Dog Site - Dog Stuff
Dog Forum | Dog Pictures

Go Back   Chazhound Dog Forum > Dog Discussions and Dog Talk Forums > Dogs - General Dog Chat


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-10-2014, 08:06 PM
krissy krissy is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Central Ontario
Posts: 562
Default Does the dog meet standard?

A bit of a spin off the "is your dog typey?" thread... this is something I've been thinking about for awhile and it seems appropriate given Westminster is on now.

For your particular breed is there something in the show ring that you dislike? I don't want this to get really heated, it's just meant to be some light hearted sharing. I realize it might be difficult to do without pictures, but I think in the name of keeping this from getting heated or offensive that perhaps it is best to avoid... unless perhaps you can use pictures of dogs that are deceased or lines that are no longer active or are your own dogs?

I will preface this by saying that I know virtually nothing about conformation. I showed Kili a few times for fun last year but my opinion is based purely on my own feeling of aesthetics.

I've noticed some show greyhounds (I have basically never seen it among the racing NGA hounds) have these really exaggerated deep chests. This is a deep chested breed, obviously, however I've seen pictures of some dogs where the chest is so deep that it makes the dog look squat (the legs don't look long enough even though they are). Generally these dogs also have a very square/boxy chest and therefore a less exaggerated tuck up (standard says "chest is deep, and as wide as consistent with speed"). I also don't like when the back slopes from the shoulders to the haunches (like a GSD). I like a nice flat back or a bit of an arch (the standard says "well arched" which I don't think we see a lot of).

Anyway, I'm not posting pictures because I know nothing but what pleases my own eye. I'm just curious what others think... especially others that are as uneducated as I am. While watching dog shows what makes you just go "how does that fit in the interpretation of the standard" within your own breed(s).
__________________

Kristie and the Apex Agility Greyhounds:
Summit (BBF Dropout) - Retired from racing, not life
Kili (Lakilanni Where Eagles Fly) - Walking dreamer
Future Puppy - Coming ~2016-2017
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-10-2014, 09:37 PM
*blackrose's Avatar
*blackrose *blackrose is offline
"I'm kupo for kupo nuts!"
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 5,875
Default

Well, I am by NO means an expert. As in, I have no show background, nor have I actually owned a well bred Labrador, but...

I hate the huge swings in the breed. Hate hate hate hate hate. And I'm going to preface to say that the dogs I have in these photos are just random google images and I have NOTHING against any of the dogs. I just...don't see why?

Like, these two dogs are both purebred black Labradors from reputable breeders:



WHY are there such extremes?

This really bothers me, and is one of the reasons I did not end up with a Labrador. I could NOT find a breeder that was producing what I think of as a well put together Labrador (type, titles, and health clearances) that was not clear across the country and I find that incredibly sad. A lot of great dogs, mind you, but...either short and stout show dogs or tall and wispy field dogs. WHY are moderate type dogs not bred for?

One of the clients at work has a pup from one of the Lab breeders I was looking at when I was considering a pup. He's a gorgeous Lab, don't get me wrong...but he is going to be HUGE. Like, Abrams huge, only wider. There is another Lab that I absolutely *drooled* over as a puppy, but he's matured into a dog BIGGER than Abrams, both in height and girth. He's probably over 100 pounds by now and is bigger than some Rotties I've seen. A well put together dog (as in, if he was about 75 pounds he'd be perfect)...but I don't think Labradors need to be in the 90 pound range, either caused by bulk or in height. Labradors are not a *giant* breed. They should not be flying past the 80 pound mark before they're 7 months old.


Like....I think these are good looking dogs:



I suppose I don't understand why that type has gone by the wayside and isn't more popular.

I could also be a fuddy duddy who just doesn't understand what a proper Lab is. But I'm happy being a fuddy duddy.
__________________

Abrams, Momma's boy Chesapeake Bay Retriever and Cynder, Daddy's girl little lab muttly
~*~ DOB 4/11/13 ~*~ DOB 1/28/2006 ~*~


Last edited by *blackrose; 02-10-2014 at 10:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-10-2014, 09:43 PM
AlbertaLab AlbertaLab is offline
Active Pup
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Alberta
Posts: 13
Default

My two labs are not to standard, but that's ok with me. Dio is 110 lbs of muscle but is much taller than the breed allowance. His personality is 100% lab though. I love the narrower muzzles personally, which is why I go for the Field type Labs over Bench.
__________________
Dio- 4 1/2 year old black Labrador Retriever
Kaity- 4 year old chocolate Labrador Retriever mix
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-11-2014, 01:13 AM
Paige's Avatar
Paige Paige is offline
Let it be
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,359
Default

There is nothing I find appealing about a show bred BC.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-11-2014, 01:37 AM
Saeleofu Saeleofu is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,036
Default

I don't like collies with very little white. A collie without white feet just looks...wrong.



I also don't like the weird, weird head shapes of Russian smooth collies. WEIRD.

I'm torn on the houndy coats of smooth collies in areas where smooths can't be bred to roughs. I like that they're tight and probably shed very little, but...the standard calls for an abundance of undercoat, and it makes their shape look strange to not have a ruff at all.

I don't like the roman nose and tiny eyes that are common on so many BYB collies.



For eye see the second picture on the top row. SO MANY collies around here look like that.

Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-11-2014, 06:58 AM
Ozfozz's Avatar
Ozfozz Ozfozz is offline
Higbread Dingbat
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: The Hammer, Ontario
Posts: 768
Default

From what I have read, (I am by no means an expert), yes my boy does meet the written standard. He's within the right height, he's structurally sound, intelligent, alert, etc.



"The Border Collie is, and should remain, a natural and unspoiled true working sheep dog whose conformation is described herein. Honorable scars and broken teeth incurred in the line of duty are acceptable."


But there seems to be massive discrepancies between the written standard and the "show" Border Collies.
Somehow the standard gets read as "Wide face and huge thick coat"
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-11-2014, 11:21 PM
Paviche's Avatar
Paviche Paviche is online now
Duuuuude.
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Aurora, CO
Posts: 939
Default

Honestly, I think a lot of heavily coated breeds are flipping off their standard in favor of flashy winning dogs.

American Cocker:

Quote:
On the head, short and fine; on the body, medium length, with enough undercoating to give protection. The ears, chest, abdomen and legs are well feathered, but not so excessively as to hide the Cocker Spaniel's true lines and movement or affect his appearance and function as a moderately coated sporting dog. The texture is most important. The coat is silky, flat or slightly wavy and of a texture which permits easy care. Excessive coat or curly or cottony textured coat shall be severely penalized. Use of electric clippers on the back coat is not desirable. Trimming to enhance the dog's true lines should be done to appear as natural as possible.


Old English Sheepdog:

Quote:
A strong, compact, square, balanced dog. Taking him all around, he is profusely, but not excessively coated , thickset, muscular and able-bodied. These qualities, combined with his agility, fit him for the demanding tasks required of a shepherd's or drover's dog. Therefore, soundness is of the greatest importance. His bark is loud with a distinctive "pot-casse" ring in it.

(...)

Profuse, but not so excessive as to give the impression of the dog being overly fat, and of a good hard texture; not straight, but shaggy and free from curl. Quality and texture of coat to be considered above mere profuseness.


Bearded Collie:

Quote:
The coat is double with the undercoat soft, furry and close. The outercoat is flat, harsh, strong and shaggy, free from wooliness and curl, although a slight wave is permissible. The coat falls naturally to either side but must never be artificially parted. The length and density of the hair are sufficient to provide a protective coat and to enhance the shape of the dog, but not so profuse as to obscure the natural lines of the body. The dog should be shown as naturally as is consistent with good grooming but the coat must not be trimmed in any way. On the head, the bridge of the nose is sparsely covered with hair which is slightly longer on the sides to cover the lips. From the cheeks, the lower lips and under the chin, the coat increases in length towards the chest, forming the typical beard. An excessively long, silky coat or one which has been trimmed in any way must be severely penalized.


Pekingese:

Quote:
Coat - It is a long, coarse-textured, straight, stand-off outer coat, with thick, soft undercoat. The coat forms a noticeable mane on the neck and shoulder area with the coat on the remainder of the body somewhat shorter in length. A long and profuse coat is desirable providing it does not obscure the shape of the body. Long feathering is found on toes, backs of the thighs and forelegs, with longer fringing on the ears and tail. Presentation - Presentation should accentuate the natural outline of the Pekingese. Any obvious trimming or sculpting of the coat, detracting from its natural appearance, should be severely penalized.


etc, etc.

In Brittanys, there are some dogs that are really waify, like if the wind was strong enough they might get blown away. The standard says this:

Quote:
Substance--Not too light in bone, yet never heavy-boned and cumbersome.
I don't care for this look, although I think it is technically within standard:



I much prefer a dog like this:



Still obviously athletic and agile, but with a little more substance. Personal preference though I guess. I actually tend toward the more strictly field bred dogs aesthetically, but that's definitely personal preference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kady05 View Post
That's because while the standard says natural preferred, they have to be correct natural ears. The vast majority of Amstaffs wouldn't have correct natural ears because breeders don't breed for them since 95% of people crop. Not worth the risk for most people.

That and, a well done crop looks amazing. I'm a little biased though
But shouldn't breeders at least be trying to breed for decent ears, since the standard specifically states that uncropped is preferred? Cropping because ears are crappy seems like a cop out.
__________________

Kendall & the Red Dogs: Rowan & Riff
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-12-2014, 01:03 AM
Saeleofu Saeleofu is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,036
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paviche View Post

But shouldn't breeders at least be trying to breed for decent ears, since the standard specifically states that uncropped is preferred? Cropping because ears are crappy seems like a cop out.

Yes and no. If ears are the only thing wrong in your breed, by all means breed for ears and count yourself lucky. But usually there are more pressing matters. In my breed, most dogs have CEA to some degree. Most dogs are MDR1 mutants. There are also other genetic health issues in the breed, in addition to structure and all that fun stuff. Those, to me, are more important than having perfect naturally tipped ears (and ears are a BIG DEAL in my breed. Most collies, at least in the US, have their ears taped and/or glued at some point, and some people apparently think it's cruel. WTF. Those are the same people who breed houndy-looking ugly-headed European collies, though, too.)
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-12-2014, 12:58 PM
Elrohwen's Avatar
Elrohwen Elrohwen is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posts: 893
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paviche View Post
In Brittanys, there are some dogs that are really waify, like if the wind was strong enough they might get blown away. The standard says this:



I don't care for this look, although I think it is technically within standard:



I much prefer a dog like this:

Totally agree with you on that. I don't like the super racy Brittanies at all. I love the second dog. Some Welshies are too stocky with too much coat for me, and some brittanies are too skinny and racy, but that dog sort of hits the nice mark between both of them.

I looked at Britts before Welshies and if I had seen more dogs like that, I may have ended up with one.
__________________

Watson - Ch. Truepenny Olympic Triumph | Welsh Springer Spaniel | DOB 8.2.12

Last edited by Elrohwen; 02-12-2014 at 01:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-12-2014, 01:30 PM
FG167's Avatar
FG167 FG167 is offline
Top Dog
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Jefferson, GA
Posts: 2,463
Default

GSDs, I am not a fan of ASL (American Show Lines), they do not look like a breed that is going to be able to do the demanding physical things I want...and I don't personally care for the temperament. WGSL (West German Show Line) is the route I would go if I *had* to get a show line dog. Although again, the temperament in general is not what I like.

Working line GSD = love. Kastle is a pretty good representation of a WL dog, and gets very good critiques when I show him against WGSL dogs. Unfortunately, he's a long coat, which many dislike...and he has some other...issues. But, physically looking at him, he's quite nice. Moderate, he's got good secondary sex characteristics, excellent movement. He could be a touch heavier but with his coat, he looks like he is and he may fill out more as he ages.



Real crappy stack but you get the picture...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Paviche View Post
I much prefer a dog like this:

I adore the look of that dog!
__________________
~Falon~
Jentry (GSD) - Limit (Kelpie) - Kastle (GSD) - Eden (Cardi)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:29 AM.


1997-2013 Chazhound Dog Site