fixer

Class? As in like you & Rebanne perhaps? If that is class, I certainly don't have any. And better off for it.

False accusations make you look silly. Answer.. edit.

well if not believing there were more neuters entered in a group than there were entires, i'm afraid I would be. However, She didn't actually claim that. So not yet. Nice try. Missed again though.

Sorry, But the question is, were there more neuter entries than entire entries. The statement was an explanation as how the claim of more neuters in their group line up than there were in the entires line up. I do agree it is possible, but I am sceptical. However, if the answer to the question is "yes' i'm now more than sceptical, I simply don't believe it.

If that question means 'were there more breeds represented in neuter than entire?', the answer is Yes It wasn't a question. It was a statement about such a curious situation could occur. You will have to pardon my scepticism though.

reply to showdog. Wrong again. I try to see as many rings as time allows. Although my own breed & group takes preference naturally enough. Just as an aside. Most often than not I would enter more dogs in my breed than there are neuters entered in the entire group.

Is he the boy the boy with yellow eyes? Did you you breed him? I don't the know the dog, I merely repeated some complaints about awarding dogs with obvious faults from another forum.

I don't recall QANTAS saying Braccy breeds were banned because they were 'historically aggressive' though? A rose by any other name perhaps?

Ridiculous. But blame the unions, not the carrier.

Agree. The only people I know or am aware of who enter neuters are exhibitors who take the opportunity to give their old neutered conformation champions a run. Dogs that have paid their dues in the real world of dog showing. Still, showies are much more interested in the veterans s.s than they are the neuter scene. The veterans actually draw the crowd & the applause & the admiration. Disagree with you on all points fixer. As dotdashdot is a perfect example of, there are people out there showing dogs in neuter that haven't got their Ch. A lot of people are very supportive of neuter classes, including the majority, if not all, the judges I have shown a neuter under. Many people still stick around for NIS, even though it is the last class to be judged, and I have heard some great cheers for NIS wins. Which is what a discussion is all about. I am yet to witness neuter judging draw any appreciative interest, except from those associated with the exhibits.

I've also been to shows where the Neuter in Group line up was longer than the BIG line up :) Was the neuter group entry longer than the group entry? The way it could happen is if one or more entire breeds weren't represented. Which I have seen.

I would like to see the standards really tightened up. The breed description more precise & faults listed by degree. Dq faults needn't be listed if, in a perfect world, the judge has as much concern for the well being & improvment of the breeds as the ethical, responsible breeders do. Non awarding does happen, but not enough. The onus could be taken away from the judges if minimum entry requirments ( based on breed registration numbers) for the awarding of C.C.'s was introduced. Like it is in the U.K. for instance. I nearly choked on my french donut when I read on "minority" breed exhibitors complaining it would be impossible for their dogs to attain the new "Supreme Ch" status. It really is hypocritical for people to join the face judging & payback chorus' regarding judges awarding judges,. Everyone knows it happens, but the rub is judges usually have very good dogs to begin with. When a suggestion is put forward were there is something tangible to complain about they want to poh bah the idea. Go figure.

The thread was inspired by the "Look what their doing to our dogs'' thread. And of course personal disappointment. I enter with expectations. As I would expect does everyone. I know my dogs faults, as I know the faults of the their regular opposition. Of course i'm disappointed not to win, as I expect everyone is, my disappointment is diminished somewhat when the opposition I picked as worthy are awarded. My dogs have always moved well. It is one of their best assets. A necessity in any dog, Ch or pet. Bad movement is so obvious to me I wonder why it is not to some judges. The disappointment comes when dogs with obvious faults are awarded over more correct exhibits. I breed one breed sparingly & exhibit under my own prefixm also sparingly. Unlike those who breed various breeds often, never exhibit their own prefix, nor have titled an exhibit of their own breeding in the twelve years I competed on their circuit. Sour grapes? No, frustration. Frustration at seeing unworthy dogs awarded over those more worthy. This is not a personal opinion, this is the same opinion everyone who exhibits has heard at one time or another about shows they have ever attended & will ever attend in the future. This is a situation that must be suffered in silence. This topic is merely a suggestion that could remedy that situation. I'm wondering if those choosing to denegrate rather than discuss are worried if such a provision came to be they would be ''embarassed" by a challenges. For the record. I have three titled dogs of my prefix currently in my kennel. Two titled of my prefix & two titled purchased dogs that are no longer of this world. "They" have been awarded multi B.O.B, B.I.G & class in group. One B.I.S. That is as successful as I ever hope to be when I started out all those years ago. Real "success" is breeding your own titled dogs.

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. can I ask you a personal question? You don't need to answer if don't want to. Would you tell me how much experience in the show scene you have? S777 accuses me of being obsessed with faults. I'm not. But you are. People claim the perfect dog has yet to be whelped. If that is true, there a bloody lot of near perfect dogs out there. It is not impossible as you think one fault could seperate two near perfect specimans. Dogs, like their handlers, have off days. it isn't always the vitues or faults decide the result.

Give me a bigger dog that is balanced any day, over something that is 16 inches, with a short upper arm and the lenght of a freight train. I'll even take the lighter eyes, when the rest of the head is what it should be. The probable result from a line up of say 6 dogs which includes the 16" with short upper arm & the length of a freight train & the taller than desirable, though well balanced black brindle with yellow eyes, would be are they placed 5th & 6th...in any order because they both don't rate. Which is as it should be.

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.

I'm not obssessed with faults at all. That seems to be your problem. Faults are a fact of life. This is about eliminating faults, not rewarding them. Which should be the goal of anyone claiming to be a responsible ethical breeder. Think Julius Caesar Think we are here to bury them....not to praise them.

Well, Suleiman is technically a human name. But that's nitpicking for certain :laugh: I do call him Suleiman, it's three syllables and easy to pronounce, but I will shorten it to Sully and also call him cottonhead, cloudface, icky and other nonsense nicknames. He responds to "Suleiman" and "Sully" (which is in his full name anyway) for attention/recall :) it's the way of it. People don't even call each other by their given names ALL of the time. So far I think the Devil is going to leave most of us alone..

I have no problem with that. What problem do you & others have with a provision for an exhibitor to challenge a decision to award a dog with an obvious fault? Let's be honest here. Most, if not all, experienced breeder/exhibitors are breed experts. Most, if not all, would know the quality of their competition either by previous experiences, reputation or on the spot visual assessment. Most, if not all, would have an opinion about which were their main opposition. In most instances there wouldn't be a struck match between the top few. Most, will be disappointed. Disappointment is not a hanging offence. Show me a good loser & I will show you a born loser. So, if the bolter, with an obvious fault, gets the nod, why shouldn't the decision be subject to a challenge? Don't say later, later is too late. I am not advocating the judge change his decision. Just he he has to explain it. Then & there. To the people who know at least as much as he/she does. There could be provisions for penalties for frivolous challenges. Suspension or a fine. Just to make people think it through before jumping in. Let's have no more singing from the hypocrites hymn book about gracious winners & happy, happy, & then going back to the gazebos & kicking the crap out of their picnic hampers & badmouthing all & sundry, the judge, the other, their dogs, the pope, who comes to mind comes to mouth. This way they could show some resolve & put the issue to bed there & then. The issue to be noted in the day book as a record. A brief comment initialed by both parties maybe. If a pattern emerges, questions could be asked. The upside, I.M.O. is the judges would know they were being watched just a little bit more intensly & we would get better judging as a result.

If it doesn't affect function, how can it be a "major fault"??? What about mismarkings that are prohibited by the a standard. Cosmetic? Not a major fault? 16" when the standard declares Not to be any taller than 14'' Cosmetic? Not a major fault? Give me a break.

Because it holds up every other exhibitor while you give the judge the "benefit" of your wisdom on the breed standard. It's not a debate, its a decision that, regardless of what YOU think of it should be accepted. There is a time and a place for asking judges why they did what they did and that time is after the judge has finished judging for the day. It's called consideration for your fellow exhibitors. So is not cheapening their win because you can't lose gracefuly. Most of the "questioning" of opinions I've seen seems to come from people who are disagreeing with what the judge did. Build a bridge I say. The show ring is neither the time nor the place for judge education. If you're that cheesed off about it, put it in writing. Otherwise have the good grace to congratulate the person who won or shut the hell up. If you dont' like what a judge puts up, don't enter under them again. It's not that hard really. Kennel blindness is alive and well with some folk. If a whole heap of judges put a dog over yours and you can't figure out why, the best place to start on the "why" of the issue rests with your dog. None of them are perfect. Seems to me those so keen to find fault in others' dogs should conduct the same rigorous evaluation of their own once in a while. If a judge is prepared to put a dog with "an obvious major fault" over yours, it might still be the better dog ya know. :) It might also be your handling. For some exhibitors the "real challenge" is demonstrating grace in defeat. If you don't comprehend the topic you shouldn't really reply.

What you should do is read the topic. When you have something other than bile to contribute please join us. I did contribute but you said I didn't count cause I have a minority breed, of course this was before you showed your hand. And those of us who not only have a breed with high numbers, but also the breed the vitriole was aimed at, aren't allowed to reply either.....odd :laugh: I mentioned once instance that I witnessed first hand that was more about a judge not knowing the standard ( which isn't that unusual in the overall scheme of things) the rest were complaints I had heard/read third hand. Each mentioned a fault. A definate fault. Faults you & S 777 denied or defended. Only one was a SBT btw. So far no retorts from the rotties, the Bostons or the lakeland folks. Do you think they are maybe more in tune with reality than you & your sidekick? People usually only defend the indefensable because they need to for personal reasons. Now, cut the crap & give a sensible, logical reasons why the suggestion is out of the question. Remember, this has nothing to do with personal opinion, we are into reality here. Try it, it doesn't hurt.

What you should do is read the topic. When you have something other than bile to contribute please join us. I did contribute but you said I didn't count cause I have a minority breed, of course this was before you showed your hand. you don't. & it's nothing to do with breed, it's an intellect thing. Showed my hand? Does not compute.

All of my dogs regardless of their name have many variations and nick names that I call them, some are even longer than their actual name :laugh: Another for door three.

SBT's and he's full of sour grapes... I'm guessing my dog is one that he's taking a shot at :laugh: Does your dog have yellow eyes? This may it it folks. :laugh: so you started this thread just to have a go a one person and their dog. Sour grapes big time. What you should do is read the topic. When you have something other than bile to contribute please join us. I am not responsible for a guilty conscience. For everyone else. It is a shame this topic has degenerated into the mire that enveloped the topic that inspired it. "Look what we have done to our dogs" That topic was a lost cause before I decided join, so I didn't bother with it. At first I was disappointed the most vocal of the fault defenders were from the SBT clan. But in hindsight it was actually a breed that is very good example to use. Being a breed that regularly attracts a lot of entries, is a breed on a sound footing with many, many beautiful examples of standard, it is ideally suited for the topic. Which is "A real challenge" Giving exhibitors the option to challenge judges to explain when they award an entry with an obvious major fault. Who would have thought the fault defenders would attack the the fault amenders. Strange people live here.