Well I have to step into the lions den here, I am posting the breed standard for SBT
I do not wish to start an argument and don't wnat this post locked PLEASE.
But I think there are enough Stafford owners on here to get a decent debate/exchange of information and views here :)    

>>>General   Appearance:  Smooth-coated, well balanced, of great strength for his size. Muscular, active and agile.
>>>Characteristics:  Traditionally of indomitable courage and tenacity. Highly intelligent and affectionate, especially with children.
>>>Temperament:  Bold, fearless and totally reliable.

  
   The wording "totally reliable" is what I think is the most important "statement" in the whole SBT breed standard.
    What do you think the wording "totally reliable" refers to?

Karen

Is it reliable in regards to bold and fearless ?
Or reliable as in behaving ?

Think reliable means you can depend on the dog to be there for you if you ever needed them to be.

Would that not apply to any dog so why put it in the standard.

No as certain breeds wouldn't stand in the way of an attacker like a staffie would. That is where the fearlessness and boldness comes from. They are willing to stand up to bigger foes to protect themselves and their owners

should that not then read "should be totally relied on to guard you" I still think all dogs will be there for you when you need them, but you are right not all would attack another person for you particularly when you have spent most of their life telling them that they should not put teeth on human skin.

    Well I have always taken "totally reliable" to mean "bombproof" ie an average well bred Stafford should not show any tendencies toward malice or nastiness in his nature. In other words he should be reliable in any situation - I have always taken this to mean with people because obviously if they have never been socialised with other animals that area would be difficult as he is a terrier.

    Although saying that Sal has never been close to a rabbit but we have at the moment my friends rabbit for the weekend while they move and after being told "No" once she has given the hutch a wide berth :)   
   Karen

Does anyone else have a view on any part of the SBT standard?

So far I'll buy your understanding of it Kazz ;)

As they are not gaurd dogs you can't say they can be relied on to guard you as the famous story of the staffie owners whose house was burgled and the dog let the burglars take all the best silver will testify!!!!! Howver if you were in danger they would probably try to help you as best they could. I also see what kazz means about reliability in a situation but having answered about 200 topics on staffies in parks and walking off leads the chance may not arise for some people to practice that breed trait.

Think that is too wooly to be put into a standard and would be impossible to judge.

Maybe reliable is a nice way of saying calm unless provoked. The Kc muddies the waters iwth alot of what they say and write.

Standards are drawn up by the breed clubs and approved by the KC who then publish them and hold the copyright. Have read the standard and I am inclined to think it means Bold, fearless and totally reliable, in other words not skittish, unstable or nervous, that the dogs response to outside happening are taken in a bold and fearless manner.

I agree with you Jackie - without wanting an argument luxnallsstaffs  how would a judge - judge that a  dog would guard it's family? It is too wooly I agree with Jackie.
It is a valid point but you have to remember too that the standard was first written in 1935 and then revised on 9th October  1948 (I know the revision was not accepted by the KC until January 1950) but the revision was only on the following points:
Eyes changed from dark to dark but bears some relation to coat (I think this allows too much freedom of interpretation)
Ears This was I think a good change saying Prick ears will be penalised.
Colour blue coat added
Height changed from 15-18 to 14-16 (which in my opinion has helped get better balanced specimens)
Mouth and Nose Good step virtually allowing disqualification of badly undershot and undershot mouths and the dudley nose.
  The "old" Stafford people dispised a dog that could not be "trusted" and to them it was not a true Stafford and many had a one way trip to the canal. Harsh (and I am not condoning it) but this ruthless vision got us the dog we now love.

Karen

 

Reading some of the annuals with the critiques in it the judges say they look for a dog who was alert all the time and on its toes so I am guessing the dogs who fits that picture would be alert at all times not just when other dogs or a judge was lookng at it unless the exhibitor was very clever in their ringcraft. Maybe you are both right. I am here to learn and hopefully help others out and it is nice to have civil conversations without people getting all angry and being rude. Have found it hard to get any decent books on the 'olden day' staffies but always trying to peice together the history of the dog and find out more.

You should have a look on ebay occasionally for any books by John F Gordon, I know a lot of the books are almost "collector" items now but they occasionally come up. 
And you are right it is nice to have a civil conversation about SBT.
Can I ask does anyone have "OUR DOGS" and if so did you see/have read the comment by Alan Hedges? the man who judged the bitches at Crufts.

How long have you had Staffs luxnallsstaffs?

And too all is there any part of the standard you would alter, and if the answer is YES what to? 
Karen

There are lots of staffs round our way and they seem to come in 2 types - very broad, deep heads, body length the same as the height, very wide chests and a lighter built, sltlightly taller with smaller head but still very muscular and agile looking. The deep bodied ones do the split pumpkin "grin" and seem to struggle to look up unlike the lighter ones who hold heads higher. Are they both real Staffs?

Now weve started reading about Staffs there is much discussion about how Stinkfoot will manage hers. The authorities say Staffs are strong willed yet sensitive so be firm and fair without being severe, loyal and protective of kids and there are hints about their attitude to other dogs which give us a little concern. All the ones I know are confident, happy and very playful Ive only met one timid one and thats the result of her being attacked as a pup, she isnt dog aggressive she just sticks to her owner like glue. There are reports of Staffs fighting other dogs but I feel these are the result of bad breeding, poor socilaistion and lack of training - or am I wrong?

Even had a good friend ask if we were wise to let our daughter have a Staff and wouldnt we be better with a softer breed like a Spaniel or Tbetan Terrier? Her parting comment was " Itll be hard for your little girl if she has to avoid other dog owners because of having a Staff" So far my response has been to smile and thank her and reflect that it all depends on the dog and we dont have to accept the first dog offered if unsure. We dont want to end up with a dog Stinkfoot cant walk or train herself with help from us. How useful are breed standards in dog selection?

I thought totally reliable meant excellent with kids i.e the term "nanny dog".

I tend to agree that "totally reliable" refers to their being ideally superb with their family and friends, good with kids etc. That sort of thing :)

Lindsay

'Totally reliable' is a very loose term! It can be taken to mean whatever anyone wants it to mean. Totally reliable with children? Totally reliable with people as a whole? Totally reliable to be housetrained at 6 weeks? Totally reliable to savage anything that moves? Totally reliable to whistle 'Dixie' whilst riding a unicycle?

I would hope that only the first two of those options were intended. Poor wording.

Lorelei,
       Can I ask how old is your daughter? Because I would say I would be "aware" if I meet a Staff or any breed come to that out with a child alone. Staffords are stronger than they look - honestly - and dogs stronger than bitches. Has your daughter tried walking one of your friends Staffs and could she hold her easily or was it a struggle? As a guide my elder niece is 11 tall and really skinny ;)  the younger is normal weight and 10 both can hold Sal easily on the lead (but Sal is good on the lead) as long as Sal is walking to nicely but I would not let them take her out alone - I always go along and when someone approaches I hold the lead too. Both can hold Sal if she decides to "investigate" someting but only if they are prepared for it and then they have to brace both legs apart and hold the lead with two hands (this happens only in the secure back graden) when the girls are "training" her to find her ball - one of them hold the lead the other hides the ball.  So although both girls are capable of getting Sal to sit-down-stay-give easily I would not due to their size allow them out alone.
       Now my Godson David is 15 in July and he too adores Sal but again I would not let him out with her alone which he does not like :( but I know he is responsible and strong enough to hold her but he would not be capable of sorting out a dog fight (not sure I would either) but apart from that I am happy for Sal to walk ahead (as if I could stop her) with the children on a walk - but not out of sight.
     I may be a worrier and extra cautious but the way of the world makes me careful not everyone is NICE are they?
     I would say though Staffords are not "stubborn" as you would expect it but they do have minds of their own and are normally independent - but they are very easy to train - because they are receptive to their owners and love works wonders with Staffords :)
      And in answer to your question YES they are both Staffs, just bred by people interpreting the standard in a diferent way.
  PS Book in the post :)
Karen     

Hi Kazz, shes 9 and would NEVER be allowed out with any dog alone. When we say walk your dog yourself to her we mean get it ready, hold the lead and pick up the poo.An adult would always be there with her because as you say the world is not always nice - dog napping and challenges by other less well trained dogs are the main dangers IMHO. Thanks for the book will ler you know when it arrives. :)

Sal hasn't mastered the unicycle yet - but can whistle "dixie" while ridin' tandem :D

Karen

I think the "totally reliable" sums up the other qualities mentioned in the "characteristics"
A staff should be sound with people from small children to old people, the only exception from this would of course be if the owner was being attacked by someone in which case I think we all agree most dogs would defend :-)
When I see on here posts regarding people aggresive staffs this is why I always emphasise this is NOT how a staff should be. To me a person aggressive staff is the WORST fault in the dog and the FURTHEST away from the breed standard.
Of course some staffs are not "totally reliable" to be left in the house on their own because the 3 piece suite or your Jimmy choo shoes might be just that bit too tempting for reliability to come in  :D lol

The best book I have read on the Stafford is by Clare Lee & Joyce Shorrock called "The Ultimate Staffordshire Bull Terrier".  It gives you an insight into staffords from the early days Where they originated from and how we come to have the current breed standard. 

I would definately agree that they are not a breed to have if you are looking for a "guard dog".  They are more likely to go and get your silver and pop it in the bag for burglar's than protect it or even lick the burglar to death :)

Although my children of ages 4 and 3 can get my Jas to sit, lay down and roll over I do not allow them to walk them.  My daughter can hold Jas and as soon as he knows that one of the kiddies is holding his lead he makes a conscious effort not to pull. 

However, he cannot be relied upon to be left alone in the house for long as he finds that sleeping on the sofa or on my bed is far more comfortable than sleeping in his basket with a nice thick wooly blanket.

This is our second time in having staffies the first being some 12-13 years ago when I was but a mere slip of a lad! He was our uncles dog but as my uncle moved back to Jamaica for good he left the dog with us. IN 2002 we decided that we wanted another Staffie and started to research a bit about the breed and their tempremant and how much excersice they needed etc. We were told by so many people that we were mad to have a Staffie with a newborn baby but we stuck to our guns and if it was going to be hard work then we were prepared for it and finally got the dog we'd been waiting for last year. The dog and the baby get on like a house on fire and she allows him to pull her ears and to poke her and in return he doens't mind being nudged in the bum by her nose or having his face licked!

Which term(s) of the breed standard do you feel are NOT being judged properly in the ring at the moment? I'd have to say that movement seems to be less important and that heads are what alot of people seem to be judging on in my (limited) experience.

<<<Which term(s) of the breed standard do you feel are NOT being judged properly in the ring at the moment? I'd have to say that movement seems to be less important and that heads are what alot of people seem to be judging on in my (limited) experience. >>>>

Eeeek - now you've gone and done it
;)

In fairness though Not ALL go for heads - there are judges who go for overall balance - which is actually stated in the standard
although there are one or two judges known as "head hunters"

Kazz,

My understanding of 'totally reliable' is that they don't give you any surprises.  In other words they are predicatable.  Each Staffy will have their own little quirks but they won't surprise you with extreme behaviour.  I think :)

I'm seeing some not very level toplines just now. JMO, don't want to start an argument here!!

I think there are huge differences - both between  those in the ring and those not in the ring
You can get two KC registered show dogs and they can look completely different from each other .
Is it the same in other breeds ?

Toplines would be my next point to raise. At downlands a women there said she had bred from her bitch which was not good enough for the ring as it had an uneven topline. Left me wondering why she bred from it in the first place?

Hi all,
       I think most of you are correct in one way or another, it is a very loose term Totally Reliable!!!!
personally i think Staffs are not like any other dog!! not trying to upset anyone all dogs have there own little quirks and traits and are loyal companoins to there owners, any good staff owner will tell you that Staffs dont see themselves as a dog, but a member of the family (ie one of us!!!) they try to talk to you, they love to have what your eating if they get the chance if i'm having a bacon butty i always save a little for her. More of a friend for life than a companoin, I have a bitch who will be two in June she's sound with the kids if they push her to far she gives a little growl and before anyone says this is not normal i believe she telling me or the missus hey sort this one out please or just telling them of herself!! for instance my boy was 2 in january so they've grown up together he used to be able to do anything, jump on her she would just take it no problem now he's older she tells him of!!! my youngest who is only 3mths the dog lies near her bouncer, she did'nt go near when she was new born, she would approach her have a look then a sniff that was it. Her temperment is spot on never had a scrap she got started on by another staff when she was about 11 mths old thought may have problems but no the only thing she does do is defend her stick if another dog comes near her she lets them know there getting to close (verbally of course)  but thats it she loves to play, the only thing she does that annoys me is if there's a puddle of any type big or small she's in it drinking the water splashing about.
so i say that a well bred Staff as a whole is totally reliable loves to have fun but knows how to deal with trouble should it arise i'm sure they've sussed out any situation long before you have!!!

Sorry Scooby, but you are right, that growl is definately not normal, not looking to cause you grief but that to me is not "totally reliable" and I would see it as questionable temprement. I have a bitch (spayed) who if you hold her or pick her up gets very excited and will be er...vocal, until she is released and this is the one who absolutely loves the kids, tries to follow them everywhere, but she is always supervised and called away after the initial hello and cuddles. I do not think for a single minute she is being nasty, just a small clue into how some undesirable traits are becoming more noticable in the breed. I also have a "talker" a very vocal bitch, but never has she growled or grumbled at anyone, and I trust her temprement as much as anyone should trust their dogs with children/people.
I know we expect a hell of a lot from our dogs and the Stafford in particular, but I understand Totally Reliable to mean TOTALLY TRUSTWORTHY in any given situation.

no no, dont get me wrong this isnt a real nasty type growl, just more of a rruuurrr one of my kids is a right little (female dog!!) she acts like another dog (should not have bought them dalmation outfits!!!)
no honestly i know in my heart that she would never do anything
but on the other hand even the most laid back dog in the world can turn!!!
i do tell the kids of as well!!!!

In all fairness children should be brought up to respect the dogs and vice versa and to me that does not mean allowing children to jump on dogs regardless of how small the child :-(
My staffs let my daughter dress them up, sit them down and listen to her read etc but my daughter would NEVER jump on them, I think most dogs would object to being hurt.
I do not know your dog but would imagine she is probably deep down a little nervous when the children are around incase she may be jumped on again hence the warning growl - she sounds as though she may have had enough and her tolerance not be as high as it maybe.
Your children must learn a dog is a living creature and not a toy to be jumped on. Don't mean to get personal bu I know of a tale of a dog - not a staff in this instance - left alone with a toddler. Mom heard the dog growl and the child scream. Luckily it was a warnng growl and the child was shocked but not hurt. Dog got a severe telling off only later to find out a very sore damaged ear on the dog.... yep the toddler had been happily shooving crayons down the poor dogs ear. Now had the dog bit the child who would have been at fault? The toddler who unsupervised did not understand the hurt he was causing, the dog for biting when there was no escape from a torturing experience or the irrisponsible mother????