British And American Whippets

[beaker]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

so many good points and questions being raised :thumbsup:

do we not test because it is generally assumed that there is no problem?

 

[seaspot_run]

FWIW, I do think that the UK has better underlines on average than the US. Underline is valued more in judging in the UK, clearly. I can't recall many critiques from over here where the judge said they made their final choice on underline and shape of middlepiece. It's usually all about side gait over here. You can have great underlines, but if the dogs don't move really well, you don't get a lot of love at the bigger shows for it. OTOH, a lot of judges do emphasize how well the dog carries their topline on the move. Judges are looking at topline much more than underline, so some of our underlines are lacking in depth and tuck-up, IMO, including on some of our top winners.

I also think that the UK has more of a consensus on what a correct topline should look like than the US. They're judged on topline here, but there's not a lot of consensus on what an ideal topline really is.

As for fronts, I feel the US is unfairly condemned for them quite often in comments I both read and hear. I'm not aiming this at any particular poster or post.

So, as a general comment regarding fronts, I think that front problems are common in Whippets everywhere. It is very hard to hang a show ring trotting front end assembly on a deep and narrow ribcage. This is a challenge for all breeders of sighthounds and Whippets in particular. Of course, I have seen a lot more US fronts than UK fronts, but I do look at photos of the winners and our top winners tend to have good fronts and sometimes those who fill out the rest of the entry are lacking there, and I see the same thing in the photos of the UK lineups--that there are some faulty front assemblies in the entry, but that most of the more consistent winners are good in front.

Although front faults are common in both UK and US dogs but the nature of those faults is somewhat different, which is probably why the various country's lines cross and complement each other so well. I also think that our style of stacking which is designed to show off more neck gives the appearance of a straighter front and a dog who is more up on its toes. However, upright pasterns are clearly a bigger problem here. But I see more weak pasterns on UK Whippets.

I get the impression that the feel of a great shoulder is more important in judging the Whippet in the UK, whereas in the US, it only matters much if the shoulder is accompanied by side movement which is extended, otherwise, you get not much credit for it. This is a judging-driven difference, not a breeder-driven difference. A great shoulder doesn't give you any side gait if the upper arm that goes with it is too short.

 

[T Hoare]

Hope this is better

 

[seaspot_run]

Same dog, same day, same photographer.

More relaxed, balanced, English-style stance:

Pulled up and forward to show more neck, US-style:

Differences in stacking and baiting can give a very different impression.

 

[T Hoare]

Same dog, same day, same photographer.
More relaxed, balanced, English-style stance:

Pulled up and forward to show more neck, US-style:

Differences in stacking and baiting can give a very different impression.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Looks like the 2nd picture the dog is standing uphill, or is that just a trick of the eye?

 

[seaspot_run]

Same dog, same day, same photographer.
More relaxed, balanced, English-style stance:

Pulled up and forward to show more neck, US-style:

Differences in stacking and baiting can give a very different impression.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Looks like the 2nd picture the dog is standing uphill, or is that just a trick of the eye?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I don't think there's that much of a slope. Except of her topline. She looks like she has more rear angulation relative to front angulation to me in the lower shot.

I didn't take the photos. Maybe Scudder can tell me if she was perched on a hillside for the second photo. I think that's a bit of a ridge behind her.

 

[Alayna Morland]

Hope this is better

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

New wording in the standard for forequarters is as follows and makes it easier to picture.

Forequarters

Shoulders well laid back with flat muscles. Moderate space between the shoulder blades at the withers. The upper arm is approximately of equal length to the shoulder, placed so that the elbow falls directly under the withers when viewed in profile. Forearms straight and upright with moderate bladed bone. Front not too wide. Pasterns strong with slight spring.

My personal opinion is that this picture does not demonstate the this part very well:

The upper arm is approximately of equal length to the shoulder, placed so that the elbow falls directly under the withers when viewed in profile.

as I think the the upper is to short.

Alayna

 

[T Hoare]

The illustrated breed standard I have is the 1995 one, I have not yet purchased the newer edition, sorry.

 

[Alayna Morland]

The illustrated breed standard I have is the 1995 one, I have not yet purchased the newer edition, sorry.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

The pictures are still the same I was just adding the new wording as I think it has made it easier to picture the forequarters.

Alayna

 

[Seraphina]

It is all very well to be looking at drawings, usually done from a photo of a dog that has some faults. We should be looking at skeletons, or X-rays. I always believed that the upper arm should be about the same length as the shoulder blade. I surprised to find that wolf has the shoulder blade shorter than upper arm. The trouble with longer upper arm is that it means often the chest not being able to go as far to the elbow as in a dog with short upper arm, and the dog's chest is declared too shallow.

skeleton of a wolf (somewhere in museum, not a plastic)

 

[patsy]

Same dog, same day, same photographer.
More relaxed, balanced, English-style stance:

Pulled up and forward to show more neck, US-style:

Differences in stacking and baiting can give a very different impression.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Looks like the 2nd picture the dog is standing uphill, or is that just a trick of the eye?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I don't think there's that much of a slope. Except of her topline. She looks like she has more rear angulation relative to front angulation to me in the lower shot.

I didn't take the photos. Maybe Scudder can tell me if she was perched on a hillside for the second photo. I think that's a bit of a ridge behind her.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

The only difference that I can see is in in second picture she looks to be standing up hill, surely baiting would not alter top line.

 

[seaspot_run]

I agree that visualization picture appears to show a very laid-back shoulder, but an upper arm which is too short to give proper side movement. Also, I think the standard wording change which now places the point of the elbow under the top of the shoulder will eventually result in the UK fronts coming to resemble the US ones more closely, since that's been our model for front end construction for much longer. The angle changes from a very laid-back shoulder with a more upright upper arm to one which is less laid-back in shoulder, but which has an upper arm which is longer and a bit more set-under.

I thought we did a ton of photos on shoulder angle and front much earlier in this thread, and while Seraphina and I each located the spot for the elbow in a different place, both of us put up a ton of photos and figures with lines drawn on them.. Might be 20 pages back by now.

Maybe one or more of them could be brought forward with a quote function?

 

[UKUSA]

I agree that visualization picture appears to show a very laid-back shoulder, but an upper arm which is too short to give proper side movement.  Also, I think the standard wording change which now places the point of the elbow under the top of the shoulder will eventually result in the UK fronts coming to resemble the US ones more closely, since that's been our model for front end construction for much longer.  The angle changes from a very laid-back shoulder with a more upright upper arm to one which is less laid-back in shoulder, but which has an upper arm which is longer and a bit more set-under.
I thought we did a ton of photos on shoulder angle and front much earlier in this thread, and while Seraphina and I each located the spot for the elbow in a different place, both of us put up a ton of photos and figures with lines drawn on them..  Might be 20 pages back by now.

Maybe one or more of them could be brought forward with a quote function?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Quite right ,we did..........a lot.Surely we dont need to cover this again...........do we?

Nicky

 

[Seraphina]

New wording in the standard for forequarters is as follows and makes it easier to picture.
Forequarters

Shoulders well laid back with flat muscles. Moderate space between the shoulder blades at the withers. The upper arm is approximately of equal length to the shoulder, placed so that the elbow falls directly under the withers when viewed in profile. Forearms straight and upright with moderate bladed bone. Front not too wide. Pasterns strong with slight spring.

My personal opinion is that this picture does not demonstate the this part very well:

T

Alayna

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

EXACTLY! Why cannot we manage pictures that actually represent exactly what the standard says?

 

[T Hoare]

I agree that visualization picture appears to show a very laid-back shoulder, but an upper arm which is too short to give proper side movement.  Also, I think the standard wording change which now places the point of the elbow under the top of the shoulder will eventually result in the UK fronts coming to resemble the US ones more closely, since that's been our model for front end construction for much longer.  The angle changes from a very laid-back shoulder with a more upright upper arm to one which is less laid-back in shoulder, but which has an upper arm which is longer and a bit more set-under.
I thought we did a ton of photos on shoulder angle and front much earlier in this thread, and while Seraphina and I each located the spot for the elbow in a different place, both of us put up a ton of photos and figures with lines drawn on them..  Might be 20 pages back by now.

Maybe one or more of them could be brought forward with a quote function?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Quite right ,we did..........a lot.Surely we dont need to cover this again...........do we?

Nicky

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I wouldn't have thought so, have just had a quick look and there are some front/angulation pics on pages 6/7 etc. crumbs was it that long ago when I looked at them??!!

 

[seaspot_run]

The AWC's Illustrated Standard we give out over here could use some new graphics as well.

It means terribly well, but it's really overdue for an overhaul, and this time with an actual professional graphic artist and illustrator.

 

[Seraphina]

You can certainly change a dog awfully just by stacking them differently; look what somebody did to my Stella! (w00t)

 

[patsy]

.I think this subject has been well covered in past posts. What do you all think about the mention of bone in the revised standard.

 

[seaspot_run]

.I think this subject has been well covered in past posts. What do you all think about the mention of bone in the revised standard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I love it that the bone in the front legs is specified as moderate and bladed in the UK standard. I absolutely wish we had this wording in ours. I prefer the UK standard to ours in many respects, except that I prefer our wording about underjaw.

My biggest pet peeve in US Whippets at this time is round bone which is massive and foxhound-like. Tends to go with straighter pasterns and rounded, cat feet. To me, very atypical.

 

[Seraphina]

I love it that the bone in the front legs is specified as moderate and bladed in the UK standard.  I absolutely wish we had this wording in ours.  I prefer the UK standard to ours in many respects, except that I prefer our wording about underjaw.
My biggest pet peeve in US Whippets at this time is round bone which is massive and foxhound-like.  Tends to go with straighter pasterns and rounded, cat feet.  To me, very atypical.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Yes, I think that the bladed bone bit is very important and should be in every standard.

As far as the fronts go, we definitely discussed whether the angulation means the angle between the axis of the humerus and scapular or something else, but I cannot see anywhere where we actually discussed the length of these bones, which is another important point. Especially as the standard depiction is wrong.