Worrying Trend In The Show Ring

[WreckitWhippet]

which breeds ? because so far all we have in a possible example of one lab in another country and that's certainly not indicative of the Australian show scene.

[Leah82]

Leah82:

What we need is a machine the dogs go into to measure their whole body and the one physically closest to the breed standard wins :p

Except it wouldn't measure temperament, check coat type or colour , nor weight minor faults in the balance..

Well the machine doesn't actually exist so you could have it pretend measure whatever you want

[Salukifan]

Leah82:

What we need is a machine the dogs go into to measure their whole body and the one physically closest to the breed standard wins :p

Except it wouldn't measure temperament, check coat type or colour , nor weight minor faults in the balance..

Well the machine doesn't actually exist so you could have it pretend measure whatever you want

The point I was making is that there is more to a breed than its physical shape.

[Leah82]

Leah82:

What we need is a machine the dogs go into to measure their whole body and the one physically closest to the breed standard wins :p

Except it wouldn't measure temperament, check coat type or colour , nor weight minor faults in the balance..

Well the machine doesn't actually exist so you could have it pretend measure whatever you want

The point I was making is that there is more to a breed than its physical shape.

And that's fair enough, I'm not a breeder and don't attend shows so these things don't often come to mind. However to complain about the abilities of a machine that doesn't exist was probably not the best way to make your point.

[OSoSwift]

The reference to a dog carrying more weight - in that example 1kg - was not saying the dogs are fat in the show ring compared to the dog sport ring. They were saying their dogs carry a little more weight in the show ring compared to the dog sport ring. Mine quite often do, although these days I tend to do weekends that I show, and trial at the same time.

My dogs if going to a show only weekend typicaly around 500grams more than if they are at a trialing weekend. If theya re tiralling they carry not a gram more of cover than they need to. This means that often we have 4 or more ribs peaking thorugh, in the show ring I only want one or two. They look slightly smoother with that few hundred grams more on. They are still very fit they just carry a little more. If they were coated I wouldn't bother.

My working dog is very lean he has no extra fat and at times it is hard to get weight on him, but he has very good muscle and could and does run all day working sheep without knocking up. i would not show him at that weight I would put a little more on him as being able to feel the top of hip bones and all his ribs easily is probably not the best for the ring. That is not to say he would be fat.

There are some dogs of different breeds that are fat in the show ring. Different people have different views of what fat is. My view and I find that of most people who do dog sports and those that have very fit athletic dogs is that the leaner dogs are perfect. Many others think it is too skinny.

[OSoSwift]

In the show ring it is obviously easier to see dogs weight when they are not coated. I don't go around sticking my hands on peoples dogs to see what their weight is.

My bigger concern is seeing some show dogs who obviously lack condition and muscle especially when they are from a working breed. However I like my dogs to be in the peak of fitness and not overweight, otehrs may not notice it or find it as concerning.

[Salukifan]

And that's fair enough, I'm not a breeder and don't attend shows so these things don't often come to mind. However to complain about the abilities of a machine that doesn't exist was probably not the best way to make your point.

Maybe you should redress that aspect of your dog knowledge before proposing hypothetical solutions to real issues as they affect show dogs.

Some of us are doing this for real.

Edited June 10, 2014 by Haredown Whippets

[Jed]

Marvellous that the pet owners here know more about specific breeds than some of the most learned judges in the country. ie, labradors, and Westminster. Of course the judge wouldn't know a good labrador. He has probably never seen one.

Read up on the labrador - see what his job was .... and still is in a lot of cases. It was not to canter a couple of meters and drag home a sparrow or two. He needs a great spring of rib, excellent layback of shoulder and hindquarter to do the job he was meant for. He does not need long legs like a greyhound.

I don't think the Westminster dog is particularly fat .... I think if you saw him and had your hands on him, he would prove to have an excellent spring of rib, and good conformation. and a "dense" coat, as required by the standard.

Quotes from the AKC standard of the breed.

The Labrador Retriever is a strongly built, medium-sized, short-coupled, dog possessing a sound, athletic, well-balanced conformation that enables it to function as a retrieving gun dog; the substance and soundness to hunt waterfowl or upland game for long hours under difficult conditions

Above all, a Labrador Retriever must be well balanced, enabling it to move in the show ring or work in the field with little or no effort. The typical Labrador possesses style and quality without over refinement, and substance without lumber or cloddiness. The Labrador is bred primarily as a working gun dog; structure and soundness are of great importance.

Proportion--Short-coupled; length from the point of the shoulder to the point of the rump is equal to or slightly longer than the distance from the withers to the ground. Distance from the elbow to the ground should be equal to one half of the height at the withers. The brisket should extend to the elbows, but not perceptibly deeper. The body must be of sufficient length to permit a straight, free and efficient stride; but the dog should never appear low and long or tall and leggy in outline. Substance--Substance and bone proportionate to the overall dog. Light, "weedy" individuals are definitely incorrect; equally objectionable are cloddy lumbering specimens. Labrador Retrievers shall be shown in working condition well-muscled and without excess fat.

If you get your rulers out, I think the dog pictured would prove to be properly proportioned.

I suppose if you own a weedy labrador, lacking in bone, and in bad condition, you may think this particular Labrador is too fat and too low. Reading the standard shows that he is correct.

Edited June 10, 2014 by Jed

[Brandiandwe]

Question (for information and out of curiosity only): would you expect dogs of different ages to have different coverage? I know someone mentioned up thread that the dog may have been in a veteran's class - so as a dog ages, would you expect weight to be distributed differently (as is happening to me) or for the dog still to be fit, but perhaps heavier? Or a young dog (I'm thinking especially of giant breeds here, I guess, but others too), to be a bit lighter and perhaps a bit leggier or out of proportion as they grow into themselves?

[WreckitWhippet]

Mary Roslin Williams explains in very clear terms what they Labradors function is, why it is required to be constructed as per the breed standard and what happens when individuals or indeed entire kennels deviate from the standard.

It might help some to gain a basic understanding of canine anatomy, read the Labrador standard, look at as many pictures as people can and listen to the Mary Roslin Williams breed lecture, before they pass judgement on the Labrador and what they "think" is correct.

[Leah82]

And that's fair enough, I'm not a breeder and don't attend shows so these things don't often come to mind. However to complain about the abilities of a machine that doesn't exist was probably not the best way to make your point.

Maybe you should redress that aspect of your dog knowledge before proposing hypothetical solutions to real issues as they affect show dogs.

Some of us are doing this for real.

oh FFS I was joking. I'm sure if someone wanted to build such a machine they would get the relevant dog body involved

I sure as hell aren't suggesting I'm about to do it

Interestingly people with the least experience often come up with the most creative solutions - this is the case in many industries. That's not to say each new creative solution will work but if you only look to the people that have spent the most time in an industry you're probably always going to get the same answer which is often 'We've always done it this way'

So before you put down pet owners, consider that by looking from the outside in they may question something you have just accepted for years

[melzawelza]

Marvellous that the pet owners here know more about specific breeds than some of the most learned judges in the country. ie, labradors, and Westminster. Of course the judge wouldn't know a good labrador. He has probably never seen one.

Read up on the labrador - see what his job was .... and still is in a lot of cases. It was not to canter a couple of meters and drag home a sparrow or two. He needs a great spring of rib, excellent layback of shoulder and hindquarter to do the job he was meant for. He does not need long legs like a greyhound.

I don't think the Westminster dog is particularly fat .... I think if you saw him and had your hands on him, he would prove to have an excellent spring of rib, and good conformation. and a "dense" coat, as required by the standard.

Quotes from the AKC standard of the breed.

The Labrador Retriever is a strongly built, medium-sized, short-coupled, dog possessing a sound, athletic, well-balanced conformation that enables it to function as a retrieving gun dog; the substance and soundness to hunt waterfowl or upland game for long hours under difficult conditions

Above all, a Labrador Retriever must be well balanced, enabling it to move in the show ring or work in the field with little or no effort. The typical Labrador possesses style and quality without over refinement, and substance without lumber or cloddiness. The Labrador is bred primarily as a working gun dog; structure and soundness are of great importance.

Proportion--Short-coupled; length from the point of the shoulder to the point of the rump is equal to or slightly longer than the distance from the withers to the ground. Distance from the elbow to the ground should be equal to one half of the height at the withers. The brisket should extend to the elbows, but not perceptibly deeper. The body must be of sufficient length to permit a straight, free and efficient stride; but the dog should never appear low and long or tall and leggy in outline. Substance--Substance and bone proportionate to the overall dog. Light, "weedy" individuals are definitely incorrect; equally objectionable are cloddy lumbering specimens. Labrador Retrievers shall be shown in working condition well-muscled and without excess fat.

If you get your rulers out, I think the dog pictured would prove to be properly proportioned.

I suppose if you own a weedy labrador, lacking in bone, and in bad condition, you may think this particular Labrador is too fat and too low. Reading the standard shows that he is correct.

I wonder why I've never once seen a Labrador that was bred to do it's original function, and that actually does it, look like the Lab in the OP. Could it be that a fat dog wouldn't be much chop working all day?

[Salukifan]

Interestingly people with the least experience often come up with the most creative solutions - this is the case in many industries. That's not to say each new creative solution will work but if you only look to the people that have spent the most time in an industry you're probably always going to get the same answer which is often 'We've always done it this way'

So before you put down pet owners, consider that by looking from the outside in they may question something you have just accepted for years

I never said a thing about pet owners. My comments were directed to you and you alone and based on your response to my comments. Don't wrap yourself in the flag of "all pet owners" to defend yourself. I'm one too you know.

I'm not putting you down. I'm suggesting that an avenue exists for you to augment your knowledge before passing comment on things which, by your own admission, you know nothing about. That avenue is free and available most weekends.

One of the first things you will notice is that people are very passionate about their dogs. What's a joke to you, is deadly serious to others. Its all about context.

I wonder how lean people want to have a working dog that's expected to be in damn cold water to do its job. Indeed, the Cheasapeke Bay Retriever was expected to break ice to retrieve water fowl.

Edited June 10, 2014 by Haredown Whippets

[Jed]

According to the AKC standard, that dog would do it, Melzawela. The labs acknowledged as "top" dogs in Aust look like that too. When you look at that dog, from a conformation point of view, he could go all day - at a trot or slow canter, and do all the fetching and swimming he was asked to do. And pull up at the end of the day - tired but sound.

One of the top lab breeders in this country wins royals and specialty shows with his dogs, and sells pups from show litters to work, and work they do; and win trials.

As Mary R says, a badly conformed dog will do the job IN SPITE OF ITS CONFORMATION.

I think, instead of putting our own interpretation on the standard, we should consider it as it was written, and why it was written as it is.

[WreckitWhippet]

According to the AKC standard, that dog would do it, Melzawela. The labs acknowledged as "top" dogs in Aust look like that too. When you look at that dog, from a conformation point of view, he could go all day - at a trot or slow canter, and do all the fetching and swimming he was asked to do. And pull up at the end of the day - tired but sound.

One of the top lab breeders in this country wins royals and specialty shows with his dogs, and sells pups from show litters to work, and work they do; and win trials.

As Mary R says, a badly conformed dog will do the job IN SPITE OF ITS CONFORMATION.

I think, instead of putting our own interpretation on the standard, we should consider it as it was written, and why it was written as it is.

Yep, she goes on to say it does it on courage and determination alone.

Interesting that people think labs should run all day. They were never intended to run all day, they were bred to heel or follow closely behind the master and to retrieve when sent.

[Leah82]

Interestingly people with the least experience often come up with the most creative solutions - this is the case in many industries. That's not to say each new creative solution will work but if you only look to the people that have spent the most time in an industry you're probably always going to get the same answer which is often 'We've always done it this way'

So before you put down pet owners, consider that by looking from the outside in they may question something you have just accepted for years

I never said a thing about pet owners. My comments were directed to you and you alone and based on your response to my comments. Don't wrap yourself in the flag of "all pet owners" to defend yourself. I'm one too you know.

I'm not putting you down. I'm suggesting that an avenue exists for you to augment your knowledge before passing comment on things which, by your own admission, you know nothing about. That avenue is free and available most weekends.

One of the first things you will notice is that people are very passionate about their dogs. What's a joke to you, is deadly serious to others. Its all about context.

I wonder how lean people want to have a working dog that's expected to be in damn cold water to do its job. Indeed, the Cheasapeke Bay Retriever was expected to break ice to retrieve water fowl.

I was joking about creating a machine to measure dogs against the breed standard and you had an issue because I didn't include colour, temperament and balance.

I don't understand why you need to be deadly serious about something that doesn't exist but if it makes you feel better I will edit my original comment

(and the comment about pet owners was more in response to Jed)

[melzawelza]

According to the AKC standard, that dog would do it, Melzawela.

And yet, the dogs actually doing it don't look like him, or have as much weight on them as him. Interesting.

[LisaCC]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe Labradors (and other retrievers) were bred from St. Johns Water Dogs. The old photos floating around of them definitely don't look weedy, they actually seem quite stocky.

Edited to add picture:

Edited June 10, 2014 by LisaCC

[Salukifan]

I was joking about creating a machine to measure dogs against the breed standard and you had an issue because I didn't include colour, temperament and balance.

My "issue" as you wish to put it was that you didn't seem to have much of a grasp on the contents of breed standards and how they are evaluated. No dog is perfect - how would a machine weigh breed faults and determine which fault was less important than others, even in a working context. God knows human beings struggle enough with all the variables.

But none of this deals with the topic of condition on show dogs. I don't get why some of them are shown as heavy as they are - but I'm not going to tell gundog people how to condition or judge their own breeds. In Whippets we get the other issue from observers outside the fancy - "those dogs are too skinny". God knows how the Saluki and Azawakh folk handle it. Their dogs are usually leaner than Whippets.

Edited June 10, 2014 by Haredown Whippets

[WreckitWhippet]

I copped it from the general public with the Pointers, especially Clarkie who was super fit and very lean.

Get it all the time with the Whippets and had a member of the public refer to my IG as " a poor unfortunate stick creature"