For those who vilify us show people

ACooper

Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
27,772
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
IN
#21
I'd say temperment is the 100% most important aspect when breeding dogs, with health a close second. The sooner puppy buyers and puppy breeders get on board with that the better off they'll be, including the dogs.
Agreed 100%. For me personally, I don't care one whit for show titles, working titles, sports titles, etc.

I care about how the dog ACTS and how healthy it's going to be. I am not into any dog events of any kind, I have dogs simply to be my companion and because I love them.........so those two things are number one in my book.

That said, I have never and will never 'vilify' any dog venue. To each their own. I can see merits in all of them, and definitely can agree that obedience titles, TD titles and the like would be nice in addition to showing.
 

Fran101

Resident fainting goat
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Messages
12,546
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Boston
#22
example: early 19th century. Toy breeds..

I think everyone here is basically the same lol

that lil munchkin looks just like romeo!
 

Jules

Magic, motherf@%$*#!
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
7,204
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
42
Location
Indiana
#23
Long story short, working dog people don't like the show people because they ruin our breeds for working. Look at the GSD, look at the Malinois thread (gag), at least that's my malfunction with the "show" people. You can't say it doesn't happen in companion breeds because look at pugs. Breed for those short faces and they have breathing problems, oh but they win in the show ring!!! The interpretation of their standard is ruining them for pets because of health issues, attributed by showing and winning. Yep that CH dog gets bred, it's a "good" specimen of it's breed - too bad it has a short face and produced other pups that might win at showing, but can't breathe.
I am not against breeding dogs- I am thankful for the people who are responsible and invest their time and money into bettering the breed and keeping breeds alive.

Like it has been said many times before in this thread, I want to see more of a dog than just knowing that it can prance around and look pretty. I also do not get why dogs are being deformed over the course of time. And this is why I quoted part of Camp's answer. It is a shame what has been to the the GSD (and of course many other breeds).

I would support a working breeder or a breeder who shows, but also "works" and tests his dogs on many other levels than one who only shows.
 

Dekka

Just try me..
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
19,779
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
48
Location
Ontario
#24
True enough. But there are those that blanket statement people who show. So I started this thread to show them that most of us don't only show and to bounce various opinions around.
I don't think there are many (any) on this board that are as bad as some I meet in real life. Do you know how many times I have been told function follows form? That drives me nuts.

How many show breeders I run into who honestly don't care if their dogs can do anything but show and decent enough temperaments to exist as pets. Who breed dogs who are KNOWN producers of health issues? I come across breeders who are breeding for the latest fad even though its outside of the standard. (and confo showing is all about breeding TO the standard)

I run into show breeders all the time who act like showing is the ONLY real measure of determining breed worthiness in a dog. Even in the JRT world I got some comments for saying I was breeding Dekka (who couldn't win a confo class unless she was the only one in it) Yet they breed pretty JRTs who have no drive. I mean no drive at all. This one particular breeder (who I really like a person, she's great) was all impressed that every one of my JRTs has their champion certificate in GtG. To me thats a given, and not hard even with low drive JRTs.
 

Laurelin

I'm All Ears
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
30,963
Likes
3
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Oklahoma
#25
All my dogs came from show breeders, in fact what I'd call primarily show breeders. Summer's breeder also does a LOT of therapy work with her dogs. We actually found her by watching the breed ring then not finding what we were looking for and moving on to rally where we saw two of her dogs competing.

Mia's breeder is basically just a show breeder but they have dogs going out and doing practically EVERYTHING you can think of for a papillon and doing it well. Mia's dad only had Ch title but her brothers, sisters, etc had lists of long agility titles and obedience titles. Her sister was a therapy dog, her brothers performance dogs and her other brothers conformation dogs. Her mother had no titles, actually. The breeder is also one of very few producing true honest to goodness WORKING papillons. I know that sounds like baloney but she has bred quite a few papillons that went on to do real work as service dogs for the disabled. The only thing she's lacking to me is tracking titles that some other breeders get.

My goal if I ever breed papillons is a nice well rounded dog. Paps are not like other toys in that they're very work oriented and driven little dogs. I want that to stay the same. They excel at things and it would be sad if they stopped. my love for papillons lies primarily in their temperament. I mean I think they're pretty little dogs but they have such a mind and I believe it should be put to use.

Papillons are nicknamed 'The working toy dog' and I want to keep it that way.
 
Last edited:

Laurelin

I'm All Ears
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
30,963
Likes
3
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Oklahoma
#26
So telling me that I can get various other titles for my dog does not make me think he is breed worthy unless he attains his CH.
Also to me there are lots of papillons that are breed worthy that can't get their Ch. Looking at my dogs not all of them came from Ch titled parents. Sure one parent had a Ch but the other might not. Mia for example only had one titled parent. Her mom wasn't finished and I don't know if she'll finish. she has a couple things like a solid head going against her. Some dogs have a lot to give the breed even with a fault that excludes them from showing. Too short a coat, slight mismark, solid head (you can finish these but it's often hard), etc. These things don't affect structure, don't affect the ability to be a companion dog. To me the benefits of leaving some less than perfect dogs in the genepool outweighs the risks. Especially mismarks because markings don't really mean much at all and you can breed mismarks to get well marked dogs. I know a lot of breeders that keep mismarks occasionally. Coat is iffy but I think we could lose some coat and still be okay. Then again I'm totally biased towards the American lines which don't have as much coat.
 
Last edited:

Dekka

Just try me..
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
19,779
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
48
Location
Ontario
#27
Thats the thing. I don't think a dog needs a ch to be breed worth. As long as they are still within standard, and if what it is that makes them not a great show dog isn't a major flaw.

By that standard Dekka should never have been bred. I have to say I am pretty happy how the Dekklets turned out! :D

A pretty shell of a breed to me is worse than a less perfect looking dog with the right temperament and abilities.

Not aimed at the OP.. but I have often felt like telling some people to just get a stuffed pet. Then it will look exactly how you want it too... since looks is the single most important thing on their list. (I like a nice looking dog, but that has more to do with athleticism, looking healthy, and physical attributes I can live with .. ie no extreme grooming, shedding, ear care etc)
 

Lizmo

Water Junkie
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
17,300
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
AL
#28
It is a total waste of time if all the dog can do is prance around a show-ring and win because it's the "new best thing" or the newest fad, yet has a sh!t temperament. For companion dogs, temperament and health are the biggest concerns. Function before form - same thing working dog people state.

The dog must be able to function to do it's JOB. A companion dogs job is to be a companion, meaning it needs to be healthy, and needs to be temperamentally sound. Form follows this. Sure it's nice if it can win at shows and is a good specimen (don't get me started on standards here) of it's breed, but double important is that it can function doing it's job.

The whole argument of "well even a mutt can do that" doesn't hold water either. A mutt can do SchH, a mutt can herd cattle, a mutt could work as a drug dog, etc...but the reason for not breeding them is consistency.

Example, the mutt you pick up at the shelter likes to herd. You breed it to whatever, that also likes to herd, none of the puppies herd or like to herd. The border collie you buy likes to herd, it's a breed trait, more than likely if you breed it, at least some of the puppies are going to herd (no guarantees but much more likely than the mutt)

Same goes for a companion dog. You pick up a God-only-knows-what companion dog mix at the shelter. Sweetest thing on earth. You breed it, none of the puppies have that temperament at all, they threw back to a great grandparent with a bad disposition. Now the purebred dog that has carefully been selected for it's temperament is much more likely to produce pups with a good temperament.

That's why showing isn't the end all be all of a breed.Even that CH dog might throw a litter of plug-uglies, but at least you'll know that the puppies will more than likely be healthy and sound minded.

That's the huge difference. Working dog folks breed for conformation as well - if the dog is poorly conformed it's unlikely it will be able to work, dogs that don't work, don't get bred.

Long story short, working dog people don't like the show people because they ruin our breeds for working. Look at the GSD, look at the Malinois thread (gag), at least that's my malfunction with the "show" people. You can't say it doesn't happen in companion breeds because look at pugs. Breed for those short faces and they have breathing problems, oh but they win in the show ring!!! The interpretation of their standard is ruining them for pets because of health issues, attributed by showing and winning. Yep that CH dog gets bred, it's a "good" specimen of it's breed - too bad it has a short face and produced other pups that might win at showing, but can't breathe.
:hail: :hail:

Puppydog, where did someone say showing campanion breeds wasn't okay? I only remember it being for the work dog breeds.
 

Laurelin

I'm All Ears
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
30,963
Likes
3
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Oklahoma
#29
Thats the thing. I don't think a dog needs a ch to be breed worth. As long as they are still within standard, and if what it is that makes them not a great show dog isn't a major flaw.
Same here. What made Rose a bad show dog was a skittish temperament (I don't know how much was to blame on her past owners but it wasn't something we were going to risk). However Gucci (Mia's mom) is not the best show dog because of her markings. Two very different issues there.
 

Lizmo

Water Junkie
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
17,300
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
AL
#30
However Gucci (Mia's mom) is not the best show dog because of her markings. Two very different issues there.
So do you continue to breed even though the markings are out of standard? Coming from a breed that the color doesn't matter, in a breed that gets disqualified for color (like Pap's a guess?) would you continue to breed even though the color 'isn't right' in the show ring?

--just curious
 

Laurelin

I'm All Ears
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
30,963
Likes
3
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Oklahoma
#31
So do you continue to breed even though the markings are out of standard? Coming from a breed that the color doesn't matter, in a breed that gets disqualified for color (like Pap's a guess?) would you continue to breed even though the color 'isn't right' in the show ring?

--just curious
It depends. Markings like Gucci's are not 'wrong' they just don't tend to do well in the show ring. It's not a dq, it's not a fault, it's just 'not preferred' in the ring.

Now dilutes and such would be a definite no breeding as they're a DQ. Too much white on the head over the ears (a lot of the ear) would also be a no go. I've heard of some deafness issues occurring with too much lack of pigment so to me that's beyond a simple cosmetic issue. Dilutes in a lot of breeds can have more issues. Luckily they're extremely extremely rare in the breed so it's not a big concern. I don't know anyone who has bred a dilute but I know a lot of people that have bred various 'mismarks'. Split face, white ears, etc are mismarks in the breed. I would definitely not breed for them.

A little white on the ear will sometimes grow out okay and will not really be a big issue in breeding though.
 

Laurelin

I'm All Ears
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
30,963
Likes
3
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Oklahoma
#32
For non show people 'not preferred' just means all things equal (which they never are) the dog with the blaze gets put up. The problem is judges treat it like a fault when it is not. If a dog is the most conformationally sound and has a solid colored head it should win but it often doesn't.
 

babymomma

Remembering Casey ♥
Joined
Mar 29, 2009
Messages
2,422
Likes
1
Points
38
Age
31
Location
canada
#33
well personally, I dont see how winning a beauty contest (which IMO is what showing comes down to) qualifies a dog to have a good temperment or health certified.. it proves nothing to me other then the dog is pretty. *shrugs*

And to be honest, alot of the dogs winning the championship titles are definatly not the best representatives of their breed and the look.. Some look terrible.
 

AllieMackie

Wookie Collie
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
6,598
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Ottawa, ON
#34
I don't think any regulars here believe that showing is wrong, as a blanket statement. Many of us feel that certain breeds are ruined by showing, sure... myself included. But those dogs are usually working dogs that can be proven by other means. I'm unsure what prompted this thread except to bait "anti-show" people.

However, regarding your initial question, as others have already said, there's lots of ways that ANY breed can be proven. Obedience and rally trials are both excellent titles for any breed to have, as well as agility, therapy work... most breeds are capable of many things, and even the ones that aren't, like dogs ill-suited to dog sports, can still kick major butt in obed trials.

IMO, training a dog from 2-4 weeks to stack, trot and be touched and prodded is all well and good, but it's all a beauty contest in the end. I'm more impressed by a dog who has not only done the show ring, but is titled in another venue or four as well.
 

sammgirl

ACoops favorite
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
845
Likes
0
Points
0
#35
In re: to the color question- it depends on the breeder. I know breeders who are good breeders and won't let a mismark keep a dog from their breeding program. I know some who would.
 

Dekka

Just try me..
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
19,779
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
48
Location
Ontario
#37
So do you continue to breed even though the markings are out of standard? Coming from a breed that the color doesn't matter, in a breed that gets disqualified for color (like Pap's a guess?) would you continue to breed even though the color 'isn't right' in the show ring?

--just curious
Markings, to an extent aren't genetic.

Take the issue of tollers. White on the back of the neck is either a dq or serious fault. But its not genetic. WHat I mean by that a dog will have a genetic predisposition for white markings, but if you cloned them the white markings will not be the same, not there, or very different. The dog with the white on his neck IMO should still be used if he is a fantastic dog (that and up until recently it was allowable and not penalized)

Which gets into another area. Why change the standard to fit the dogs who are winning?
 

~Jessie~

Chihuahua Power!
Joined
Oct 3, 2006
Messages
19,665
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Central Florida
#38
Owning a breed bred to be only companions, and then owning a breed bred because of its working ability, I'm kind of torn when it comes to showing.

With chihuahuas, I do feel that they NEED to be in the breed standard in order to be bred. Without the apple domed head, stocky little body, etc, etc, it doesn't LOOK like a chihuahua. Chihuahuas outside of the breed standard don't even LOOK like chihuahuas...

Of course personality is important... so I wish that all show dogs had to have the proper temperament to fit the breed. Seeing other titles are nice too, to show that it's about the overall dog and not just the looks.

Again, chihuahuas are supposed to be companion breeds. So the most important things to me when looking for a breeder is one who breeds inside the AKC breed standard, health tests for breed related issues, and has dogs that fit the chihuahua temperament.

When it comes to Border Collies, I do NOT agree with showing... they were developed without a breed standard when it comes to appearence, and the most important thing is their working ability. A border collie that can't herd sheep is just a shell of a dog... I really don't think that working breeds should be shown at all. It makes me really sad to see these froo froo border collies prancing around at dog shows, because this is NOT what border collies were ever, ever supposed to do. Agh.
 

Dekka

Just try me..
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
19,779
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
48
Location
Ontario
#39
But you can have a dog who is within breed standard, but who will never win in the ring. Esp if you have a very competitive breed. (say like a golden)

I am not really a fan of breeding outside the standard unless there is a very real need and clear goal. (I wanted to breed Bounce to Bill even though he was over the height standard. THere were many reasons this seemed to be a good idea. And the fact that his littermate is tiny shows he is not going to throw all big genes... but then it turns out both he and bounce are carriers for an eye condition)

Dekka is with in standard. She is not show ring material.
 

Laurelin

I'm All Ears
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
30,963
Likes
3
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Oklahoma
#40
Markings, to an extent aren't genetic.

Take the issue of tollers. White on the back of the neck is either a dq or serious fault. But its not genetic. WHat I mean by that a dog will have a genetic predisposition for white markings, but if you cloned them the white markings will not be the same, not there, or very different. The dog with the white on his neck IMO should still be used if he is a fantastic dog (that and up until recently it was allowable and not penalized)

Which gets into another area. Why change the standard to fit the dogs who are winning?
Yep that too. There does seem to be a predisposition for too much white or too little white but the exact markings not so much. I wouldn't breed a pap that was 99% white nor one that was mostly colored however one with a little too much white is not a big deal.

We really don't have strict marking standards but ring trend favors certain markings which I think is the problem.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top