The AKC Ruins Breeds
- Thread starter Raegan
- Start date
Not that slowly. AKC border collies are not very far removed from performance bred dogs, and already there is a big split in appearance alone. The AKC bred dogs I have met practically looked like poms they had so much poofed up coat.
But again, it's the breeders in your example who are ruining the breed. The breed clubs are the ones that write standards calling for a ton of coat or upright shoulder, and the breed clubs are run by breeders. Not by the registries.
To look at it from another angle, look at all the toy breeds completely ruined by pet breeders and puppy mills. Not only is the conformation totally screwed up, but the temperaments and health is down the toilet as well. Those breeders are motivated by $$ rather than ribbons and trophies, but the result is the same. The dogs suffer as individuals and as a whole breed.
ETA: and those sheltie breeders will find a market if they search for one/create one. It probably won't be among conformation breeders if it doesn't fit the current fads. It might mean creating a separate breed club (which has been done before) or whatever, but there is a market for sporty little herding dogs that can perform outside a show ring.
But again, it's the breeders in your example who are ruining the breed. The breed clubs are the ones that write standards calling for a ton of coat or upright shoulder, and the breed clubs are run by breeders. Not by the registries.
To look at it from another angle, look at all the toy breeds completely ruined by pet breeders and puppy mills. Not only is the conformation totally screwed up, but the temperaments and health is down the toilet as well. Those breeders are motivated by $$ rather than ribbons and trophies, but the result is the same. The dogs suffer as individuals and as a whole breed.
ETA: and those sheltie breeders will find a market if they search for one/create one. It probably won't be among conformation breeders if it doesn't fit the current fads. It might mean creating a separate breed club (which has been done before) or whatever, but there is a market for sporty little herding dogs that can perform outside a show ring.
The AKC happily takes money from BYB and millers.... So IMO they are culpable for that.
You will note I never said that the AKC ruins breeds, but the system does. Confo showing is their prime money maker, so they push confo showing as the end all and be all. When you talk to pet people and they tell you their dog's parents are champions 99% its a confo champion. And the points can be gamed.. its the system as set up by the people who got involved in the AKC.. and you know who those ppl are? Breeders.
The BC split has been happening for longer than I have been involved in dogs. As, IIRC, the average AKC breeder stays at it 5 years, that is more than a few 'generations' of new people coming through.
You will note I never said that the AKC ruins breeds, but the system does. Confo showing is their prime money maker, so they push confo showing as the end all and be all. When you talk to pet people and they tell you their dog's parents are champions 99% its a confo champion. And the points can be gamed.. its the system as set up by the people who got involved in the AKC.. and you know who those ppl are? Breeders.
The BC split has been happening for longer than I have been involved in dogs. As, IIRC, the average AKC breeder stays at it 5 years, that is more than a few 'generations' of new people coming through.
I'm of the general opinion not every breed is for every person and a breed is not an exterior paint job. If a person is set on a GSD and not appropriate for one they need to be screened out as not appropriate for one by the breeder, the breeder should want their puppy back if it does not work out in that home. Working line GSDs can and do make fine housepets, therapy dogs, etc for the right people... just not every person. That does not justify the roached backs, dragging hind ends, and poor temperament exhibited by showline dogs.
Interesting article on this subject. Finding a purebred working dog that is still capable of working as they were intended to is hard. Especially if for example a Belgian Mal does not appeal to you for anything other than their drive. I would love to get involved in ringsport but to find a dog that is not a Mal that will excel in this is hard.
Rosettes to Ruin
Rosettes to Ruin
Toy breeds are as changed by the ring as many working breeds. There are MANY toy breeds that have gotten a lot more extreme. Pretty much all of them really have gotten more extreme to some extent and in some way. Paps are one of the more fortunate imo, you just get the certain lines that have hair draping the floor (literally, they look almost like a maltese coat) and the ears have gotten bigger. Some lines are getting really chi shaped heads with no muzzle (HATE that). Other breeds are worse now incredibly brachycephalic, tons of health problems, non functional coats (I'm not just talking long coats, but just overkill). There are huge splits in a lot of the toys as well between show and then 'pet' type. I don't exactly mean BYB dogs but there's just the fact the show type has gotten much more extreme. The pet bred only type can actually be closer to the original (just talking phenotype). Chihuahuas and pekignese come to mind here. Show chis are getting more and more extreme 'apple' heads, no muzzle, etc. And show pekes are just...
It is tough for me to figure out where I stand to be honest. I love two breeds very much and one is a working breed, the other isn't. There is no 'working standard' for a toy breed to breed for. Border collies are a little bit easier to figure out imo. Of course you should breed for a companion type temperament that meshes with the proper breed temperament. (what defines a pap from a pug is more than just the look, the temperament is very different even though they do the same job). But to some extent you have to take into account looks too in toys and companions. A pap is not a pom partly because it has a single coat, not a double, and it's not a chi because of those distinctive fringed ears.
I like the idea of some sort of certificate for conformation more than the current system. Aka just something saying a dog is sufficiently 'papillon'. Something to do with health, proper temperament, and structure/appearance. I think handing out major prizes and prestige for shows is what is the main problem. There is often (even in papillons) a HUGE difference between the dogs that are showing in the lower classes and then the big name specials campaigning for top rankings and wins. Almost all our specials are imports and most the time they have a ton of coat and are very flashy whereas the class dogs are not so much. You cannot really campaign a dog with so-so ears to be a BISS or BIS winner. However, you can finish them and really are ears going to ruin the breed? No. IT's silly to me you need the really thick, draping fringe like Rose has to really win in the ring. A dog like Summer with less fringe is still imo correct and clearly papillon. If you could stop showing at the class level somehow, it might be more effective and weed out some of the pushing for the extreme.
It is tough for me to figure out where I stand to be honest. I love two breeds very much and one is a working breed, the other isn't. There is no 'working standard' for a toy breed to breed for. Border collies are a little bit easier to figure out imo. Of course you should breed for a companion type temperament that meshes with the proper breed temperament. (what defines a pap from a pug is more than just the look, the temperament is very different even though they do the same job). But to some extent you have to take into account looks too in toys and companions. A pap is not a pom partly because it has a single coat, not a double, and it's not a chi because of those distinctive fringed ears.
I like the idea of some sort of certificate for conformation more than the current system. Aka just something saying a dog is sufficiently 'papillon'. Something to do with health, proper temperament, and structure/appearance. I think handing out major prizes and prestige for shows is what is the main problem. There is often (even in papillons) a HUGE difference between the dogs that are showing in the lower classes and then the big name specials campaigning for top rankings and wins. Almost all our specials are imports and most the time they have a ton of coat and are very flashy whereas the class dogs are not so much. You cannot really campaign a dog with so-so ears to be a BISS or BIS winner. However, you can finish them and really are ears going to ruin the breed? No. IT's silly to me you need the really thick, draping fringe like Rose has to really win in the ring. A dog like Summer with less fringe is still imo correct and clearly papillon. If you could stop showing at the class level somehow, it might be more effective and weed out some of the pushing for the extreme.
I saw a study on BCs that showed that the show BCs and working BCs were as far apart from each other as most breeds are from one another. I think there's a good argument that show BCs are now a completely separate breed.
BCs are a bit different though than the typical show/working split. The BC show standard is totally arbitrary and designed after one specific type of dog (ANKC). I went to a show last year (actually Reliant if anyone is familiar). I went from the agility/flyball rings to the meet the breed for border colllies and it really was like it was another breed. There is really little past the fact most are black and white and irish spotted that is the same. The look is not the first thing I really noticed that was different, it was the movement. Show bred BCs remind me a lot of shelties instead of BCs. The movement was much more upright, the backs a lot shorter, similar to a sheltie to me. That was what stuck out first over the coat and dished faces. The slink, the eye was not there and that is one of my favorite parts about BCs. They were more of generic showy dogs instead, lacking the specialness BCs have to me. So yeah, I will never get a show bred BC honestly. Why? Because they're not what I want at all and they don't appeal to me.
BCs are a bit different though than the typical show/working split. The BC show standard is totally arbitrary and designed after one specific type of dog (ANKC). I went to a show last year (actually Reliant if anyone is familiar). I went from the agility/flyball rings to the meet the breed for border colllies and it really was like it was another breed. There is really little past the fact most are black and white and irish spotted that is the same. The look is not the first thing I really noticed that was different, it was the movement. Show bred BCs remind me a lot of shelties instead of BCs. The movement was much more upright, the backs a lot shorter, similar to a sheltie to me. That was what stuck out first over the coat and dished faces. The slink, the eye was not there and that is one of my favorite parts about BCs. They were more of generic showy dogs instead, lacking the specialness BCs have to me. So yeah, I will never get a show bred BC honestly. Why? Because they're not what I want at all and they don't appeal to me.
My point wasn't that the conformation ring doesn't change dogs. That is a motivator for some people to breed for extremes. My point is it's not the only thing that changes a breed for the worse. Ultimately it's the person who decides to mate Dog A with Bitch B for whatever reason that has that impact on future generations.
And Dekka, where does that figure of only being involved with a breed for 5 years come from? I don't know anybody who's been involved for that little time in conformation that has bred their own litter without mentoring or co-breeding with someone that has decades of experience in the breed behind them.
I don't think the AKC or any registering body should be responsible for regulating whether or not puppymills are registering stock with them. They aren't the police. If a breed club finds out and wants to kick someone's bootay out of their club, that's cool and good for them. If a puppymill is violating USDA (or other country of origin's) standards of care, or being cruel/neglectful towards their dogs, then that's the job of law enforcement. Not the folks keeping pedigree records.
And Dekka, where does that figure of only being involved with a breed for 5 years come from? I don't know anybody who's been involved for that little time in conformation that has bred their own litter without mentoring or co-breeding with someone that has decades of experience in the breed behind them.
I don't think the AKC or any registering body should be responsible for regulating whether or not puppymills are registering stock with them. They aren't the police. If a breed club finds out and wants to kick someone's bootay out of their club, that's cool and good for them. If a puppymill is violating USDA (or other country of origin's) standards of care, or being cruel/neglectful towards their dogs, then that's the job of law enforcement. Not the folks keeping pedigree records.
The thing is that the AKC, is seen (for better or worse) as the pinnacle of dog worthyness by so many people. And they work hard that way.
The AKC promotes a product, the pure bred dog. They test it, award it, and lobby to the public that this product is great. Their tests encourage these problems. Sure people could decide not to play. And yes they bear some responsibility. But so does the AKC (and CKC...) IMO if you are putting your stamp on it, then yes you should be the one doing some quality control. The AKC licences those (not always pure bred) puppy mill dogs. They make a nice profit on them too. You can be outside your breed club and still register AKC, so not sure how the breed club would police that. Or even should, the breed club isn't putting their stamp on the papers... perhaps that is also part of the problem.
The 5 year thing was from a statement of statistics put out by the AKC or with the AKC (I forget which) a few years back.
The AKC promotes a product, the pure bred dog. They test it, award it, and lobby to the public that this product is great. Their tests encourage these problems. Sure people could decide not to play. And yes they bear some responsibility. But so does the AKC (and CKC...) IMO if you are putting your stamp on it, then yes you should be the one doing some quality control. The AKC licences those (not always pure bred) puppy mill dogs. They make a nice profit on them too. You can be outside your breed club and still register AKC, so not sure how the breed club would police that. Or even should, the breed club isn't putting their stamp on the papers... perhaps that is also part of the problem.
The 5 year thing was from a statement of statistics put out by the AKC or with the AKC (I forget which) a few years back.
Show BCs existed prior to them being accepted into AKC. Most of the first show type BCs were imported from New Zealand or Australia, where there apparently was already a split.
I think there are breeds which are going to have to allow for some outcrossing to a different breed to reintroduce normal genes for certain issues. Cavaliers come to mind and if I'm not mistaken, there is a group of breeders in Europe working towards this.
The idea of having a written breed standard is not supported (not at all) by the majority of BC people outside of the AKC world. In fact, ABCA opposes any venue which has a written standard for BCs. BCs are judged only to a working standard and moving away from that will change the breed. In a way you could say ASCA is responsible for the split with Aussies because they determined it was important to have a written standard.
No matter what system you come up with, a split would likely form. This is the system in place for GSDs in Germany and there is a huge split between show and working:
Typical German showline male
Typical German working line male:
I think there are breeds which are going to have to allow for some outcrossing to a different breed to reintroduce normal genes for certain issues. Cavaliers come to mind and if I'm not mistaken, there is a group of breeders in Europe working towards this.
The idea of having a written breed standard is not supported (not at all) by the majority of BC people outside of the AKC world. In fact, ABCA opposes any venue which has a written standard for BCs. BCs are judged only to a working standard and moving away from that will change the breed. In a way you could say ASCA is responsible for the split with Aussies because they determined it was important to have a written standard.
No matter what system you come up with, a split would likely form. This is the system in place for GSDs in Germany and there is a huge split between show and working:
Typical German showline male
Typical German working line male:
Why does it have to be? If you make working a requirement...
The stud dog I bred Dekka too has his bronze medallion, AND has been the US confo champion. (same has his sire) In the JRTs you don't see a huge split. Sure there are people who just enter the open classes, but they can't win the big awards and they often breed to the dogs of people who do
That is not to say JRTs are not with out a lot of variation, there is. Things like heads are not really significant. There are various 'styles' of heads preferred by people, as long as the head looks like a JRT... its a good head. Functional conformation is the key..
The stud dog I bred Dekka too has his bronze medallion, AND has been the US confo champion. (same has his sire) In the JRTs you don't see a huge split. Sure there are people who just enter the open classes, but they can't win the big awards and they often breed to the dogs of people who do
That is not to say JRTs are not with out a lot of variation, there is. Things like heads are not really significant. There are various 'styles' of heads preferred by people, as long as the head looks like a JRT... its a good head. Functional conformation is the key..
The German system for GSDs requires working titles on all dogs and each show has a "character test", yet there is still quite a split between working and show. Many would argue that this system has encouraged a "dumbing down" of SchH and character tests. Many judges won't even consider giving working line dogs, who are more historically correct for the breed the higher conformation ratings. Many will overlook weak nerves in the showline dogs though...
Why does it have to be? Because people are interested in having big winning show dogs I suppose. It seems there is no system that will prevent people from selecting for and rewarding exaggerated characteristics.
Why does it have to be? Because people are interested in having big winning show dogs I suppose. It seems there is no system that will prevent people from selecting for and rewarding exaggerated characteristics.
I mean make real work a requirement, or as close as can be made (ie earth dog tests not enough)
But if to enter a confo show they have to be proving working dogs first... there shouldn't' be a huge split. Sure you could have some strictly working lines, but any confo change that made working difficult (as can be seen in FT, some bench labs and other breeds) would not be able to propagate.
But if to enter a confo show they have to be proving working dogs first... there shouldn't' be a huge split. Sure you could have some strictly working lines, but any confo change that made working difficult (as can be seen in FT, some bench labs and other breeds) would not be able to propagate.
That is what ShcH was always intended to be - a working suitability test for GSDs. It was developed by the founder of GSDs because he realized no all GSDs would be able to be real working dogs. Many working GSD people feel modern SchH has been dumbed down to allow the showline dogs to be more successful. And it certainly has changed. So if that's the case, the "work" is being adapted to the show dogs, not the other way around.
In theory that does logical. However, the split within German GSDs (which are all judged and bred under a system which requires a working title, character test, endurance test, conformation rating and hip test) seems to suggest it doesn't necessarily work that way. The German showline dogs overwhelmingly have roach backs, thick plushy coats (almost always black and red), large bone and increasing rear angulation. It really seems there is no system that will prevent such things.
In theory that does logical. However, the split within German GSDs (which are all judged and bred under a system which requires a working title, character test, endurance test, conformation rating and hip test) seems to suggest it doesn't necessarily work that way. The German showline dogs overwhelmingly have roach backs, thick plushy coats (almost always black and red), large bone and increasing rear angulation. It really seems there is no system that will prevent such things.
So are the judges for these dogs working people, or just confo people? Just how are dogs with roach backs doing the working requirement? Or do roach backs and over angulation not at all a hindrance? In which case shouldn't' be penalized as its merely aesthetics.
I still think if you made the dogs work (ie not dumb down the tests.. that is like saying a JRT who can do earth dog games can can work. ) then you won't have a split, unless its non functional things that are different, like JRT heads.
I still think if you made the dogs work (ie not dumb down the tests.. that is like saying a JRT who can do earth dog games can can work. ) then you won't have a split, unless its non functional things that are different, like JRT heads.
In that case, the AKC is hardly responsible for it happening. That's like someone importing some rad working line GSDs from the Czech Republic, breeding them for a couple of generations, and claiming their amazing working dog breeding program is solely responsible for producing such awesome drive and working ability in those dogs.
I do agree with Dekka about it making more sense to have working requirements for breeding dogs. Also, I strongly prefer the FCI system of judging where they are judged against a standard instead of each other. Plus the written critiques are really nifty. Wirehaired pointing griffons are an AKC recognized breed that does NOT have a working/show split. That is credit is due 100% to the breeders who are, for the most part, excellent stewards of the breed. I also really like that there is both a conformation standard and a working standard for the breed, since griffons have a very specific working style that sets them apart from most other pointing breeds.
I do agree with Dekka about it making more sense to have working requirements for breeding dogs. Also, I strongly prefer the FCI system of judging where they are judged against a standard instead of each other. Plus the written critiques are really nifty. Wirehaired pointing griffons are an AKC recognized breed that does NOT have a working/show split. That is credit is due 100% to the breeders who are, for the most part, excellent stewards of the breed. I also really like that there is both a conformation standard and a working standard for the breed, since griffons have a very specific working style that sets them apart from most other pointing breeds.
This may be beating a dead horse, who knows.
But if there is already a system/registry in place for those who work/breed dogs (the ABCA, for example in Border Collies), why is there a need to show these dogs? In my mind there is still not a good reason to put my sound, health tested, strong working dog in a show. Do you really think having these shows for working dogs would stop farmers and ranchers, even trialers, from breeding there good, healthy working dogs when there dog looses in a show?
This doesn't have anything to do with AKC 'ruining breeds', but since it's being discussed now I thought I'd ask.
But if there is already a system/registry in place for those who work/breed dogs (the ABCA, for example in Border Collies), why is there a need to show these dogs? In my mind there is still not a good reason to put my sound, health tested, strong working dog in a show. Do you really think having these shows for working dogs would stop farmers and ranchers, even trialers, from breeding there good, healthy working dogs when there dog looses in a show?
This doesn't have anything to do with AKC 'ruining breeds', but since it's being discussed now I thought I'd ask.
It has been dumbed down for a number of reasons. one to pass dogs easier. another is to bow to political pressure in Europe, they have a worse animal rights problem there than we do here. It's not even going to be called Schutzhund anymore, it will be called something else without "protection dog" in the name. There used to be a reed stick, now it's padded, the Swiss have gotten rid of the stick hits all together and talk is their taking out in other places too, just to satisfy the masses. Attack out of the blind, gone, wall, gone, a lot don't call it a long bite anymore because it has "bite" in the name. It's not the "courage test" because that sounds like you're testing the dogs courage, and that's mean, now you have what's called a "long grip" and hopefully they don't get rid of that.
They're talking of taking out motion obedience exercises, why? who knows, to make it easier again. all sorts of BS.
the SV, the people, the judges, etc are all to blame.
They water it down to cave to pressure, they water it down so more people can find success, they water it down so their pieces of **** that can't heel 10 feet and face a threat can pass, they water it down for all sorts of reasons, and for as much as they've done, there are people using it as they should and still producing **** fine dogs.
Even with the rules as they are, if used correctly, you can still test the dogs. But people don't. You know how many judges come here and "handlers" from Germany that come here for a show, and go back home with 10 dogs a piece being sent to them for "training" and titles after a show here. One of our own former club members did this. Not because he dog didn't have good training here, she did, but the judge told her the dog would be titled to SchH II in 6 weeks.
She sent her over, and got her back with a SchH II. A dog that had good grips, a decent character and could do some exercises, suddenly couldn't heel, cowered at everything, bite for ****, had no confidence and really had that been the first time I saw that dog, I would have wrote her off as crap. now she was OK. She was showline, but as I like dogs, she was just OK. NOthing more than a club level dog for someone to have fun with. But she came back from Germany with V ratings and a SchH II title. Dog didn't know ****.
What they did to her over there I have no idea. How she got her titles? Don't even ask, because there wasn't a chance in hell that dog could have passed a BH legit when she came back. This isn't an uncommon story. It used to be a much bigger problem. Now there are at least a good handful of showline people that are working their own dogs and trying to make them better. I can respect that. But not long ago, whole litters would be sent over to a friendly judge, titled and sent back to make lots and lots of puppies. Maybe it still is a big problem, I just don't see those people anymore.
But the test itself is still legitimate. But the people doing it have to be honest and good luck with that these days.
I don't see as many roachy dogs bred here, not the ones I usually get to work with. Well, not the ones I get to see do everything I should say. The OB, the tracking, the protection. I have worked a lot of roachy dogs in protection only because all they do is heel a few feet and send them for a bite. I never get to see blind searches or jumps, or a-frames because they "did all that in Germany" and now they just have to 2 bites and leave.
an attack out of the blind used to be a test, now the judges instruct the helpers to run out sideways and present a fat target. Used to be your charged out with sleeve held in close and the stick over the top acting like you were a crazed man and going to kick the hell out of the dog. That was a test, now it's joke. so weak nerves can pass.
and part has been done so more people participate. Not many want to participate if their dog doesn't do well. and I'm ok with easing training and exercises in training to whatever level you need to, so people and dogs have success and fun. It's the main reason I do this stuff, i love it, and I love the people, and mostly the dogs. Sometimes the people are a real pain in the ass.
But when its testing time, trial time, it's gloves off testing. At least it should be. Training to pass an obedience routine? isn't terribly difficult, to do well is pretty hard, but to pass, not that hard. To pass tracking? again not difficult to pass, but hard to do well. Protection always takes time. But to pass all three on the same day is tough, or at least it should be. It's part of the test. Lots of dogs will break down just from the pressure of not getting a reward in OB and then having to go do protection. Their minds are wondering what the eff is going on. One problem with the hurdle, can build in every exercise after. and by the end of the routine, some dogs are off on a "avoidance walk". they can tell their handlers aren't happy, and they want no part of that field anymore.
It's why the most common phrase on trial day is my dog never did that before.
anyway, what's probably lost in all my ranting is that although things are "watered" down from what they were, it can still be very useful for what it was intended. If only the people involved were honest. I have never seen really blatent bullshit at any trial i've ever been a part of, but I have certainly seen the results of dishonest people. Dogs with scorebooks that have SchH III scores, but can't do a straight baited track, can't heel, and certainly can't bite, it still happens today.
I'd love if they got rid of confo placings all together. Completely get rid of them. You show your dogs, the judge can still give them a rating, G, SG, V and that's it. They fit the standard, it's what it should be. Then all the ratings after in their koer reports should be performance ratings under legit trials. Then people can decided on their breedings based on mental make up of dogs that are within a physical standard, rather than some "place winner" VA champ that has a more red coat than the dog that could work all day but wasn't "red" enough to win.
They're talking of taking out motion obedience exercises, why? who knows, to make it easier again. all sorts of BS.
the SV, the people, the judges, etc are all to blame.
They water it down to cave to pressure, they water it down so more people can find success, they water it down so their pieces of **** that can't heel 10 feet and face a threat can pass, they water it down for all sorts of reasons, and for as much as they've done, there are people using it as they should and still producing **** fine dogs.
Even with the rules as they are, if used correctly, you can still test the dogs. But people don't. You know how many judges come here and "handlers" from Germany that come here for a show, and go back home with 10 dogs a piece being sent to them for "training" and titles after a show here. One of our own former club members did this. Not because he dog didn't have good training here, she did, but the judge told her the dog would be titled to SchH II in 6 weeks.
She sent her over, and got her back with a SchH II. A dog that had good grips, a decent character and could do some exercises, suddenly couldn't heel, cowered at everything, bite for ****, had no confidence and really had that been the first time I saw that dog, I would have wrote her off as crap. now she was OK. She was showline, but as I like dogs, she was just OK. NOthing more than a club level dog for someone to have fun with. But she came back from Germany with V ratings and a SchH II title. Dog didn't know ****.
What they did to her over there I have no idea. How she got her titles? Don't even ask, because there wasn't a chance in hell that dog could have passed a BH legit when she came back. This isn't an uncommon story. It used to be a much bigger problem. Now there are at least a good handful of showline people that are working their own dogs and trying to make them better. I can respect that. But not long ago, whole litters would be sent over to a friendly judge, titled and sent back to make lots and lots of puppies. Maybe it still is a big problem, I just don't see those people anymore.
But the test itself is still legitimate. But the people doing it have to be honest and good luck with that these days.
I don't see as many roachy dogs bred here, not the ones I usually get to work with. Well, not the ones I get to see do everything I should say. The OB, the tracking, the protection. I have worked a lot of roachy dogs in protection only because all they do is heel a few feet and send them for a bite. I never get to see blind searches or jumps, or a-frames because they "did all that in Germany" and now they just have to 2 bites and leave.
an attack out of the blind used to be a test, now the judges instruct the helpers to run out sideways and present a fat target. Used to be your charged out with sleeve held in close and the stick over the top acting like you were a crazed man and going to kick the hell out of the dog. That was a test, now it's joke. so weak nerves can pass.
and part has been done so more people participate. Not many want to participate if their dog doesn't do well. and I'm ok with easing training and exercises in training to whatever level you need to, so people and dogs have success and fun. It's the main reason I do this stuff, i love it, and I love the people, and mostly the dogs. Sometimes the people are a real pain in the ass.
But when its testing time, trial time, it's gloves off testing. At least it should be. Training to pass an obedience routine? isn't terribly difficult, to do well is pretty hard, but to pass, not that hard. To pass tracking? again not difficult to pass, but hard to do well. Protection always takes time. But to pass all three on the same day is tough, or at least it should be. It's part of the test. Lots of dogs will break down just from the pressure of not getting a reward in OB and then having to go do protection. Their minds are wondering what the eff is going on. One problem with the hurdle, can build in every exercise after. and by the end of the routine, some dogs are off on a "avoidance walk". they can tell their handlers aren't happy, and they want no part of that field anymore.
It's why the most common phrase on trial day is my dog never did that before.
anyway, what's probably lost in all my ranting is that although things are "watered" down from what they were, it can still be very useful for what it was intended. If only the people involved were honest. I have never seen really blatent bullshit at any trial i've ever been a part of, but I have certainly seen the results of dishonest people. Dogs with scorebooks that have SchH III scores, but can't do a straight baited track, can't heel, and certainly can't bite, it still happens today.
I'd love if they got rid of confo placings all together. Completely get rid of them. You show your dogs, the judge can still give them a rating, G, SG, V and that's it. They fit the standard, it's what it should be. Then all the ratings after in their koer reports should be performance ratings under legit trials. Then people can decided on their breedings based on mental make up of dogs that are within a physical standard, rather than some "place winner" VA champ that has a more red coat than the dog that could work all day but wasn't "red" enough to win.