Judges Refusing A Challenge...

[angelsun]

I've been non awarded with a Junior male....the judges reasons weren't mine..I too would have non awarded him, as he was naughty that day, didn't move right, squirmed during the exam etc etc....the judge said simply "he's not mature enough"...he was 12 months and a week...duh....

Anyway..I have no issues with being non awarded, but have the right reasons...not an 'opinion' (if that makes sense) I watched a line up for bitch challenge a couple weeks ago....winners in their classes...but put them all in for challenge and to be honest, there wasn't one there that would meet the breed standard if I was in charge of awarding....but challenges were given, and people went off happy....

I had a judge friend once tell me the story of him judging and non awarding due to lack of merit...the exhibitor was NOT happy and stated firmly that 'this dog is a champion'...to which my judge friend said 'not as far as I"m concerned'.

[WreckitWhippet]

Judges really need to start refusing challenges, rather than handing them out like lollies. There are some hideous examples across the breeds that have titles, because judges didn't say no and quite frankly whole line ups in some cases that should be told no.

[Mjosa]

As Isaid in a previous post how some dogs are"petrol Champions" very seldom getting shown were there is competition in their particular breed, then the owners will spend money advertising the fact that their dog is a champion, along comes someone new to the breed, wants to breed a litter having no idea of bloodlines or the dogs that appear in the pedigrees, breeding is a science as far as I am concerned, approaches this person whose dog would not get used in usual circumstances blinded by the fact that he is a Champion and whoops along comes problems.

Refusing CC's is a good thing if the judge on the day deems it not worthy,they are doing a professional favour to the dogs of the future.

Should be more of it.

[armahani]

I don't think our system readily enables judges to refuse a challenge without it coming across as a huge insult. So I can understand them often being reluctant to do so.

I love the European system with gradings for every dog entered (Excellent, Very Good, Good, Sufficient, Disqualified) with definitions for these, and written critiques which help the exhibitor understand why their dog was graded that way on the day. There only those graded Excellent are eligible for challenge. But a dog graded Very Good doesn't mean "terrible" - particularly a young dog - and often not a reason to get upset. It just means exactly that "this is a very good example of its breed, just with something which means it is not quite at that superior level where I would say it is excellent".

Obviously a dog graded Very Good doesn't mean terrible, but it still isn't eligible for the challenge. Yet here, refusing a challenge gets interpreted as a judge saying "this dog is terrible."

It's just a different perspective. We seem to think that any example of its breed as long as it is not "terrible" is challenge worthy. In Europe a dog is not seen as challenge worthy unless they are that extra level above.

I don't know what it is like in other breeds, but I've had a glance at a number of show results for my own breed in its country of origin, and I would say on average only about half of those who enter the ring at most shows get graded excellent. That seems to say that only about 50% of dogs showing are challenge worthy. Here I would speculate that most people assume 100% of the dogs who enter the ring should be challenge worthy.

As I said, a different perspective, but I think the European system (and perhaps showing culture) makes it far easier for dogs to be refused challenges there.

[Dogsfevr]

I don't see the European system any better ,there are dogs awarded titles over there that are far worse than any bad ones here .

It just comes down to the wording is it quality & worthy of a ttitle answer is simple Yes/No

[conztruct]

I don't think our system readily enables judges to refuse a challenge without it coming across as a huge insult. So I can understand them often being reluctant to do so.

I love the European system with gradings for every dog entered (Excellent, Very Good, Good, Sufficient, Disqualified) with definitions for these, and written critiques which help the exhibitor understand why their dog was graded that way on the day. There only those graded Excellent are eligible for challenge. But a dog graded Very Good doesn't mean "terrible" - particularly a young dog - and often not a reason to get upset. It just means exactly that "this is a very good example of its breed, just with something which means it is not quite at that superior level where I would say it is excellent".

Obviously a dog graded Very Good doesn't mean terrible, but it still isn't eligible for the challenge. Yet here, refusing a challenge gets interpreted as a judge saying "this dog is terrible."

It's just a different perspective. We seem to think that any example of its breed as long as it is not "terrible" is challenge worthy. In Europe a dog is not seen as challenge worthy unless they are that extra level above.

I don't know what it is like in other breeds, but I've had a glance at a number of show results for my own breed in its country of origin, and I would say on average only about half of those who enter the ring at most shows get graded excellent. That seems to say that only about 50% of dogs showing are challenge worthy. Here I would speculate that most people assume 100% of the dogs who enter the ring should be challenge worthy.

As I said, a different perspective, but I think the European system (and perhaps showing culture) makes it far easier for dogs to be refused challenges there.

I really can't say whether the European system is better or worse than the one here but I do agree with your point that a challenge refusal in Australia is basically considered that the dog is a very poor specimen of the breed.

The part of the European system you described is the written critiques - I think these have the potential to be very educational and helpful to exhibitors and breeders, and it also places a bit of accountability on the judge as well.

[Sandra777]

The first and most obvious issue with the European system is it requires lots and lots of judges - which means expenses for the clubs go up which means entry fees will go up. Me, I'm happy to enter fewer shows and pay a higher entry fee for a judge with knowledge of my breed but how off putting is this for a newcomer, someone who likes to enter lots of shows (or lots of dogs), our older exhibitors on fixed incomes?

[Bisart Dobes]

I really can't say whether the European system is better or worse than the one here but I do agree with your point that a challenge refusal in Australia is basically considered that the dog is a very poor specimen of the breed. The part of the European system you described is the written critiques - I think these have the potential to be very educational and helpful to exhibitors and breeders, and it also places a bit of accountability on the judge as well.

This is again the opinion of one judge on the day - don't think it means that the dog is a very poor specimen of the breed - it is that dog on the day & that judge. I've had one dog almost refused a class at the Melb Royal because in the judges opinion that dog lacked bone. Yes, he is an elegant dog and the dogs that went up that day were more of Rotty type. But that same dog went onto win BOB & PIG under Int Judge at Sunbury that same year (with a breed entry of 35+ dogs) and won multiple BOB's under Breed Specialists - & multiple class in All Breeds & Specialty shows(& was never refused a challenge). If he'd been non-awarded multiple times then you have to question obviously, I would love to have the critique system it would really show how much or how little the judges know of your breed standard.

[conztruct]

I really can't say whether the European system is better or worse than the one here but I do agree with your point that a challenge refusal in Australia is basically considered that the dog is a very poor specimen of the breed. The part of the European system you described is the written critiques - I think these have the potential to be very educational and helpful to exhibitors and breeders, and it also places a bit of accountability on the judge as well.

This is again the opinion of one judge on the day - don't think it means that the dog is a very poor specimen of the breed - it is that dog on the day & that judge. I've had one dog almost refused a class at the Melb Royal because in the judges opinion that dog lacked bone. Yes, he is an elegant dog and the dogs that went up that day were more of Rotty type. But that same dog went onto win BOB & PIG under Int Judge at Sunbury that same year (with a breed entry of 35+ dogs) and won multiple BOB's under Breed Specialists - & multiple class in All Breeds & Specialty shows(& was never refused a challenge). If he'd been non-awarded multiple times then you have to question obviously, I would love to have the critique system it would really show how much or how little the judges know of your breed standard.

Sorry - I should have clarified further on that - yes, I agree the judges can refuse for any reason and given that they aren't obliged to provide a critique we sometimes don't know (although often the judge may make comment when refusing) but the perception created amongst the exhibitors and any spectators watching when a dog is refused is generally that it's a poor specimen because let's face it, challenges are hardly ever refused even to dogs where it is evident that there are some issues.......fully accept it's the judges decision of what they think is outstanding but looking at what goes through, there are a lot of outstanding dogs.

[cruzzi]

I really can't say whether the European system is better or worse than the one here but I do agree with your point that a challenge refusal in Australia is basically considered that the dog is a very poor specimen of the breed. The part of the European system you described is the written critiques - I think these have the potential to be very educational and helpful to exhibitors and breeders, and it also places a bit of accountability on the judge as well.

This is again the opinion of one judge on the day - don't think it means that the dog is a very poor specimen of the breed - it is that dog on the day & that judge. I've had one dog almost refused a class at the Melb Royal because in the judges opinion that dog lacked bone. Yes, he is an elegant dog and the dogs that went up that day were more of Rotty type. But that same dog went onto win BOB & PIG under Int Judge at Sunbury that same year (with a breed entry of 35+ dogs) and won multiple BOB's under Breed Specialists - & multiple class in All Breeds & Specialty shows(& was never refused a challenge). If he'd been non-awarded multiple times then you have to question obviously, I would love to have the critique system it would really show how much or how little the judges know of your breed standard.

Sorry - I should have clarified further on that - yes, I agree the judges can refuse for any reason and given that they aren't obliged to provide a critique we sometimes don't know (although often the judge may make comment when refusing) but the perception created amongst the exhibitors and any spectators watching when a dog is refused is generally that it's a poor specimen because let's face it, challenges are hardly ever refused even to dogs where it is evident that there are some issues.......fully accept it's the judges decision of what they think is outstanding but looking at what goes through, there are a lot of outstanding dogs.

Basically the judge is saying that, in their opinion, the dog is not of such outstanding merit to worthy of the title " Champion"

While I believe you should be entitled to be told the basis of the opinion, I.M.O. is uncontestable.

[conztruct]

I really can't say whether the European system is better or worse than the one here but I do agree with your point that a challenge refusal in Australia is basically considered that the dog is a very poor specimen of the breed. The part of the European system you described is the written critiques - I think these have the potential to be very educational and helpful to exhibitors and breeders, and it also places a bit of accountability on the judge as well.

This is again the opinion of one judge on the day - don't think it means that the dog is a very poor specimen of the breed - it is that dog on the day & that judge. I've had one dog almost refused a class at the Melb Royal because in the judges opinion that dog lacked bone. Yes, he is an elegant dog and the dogs that went up that day were more of Rotty type. But that same dog went onto win BOB & PIG under Int Judge at Sunbury that same year (with a breed entry of 35+ dogs) and won multiple BOB's under Breed Specialists - & multiple class in All Breeds & Specialty shows(& was never refused a challenge). If he'd been non-awarded multiple times then you have to question obviously, I would love to have the critique system it would really show how much or how little the judges know of your breed standard.

Sorry - I should have clarified further on that - yes, I agree the judges can refuse for any reason and given that they aren't obliged to provide a critique we sometimes don't know (although often the judge may make comment when refusing) but the perception created amongst the exhibitors and any spectators watching when a dog is refused is generally that it's a poor specimen because let's face it, challenges are hardly ever refused even to dogs where it is evident that there are some issues.......fully accept it's the judges decision of what they think is outstanding but looking at what goes through, there are a lot of outstanding dogs.

Basically the judge is saying that, in their opinion, the dog is not of such outstanding merit to worthy of the title " Champion"

While I believe you should be entitled to be told the basis of the opinion, I.M.O. is uncontestable.

Totally agree here - the decision is the decision but yes, some feedback would be helpful - it may help people, especially new and maybe some not so new exhibitors learn.

I had a dog refused once and asked for some feedback after the group had been completed because the judge hadn't said why at the time - the judge immediately told me that it was their perogative to refuse to which I replied, I wasn't questioning their judgement, I just wanted some more information about the reasons why. I didn't really agree with the explanation given but just thanked the judge for the feedback and decided I wouldn't be putting any of my dogs under them again.

It doesn't have to be a confrontation which it so often is. It is an opportunity to obtain some more information and feedback and to make up one's mind of the value of it.

[becks]

I really can't say whether the European system is better or worse than the one here but I do agree with your point that a challenge refusal in Australia is basically considered that the dog is a very poor specimen of the breed. The part of the European system you described is the written critiques - I think these have the potential to be very educational and helpful to exhibitors and breeders, and it also places a bit of accountability on the judge as well.

This is again the opinion of one judge on the day - don't think it means that the dog is a very poor specimen of the breed - it is that dog on the day & that judge. I've had one dog almost refused a class at the Melb Royal because in the judges opinion that dog lacked bone. Yes, he is an elegant dog and the dogs that went up that day were more of Rotty type. But that same dog went onto win BOB & PIG under Int Judge at Sunbury that same year (with a breed entry of 35+ dogs) and won multiple BOB's under Breed Specialists - & multiple class in All Breeds & Specialty shows(& was never refused a challenge). If he'd been non-awarded multiple times then you have to question obviously, I would love to have the critique system it would really show how much or how little the judges know of your breed standard.

get yourself a copy of the Uk dog papers and you will see just how generic lots of judges make their write ups - occasionally you will get the odd comment about where a dog isn't do good but there are generally from FCI judges, over here we seem to be to polite to say more then nice head, nice angles and moved well - nothing to help you guess at what breed you are reading a critique for!

[angelsun]

I don't see the European system any better ,there are dogs awarded titles over there that are far worse than any bad ones here .

It just comes down to the wording is it quality & worthy of a ttitle answer is simple Yes/No

No matter where you show, the same can be true....remember, it's the JUDGES OPINION that is up for discussion when it comes to non awarding....another judge will disagree. Dog shows and judging are subjective and this is why a dog dragged around long enough will find judges to give it points and award in the end a title. Right or wrong, it's how it is.

However, written critiques make for a judge to explain their decisions and not just have gossip ringside with disgruntled exhibitors when they are denied points.

I've participated in European style shows, with the equivalent of CAC's and CACIB's and have a far greater respect overall for the judges that hand them out. Sure there will still be some out there with generic critiques, but I have been fortunate to have dogs judged in the past by many that really know the breed. I have also had quite a few of my dogs in Europe compete and gain very educated comments (along with multiple CACIB's and Best of Breed as well as Group Wins) They saw the faults (as any dog has) but also commented on the strengths. It helps justify the awards, compared to so many shows in North America and here as well, that we get barely a pointed finger or a nod, but hardly ever any constructive communications.

And then there are the judges that think I have a Manchester, or a Dobe.....(in sweeps) not helped by a smart ass ring steward that encourages it when calling me to the ring.