|
Location: Co. Durham, UK
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 11,213
|
|
Originally Posted by
Borderdawn
The only difference is the fact the second dog has more coat and that the handler has been removed. The throat skin has been moved out of the way by the hand and the tail held up, on the first pic it hasnt. nothing more. The construction of both animals IMO is good.
Its a dog show Rips, presentation being poor is like saying Miss world doesnt need to brush her hair because she is pretty enough to win without doing so. Presentation is part and parcel of dog showing, if you dont want to present your dog to its best advantage, dont show.
Of course presentation is part and parcel of showing, my problem comes when the presentation changes the actual breed. Eg excessive feathering on a dog when the breed standard states "moderate feathering".
Originally Posted by
Kalasin
I'm not really 'in' on the showing scene since my pup isn't a recognised breed...but personally I feel that if two dogs had the same conformation and there was nothing between them health and standard wise.
Then I would expect the judge to make a decision on presentation based on the breed standard, not their own personal preference. If the standard says "moderately feathered" then a dog with /excessive/ feathers should be placed lower perhaps than a dog with moderate feathering. But then the meaning of words can be taken in different ways depending on what a judge would consider 'moderate' to be. Now if it said "feathers of 2-3 inches in length" then there would be no question.
Precisely what I'm talking about. Presentation is very important in showing, but it shouldn't be placed more important by a judge than the breed standard itself.
Originally Posted by
Borderdawn
I expect it would depend on how you interpret "moderate" I dont think the second photo is of a dog who has excessive feathering at all, take a look at the same breed exhibited in the US, THATS excessive!
http://www.dfwessa.com/08national/
And that's exactly what we could end up with if judges continue to place dogs that look glamorous, instead of dogs that have the coat as dictated by the breed standard.
Definition of moderate: Being within reasonable limits; not excessive or extreme
Given this definition I would not say the second picture I posted was of a dog with moderate feathering. Given that the ESS is a working gundog historically I'd say the feathering on that dog is definitely excessive.
Originally Posted by
Kalasin
Oh wow...I wonder if that dog has ever seen a muddy puddle?
I wonder...would the term 'moderately feathered' also change in accordance to what is on the show circuit at the time?
I prefer the first dog...but that's probably because I'm a pet owner and not a serious shower. To me the first one looks more like a dog that would be capable of doing what it was bred to do.
Spot on again. It does indeed change depending on fashions and I'm glad to say the bottom pic I posted tends to be the exception rather than the rule now. Partly I think to the programme PDE, it's only redeeming feature mind!
Originally Posted by
Borderdawn
Does it? How did you reach that conclusion, the "construction" is near identical on both dogs,
the coat on either dog wouldnt hold it back.
I'm sorry but I can't agree with that statement. The second dog I posted would struggle in thick/heavy cover. Remove the coat, however, and it would be perfectly capable. I do believe one of it's close relatives has it's SGWC.
Hmmm, I'm going to be careful what I say here. I do like Mompesson, they breed good examples most of which aren't all that excessively coated. What bothers me about the photos is the lack of depiction of the ESS original function - to hunt and flush game. Retrieving is a late addition to the breeds function. That said good on them for using the dogs in the shooting field.
Originally Posted by
Kalasin
From your pics I would say Tarn because to me his coat looks that tiny bit rougher than the others, only by pics of course. But I'd think that all of them would manage to do their jobs with no problem! But then I also bet all your dogs have seen muddy puddles and there is no 'excessive feathering' in sight!
My point with the spaniels is that if they were working as gundogs all that fur would most definitely hinder them in their work. It would get caught on things, matted, and get all manner of stuff stuck in it. I understand the importance of a good coat in the breed because it needs to be hardy. But feathers of that length I don't understand the purpose other than to look nice in the show ring.
ETA it's the same with setters, the working type setter is now pretty much a completely different breed to the show type setter.
Got it spot on again!
I have nothing against good presentation, but when people become so obsessed with it to the point where it becomes a fixed trait in a breed who's standard states it is incorrect, then I can't help but wonder if people really have any interest in the breed at all, perhaps their desire to win is more important?
Originally Posted by
mishflynn
I completley agree with Dawn
i think it would be terrible disresptectful to enter a dog to a dog show to have to be judged on its looks, if it wasnt prepared properally. Shows zero respect for the judge imo.
Its only "a part" of what the judge is looking for.
Its abit like me going to a ob show , having the BEST heelwork but not having bothered to teach the rest of the things required, & therefore just wasting the judges time
And this is where the problem lies imo, the dog should never be judged on how it looks. It should always be judged against it's breed standard. Show's imo should not be beauty pageants.
Originally Posted by
DevilDogz
Really, Have you ever seen a judge moan about handlers In jeans? alot of judges get funny about jeans so Im told. There Is one judge In cavs that will never judge a dog If handler is wearing jeans - So no one would dare turn up wearing them. If anything I would be to scared to enter the ring In jeans!
Getting sent home after spending £50 odd I dont think so!
Alot of the crested people wear jeans, and I havent seen them moaned at other than the girl I mentioned before.
How on earth can a judge refuse to judge someone's dog based on what the handler was wearing? Surely that wouldn't stand up against the rulebook?
Originally Posted by
Borderdawn
I dont agree that a coated dog cant do the job it was bred for no. Did you look at the link I posted? Those dogs are show champions, they also WORK! They work in the conditions their breed dictates, there is absolutely no reason that I can see for a coated dog not to work. Do you think a long coated GSD cant do the job it was bred for? How about an Afghan Hound?
Im not trying to be difficult here, just understand your reasoning.
A correctly (eg moderately feathered as in the first picture I posted) dog could work perfectly well hunting in heavy cover and excessively coated dog would struggle for obvious reasons.
Originally Posted by
border pop
IMO An incorrectly presented coated dog can make or break it in the ring. Excessive coat on elbows for example can give the impression of it being out at the elbows on the move. Too much coat on the inside hind pasterns can give the illusion of the dog moving close behind. lumpy coats can give a straight backed breed a roached or rolling topline. On the stack a quick go over can see through 'false faults' but on the move you can only judge what you see.
I prefer the ess on the bottom. I'm not a judge but if both these dogs were under me, both moved equally well and were as identical in structure as they appear in the photos then the dog that was presented well would win.
Even though it goes against the breed standard and the dogs original purpose? How can you justify that decision especially when several people have stated the two dogs are essentially constructed the same!
Originally Posted by
tink
I have to agree with what Dawn has said on the presentation.Although good construction and sound movement are more important i do think that basic presentation is a must.To me that means a good clean brushed coat,clean ears,eyes,nails and teeth, i dont think there is any excuse for taking a dog in the ring without those basics covered.That would deter me in placing a dog as it shows no effort has been made.Have to say its not much of an issue for me in Beagles as they are very much 'wash & go' which is just how i like it and how my breed should be.I have seen critiques from judges i have shown under that have started by praising the fact that there were 'a pleasing group of well presented hounds' meaning basic presentation,clean coats etc..
Have never tarted mine up as such,i just make sure they are bathed a few days prior so the coat is not too soft,maybe a quick rewash of the white areas on the night prior to a show an earcheck and on the day its a good brush, Mine always have clean ears and teeth anyway and their nails are always a good length from walks so i never need to trim them.
I can see what you are saying though Rips
Basic presentation is an absolute must, in no way do I condone taking a scruffy, ungroomed dog into the show ring. But like I said, when presentation starts to interfere with the actual breed then I think people need to take a serious look at why and how they are judging.
What concerns me is where will it end? Excessive coat on a Springer, soft coats on Border Terriers, single coats in Labradors - will they all be acceptable one day because someone has deemed it to look more attractive? Not saying that any of these features would make the dog look better, but I think you can understand why I used the example.
Someone who has been in Wire Vizslas in the UK since the 1970's told me that a lot of new people in the breed have started to strip their dogs coat out as it looks better. They've even started to suggest that the breed standard should be changed to allow the stripping of coats! Now correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe the Wire was bred to create a Vizsla with a Wire coat so that it could withstand harsh weather. So would people agree that it's ok to start stripping out the Wire Vizsla because the breed would look more attractive in the ring?