British And American Whippets

[patsy]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

Just moved this up as we have been talking about eye colour size etc in the two different countries, it should not be on the critique thread, Tracy is right. If anyone has any comments it can be continued here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Tracy we must have been posting at the same time but Hay ho

 

[T Hoare]

If the measure hoop was brought into Whippets, Which there has been murmours of 'doing away' with it in Poodles & Spitz Kleins. I think the Whippet entry would be drastically reduced and not necessarily for the better.

Don't get me wrong I prefer the correct sized Whippet but not if the slightly larger one is the better overall specimen & size is the only thing against it.

 

[UKUSA]

Great to see this thread up and running again!

I agree with you Tracey, I think we would loose a few if the measure was brought in! However I dont think that a correct size, inferior dog should beat a bigger but correct in all other department dog.

Nicky

 

[seaspot_run]

Well, the US perspective is that you have to decide how big is "too big" to be really "better" than anything else in the ring. Ok, 1/4" taller, 1/2" taller than ideal--nobody has a problem with that, but what about TWO inches taller? Three? A greyhound? Where?

We have decided on an upper limit. For me, this makes height in our breed not a matter of opinion, it makes it a matter of settled fact. There is plenty of room within our high and low measure for people to indulge their personal tastes if they like larger or smaller Whippets.

Now, it may very well be that we Americans have set our upper limits too high. Perhaps we have.

But back to a prior discussion, if Whippets must measure in for running events, why shouldn't they have to measure in for show events? That's not to say every dog has to be measured, but something which appears too big should be measured. That's how it's done here. A few of our specialty judges have measured in everything in the ring, but most of the time, the wicket is called for if an exhibit appears to be markedly large or small, especially if the judge intends to use that dog for a high placement.

Then, you don't have people going around saying the winner was "too big".

 

[T Hoare]

Well, the US perspective is that you have to decide how big is "too big" to be really "better" than anything else in the ring.  Ok, 1/4" taller, 1/2" taller than ideal--nobody has a problem with that, but what about TWO inches taller? Three? A greyhound? Where?
We have decided on an upper limit.  For me, this makes height in our breed not a matter of opinion, it makes it a matter of settled fact. There is plenty of room within our high and low measure for people to indulge their personal tastes if they like larger or smaller Whippets.

Now, it may very well be that we Americans have set our upper limits too high. Perhaps we have.

But back to a prior discussion, if Whippets must measure in for running events, why shouldn't they have to measure in for show events? That's not to say every dog has to be measured, but something which appears too big should be measured. That's how it's done here. A few of our specialty judges have measured in everything in the ring, but most of the time, the wicket is called for if an exhibit appears to be markedly large or small, especially if the judge intends to use that dog for a high placement.

Then, you don't have people going around saying the winner was "too big".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Please forgive my ignorance but could you tell me the height restrictions for U.S?

 

[quintessence]

I've been thinking about this on my walk so thought I would throw it in the pot. The whippet came before the breed standard, I am assuming that, when it was decided to write a standard, then the whippet as it was then, was what was being described. My question therefore is why would there ever be a need to change the original standard.

 

[chelynnah]

Just moved this up as we have been talking about eye colour size etc in the two different countries, it should not be on the critique thread, Tracy is right. If anyone has any comments it can be continued here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Have removed the appropriate posts from the critiques thread and put them in this one for continuity :cheers:

Wendy

 

[UKUSA]

Just moved this up as we have been talking about eye colour size etc in the two different countries, it should not be on the critique thread, Tracy is right. If anyone has any comments it can be continued here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Have removed the appropriate posts from the critiques thread and put them in this one for continuity :cheers:

Wendy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Thanks Wendy :thumbsup:

Nicky

 

[patsy]

I've been thinking about this on my walk so thought I would throw it in the pot.  The whippet came before the breed standard, I am assuming that, when it was decided to write a standard, then the whippet as it was then, was what was being described. My question therefore is why would there ever be a need to change the original standard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

The standards of all breeds have been revised over the years, not a lot to the whippet standard though, moderate hind angulation, holding topline on the move, slight tweak to front assembly and the word ideal for size. The old standard when I first came into the breed gave the size then the wording an otherwise good specimen should not be unduly penalised. I do not think the kennel club would allow the measure, they are for stopping measuring and weighing of all breeds.

 

[UKUSA]

Well, the US perspective is that you have to decide how big is "too big" to be really "better" than anything else in the ring.  Ok, 1/4" taller, 1/2" taller than ideal--nobody has a problem with that, but what about TWO inches taller? Three? A greyhound? Where?
We have decided on an upper limit.  For me, this makes height in our breed not a matter of opinion, it makes it a matter of settled fact. There is plenty of room within our high and low measure for people to indulge their personal tastes if they like larger or smaller Whippets.

Now, it may very well be that we Americans have set our upper limits too high. Perhaps we have.

But back to a prior discussion, if Whippets must measure in for running events, why shouldn't they have to measure in for show events? That's not to say every dog has to be measured, but something which appears too big should be measured. That's how it's done here. A few of our specialty judges have measured in everything in the ring, but most of the time, the wicket is called for if an exhibit appears to be markedly large or small, especially if the judge intends to use that dog for a high placement.

Then, you don't have people going around saying the winner was "too big".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Im not sure that I understand the "how big is too big to be really better". Because that makes it sound as though height is the only consideration to be competitive. Do you think that that is so?

Nicky

 

[T Hoare]

I've been thinking about this on my walk so thought I would throw it in the pot.  The whippet came before the breed standard, I am assuming that, when it was decided to write a standard, then the whippet as it was then, was what was being described. My question therefore is why would there ever be a need to change the original standard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

The standards of all breeds have been revised over the years, not a lot to the whippet standard though, moderate hind angulation, holding topline on the move, slight tweak to front assembly and the word ideal for size. The old standard when I first came into the breed gave the size then the wording an otherwise good specimen should not be unduly penalised. I do not think the kennel club would allow the measure, they are for stopping measuring and weighing of all breeds.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

The old standard when I first came into the breed gave the size then the wording an otherwise good specimen should not be unduly penalised.

I always thought this was the case but wondered if it was just something I had heard

 

[seaspot_run]

Well, the US perspective is that you have to decide how big is "too big" to be really "better" than anything else in the ring.  Ok, 1/4" taller, 1/2" taller than ideal--nobody has a problem with that, but what about TWO inches taller? Three? A greyhound? Where?
We have decided on an upper limit.  For me, this makes height in our breed not a matter of opinion, it makes it a matter of settled fact. There is plenty of room within our high and low measure for people to indulge their personal tastes if they like larger or smaller Whippets.

Now, it may very well be that we Americans have set our upper limits too high. Perhaps we have.

But back to a prior discussion, if Whippets must measure in for running events, why shouldn't they have to measure in for show events? That's not to say every dog has to be measured, but something which appears too big should be measured. That's how it's done here. A few of our specialty judges have measured in everything in the ring, but most of the time, the wicket is called for if an exhibit appears to be markedly large or small, especially if the judge intends to use that dog for a high placement.

Then, you don't have people going around saying the winner was "too big".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Please forgive my ignorance but could you tell me the height restrictions for U.S?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Bitches==18"-21", 1/2 inch over or under shall disqualify.

Dogs--19"-22", 1/2 inch over or under shall disqualify.

Plenty of wiggle room.

I understand in the UK that the height limit for lure coursing is 21", which seems to be to be very generous to the bitches (21" is a BIG bitch over here, even) and punitive to the dogs.

 

[~JO~]

I've been thinking about this on my walk so thought I would throw it in the pot.  The whippet came before the breed standard, I am assuming that, when it was decided to write a standard, then the whippet as it was then, was what was being described. My question therefore is why would there ever be a need to change the original standard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I do not think the kennel club would allow the measure, they are for stopping measuring and weighing of all breeds.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Yes exactly, I very much doubt the measure will ever come into force for a breed that has never been measured in the UK.

However we must remember (which I think Shirley Rawlings bought up at the SWWC seminar) that those that are within the 'ideal' are not penalised ie. in a class in which most the the exhibits are over the ideal the one that is in the ideal shouldn't be penalised for being 'small'. I find that at open shows when perhaps the judge is not that experienced in the breed can make this mistake - especially in mixed classes!!

 

[T Hoare]

I've been thinking about this on my walk so thought I would throw it in the pot.  The whippet came before the breed standard, I am assuming that, when it was decided to write a standard, then the whippet as it was then, was what was being described. My question therefore is why would there ever be a need to change the original standard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I do not think the kennel club would allow the measure, they are for stopping measuring and weighing of all breeds.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Yes exactly, I very much doubt the measure will ever come into force for a breed that has never been measured in the UK.

However we must remember (which I think Shirley Rawlings bought up at the SWWC seminar) that those that are within the 'ideal' are not penalised ie. in a class in which most the the exhibits are over the ideal the one that is in the ideal shouldn't be penalised for being 'small'. I find that at open shows when perhaps the judge is not that experienced in the breed can make this mistake - especially in mixed classes!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I think it is at the open shows, when the sexes are together, is when size is so very much more obvious.

 

[seaspot_run]

A little more history on the height disqualification in the US. The clamor for a hard and fast upper limit on height ironically did not come from the show ring. It came from the members of the AWC who were active in National Point Racing at the time. As we do not have weight grade racing here, our disqualifications for both racing and lure coursing are based on whatever is in the standard as a disqualification. Otherwise, if you have an AKC or CKC number, you can race. So, what was happening was that people were racing 24-inch Whippets and smoking the competition with these greyhound-sized Whippets. Without a breed standard height DQ, size was out of control on the race track and since the dogs LOOKED like greyhounds at that height, there was also some speculation that they WERE part greyhound (never proven or disproven, as this was prior to the DNA era).

A coalition of show/race people and show people who were not happy about the number of 23" males and 22" bitches who were winning at the specialty level formed and they voted in the height disqualification.

This is all prior to my entry into the breed, so as long as I have been a Whippet fancier, we have had an upper limit on height. I have had several of my most beautiful and sound males with very typey outlines win well as puppies and then go oversize by 1/4 to 1/2 inch, and have to be retired from everything, so I have certainly endured the heartbreak of our height DQ, as these dogs might have otherwise fallen under the umbrella of "not unduly penalize size in an otherwise outstanding specimen". But as this thread is about differences between the UK and the USA, I am just coming on here as a US person saying that I LIKE the fact we have a height limit which is set in granite, and that I further like it because we do not have a situation here where the dogs who win at the top level of our showing might be ineligible or race or lure course. I admire much about the UK system, your standard (particularly as regards pigment), your dogs, and your judging, but I feel that in a breed which had an original purpose, that any dog who qualifies to be shown should also qualify to be raced or lure coursed. It is my understanding that many of your good winners in the UK can neither measure in or weigh in for lure coursing/racing.

That makes absolutely no sense to me. At least in the US show dogs and coursing/racing dogs are inspected under the same sets of criteria to determine if they are eligible to be in competition.

 

[jayp]

I've been thinking about this on my walk so thought I would throw it in the pot.  The whippet came before the breed standard, I am assuming that, when it was decided to write a standard, then the whippet as it was then, was what was being described. My question therefore is why would there ever be a need to change the original standard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I do not think the kennel club would allow the measure, they are for stopping measuring and weighing of all breeds.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Yes exactly, I very much doubt the measure will ever come into force for a breed that has never been measured in the UK.

However we must remember (which I think Shirley Rawlings bought up at the SWWC seminar) that those that are within the 'ideal' are not penalised ie. in a class in which most the the exhibits are over the ideal the one that is in the ideal shouldn't be penalised for being 'small'. I find that at open shows when perhaps the judge is not that experienced in the breed can make this mistake - especially in mixed classes!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I agree judge said to me of our bitch, very nice but just not enough of her, she is 18 1/2 dont mind what else they feel but she is correct size, this becomes more of an issue when all the others or the majority are wrong then the correct is penalised because it is different, this also applies to other aspects, if they all have upright fronts the correct one will look wrong thats when incorrect becomes the norm!!!!

 

[affieluver]

I've been thinking about this on my walk so thought I would throw it in the pot.  The whippet came before the breed standard, I am assuming that, when it was decided to write a standard, then the whippet as it was then, was what was being described. My question therefore is why would there ever be a need to change the original standard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I do not think the kennel club would allow the measure, they are for stopping measuring and weighing of all breeds.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Yes exactly, I very much doubt the measure will ever come into force for a breed that has never been measured in the UK.

However we must remember (which I think Shirley Rawlings bought up at the SWWC seminar) that those that are within the 'ideal' are not penalised ie. in a class in which most the the exhibits are over the ideal the one that is in the ideal shouldn't be penalised for being 'small'. I find that at open shows when perhaps the judge is not that experienced in the breed can make this mistake - especially in mixed classes!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I agree judge said to me of our bitch, very nice but just not enough of her, she is 18 1/2 dont mind what else they feel but she is correct size, this becomes more of an issue when all the others or the majority are wrong then the correct is penalised because it is different, this also applies to other aspects, if they all have upright fronts the correct one will look wrong thats when incorrect becomes the norm!!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

well said :thumbsup:

 

[moonlake]

A little more history on the height disqualification in the US. The clamor for a hard and fast upper limit on height ironically did not come from the show ring. It came from the members of the AWC who were active in National Point Racing at the time.  As we do not have weight grade racing here, our disqualifications for both racing and lure coursing are based on whatever is in the standard as a disqualification. Otherwise, if you have an AKC or CKC number, you can race.  So, what was happening was that people were racing 24-inch Whippets and smoking the competition with these greyhound-sized Whippets.  Without a breed standard height DQ, size was out of control on the race track and since the dogs LOOKED like greyhounds at that height, there was also some speculation that they WERE part greyhound (never proven or disproven, as this was prior to the DNA era).
A coalition of show/race people and show people who were not happy about the number of 23" males and 22" bitches who were winning at the specialty level formed and they voted in the height disqualification.

This is all prior to my entry into the breed, so as long as I have been a Whippet fancier, we have had an upper limit on height. I have had several of my most beautiful and sound males with very typey outlines win well as puppies and then go oversize by 1/4 to 1/2 inch, and have to be retired from everything, so I have certainly endured the heartbreak of our height DQ, as these dogs might have otherwise fallen under the umbrella of "not unduly penalize size in an otherwise outstanding specimen". But as this thread is about differences between the UK and the USA, I am just coming on here as a US person saying that I LIKE the fact we have a height limit which is set in granite, and that I further like it because we do not have a situation here where the dogs who win at the top level of our showing might be ineligible or race or lure course.  I admire much about the UK system, your standard (particularly as regards pigment), your dogs, and your judging, but I feel that in a breed which had an original purpose, that any dog who qualifies to be shown should also qualify to be raced or lure coursed.  It is my understanding that many of your good winners in the UK can neither measure in or weigh in for lure coursing/racing.

That makes absolutely no sense to me. At least in the US show dogs and coursing/racing dogs are inspected under the same sets of criteria to determine if they are eligible to be in competition.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

There is no height/weight DQ for lure coursing here but you are correct as regards the racing. Although the top weight was grudgingly increased to 32lbs in recent years, that excluded my 20" coursing males who had far too much bone and substance to weigh in without the starving that some racing people regard as normal.

My personal view, which is deeply unpopular with racing people, is that the weight classes used for racing have been entirely detrimental to the breed. Historically, there were always some kind of limits for the same reason as you brought them in in the US but they were at one stage as high as 36lbs. Nowadays, I suspect that some UK show dogs would have trouble getting below that.

Coursing is currently banned but I have to say while it was never easy to breed a male with enough bone to compete in the ring that would measure in at 20", for some reason I don't understand, it has become even more difficult lately. I probably had some in my NWA entry earlier this month but they didn't strike me as dogs capable of walking for several hours and galloping over heavy plough at the speed of a hare.

Gay

www.moonlake.co.uk

 

[moonlake]

I agree judge said to me of our bitch, very nice but just not enough of her, she is 18 1/2 dont mind what else they feel but she is correct size, this becomes more of an issue when all the others or the majority are wrong then the correct is penalised because it is different, this also applies to other aspects, if they all have upright fronts the correct one will look wrong thats when incorrect becomes the norm!!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

The judge may not have been referring to her height but to her length or substance - height isn't everything. "Correct size" is really a meaningless term. I have two 18 1/2" bitches here; one of them has plenty abut her and no one has ever said she was too small while the other is frankly, weedy. There is certainly not enough of her.

Gay

www.moonlake.co.uk

 

[patsy]

A little more history on the height disqualification in the US. The clamor for a hard and fast upper limit on height ironically did not come from the show ring. It came from the members of the AWC who were active in National Point Racing at the time.  As we do not have weight grade racing here, our disqualifications for both racing and lure coursing are based on whatever is in the standard as a disqualification. Otherwise, if you have an AKC or CKC number, you can race.  So, what was happening was that people were racing 24-inch Whippets and smoking the competition with these greyhound-sized Whippets.  Without a breed standard height DQ, size was out of control on the race track and since the dogs LOOKED like greyhounds at that height, there was also some speculation that they WERE part greyhound (never proven or disproven, as this was prior to the DNA era).
A coalition of show/race people and show people who were not happy about the number of 23" males and 22" bitches who were winning at the specialty level formed and they voted in the height disqualification.

This is all prior to my entry into the breed, so as long as I have been a Whippet fancier, we have had an upper limit on height. I have had several of my most beautiful and sound males with very typey outlines win well as puppies and then go oversize by 1/4 to 1/2 inch, and have to be retired from everything, so I have certainly endured the heartbreak of our height DQ, as these dogs might have otherwise fallen under the umbrella of "not unduly penalize size in an otherwise outstanding specimen". But as this thread is about differences between the UK and the USA, I am just coming on here as a US person saying that I LIKE the fact we have a height limit which is set in granite, and that I further like it because we do not have a situation here where the dogs who win at the top level of our showing might be ineligible or race or lure course.  I admire much about the UK system, your standard (particularly as regards pigment), your dogs, and your judging, but I feel that in a breed which had an original purpose, that any dog who qualifies to be shown should also qualify to be raced or lure coursed.  It is my understanding that many of your good winners in the UK can neither measure in or weigh in for lure coursing/racing.

That makes absolutely no sense to me. At least in the US show dogs and coursing/racing dogs are inspected under the same sets of criteria to determine if they are eligible to be in competition.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

There is no height/weight DQ for lure coursing here but you are correct as regards the racing. Although the top weight was grudgingly increased to 32lbs in recent years, that excluded my 20" coursing males who had far too much bone and substance to weigh in without the starving that some racing people regard as normal.

My personal view, which is deeply unpopular with racing people, is that the weight classes used for racing have been entirely detrimental to the breed. Historically, there were always some kind of limits for the same reason as you brought them in in the US but they were at one stage as high as 36lbs. Nowadays, I suspect that some UK show dogs would have trouble getting below that.

Coursing is currently banned but I have to say while it was never easy to breed a male with enough bone to compete in the ring that would measure in at 20", for some reason I don't understand, it has become even more difficult lately. I probably had some in my NWA entry earlier this month but they didn't strike me as dogs capable of walking for several hours and galloping over heavy plough at the speed of a hare.

Gay

www.moonlake.co.uk

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I don't think there is a problem in breeding 20inc dogs with the correct bone for the ring.