|
Home
Member Profiles
Member Brags
Club Info
Events
Shows/Matches
Articles
Rescue
Breed Info
Rainbow Bridge
Links
Newsletters
Any
questions or comments?
Contact us
here!
| |
A View from Both Sides of the Ring
By Wayne Peterson
First printed in Dane Links: reprinted with
permission
I’m on my way to the dog show when suddenly the blur of another van speeds past
my windshield. “You blank, blank maniac” I think to myself. Glancing at the
clock I realize I have under-estimated the time, and need to get moving or I
could miss judging. Like any die-hard exhibitor, I begin flying down the
expressway at 75mph until another van, just cruising along in the left lane,
slows me down and boxes me in. “You blank blank idiot, did you get your license
in your breakfast cereal?” I think to myself. I finely make it to the show and
the judge places my beautiful dog reserve. What could that blank, blank judge be
thinking?
The natural progression from breeder-owner-hander to judge has become yet
another learning experience. The following are just a few of the many insights I
have come to learn.
The barometer we as exhibitors appear to use when evaluating a judge seems to be
our dog’s placement. Just like we evaluate other drivers; the ones that go
faster then us are maniacs, and the ones that are slower are idiots.
There can only be consistency in judging if there is consistency in the entry.
Quality judging only comes from an entry of quality dogs.
You just went winners after the judge moved your dog down and back, or sent the
winners class around the ring. Did you win because your dog was good moving?
Perhaps, or maybe it was just procedural. In the winners class the judge must
move the dog they are going to select to ensure it isn’t lame.
When a judge has the privilege of evaluating quality dogs there are still trade
offs. The beautiful headed dog with great presence and side gait, but could have
a better rear. The big statuesque dog with outstanding color that commands
attention, but the head planes are off and his eye is slightly round. Then there
is the smooth polished dog with a good back, correct eye and beautiful
expression, but a bad front and a bit round in the back-skull. All have
excellence, but all have faults that add up to more then a few flaws. All may
deserve to, but only one can win.
Judges may have classes where they discover two, three, or even four high
quality dogs in the class. Unfortunately, the exhibitors whose dogs place
second, third and fourth usually think the judge doesn’t like their dogs. Or in
a class of mediocrity the winner may mistakenly believe the judge thinks of the
dog as a quality dog.
As much as ones judging focuses on virtues, lack of virtue and faults do come
into play.
It is easy to put up a QUALITY dog that is trained, in good condition, correct
weight, coat, and is groomed and bathed. It is just as frustrating for the
judge, as it is for the exhibitor, if a QUALITY dog’s performance is so poor it
hinders it from winning. A dog that is DIRTY, under or overweight, out of coat,
has sores or calluses, has scars that are more than honorable or very long
un-kept nails will rarely win. The impression the judge is left with is less
than positive, not to mention the residue which maybe left on his or her hands.
You learn who your real friends are. If they chose to show to you and they lose,
and nothing changes, then they are your real friends.
I believe most judges are passionate about their job. Judges want to be proud of
the dogs they select. Within the privacy of their own minds, a good judge
whether they admit it or not, will review, reassesses, and possibly change their
mind about some of their judging decisions.
The exhibitors say the problem with the sport is poor judging, and that the
judges lack education and knowledge of the standard. I hear from judges the
problem with the sport is a lack of quality and general mediocrity within the
breeds. The breeders and exhibitors lack mentors and education. Perhaps there’s
truth on both sides?
Although we are all talking the same language of “dog,” interpretations of the
language seem to extend beyond a different dialect. Some people speak of fronts
referring to legs, pasterns and feet. Then others may be referring to upper arm
and shoulders, yet others are referring to neck-set and or fore-chests. And then
there are some of us that define fronts as the collection of all the prior.
To my ears, the word sound or soundness is the most misused word in dogs. To my
knowledge, it is not in the content of any breed standard. Yet, many people
mistakenly refer to soundness as being synonymous with movement. Buildings and
tables are sound, but they do not move. Webster defines soundness as sturdy,
whole, complete, without defect. We have all seen unremarkable dogs which are
balanced, with a straight front and straight rear that are sound standing. These
dogs may or may not converge on the down and back and almost always lack reach
and drive when viewed from the side.
What if ALL Great Dane breeders, exhibitors and handlers spoke as much of
balance, symmetry and proportions as they do “type”? And then if ALL Great Dane
judges spoke as much of “type” as much as they do balance, symmetry and
proportions? Would there be a positive impact on the quality of the breed and
judging?
I have come to believe the breeder-judges are the guardians of our breed.
I hear about the lack of quality in the judging of our dogs. I then have to
wonder why are the same” bad judges” hired over and over again?
My concluding statement may be of most interest. Yes there is politics in
judging dogs.
Like the candidates on a ballot a judge has no control over which dogs are shown
to him or her, and a judge is thrilled when there’s a good one.
Good luck at the shows, and remember the left lane is for passing.
|
