There are truly hairless CC, I have met some.

The dentition on CC's with the strange mouths I seem to recall that it is called prehistoric teeth or something like that! It is natural to the breed isn't it?

i know there are truly hairless. no one is denying that. i presume its natural, but its not good, thats why they bred from the hairier ones, as they had better mouths. e.g less teeth missing etc.

Yes it natural to the breed, because its a trait linked to the hairless gene.
There are true hairless around, few and fewer mind - still if they had no strands, stuble or tuffs of hair on body or face they had been clipped.

I absolutely agree with this, I think the "presentation" thing has got out of hand in the show ring in some breeds and it does end up altering the breed as a result. Look at the Bearded Collie - dripping in coat, not asked for in the standard but from a presentation perspective makes it more flashy in the ring, look at the English Springer - the standard asks for moderate feathering and yet some dogs have so much coat there's no light between the dog and the floor, again enhanced coat presentation will make the dog more flashy for the ring. More coat = more/better presentation = a better chance of winning. My point is too much focus on presentation begins to take the focus away from the actual dog and it's conformation - the whole point of showing, no???

I honestly think, IMO, other than hand stripping for wire coated/terrier breeds (eg breeds that actually require it) and trimming/clipping for none shedding breeds the dogs should simply just be brushed and the rest left as nature intended. I do think all this hand stripping and clipping is altering the way the dog looks in the same way that putting hairspray on a Poodle alters it's coat.

People say that showing isn't a beauty pageant, well if it isn't then there needn't be so much focus placed on presentation surely? Why not put everyone on a level playing field and judge conformation only? Although I know of course it would be difficult to police....

I know for a fact that English Springers are "stripped" of live coat in preparation for the show ring.....

I've read through the thread and cannot see a problem with testing the coat, and actually think that if a dog is being judged on everything aswell as the coat then it should be left natural to give the judge a better understanding of what the dog is really like, and be able to judge on the dog, not how much the owner knows about how to present a dog to look the best

Agree.

Great post, I know that a lot of people have issues with creative grooming, but at least the people who do that are honest about what they use and why, and no breeds are changed as a result I also think that it would be nice to see dogs in the ring looking as good as they do at home.

I am quite happy for coat testing to stay - and the rules that say that a dog cannot be exhibited with any product still in the coat that alters the colour, texture etc.

I've seen dogs tested and none that i've seen have been bothered by the vet clipping an extremely small amount of fur from their coat, or in the case of a puli a short cord was taken.

I am allergic to a lot of "beauty" products and come suffer from contact dermitits.... it comes to something when you judge a dog and about half an hour later you've got something akin to nettle rash halfway up your arms that itches like mad.

Now, if it does that to me i have to ask, what harm can these mainly chemical based products do to the dogs (ever read a the warning on a packet of black human hair dye? or read onthe net some of the after affects of it? - which can include death). Yet people are happy to put this sort of thing on their dogs?

I would admit a bias here - like my dogs natural - the vallhunds are a true "wash and wear" breed - just a brush over needed, the spitz take a bit more work, a bath and groom out but nothing in the way of styling products just a lot of work with a brush.

I must admit that I wash and condition Henry on the day of the show, I assume I wash it all out but there could be a smidgeon of conditioner left, especially as I use the spray conditioner on his feathering as I dry him. He is fully brushed before he goes in the ring but I don't know if I get it all out

I wouldn't knowingly put anything on him to disguise a patch or lack of pigmentation, but the bathing and grooming routine is no different than that I do a couple of times a week to keep him clean and fresh, so not just for the show ring.

I don't like the idea of hairsprays and similar being used but that sounds a bit hypocritical when I am using a leave-in conditioner around his tummy and thigh feathering, (he's a bit of a tiddler on those long bits and it prevents staining and smell ). I wouldn't spray it on him just before going in the ring though, just incase someone reported us

With regards to trimming, hand-stripping etc., I actually clipper Henry's ears and down his throat, this shows off his nice lines better than if he was left completely hairy. All show dogs are presented in this manner, I don't think an un-trimmed dog would be placed as he/she would appear clumpy in comparison to the elegance of the trimmed exhibits.

I seem to be on the fence a bit here, I think coat testing has it's place, (I had not heard about the poodle being dyed just to make it the right colour), but I also think, as exhibitors, we want our dogs coats to lay correctly and show off the shape and construction to it's best.

Now to me that is along the same lines as changing the texture of the coat by using products. By trimming and stripping a dog (that, unlike wire coated breeds, don't NEED stripping) you are changing it's appearance to give you a better chance of winning. If showing is all about conformation, why is there such a desperate need to make sure every stray hair is removed? I would personally like it all to be stopped and have the judges concentrate on the construction and conformtion, but of course I know it will never happen. For many breeds the obsession with looks in the ring has ruined the breeds original looks, especially the workman like gundog breeds. You only have to go back through photos of the ESS to see that, the same was evident on the recent Rough Collie thread. The coat has changed and been excentuated in an effort to increase the glamour, because being glamourous in the ring might just give you the edge and the difference between 1st or 2nd place, CC or RCC. And when one person has the edge, we all want one, but before you know it the breed is unrecognisable.

Not having a go at you Sheree, it's just the whole thing leaves me more than a little depressed!

I know exactly what you mean, there are some clever people out there that can disguise a short neck or some other less desirable feature with clever trimming, if all dogs were presented as they would be without trimming, then I think it would all be a lot fairer, but then I suppose some would trim so that it didn't show but still gave their dog an advantage...it's a vicious circle really.

I must admit that I do prefer the English in the show trim though, they just look so much neater and I find them easier to maintain, if you keep their feet and nails trimmed then each session can be used to check for foreign bodies/damage and they bring in a lot less mud when they have less hairy feet

But then if the breed wasn't bred with excess hair to add glamour and improve presentation possibilities with a view to increasing the chances of winning in the show ring, then such trimming wouldn't be needed. Look at the working Springers and Setters - the excessive coat isn't there because it isn't required. Just another slant on things.