# AKC Considering adding 'Alter' Classes?



## Pai

Here are some ideas that are percolating in various committees at the moment (via an AKC delegate in one of the mailing lists I'm on):


1-- 4-6 month puppy competition before the classes start

2-- Owner-handler competition

3-- Reserve Best in Show

4-- Puppy and adult dog bred-by exhibitor competition

5-- Neutered dog and bitch competition

6-- Master Class for Juniors

7-- Re-evaluating jump heights in agility and OB (subcommittee on this
issue)

...Ideas? Opinions? I think an Alter class would be AWESOME, personally.


----------



## RBark

Isn't that basically the mutt/ILP class?


----------



## Sighthounds4me

I have to say, I can't really see the point in altered classes. UKC does this, and I just don't get it.

Generally, the reasons breeders alter dogs has to do with a lack of show quality. For example, my Cooper was altered because his rear is very straight. Could he have finished in the show ring? Maybe, with enough time and patience (and judges who don't know the breed standard). But his breeders did not want him representing them, and I can't blame them.

Other reasons for altering would be health: maybe the dog has hip dysplasia, or PRA, or any other in a large list of hereditary problems. These are things that most breeders would not want to represent their breeding programs.

Having said that, if I had a rescue dog that I thought i could have fun with, or came close to the breed standard, I might want to show in altered classes.

So, I can see it both ways. I just think it's yet another way for the AKC to make more money...

I do like the idea of a reserve BIS, though. 

But, rather than adding more and more things like this, I would prefer to see the AKC look into revamping the show experience. UKC and Canada do things in different ways that I prefer. For example, groups immediately after all the breeds in the group. Instead of having to wait all day for groups, especially if you showed in breed early in the day, it does not need to be a LONG day for everyone.

I'd also like to see a realignment of the variety groups. For example, split out sighthounds and scenthounds. Incorporate "non-sporting" dogs into the groups they actually belong, and close the non-sporting group.

I believe there are changes that need to occur. But I don't like the idea of the AKC pandering for more money by constantly expanding it's reach to include everything. What's next? Cats?


----------



## MissMutt

> 7-- Re-evaluating jump heights in agility and OB (subcommittee on this
> issue)


Interested in this; do you have any info, Pai?


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim

Pai said:


> Here are some ideas that are percolating in various committees at the moment (via an AKC delegate in one of the mailing lists I'm on):
> 
> 
> 1-- 4-6 month puppy competition before the classes start
> 
> 2-- Owner-handler competition
> 
> 3-- Reserve Best in Show
> 
> 4-- Puppy and adult dog bred-by exhibitor competition
> 
> 5-- Neutered dog and bitch competition
> 
> 6-- Master Class for Juniors
> 
> 7-- Re-evaluating jump heights in agility and OB (subcommittee on this
> issue)
> 
> ...Ideas? Opinions? I think an Alter class would be AWESOME, personally.


Ok the 4-6 month puppy class is already approved since November of last year I believe. Only a few clubs have offered it though. It is not for points though. 

I don't see the point of an owner-handler competition, I would assume this would be another class? 


I like reserve best in show, they do it in Europe why not here. 

I am not sure what 4 would be, since bred-by is a class and puppies and adults can be shown in it. 

I don't like the alter conformation class, that is not what conformation is about. Sometimes I think it would be cool, but others I am like no that just defeats the point of conformation. 

I would need more info about the master class for juniors

Again more info about 7 would also be needed.

And you did forget one, AKC is considering adding a 5th and 6th placement to the groups, but only for those groups that have a certain amount of dogs show up at that show. So basically if a group that day doesn't have enough show up, then they don't get a 5th and 6th placement. Which I think is kind of unfair as some groups could get a 5th and 6th and others would just have 4 placements.


----------



## Pai

MissMutt said:


> Interested in this; do you have any info, Pai?


Nope, sorry. =(



> I have to say, I can't really see the point in altered classes. UKC does this, and I just don't get it.


It's also a part of cat shows, and is pretty popular with those. It's not only about increasing revenue (money is something which AKC shows have been having real problems with in recent years), but getting more people into the sport that might otherwise not. Also, there are some people who show without any desire to breed.


----------



## Nil

I kind of like the idea of an alter class, however I am in no part currently involved with conformation. But I think Pai is right in saying that it could attract people otherwise not interested in the sport. For example, someone gets a PB puppy and has to spay/neuter their puppy for whatever reason. Well it would still be nice to open the sport to these folks and allow them to train their dog and compete, get involved with a dog sport, and perhaps learn a lot more so next time they decide to get another dog they know what they are looking for. All in all, it's about having fun with your dog and giving the general public opportunities to do so.


----------



## Sighthounds4me

Pai said:


> It's also a part of cat shows, and is pretty popular with those. It's not only about increasing revenue (money is something which AKC shows have been having real problems with in recent years), but getting more people into the sport that might otherwise not. Also, there are some people who show without any desire to breed.


Yeah, but cat shows are a whole different kettle of fish. Very few cat breeds are as old or traditional as dog breeds, and most of them have been created for little more than companionship. As such, people have bred them indiscriminately for many more years than dogs, and really only recently started paying attention to breeds. Thus, in my mind, a companion class, aka altered class, makes more sense.

As for those that show dogs with no intention of breeding them, I am one. But I respect and cherish the reason for the sport. I believe that to open it up to non-breeding quality dogs, it cheapens the sport. (And I already feel it's cheap enough, given the politics, and the fact that a person could finish a pair of socks, if they drag it around to enough shows.) I show because I enjoy it, and because I am a competitive person.

As I think about it more, the other issue I can conceive is this: you say this may get more people into the sport than would otherwise be in it. Fair enough. But so many exhibitors sre very unwelcoming of newcomers, even if they get into conformation showing for the "right" reasons, and do everything the "right" way. In my mind, to include altered dogs in competition, even if it's not *direct* competition with intact dogs, will only cause that rift to deepen. Those long-time exhibitors who have made a name for themselves will really look down on people who show "pets." Then, what could have otherwise been a fun, rewarding sport for the newbie becomes an exercise in futility, and extremely frustrating. Rather than continue in the sport by acquiring a show/breeding-quality dog, as is likely intended by the AKC, what's going to happen instead is, these newbies will become very discouraged, and not want to continue.

I truly understand the money problems AKC sanctioned clubs face. But I think there are better ways to address those problems. For example, entry fees for shows have skyrocketed in recent years. My boys' breeder remembers when entry fees were $5-10, and that was not terribly long ago. Now, entry fees are 5 times that, or more! So few people can afford to enter a show at all, much less with multiple dogs, plus then afford the travel fees associated with these shows.

I am not saying that I think entry fees need to drop back to $5. But perhaps they can drop to $25 or $30 for two days, instead of one. I can enter _four_ UKC shows in a weekend for less than it costs to enter two AKC shows! And, while it's often easier to finish a dog in UKC, which makes UKC titles almost meaningless in many breeds. But that is why I often choose UKC shows to "get my feet wet" with a new dog. To introduce them to the show ring under less pressure, and with less cash outlay is very appealing. I believe that to drop the entry fees would not only ecourage more exhibitors to enter multiple dogs, it would also encourage them to show to both judges on a weekend, even if one is unlikely to appreciate his/her entries. I know I am VERY particular to go to only judges that will consider my dogs, because I *hate* to waste money on something that won't give me a return on my investment.

Now, that is unlikely to be feesible, given the costs associated with putting on a conformation show. But there has to be a way to attract more exhibitors without cheapening the sport more than it has already been cheapened.


----------



## sizzledog

I show in UKC Altered. In fact, Ronin is the first ALCH Doberman. We LOVE showing in Altered - but I wouldn't do it in AKC.


----------



## Willowy

The reason for alter class in cat shows is because very few people are able to keep an intact cat---toms can become aggressive to the judges and are generally obnoxious to live with, and even breeding queens need to be spayed ASAP after having their litters or they'll get pyo (and even if they don't, an unspayed queen will never have a showable coat because of the constant stress of being in heat). In general, only very young cats (9-18 months) are shown in Championship class in cat shows. So if they only allowed intact cats to show, there would be very few showable cats, and almost no cats over 2 years of age. So you'd never get to see a well-bred mature cat. And they say that showing the altered cats still shows off the bloodlines so it's still a good reason to show; even if THEY can't breed, their kittens and other relatives still can. Premier class is NOT a companion cat class (and I think cat show people would be irked to hear that!). . .Household Pet is for that. 

So when you look at the reasons for having an alter class, the reasons just aren't the same for dogs. It's not terribly difficult to keep an intact dog; they aren't as prone to the health and behavioral problems associated with being intact. And people who are showing dogs are less likely to own the entire bloodline (cat breeders usually have a lot of cats). But I'm sure there are some people who have altered dogs who would like to show just for the love of competition, and if it got more people into the sport, it's all good. 

To say that it wouldn't be a good idea because some people are very unwelcoming to newcomers is kind of shortsighted, don't you think? Shouldn't something be done to change that, instead of saying "oh, we can't possibly takes steps to make the sport more welcoming to newcomers because some (many? most?) dog show people are jerks"? 

If dog show people want the sport to continue, they have to be more welcoming to newcomers. Or the hobby will just die out.


----------



## Sighthounds4me

Willowy said:


> To say that it wouldn't be a good idea because some people are very unwelcoming to newcomers is kind of shortsighted, don't you think? Shouldn't something be done to change that, instead of saying "oh, we can't possibly takes steps to make the sport more welcoming to newcomers because some (many? most?) dog show people are jerks"?
> 
> If dog show people want the sport to continue, they have to be more welcoming to newcomers. Or the hobby will just die out.


I didn't say I agree with those exhibitors who are unwelcoming. I myself try to be as friendly as I possibly can be, or at the least, explain I have had a bad day, and may not be as warm as I normally am. But since I am a relative newcomer myself, and as yet have a lot to learn, it's hard for me to teach others.

I just stated that to explain one of the problems with this plan. I HATE that many exhibitors are cold and withdrawn. I agree that without more welcoming people in the sport, it's likely to die out. But, unless we can change the minds of the majority of longtime exhibitors, that aspect is unlikely to change. And, while many of us do try, many more will never change. They think they are entitled to feel this way, because they have spent years "paying their dues," or they have been burned by newcomers before, and cease putting thmselves out there, to avoid further problems. Or they just buy into the cliquiness that this sport can foster. And because the oldtimers have been around so long, their attitude is accepted. They also can't see that many newcomers/young people have good ideas too, despite that they are different than long-standing tradition.

Really, unless you have been in the dog show world, it's very difficult to understand this aspect of it. I am NOT defending it, don't misunderstand. I am simply explaining that it's an aspect of showing dogs that will likely never change.


----------



## RaeganW

I am SO FOR an AKC Altered class. I think it needs to be dealt with intelligently (and I don't have a ton of confidence that my definition of intelligently will be adhered to) but it could be an EXCELLENT way to build bridges. 

Concern needs to be paid to the fact that "pets" would be much easier to show, and we all know that just because a dog has papers and reproductive organs doesn't make him a show candidate. It would be even easier to put non-show quality animals in the ring in an altered class. I would not allow ILP dogs, as a start. And if you aren't careful you could CRUSH people who simply didn't know any better and thought it would be a nice thing to do with their dog one weekend and make them into enemies just through nastiness. 

But it could be an excellent way to bridge to pet owners of well bred dogs. People interested in exhibiting but without the resources to get a showable dog right now (cough cough, myself) have basically no way to get into the sport. If you've aged out of juniors, the best you can hope for is teaming up with someone who has two dogs they are campaigning who will let you handle one. And if your first time in the ring is with your first show puppy, you've basically dived into the deep end of the pool, depending on your breed. An Altered class could be a GREAT way to get experience without ruffling more feathers than you need to. So when you do go to a breeder for that show puppy, you have some experience to show them.

Also, I want to show Marsh. He's pretty.


----------



## Pai

Sighthounds4me said:


> Yeah, but cat shows are a whole different kettle of fish. Very few cat breeds are as old or traditional as dog breeds, and most of them have been created for little more than companionship.


There are entire breeds of dogs that were invented just to be 'pets' (almost the entire Toy goup, for example), and many more whose 'breed specific' work has not existed for generations -- the majority of show dogs do not work (trials and dogsports are not work, but are competitive games just like conformation), and are bred only as exhibition animals/pets. So I don't honestly see a difference in most cases. 

The reason fees have gone up, is because entries and participation have been going down for years now. The AKC is in a financial decline, and if people want the 'sport' of dog shows to continue in any meaningful large-scale way, they're going to have to adapt to new activities and options being added to the traditional 'breeding stock evaluation' framework (which many people will argue has been mostly lost in modern shows anyway).

Any old-school people who would be so snobby as to bash or treat newcomers badly just for competing in a class/event that they personally have no use for, are exactly the sort of people who give dog shows and show breeders a bad name, and who discourage people from ever considering going into dog shows. They _already_ hurt the sport right now, the addition of new classes won't change their underlying ego and rudeness issues. There's a reason the UKC is considered a better choice for new people -- and getting new people to show is getting new blood who have a chance at eventually becoming veterans who will then encourage others to go to the UKC rather than the AKC. Instead of wanting things to stay the same, the AKC needs to change and adapt, or it _will_ become obsolete.


----------



## KBLover

RaeganW said:


> I would not allow ILP dogs, as a start.




So that means even if Cotons were recognized by AKC, Wally couldn't play since he's registered via PAL/ILP (since Cotons are "recognized" via FSS).

That would suck if I ended up screwing Wally over because I didn't know they were doing something like this.



Sighthounds4me said:


> Very few cat breeds are as old or traditional as dog breeds, and most of them have been created for little more than companionship.



See: Toy Group. 

Or...what would a Pekingese do if he had to do a job besides being a living throw rug or lap warmer? 

I guess he could be a turtle herder - they might not out run a good Pekingese


----------



## RaeganW

FSS breeds have a hard time of it, I think they have to be fixed to be registered, which keeps your breeding population out of performance events. 

IF it is a goal of the Altered class to keep "quality" of the class relatively high (keeping in mind that the quality is likely going to be somewhat lower, after all you "best" dogs are probably intact), one way to do that is to require your entrants have a pedigree. Think of the difference between Premier in cats vs. the household pet class.


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim

Lots of Toy breeds had a small, relatively unknown to today's society, job of biting hands of unwanted gropers and alerting the guards to throw them out. They weren't just lap/hand/feet warmers, nor just companions. They kept their owners safe (since majority of toy breed owners originally were royalty, Pekingese being exclusively owned by royalty, and it was a penalty of death for stealing one). Most toy breeds were alert dogs, alert guards of trouble. Then you have the house and/or barn, and boat ratters. And let's not forget the pomeranians original job. Oh and I almost forgot about the toy poodle's days as a circus dog. Not saying you could actually move them to another group, as I think they should stay in the toy group. Just thought I would mention they did more than just give their owners companionship. I believe the pekingese was the only breed specifically originally bred for companionship. The others had some kind of job to do. 

Also FSS breeds don't have to be altered to be registered, to my knowledge. That would kind of defeat a the purpose of Foundation Stock. 

I still just don't know about an altered class.


----------



## lil_fuzzy

Maybe it's different here, but over here retired show/breeding dogs often get desexed, and still participate in shows as they get older (we already have shows for desexed dogs here). The reason being that if you have a puppy from a show dog, you might want to see how the parent turned out later on if you're consider breeding the offspring or grand-offspring of that dog.


----------



## Xeph

> To say that it wouldn't be a good idea because some people are very unwelcoming to newcomers is kind of shortsighted, don't you think?


No. It's reality.

Like Sarah, I try so very hard to be welcoming to new people, but as much as people want to believe that "one person can make a difference", a lot of the time it's not true. It doesn't matter how welcoming and kind my husband and I, or Sarah and her husband are to newcomers. That's 4 of us against hundreds of others (with hundreds of YEARS of experience behind them, to our, perhaps two decades combined).

We can be as nice as we please, but if two of us are inclusive, and 6 others basically snub the new people, what do you REALLY think is going to happen?


----------



## sassafras

ChaosIsAWeim said:


> Lots of Toy breeds had a small, relatively unknown to today's society, job of biting hands of unwanted gropers and alerting the guards to throw them out.


Huh, I never knew that. That's very interesting!


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim

Xeph said:


> No. It's reality.
> 
> Like Sarah, I try so very hard to be welcoming to new people, but as much as people want to believe that "one person can make a difference", a lot of the time it's not true. It doesn't matter how welcoming and kind my husband and I, or Sarah and her husband are to newcomers. That's 4 of us against hundreds of others (with hundreds of YEARS of experience behind them, to our, perhaps two decades combined).
> 
> We can be as nice as we please, but if two of us are inclusive, and 6 others basically snub the new people, what do you REALLY think is going to happen?


I 100% agree. I try to be as nice as possible. Yes If you are going to talk to me while my dog is on the grooming table, I will be grooming while we are talking or if I am running late I will kindly tell you to please come back later. Yes I don't generally like people to touch my dogs till we are done in the ring, so I may get snippy with persistent people, not that I mean to but seriously if I tell you not to touch my dog, don't touch my dog. Yes, since I am human, I will have my bad days where I don't want to talk to anyone, thats why I love RVing at shows, I can go and take a nap and cool off then come back and talk to people. I don't generally like to answer a million questions before I go into the ring, as I need to pay attention to the ring, but I always tell people where I am set up and tell them I will be around all day if they want to come find me and ask me those questions. 

I am always willing to help new people, that's why I joined AKC's mentoring program in the first place. Because like I said in another thread, I didn't get the help I deserved when I first started, so I know how it feels to get snubbed by some people at shows.

But there are those that you are just not going to change, no matter how much you want to. There will always be those people that ruin it for others. Just like in any sport/hobby.


----------



## Willowy

Xeph said:


> No. It's reality.
> 
> Like Sarah, I try so very hard to be welcoming to new people, but as much as people want to believe that "one person can make a difference", a lot of the time it's not true. It doesn't matter how welcoming and kind my husband and I, or Sarah and her husband are to newcomers. That's 4 of us against hundreds of others (with hundreds of YEARS of experience behind them, to our, perhaps two decades combined).
> 
> We can be as nice as we please, but if two of us are inclusive, and 6 others basically snub the new people, what do you REALLY think is going to happen?


Isn't that like saying "oh, well, our hobby will be defunct in xx years but there's nothing I can do about it so I might as well just stick with the status quo"? Just accept that dog showing won't exist in 15 years because some people were brats?

Yes, it is true that some people will be jerks no matter what, but saying that nothing should ever be changed because of those jerks is really a defeatist attitude. "Let's just give the brats whatever they want so they don't have a tantrum" kind of thing. If something will be for the betterment of the hobby, it shouldn't matter what the jerks think.

I hardly expect everybody to be gregarious and welcoming and helpful at all times (no matter what hobby/sport we're talking about), but there's a difference between not being everybody's best friend and deliberately trying to drive newcomers away from the hobby.


----------



## Sighthounds4me

Willowy said:


> Isn't that like saying "oh, well, our hobby will be defunct in xx years but there's nothing I can do about it so I might as well just stick with the status quo"? Just accept that dog showing won't exist in 15 years because some people were brats?
> 
> Yes, it is true that some people will be jerks no matter what, but saying that nothing should ever be changed because of those jerks is really a defeatist attitude. "Let's just give the brats whatever they want so they don't have a tantrum" kind of thing. If something will be for the betterment of the hobby, it shouldn't matter what the jerks think.
> 
> I hardly expect everybody to be gregarious and welcoming and helpful at all times (no matter what hobby/sport we're talking about), but there's a difference between not being everybody's best friend and deliberately trying to drive newcomers away from the hobby.


<sigh>

Let me clarify this one more time.

We. Never. Said. We. Didn't. Want. Change.

But trust me when I tell you that to expct change, even when actively working for it, is not realistic in this sport. I have spoken to AKC reps, asking them about enforcing the code of sportsmanship. They won't do it. So, unless change occurs from the top down, it'll never happen. If the "cops" won't even enforce the rules, who are we newbies to do so? All that will happen is that we will be laughed out of the ring, and no real change will occur.

It's not a matter of us not _wanting_ change. It's a matter of being realistic. There truly is only so much we can do. Again - if you haven't lived it, you can't begin to know...


----------



## Xeph

It's kinda like on another board when people were complaining how the BOB GSD winner at Westminster was set up. "Why doesn't anybody say anything?"

Because GSD Fanciers that have been in for 40+ years LIKE to see that, and in a breed when you're still considered new after a DECADE the handler *will not listen to you*!!! You WILL NOT be acknowledged and you most likely WILL be told that you're foolish!

It is not a matter of not wanting change. You would not BELIEVE the things I try to do to get people involved in dog sports (all of them). People younger AND older than me. ANYBODY that is interested! I get some people to come see us at shows, only for them to be torn down by the "Pillars" of the breed because the new people own German dogs, not American dogs, or because they bought a dog from a "rival" breeder instead of them.

People look for reasons to say a new person is not willing to learn and is a "know it all" even if that is not true.

I am not going to change the mind of a Pug breeder that has been exhibiting since 1940. They pine for the old days when younger people were seen and not heard, and that is not the way these days...and they hate it. But they won't adapt to it.


----------



## RaeganW

There are things PEOPLE can do (being nice to strangers is a place to start, as Jackie and Sarah are), and there are things the AKC can do. The AKC is in a tough place: they need more income as registrations and entries dry up, but they also can't afford to piss off the entire show community. I'll even give them the benefit of the doubt and say the head mucketymucks at AKC who make these kinds of decisions do want to do what is in the best interest of the AKC first and the exhibitors second. But the sport of Purebred dogs is primarily an old people sport. They've been doing things their way for decades and its working for them, why SHOULD they change?

That's not to say every longtime participant is stuck in the past, a lot of the people I look up to are a lot savvier about the game and what it needs than I think I'll ever be. But still, when the bunny ears ain't broke, don't take away analog television.


----------



## Sighthounds4me

By the way, I have an example of poor sportsmanship, and speaking to an AKC rep about it:

A few years ago, I attended a show as a spectator. I did not have an entry, but sat ringside during my breed. There was one special entered, several class dogs, and a few class bitches. The special is one of those dogs that should never have been shown, much less finished, but the breeder/owner/handler dragged him from show to show long enough to actually find the judges that thought he was of good quality.

Anyway, the judge put up the Winners Dog for BOB, because he was of superior quality. It was an appropriate move. as the special's breeder left the ring, she was shouting about how unfair it was. Many expletives were used, including the F-bomb, several times. Everyone in the building could hear her. The judge and steward acted as though they heard nothing.

Some time later, at a different show, I approached the AKC rep and asked him what he would have done if he had been ringside. He told me he'd have done NOTHING unless the judge had asked him to! This is despite the following code of sportsmanship (bolding is mine):



> AKC Code of Sportsmanship
> PREFACE: The sport of purebred dog competitive events dates prior to 1884, the year of AKC’s birth. Shared values of those involved in the sport include principles of sportsmanship. They are practiced in all sectors of our sport: conformation, performance and companion.
> Many believe that these principles of sportsmanship are the prime reason why our sport has thrived for over one hundred years. With the belief that it is useful to periodically articulate the fundamentals of our sport, this code is presented.
> 
> • Sportsmen respect the history, traditions and integrity of the sport of purebred dogs.
> • Sportsmen commit themselves to values of fair play, honesty, courtesy, and vigorous competition, *as well as winning and losing with grace.*
> • Sportsmen refuse to compromise their commitment and obligation to the sport of purebred dogs by injecting personal advantage or consideration into their decisions or behavior.
> • The sportsman judge judges only on the merits of the dogs and considers no other factors.
> • The sportsman judge or exhibitor accepts constructive criticism.
> • The sportsman exhibitor declines to enter or exhibit under a judge where it might reasonably appear that the judge’s placements could be based on something other than the merits of the dogs.
> • The sportsman exhibitor refuses to compromise the impartiality of a judge.
> • The sportsman respects the AKC bylaws, rules, regulations and policies governing the sport of purebred dogs.
> • Sportsmen find that vigorous competition and civility are not inconsistent and are able to appreciate the merit of their competition and the effort of competitors.
> • Sportsmen welcome, encourage and support newcomers to the sport.
> • Sportsmen will deal fairly with all those who trade with them.
> • Sportsmen are willing to share honest and open appraisals of both the strengths and weaknesses of their breeding stock.
> • Sportsmen spurn any opportunity to take personal advantage of positions offered or bestowed upon them.
> • Sportsmen always consider as paramount the welfare of their dog.
> • Sportsmen refuse to embarrass the sport, the American Kennel Club, or themselves while taking part in the sport.


So, it's not just the exhibitors we are up against. It comes from the top down.


----------



## Xeph

To add to what Sarah said, Mirada got beaten at a show by a dog that wasn't of as nice of quality as Mirada is. I left the ring, people told me I got screwed, and then they looked at me like I had four heads when I said "You lose more than you win. It's ok. My bitch showed well, and that's all that matters."

They EXPECT and almost seem to ASK for somebody to get pissy! Now what sense does that make? It doesn't make me look good, it doesn't make the sport look good, and it detracts from another person's win. Another person who MAY be a newbie! Another person who should be celebrating.

My being mad will not change the fact that the judge on that day thought the other bitch was better.

You know what I'll do? I won't give the judge another entry. Simple. I needn't pitch a hissy or steal another person's joy. I'll just exhibit my bitch to a judge that will like her type.

At this same show a dog I really happen to like won the breed, and the handler of the bitch that had beaten mine exclaimed loudly "Great! So now we can see another lame dog in the group ring!"

Please tell me what the point of that is, aside from sour grapes?

When somebody wins the breed, regardless of whether or not I care for them or their dog, I congratulate them, because it is the RIGHT thing to do. It is good sportsmanship. Many people have been doing the same with me and Mirada. I do not cry politics, or cheat, or claim somebody has dyed their dog (because it has been claimed, and does happen). If I lost, I lost. I'll hug my girl, go back to the setup, and happily talk dogs with anybody that is interested.


----------



## dantero

I'm not big on conformation, but I've never understood why altered dogs can't compete. I understand it's supposed to be a test for breeding stock, but those altered dogs have parents also. IMO the show ring should be just as much about looking at what the parents have produced, as looking at the breeding potential of the dog being shown. There are many reasons show quality dogs may be altered, some as simple as an owner who listened to their vet and spayed/neutered early. Or a dog who was placed by the breeder into a pet home who turned out much nicer than expected. Or someone who has no interest in ever breeding, and doesn't want to deal with the heat cycles. The list goes on.

When I am looking at a dog I like, my first question is "who are the parents?" Unless I think the dog I'm looking at is much better than both it's parents, I'm just as likely to look for a pup from a repeat breeding, or one of the parents, as I am a pup from the dog I'm looking at. If I'm looking for a stud dog, then I will look at how my bitch might match up with the dogs sire, in addition to how she'd match up to the dog in front of me.


----------



## KBLover

Sighthounds4me said:


> By the way, I have an example of poor sportsmanship, and speaking to an AKC rep about it:
> 
> A few years ago, I attended a show as a spectator. I did not have an entry, but sat ringside during my breed. There was one special entered, several class dogs, and a few class bitches. The special is one of those dogs that should never have been shown, much less finished, but the breeder/owner/handler dragged him from show to show long enough to actually find the judges that thought he was of good quality.
> 
> Anyway, the judge put up the Winners Dog for BOB, because he was of superior quality. It was an appropriate move. as the special's breeder left the ring, she was shouting about how unfair it was. Many expletives were used, including the F-bomb, several times. Everyone in the building could hear her. The judge and steward acted as though they heard nothing.
> 
> Some time later, at a different show, I approached the AKC rep and asked him what he would have done if he had been ringside. He told me he'd have done NOTHING unless the judge had asked him to! This is despite the following code of sportsmanship (bolding is mine):
> 
> 
> 
> So, it's not just the exhibitors we are up against. It comes from the top down.




Just wow!

What's the point of having rules and codes of conduct if the AKC isn't going to enforce their own rules.

I'll never understand dog sports I guess. It would be like the NFL deciding not to enforce the rules of football because some of the owners want to do things "the old way" and if any rules interfere with that, they'll just ignore it and the commissioner won't fix it.

I don't get it. To me, a sport has to have rules and those rules have to be enforced. All of them. Not just the ones that won't upset the veterans of the sport. 

I'll never understand it.


----------



## MissMutt

I don't agree with it, but I DO understand it.  Comparing it to the NFL doesn't make sense, because even if you enforce the rules and make some people leave the NFL, there will always be someone willing to play (because they are getting PAID to play). If you piss off the veterans at dog shows, who bring dozens of dogs EACH to shows, that's losing thousands, maybe millions in the entry fees that the AKC so desperately needs.

Economically, which is better in the short term for the AKC - hanging on to its veterans who bring kennel-fulls of dogs to shows and perhaps some of their own dogs' progeny? Or changing things to draw in a few new beginners with 1-2 dogs each?


----------



## Yvonne

Conformation showing exists so that dog owners get an evaluated and judged idea from someone who is not kennel blind to how they view their dog to kind of get a second and third and fourth opinions that what they see in the dog is there as a criteria for later breeding. It does not make sense to conformation show a dog that cannot reproduce based on why conformation showing exists. As an owner I can omg my dog is gorgeous because I love my dog and may not see things that are or are not there where as someone else knowledgeable viewing the dog is objective and says omg the pasterns are weak and or the croup is terrible or look at the topline and the owner goes huh I just dont see that at all. When I had my first bitch I learned all of this roughly. I saw only one or two faults until I got second dog then third then fourth and over time I now see clearly the problems in my first bitch glaringly. Did I get pissed if someone talked to me of my dogs issues that I did not see? oh yeah!! but I learned and it was rough but I am a better dog owner for it now and more knowledgeable in what I see in other dogs to. Only experience can do that. I developed an "eye" that I thought I had in the beginning and I am the first to admit now that with my knowledge level now that back then I was not as good as I thought. Time and patience and listening are the best teachers.


----------



## RaeganW

Yvonne said:


> Conformation showing exists so that dog owners get an evaluated and judged idea from someone who is not kennel blind to how they view their dog to kind of get a second and third and fourth opinions that what they see in the dog is there as a criteria for later breeding. It does not make sense to conformation show a dog that cannot reproduce based on why conformation showing exists. As an owner I can omg my dog is gorgeous because I love my dog and may not see things that are or are not there where as someone else knowledgeable viewing the dog is objective and says *omg the pasterns are weak and or the croup is terrible or look at the topline* and the owner goes huh I just dont see that at all.


Sounds like something that would be useful for performance dog owners to hear...



> When I had my first bitch I learned all of this roughly. I saw only one or two faults until I got second dog then third then fourth and over time I now see clearly the problems in my first bitch glaringly. Did I get pissed if someone talked to me of my dogs issues that I did not see? oh yeah!! but I learned and it was rough *but I am a better dog owner for it now and more knowledgeable in what I see in other dogs to.* Only experience can do that. I developed an "eye" that I thought I had in the beginning and I am the first to admit now that with my knowledge level now that back then I was not as good as I thought. Time and patience and listening are the best teachers.


Sounds like something interested and active dog owners would like to be...


----------



## Yvonne

anytime you tell someone more interested in working lines <working sport dogs> that the structure of their dog is lacking they will respond show dogs suck and their dog is just fine lol


----------



## RaeganW

I'm not talking about GSDs. I'm talking about the person who has a purebred Miniature Schnauzer with a front so straight his point of shoulder is in front of his prosternum. Should would be nice for the dog if someone told them "Your dog has a straight front" before they asked that dog to jump his height, slam to a 2-on-2-off, or weave 12 poles in a row.


----------



## Yvonne

yes I agree it should be and what I said is not restricted by no means to just the gsd. Border collies and many other breeds also have the same prejudices between working bred and conformation bred. I agree that knowing the proper conformation and why it is so is a great benefit for even pet dogs that run agility courses but most people get offended or say something rude about conformation shows rather that be practical and understand there is a reason and stregths and weaknesses behind their dogs builds.


----------



## RaeganW

Yvonne said:


> yes I agree it should be and what I said is not restricted by no means to just the gsd. Border collies and many other breeds also have the same prejudices between working bred and conformation bred. I agree that knowing the proper conformation and why it is so is a great benefit for even pet dogs that run agility courses but most people get offended or say something rude about conformation shows rather that be practical and understand there is a reason and stregths and weaknesses behind their dogs builds.


Gee! Sure would be nice if there was a way to bring these people into the fold rather than always exclude them and build up hostilities on both side of the fence!


----------



## Yvonne

i agree and always have. The best way I figure is only buy from working lines that pay attention to structure and only buy from showlines that do full working titles and not just a Bh here and a herding instinct test there. Support the breeders that have the full package no matter which type.


----------



## animalcraker

The only bad thing that I could see happening with adding an alter class is that now your dog won't have to remain intact to be shown. Once law makers and AR's get a whiff of that they won't be allowing provisions in their mandatory speuter laws for show animals and will likey make it even more difficult to own an intact animal, let alone breed one.


----------



## KBLover

MissMutt said:


> I don't agree with it, but I DO understand it. Comparing it to the NFL doesn't make sense, because even if you enforce the rules and make some people leave the NFL, there will always be someone willing to play (because they are getting PAID to play). If you piss off the veterans at dog shows, who bring dozens of dogs EACH to shows, that's losing thousands, maybe millions in the entry fees that the AKC so desperately needs.
> 
> Economically, which is better in the short term for the AKC - hanging on to its veterans who bring kennel-fulls of dogs to shows and perhaps some of their own dogs' progeny? Or changing things to draw in a few new beginners with 1-2 dogs each?



Rules of a sport should be enforced - or don't have them. I do not understand why you have rules and won't enforce them. 

That's sports - every game/competition has rules that need to be followed. If the "game" is going to be changed at the whim of people who pay the money - then what sort of sport is it?

Yeah, the players are getting paid in the NFL, but the owners are PAYING for the players and to buy teams in the first place. That's why I said owners, not players. NFL doesn't change rules because some owners paid more for their teams or their teams or winning so they make more money for the NFL from fan revenue, etc. 

If AKC cares about the sport - they would want the rules to be upheld, regardless of who's who and how many dogs they register for an event, etc. Sounds like they are worrying more about money and who's making it over the sport.

Again, I ask, what's the point of rules if you're not going to enforce them or do so only by who you are and how much money you're generating. What other sport out there does that and "set up" winners, etc, instead of it being open competition on a level playing field? 

That's why I like dog sports like agility. The course and the clock don't give a dog's butt who you are.


----------



## sizzledog

RaeganW said:


> FSS breeds have a hard time of it, I think they have to be fixed to be registered, which keeps your breeding population out of performance events.
> 
> IF it is a goal of the Altered class to keep "quality" of the class relatively high (keeping in mind that the quality is likely going to be somewhat lower, after all you "best" dogs are probably intact), one way to do that is to require your entrants have a pedigree. Think of the difference between Premier in cats vs. the household pet class.


UKC Altered dogs are required to be registered with the UKC. 



animalcraker said:


> The only bad thing that I could see happening with adding an alter class is that now your dog won't have to remain intact to be shown. Once law makers and AR's get a whiff of that they won't be allowing provisions in their mandatory speuter laws for show animals and will likey make it even more difficult to own an intact animal, let alone breed one.


THIS is exactly the reason why I don't want it to happen in the AKC. If you want to show in Altered, go to UKC. Make Altered something GREAT in UKC.... but to pull it over to AKC would be (in my opinion) shooting ourselves in the foot.


----------



## Pawzk9

Pai said:


> Here are some ideas that are percolating in various committees at the moment (via an AKC delegate in one of the mailing lists I'm on):
> 
> 
> 1-- 4-6 month puppy competition before the classes start
> 
> 2-- Owner-handler competition
> 
> 3-- Reserve Best in Show
> 
> 4-- Puppy and adult dog bred-by exhibitor competition
> 
> 5-- Neutered dog and bitch competition
> 
> 6-- Master Class for Juniors
> 
> 7-- Re-evaluating jump heights in agility and OB (subcommittee on this
> issue)
> 
> ...Ideas? Opinions? I think an Alter class would be AWESOME, personally.


ASCA has been doing altered classes for years, and despite original reservations, it's gone well. It still reflects on the kennels and dogs who produce quality dogs, whether or not those dogs are chosen to continue to contribute to the gene pool. What sort of evaluation are they considering of obedience jump heights? Step over? Already they have been taken down from one and a half times, to one and a quarter times, to shoulder height. IMO, any dog who can't jump shoulder height probably shouldn't be asked to jump.



RBark said:


> Isn't that basically the mutt/ILP class?


No. It is for dogs who have known pedigree but are not producing puppies, as opposed to dogs of unknown heritage/



Sighthounds4me said:


> I have to say, I can't really see the point in altered classes. UKC does this, and I just don't get it.
> 
> Generally, the reasons breeders alter dogs has to do with a lack of show quality. For example, my Cooper was altered because his rear is very straight. Could he have finished in the show ring? Maybe, with enough time and patience (and judges who don't know the breed standard). But his breeders did not want him representing them, and I can't blame them.
> 
> Other reasons for altering would be health: maybe the dog has hip dysplasia, or PRA, or any other in a large list of hereditary problems. These are things that most breeders would not want to represent their breeding programs.
> 
> Having said that, if I had a rescue dog that I thought i could have fun with, or came close to the breed standard, I might want to show in altered classes.
> 
> So, I can see it both ways. I just think it's yet another way for the AKC to make more money...
> 
> I believe there are changes that need to occur. But I don't like the idea of the AKC pandering for more money by constantly expanding it's reach to include everything. What's next? Cats?


I don't know exactly what UKC does (or what AKC would do), but a rescue dog who meets the breed standard but doesn't have a registration history would not be eligible in ASCA. Some other reasons for showing a dog in altered would include testicular injuries or medical reasons for spaying. I had a multiple BOB/S, BIS (rare breed - close to 100 dogs) winning bitch (ASCA, before my breed was AKC) I would have continued to show if I could have after she developed pyo and required spaying.



animalcraker said:


> The only bad thing that I could see happening with adding an alter class is that now your dog won't have to remain intact to be shown. Once law makers and AR's get a whiff of that they won't be allowing provisions in their mandatory speuter laws for show animals and will likey make it even more difficult to own an intact animal, let alone breed one.


That is a point to be considered.


----------



## dantero

Yvonne said:


> yes I agree it should be and what I said is not restricted by no means to just the gsd. Border collies and many other breeds also have the same prejudices between working bred and conformation bred. I agree that knowing the proper conformation and why it is so is a great benefit for even pet dogs that run agility courses but most people get offended or say something rude about conformation shows rather that be practical and understand there is a reason and stregths and weaknesses behind their dogs builds.


Except that many times, the structure that is popular in the show ring is NOT the best structure for work. And unless you have one of the few breeds bred strictly to be a pet, the breeds started out as working dogs who perfomed a job, and looked enough alike for someone to decide they were a breed, write up a standard, name it, etc and then start showing it.

Good structure is good structure, but conformation fads and good structure do not always go hand in hand. I'll take my own breed (Malinois) as an example. I am generalizing, but what I see in the conformation ring compared to the working arena is straighter fronts and rears, fronts that are to far forward, dogs that are square but in some cases are actually shorter in length than in height, and in some cases have gotten the square appearance not because of short backs but because of angulation loss. These are the dogs that are put up as "correct" for the breed. On the other hand many of the working dogs have more angulation, and are a little longer than square. But I find a much higher level of athletic ability in the working dogs, in terms of jumping, running, etc. I'm not talking about jumping 20-24 inch jumps, I'm talking about jumping 4+ foot jumps, 15 foot long jumps, etc. 

I'm not touching on things like heads, ear set and size, etc because those don't effect athletic ability.

Another breed which you mentioned, the BC. Working BC's look quite different than conformation BC's. When I'm out at herding though, the working bred BCs can work circles around the conformation bred BCs, and I don't mean in terms of instinct. I mean in terms of athletic ability. The show dogs are held up as being the proper dogs conformationaly, but they don't have the athletic ability of the working dogs (in general). So which one is really correct?

I'm not even going to touch the GSD, no one will ever convince me the average conformation GSD has better structure than the average working GSD.

Final thought, many of the working dogs may not meet the current "standard" for the show ring, but if you read the written standard for their breed, they do fit that.



Yvonne said:


> Conformation showing exists so that dog owners get an evaluated and judged idea from someone who is not kennel blind to how they view their dog to kind of get a second and third and fourth opinions that what they see in the dog is there as a criteria for later breeding. It does not make sense to conformation show a dog that cannot reproduce based on why conformation showing exists.


IMO it does, since those dogs have parents. Learning about the dog in front of you helps you learn what the parents of that dog are producing. It also helps you learn about the strengths and weaknesses of the dog in front of you.

If the whole point of dog shows are to evaluate dogs for breeding, then why allow people to enter dogs who they have no intentions of every breeding, just because the dog is intact? How many times have you read on the internet, or heard someone say in person "as soon as he/she finishes his/her Championship I'm going to alter him/her and start doing performance events". Why not ask people if they plan to breed their dog once it finishes the CH, and if the answer is "no", then reject their entry? If the only point really is to evaluate the breeding potential of the dog that was entered.


----------



## Yvonne

I will agree to disagree this show line I own has sch working titles and is correct in structure. In order to get to sch three he must jump six foot walls carrying dumbell and trot many miles... ect... look at him and tell me he is a horrible fad conformation? btw he got his V rating and KKL1 for life in Germany.
http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/german_shepherd_dog/dog.html?id=343309











Now AKC conformation there may be a total of 2 dogs I would own of them all.


----------



## sassafras

dantero said:


> ...fronts that are to far forward...


Does this mean that the front _legs_ are too far forward? I find these discussions really interesting but I don't know the terminology very well.


----------



## dantero

Yvonne said:


> Now AKC conformation there may be a total of 2 dogs I would own of them all.


I can't look at the photos right now (server block) but since we were talking about AKC and what they are going to allow into their conformation ring, I was talking about "AKC conformation"


----------



## Yvonne

but AKC is not the only show line and most see what you post and do not know any better. Working line is not split up into German and AKC so the distinction is important and it still insults anyone with show lines that can work and are not crippled by fad conformation as you put it.


----------



## Sighthounds4me

Pawzk9 said:


> I don't know exactly what UKC does (or what AKC would do), but a rescue dog who meets the breed standard but doesn't have a registration history would not be eligible in ASCA. Some other reasons for showing a dog in altered would include testicular injuries or medical reasons for spaying. I had a multiple BOB/S, BIS (rare breed - close to 100 dogs) winning bitch (ASCA, before my breed was AKC) I would have continued to show if I could have after she developed pyo and required spaying.


In UKC, the dog would have to have been registered with an *approved* registry. For example, if I had an ex-racing Greyhound, that dog would have been registered with the National Greyhound Association (NGA), and as such, would be recognized as purebred and pedigreed. That dog would be allowed to be cross-registered with UKC, and thus be eligible for altered classes.

There are many other breed clubs that would be approved registries. I don't recall any of them at this time, but I know there is a list on UKC's website. Also, a dog that has a limited registration in AKC would be eligible.


----------



## kacaju

I am not sure about an altered class....what about an adult showmanship class like the have for the Juniors? The Juniors can have an altered dog in the class. They are supposed to be judged on their handling..not the dog.
What would a Master Jr class be?


----------



## Yvonne

However when you cross register with UKC they allow full registration when breeders sell dogs on limited registrations with AKC. They also award championship conformations to your breeds DQs. I do not respect the UKC and what they do with my breed.


----------



## Xeph

While I don't care for a lot of the quality of dogs in GSDs at UKC shows, I have to admit that I have no problem with white dogs. I wouldn't be upset to see them reintegrated into the breed. I've seen some very nicely structured ones.


----------



## dantero

Yvonne said:


> but AKC is not the only show line and most see what you post and do not know any better. Working line is not split up into German and AKC so the distinction is important and it still insults anyone with show lines that can work and are not crippled by fad conformation as you put it.


Not any more than it insults working people to be told they know nothing about structure, have dogs that don't fit the standard, etc.



> sch three he must jump six foot walls carrying dumbell and trot many miles


The "wall" is an a-frame which is climbed over, not jumped. And is IMO the minimum any working dog should be able to do, little dogs in agility trials do something very similar, granted without the dumbell. Also there is no trotting many miles for a SchIII. There is no trotting at all except for maybe during the change of pace and motion exercises.

I'm not sure how this discussion became about your dog though. We were talking about AKC conformation, ie the dogs that are shown in the AKC show ring, and dogs in general, not even specific breeds. You even said you there were only 2 AKC conformation dogs you would own, reinforcing my point, that just because it's popular in the AKC show ring doesn't mean it's proper structure for working, or even proper according to the standard.

Your dog is good looking, as far as fads or what not I don't follow the GSD that closely. He looks different than most of my Schutzhund friends dogs, but they have working lines as far as I know.


----------



## Yvonne

They may not trot in sch for all breeds I was speaking of the trotting expected of a gsd. I did not start this about gsds I made an all breed announcement and went on to say it was in border collies and others as well. They others tried to make it about the gsd, not me. Perhaps reread the thread again and my posts will help.

It is more than the white variety I speak of in DQ for my breed with the UKC. I have also seen championship on a coated gsd that did not even have an undercoat.... big no no and they just don't have a clue or really don't care. I am against breeding whites as a gsd and am for making them a separate breed if they wish. It has been notated the white masking gene does affect quality and you should research the lines that bore livers and the whites that existed in those lines. IMO livers should not be produced.

I find it amusing when people do not "know" the gsd to tell me about the gsd and their qualifications ans structures.


----------



## Xeph

Nobody was trying to tell you anything. Dantero was just sharing her opinion, like everybody else on the thread.


----------



## upendi'smommy

Xeph said:


> Nobody was trying to tell you anything. Dantero was just sharing her opinion, like everybody else on the thread.


This this this. 

Honeslty Yvonne you seem to be taking everything personally when no one in here has attacked you or your dogs. Also, I didn't see anyone in here saying they think livers should be bred so I'm not quite sure why you feel the need to bring that up? Especially since last I checked they can not be shown in AKC or UKC because genetically they can not have a black nose. Last I knew no REPUTABLE breeder of working or show lines was breeding for liver dogs, do they pop up unexpectedly sometimes? Sure, but no reputable breeder out there is actively breeding for them so that point seems kind of moot.


----------



## RaeganW

dantero said:


> Good structure is good structure, but conformation fads and good structure do not always go hand in hand. I'll take my own breed (Malinois) as an example. I am generalizing, but what I see in the conformation ring compared to the working arena is straighter fronts and rears, fronts that are to far forward, dogs that are square but in some cases are actually shorter in length than in height, and in some cases have gotten the square appearance not because of short backs but because of angulation loss. These are the dogs that are put up as "correct" for the breed. On the other hand many of the working dogs have more angulation, and are a little longer than square. But I find a much higher level of athletic ability in the working dogs, in terms of jumping, running, etc. I'm not talking about jumping 20-24 inch jumps, I'm talking about jumping 4+ foot jumps, 15 foot long jumps, etc.


That's very interesting! Mals are no where close to being my breed, but I've seen a few pictures of show and working Mals and couldn't quite put my finger on it. Very interesting that they're getting overall less angulated! Since in so many breeds you just keep getting more rear. Not that it's any better really, but interesting.


----------



## Pawzk9

dantero said:


> Not any more than it insults working people to be told they know nothing about structure, have dogs that don't fit the standard, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> The "wall" is an a-frame which is climbed over, not jumped. And is IMO the minimum any working dog should be able to do, little dogs in agility trials do something very similar, granted without the dumbell. Also there is no trotting many miles for a SchIII. There is no trotting at all except for maybe during the change of pace and motion exercises.
> 
> I'm not sure how this discussion became about your dog though. We were talking about AKC conformation, ie the dogs that are shown in the AKC show ring, and dogs in general, not even specific breeds. You even said you there were only 2 AKC conformation dogs you would own, reinforcing my point, that just because it's popular in the AKC show ring doesn't mean it's proper structure for working, or even proper according to the standard.
> 
> Your dog is good looking, as far as fads or what not I don't follow the GSD that closely. He looks different than most of my Schutzhund friends dogs, but they have working lines as far as I know.


There is a four foot jump as well as aframe though. And not for a SchH III, but some dogs do the AD which is endurance, right? (I guess they still do that - been away from the sport for a couple of decades.


----------



## sizzledog

Sighthounds4me said:


> Also, a dog that has a limited registration in AKC would be eligible.


I believe an AKC limited reg dog must have photos submitted to show the dog does not have a DQ fault per the uKC standard. I registered my full-reg dog with no issues, but a friend with limited reg had to take a slew of photos and submit them with her application.


----------



## Yvonne

ok what good is showing non dq photos to UKC when they don't have any of the dq criteria for my breed? They give championships/ full registration to whites and coats and coats without undercoat. They do not go by dq's in a breed so what would the photos even do? This makes no sense. 

Yes, they still jump walls and they still do the endurance trot for AD Pawz, that is why I could not believe it was being denied. Gsds are trotters not jumpers like mals even though many working line folks are trying to breed their gsd in the shape of a mal and all they care a dog can do is the flashy sch. I do not feel that is very good for the breed. If they wish to use it like a mal get a mal.


----------



## Pawzk9

Yvonne said:


> ok what good is showing non dq photos to UKC when they don't have any of the dq criteria for my breed? They give championships/ full registration to whites and coats and coats without undercoat. They do not go by dq's in a breed so what would the photos even do? This makes no sense.
> 
> Yes, they still jump walls and they still do the endurance trot for AD Pawz, that is why I could not believe it was being denied. Gsds are trotters not jumpers like mals even though many working line folks are trying to breed their gsd in the shape of a mal and all they care a dog can do is the flashy sch. I do not feel that is very good for the breed. If they wish to use it like a mal get a mal.


Wasn't SchH developed FOR the GSD? I think Ringsport is more a Malinois type thing.


----------



## sizzledog

Yvonne said:


> ok what good is showing non dq photos to UKC when they don't have any of the dq criteria for my breed? They give championships/ full registration to whites and coats and coats without undercoat. They do not go by dq's in a breed so what would the photos even do? This makes no sense.
> 
> Yes, they still jump walls and they still do the endurance trot for AD Pawz, that is why I could not believe it was being denied. Gsds are trotters not jumpers like mals even though many working line folks are trying to breed their gsd in the shape of a mal and all they care a dog can do is the flashy sch. I do not feel that is very good for the breed. If they wish to use it like a mal get a mal.


Why does everyone focus on *just* their breed? It's like condemning an entire bushel of apples to the hog trough just because one apple isn't exactly what someone wants. You disagree with the way your breed is described in the UKC standard. That's fine. But not all breeds are like that in UKC.

Perhaps photos are no good for GSDs, but that's not to say photos of another breed are equally as useless. The dobe standard is actually more strict in UKC than AKC when it comes to the mouth, which I appreciate.


----------



## RaeganW

That's actually why structure is my favorite dog topic. Some stuff is breed-specific, but more is function-specific and sound-dog specific. Like you generally want well-laid back shoulders, but in sighthounds a more open front angle is beneficial for sprinting.


----------



## dantero

Yvonne said:


> Yes, they still jump walls and they still do the endurance trot for AD Pawz, that is why I could not believe it was being denied.


You said trotting many miles was required for the SchIII. 



> sch three he must jump six foot walls carrying dumbell and trot many miles


You did not say anything about the AD. I replied that trotting is not required for a SchIII. Dogs may trot during a few of the SchIII exercises, such as during the faster speed in the heeling, or the running (handler running) motion exercises, but in general dogs doing a SchIII, regardless of the breed, are not trotting. And once again, they do not jump walls. They do jump a hurdle, which is 1 meter, which is 3.28 feet, not 4 feet. But what used to be a wall many years ago is now an a-frame, and they climb it, they do not jump it.

If you want to talk about the AD instead of the SchIII, then yes, the dogs trot for many miles. Almost all the breeds trot, thats not a GSD specific thing.



> I find it amusing when people do not "know" the gsd to tell me about the gsd and their qualifications ans structures.


I never tried to tell you anything about GSD structure, other than there is an obvious difference in the structure of the different types of dogs within the breed. I don't have to be intimately knowledgable in the GSD to see that, I simply have to understand canine structure.

As far as "qualifications" go, if you mean Schutzhund, once again I don't have to know anything about GSD to know a LOT about Sch. 

I'm still confused about this comment though


> Gsds are trotters not jumpers like mals


Jumpers? As in they don't walk trot or gallop they just jump? My dogs trot a lot. It's a very natural gait for them. They don't trot the way a GSD does, they aren't built like GSD, but they definitely trot.

Anyway, at this point I think we are WAY off topic. I've given my opinions as to why I think allowing altered dogs in the conformation ring is a good idea, don't have much more to add to this thread.


----------



## Xeph

> Why does everyone focus on *just* their breed? It's like condemning an entire bushel of apples to the hog trough just because one apple isn't exactly what someone wants.


Agreed!!! A person can provide a LOT of structure insight and the like, regardless of whether they have a Pug or a Poodle! They don't need to be in "your" breed in order to have valid information!


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim

I finally found out what the Master class for Juniors is going to be.

This is what the AKC gazette says word for word.

"Master. This class will be fore boys and girls who are at least 9 years old and under 18 years old on the day of the show, and who have won the 10 first place wins in an Open Class Competition. The calendar for this class will be November 1-October 31 of the following year. 

All Juniors meeting the criteria for this class are required to enter the Master Class and may change their entry without charge the day of the show if entries are already closed. Once the eligibility time frame for that year has passed all participants return to the Open Class to compete for the following year."

This has been unanimously voted for, and I assume it will start this November. 

There were a few other new ideas AKC has come up with as well. Something about an "Open Show" but I am not sure what they mean by it. And an Adult Handler competition, which I wouldn't mind, I did that in England while I was there. I assume it would be without pro handlers but not much info on it. 

The Reserve BIS and 5th and 6th group placement ideas are going to vote in September. So we will see what they decide on those then. I think they will approve the Reserve BIS but not sure on the extra group placements.


----------



## Xeph

I like the idea of a Reserve BIS, but not the 5th and 6th placements. I honestly can't tell you WHY...something about it just bugs me...


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim

Well I don't like it because the thing about it is, the only time it will get in place is for groups to have a certain amount of dogs show up that day. I think it is 12 or so. So that means the non-sporting group would basically need every dog to show up that day. 

So I don't see how it is going to work because it really wouldn't be fair.


----------



## Sighthounds4me

Xeph said:


> I like the idea of a Reserve BIS, but not the 5th and 6th placements. I honestly can't tell you WHY...something about it just bugs me...


I don't disagree with this. Indtead of more group placements, I would like to see points for all group placements, like in Canada. The possibility of majors for class dogs who receive group placements makes sense. After all, if a class dog is determined to be of good enough quality to receive a bigger nod than just a breed win, he/she should receive more points, IMO. Especially if there are few, if any, points available in the breed.


----------



## Xeph

> The possibility of majors for class dogs who receive group placements makes sense.


While I agree, I do not think that a dog that won BOB because there was no other competition in its breed should garner those points. I feel that the BOB animal needs to beat at LEAST one other of it's breed in order to receive the points in the group. 

That's one of the things I don't care for about UKC....a dog can get its championship without ever defeating any other dog of its own breed!


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim

Also if I read this correctly, have to go back and look at it, AKC is putting a moratorium on new shows, so that they can review the affect of multiple shows a weekend, has on the entries at shows. But I still have to go back and look at that to see if that is correct.


----------



## Pai

Xeph said:


> That's one of the things I don't care for about UKC....a dog can get its championship without ever defeating any other dog of its own breed!


I dunno, that's actually one thing I like about UKC. If the dog is a good example of the standard, why does it need to 'beat' anybody? It either meets the standard or it doesn't. In the UKC, it's 'Grand Champion' that is the brag-worthy competition title that you have to beat other dogs to earn.



> C. Requirements for Grand Champion title. To earn a UKC Grand Champion title, a dog must:
> 
> 1. Win the Champion class at least five times with competition, and
> 
> 2. Win the Champion class under at least three different UKC licensed Judges.
> 
> D. Competition for the Grand Champion title. Competition is defined as at least three dogs correctly entered and shown in the Champion class. When awards are withheld from other dogs entered in the Champion class (i.e.,Reserve Champion) and a dog is declared the winner of the Champion class, the other dogs shall not count as competition. A Champion wining Best of Breed may count the number of Champions defeated as well as any Grand.Champions defeated by winning Best of Breed to fulfill the requirements of a competition win towards the Grand Champion title.


----------



## Xeph

It just makes no sense to me for a dog to gain it's championship without beating ANY of its own breed! That's great that the Gr Ch is harder, but the Ch shouldn't be so easy to obtain in the first place. JMO.


----------

