Cheating

[Miss B]

What would you do if you suspected a fellow exhibitor within your breed was cheating, by modifying their dogs appearance (dying the coat, colouring the nails or paw pads, etc). What would be the most appropriate way of dealing with the situation?

[mersonmalinois]

What would you do if you suspected a fellow exhibitor within your breed was cheating, by modifying their dogs appearance (dying the coat, colouring the nails or paw pads, etc). What would be the most appropriate way of dealing with the situation?

I would beat them in the show ring with dogs that are NOT artificially altered to demonstrate to him/her that all that "stuff" is not necessary to win.

[-Megz-]

Suspected is a long way from knowing so I would put up or shut up.

[Andisa]

Most people really know the truth anyway.

eta: if you have proof you could tell the judge on the day and hope they deal with it. If you decide to put it in writing later on you will only be out of pocket and they will lie to get out of it..

Edited June 24, 2010 by Andisa

[Darkrai]

What would you do if you suspected a fellow exhibitor within your breed was cheating, by modifying their dogs appearance (dying the coat, colouring the nails or paw pads, etc). What would be the most appropriate way of dealing with the situation?

there is nothing you can do with out proof and if you have proof there is still nothing you can most of the time...

But these days artifically altering a dog is the normal...

[Shaar]

There was someone saying ages ago in Tas that they could take a clipping of your dogs coat to send away for testing...

Needless to say that was not taken well... there were many threats (jokingly) of broken fingers if anyone tried to take a clipping from their dog!

If you have actually seen someone cheating (not just suspecting) then you can contact your local club and notify them.

But really, if it's that obvious I'm sure the judge will be able to pick up on it (ie: dog with brown eye rims but a black nose!)

Some breed standards state 'no artificial substances in the coat' so that means no chalking or hairspray... these things get overlooked as they are considered the 'norm'

[Borderpower]

Sadly I saw alot of this when I was showing, not in my breed but most within the same group, I just look the other way.

[Shaar]

Sadly I saw alot of this when I was showing, not in my breed but most within the same group, I just look the other way.

Sometimes that's the only way to avoid an all-out dog war.

[Dogsfevr]

Suspected is a long way from knowing so I would put up or shut up.

So agree with this.

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Some breed standards state 'no artificial substances in the coat' so that means no chalking or hairspray... these things get overlooked as they are considered the 'norm'

It's not just the breed standards, it's in the regulations for the canine controls.

From the DogsACT Regs:

7.8 Dogs Improperly Prepared.

A dog is considered to be improperly prepared if:

1. The natural colour or shade of natural colour or the natural markings of the dog have been altered or changed by the use of any substance whatsoever;

2. Any substance, preparation, powder or fluid used for cleaning has been applied to and remains on the dog during exhibition to such an extent as to deceive or be likely to deceive a judge whether it was applied with intent to deceive or not;

3. Any cutting, piercing, breaking by force, or any kind of operation or act which destroys the tissues of the ears or alters their natural formation or carriage, or shortens the tail or alters the carriage of the tail, has been practiced, provided however, that shortening the tail shall be allowable in the case of breeds accepted by.

4. At no time may a Non Registrable Docked Dog be exhibited or shown at an exhibition or show.

[jedi knight]

Really theres a lot of stuff happing in the show scene these days which is sad because it is just spoiling the sport and alot of new comers don't last long the whole show scene needs a real shake up from top to bottom but for now if you win and you have done it with out any cheating or empty lead then you can hold your head high

[Andisa]

Some breed standards state 'no artificial substances in the coat' so that means no chalking or hairspray... these things get overlooked as they are considered the 'norm'

It's not just the breed standards, it's in the regulations for the canine controls.

From the DogsACT Regs:

7.8 Dogs Improperly Prepared.

A dog is considered to be improperly prepared if:

1. The natural colour or shade of natural colour or the natural markings of the dog have been altered or changed by the use of any substance whatsoever;

2. Any substance, preparation, powder or fluid used for cleaning has been applied to and remains on the dog during exhibition to such an extent as to deceive or be likely to deceive a judge whether it was applied with intent to deceive or not;

3. Any cutting, piercing, breaking by force, or any kind of operation or act which destroys the tissues of the ears or alters their natural formation or carriage, or shortens the tail or alters the carriage of the tail, has been practiced, provided however, that shortening the tail shall be allowable in the case of breeds accepted by.

4. At no time may a Non Registrable Docked Dog be exhibited or shown at an exhibition or show.

I have a little saying - "The fairy Godmother doesn't have a magic wand - you have to find the Vet who does". Don't waste your money putting it in writing because you will be out of pocket.

Would be interesting if they brought in drug testing like they do with greyhounds - how many dogs would be withdrawn?

Some cheating is far more obvious than others and what is more surprising are the ones who are doing it....

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Would be interesting if they brought in drug testing like they do with greyhounds - how many dogs would be withdrawn?

Some cheating is far more obvious than others and what is more surprising are the ones who are doing it....

I would LOVE to see drug testing but I think the expense - and I'm not just talking about the testing but the regulatory framework around it - makes it unfeasible.

Edited to fix a tautology...

Edited June 24, 2010 by SkySoaringMagpie

[conztruct]

What would you do if you suspected a fellow exhibitor within your breed was cheating, by modifying their dogs appearance (dying the coat, colouring the nails or paw pads, etc). What would be the most appropriate way of dealing with the situation?

I'd be forgetting about it unless you have irrefutable proof rather than a suspicion - even if you do have this proof, I'd probably leave it.

Sometimes standing up for the rules and the right thing can cause you more harm than good. As some of the other posters have said, the judges should be picking up on any signs of this and it's their job. I once heard a judge say to an exhibitor that they had to judge what was presented in front of them then and there and this is true - even if you said to them that you believe the other exhibitor was cheating they have no "before" picture to refer to in order to see what has been altered.

Leave it and just concentrate on your own dogs that you're showing as they are and be proud that you don't need to and aren't sad enough to go to these lengths. Some people will do anything to win yes, and it's a shame that this kind of thing happens but I think you need to consider whether it's a battle you want to fight because it will be and may well end up being a war.

[whippets]

I don't really care about chalk and hairspray being used on dogs. I'd be more peeved when an obviously unsound dog gets put up for a major award.

[oakway]

I would abide by what ellez has on the bottom of all her posts.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

i think crufts has made a point that this year they will not tolerate dogs being dyed...will try to find the article

eta

here is the article http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/738...in-make-up.html

Edited June 25, 2010 by Jaxx'sBuddy

[Paptacular!]

I have heard from an exhibitor where a judge told her she should artifically enhance her dog.

It's a sad, sad state of affairs when a judge advises an exhibitor they should be cheating.

What the judge didn't know is that the dog in question was a Gr Ch anyway and had got to that title without being comestically altered.

[SparkyTansy]

I just don't think it's worth it to try and prove... as someone else said, beat them with your non-enhanced dog.

[-Megz-]

I have heard from an exhibitor where a judge told her she should artifically enhance her dog.

It's a sad, sad state of affairs when a judge advises an exhibitor they should be cheating.

What the judge didn't know is that the dog in question was a Gr Ch anyway and had got to that title without being comestically altered.

:D that would be shocking

From memory that exhibitor was told that she should blacken the dogs toenails.

Now the Standard for the breed does call for black nails but it also says:

Faults: Any departure from the foregoing points should be considered a fault and the seriousness with which the fault should be regarded should be in exact proportion to its degree and its effect upon the health and welfare of the dog.

I hardly think that the dog would be in a predicament if it's nails weren't black :D