Grand Champions & (new Title) Supreme Champions

[WreckitWhippet]

I feel sorry for those who worked their arses off, to achieve a Grand under the revised system, their great achievement will now be lumped back in with those who were merely good enough not to get non awarded along the way, were prepared to travel and pay for the petrol.

don't you think that is a bit rude to some of the GR Ch that got their title under the old (new) system. Not the dogs fault or the handlers that they won under the rules of the day. They can't have all been undeserving surely

There's nothing to differentiate those who achieved their Grands with the BIG, BIS and CC requirements, from those who merely racked up the points, having beaten nothing or never won a group.

I'd never bothered to put a grand on a dog, as I couldn't see the point before the changes. I could however see the title was no longer hollow, when a dog had to at least prove that it could win the big CC's, BIG or a BIS to earn the title. Now it's reverted back to simply racking up the points, it's again meaningless.

[GRD]

I see this one managed to slip through without anybody noticing....

7.7 Championship Points System (05/99) (10/11)

The owner of a dog registered with the ANKC Ltd which:

(a) Wins not fewer than four Challenge Certificates/Best of Breed Certificates

under not fewer than four different Judges at four different exhibitions; and

(10/99)

(b) Gains a total of 100 points; may apply for such dog to be known as a

Champion.

NOTE that the 25 points after the age of 12 months is no longer required ;)

well I think that's a bit disappointing. I realise the smaller breeds would be mature by 12 months of age but all the others, mine included, are being judged on potenial. It would be unrealistic to wait, for any breed, to be fully mature, in my breed we would be waiting for the boys to be at least 4 :D , but I think 25 points after 12 months was reasonable. Actually it wouldn't bother me if the age was put up to 18 months but I suspect I would be in the minority

The rationale behind it was, why should a CC awarded at 6 months be more important to one which is awarded at say 11 months old.

If a dog must be 12 months old to be concidered worthy to be awarded a title, then awarding a CC which states the dog is worthy of the title Champion at 6 months old is a bit contradictory.

My view was either remove the 25 points after 12 months old or amend the age at which challenges can be awarded.

Graham

[WreckitWhippet]

A retrograde step IMO. Really disappointing.

The possibility is being a made up "Champions" in 17 shows, grandies in 167 without actually having been placed before another exhibit?

Divided by 2 or 3 shows a week & it really show how ridiculous the situation is.

6 weeks for champ, just over a year for grand without opposition?

Not much credibility there.

Any wonder overseas associations regard our awards with suspicion.

So with a breed like mine (Basset Fauve De Bretagne) where there are currently less than 10 being shown reasonably regularly between Townsville and Melbourne our challenges shouldn't count UNTIL we compete against others of our breed? I've travelled for competition and LOVE competition (even when my girls lose) but at the moment unless I travel the only competition my girls get is each other. ETA or should they count only when they also win a class in group? Or only when they win group? There IS no perfect answer to any of these problems. No matter which way the ANKC goes people are going to be pissed off.

Don't worry Trisven, do what I did and breed your own competition Not all of us live near the showing centres or have the money or time to go chasing competition. Particularly when there is no competiton within cooee to chase.

ETA as for getting a 25 point Challenge would have to move overseas to have any hope of that.

25 pointers also come in the form of Best In Group and any dog that is good enough, is capable of winning one, be it rare breed, popular breed, one of or one of 50 entered on the day

[stone]

ETA as for getting a 25 point Challenge would have to move overseas to have any hope of that.

If a dog can't ever win a 25 point challenge or a 25 point group in it's entire show life I don't consider it worthy of Ch status.

Just my opinion.

[conztruct]

As a few have mentioned, there is no easy fix to this issue that will please all parties.

I guess the thing for me is that even though I love showing and achieving title requirements (only CHs for me - a Grand is a distant dream at this point - LOL), these titles really don't impact on my perception of a good example of the breed.

There are many dogs in my breed and others that have CHs and Grand titles but I would never consider using them in a breeding program. Would be interested to hear what bearing the title a dog has, has on others breeding decisions? Regardless then, whilst I'm not saying there's no point in showing (because I love it), do the titles really mean anything except for a sense of personal achievement and maybe a good advertising point to create interest in a dog? I know if a dog has a Grand Ch., I'm pretty keen to have a look at it - sometimes I'm really impressed, other times I'm disappointed.

[Keshwar]

ETA as for getting a 25 point Challenge would have to move overseas to have any hope of that.

If a dog can't ever win a 25 point challenge or a 25 point group in it's entire show life I don't consider it worthy of Ch status.

Just my opinion.

I think the point people are trying to make is that for many if not most breeds it would be impossible to get a 25 point challenge outside of a speciality. And as has been regularly pointed out not all breeds have breed specialities.

In the three breeds I'm involved in it would be a rare event to see a breed line up of 19+ at an all-breeds show.

Unfortunately the days are long gone when there used to be a Judge just for the Afghans.

And to clarify your original post only mentioned a 25 point challenge with no mention of BIG.

IMO, The requirements apparently just dumped for the awarding of the GCh title were a breath of fresh air.

The requirements for Ch awards should have been a modification of that.

Two 25 point challenges to be gained before Qualifying for the title of Aust Ch for e.g.

Your challenge points would still count but being titled would require more credibility.

It is probably harder for a ''popular'' breed to be titled due to the amount of competition.

The rewards are greater for sure, but much harder to come by.

Consider a previous topic where it is possible for a r/u BIS to finish in front of a 1000 dogs for no reward & yet some go home with 6 points just for being there?

Ridiculous.

Just my opinion.

Just my opinion. ;)

Edited November 22, 2011 by Keshwar

[Rebanne]

As a few have mentioned, there is no easy fix to this issue that will please all parties.

I guess the thing for me is that even though I love showing and achieving title requirements (only CHs for me - a Grand is a distant dream at this point - LOL), these titles really don't impact on my perception of a good example of the breed.

There are many dogs in my breed and others that have CHs and Grand titles but I would never consider using them in a breeding program. Would be interested to hear what bearing the title a dog has, has on others breeding decisions? Regardless then, whilst I'm not saying there's no point in showing (because I love it), do the titles really mean anything except for a sense of personal achievement and maybe a good advertising point to create interest in a dog? I know if a dog has a Grand Ch., I'm pretty keen to have a look at it - sometimes I'm really impressed, other times I'm disappointed.

well said. The sire of my last litter was only very rarely shown before going to a pet home and is not titled, he is stunning and the litter is very promising.

[stone]

And to clarify your original post only mentioned a 25 point challenge with no mention of BIG.

Pedantic.

6 pointers are listed as BOB.

All points are recorded on the BOB ceritficate.

Group is actually another challenge.

Points are adjusted to include any additional points gained for BIG on the BOB certificate.

To a max of 25.

Hence the commonly used & accepted term

BIG, 25 point challenge.

(not all group wins amount to 25 points.)

Fact

Not an opinion.......

Edited November 22, 2011 by stone

[Trisven13]

ETA as for getting a 25 point Challenge would have to move overseas to have any hope of that.

If a dog can't ever win a 25 point challenge or a 25 point group in it's entire show life I don't consider it worthy of Ch status.

Just my opinion.

So you make no allowances at all for the fact that there are breeds who would find it impossible to get a 25 point challenge even if every dog that was shown in the country was at that one show? The highest point BOB challenge ever awarded to a Fauve here in Australia was 15 (think I've got that right 10 dogs so 10 points plus 5?). There is only one Fauve in Australia at the moment who has won a Best in Group so he is the only one who deserves to be a champion?

[Shaar]

As a few have mentioned, there is no easy fix to this issue that will please all parties.

I guess the thing for me is that even though I love showing and achieving title requirements (only CHs for me - a Grand is a distant dream at this point - LOL), these titles really don't impact on my perception of a good example of the breed.

There are many dogs in my breed and others that have CHs and Grand titles but I would never consider using them in a breeding program. Would be interested to hear what bearing the title a dog has, has on others breeding decisions? Regardless then, whilst I'm not saying there's no point in showing (because I love it), do the titles really mean anything except for a sense of personal achievement and maybe a good advertising point to create interest in a dog? I know if a dog has a Grand Ch., I'm pretty keen to have a look at it - sometimes I'm really impressed, other times I'm disappointed.

To me the title of just regular champion says that the dog has been to dog shows... that's it. I know quite a few dogs who honestly shouldn't even be in the ring let alone winning and they are champions.

Judges in this country don't non-award as much as they should and to fix that problem there wither needs to be a crack down on the standards judges have, OR tougher requirements for becoming a champion.

I actually think that having an additional requirements for becoming a champion (such as winning one best in group or one 25 point CC) is a good idea. Yes it will make it harder, but do you really want a title that you can get simply by turning up anyway?

BUT... this is a moot point, it has changed and most likely it will be a few years before we see the system change again.

[StarLapyz]

A retrograde step IMO. Really disappointing.

The possibility is being a made up "Champions" in 17 shows, grandies in 167 without actually having been placed before another exhibit?

Divided by 2 or 3 shows a week & it really show how ridiculous the situation is.

6 weeks for champ, just over a year for grand without opposition?

Not much credibility there.

Any wonder overseas associations regard our awards with suspicion.

Beating other dogs is irrelevant.

Your dogs are judged against the standard, if the Judge doesn't consider them worthy of Champion/Grand Champion, they will non-award them and they won't get the points.

If dogs that are getting point uncontested shouldn't be getting titles that the issue is with the Judges, not the points system.

Getting there with uncontested six pointers is just as valid as getting there by beating a lot of dogs (and arguably shows a lot more dedication and effort).

[kelpiesrule]

It looks to me that NOBODY is happy no matter what rules changes there are. Just because a dog has gained Champion or Grand Champion without groups does NOT mean it is an inferior speciman of it's BREED. Not ALL dogs that have a Grand Champion under the old rules are petrol Champions. Dont lump everyone under the same status. It seems like people just like to whinge for the sake of whinging... if you are doing your homework on prospective studs or litters.. then all you need to do is ask the owner of the Grand Champion what exactly the dogs have won. There are alot more 'petrol' Grands under the current system due to people travelling to small shows trying to pick up easy wins. Not all people are able to do that.

I am rapt the Grand is going back to the old rules - makes those happy that find the current rules hard. The Supreme Champion is fantastic for those that have the dogs that can achieve this. Two ticks for making the majority happy and keeping people in the ring, after all isn't that another thing people are whinging about.. lack of entries? I am a little disapointed with the rule change for Champion as I think the 25 after 12 months kept the breeds a bit honest and gave it longevity but those are the rules so that is what I will go by.

Lets just stop carrying on complaining about everything in sight, see the positives and stop putting those down that you think are below you on the showing food chain. We are ALL equals, we ALL love our dogs.

[Rebanne]

To me the title of just regular champion says that the dog has been to dog shows... that's it. I know quite a few dogs who honestly shouldn't even be in the ring let alone winning and they are champions.

Judges in this country don't non-award as much as they should and to fix that problem there wither needs to be a crack down on the standards judges have, OR tougher requirements for becoming a champion.

I actually think that having an additional requirements for becoming a champion (such as winning one best in group or one 25 point CC) is a good idea. Yes it will make it harder, but do you really want a title that you can get simply by turning up anyway?

BUT... this is a moot point, it has changed and most likely it will be a few years before we see the system change again.

the dog is being judged against it's standard, that is all. If there is only one dog of the breed entered then the judge has to be happy to sign the certificate. If there are 2 or more entered, then the judge chooses the one closest to the standard, in their opinion, as the winner. It's that simple. Or should be. And like it or not there are plenty of dogs that won't win a BIG for reasons other then not being good enough as well as plenty who do win when they should not. So, no matter what rules abide, not every one will agree on what is a worthy Ch or Gr Ch. I know I am happy with my breed and if that means all their wins will be 6 pointers then so be it. I show the breed I love to live with and would never change to another just to win ( or lose ) against more entries in the ring.

[stone]

makes those happy that find the current rules hard.

So who's whinging?

You miss the point.

Some here believe gaining titles should be harder to obtain than simply being gifted for turning up.

I believe a title gain by a dog being placed before maybe a couple of hundred exhibits at breed level is more worthy of the title than one that hasn't been placed in front any.

You obviously don't agree.

that's your opinion, you are entitled to it.

Edited November 22, 2011 by stone

[GRD]

[

BUT... this is a moot point, it has changed and most likely it will be a few years before we see the system change again.

Next year to be precise (changes to be implemented in 2014)

One of the other things to come out of the ANKC meeting is the formation of a National Conformation Committee, to develop a National set of Conformation Show Rules.

This is the first time there will be a National set of RULES (not regulations)The aim is to remove any differences between the rules and regs in each state so that if you do travel interstate you know the rules will be the same.

The best part however will be the opportunity to totally review all aspects of conformation shows. There is a members consultation process written in to the proposal for this committee, so every member Australia wide will have the opportunity to make a submission on what should be in the rules. I am hoping that notification for submissions will be in the journals and DNA early next year. This will depend on designing a format where no individual can be identified from their submission during the decision making process and the lead in time for the journals.

Whether there will be major changes to the current system is entirely dependant on the submissions received, the more members that participate the more chance for change there will be.

The last time this was tried (Championship points system) there was only 3 submissions Australia wide, not much of a push for change.

Graham

[stone]

A retrograde step IMO. Really disappointing.

The possibility is being a made up "Champions" in 17 shows, grandies in 167 without actually having been placed before another exhibit?

Divided by 2 or 3 shows a week & it really show how ridiculous the situation is.

6 weeks for champ, just over a year for grand without opposition?

Not much credibility there.

Any wonder overseas associations regard our awards with suspicion.

Beating other dogs is irrelevant.

Your dogs are judged against the standard, if the Judge doesn't consider them worthy of Champion/Grand Champion, they will non-award them and they won't get the points.

If dogs that are getting point uncontested shouldn't be getting titles that the issue is with the Judges, not the points system.

Getting there with uncontested six pointers is just as valid as getting there by beating a lot of dogs (and arguably shows a lot more dedication and effort).

I didn't say ''beat other dogs''

"Placed before" is entirely different.

Dogs that haven't been placed before an other entrant don't deserve the title is my opinion, set in stone.

Edit:- one competitor with two entries doesn't count for much either. IMO

Dedication?

Dedication is turning up & competing with expectation, not certainty.

The gentle applause when a judge actually has the balls to non award regular single dog entries tells the story.

Edited November 22, 2011 by stone

[Trisven13]

I didn't say ''beat other dogs''

"Placed before" is entirely different.

Dogs that haven't been placed before an other entrant don't deserve the title is my opinion, set in stone.

Edit:- one competitor with two entries doesn't count for much either. IMO

Dedication?

Dedication is turning up & competing with expectation, not certainty.

The gentle applause when a judge actually has the balls to non award regular single dog entries tells the story.

Genuine question here. IN YOUR OPINION should I then stop showing my dogs until there are more of the breed available to show against? What do you expect those of us with rarer breeds to do? As I have said earlier there are no more than 10 Fauves being exhibited Australia wide and only 30 in total in the country.

[stone]

I didn't say ''beat other dogs''

"Placed before" is entirely different.

Dogs that haven't been placed before an other entrant don't deserve the title is my opinion, set in stone.

Edit:- one competitor with two entries doesn't count for much either. IMO

Dedication?

Dedication is turning up & competing with expectation, not certainty.

The gentle applause when a judge actually has the balls to non award regular single dog entries tells the story.

Genuine question here. IN YOUR OPINION should I then stop showing my dogs until there are more of the breed available to show against? What do you expect those of us with rarer breeds to do? As I have said earlier there are no more than 10 Fauves being exhibited Australia wide and only 30 in total in the country.

if my opinion re tougher criterior for titles was reality it would be up to you if you continued.

It would be interesting to see if people with unpopular breeds actually stuck to it if the titles weren't so easy to gain.

Really interesting.

[conztruct]

A retrograde step IMO. Really disappointing.

The possibility is being a made up "Champions" in 17 shows, grandies in 167 without actually having been placed before another exhibit?

Divided by 2 or 3 shows a week & it really show how ridiculous the situation is.

6 weeks for champ, just over a year for grand without opposition?

Not much credibility there.

Any wonder overseas associations regard our awards with suspicion.

Beating other dogs is irrelevant.

Your dogs are judged against the standard, if the Judge doesn't consider them worthy of Champion/Grand Champion, they will non-award them and they won't get the points.

If dogs that are getting point uncontested shouldn't be getting titles that the issue is with the Judges, not the points system.

Getting there with uncontested six pointers is just as valid as getting there by beating a lot of dogs (and arguably shows a lot more dedication and effort).

I didn't say ''beat other dogs''

"Placed before" is entirely different.

Dogs that haven't been placed before an other entrant don't deserve the title is my opinion, set in stone.

Edit:- one competitor with two entries doesn't count for much either. IMO

Dedication?

Dedication is turning up & competing with expectation, not certainty.

The gentle applause when a judge actually has the balls to non award regular single dog entries tells the story.

I agree with you that more dogs should be non-awarded but that is an issue with the judge.

I don't understand the bolded part - I think this is penalising the exhibitor for the judges decision - if the judge decides the specimen is worthy of challenge points that should be it.

[kosmology]

As a few have mentioned, there is no easy fix to this issue that will please all parties.

I guess the thing for me is that even though I love showing and achieving title requirements (only CHs for me - a Grand is a distant dream at this point - LOL), these titles really don't impact on my perception of a good example of the breed.

There are many dogs in my breed and others that have CHs and Grand titles but I would never consider using them in a breeding program. Would be interested to hear what bearing the title a dog has, has on others breeding decisions? Regardless then, whilst I'm not saying there's no point in showing (because I love it), do the titles really mean anything except for a sense of personal achievement and maybe a good advertising point to create interest in a dog? I know if a dog has a Grand Ch., I'm pretty keen to have a look at it - sometimes I'm really impressed, other times I'm disappointed.

Well said. While titles appear impressive, the quality (incl. temperament) of the animal is what counts. I'm a complete novice to the show arena, which may work in my favour when it comes to perceptions about whether or no a dog is worthy of a particular title. In addition, I'm finding it a challenge to even receive lessons on showing (they are held late at night at some distance from me), let alone compete in the field (most shows seem also to be held in the evenings and at the same venue in Perth, WA). I do, however, consider my pup is very much show quality, and I feel the competitive 'vibe' from other, more experienced, exhibitors who view him. Neither his Dam or Sire currently hold titles.