Judging Puppies

[jayp]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

I would be very interested in your opinions on judging puppies as this could possibly change a breed. I would hope everyone tries to breed to the standard but judges opinions are what changes a breed. We all know that if a certain typeis winning in the ring then this is inevitably the type that becomes the norm over a period of time. As context to this topic look at a few different breeds and consider how they have changed. Golden retrievers are not golden, greyhounds are now two breeds, german shephards are unsound, lots of breeds are becoming shorter in leg,so short their bodies barely clear the ground and i could go on.If we judge puppies to the standard they would hopefully be lacking in certain areas,width,depth of brisket, muscle, etc. which we hope they will go on to develop with age. This we cannot know we can only see potential using our experience of the breed, for example if a puppy is very short coupled we can be pretty sure this will never attain the length as an adult. If the puppy is a long flat backed baby we can hope with age this will come together to give the topline required.What will the puppy mature enough to take top honours look like as a 4 year old? All too often we don’t see them. If we continue to require maturity in our youngsters, and we see “won on maturity” so often in critiques will our puppies needing time be replaced by miniature adults made up at 12 months and looking nothing like the breed standard as a mature adult? controvertial

 

[jok]

Good topic :thumbsup: I am very interested to hear what the judges on the forum think about this one.

The words you mention, 'just losing out on maturity' etc do seem to feature heavily in the critiques.

 

[TC]

Controversial? Methinks it might be

However, like Jok, I am really looking forward to the replies on this one I think you've made some good points, certainly ones that we all must have thought at one time or another.........

 

[~JO~]

Yes very interesting!

At the end of the day you cannot judge the potential of any dog - all you can judge is how close each dog is to the breed standard and the one that fits the breed standard most closely in your eyes must win

If you had a puppy that was very shallow in brisket or with no spring of rib, you can never be certain that this will improve with age, it may well but there is no certainty.

The interesting thing is that reasonably frequently pups that win a lot when they are younger don't go on and do well. The slow maturers are the one that seem to go and have a longer career. I don't think (or hope) many breeders would breed for 'miniature adults' as if this is sacrifing the show career of the adult dog it surely wouldn't be worth it? hmmmmm :b

 

[doris]

what a clever thread! :thumbsup:

 

[Ridgesetter]

Very interesting topic but complex and I’m sure there are different opinions depending on what country you reside in and how your system operates. I won't separate puppies from adults as puppies don't influence the future of a breed.

When judging, you have to remove your breeder's hat and put on your judge's hat and assess the dog on the day regardless of potential, pedigree and even more importantly, who is on the end of the lead. :sweating: There are dogs who win well as puppies as they are very put together but as adults they are coarse and heavy. Conversely, there are puppies who are fine and shelly and don't win much as youngsters but mature into lovely examples of the breed. However, I still believe the basics should be there.

Unfortunately, dog shows have become beauty shows where function is not prized as much as maybe it should be. Understandably, this may be because many exhibitors/breeders/judges have no real experience of the breed’s function apart from reading a book. We send dogs around the ring at a trot which in no way simulates their prowess at running down game, retrieving, baying, weight pulling, sledding, pointing, flushing etc. We look for happy dogs that enjoy the show which may be in direct opposition to what is called for in the temperament and character of their breed standard.

As for judges changing the look of breeds, to a small degree, I tend to agree with this but judges only judge what is exhibited to them. The major fault lies with breeders and what they register and exhibit. Remember, judges are only exhibitors that have progressed to another level.

Most judges don't like withholding CC's so 9 out of 10 times, so many dogs obtain titles that probably shouldn’t. And because it's titled, the dog gets bred from and so the problem is perpetuated and sometimes, a different look or type becomes the 'norm'.

I believe it's vitally important that breed clubs offer the best possible lectures on their breed and not just have whoever has been in the breed the longest give the lecture. I've attended many breed lectures and the best have been done by qualified educators with a mix of hands on. As a judge, you tend to enjoy judging the breeds that offered great lectures - not someone standing in front reading from a standard and telling you the dogs they brought along are great examples of the breed.

Judging is extremely subjective and difficult to measure. What is white to one person will be golden to another. What is short in leg to one will be okay to another. I've watched judges ignore great Golden Retrievers because of colour and put up unsound and sometimes untypey dogs but they had a lovely golden colour. So if the sound, typey light coloured dogs win consistently and get used often enough, the colour of the breed will change. So this is when it is important for breeders to keep changes in check.

Never assume judges understand all the nuances in a breed so provide them with expansive extension notes on the standard. Too many times I've been asked where the arch should be on a whippet. Is my assessment right? Do we as breeders/owners all agree? As breeders, we decide on what we think is correct and breed and show accordingly but if you win, does it make you right? :- "

It's a dog show. There'll be another one tomorrow/next week/month.

Cheers

 

[Seraphina]

Excellent topic. Of-course judges have to judge what they see on the day, BUT judge should have some concept of what a youngster should look like and it should be different from an adult. Child of 10, or 15 generally does not have the physique of somebody in mid 20s. And 12 months old Whippet should not be expected to look like 2.5 years old.

When I look at a photo of a pup (even if it not possible to judge its size) I am usually able to say at glance if it is 6 weeks old, 8 weeks old or 12 weeks old. There should also be noticeable general difference between say 7 month old and 12 months old, or 18 months old and 2years old. After 2 - 2.5 years I would like to see the dog remain relatively unchanged until the old age start taking its toll.

 

[masta]

judges are generally breeders that have achieved success in the ring with a line/type that they have bred for many years, they have a definite view of what they believe to be correct and that must be the line/type they have been trying to perfect? or why would they bother, i would say that judges have had a hand in altering/changing the look of most breeds over the years. i think whippets have been lucky so far inthat they still represent the function for which they were originaly intended. Yes they put there "judges hat on" and they can only assess what is in front of them but they will allways judge to their "type" (i have judged not dogs) hence why you see posts on K9 saying " who's judging x show" if all judges stuck to breed standard why bother asking? level playing field etc

 

[JAX]

Only time for a quick responce at the moment , will give longer reply later ,

Just an observation I made a while ago , I looked back at previous best Puppy in breeds at champ show , and counted just how many actually made it to Champions , On average over a few years it was 6 puppies a year only that made up , food for thought :cheers:

 

[05whippet]

Very interesting topic but complex and I’m sure there are different opinions depending on what country you reside in and how your system operates.  I won't separate puppies from adults as puppies don't influence the future of a breed.
When judging, you have to remove your breeder's hat and put on your judge's hat and assess the dog on the day regardless of potential, pedigree and even more importantly, who is on the end of the lead.  :sweating:     There are dogs who win well as puppies as they are very put together but as adults they are coarse and heavy.  Conversely, there are puppies who are fine and shelly and don't win much as youngsters but mature into lovely examples of the breed.  However, I still believe the basics should be there.

Unfortunately, dog shows have become beauty shows where function is not prized as much as maybe it should be.  Understandably, this may be because many exhibitors/breeders/judges have no real experience of the breed’s function apart from reading a book.  We send dogs around the ring at a trot which in no way simulates their prowess at running down game, retrieving, baying, weight pulling, sledding, pointing, flushing etc.  We look for happy dogs that enjoy the show which may be in direct opposition to what is called for in the temperament and character of their breed standard.

As for judges changing the look of breeds, to a small degree, I tend to agree with this but judges only judge what is exhibited to them.  The major fault lies with breeders and what they register and exhibit.  Remember, judges are only exhibitors that have progressed to another level. 

Most judges don't like withholding CC's so 9 out of 10 times, so many dogs obtain titles that probably shouldn’t.  And because it's titled, the dog gets bred from and so the problem is perpetuated and sometimes, a different look or type becomes the 'norm'. 

I believe it's vitally important that breed clubs offer the best possible lectures on their breed and not just have whoever has been in the breed the longest give the lecture.  I've attended many breed lectures and the best have been done by qualified educators with a mix of hands on.  As a judge, you tend to enjoy judging the breeds that offered great lectures - not someone standing in front reading from a standard and telling you the dogs they brought along are great examples of the breed. 

Judging is extremely subjective and difficult to measure.  What is white to one person will be golden to another.  What is short in leg to one will be okay to another.  I've watched judges ignore great Golden Retrievers because of colour and put up unsound and sometimes untypey dogs but they had a lovely golden colour.  So if the sound, typey light coloured dogs win consistently and get used often enough, the colour of the breed will change.  So this is when it is important for breeders to keep changes in check.

Never assume judges understand all the nuances in a breed so provide them with expansive extension notes on the standard.  Too many times I've been asked where the arch should be on a whippet.  Is my assessment right?  Do we as breeders/owners all agree?  As breeders, we decide on what we think is correct and breed and show accordingly but if you win, does it make you right?    :- "

It's a dog show.  There'll be another one tomorrow/next week/month. 

Cheers

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

This is a very interesting thread.

And this is an excellent answer.

 

[dessie]

I judge the puppy class the same as any other, i.e. the best constructed/moving/typey dog wins. If they are all equal then the more mature one may win purely because it has probably got its act together and looks more 'finished'. I do not believe in giving top awards to puppies though because they give away so much in maturity and, if they do look that mature, then the chances are they are going to go way over the top!!

 

[masta]

I judge the puppy class the same as any other, i.e. the best constructed/moving/typey dog wins.  If they are all equal then the more mature one may win purely because it has probably got its act together and looks more 'finished'.  I do not believe in giving top awards to puppies though because they give away so much in maturity and, if they do look that mature, then the chances are they are going to go way over the top!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

how do you define " typey "

 

[dessie]

I judge the puppy class the same as any other, i.e. the best constructed/moving/typey dog wins.  If they are all equal then the more mature one may win purely because it has probably got its act together and looks more 'finished'.  I do not believe in giving top awards to puppies though because they give away so much in maturity and, if they do look that mature, then the chances are they are going to go way over the top!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

how do you define " typey "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

If it looks like what it's meant to be!! I am not just referring to Whippets here but any breed. That is why I put typey last of my three prerogatives because most of the time, when you have that first look round the ring you will see whatever breed it is you are meant to be judging, some will be better than others but they all look like that breed.

However, if you are judging a variety class and you have to wonder whether it is, for example, a Cocker or a Field or an English Springer Spaniel then it is not typey and so could be the best constructed/soundest moving dog there but could not win because it did not look like what it was meant to be.

It is like most things, if something is correct you don't tend to overly notice it but when something is blatantly awful, it will jump out at you. But then you have to consider how much it affects the overall picture and what is acceptable to you, as the judge, and what is not.

 

[jayp]

Some interesting replies, What i was saying is why should maturity in a puppy be considered an asset? We should surely be using our experience as breeders in judging puppies and place accordingly. If we as breeders would not be happy with a 7month puppy looking like an open dog contender then why would it win on this alone? Surely that is the whole point of age classes. We ask the age in age classes to assess whether the pup has developed in line with its age in our opinion of course. If this is not the case and we are judging all classes equally then why bother with age classes? As far as judging to type as opposed to colour ths is a different topic and not what cncerns me. The reference to changing breeds i think is valid as if we continue to award maturity in our youngsters many breeders will in fact breed for this quality as we all want to win. There are very few breeders who will stick to what they beleive is right if they are always at the wrong end of the line. This is why we now have Dobermans looking like Rotties, Labs like blobs on legs, white Goldies, banana backed Shepherds and the list could go on to include overcoated breeds etc. This breeding for early maturity is happening accross many breeds, they win at a young age and are then taken out of the ring for breeding to be replaced by another fast maturing pup!!!! This and the success of the breeder is what changes a breed. It is a slow process but almost irreversable. :- " :- " :- " jan

 

[masta]

worth a read

http://www.terrierman.com/rosettestoruin.htm

 

[jayp]

worth a read
http://www.terrierman.com/rosettestoruin.htm

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Well worth a read :cheers: especially liked working standard "Ears Two" Illustrates very well the point i am trying to make, At least in whippets we have abreed capable of work and show but should present trends continue will we travel the greyhound route, Ihope not, and it is not just size that is of concern but more the slow change from racehorse to cob :- " :- " :- " jan

 

[05whippet]

worth a read
http://www.terrierman.com/rosettestoruin.htm

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

That is a really interesting topic that he has hit on there. I must say I do agree with him,even regarding Whippets.I have often watched Whippets in the ring and wondered to myself just how many of them would actually be able to take down a Hare or even a rabbit for that matter? They often have no muscle and quite a few have no under jaw and some have a bad hackney movement which in turn means that it will not be able to extend into and run correctly. We do show our Whippets but they also work, and I therefore know that they are capable of doing the job they were bred to do and can also have success in the ring too, I think it would be very interesting to add a "working" or a "coursing" test to the whole show side of things,that way we could maybe retain some of the essence of the breed?

I have heard though I don't know if there is much truth in it ,that in the South of Ireland under the new FCI that Dachshunds now have to do some form of test involving going down a hole,does anyone know if this is correct??

 

[Seraphina]

That is an excellent article and very relevent to this current thread in "Whippets General Discussion" on K9

whippet named

 

[JAX]

I judge the puppy class the same as any other, i.e. the best constructed/moving/typey dog wins.  If they are all equal then the more mature one may win purely because it has probably got its act together and looks more 'finished'.  I do not believe in giving top awards to puppies though because they give away so much in maturity and, if they do look that mature, then the chances are they are going to go way over the top!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I agree with Caroline , if I was to place one above another and give` more mature `as the reason it would purely be done to how it looks for its age , An 11 month pup should look `more mature` that an 8 month .

Ive recently judged the odd whippet puppy that IMO look finished (w00t) great to have lots of wins with them but then what ,

Of course we judge whay we see in the ring and not what we think they will mature into .

We do, of course have judges who like to `find a star ` some go on to get their title , some dont .

 

[jayp]

I judge the puppy class the same as any other, i.e. the best constructed/moving/typey dog wins.  If they are all equal then the more mature one may win purely because it has probably got its act together and looks more 'finished'.  I do not believe in giving top awards to puppies though because they give away so much in maturity and, if they do look that mature, then the chances are they are going to go way over the top!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I agree with Caroline , if I was to place one above another and give` more mature `as the reason it would purely be done to how it looks for its age , An 11 month pup should look `more mature` that an 8 month .

Ive recently judged the odd whippet puppy that IMO look finished (w00t) great to have lots of wins with them but then what ,

Of course we judge whay we see in the ring and not what we think they will mature into .

We do, of course have judges who like to `find a star ` some go on to get their title , some dont .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Well I wish I could say it has all become clear but I cant. I know an 11 month old should look more mature than a7 month old but i still fail to see why it should win on maturity alone To put it plainly we have two puppies to judge; One is a raw but promising baby with everything required FOR ITS AGE of say 7 months, its a stunning puppy and you wish it was yours!!!! The other puppy is already looking the finished product at 11 months and yes it may be better behaved it may be closer to the breed standard which is intended to represent the ideal ADULT WHIPPET if we then reward this with the win then this is probably why lots of puppy winners never make the grade. If the win was given to the stunning but raw puppy perhaps our best puppies would be best adults. :- " :- " jan