Boxer Crazy

The Breed and Breeders => The Boxer Standard => Topic started by: roxeli on January 05, 2009, 09:46:06 PM

Title: Boxer Evolution.
Post by: roxeli on January 05, 2009, 09:46:06 PM
It is always interesting to see how much the Boxer has evolved in such a short time.  If you click on the image links here you can see some of the early Boxers.
http://americanboxerclub.org/boxer_history.html

Even Friederun and Philip Stockmann's Boxers looked different compared to today's Boxers.  Their Boxers look a little dane faced, longer muzzled, and they all seem to lack turn up.  You can already see the difference between Ivein v. Dom and Sigurd v. Dom.  Sigurd looks closer to today's Boxer.  And Lustig v. Dom, he definitely contributed some nice genes to the Boxer gene pool.

Cool stuff.
Title: Re: Boxer Evolution.
Post by: blynn03 on January 05, 2009, 09:48:59 PM
Even Friederun and Philip Stockmann's Boxers looked different compared to today's Boxers.  Their Boxers look a little dane faced, longer muzzled, and they all seem to lack turn up.  You can already see the difference between Ivein v. Dom and Sigurd v. Dom.  Sigurd looks closer to today's Boxer.  And Lustig v. Dom, he definitely contributed some nice genes to the Boxer gene pool.

I am actually just reading My Life With Boxers (okay, so I started it and read a lot of it, and haven't picked it up since because I've been so busy)....but I can definitely agree about the boxers changing a lot even from the beginning to the end of just the Stockmann's breeding days.
Title: Re: Boxer Evolution.
Post by: Patti on January 05, 2009, 09:56:42 PM
Wow, Lustig was so muscular!
Title: Re: Boxer Evolution.
Post by: roxeli on January 05, 2009, 10:09:39 PM
My Elmo, who passed away in August, looked identical to Maier's Lord.  Not similar, but identical! LOL  People would always question Elmo's pedigree because he did not look like a modern Boxer at all.  The image here of Maier's Lord is a poor quality picture, but almost every Boxer book I own has one of him and I always marveled at how closely Elmo resembled this ancestor.  Elmo must have been a throw-back to the Bullenbeiser.
Title: Re: Boxer Evolution.
Post by: Newcastle on January 05, 2009, 10:52:59 PM
There's a collection of AKC breed standards from 1902-present here, which also shows the evolution:
http://www.harvelboxers.com/Standard.html

Interestingly, the 1902 standard (which was the same as the German standard at that time) called for a dog with a muzzle that was 1/2 the length of the head (rather than 1/3), and a reverse scissors bite (rather than an underbite).  Philipp Stockmann wrote in 1926, regarding that early standard, "....hardly a Boxer came close to meeting its requirements, and probably no Boxer had the desired bite as it is quite definitely esablished today, [but] the leading fanciers of that time had visions of a Boxer which reasonably corresponds to the present day breeding trend in body structure."  In 1938 John Wagner and Herr Stockmann rewrote the AKC standard, and this is when the underbite was included.  (It wasn't until 1989 that the 1/3 muzzle was included in the AKC standard, though the UK standard I believe included that proportion from at least 1965.)
Title: Re: Boxer Evolution.
Post by: roxeli on January 05, 2009, 11:19:49 PM
Wow!  More proof that Elmo was a throw-back to earlier Boxers.

The 1902/1904 Standard stated, "The head should be dry throughout with as few wrinkles as possible."  Elmo had less wrinkles than most boxers.  His muzzle didn't even have quilting.

He also had the same bite described here: "Upper and lower jaws are definitely parallel; the teeth are at right angles to the jaws. The teeth of the lower jaw stand in front of the teeth of the upper jaw and fit so that the teeth touch each other when the mouth is closed, in the manner of a scissors."  That's exactly what Elmo had, a reverse scissor bite.

Had Elmo been born in 1902, he might have been considered incredible breeding stock. :laugh4:

(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y22/roxeli/DSC03275.jpg)
Title: Re: Boxer Evolution.
Post by: BoxerPerson on January 06, 2009, 07:37:57 AM
LOL...kind of looks like a flashy brindle Goofy LOL
Title: Re: Boxer Evolution.
Post by: Boxermom,K on January 06, 2009, 05:33:01 PM
I have a few photos of boxers from the 1950's (I posted them once before) and they also have a bit longer nose than many of the 'ideal' boxers of today. But at that time they were considered great breeding stock.
Breeds do tend to evolve a bit over time, we can only hope that they are evolving for the best and not to their demise.
Title: Re: Boxer Evolution.
Post by: Renee on January 06, 2009, 05:41:54 PM

Quote
Even Friederun and Philip Stockmann's Boxers looked different compared to today's Boxers. 


I often wonder what she would think of todays Boxers...
Title: Re: Boxer Evolution.
Post by: ltournat on January 06, 2009, 07:41:37 PM
The early boxers almost look like pits.  Weird.