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

[sandgrubber]

Great article. Thanks for posting.

btw, when did the points system go by the wayside? I would love to see it used.

[angelsun]

Many breeds still use the point system, but many others have let them lapse as the breed clubs (based on the input from the members) claimed that it wasn't relavent or simply not working.

I would like to see points (priorities) assigned to breeds and have to be able to justify why the points are there and the level they are, in the first place.

For those unaware, this is where often we hear the term 'this breed is a head breed' comes from, when the breeds points gave the most for the head of the dog in comparison to the rest of the dog.

[Wags]

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

Fabulous article. I've come to the conclusion that the breeders and showers are, in many cases, causing their own problems. The judges can only choose from what is presented, and as you say, they're breeding to win. I've noticed that if a dog appears to be winning well, a lot of breeders tend to want 'some of that' in the hope that they will also win well with the offspring. That seems to create a trend towards that 'winning' dog, but in fact is only lending towards a mixmatch of pedigree which is not necessarily producing good quality puppies, out of which the perceived 'best' is chosen to go on and add to the original trend of change. I'm afraid I can't see how this is keeping the type of the breed true, or even improving the breed.

[angelsun]

Fabulous article. I've come to the conclusion that the breeders and showers are, in many cases, causing their own problems. The judges can only choose from what is presented, and as you say, they're breeding to win. I've noticed that if a dog appears to be winning well, a lot of breeders tend to want 'some of that' in the hope that they will also win well with the offspring. That seems to create a trend towards that 'winning' dog, but in fact is only lending towards a mixmatch of pedigree which is not necessarily producing good quality puppies, out of which the perceived 'best' is chosen to go on and add to the original trend of change. I'm afraid I can't see how this is keeping the type of the breed true, or even improving the breed.

I totally agree with what you're saying. WE are the cause of the styles of dogs that WE claim to hate and are in our opinions, bad representatives of the breed! WE are the ones that over angulate because Ch.Angle Angle Who's Got The Angle, won the Royal three times running and then the Breed specialty right after that! WE are the ones that breed over coats because Ch.Puffy Fluffy was top dog all breeds ten years ago and we figured it MUST be because he's got ALL that coat! WE are the ones that breed so much bone into our moderate breed because Ch.Brick Outhouse was top in his breed for three years running.

Were these dogs correct and to the standard? Probably not....they won for flash, flare and good advertising in many cases and new breeders came along, saw the rosettes and sashes and wanted a piece of it, so they breed to it. Yes they got these things..and more and more of these dogs showed up in the rings. They became the majority because everyone grabbed the 'flavour of the month'.

Those breeders wise enough to not jump on the fashion trend, continued to follow their blueprint, but got left behind as the judges awarded what they saw the most frequent. WE are to blame for the judges doing this...as mentioned, they can only judge what we the breeder puts in front of them. They can only judge what we the breeders take to them for their judges education seminars. We can't blame the judges....we have created our monsters.

[alpha bet]

Great article - perhaps does leave us with concerns for where things will go in the future.

Back in the 70's and 80's I was more involved in the working dog ring, it was common to see judges allocating BOB's to the dog who stood out from the others. Especially taking their time with the judging of the males - after all these were the ones who could potential hold a great deal of influence over the breed future.

There were also larger classes than seen today and from more kennel prefixes - perhaps this is one reason there may have been more variety of type? Is this good or not?

Today showing seems to be a different world to what I remember - For just one example - Recently I went to the Royal to watch the Aussie Shepherds (all up only 36 entries of which quite a few were not presented - not really a huge representation). There were only about 5 animals in both sexes of solid colour - others were all merle, so of course it was merles who took out the honours. Talking with some of the exhibitors this is a common sight at most shows. This alone would seem to be an issue of concern. You cannot breed merle to merle - then the breeders should be campaigning their solid coloured dogs and bitches, as these have a more open breeding choice.

Obviously the exhibitors feel that the merle is more favoured in the ring - therefore these are the colour being shown. So proof that the exhibitors are following a trend first - I'm not saying these dogs were not quality but choosing to show by colour is a real danger.

How can judges really learn to comprehend the rull range if really they are only seeing mainly the blues. The danger down the line is that there will be limited number of solid colours available for breeding.

[Jed]

Of course if judges fully understood the standards of the dogs they are breeding, this would never occur.

[asal]

n from what ive seen it cuts both ways.

stick to your guns and breed what you believe knowing full well its a waste of your time to show as you are not following the flavour of the day, month or year.

or breed and show whats wanted NOW.

since it seems the majority of show breeders feel they have to follow fashion or they dont get awarded soooo... its not just the breeder to blame.

if they want the coveted ribbon they feel they have to deliver what the judges are awarding.

n so true about judges not worrying about that it takes to breed. some of the worst pups ive run on were under the advice of judges who said what they thought were the best pup in the litter... the same pups 9 months on? uuuuggghh

but then they were "judging them on the day" goes to show "on the day" doesnt mean its going to mature into what you want as an adult. did make me wonder a little how many litters the judges i asked had actually raised from weaning to adult so knew what looked like this usually maturees into, that?

[asal]

and the saddest thing i ever heard?

A judge boasting that he could "take a camel and make it a champion"

what is he saying about the intregrety and/or inteligance of those who would put up his "camel" ?

I know he meant it that he was such a good showman he could title anything on the end of his lead.

but he seemed totaly unaware of what he was saying about his fellow judges.

n since ive seen "camels" shown and win. the boast wasnt an idle one

the biggest trouble of couse is said "camels" become studs or broods, not to mention the soo many on the sidelines either thinking this is what the breed standard is, n never knowing better... or those who think,,, ive had this and walk....or those who think well if this is the standard got to go with the flow or miss out.

in every instance the breed and the breed standard is the loser.

Edited October 2, 2010 by asal

[sandgrubber]

So what do people think about reviving the points system?

Has it helped with the breeds that still use it?

[Wags]

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

Fabulous article - saw a similar one, if not the same on Universal Cavalier. Honestly, the showing and breeding fraternity are causing their own problems in many cases and the loss of original type and quality are borne or trends. Well put in this article.