Showing scandal linked to Yogi

[CorvusCorax]

Well I think everyone knows that I prefer the Sieger to Crufts
And the fact that there is now a British and Irish Sieger and that there will be the first of many WUSV-approved Regional Events in just a few weeks time, organised by the GSDL makes me very, very happy indeed.

My problem with Crufts, and with the majority of breeds shows, is the potential for dogs to succeed despite having health problems, there is no way of looking at the whole dog.
Two of the three GSDs who won the Crufts BIS title were well known for producing epilepsy. That is not the type of animal that should be promoted.

Dogs cannot succeed at the highest level in WUSV events without the required health test results and working qualifications.

(Apologises for sounding like a broken record )

 

[UnaB]

Well I think everyone knows that I prefer the Sieger to Crufts
And the fact that there is now a British and Irish Sieger and that there will be the first of many WUSV-approved Regional Events in just a few weeks time, organised by the GSDL makes me very, very happy indeed.

My problem with Crufts, and with the majority of breeds shows, is the potential for dogs to succeed despite having health problems, there is no way of looking at the whole dog.
Two of the three GSDs who won the Crufts BIS title were well known for producing epilepsy. That is not the type of animal that should be promoted.

Dogs cannot succeed at the highest level in WUSV events without the required health test results and working qualifications.

(Apologises for sounding like a broken record )

But Crufts is a dog SHOW. Many people can and do work their dogs in other areas and the majority of successful show dogs are fully health screened in accordance with KC and breed club guidelines. However, dog showing is judging the dog for conformation and soundness. The judge cant be blamed for putting up a dog that has produced epilepsy as they have no way of knowing that from looking at it, it is the owners responsibility to remove that dog from the breeding programmes and gene pool. Dog showing should (IMO) be a method of selecting dogs suitable for breeding, assuming they are also healthy of course. We have many, many different things we can do with our dogs -field work, obedience, agility etc etc, dog showing is just one and whether people agree with it or not, it is just judging a dog against a breed standard, the responsibility for deciding whether that dog is breeding quality in other areas remains with the owner.

 

[FestiveSpirit]

But Crufts is a dog SHOW. Many people can and do work their dogs in other areas and the majority of successful show dogs are fully health screened in accordance with KC and breed club guidelines. However, dog showing is judging the dog for conformation and soundness. The judge cant be blamed for putting up a dog that has produced epilepsy as they have no way of knowing that from looking at it, it is the owners responsibility to remove that dog from the breeding programmes and gene pool. Dog showing should (IMO) be a method of selecting dogs suitable for breeding, assuming they are also healthy of course. We have many, many different things we can do with our dogs -field work, obedience, agility etc etc, dog showing is just one and whether people agree with it or not, it is just judging a dog against a breed standard, the responsibility for deciding whether that dog is breeding quality in other areas remains with the owner.

Completely agree with UnaB on what she says here Also to me the same principle applies with show horses - they may not operate in the same way as a top eventer or show jumper, but that is not what they have been bred to do

 

[UnaB]

Interesting replies from both of you, and like I say I can completely see the points you are making and I very much agree that those scenarios can occur too - particularly the breed specialist being even more picky about faults etc? Like Una has said, it is interesting to see different perspectives

But then I suppose judging generally is (obviously!) so subjective, I know for example that one judge I know I will not overlook or forgive what I would consider to be fundamentally important things (good movement, good topline, soundness etc) so I suppose that is where I have got my views and opinions from This can mean that 'commercial' success can sometimes be lost of course, due to a refusal to compromise on what that individual deems important? Not saying that this is always right, or that a 'commercially' successful breeder cannot have good examples of the breed BTW!

Thats why its important to try your dogs under a variety of judges before breeding them as some judges are clueless or still living in the 1950's where such importance wasnt always put on the soundness of show dogs!

At a judging seminar i attended for one of my breeds i failed my assessment as i said that a small head was less of a fault than very poor rear movement. I wouldnt back down and agree with the assessor when she kept saying it was a "head" breed (pugs) and that movement wasnt important. I complained to the club the following day, the assessor had ALL of her candidates tests re-evaluated and many that she failed were then passed (i was one) and several that she passed ended up failing.

She is a lady who has been in the breed about 60 years and doesnt see soundness and good movement as important as a big head with bulging eyes (not what the standard asks for anymore anyway!!) and so i wouldnt put my dogs under her as i dont rate her opinion. She has not been asked to assess at subsequent judging seminars btw...lol

 

[CorvusCorax]

Also agree but I just prefer the more inclusive system promoted by the WUSV. Totally agree with the 'horses for courses' aspect, having a too tall, wonky-willied male and a midget female with less front than Kate Moss

Our breed selection tool is Schutzhund, at which one fails miserably and the other will only excel at one element - both staying barren

 

[UnaB]

Completely agree with UnaB on what she says here Also to me the same principle applies with show horses - they may not operate in the same way as a top eventer or show jumper, but that is not what they have been bred to do

Indeed. I tend to think that the show dogs should be able to do the job they were bred for, and mine certainly can, but you cant compare a dog show with a sieger IMO as the dogs dont get a chance to show whether or not they can work, they are judged purely on how they look. Its up to the individual to then decide if they want to work their dogs as well

 

[FestiveSpirit]

Thats why its important to try your dogs under a variety of judges before breeding them as some judges are clueless or still living in the 1950's where such importance wasnt always put on the soundness of show dogs!

At a judging seminar i attended for one of my breeds i failed my assessment as i said that a small head was less of a fault than very poor rear movement. I wouldnt back down and agree with the assessor when she kept saying it was a "head" breed (pugs) and that movement wasnt important. I complained to the club the following day, the assessor had ALL of her candidates tests re-evaluated and many that she failed were then passed (i was one) and several that she passed ended up failing.

She is a lady who has been in the breed about 60 years and doesnt see soundness and good movement as important as a big head with bulging eyes (not what the standard asks for anymore anyway!!) and so i wouldnt put my dogs under her as i dont rate her opinion. She has not been asked to assess at subsequent judging seminars btw...lol

Again that is really interesting because my view would be that it is more modern breed judges who care less about construction/soundness/good movement and more about having a 'glamorous' dog which wows the judge when standing then falls apart (looses topline, doesnt move strongly or correctly) when moved?

Love the example of your pug judge, it just shows how some people completely fail to recognise or accept evolution and change in a breed!

 

[UnaB]

Again that is really interesting because my view would be that it is more modern breed judges who care less about construction/soundness/good movement and more about having a 'glamorous' dog which wows the judge when standing then falls apart (looses topline, doesnt move strongly or correctly) when moved?

Love the example of your pug judge, it just shows how some people completely fail to recognise or accept evolution and change in a breed!

Maybe it depends on the breeds your involved in...? Might explain the differences we have found!

Unfortunately, pugs are a breed that are very popular with the um, "elderly" generations lol And a lot of them see things such as health testing as modern and unnecessary and detrimental to their lines and the "type" they have built up over many years. I am quite vocal (to many peoples annoyance im sure lol) about how health testing and improving the soundness of pugs can only help peoples lines, but many are so set in their ways they wont hear any of..

Bring on the new generation of pug breeders i say, hopefully we will keep the breed safe and healthy for the future