register for free
View our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
rachelsetters
Dogsey Veteran
rachelsetters is offline  
Location: East Sussex, UK
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,384
Female 
 
24-11-2006, 01:03 PM
Sheree - I don't think I'm experienced enough to say - but I would like to think that if the dog has a medical reason for the neutering and in all other aspects a good example then the neutering should not sway the decision.

However, I'm thinking that not everyone thinks like me!

Hope all goes well for Bradley - fingers and paws crossed here for you and Bradley.
Reply With Quote
thandi
Dogsey Veteran
thandi is offline  
Location: east sussex UK
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,662
Female 
 
24-11-2006, 01:10 PM
I wont go into the the gay tail thing again, cos it has already been covered.
If he came under me and was the best in the class on the day, then he would be placed accordingly. If however there was an equally stunning dog who was not castrated, then I have to say that the other dog would get placed higher, as I believe it would be unfair to do otherwise (judging to the standard, which currently calls for testicles).
It is my own personal opinion that the standard should be changed in this area.

jmo
Reply With Quote
Borderdawn
Dogsey Veteran
Borderdawn is offline  
Location: uk
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 18,552
Female 
 
24-11-2006, 01:11 PM
You judge the dog according to the breed standard, therefore i would place the neutered dog, as showing rules have changed its perfectly acceptable and whether it was entire or not previously wouldnt matter, it could of been infertile or never used anyway.
dawn.
Reply With Quote
scorpio
Dogsey Veteran
scorpio is offline  
Location: Old Leake, UK
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 12,080
Female 
 
24-11-2006, 02:13 PM
Thanks so much everyone, I was so hoping that most people would feel the same. I know there'll always be judges that will ignore a dog without testicles but they may ignore my dog anyway. You've cheered me up no end.
Reply With Quote
Patch
Dogsey Veteran
Patch is offline  
Location: Virtual Showground
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 9,518
Female 
 
24-11-2006, 06:19 PM
Same answer from me, I would place the best quality dog first regardless of neuter status because neuter status is irrelevent.
The only applicable rule is that if a dog happens to be entire the testicles must both be descended.

I am pro-neuter through and through. Were I to Judge any line up of dogs, the only ethical thing to do is place the best dog first and if an entire dog was the best then thats the one I would place first, I would not let my staunchly pro-neuter stance sway me in to placing a neutered dog above entire dogs if the neutered dog was not the best one. I would not expect any ethical judge to do any different regardless of their personal preference on neuter or entire because its irrelevent and is not what they are contracted to judge :smt001
Reply With Quote
random
Dogsey Veteran
random is offline  
Location: Norf Eest
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 14,995
Female 
 
24-11-2006, 06:29 PM
Personally if he were the best in class, I would place him accordingly, but I'm no judge and I know not all judges think the same way. After all they are all people with their own views, and they may/may not favour un-neutered dogs over neutered.

However as the breed standard calls for testicles, you should probably set yourself to expect some judges will count his lack of as a minor fault. But don't get hung up on it, no dog is perfect and there is a valid reason for his neutering, so I should think the vast majority of judges will not let it get in the way of his show career. Just expect to come across a few who will see it differently.
Reply With Quote
Deccy
Dogsey Veteran
Deccy is offline  
Location: Ireland
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 3,922
Female 
 
24-11-2006, 07:53 PM
Yep, we all have our prejudices as judges, plus every dog has faults if we are honest, so we are placing the dog that is overall the best example in the class in our opinion. Neutering is just one more feature to weigh up against all the others IMO - I found my most difficult class to judge was a PG at an Open where every entry had a fairly obvious but different fault compared to the standard - and I had to rank them!

Deccy gets put down the line, it may be because he is liver, because he looks small for a male (he is actually bang on the standard but some are huge by comparision), because he fidgets rather than stand like a statue, because he has an overweight owner, ...... the list of reasons why you don't win despite having a decent dog is endless, and you never really know why you can win a Group one week and get dumped in the breed class the next.

Set against this, neutering to my mind should not be a significant handicap. As I have already said, my neutered boy Polo won Limit Dog class this summer at a club Champ show under a breed specialist, because his other attributes put him above the rest in the class.
Reply With Quote
scorpio
Dogsey Veteran
scorpio is offline  
Location: Old Leake, UK
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 12,080
Female 
 
24-11-2006, 08:31 PM
Thanks for the latest responses. I'm pleased that everyone seems to be thinking the same, that neutering should not be looked upon as a handicap as far as showing goes, but we all accept that there probably will be judges that will not share our opinion. As I said before, I've taken absolutely stunning dogs into the ring, one week I won Best Puppy at a champ show then was placed 4th out of 6 at the next champ show the following week, so I know only too well that simply having a near perfect specimen is not good enough for some judges.

Deccy, I must congratulate you on doing so well with your boy, this thread has certainly given me the incentive I was looking for.
Reply With Quote
Patch
Dogsey Veteran
Patch is offline  
Location: Virtual Showground
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 9,518
Female 
 
24-11-2006, 08:44 PM
Originally Posted by random View Post

However as the breed standard calls for testicles, you should probably set yourself to expect some judges will count his lack of as a minor fault.

Noooo, breed standard does not call for them now, only that *if* they are present that they are descended thats all.
Judges are not allowed to consider lack of them as a fault because thats not within their remit. If they fault them through personal preference or prejudice, they can have a formal complaint lodged against them for it.

[ Not aimed at you Random, just for general info ], Permission to Show a neutered dog is not a requirement either, informing the KC is, yes, but having to seek permmission to show a neutered dog, no absolutely not the case.

I do think that if neutered because of one or both testicles being undescended, if it has been recorded as the reason and is checked up on, imo that should be marked as a breed fault because such dogs, which may still be capable of siring, should not be bred from as its usually a hereditary `fault` therefore such a dog is not a good example of the breed, [ whatever the breed may be ].
Reply With Quote
Sal
Dogsey Veteran
Sal is offline  
Location: gloucestershire
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,432
Female 
 
24-11-2006, 09:18 PM
Originally Posted by Patch View Post
Noooo, breed standard does not call for them now, only that *if* they are present that they are descended thats all.


Note
Male animals should have two apparently normal testicles fully descended into the scrotum.

This is what our breed standard is still saying.
I do agree though dog's should still be placed but there are many other factors to consider,when judging.
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 2 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 > Last »


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


© Copyright 2016, Dogsey   Contact Us - Dogsey - Top Contact us | Archive | Privacy | Terms of use | Top