Dogma, there are some really nice threads where people have given very good posts about why the AKC show lines have become what they are. Look for them on the American show shepherd and working line shepherd and german line show shepherd topics.

Sable, that dog you pointed out earlier is a German show import, not an American line animal. No comparison because the SV requires SchH or HGH titles to breed. The German show lines still have an flicker of fire left in them.

Thanks. I'll go look.

I think we could go round and round about this forever. Richard, I agree with your ideaology, unfortunately, this is not a perfect world. Your point is for working folks to enter AKC shows so the walls can start to broken down.

We didn't put the walls up, they did. They are the ones that are more interested in beatiful dogs that have no nerve. I like to see a good looking dog as much as the next person. So, my answer would be to participate in other conformation rings that still recocgnize working ability as well as conformation. Like seiger or ARC, not AKC.

I also feel that from your example of the field trial that you would like to see CH dogs introduced into field trial lines.

Well, I agree that some of the top retrievers in the business do look pretty weird sometimes. So, I guess I would keep an open mind about that. As long as the CH that was introduced was still a dual purpose dog. Had some hunting or field titles and some CH, nothing wrong with that. But, I think you would agree field trial labs don't require the nerve and courage that a top schuthund competitor does?

After all is said and done we all love dogs and that is all that matters.

Joe,

In reality it wasn't the show people that put up the walls it was the working people. There is no way that our dogs can be excluded from the Conformation ring under the rules. As a result it was us that stopped entering.

In reality there is much more support for our position amongst the conformation people than you would think. Several claubs attempted to make a TT required for some show, bucking the AKC on the issue. The reason it was dropped is the dogs couldn't pass the tests. What most of the National Breed Clubs are finding is that there is a real tendancy to move back towards the working chacteristics. A big portion of the reason for this is that the temperament is as important to the breed as is the confomation.

Ok, allow me to get on my soap box for a minute. Dog shows are way too much like figure skating, and we all know (though I could care less about figure skating)what a joke the judges are. In fact, I would say dog shows are even more subjective than skating, at least the humans make mistakes.

Start with the basic premise that in order to compete in a dog show the dog cannot have any faults. Then you say, which dog is closest to the breed standard and most closely fits what the dog was originally bred to do. If all the dogs are perfect, according to their individual standard, the purpose of the dog show is to find which dog is the "Most Perfect."

The director of this beauty contest, is human. I know that there is some magic lab coat that a judge puts on that frees him from his personal biases. But, at this moment I am the sum total of my experiences up to this point in my life, as is everyone else in the world. How can one person reasonably pick from what are supposedly perfect dogs, which dog is the most perfect. The whole concept/premise is silly. Lets face it some people simply like blondes, some like red heads, and some brunettes. Put 3 women side by side same height, weight, and ability our biases take over. We simly choose the one we like. Dog show judges are in the same position. There is no accounting for taste all the dogs in the ring are "perfect." The only thing that sets one dog apart from another is personal preference.

Im not against confirmation, I think it has its place. I'll use a basketball analogy here, I happen to be a fan of Charles Barkley. Charles Barkley was said to be too short, and too fat to be a power forward in the NBA. All the guy did was play as well as any body who had come before him. Love him or hate him he was one of the best ever. I feel the same way about my dogs. Pretty is as pretty does, which is absolutely nothing. You can have your pretty dogs that do nothing, ill take the ugly duckling who happilly does his job any day.

Princelydeeds,

Are you suggesting that there is no subjectiveness in perfomance trials? At the top levels it will come down to a judges subjective evaluation of the dogs performance. The only difference is that you have more control over the dogs performance. If you would like to compare to figure skating, the analogy would be closer to performance trials. Conformation would be more like a beauty contest. With conformation showing often the winner is determined by the dogs performance in the ring. That is trained just like doing an obedience routine.

You can make any excuse you want, it comes down to the fact that conformation is as important as training in a performance dog. I have watched so many dogs come up lame while working in training for lack of proper conformation. The argument becomes circular, and people on both sides make argument after argument why either conformation or working training isn't important. If that is the case then why is there a breed standard at all? The breed standards refelect the proper confomation for the breed so it can do the job it was intended to do. If you ignore the standard why not just select mutts to do the work? Most of the problems in working breeds are a result of ignoring the proper conformation in the breed. Which can be ignored based on the fact that the dogs work in short bursts rather than working for long periods.

So make any excuse you want. If the dog lacks the proper conformation it is no more a good representative of the breed than a dog with perfect conformation and no ability to work. Ignoring either conformation or working ability (or both) creates the situation that exists today. Some people have recognized this and made efforts to remedy the situation in their breeds. I talked with someone over the weekend that is in German Wirehaired Pointers. They had the same problem and both sides worked together to unify the working and conformation aspects of the breed. Now the breed is unified again and conformation dogs will hunt and hunting dogs have sound conformation and most of the dogs can do both. It is a fixable situation as long as people will stop making excuses and start working towards a complete dog.

Richard,I fully agree that conformation is important in the working dog for the reasons you stated but it is the standards that have changed,in the UK the conformation GSD has so much slope at the rear that they are suffering all sorts of hip problems etc.
Conformation as you state is fine but the kennel clubs are altering the real conformation to suit what sells,the UK GSD until the seventies was a strong agile and healthy dog,now they are few and far between.
Paul

Paul,

The GSD has become a special case, and a lesson to the rest of us. If you look I think you will find that the standard hasn't changed. The application of the standard has changed. The judges judge based on education they recieve from the breed clubs. If the breed clubs are dominated by the people that want a different breed than what the breed should be, that is what you will get. If we don't participate in those decisions then our views will not be represented.

For the breeds other than the GSD there is no reason that the judges could not be educated as to what the breed should be. If we want to maintain the breeds we need to participate in the decisions being made about them. We need to participate in the conformation shows as well as the performance trials. More breeds can get away from us, we need to work to insure that it doesn't happen.

Richard great responces in this thread.

The GSD is indeed an exception where the confirmation standard as applied in the show ring no longer allows for the function the dog is meant to do. This is incredibly sad and should show those of us within other breeds what can happen when a deversity is placed between the form and structure of a dog and the function or role that the dog must fulfill.

However within this thread the Rottweiler is definatly a breed where form and function should be one in the same. The reality is that there seems to be differences forming between those dogs that are for working applications and those that are bred for shwing alone. This is due to ignorance on both sides of the spectrum, from people that truly do not understand the importance of the other. The fact is that for the dog to do the role it should have the soundness of movement and correct structure to perform such a role as well as the temperament and character that enables it to perform in such a role.

Whilst cosmetic differences are important in the show ring which do not apply to the dogs overall performance without question what is truly important and under the greatest watch from any judge that truly knows the breed is the soundness of the dog.

For me any dog that is too be bred from should first undergo both a working test as well as a confirmation appraisal by a true independant expert. Working ability and confirmation are indeed on in the same. Allowing either to be watered down will only weaken the overall quality of the breed. If we are to seek to keep true strength within any breed weather this be work or confirmation we must seek to hold true to the original function this is was bred to achieve.

It is no more correct to believe that the temperament of the dog should be changed than the confirmation standard. Both are equally important to creating a overall dog.

Mick.

Mick, both working ability and confirmation are important, but not 50/50. Working ability and temperament are much more important. Same goes for any of you other jokers who think the same. I think it is important for a dog to conform to it's breed standard, but judging beyond that point in confirmation, to me, is worthless. I want dogs with good confirmation, but it will never be something that I look at more than working ability. As long as the animal conforms to the standard, without any major faults, I am a happy camper. Breeders should keep confirmation in mind when breeding to ensure that the animals are representative of their breeds, but never as the main consideration in breeding. I think that is the real reason our breeds have gone down the toilet here in the US.

In my ideal world there would be a test for confirmation, pass or fail, and then a very strict group of selection tests for working ability. I don't like confirmation contests, they are stupid. I would only like to see contests in working ability for the utility breeds. These dogs were not meant to be pretty. Confirmation in type yes, any judging beyond that point -F- NO.

Get that guys, confirmation as a breeding goal is stupid. Breed for work, but make sure that your animals conform to the standard. That's it.

Now, when talking about standards that's another war. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />