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".

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.

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.

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!

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.

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?

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.

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?

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.

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!

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?

Not sure how It stands tbh.. But he felt that the handler was showing no respect and lack of presentation on her part.

Sorry Rips, I think you need to look at the situation better, I think you have issue with presentation, none of those coated dogs would not be able to work, I dont think you want to think they can.

Interested to hear about the people not being able to show wearing jeans! Seems a bit controlling to me!

I only show at local dog show level with Parker but he is a heavily trimmed and coiffured (spelling?) breed and therefore if he wasn't presented correctly trimmed I wouldn't expect to do well. As I never see pet Kerries and trim Parker myself for shows it is hard when the only examples you see of the correctly trimmed breed are done by experts who have been showing for years and know what they are doing much more than me!

However, one thing I noticed when watching the Kerries being judged at a top dog show in "Youtube" was how the handlers didn't wear the right colour clothing to show the dog off agianst them, they all had dark grey/black suits on which merges into a dark grey/black dog! I have a pair of smart light pink or lilac trousers which I wear when showing Parker so he shows up nicely against me. Obvious really.

Based on what evidence?! I have no issue with correctly presenting a dog for the show ring, I do have issue with twisting the breed standard to fit in a flashy dog and therefore morphing the breed into being flashy also. It has been proven on this thread that people will go for the flashier dog inspite of said dog being incorrect coat wise for it's breed.

The Breed Standard calls for moderate feathering on a working gundog created to hunt in thick cover! A dog of this description with excess coat would not be able to carry out it's job effectively, simple as that. I know, I've been in thick cover and seen what these dogs have to go through. Remove the excess coat from a show type and you'd have a dog able to do it's original purpose with no problem.

Or is it more the fact that you disagree which makes you believe I am wrong perhaps?

The very fact YOUR interpretation of "moderate" is correct, and that YOU say a dog with a decent amount of feathering couldnt work properly, thats not true at all. If you cared to look carefully at some of the links posted you will see that SHOW dogs can and do work properly, making your assumption they cant, incorrect.

Coming in late to this thread, but heres my opionion fwiw, I think that a dog should be presented in the ring in a way that would enable it to do what they were originally bred for, I mean isn't the KC's thing 'fit for function fit for life' how is a dog walking around the ring proving that they are doing anything to prove that they mean what they say? And why I think a dog should be presented in the ring in a way that would enable it to do what they were originally bred for, is beause I would love the KC to put its money where its mouth is, and have dogs judged on their working abilty as well as fitting the breed standard, not with breeds like Staffordshires fighting each other, but there are many activities that dogs can do to prove that they work, there are field trails, search and rescue, Schutzhund, obience even agilty that can prove that dogs are fit for function fit for life, so I think that the dogs should have to prove their worth in other areas aswell as in the show ring, and if the way that they are groomed, to be presented in the ring can cause them to be hindered in working, which with things like excess coat could leave breeds like English Springer Spaniels more uncomfortable if more items from fields and undergrowth get stuck in their coat, then it should be judged approipatly in the ring IMO, and after most breeds that are shown came from working dogs, not the other way round, just because a dog has a standard it shouldn't forget its roots

I'm saying a dog with excessive, not decent (which is defined as meeting accepted standards; adequate), feathering will be hindered in thick cover by this feathering thereby preventing it from doing it's job properly.

Here's a dictionary definition of moderate:

Being within reasonable limits; not excessive or extreme

Now, are you seriously trying to tell me that the second picture I posted is neither excessive nor extreme when breeding a dog to go through thick cover to flush game?

Oh I looked at the links Dawn and I commented on them, they're the same links you use everytime this debate arises. As I said, the Springer was bred to be hunter first and foremost, retrieving has come in very late in the breeds history. Yes these dogs can retrieve, but that is not their original purpose - which is to find and flush game.

There are many show kennels that truly work their Springers beating, but they have to trim a lot of the feathering away to enable the dog to do this. I don't assume, I know. To me this is entirely incorrect - the dogs should be bred with the correct "moderate" feathering in the first place. The "moderate" feathering which is clearly asked for in the breed standard!!!! I'm not having a go at those that do work their Show Springers in the field, but it's about time show people pulled their heads out of the sand and stopped breeding dogs to be flashy and go back to breeding to the breed standard, not to fashionable extremes.

I totally agree with this and would welcome something whereby a show dog does not get its show title until it has proven it's worth in it's particular field.

So what field would lets say a pug or any other toy breed have to partake in to prove its worth , before it can take a tittle in the show ring!!

I don't know and I don't really care tbh, I'm talking about working gundogs, and more accurately English Springers.

Thanks though.