Worrying Trend In The Show Ring

[teekay]

The vast difference you get in shapes. From really stocky and muscly, to a far smaller slighter looking dog.

[huski]

Once upon a time, the gundog reined supreme in the obedience ring. The sport was developed, after all, as a basic test of the obedience of a gundog. They were taught to heel on the left for a reason. Now the sport has evolved beyond them. Do we change the breed to suit the sport? A lighter, more lithe dog would certainly be able to do wrap style heeling better.

HW, don't get me started on this, I have never owned a gundog, always working breeds for me, but I yearn for the days when dogs actually heeled in parallel with their handlers :laugh:

IME gundogs are still quite popular in obedience, but you definitely see a lot of herding breeds competing and winning now. I am sure 'back in the day' you wouldn't see many of the breeds we see competing now!

ETA: I have seen some Goldens with beautiful stylised heel work in obed, Bridget Carlsen from the US springs to mind.

Edited June 10, 2014 by huski

[silentchild]

I just had a look at the website of some working labradors - Philippa Williams and Levenghyl Labradors comes to mind as I always love watching her gundog demonstrations at Crufts, and the working labradors I can see on the websites and in her videos definitely look slighter in build.

I remember the labrador who won BOB at Crufts last year was also a stocky looking fellow - in fact I remember a thread about it here as well, lol.

There is only one breed standard after all - shouldn't all lab breeders endeavour to breed just one "type" of labrador to the breed standard and not have such a clear difference between the slighter working line and the stockier show line?

I know nothing about labradors so genuinely curious.

[Kavik]

This also got me thinking if there are other breeds where there seems to be a large difference between 'show' lines and other lines.

There are LOTS of breeds where there is a large difference between show lines and working lines :laugh: Both of the breeds I own for example - Kelpies and GSDs.

When I was last doing obedience (about 5 or maybe more years ago?) Golden Retrievers, Border Collies and Australian Shepherds were the breeds of choice in the higher classes

[WreckitWhippet]

The vast difference you get in shapes. From really stocky and muscly, to a far smaller slighter looking dog.

They are a combination of Bull and Terrier however they should be muscular, active and agile.

Slight and underdone is just as bad as coarse and unclean, neither are correct.

You will find that the top winning kennels have a great blend of bull and terrier and balanced dogs. The best place to look at SBT's is a Specialty where the balanced cream of the crop usually rises to the top.

[teekay]

This also got me thinking if there are other breeds where there seems to be a large difference between 'show' lines and other lines.

There are LOTS of breeds where there is a large difference between show lines and working lines :laugh: Both of the breeds I own for example - Kelpies and GSDs.

When I was last doing obedience (about 5 or maybe more years ago?) Golden Retrievers, Border Collies and Australian Shepherds were the breeds of choice in the higher classes

But why Kavik, that is what I don't understand? If the breed standard was established to be a 'perfect' example of the the breed then surely they should be the ones who can 'work' well. In the working class obviously.

I just had a look at the website of some working labradors - Philippa Williams and Levenghyl Labradors comes to mind as I always love watching her gundog demonstrations at Crufts, and the working labradors I can see on the websites and in her videos definitely look slighter in build.

I remember the labrador who won BOB at Crufts last year was also a stocky looking fellow - in fact I remember a thread about it here as well, lol.

There is only one breed standard after all - shouldn't all lab breeders endeavour to breed just one "type" of labrador to the breed standard and not have such a clear difference between the slighter working line and the stockier show line?

I know nothing about labradors so genuinely curious.

Yep, that's what I was trying to say, in a long convoluted way :laugh:

Edited June 10, 2014 by teekay

[Salukifan]

But why Kavik, that is what I don't understand? If the breed standard was established to be a 'perfect' example of the the breed then surely they should be the ones who can 'work' well. In the working class obviously.

There are "working dogs" in all Groups but Toys and (arguably) Non Sporting.

Hounds are the oldest "working dogs" of all and I'd argue, probably the least divergent of the breeds between "bench" and "working" although there is some.

Terriers, LGDs, herding breeds predate gundogs. They were bred to "work" though.

Gundogs and your modern "protection" breeds are probably the youngest of breeds in terms of history. This is where many of the greatest differences appear to be IMO.

[WreckitWhippet]

It also depends what you define "work" as.

For the Labrador it was bred to retrieve game in what could be very cold and harsh conditions. Whilst they now perform other roles such as guide dogs and customs and do a great job, they were not originally bred with the intention to do so. To compare the original role and what some of the dogs do now, is like comparing apples and oranges and to state that the heavier, correct boned and coated dogs are not fit for function is grossly unfair.

[LisaCC]

Working breeders sometimes only ever breed just for being a good worker. I've seen this in farm kelpies where yes you may get lines of bloody excellent workers, but the dog is useless after 4-5 years because it's body can't handle it anymore.

[Kavik]

This also got me thinking if there are other breeds where there seems to be a large difference between 'show' lines and other lines.

There are LOTS of breeds where there is a large difference between show lines and working lines :laugh: Both of the breeds I own for example - Kelpies and GSDs.

When I was last doing obedience (about 5 or maybe more years ago?) Golden Retrievers, Border Collies and Australian Shepherds were the breeds of choice in the higher classes

But why Kavik, that is what I don't understand? If the breed standard was established to be a 'perfect' example of the the breed then surely they should be the ones who can 'work' well. In the working class obviously.

I'm not sure why there are differences.

With some breeds, like the GSD, its purpose has changed over time, now working line GSD mostly means protection or protection sport bred, and not sheepwork. No idea if that has also influenced its changing shape in the showring, probably one of the most controversial breeds in the showring.

Working Kelpies still perform their original sheepherding task, and working Kelpies vary quite a bit in build, depending on the type of work that person does, the terrain, type of stock, and preference. I'm not sure why show Kelpies are so different - they are in general shorter and heavier built, with more coat.

[Dogsfevr]

When i competed in agility in the 90's you would see a wide variety of breeds,it was a beautiful site to see all shapes & sizes with there proud owners.

Then the courses started to become crazy & no longer suited all breeds & it saw many people turn away from the sport because it became to dangerous with the sharp turns & all about speed not about a sport for dogs of all shapes & sizes .

People who traditionally used Goldies,GSD & the likes started to buy working BC just to be competitive & all about fast times.

I now here numbers are dropping more & more & its the same faces competing all the time.You still get people competing & working on get passes but the fun where of after awhile.

I attended the fly ball nationals last year & it was awesome to see a sport where all breeds where embraced & appreciated for the effort they put in & alot of them are rescue dogs .

My breeds are highly affected by the show v working debate & the reality is a good dog should do both but like many dog sports extreme times are creating dogs that just aren't the breed anymore like the case of the Iditorod ,

In France the breed club has created there own standard so the judges don't even judge FCI,they consider this correct

[Kavik]

When i competed in agility in the 90's you would see a wide variety of breeds,it was a beautiful site to see all shapes & sizes with there proud owners.

Then the courses started to become crazy & no longer suited all breeds & it saw many people turn away from the sport because it became to dangerous with the sharp turns & all about speed not about a sport for dogs of all shapes & sizes .

People who traditionally used Goldies,GSD & the likes started to buy working BC just to be competitive & all about fast times.

I now here numbers are dropping more & more & its the same faces competing all the time.You still get people competing & working on get passes but the fun where of after awhile.

I attended the fly ball nationals last year & it was awesome to see a sport where all breeds where embraced & appreciated for the effort they put in & alot of them are rescue dogs .

My breeds are highly affected by the show v working debate & the reality is a good dog should do both but like many dog sports extreme times are creating dogs that just aren't the breed anymore like the case of the Iditorod ,

In France the breed club has created there own standard so the judges don't even judge FCI,they consider this correct

Yes agility has changed a lot and is continuing to change! I feel it is getting more complicated and is now a lot more about handling, as we are starting to look at what is happening overseas, particularly in Europe, in terms of course design. Some things have gotten 'easier' eg lower jump heights and more jump heights, lower seesaw height, and now there are separate heights so that the small dogs, medium dogs and large dogs are only competing against their own height, not against all heights. This gives many non-traditional breeds that are small or large a good chance, as they are not competing against the Border Collies.

BCs are the most popular breed at the highest level all over the world. However, there are still a wide range of breeds participating in agility at all levels, and I don't see the numbers dropping where I am.

[RuralPug]

This conversation has been around, in one form or another, since about thirty years after confirmation showing started, and in my humble opinion it is a healthy discussion.

Like it or not, some of the show lines in some breeds today ARE strikingly different from the working lines in the same breeds today.

And many cream of the crop in some breeds today (not necessarily the same breeds) are strikingly different to cream of the crop in the same breeds five or more decades ago. In some of those cases, in my own opinion, the difference is sadly for the worse.

In some breeds (and I don't believe the labrador retriever is one of these cases) where the INTERPRETATION of the standard by breeders and judges over the years has led to over-emphasis on various aspects so that the resulting "cream of the crop type" would actually have horrified the original standard writers. I am not going to point the finger at any breed in particular - there is a sliding scale (plus in some cases limited gene pools have meant harder work for the breeders.) In some instances, the original standard writers didn't bother to write in what horse and hound users assumed was common knowledge of the day and later generations have simply not realised the necessity of the "missing" instructions.

I don't think I could say whether or not the winning dog in the OP is fat - not just looking at the picture. The strong bone and heavy coat are going to contribute more to his shape than in the example of the lighter pet in the same post. Whether the difference is fat or muscle cannot be judged in a photograph. And I would not consider that dog obese, as can easily happen with labradors.

In my own breed, as it happens, exhibits are quite often simply too fat. My breed should not be lean, however a good healthy covering of well toned muscle over the correct body structure and weight of bone should, in my opinion, produce the required shape. Just adding weight with fat, as happens too often in my breed, I do not accept it as correct. Apart from long term health considerations, muscle weighs more than fat and the overall goal for my breed is "multum in parvo" [much in little].

Personally, while I believe that the confirmation of a breed type should reflect original purpose I don't agree that all aspects of temperament for original purpose need to be retained in every breed..

Hypothetical example: I love the tenacity, loyalty and courage of the Ukranian Bear Baiting Dog but because I don't need it to defend me from bears while I lie possibly unconscious in the forest, but I'm still very glad that the showing line now also has bidability so that it can be called off if it thinks someone or something is bearlike.

[pie]

Sorry Showdog I disagree- I have competed in agility in WA for 5 years and have noticed increasing numbers of new people and also higher numbers in heights other than 500 - particularly smaller dogs. There are also quite a few 'old faces' with BCs now getting smaller dogs to compete with. Yes agility is dominated by BCs but so is flyball isn't it? I think BCs dominate dog sports because the types of people that like them/have them also like to do active things.

[teekay]

When i competed in agility in the 90's you would see a wide variety of breeds,it was a beautiful site to see all shapes & sizes with there proud owners.

Then the courses started to become crazy & no longer suited all breeds & it saw many people turn away from the sport because it became to dangerous with the sharp turns & all about speed not about a sport for dogs of all shapes & sizes .

People who traditionally used Goldies,GSD & the likes started to buy working BC just to be competitive & all about fast times.

I now here numbers are dropping more & more & its the same faces competing all the time.You still get people competing & working on get passes but the fun where of after awhile.

I attended the fly ball nationals last year & it was awesome to see a sport where all breeds where embraced & appreciated for the effort they put in & alot of them are rescue dogs .

My breeds are highly affected by the show v working debate & the reality is a good dog should do both but like many dog sports extreme times are creating dogs that just aren't the breed anymore like the case of the Iditorod ,

In France the breed club has created there own standard so the judges don't even judge FCI,they consider this correct

That's a shame about agility. It would have been fun to see so many breeds.

What's FCI? and sorry Showdog, but what is your breed?

[Dogsfevr]

Sorry Showdog I disagree- I have competed in agility in WA for 5 years and have noticed increasing numbers of new people and also higher numbers in heights other than 500 - particularly smaller dogs. There are also quite a few 'old faces' with BCs now getting smaller dogs to compete with. Yes agility is dominated by BCs but so is flyball isn't it? I think BCs dominate dog sports because the types of people that like them/have them also like to do active things.

Flyball no way certainly not in Australia & not the winning teams ,

Yes at Crufts it is ,same breed over & over again ,you just have to read the twitter pages at that time from pet owners saying how disappointed there breed can't compete as they presume its that breed only

Numbers may be increasing again but that isn't always the talk with clubs holding trials & numbers are nothing like they where with the breed varieties .even trials numbers are small ,the club i am on obedience trial numbers where pretty bad until with introduced Rally O last year .

many of the well known obedience people used more traditional breeds for countless years until many switched to working BC

Edited June 10, 2014 by showdog

[Dogsfevr]

What's FCI? and sorry Showdog, but what is your breed?

Not all countries use the same breed standards .

So for example in Australia we use alot of the UK standards other breed FCI which is the European body then you have the US standard

So you in reality world wide one breed could have 3 breed standards that are all different .

International judges when they judge here are to judge by the breed standards Australia uses which could be different to there country & gain pose issues at times .

The dog in the picture is an Irish Setter in France

[pie]

Obedience is a different kettle of fish to agility - I know obedience numbers are in a sad state.

Flyball still has a lot of BCs from a quick search of Australian teams, but I guess the saving grace for the smaller flyball dogs is that it is good to have a smaller height dog on the team.

Getting back to the labrador breed - I have seen some labs ringside at shows that were like jabba the hut - no muscle going on there at all... but I have a question, were these 'traditional labs' required to jump over logs etc or was it mostly flat ground and swimming?

[LisaCC]

Obedience is a different kettle of fish to agility - I know obedience numbers are in a sad state.

Flyball still has a lot of BCs from a quick search of Australian teams, but I guess the saving grace for the smaller flyball dogs is that it is good to have a smaller height dog on the team.

Getting back to the labrador breed - I have seen some labs ringside at shows that were like jabba the hut - no muscle going on there at all... but I have a question, were these 'traditional labs' required to jump over logs etc or was it mostly flat ground and swimming?

I'm not sure about ground covered but originally water retrieving in icy Newfoundland waters. I've seen mentions of them breaking ice to retrieve, like someone previously said about another retriever (was it chesapeakes?)

[Rebanne]

Getting back to the labrador breed - I have seen some labs ringside at shows that were like jabba the hut - no muscle going on there at all... but I

have a question, were these 'traditional labs' required to jump over logs etc or was it mostly flat ground and swimming?

I'm sure you have seen dogs at shows with no muscle tone, they are out there, but it's no one breed. Not every dog is worked to full fitness, and some not at all