the way we expect them to but they still make the most wonderful pets in the world.