Printable View
Sophie said everything I did not have time to say before. I hate how my stepdad is stuborn and won't hear me that it isn't just about the looks. It they were judging the look of the dog then why would the judge feel the dog's cost and bone structure or watch their movement?
I also plan to have horses and compete with my future Dals in Road Dog trials and Coaching Certificate Trials.
Actually they now have a conformation show for altered dogs. They have yet to have conformation for mutts, but I think that would be next to impossible as every mutt is different & there is no breed standard for mixed breeds to match the dog up to.Quote:
Originally posted by IRescue452
That's the people though, the thing I don't like about the shows themselves is there are no equivilent shows for spayed and neutered family pets or mutts. Only Junior handeling and match shows. I'd love to be able to bring Autumn an show her even though she's spayed. I'd expect her to be in a different class though as she isn't being show for breeding purposes.
But mutts can be shown in a lot of other venues, like agility, flyball, disc, obedience etc.. etc...
And like Giselle said "The good news is that there are these contests!!!
They're often run by wealthier shelters, however, so you might have to contact your local shelter and see if you and the group can coordinate something. Generally, they have Whitest Teeth, Cutest Couple, Fastest Tail, Loudest Bark, Golden Seniors, etc. It's greyt fun!"
Actually, I have finally found a way to do conformation with my mutt! 4H! They have you do weird patterns like Bs and triangles and Ps and Ls (which I like) as well as the normal down and back, and they judge only the way the handler deals with and interacts with the dog. They also ask you questions about dogs and caring for dogs. I plan on starting for the 2005- 2006 4H year.
I am not fond of dog shows (Conformation) and try to avoid them at all cost's. I like seeing dogs doing what they were bred to do and not being paraded around a show ring :(.
We have neuter classes in Australia for pedigree dogs, they cannot go for champion titles but can still be shown in their classes.
hm.. my opinion on dog shows is somewhere in the middle of Cali's and Lv4dog's. There are some breeds, like Border Collies (which is why I'm guessing Cali doesnt think ANY dog should be shown), who's main purpose is to be an impeccable working dog. They have not been bred for appearance, except for general size color and type, and they shouldn't be judged solely by appearance for their breedability. If all Border Collie breeders showed and championed their dogs before breeding them, the breed would literally be ruined. Many awesome working BC's that add a ton to their breed wouldn't even be looked at in the show ring ~ because ACK *does* favor BC's with unrealistic poofy coats, short muzzles, large height/weight, heavier bone, and more docile temperament than what is realistic for a working BC. They are basically show Aussies, with tails. I also HATE that ACK condones and even orders that some breeds have their ears cropped and tails docked. All for the sake of appearance.
On the other hand, not ALL dogs are bred to be working dogs with very little attention to appearance. Toy dogs, for example, are bred mostly for appearance (along with temperament + health). Soo, of course they're perfect for conformation shows. For me, seeing dogs running around the show ring (like Border Collies) who have NO place there, who have been bred for 100's of years to work, it is kinda messed up. However, if those dogs were also required to attain working titles before or during the show process, I'd have no problem with it. The general appearance of all breeds should be upheld, but for working dogs, its just stupid to judge their breedability based solely on physical traits ~ its like judging a doctor or dentists credibility by how many beauty pageants he's won. I do know a LOT of awesome breeders in the Cali BC Club who show their dogs often AND work them every day on stock... I have no problem with that, either. As long as the dog is doing what it was bred to do, getting bonus points from showing cant hurt.
I'm rambling on... but I have tons of examples of a breeds ruined by the ACK ~ Labradors, Golden Retrievers, German Shepherds (who have been bred by ACK breeders sooo severely for a sloping topline and angled hocks that there are TONS of puppies coming out of show stock that are literally walking on their hocks and are permenantly disabled!), Australian Shepherds, English Bulldogs.. just to name a few. Show-type Labs are especially different than working Labs. My sister's Dads family bred working Labs forever - and they're completely taken aback by show Labs. Not only are they often twice the weight of a working Lab, their chest is waaay too deep, and their stomaches almost drag on the ground because they've been bred to be so stumpy. This heavy-set type of breeding has definitely contributed to the horrible hips and elbows in the breed (also attributed to lots of BYB-breeding and being so popular). Show Labs simply cannot work, I dont see how they can even swim... they're just way too big and stumpy to be able to run all day, swim all day, etc. That exaggerated chest and fat might keep them warm, but seriously, how can they even swim being so stumpy? :p
Anyway, my general opinion of dog shows is ~ at least they're doing something with their dogs, and as long as they have their hearts in the right place and they are really trying to IMPROVE their breed rather than just go with trends, its fine with me. 99.9% of show dogs have life a LOT better than the millions of dogs in this country that sit in backyards their whole life. Show dogs HAVE to be well-trained and socialized and taken excellent care of, so that makes me happy :). However, when the AKC puts unrealistic standards on breeds just for aesthetic purposes and not for their original purpose - to work- it is wrong in every way. Especially when it's the dogs who end up suffering from poor health (GSDs, Labs, Bulldogs, etc) and/or a complete loss of working/herding/sporting ability.
sorry, I had to quote you :)Quote:
Originally posted by Suki Wingy
It they were judging the look of the dog then why would the judge feel the dog's cost and bone structure or watch their movement?
Actually... yes, conformation shows ARE all about appearance (and structure, but structure is basically within appearance). But, for many breeds, appearance is extremely unimportant and secondary to a LOT of MUCH more important traits. Seriously, let's not try to give dog shows a deeper image ~ because it is basically a beauty show. If it wasn't, why do the handlers spend hours and hours blow-drying, styling, and poofing up a Border Collie that was bred for work, not appearance? I know that the dogs have to conform to a standard, and the dog that fits the standard most wins, blah blah blah. But, that IS judging by looks. How is a conformation judge going to determine the biddability and working instinct of a German Shepherd that is standing stock-still 98% of the time he's in the ring? He can't, even though working instinct IS in the standard. Sooo, he could end up picking a GSD completely void of any herding or working drive as BIS, just because of how he looks. What about Miranda's GSP Heidi? She's an awesome working dog, beautiful, and a great example of her breed. However, when put up against smaller females who potentially (and probably) have NO sporting experience, Heidi could not even place! Simply because her size is not the "trendy" size of GSP females at the moment.. even though she fully conforms to the standard. Anyway, its not fair to say conformation isn't based on looks ~ because it IS!
It's kind of contradictory and quite confusing because working people are arguing (and justly, at that) that many breeds ultimately bred for work and not appearance are being transformed into totally different builds, oftentimes not suitable for their original work. On the other hand, the ONLY objective for conformation is to retain the original build of the breed so that it *can* do its original work. Unfortunately, the two groups have severed and, thus, the extremities arose. I honestly feel that if working people have a problem with the standard, they should appeal to the breed club. After all, it is them who decide the standards and if the two groups work together, they can decide on a proper standard that rules out unfavorable physical attributes. Along the same lines, I feel that it MIGHT be favorable for most working, herding, sporting, and similar breed groups to have less detailed standards. In most breeds where this is true, the distinction between working and conformation dogs is less pronounced. For example, take my breed, the Greyhound. The Greyhound standard is incredibly vague, with each physical attribute covered in a mere two or so sentences. As a result, AKC Greys and NGA greys don't have as many differences as, say, GSDs. The primary differences are almost imperceptible to one who has not studied both types. Generally, this includes the fact that AKC greys having well bent hind legs whereas NGA greys have straighter hindquarters. There are minor differences in head and chest structure, but I figure that's all subjective.
As for conformation shows and appearance, I admit conformation is beginning to turn *more* based on appearance. However, as in Terriers, an over worked coat is going to get you excused from the ring. There are still many breeds in which a natural coat and texture is what the exhibitors aim to achieve. I'll have to get back to this later...Time for the pup's dinner.
couldnt have said it better myself.Quote:
Originally posted by cali
my opinion is that dogs shows should not exist. I am extremly pro working, so when show people say they are "improving" the breed while making them entirly differnt breeds, sometimes even crippling them I just go crazy. they pretty much all end up blocky with huge coats and soft eyes. its destroys the working dogs, there are very few dogs left in the world that can actually do what they were bred to do nd do it the WAY they were bred to do it(beardie did NOT herd by bouncing and barking, they are at one point in time wire coated border collies) so I think its cruel noty to the dogs themselves but to the breeds as a whole.
the only dog shows I like are pit bull shows that are heled by ADBA, AADR, APBTC and a couple others that i cant remember. the dogs are evaluated for their condition and structure, the dogs are never stacked or pranced around the ring. they want to see the dog in it's real form and movement.
Okay, back. I just thought of something. In the same way working people accuse conformation people of showing dogs that could not do their original work....How can you justify that? How can you (general you) look at a BIS GSD and say, No, that's wrong. That dog can't work."
Take, for example, Pepi of Gaia Greyhounds
http://www.gaiagreyhounds.com/Web32pepi.jpg
As a conformation dog, he excelled. As you can see, he has a wonderful, type-y head, well-bent hindlegs, and a deep chest, which, according to the GCA allows for large lungs to accomodate the Greyhound when in full sprint. However, he is the opposite of virtually all NGA greys, and he is the epitome of what an NGA supporter would deem "detrimental" to the breed. But does that mean he couldn't work? Nope. He could. Before his death, he was a Junior Courser and had his first two legs on his Senior Courser.
The same holds true for all breeds. There are plenty of GSD champions who work in Schutzhund. There are plenty of AKC Labs doing fieldwork. Likewise, there are plenty of Cocker Spaniels, Parson Russel Terriers, Border Collies, and Doberman Pinscher champions successfully doing the work that was originally intended, whether it be through AKC sanctioned events like Earthdog and Lure Coursing or non-AKC sanctioned events like NOFCA (field coursing).
You can't say "no thats wrong, that dog can't work" without seeing ANY dog actually working in the sport/activity they're bred for... thats the point! I totally cannot judge any show GSD as unfit to work ~ however, there is NO point in having an insanely exaggerated 45* angle topline and hocks that touch the ground, except for aesthetic reasons! Its not practical in a dog that will be running, herding, working, being knocked over by criminals, etc, every day. I know one of the best GSD breeders in Cali, she imports a lot of her stock and all of them come from at least 75% German or Scandanavian lines because generally American GSD's are useless if you want a real working schutzhund dog. Her dogs need to have solid, proportionate structure to work all day long ~ their backs are pretty much level and their hocks are straight, and they are some of the top Schuzthund dogs in the country.Quote:
Originally posted by Giselle
Okay, back. I just thought of something. In the same way working people accuse conformation people of showing dogs that could not do their original work....How can you justify that? How can you (general you) look at a BIS GSD and say, No, that's wrong. That dog can't work."
I agree with you about breed clubs setting a more vague standard! I think show people tend to obsess over every word in the standard (because they want to win), and therefor exaggerate that as much as possible... the GSD standard calls for a sloped topeline (aka bananaback) and bent hocks ~ so they breed in the most sloped topelines and the most bent hocks possible! ack. the whole thing is crazy. Like I said before, its like selecting a doctor based on how many beauty pageants he's won... you really cant tell IF a dog will work based on how he looks. I think I'm way more annoyed by ACK in general, because Border Collies are bred for working with very, very little attention to looks. Which is why every working BC you see looks unique, two rarely look the same!
^.^ what you said about plenty of show people working their dogs ~ I frickin hope so!!! If they put that much money and energy into showing their dogs to prove their breedability just based on appearance, they'd better prove them in the sport they're bred for.
The two ideas contradict again. In working breeds, work ethics is focused on while aesthetics is ignored. In conformation aesthetics and build is focused on while work ethic is much less important. Therefore, you've got greyt working dogs, but, like you said, they don't look the same. In conformation, that's the opposite of what they strive for. Much of conformation is based on tradition and consistency. I don't feel as strongly as working people feel about this whole thing, but when the situation has gone so far that one group wants the other to cease to exist, imo, it's time for intervention.Quote:
Originally posted by bckrazy
I agree with you about breed clubs setting a more vague standard! I think show people tend to obsess over every word in the standard (because they want to win), and therefor exaggerate that as much as possible... the GSD standard calls for a sloped topeline (aka bananaback) and bent hocks ~ so they breed in the most sloped topelines and the most bent hocks possible! ack. the whole thing is crazy. Like I said before, its like selecting a doctor based on how many beauty pageants he's won... you really cant tell IF a dog will work based on how he looks. I think I'm way more annoyed by ACK in general, because Border Collies are bred for working with very, very little attention to looks. Which is why every working BC you see looks unique, two rarely look the same!
^.^ what you said about plenty of show people working their dogs ~ I frickin hope so!!! If they put that much money and energy into showing their dogs to prove their breedability just based on appearance, they'd better prove them in the sport they're bred for.
And you're right. I'd hope that people only use conformation as one step on the breeding ladder, too, because *that's* the way it is supposed to be. Success in the show ring doesn't immediately prove a dog. Among the obvious, he should pass extensive health tests with flying colors and show appropriate work ethic and have an excellent temperament. Of course, there are some fame-driven exhibitors who dream of the BIS trophy and none other (one prominent kennel in the Sonoma area has produced hundreds of champions, but their dogs have horrible temperaments. In fact, one of their dogs made it to a group placement at Westminster, but they are shunned by many reputable breeders who realize the "standards" they live up to. Although they've had success in the show ring, I would not consider the bulk of their dogs breed-able nor would I deem them reputable). I admit it is them who should be blamed and not the sport as a whole.
At any rate, the two sides have such different views. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree since that's all they've (both sides) been able to accomplish nowadays :rolleyes:
That's why I picked Dals as my breed! They aren't split, yet I have a performance sport to do with them, plus to controvercy with cropping and docking. (But I wouldn't hesitate to tape ears)
i show my siberian husky,Gracie. she loves it. a dog show is a place to prove you have a dog that is what the breed standard says it should look like.
i have heard of some handlers getting so caught up in the sport that they go to extreme measures to win. a lot of the dogshow world is political. sometimes the judge will choose a dog becasue he knows and likes the handler. a good judge wouldn't do that.
do i think dogshows are cruel? not at all! most show dogs are spoiled beyond some pet dogs.