I didnt say that. What I said was if it was a good dog it wouldnt matter to me if it was pink I would still hunt over it.

"What I want to see is a dont not discriminated against in a show ring because of its color."

then please explain what you mean by this comment? If you dont participate in the show ring then what does it matter to you if black is accepted or not?

Blacks don't produce anything that Liver can't produce. 

The issue I have with Blacks, are the breeders that breed for the black color and use it as a marketing tool and refer to them as Rare.  This does not help the breed in any way. 

Yes, black has been in the background of the American GSP for many generations, mainly for the purpose of darkening the pigment of the fading colors that existed.

Saying that color makes the nose or gives added ability, in my opinion, is NOT a valid statement.  And in making a statement like that, I would certainly hope that there is proof, in that the proof should include more than just one or two bloodlines.

Liver show dogs that owners want to get a JH title on, shouldn't be in the mix.  Other than color, the comparison should be made "Apples to Apples".  Like types to like types.

Just my opinion, but hey, what do I know other than having 20+ years in the breed and producing liver dogs with superior noses.

If you were to judge blacks, based on the AKC reg. ones we have available, how would you accurately do that apples to apples?  What do you figure there are--maybe one black to every 50-100 livers born?  Seems like that would be pretty hard to quantify talent, based on the numbers.  There will be the best and the worst of both colors, and I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't proportional.  

People talk about fad breeding, but how many folks out there are chasing field titled dogs, with no care to conformation--or show dogs with no care to field work.  That is a fad to me, and as much a disservice to the breed as any damage perceived that allowing and procreating black could do.  I'm not saying a dog has to have a single title to be worthy of breeding, or can't have the all FT or Ch pedigree and not have good conformation.  I am saying that some people will always buy and breed dogs for lopsided reasons, so I'm not sure how allowing black to show, will equal doomsday.. 

The DK folks seem to be doing okay with black, and they actually have testing requirements before breeding.  If you were to blindfold me and put two boxes in front of me, one with unknown AKC liver pups and one with unknown DK black pups, I would have to pick the DK pup every time.  I would at minimum know that every dog on the pedigree was hip tested and could find game vs the GSP box which could be a newspaper litter with bad hips and no nose.  You can twist that if you'd like, but I own and love 2 liver AKC GSPs, and believe their are a lot of great breeders within the registry.  All I'm saying is that I find it ironic to put so much emphasis on a color standard of an organization that allows dogs to be bred willy nilly and registered through AKC, yet shun a color that is accepted in the DKs, where they actually have testing and breed controls in place.

I think you are 100% right well said

"The issue I have with Blacks, are the breeders that breed for the black color and use it as a marketing tool and refer to them as Rare.  This does not help the breed in any way. "

I agree that people that breed "designer dogs" whether it is for a "rare color" or something like a "labradoodle" are doing dogs a disservice.  But couldn't we undermine the ones trying to pass off the black or black and white GSPs as "rare" if we just took that color discrimination away from them by adding it into the standard and allowing black and black and white GSPs into the breed ring?  Of course, I do not condone doing that for a mixed breed like a labradoodle, but the black and black and white GSPs are not mixed breed dogs and compete with the rest of the GSPs in other performance events.  There are some awfully nice blacks and black and white GSPs out there and I can see nothing but positives for allowing them in the gene pool. Heck we allow the solid livers and there aren't that many of them around either (at least not in Texas).  So, someone could say they are rare too. Does that mean we should leave solid livers out of the standard too?  (That is rhetorical)  I don't believe for a minute we should exclude the solid livers. There are some very nice solid liver dogs around too. 

Bad people that do bad things for bad reasons will always exist, so prosecute them under the law if they are breaking it or shun them or speak out against them, but don't punish the many good breeders and their dogs because of a few problem breeders.

I still think the passion around color is interesting. It amazes me that we don't see near the passion around other aspects of form and function in the breed.  Maybe that is just because we have color to discuss.  Or maybe not. 

After some thought, I've decided to delete my rather long winded reply, as I felt I couldn't reply without it having some personal nature to it and detracting from the thread.

I stand by my statements of my observation/OPINION and feel a superior Black specimen could offer as much to the Breed as a Superior Liver specimen and feel they should be on equal ground.