Worrying Trend In The Show Ring

[Tatelina]

Unless there is no space between the end of the ribs and the hips then it is possible for every dog to have a tucked in waist to some degree. It may be more or less pronounced in different types and breeds

The dog on the left in a show (and retrieving) champion from the 1960's. He has many features previously mentioned:BROAD, DEEP, WIDE, BARREL RIBS, STRONG and also actually looks like an athletic, fit water dog. Like many breeds, I guess the lab is just becoming more extreme in certain areas.

What a good lookin' dog!

[mita]

This dog is more "strongly" built and probably fits the standard better than my female but to me still actually looks athletic and fit.

http://www.dogzonline.com.au/breeds/profile.asp?dog=65594

My dog!!! Until sold to the Australian Government, as I only keep bitches nowadays as I import semen from overseas. I use no Australian studs.

What a beautiful dog. :)

[tdierikx]

I suppose I'm more enamoured of the working line style of Labrador than the stockier style favoured in the showring then... and certainly NOT a fan of the really fat pet ones that I see all over the place either.

Seriously though, who would mistake my girl as anything other than a Labrador - albeit a lean one... *grin*

T.

[WreckitWhippet]

I suppose I'm more enamoured of the working line style of Labrador than the stockier style favoured in the showring then... and certainly NOT a fan of the really fat pet ones that I see all over the place either.

Seriously though, who would mistake my girl as anything other than a Labrador - albeit a lean one... *grin*

T.

People must if they don't believe it's a Lab

[tdierikx]

I suppose I'm more enamoured of the working line style of Labrador than the stockier style favoured in the showring then... and certainly NOT a fan of the really fat pet ones that I see all over the place either.

Seriously though, who would mistake my girl as anything other than a Labrador - albeit a lean one... *grin*

T.

People must if they don't believe it's a Lab

The only ones who've been confused have been "fat Lab" owners... they can't understand why mine's not fat like theirs...

Might be because I don't feed her as much as she wants to eat, and she doesn't get treats all the time either.

A friend of mine has 2 obese Labs - and she is always making a point that they get fed the same amount of kibble each day as my girl gets... problem is that she doesn't seem to count the dentasticks, pig's ears, and bone biscuits she also feeds them EVERY day!

My girl might get lucky to get a pig's ear on her birthday or at Christmas. And I certainly don't share any of MY food with any of my dogs either! I'm immune to that pleading stare... *grin*

T.

[WreckitWhippet]

The 3rd photo is NOT my dog, but a lovely young girl from quite sought after lines...

Most people don't believe that MY girl is a Lab... because she's not FAT... scary! Do people realise how much work goes into keeping a Labrador trim? Mine would eat her own bodyweight in food if I let her... *grin*

I'm not saying my Lab is a good example of the breed standard - but more of an illustration of the LACK of extra weight seen on so many of them - even in the showring (IMHO).

T.

so which is it, the fat Lab owners or most people ?

[tdierikx]

Most people I have met out there in the real world (read not as dog savvy as the average DOLer) seem to be of the mindset that Labradors are supposed to be fat and lazy.

T.

[Cleo's Corgwyn]

You need to find me in Yass this weekend if you're there as I have a cute baby Pembroke who likes cuddles.

How does he/she feel about playing with Whippets? Dodger loves babies!

I'll be there on Sunday.

She likes everything :) I'll see you and Dodger on Sunday!

I'll be there on Sunday with my adorable baby Cardigan Corgi puppy - we could have an adorable play session!

[Salukifan]

I'll be there on Sunday with my adorable baby Cardigan Corgi puppy - we could have an adorable play session!

Lets hope the weather forecast improves and the adorable play session isn't mud wrestling.

[Angeluca]

I'm sorry but any breed of dog that can't walk properly because it has been bred that way (one individual or a showline) should not be bred from anymore or bred to a dog with better hocks to improve and correct. The truth hurts but in my opinion and my opinion only I believe many of the showline dogs here and overseas are in obvious need of correction in the hind legs. I'm glad the dog HW posted won as that shows a recognition of better/correct conformation. But that's only my opinion so don't take it too much to heart.

so what is it about the hocks that needs to improve in your opinion to correct all of these GSD's that can't walk properly ?

First it was their back legs, now it's their hocks.

I don't know I'm not into anatomy. Maybe you should speak to a vet who specialises in GSDs if you're concerned. I have seen enough to know there is a problem but if people choose to ignore the obvious then i can't do anything about it. What i can do is acknowledge that the judges are (in Australia at least) rewarding the correct dogs so hopefully breeders will see this and adjust accordingly. That's all i will say. I'll leave the thread now as with all DOL conversations people have their own opinions and are immovable and I truly appreciate all differing opinions/standpoints and I have stated mine. Enjoy your chat :) Seeya

You're not into anatomy = you really have no idea what you're talking about.

Thankyou for leaving this thread and ceasing to talk/generalise about something you know nothing about.

:)

I think i get what mup is on about. I am seeing a trend of gsds that just don't look right when they walk for example there were 5 at a local obedience rally recently, 1 dog i know personally though the club and 4 others 2 of which were litter mates.

The dog I know personally does well in shows (when he can be bothered) and does really well in his obedience. (apart from a bit of sep anx. that i think the owner has encouraged a little. But the only thing he does is fidgit too much which is a shame.) He has a nice thick look in the shoulder and when watched from the side seems to glide in his walk.

One of the others non litter mates was hard to judge his stride as he was taught to bounce or spring up in his step, I don't think they show but he was a nice looking healthy dog.

Both the litter mates one male one female were 2 years old. the female larger then the male walked with an obvious roll of the back end and a collapse of the hocks inward. when question about this it was stated she had always done it, owner got offended. the male had a what can be described as roll to the hips but not half as severe.

the last dog which had an excessive rounding of the back also walked odd and seemed to drop his hip every time he took a step. This dog i believe was also a show dog.

All these GSDs were of showlines.

the only time i have seen any excessive rolling of the hip is when i have seen HD, I'm not talking loose skin rolls I am talking full body twisting rolls. These dogs are being competed whether in the ring or trial the public are seeing theses examples of breeds.

[sandgrubber]

It took me a while to find this quote but I think it very relevant with all of the discussion about "type" and what people prefer or like.

It's a good reminder for the novice and the seasoned breeder alike.

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

.

There is but one breed standard if you judge by 'conformation'. Some people judge their dogs by something other than conformation, eg, performance, temperament, health, movement. Technically, the breed standard covers temperament and movement, but the ring doesn't provide an great forum for evaluation and these things sometimes get put in the 'too hard basket'. Not to judge the judges. I couldn't evaluate 10+ dogs in 5 minutes, as often happens in the ring. And if I were a blind person relying on a Labrador, I would not care if it has strong retrieving instinct or was a good water dog. I might hope it has a 'poor' coat by breed standards so the dog would have better tolerance of heat ... and shed a little less.

With respect to Labradors, I'm happy there's a great variety. I think it's healthy for the breed. The original purpose of the dog -- landed gentry's fetch dog, or before that 'dog that catches fish that have slipped off an unbarbed hook and is also good for some game hunting, pulling carts, etc.' -- is long gone. I love the breed and am happy to see it move into Guide Dog and drug sniffing work. I can see that some of the traits in the original purpose become irrelevant in the new purposes.

It's the carping that bothers me. I get p.o.'d when someone tries to slander a dog as fat when they have no evidence of fat . . . may just be a well boned, heavyset dog with a thick coat.

[Salukifan]

SG:

. I couldn't evaluate 10+ dogs in 5 minutes, as often happens in the ring.

Not around here it doeesn't. The "standard" judging rate is 40 dogs an hour and many judges take longer.

I won't disagree about conformation showing not testing performance though. The very best it is capable of is assessing potential fitness for purpose. However, as has been discussed, when performance in sporting events can be improved by breeding away from the breed standard, where does that leave the breed?

If I can teach a greyhound to reliably retrieve, would it win a trial? Perhaps, but it certainly wouldn't be a Labrador.

Edited June 11, 2014 by Haredown Whippets

[The Spotted Devil]

HW - just trying to clarify. Are you of the understanding that Labs in the US were CROSSED with Greys?

[Salukifan]

HW - just trying to clarify. Are you of the understanding that Labs in the US were CROSSED with Greys?

I have no idea. Mary Roslin Williams suggests it but who knows?

What I am saying is that if straight line speed is the mark of a good retrieiving trial dog then a greyhound, if taught to reliably retrieve would surely be ideal. But it wouldn't bear more than a passing resemblence to a Labrador.

I've had people explaiin to me how a weak nerved dog can be taught to do Schutzhund reliably. Im sure many of us have seen the JRT perform a Schutzhund test. But it wouldn't make the grade as a police dog. "Sport" is just that - its stylised. As you modify the rules of the sport or what wins in the sport, you modify the ideal type of dog to compete in the sport. But is it truly a reflection of "original purpose" and does it reliably test performance of "original purpose". I accept that in some case its the best test you're going to get but my guess is that people who shoot over their dogs outside of the trialling environment or who actually work their dogs probably raise their eyebrows about what wins as much as the sports folk do about show wins.

Maybe I'm just not happy to accept that everything that's gone wrong with a breed is as a result of conformation showing, especially in this country where we seem less inclined toward extremes of breed type (or at least I hope so). We're not in the habit of changing breed standards to make them different to the country of origin's one as happens in the USA.

Edited June 11, 2014 by Haredown Whippets

[The Spotted Devil]

I'm not going to get into that debate. Vive le difference.

But I think for MRW to imply they were crossed with Greys is a stretch. You only have to look at how all dogs have changed over the last 100 years to understand the effects of selection pressure on conformation and temperament.

[Gottalovealab]

It took me a while to find this quote but I think it very relevant with all of the discussion about "type" and what people prefer or like.

It's a good reminder for the novice and the seasoned breeder alike.

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

.

There is but one breed standard if you judge by 'conformation'. Some people judge their dogs by something other than conformation, eg, performance, temperament, health, movement. Technically, the breed standard covers temperament and movement, but the ring doesn't provide an great forum for evaluation and these things sometimes get put in the 'too hard basket'. Not to judge the judges. I couldn't evaluate 10+ dogs in 5 minutes, as often happens in the ring. And if I were a blind person relying on a Labrador, I would not care if it has strong retrieving instinct or was a good water dog. I might hope it has a 'poor' coat by breed standards so the dog would have better tolerance of heat ... and shed a little less.

With respect to Labradors, I'm happy there's a great variety. I think it's healthy for the breed. The original purpose of the dog -- landed gentry's fetch dog, or before that 'dog that catches fish that have slipped off an unbarbed hook and is also good for some game hunting, pulling carts, etc.' -- is long gone. I love the breed and am happy to see it move into Guide Dog and drug sniffing work. I can see that some of the traits in the original purpose become irrelevant in the new purposes.

It's the carping that bothers me. I get p.o.'d when someone tries to slander a dog as fat when they have no evidence of fat . . . may just be a well boned, heavyset dog with a thick coat.

But this is the thing, regardless of how judges in the ring judge, the breed standard reverts back the original function of the breed. The breed standard may not specifically point out performance, but the way the dog is conformed and thus, the way the breed standard is set out, does. Unfortunately many judges and breeders decide to disregard the standard and go for 'fads'.

It is the responsibility of not just the breeder, but the potential owner as well to understand that. To hope that your Labrador ' has a poor coat by breed standards because I don't want it to shed as much' is silly. Surely you would just go for another breed? It it's true that a blind person wouldn't care, but where the dog comes from ( the breeder) would and that is what keeps the Labrador being a Labrador.

The fact that they are great at drug work and seeing eye and all of those things is because of the gundog traits, again going back the original function of the dog and group itself. They are and were bred to work with the handler.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Gottalovealab

[The Spotted Devil]

But Guide Dogs tend to breed their own Labs - they don't care about the head shape or coat or look of the dog provided they are A) sound and B) can do the job. You don't want a GD that is attracted to birds, chasing and retrieving. The dogs used for drug detection are at the complete opposite end of the spectrum for drive to retrieve.

[mita]

when it comes to discussions of type, I prefer Richard Beauchamp's reasoning which he discusses in his book 'Solving the Mysteries of Breed Type'. In this he discusses that there is only one 'type' which are the basic hallmarks that make a dog instantly recogniseable as a breed. He discussed common denominators, breed character, silhouette, head, movement and coat. He discusses however that within type there are different 'styles' of dog. And style can vary from region to region, kennel to kennel etc. Type or style or strain it is largely semantics, but his way of putting it does make a lot of sense. His book is a great 'workbook' for those wanting to explore breed type in their own (or any) breed.

However, Mary Roslin Williams of Mansergh Labrador fame (and folks interested in the Labrador should really read that book. And if you haven't already, please go listen to her speech in the link posted earlier) wrote about varying types: "The sturdy well coated Manserghs are at their best in rough hilly country, able to clamber and run up and down cliffs and overhanging woods and into and out of punishing covert, bushes, brambles, healther, rocks, bogs and water of every sort. their feet, their build and their coats stood up to it. But when on cold flinty open country, they were at a loss to gallop great distances out over stubbles where the taller, longer legged, more lightly got-up dogs were at a great advantage, being able to see further owing to their height giving them a longer horizon and able to race out over open ground for long distances in a straight line, i.e. a galloping type of dog. For this reason I never when judging penalise a dog for being a different type to mine so long as it is still a Labrador. A longer legged dog suits one country and a shorter another. The same with weight, a strong heavy-boned dog standing up better in my Westmoreland type of country than the lighter boned.....I do feel that even if you may not personally like a certain stamp, that you must remember that there are different ideas for different purposes and that you must be able to recognise the good ones of other makes"

Yep, there is a reason this lady is so revered by so many......

An excellent post. For general principles, I really like the summary you made of Richard B's reasoning. That's a keeper.

[mita]

But Guide Dogs tend to breed their own Labs - they don't care about the head shape or coat or look of the dog provided they are A) sound and B) can do the job. You don't want a GD that is attracted to birds, chasing and retrieving.

So true ... or even being a water bunny. People I know adopted a failed Guide Dog labrador in training (he was too friendly with every dog he met). He had no idea what to do in water. They had to patiently teach him to get his feet wet and to swim. Here he is at 'swimming lessons' (click enlarge):

[Maddy]

I'm not going to get into that debate. Vive le difference.

But I think for MRW to imply they were crossed with Greys is a stretch. You only have to look at how all dogs have changed over the last 100 years to understand the effects of selection pressure on conformation and temperament.

Outcrossing to a breed that is the exact opposite of what you want definitely seems like a stretch to me. Greyhounds are generally terrible (but hilarious) swimmers, they don't cope well with the cold or with sustained activity and teaching them to retrieve is painful. If you wanted longer legs on your labrador, there are more obvious breeds to choose from.

Having alonger legs and a defined tuck doesn't make something a greyhound cross.