conztruct

I haven't heard of a judge ever being paid for a result although I'd never consider anything is impossible in the Dog Show world. I think most judges are pretty ethical, usually being current or past exhibitors they have been on the outside of the ring and if they've ever witnessed a decision that is, shall we say, dubious, they know how bad it looks. I can't understand why they'd want to damage their reputation by doing it. On the other hand, the behaviour of some exhibitors in trying to influence decisions is appalling. Yes, it is ultimately the judge who makes the decision and should be accountable but just once or twice I'd like to see a response from a judge that went something like "Yes, your dog that you've been sending me thousands of pictures of and listing it's wins and including your picture as the handler and just mentioning that you'll be showing under me in the near future, looks lovely however, I think it's innappropriate for you to do all this before my appointment so I would appreciate it if you did not enter under me". This does happen a lot - I am friends with trainee judges who have told me that when their appointments are announced, out comes the facebook friend requests, photos and messages and it's blatently obvious what the exhibitor is trying to do. I'd like to see that addressed. So like exhibitors there are probably judges who lack some integrity but as has been mentioned before, it's worth giving a judge an entry and if you don't like the result or think something is "up", don't enter again under them.

It's lots of things but mainly just about knowing your dog and having a relationship with them. Very rarely does a very successful show dog not work as part of a great team with their handler. For me, I don't think I'm in any way a great handler but I always do all I can to just focus on my dog and me and what we are doing. If we win, we win...if we don't then I try to look at what I could do better as a handler to improve my chances. By not worrying about what anyone else is doing it certainly takes a bit of pressure off although I must admit that I try to watch the really good handlers who do well so I can hopefully pick up some good habits.

The bullies were nice. You should have seen the coloured one show (I watched it on the Westminster site) - showed like a bomb.

This is again the opinion of one judge on the day - don't think it means that the dog is a very poor specimen of the breed - it is that dog on the day & that judge. I've had one dog almost refused a class at the Melb Royal because in the judges opinion that dog lacked bone. Yes, he is an elegant dog and the dogs that went up that day were more of Rotty type. But that same dog went onto win BOB & PIG under Int Judge at Sunbury that same year (with a breed entry of 35+ dogs) and won multiple BOB's under Breed Specialists - & multiple class in All Breeds & Specialty shows(& was never refused a challenge). If he'd been non-awarded multiple times then you have to question obviously, I would love to have the critique system it would really show how much or how little the judges know of your breed standard. Sorry - I should have clarified further on that - yes, I agree the judges can refuse for any reason and given that they aren't obliged to provide a critique we sometimes don't know (although often the judge may make comment when refusing) but the perception created amongst the exhibitors and any spectators watching when a dog is refused is generally that it's a poor specimen because let's face it, challenges are hardly ever refused even to dogs where it is evident that there are some issues.......fully accept it's the judges decision of what they think is outstanding but looking at what goes through, there are a lot of outstanding dogs. Basically the judge is saying that, in their opinion, the dog is not of such outstanding merit to worthy of the title " Champion" While I believe you should be entitled to be told the basis of the opinion, I.M.O. is uncontestable. Totally agree here - the decision is the decision but yes, some feedback would be helpful - it may help people, especially new and maybe some not so new exhibitors learn. I had a dog refused once and asked for some feedback after the group had been completed because the judge hadn't said why at the time - the judge immediately told me that it was their perogative to refuse to which I replied, I wasn't questioning their judgement, I just wanted some more information about the reasons why. I didn't really agree with the explanation given but just thanked the judge for the feedback and decided I wouldn't be putting any of my dogs under them again. It doesn't have to be a confrontation which it so often is. It is an opportunity to obtain some more information and feedback and to make up one's mind of the value of it.

This is again the opinion of one judge on the day - don't think it means that the dog is a very poor specimen of the breed - it is that dog on the day & that judge. I've had one dog almost refused a class at the Melb Royal because in the judges opinion that dog lacked bone. Yes, he is an elegant dog and the dogs that went up that day were more of Rotty type. But that same dog went onto win BOB & PIG under Int Judge at Sunbury that same year (with a breed entry of 35+ dogs) and won multiple BOB's under Breed Specialists - & multiple class in All Breeds & Specialty shows(& was never refused a challenge). If he'd been non-awarded multiple times then you have to question obviously, I would love to have the critique system it would really show how much or how little the judges know of your breed standard. Sorry - I should have clarified further on that - yes, I agree the judges can refuse for any reason and given that they aren't obliged to provide a critique we sometimes don't know (although often the judge may make comment when refusing) but the perception created amongst the exhibitors and any spectators watching when a dog is refused is generally that it's a poor specimen because let's face it, challenges are hardly ever refused even to dogs where it is evident that there are some issues.......fully accept it's the judges decision of what they think is outstanding but looking at what goes through, there are a lot of outstanding dogs.

I really can't say whether the European system is better or worse than the one here but I do agree with your point that a challenge refusal in Australia is basically considered that the dog is a very poor specimen of the breed. The part of the European system you described is the written critiques - I think these have the potential to be very educational and helpful to exhibitors and breeders, and it also places a bit of accountability on the judge as well.

I agree that there should probably be more non-awarding, it should help people to learn and really look at their dog and/or their own skills in preparing their dog. In line with it being a learning experience, I do feel it's appropriate for judges to provide a reason for with-holding challenges. If they do not, then it makes it very difficult for the exhibitor to learn. In my (albeit limited) experience, I have found judges quite helpful in this aspect. I have had a challenge refused against a dog I was showing, I spoke to the judge after the group and whilst I didn't agree with the reason, I respected their decision and thanked them for the feedback. Several judges have also given me feedback even when awarding about things I should be careful of if I intend to breed with the exhibit they are judging - I think this is great. I can understand some judges being defensive about being asked why because I have witnessed plenty of exhibitors descending to attack them who want to know why they didn't win but don't really want to listen, just attack and tell the judge how wrong they are. I think the appropriate process would be that an exhibitor can ask a judge why a challenge was refused and the judge should give them the reasons and then that should be the end of it. If you don't agree with the reasons then you learn about the judge, but it may be a great opportunity to learn more about your dog.

What a beautiful Staffie Pav Lova - you are to be commended on him - a beautiful dog, beautiful condition and beautiful coat.

Of course you can. I've been showing dogs for about 8 years but have also been very lucky within that time to be friends with exhibitors who have been doing it for years. I'm not quite sure how you've come up with me being obsessed with faults because all I've asked you about and talked about is balancing all aspects of the dog in decisions bad faults and great virtues and everything in between. I must admit that at times I have thought exactly the same way you do when a dog with an obvious fault has beaten mine, but that tells me that I need to look seriously at the dog I have and decide if this result reflects something that I'm not willing to see in it. Sometimes I disagree with the opinion but as you are advocating, I don't think it is appropriate to challenge the decision at that point. Sure, by all means maybe go and ask the judge if they can give you more information later, or if the judge actually says something to you in the ring which is blatently incorrect, you could ask if they want to check the standard before making their decision. I get a little tired of people who have been showing for years who think they're superior because they've been doing it for a long time - all I see at shows is some people who "get it" and some people who don't and never will - time and experience can be useful but only for those who wish to learn.

Breeding good dogs isn't about eliminating faults - it's about creating animals with the virtues required in the breed standard. As someone who actually managed to breed world-famous dogs once wrote: The biggest fault of all is a lack of virtue. By saying it's about eliminating faults only reinforces my original opinion that you are certainly obsessed with faults. This! This is what I was trying to get across! Just because a dog has a fault does not instantly make it less worthy. You have to look at the whole dog. And the decisions made in judging are not necessarily the same ones made when breeding as they are being made in a different context. A dog with afault is less worthy than a dog in the same line up with all the same virtues..sans fault. But no two dogs have all the same virtues to the same degree with only one fault differentiating them. I totally see what you're saying but it's virtually impossible to create the circumstances you're talking about. Between two different dogs they will have virtues and faults, all of differing degrees. Add more to the mix and it becomes more complicated. At the end the judges need to weigh up all the virtues and all the faults, and their degrees and make a decision.

Would you like to include the neuters that I know were neutered because they only had one testicle ? I'd have to say yes on that - if they were neutered they wouldn't have any even if they had 4 beforehand. But you raise a very valid point and it's why I said that I think we would be a very long way off running off a neuter and entire for a BOB. Personally I think they should be kept separate but that's just a personal view.

That's fair enough and your opinion is valid - that's why I did the poll and started the thread - to find out what people think. I would hope though that you're also open to discussing why and answering questions about your opinion. I just wanted to pick up on what you said above and discuss a bit further, and I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong because I think it's subjective. If that is true and the theory is to exhibit prime breeding stock, do you think that titles should be stripped from dogs or bitches that then fail to produce or should they have to provide evidence of their fertility before being allowed to compete? I know that a lot of people do use dog shows and have for many years to look at potential breeding stock, but I always thought the basic theory was to judge dogs against their breed standard and identify the exhibits that conform the best against those standards (in the opinion of the judge....). Certainly, identifying breeding stock is a by-product but I didn't think it was the main purpose?

Sorry conztruct this one is just killing me :laugh: :laugh: Staffords, locked and loaded. :rofl: Pump HANDLE tail :D Whoops!!! I did say I was ignorant to the breed standard - ;)

What reasons? Any reason. Age. Illness. Because the owner wants. There is talk they should be eligible for the BoB lineup Good grief. Actually I'd rather see more veterans than neutered. That doesn't really make sense for a conformation show. It doesn't matter why a neutered dog has been neutered they should be eligible to compete for the neutered class because that's the pre-requisite - the fact that it hasn't got a confirmation title to it's name has no bearing on the judges ability to assess it against the standard, why not let them do it then. If it's a poor exhibit of the breed they can non-award, if it's good enough it will get a neuter challenge and some points. I would agree with you that they really shouldn't be lining up against the entire exhibits for BOB though at this point in time although if the concept of neuter really took off, they could certainly look at Best Entire, Best Neuter and then run off for BOB - I just don't think we've reached that point yet.

I agree that a judge should know and action disqualifying faults but many faults are not disqualifying. I must say that I kind of agree with the judge's comments in your answer above. I am quite ignorant of the Staffie standard but you are suggesting that the dog with the undesirable colouring should have been discounted because of that fault. What if as the judge says, they thought it was a better type than the others presented, what if it had a pump-action tail and the others didn't? The judge should be judging the overall dog - sure any fault should come into consideration but so should the virtues of the dog. Again with the mini bull terriers, being over height is a fault and I've seen many challenges refused based on this and other faults in the dogs...a lot of judges understand that the minis are also currently in an extended interbreeding program with the standard bullies to eliminate some debilitating genetic conditions (PLL) and size is one of the sacrifices of doing this. B&T is in SBT's Is "highly Undesirable. If the judge actually know the standard & did think this dog was the pick she should have non awarded the whole lot. A much better result for the breed. Just turning up shouldn't guarantee a result. That actually may be the case, but perhaps the judge considered the exhibit worthy of the award on the basis that said highly undersirable fault was not detrimental to the health of the animal as the standard says when considering the degree of seriousness, and as the fault was highly undesirable rather than disqualifying, they were ok with awarding a challenge. It's purely speculation as to why a judge will and will not award and we are not always privy to their interpretation of the standard to know if they do or do not know it. I assume that if you were presented an exhibit with this colouring that you'd place it well below others of the breed - what faults would you consider more acceptable in others though - no pump action tail, inclined canines, poor topline? I'm not a judge but I'd always consider a dog with a coat colour fault more desireable than a dog with very poor construction.

Here we go - Qld now has neuter classes (well ones that count for points and a title). Make sure you ensure your dog is registered as neutered with the office though. From Rob and DQ: I would draw your attention to the article as printed in the January Council Notes. NEUTER CHAMPION All Members and Clubs are reminded that the Neuter Champion Title may be applied for through the Dogs Queensland Office. A complete article in regards to this will be published in the February Dog World but here is a brief report; A Neuter Championship Title is available. Championship points will be allocated to the best exhibit in each sex in the breed as per the normal championship points system. Only dogs or bitches registered as a neuter on the Main Register are eligible to compete in the Neuter Classes. If you have a dog or bitch on the Main Register that is neutered, but their registration details have not been changed, you must do so before entering in a show. To have your dogs details changed all the office needs is your original certificate of registration and pedigree along with the sterilisation certificate issued by your vet at the time of the operation. The CCC(Q) Rules are presently being reviewed and this article will appear in the February Dog World

I agree that a judge should know and action disqualifying faults but many faults are not disqualifying. I must say that I kind of agree with the judge's comments in your answer above. I am quite ignorant of the Staffie standard but you are suggesting that the dog with the undesirable colouring should have been discounted because of that fault. What if as the judge says, they thought it was a better type than the others presented, what if it had a pump-action tail and the others didn't? The judge should be judging the overall dog - sure any fault should come into consideration but so should the virtues of the dog. Again with the mini bull terriers, being over height is a fault and I've seen many challenges refused based on this and other faults in the dogs...a lot of judges understand that the minis are also currently in an extended interbreeding program with the standard bullies to eliminate some debilitating genetic conditions (PLL) and size is one of the sacrifices of doing this.

What reasons?

I've asked a judge questions about a decision before. I waited until after all the judging had been completed and there was a break and was very respectful to her as I really just wanted to understand where she was coming from in her reasoning - it didn't really have anything to do with whether I won anything. I thought what I had done was fair enough and I thanked her for her explanation at the time however, it was really disappointing that I later heard she was not very happy that I had questioned her. I had previously done really well under her with another dog, but I will never again show under her with any dog I have. I guess the situation comes back to all types of competition where there is a judge or referee. Sometimes decisions are made which are obviously wrong and even in competitions where questioning does happen freely on decisions, they are very rarely changed otherwise the judge/ref feels they lose their authority. Several years ago a very seasoned show person told me that if ever a judge mentions something in the ring about your dog that you know is incorrect in the standard, politely say "Excuse me Sir/Maam, you may like to check the standard before you make your decision?". Don't get me wrong - judges have a difficult job to do and sometimes they can get it wrong and sometimes they agonise over decisions they've made as to whether they've been right or wrong. I totally respect that but I believe that all judges should be open to discussion at an appropriate time and also be open to the fact that they may not be correct and not afraid to pull their standard out if there's any uncertainty. I think exhibitors would appreciate this rather than view it as the judge not knowing what they're doing.

Terrible - well, the opportunity for them to come clean has been offered and they didn't take it. I'd be going to small claims or something to recover the money for the vet bills.

As someone who does show neuter dogs and I see you are in Queensland - do you know if Dogs Qld has made any further statements about neuter classes than the one in 2010 that I linked earlier in the thread?

I'd ignore him and continue reporting him.

Just wanted to say thanks for participating in the survey and for your responses and discussion - it's been really good. If you know of anyone on DOL who you know has a strong opinion on this and maybe isn't aware of the survey, I'd love to get as many responses as possible. I'm thinking of maybe taking it to a wider group at shows or something like that. The design I guess is to try and guage the level of support for the neuter classes and to try and glean some reasons why/why not. A couple of comments I'd like to make in relation to the discussion: 1. I don't think limited register is necessarily an indication of the quality of the dog but more the breeders wishes in relation to them and that can be different for different breeders. Sometimes it could be because they don't think the dog is good enough to show or breed with, they may not think that the buyer has the expertise to adequately present the dog or it has been purchased as a pet so showing has never been a point in the discussion (if it was it is likely the breeder would probably offer some support and maybe recommend a different dog where another purpose is stated). 2. I don't think a dog being neutered is a reflection of it's quality - maybe more of the owners wishes. A neutered dog may be a very good example of it's breed against the standard (except for the entire bit....) while an entire dog may be a very poor example of it's breed against the standard and vice versa. I can understand the appeal of a neutered dog to someone who may like showing but has no intention of breeding. I know that many people view dog shows as a way of inspecting potential breeding stock but what is the core purpose really? I thought the main purpose of a conformation show was to identify the exhibits that are the best example of their breeds against their breed standard? 3. If the purpose of the neuter class was to encourage pet owners/social people to get involved in shows, I still don't think a conformation show is the right vehicle for it. As mentioned above, the purpose of it is to identify the best exhibit which is a competition usually including professionals. Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy showing as a social pursuit, but I do have competitive dogs and do everything I know how to prepare them for the show so they present well. I do however, see it as a way for people who might enjoy this competition, are only interested in showing and not breeding to be able to neuter their dogs before they normally would (they would normally keep them entire to compete). I'm not saying I have answers to encourage a new group of participants but I just don't think neuter class is the way to do it (if that was the purpose originally - I'm not sure I've ever seen something offical from the ANKC about the purpose of introducing it - maybe someone can help with that?

All of your points are totally valid and correct - but would it not suggest that maybe conformation showing (because that's what it's about) is not for pet owners with neutered dogs and they should be offered social days, etc. I don't know what the answer is but if you're including neuter classes in a confirmation show the pet owner won't be getting any enjoyment when a judge non-awards an inferior specimen - I couldn't see a pet owner looking to participate getting much enjoyment out of that. I do see where you're coming from but I think a greater participation of pet owners isn't going to be brought about by introducing neuter classes at shows. Maybe if it was like an open show parade or something where a knowledgable judge went over the dogs and told the person what was good about them and not so good and helped to educate them about their breed - that might work.

Yeah - I must agree that some waiting rooms are an absolute nightmare. I am very fortunate that my vet has a "side door" that backs onto the examination rooms - I just wait there and they come and get me when they're ready. I'm quite a regular so I don't think they mind - the ladies at the front reception desk even bring in the EFTPOS thingy so I can pay in the examination room and don't have to go to the front counter.....LOL. I really like them - they have great staff and the vets have always been really helpful.