Preferred Breed Type (article)

[angelsun]

PREFERRED BREED TYPE

Why The Stand-Out Best Dog Can Be A Loser

E. Katie Gammill © TheDogPlace January 2009 - The Best of the Best or one that looks like the rest? Let's be honest. Something called "preferred type" is flooding the rings today and in many breeds, it has little to do with the Breed Standard. When "current type" does not equal correctness, the best dog can lose because in many rings, the fatal flaw is being a stand-out.

"The best dog you'll ever breed may be the hardest dog you ever finish!"

A dog show friend, absent from the sport for several years, attended some local shows with me. Welcoming the opportunity to view dogs in general after her sabbatical, she became visually distressed. Her despair increased when a "less than average" class dog received BOB. The waning quality in her beautiful breed breaks her heart. She stated it would be wasted effort to show a dog correct to the standard today, as some judges feel compelled to award dogs conforming to the majority of the entries.

Observing other breeds, she remarks on the lack of neck, restricted front movement and the lack of rear follow through; we discuss "gay tails" and breed type variances. We watch faulty movement and see coats dragging the ground. Weak pasterns and sickle hocks complete the picture. She wonders what causes this to happen to functional dogs in such a short time. It seems the correct dogs have fallen victim to what one may refer to as the "Perfection of Mediocrity".

Today, many breeders and owners turn to performance, choosing not to participate in a "crap shoot" where such variety in type confuses both judges and ringside. I make this statement at the expense of being tarred and feathered but increasingly, the best dog you'll ever breed may be the hardest dog you will ever finish. It will be the "odd man out" and look different from the majority of dogs represented in the ring. Why? Some judges, insecure in a breed and therefore lacking courage, choose to walk "different" dogs rather than stick their neck out. Understandable, but should those lacking confidence be passing judgment on another's dog?

My old mentor said, "The pendulum of type swings to and fro, but those remaining true to the standard triumph in the end." Those dedicated breeders have the knowledge to restore a breed to its initial form once it hits bottom.

Should a judge reward a dog to suggest it could possibly assist in correcting breed faults? NO! It is a breeder's responsibility to incorporate such animals into their programs, regardless of success in the show ring. Judges are to judge to the written standard to the best of their ability, fairly and efficiently. They avoid awarding "drags of a breed" when possible but judges have little insight into the Pandora's Box of breeding.

A respected dog person of long standing approached me with this statement while at a seminar. "A judge CAN NOT GO WRONG by putting up winners conforming to the majority of the type of dogs in the ring on a given day." My response was "Surely not!" Well, I believe it now! After observing an all breed judge from ringside, I watched two outstanding individuals "walk" because they looked different from the rest of the short neck, sickle hock, smaller than average dogs lacking side gait that toddled around the ring like fuzzy little caricatures of the breed.

This strange "look alike" perspective takes over in many breed rings and not just among judges. Asking a breeder what their standard said about head planes, the response was: "What are parallel planes?" We discussed the occipital bone, short and medium muzzles, balanced heads, etc. Reading a standard and applying it can be two different things.

Judges should have the ability to articulate why one dog wins over another. So is that why they make terminology common among standards - to make it easier for judges? If anyone can describe a bulldog and an afghan using the same language, please step forward. Removing the "point system" from the old standards has had a negative affect. In a final decision between two comparable individuals, one has an idea where to hang their hat regarding prioritizing.

Should we just BREED TO WIN or should we BREED TO THE STANDARD and expect judges to judge to the Standard?

It is a "Judas Kiss" to any breed when a judge puts up a dog simply because it looks like the majority in the ring. It encourages people to breed to "winners" rather than to a breed standard. In judge's education, they address soundness but type takes priority. Educators assume that new applicants understand structure and corresponding movement. Type without soundness is as detrimental to a breed as soundness without type. A bad front and bad rear working in sequence produces "balance". Do two wrongs make a right? The goal is "a balance between type and soundness". A breed must be able to walk to the water bowl without falling over its own feet!

This brings us to the next question. Are not judges "protectors of the breed standards?" Judges education is NOT at fault. Perhaps the problem is what some judging applicants do NOT bring to the table! It is a privilege to pass judgment on a breed but one has the responsibility of understanding "Basic Dog 101". The AKC's required anatomy test neither assures someone's knowledge nor is it any guarantee a judge has the ability to analyze structure and movement.

Some breeder judges today send dogs with a handler giving little thought as to their quality or future effect on a breed. Shouldn't breeder judges be especially careful to send correct dogs for public observation? Breeders have a responsibility to put out "the best of the best" rather than a dog that wins simply because it "looks like the rest." By so doing, they are sending false signals to both ringside and new judges.

When judges say, "This must be what the breeders want as the ring is flooded with this type" it is detrimental to any breed. It IS NOT about "what breeders want." Breeders and judges have a responsibility to breed and judge to standard.

Should handlers show dogs for clients when they KNOW the dog or bitch is not a good representative of the breed? Breeders and exhibitors have a responsibility to promote only dogs that DO represent their breed standard and to sell as pets those who do not! A good handler should make every effort to finish a dog but they too are responsible and should be more selective regarding client dogs. Handlers who read the standard and who have the courage to turn down an inferior dog are to be admired.

Advertisement does not always mean a dog represents "breed excellence". Handlers do not always present "good dogs". Advertising carries some influence and if a judge selects winners on advertising alone, they do a disservice to the breed and it reflects on their ability as a judge.

"Priority judging" can be detrimental to breeds as Judges become caught up in selecting for individual virtues be it eye, ear set, feet, or coat color. That is why some specialty judges "put up pieces" rather than the whole package. Virtues are important, but a dog should "fill the eye". A single virtue cannot take precedence over a plethora of faults! Priority judging explains why many judges take so long to judge a class.

Dismayed exhibitors approach me with serious concerns regarding the direction of our sport. Time and effort is required to understand what makes a breed "breed specific", and what constitutes "breed excellence". There is no short cut. Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion. However, it should be a knowledgeable opinion. Personal preference only enters in when two dogs are equal according to the breed standard.

Another issue is "spot entering". Granted, today people enter under specific judges where they feel there is a chance of winning. However, why on a four-day weekend, do we see one point on Thursday, a major on Friday, one point on Saturday, and a major on Sunday? Should not one support the person who supports them by entering all four days? If there is a major, don't break it by not attending. Don't bump up a bitch or dog to BOB without first asking the other exhibitors their preference. Many people drive miles only to find someone failed to show up ringside or" bumped up" a new champion and broke the major. This co-operation is something we used to be able to count on. Today it is "iffy" at best. This is "sportsmanship"!

Watch dogs go around the ring. Some are structurally inefficient. Some shoulders do not open up, the dog reaches from the elbow. Ask yourself why one dog out-moves another. Go analyze short coated dogs. Take this knowledge to your own breed ring and "look beneath the coat". Understand top lines, body shape, breed specific movement and toy/moderate/ giant. Do some study and then some soul searching. Ringside observers and breed enthusiasts look on in dismay today, wondering where the functional dogs of the past have gone. Sadly, some faults are so prevalent today they are viewed as "virtues".

"Winning because of an exceptional breeding program takes the breed and breeders toward breed excellence. That should be the goal yesterday, and today."

Requested to address this issue, I decided to take time to sit back and see the "big picture." The "big picture" is upon us, folks, and it is not pretty! My reason to become a judge was the challenge to select the best of the best according to a written standard. I love dogs! I love SOUND dogs with BREED TYPE! Both virtues, believe it or not, can be present in the same animal! Through combined efforts and a willingness to call "a spade a spade", our breeds WILL survive. Breeding for the sake of winning is a downhill slide. This alone assures the future of our breeds. Turning things around will take dedicated breeders and judges, critical handler selection, and educated exhibitors. Our sport deserves nothing less than the best of our intentions.

ASK YOURSELF THESE QUESTIONS.

1.. Why do breeder judges "put dogs with handlers when they know the animal does not represent breed excellence?

2.. Why do handlers accept such dogs knowing once they finish, they will be "petted out"?

3.. Are you kennel blind and do you breed to standard?

4.. Should breeders and newcomers read the standard prior to stud and bitch selection?

5.. When will more mentors open up to newcomers?

6.. And lastly, are "gas money" and "filler" dogs destroying our sport?

Putting a breed back on track requires ETHICAL HANDLERS, DEDICATED BREEDERS, AN UNDERSTANDING OF BREED STANDARDS and KNOWLEDGEABLE JUDGES WITH THE COURAGE TO MAKE RESPONSIBLE SELECTIONS. Being a judge is not for the faint of heart. Sending the best dog to the next level and being a part of its journey to the pinnacle of success is a thrill of a lifetime.

There is but ONE standard. "Preferred breed type" is like a flavor of the month, very fleeting! BREEDERS, JUDGES AND EXHIBITORS HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THEIR BREED STANDARDS. CURRENT FADS AND PERSONAL OPINIONS ARE FLEETING AND DESTRUCTIVE.

Author bio, illustrations, photos:

http://www.thedogplace.org/Breeder/ShowDog...ammill-0901.asp

[whippets]

I have a copy of that article from two years ago (I think). It's a pretty good read.

As to my opinions on whippets being bred for "flash at the expense of function" and preferred coat colours that judges like....well I'll keep those opinions to myself

[SilverHaze]

Excellent article!

"The best dog you'll ever breed may be the hardest dog you ever finish!"

I totally relate to this quote.

I have a bitch who is a "stand out" from the crowd....and we are always facing exactly what this article describes. The frustration is immense, and so is the disapointment.

[SparkyTansy]

A very good read and one everybody could learn from... however if the article is two years old I would say not much has changed since...

[poodlefan]

I have a copy of that article from two years ago (I think). It's a pretty good read.

As to my opinions on whippets being bred for "flash at the expense of function" and preferred coat colours that judges like....well I'll keep those opinions to myself

My guess is that your opinions are more widely held than you might think Whippets. We all know what goes up and it takes patience and belief in your dog to show anything else.

Not so long ago I was at a show. BOB was awarded in my breed. As we left the area a fellow hound exhibitor asked "are Whippets supposed to have a flat back?". I told her about the breed standard requiring "Broad, well muscled back, firm, somewhat long, showing graceful arch over the loin but not humped" (or words to that effect).

"So why did the BOB have a flat back" she asked. "You tell me" was my response.

Personally I think the "all breeds judge" system fuels awarding high profile dogs and putting up type that comes through to General Specials. Its challenging for anyone to know type inside out in so many breeds. Judges can tell me but I guess they form a picture of what they think type is and colour becomes an important part of that. I think the push to gain credentials for Groups, not individual breeds, fuels this. Then there is "exception" judging - promoting the existance of a single characteristic or putting down the existance of a single fault without weighing type in the balance.

I know size in an issue in Whippets today but when you see a dog go through that's a good size but the moves like a harness pony you really have to shake your head. I'm a novice in this breed but for a dog developed to run, incorrect movement is the greater fault IMO.

Then there is the issue of too much muscle bulk (commented on by Editha Newton when she judged here as a problem with some dogs she judged). They're Whippets, not SBTs but gee some dogs look damn chunky. Excess muscle bulk holds too much heat - hardly an asset for a sprinter. How many chunky cheetahs do you see?

Edited September 16, 2010 by poodlefan

[lappiemum]

Excellent article.

[whippets]

I have a copy of that article from two years ago (I think). It's a pretty good read.

As to my opinions on whippets being bred for "flash at the expense of function" and preferred coat colours that judges like....well I'll keep those opinions to myself

My guess is that your opinions are more widely held than you might think Whippets. We all know what goes up and it takes patience and belief in your dog to show anything else.

Not so long ago I was at a show. BOB was awarded in my breed. As we left the area a fellow hound exhibitor asked "are Whippets supposed to have a flat back?". I told her about the breed standard requiring "Broad, well muscled back, firm, somewhat long, showing graceful arch over the loin but not humped" (or words to that effect).

"So why did the BOB have a flat back" she asked. "You tell me" was my response. ;)

Personally I think the "all breeds judge" system fuels awarding high profile dogs and putting up type that comes through to General Specials. Its challenging for anyone to know type inside out in so many breeds. Judges can tell me but I guess they form a picture of what they think type is and colour becomes an important part of that. I think the push to gain credentials for Groups, not individual breeds, fuels this. Then there is "exception" judging - promoting the existance of a single characteristic or putting down the existance of a single fault without weighing type in the balance.

I know size in an issue in Whippets today but when you see a dog go through that's a good size but the moves like a harness pony you really have to shake your head. I'm a novice in this breed but for a dog developed to run, incorrect movement is the greater fault IMO.

Then there is the issue of too much muscle bulk (commented on by Editha Newton when she judged here as a problem with some dogs she judged). They're Whippets, not SBTs but gee some dogs look damn chunky. Excess muscle bulk holds too much heat - hardly an asset for a sprinter. How many chunky cheetahs do you see? :D

Flat toplines is an issue but more so are straight fronts and short upper arms coupled with high stepping front gait. Fronts is the biggest problem IMO. The generic whippet show dog is rampant now. I rarely show under local judges, I can mark the catalogue before dogs go in the ring.

[Guest CaptainCourageous]

A good read.

I often wonder about complaints that judges haven't stuck to type, rather than stuck to standards.

The article acknowledges an influence of advertising. I hate the idea that advertising may affect results in the ring.

Interesting also to note breeders turning to performance, as my breed club has extended intself into Agility.

CC

[WreckitWhippet]

Without being kennel blind, the best you can do is stick to what you believe in.

[Missymoo]

:D ;)

[fifi]

:D Agree, very relevant & very much what friends & I were discussing this week.

fifi

[RallyValley]

Removing the "point system" from the old standards has had a negative affect. In a final decision between two comparable individuals, one has an idea where to hang their hat regarding prioritizing.

Chessies still have thiers :D

here is the Chessie "point system"

(Taken from the newly Australian recognised Chessie standard from the USA)

Positive Scale of Points (Should be only used for a reference and not used for judging)

Head, including lips, ears and eyes 16

Neck 4

Shoulders and body 12

Hindquarters and stifles 12

Elbows, legs and feet 12

Colour 4

Stern and tail 10

Coat and texture 18

General conformation 12

Total 100

Edited September 16, 2010 by valleyCBR

[SpikesPuppy]

Excellent article!

"The best dog you'll ever breed may be the hardest dog you ever finish!"

I totally relate to this quote.

I have a bitch who is a "stand out" from the crowd....and we are always facing exactly what this article describes. The frustration is immense, and so is the disapointment.

Same here :D look at her and she is amazing, but she is different...

[whippets]

There are quite a few good show dog articles from the site where I got the Gammill article a while back. HERE

The "flash in a pan puppy", "breeding choices", "pick the right puppy" and "free stacking" are also good reads.

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Interesting also to note breeders turning to performance, as my breed club has extended intself into Agility.

I think this is very important. Not all breeds can legally do exactly what they were bred to do, but in my breed watching a dog hunt or even lure course tells you a lot about what is between its ears and its construction. I would now want to see a dog lure course at least before using them.

I do think there are some problems with generic show dogs but I also think it's important to take the time to watch your breed judging when you are not entered. That way you don't have the influence of your own feelings about where your dogs placed to affect your view of the judging. My kids are all titled so I've been going to a few shows with OH without my dogs and it's really interesting to watch what is rewarded by different judges when I have no emotional attachment to what is going on.

I'll be honest tho', it is also sometimes pretty depressing. Our breed has some bad movement problems for a breed that is supposed to be a steady long distance hunter and almost never are those movement problems penalised. If the animal is cream and feathered a multitude of sins will be forgiven because it satisfies "type". Don't get me wrong, Australia has some very lovely cream feathered dogs, but it also has some very unsound ones that would never get away with it if they were a smooth or a parti-colour or a brindle.

[suezija]

:D A great article and relevant to so many breeds today.

[Faolmor]

So true, Angelsun, and a great article - coincidentally also just posted on another site I'm on.

I have to admit, though, reading it is a bit like banging your head against the wall - it doesn't change anything. As long as their are dogs and dog shows, there will be those who frankly care less about conformation faults than they do winning with a flashy animal. There will be people who deliberately overlook these faults in their breeding animals - and why wouldn't they, when the judges have put them up time and time again? Obviously this makes the dog a good one...right?! This is evident itself in the number of photos in the breed sections of animals with clear movement and conformation faults, or faults that don't meet the standard for the breed. Legs going everywhere on the move, or dogs with poor forward reach and sickle hocks behind. Always amazes me that these are the pictures people have chosen to display! I never know whether to laugh, because they have highlighted the dog's faults to the showing fraternity, or cry, because those dogs also seem to be top winners.

Who knows - maybe it doesn't matter any more if your dog is badly-made? If it's flashy, you can still be guaranteed to be the best.

What I don't understand is why beauty now doesn't seem to equal well-made? Surely well-made PLUS well-presented is better than just well-presented?

For me, it just means that the sport I love can never be anything more than bittersweet.

[Aziah]

Faolmor I see your point but the judges don't HAVE to put these animals up, they CHOOSE to...

If we are true to ourselves, follow what we believe in then that is all we can do, we cannot change trends or dogs of incorrect type winning in the ring and I guess we have to remember that everything can be interpreted on a personal level (but that's a whole other kettle of fish)!

RSG summed it up for me...

Without being kennel blind, the best you can do is stick to what you believe in.

Edited September 17, 2010 by Aziah

[Faolmor]

Faolmor I see your point but the judges don't HAVE to put these animals up, they CHOSE to...

If we are true to ourselves, follow what we believe in then that is all we can do, we cannot change trends or dogs of incorrect type winning in the ring and I guess we have to remember that everything can be interpreted on a personal level (but that's a whole other kettle of fish)!

RSG summed it up for me...

Without being kennel blind, the best you can do is stick to what you believe in.

That is my point LOL

And I agree. That's what makes it so sad.

[Aziah]

Faolmor I see your point but the judges don't HAVE to put these animals up, they CHOSE to...

If we are true to ourselves, follow what we believe in then that is all we can do, we cannot change trends or dogs of incorrect type winning in the ring and I guess we have to remember that everything can be interpreted on a personal level (but that's a whole other kettle of fish)!

RSG summed it up for me...

Without being kennel blind, the best you can do is stick to what you believe in.

That is my point LOL

And I agree. That's what makes it so sad.

Sorry

It is sad but I'm glad we agree and I meant choose!

Edited September 17, 2010 by Aziah