Worrying Trend In The Show Ring

[Diva]

I posted this in another thread, but for those truly interested in an expert view on the labrador - both working and show - get a cup of tea and sit down and listen to these two clips, which are a single lecture given by Mary Roslin Williams in the 1980's.

What a treasure, being able to describe different working styles like that is such a depth of knowledge.

Edited June 9, 2014 by Diva

[WreckitWhippet]

I posted this in another thread, but for those truly interested in an expert view on the labrador - both working and show - get a cup of tea and sit down and listen to these two clips, which are a single lecture given by Mary Roslin Williams in the 1980's.

What a treasure, being able to describe different working styles like that is such a depth of knowledge.

absolutely

Mary Roslin Williams " it must look like a Labrador"

Edited June 9, 2014 by WreckitWhippet

[Rebanne]

Even purebred registered dogs produce puppies that aren't exactly to standard. That's what limited reg and pet homes are for right?

OT but there are plenty of superb dogs on limited and in pet homes. Limited and pet do not automatically mean substandard

[OSoSwift]

I will say I have heard show people who do performance sports say they normally leave an extra kilo on their BCs if they are showing them in the show ring as against just trialling them and you do hear talk of show weight v performance weight. Maybe dogs in proper working condition are seemingly penalized in the show ring otherwise why such a comment.

I hear this all the time from people I teach, both with BC's and other breeds. It drives me nuts!

Why does it drive you nuts?

The fact people do it or the fact people talk about it?

[OSoSwift]

So the yellow bitch gaiting down the bottom is substandard with flat feet and a dippy topline?? okay then..........

I can just about guarentee you will not find a Lab in the field with as much fat as the Lab in the first photo in the OP.

Edited June 9, 2014 by OSoSwift

[RiverStar-Aura]

This is my BYB Lab at around age 4 - in prime condition and just the way I like her to be.

T.

Whilst I understand your lab came from a BYB, Tdx, I feel that her, and even the stunning young one below, aren't good representations of a lab. The bottom girl IMO is too leggy and not solid/broad enough to meet the breed standard as mentioned above and almost appears more Kelpie shaped than the true stockiness of a Lab.

I don't know much about Labs TBH, but the 'leaner', more fine boned lines seem to go against everything I've come to know and understand about the breed. There are two gorgeous Canadian Labs at the dog park I frequent, one choc and the other black, who are stunning representations of the breed. They're both broad and stocky with nicely shaped heads and the male is more solid than the female -- and no they're not overweight!!

[OSoSwift]

There is a vast difference between stocky, broad, well filled out and fat.

[melzawelza]

There is a vast difference between stocky, broad, well filled out and fat.

This.

Also interesting that all the Labs I have seen that actually do the work they were bred for look a lot more like the yellow that Tdeirikx posted than the dog in the OP...

[sandgrubber]

This is hardly a new trend in the US show ring. Look up pictures of Dickendall Arnold (1988-2001), one of the more famous 'peripotent' stud Labradors in US history.

eg. http://www.dickendall.com/arnold.html

Arnold was built like a tank. For my taste he is too heavy, even in younger photos when he was working (he was a great hunter and sired a lot of JH's and MH's). Many US judges favor this look. I owned an Arnold granddaughter. She was a great dog for temperament and I wouldn't trade her. But she was anything but svelte.

It wouldn't surprise me to find a fair amount of Dickendall Arnold on that winning dog's pedigree.

[shapeshifter]

I can't see anything different to what has already happened in the horse world, I'm really not surprised.

The animals will pay the price in the long run.

[Kajirin]

It wouldn't surprise me to find a fair amount of Dickendall Arnold on that winning dog's pedigree.

Had a quick look about 5 references to Dickendall Arnold in the great great grandsire/dam and one in the great great great section [think that's the right terminology].

[dancinbcs]

I will say I have heard show people who do performance sports say they normally leave an extra kilo on their BCs if they are showing them in the show ring as against just trialling them and you do hear talk of show weight v performance weight. Maybe dogs in proper working condition are seemingly penalized in the show ring otherwise why such a comment.

I've never heard this comment in almost 20 years of showing Border Collies. Everyone I know wants their Borders in hard working condition whether it's showing or performance. Our dogs are NEVER penalised for being fit. I don't agree with that comment at all

Totally agree Benshiva. I've never heard anyone say that either in 30 years in the breed. I know plenty of BCs who have been dumped in the showring due to being too fat but never too lean. I have heard judges say that all but one were too fat. Fine if they are but on one occasion the dog put up as being correct weight was drastically underweight to the point the owner was worried about his health and she is known for keeping all her dogs very lean and fit. Personally I prefer my dogs lean but not skinny like some of the performance dogs are. If I am not doing agility I don't need dogs that skinny but to say they need weight on to be shown is totally wrong. I do know of a couple of less well known breeds that tend to be shown too fat and the lean ones stand out.

[Vickie]

I will say I have heard show people who do performance sports say they normally leave an extra kilo on their BCs if they are showing them in the show ring as against just trialling them and you do hear talk of show weight v performance weight. Maybe dogs in proper working condition are seemingly penalized in the show ring otherwise why such a comment.

I hear this all the time from people I teach, both with BC's and other breeds. It drives me nuts!

Why does it drive you nuts?

The fact people do it or the fact people talk about it?

It drives me nuts because I don't see any benefits to an overweight dog.

It drives me nuts because it is rarely just a kilo.

It drives me nuts because coat & fat cannot substitute for substance.

It drives me nuts because working condition is not the same thing as lack of or reduced fat.

Overweight dogs knock up quickly, are prone to injury and are often often have handlers who expect more from them than the dogs condition allows.

Overweight dogs are everywhere...pets, showring, agility, obedience etc.

I've never seen an overweight dog at a sheep trial. They would be knocked up after the cast, so there would be no point trialling them.

In agility, they tend to not get results so things change.

Maybe if overweight dogs did not get results in the showring, their incidence there would be less.

Edited June 9, 2014 by Vickie

[Leah82]

So if this is such a worrying trend why aren't any of you complaining to your state dog body or the ANKC?

registered breeders need to stand up for what they believe is a good example of the breed and fit for purpose.

personally I don't see some of the more heavier and stockier Labs being able to retrieve very well and if the trend continues then surely hip problems are only going to get worse as they are having to support the extra weight.

The GSD in my opinion is a perfect example of a particular trait being promoted to the detriment of the breed. Working GSDs generally have a level top line because the sloping top line causes issues, surely these dogs are not fit for purpose so why are they being bred?

Forgive me if my comments seem ignorant I don't understand why show dogs should look any different to working dogs as the working dogs are the ones that are generally fitter and healthier. What is the purpose in rewarding traits that means the dog is no longer fit for purpose, how is this bettering the breed?

Edited June 9, 2014 by Leah82

[WreckitWhippet]

So if this is such a worrying trend why aren't any of you complaining to your state dog body or the ANKC?

registered breeders need to stand up for what they believe is a good example of the breed and fit for purpose.

personally I don't see some of the more heavier and stockier Labs being able to retrieve very well and if the trend continues then surely hip problems are only going to get worse as they are having to support the extra weight.

The GSD in my opinion is a perfect example of a particular trait being promoted to the detriment of the breed. Working GSDs generally have a level top line because the sloping top line causes issues, surely these dogs are not fit for purpose so why are they being bred?

Forgive me if my comments seem ignorant I don't understand why show dogs should look any different to working dogs as the working dogs are the ones that are generally fitter and healthier. What is the purpose in rewarding traits that means the dog is no longer fit for purpose, how is this bettering the breed?

and what would those issues be ?

[Leah82]

So if this is such a worrying trend why aren't any of you complaining to your state dog body or the ANKC?

registered breeders need to stand up for what they believe is a good example of the breed and fit for purpose.

personally I don't see some of the more heavier and stockier Labs being able to retrieve very well and if the trend continues then surely hip problems are only going to get worse as they are having to support the extra weight.

The GSD in my opinion is a perfect example of a particular trait being promoted to the detriment of the breed. Working GSDs generally have a level top line because the sloping top line causes issues, surely these dogs are not fit for purpose so why are they being bred?

Forgive me if my comments seem ignorant I don't understand why show dogs should look any different to working dogs as the working dogs are the ones that are generally fitter and healthier. What is the purpose in rewarding traits that means the dog is no longer fit for purpose, how is this bettering the breed?

and what would those issues be ?

I don't know exactly, just what I've heard but regardless I don't understand the purpose of the sloping top line if the actual working dogs generally have a level top line.

Edit: I don't want to turn this into a debate on different breed issues, my point is if you have an issue with something then speak up. Judges are only human and therefore have their own preferences and biases which can unconsciously affect who wins on the day.

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

Edited to include balance, colour and temperament into the machine's abilities

Edited June 10, 2014 by Leah82

[Salukifan]

If you ask the GSD folk about what's gone astray (and is being amended) in their breed the answer is NOT the topline.

All GSDs are meant to have a sloping topline. It is over angulation in rear and the manner of stacking that produces that extreme slope.

I agree that some show dogs carry too much weight. . It's pretty hard not to if you observe dogs at shows. It's not a trend, its been that way since I started showing.

I don't think smacking breed fanciers around the head will change anything. The problem is not universal so sweeping generalisations are unhelpful and inaccurate.

And sorry, but some show folk take pride in the condition of their dogs for the show ring. I defy anyone to tell me that this dog is "fat".

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..

Edited June 10, 2014 by Haredown Whippets

[sandgrubber]

It wouldn't surprise me to find a fair amount of Dickendall Arnold on that winning dog's pedigree.

Had a quick look about 5 references to Dickendall Arnold in the great great grandsire/dam and one in the great great great section [think that's the right terminology].

We usually go by generation numbers . . . it's easier.

I got six Arnolds on a five generation pedigree, three at four generations, three at five.

http://www.k9data.com/fivegen.asp?ID=591274

Arnold was a great dog, but I find the line breeding more worrisome than the heavy build.

[WreckitWhippet]

or these, I don't think I've ever shown an over weight dog.

[melzawelza]

WIW & Haredown Whippets - the dogs you've posted are clearly healthy, fit and gorgeous. No one is saying that all show dogs are fat - just that there is a definite and obvious trend, particularly in some breeds, for dogs to be shown and win while overweight, and this is concerning.