I understand what you are saying here, but the op is asking about breeding for the show ring in particular, rather than the pet market.

Of course it happens that someone will buy a dog from a pet breeder and take it to the highest honours in the show ring, but it is highly unusual and most people that show go to breeders that also show because they like to think they know what they are going to end up with. I do, however, think it very unlikely that someone would buy a pup/youngster from a puppy farm/byb and achieve the same.

Sorry, I don't know a big deal about the dog show world, I just assumed it was similar to the rat fancy where breeders breed a litter, pick the best to go on to show/breed and those that don't meet the mark/standard are homed into pet homes. So each litter that's bred is bred to better the breed in terms of getting show rats that meet the standard, but as a result of that you get pet quality rats that have a better head shape, longer lifespan, etc. - the qualities you aim for in the standard generally reduce health issues and result in a better temperament.

Don't feel the need to say sorry...we all know about what we are interested in, thats all

From what you are saying about the rat world that seems a very healthy way to go about things and one that most of us breeders would aspire to. Unfortunately there are a lot of politics involved in the show world and many breeders use each others dogs just to win favours...that, in my opinion, doesn't necessarily do the breeds any good.

Yes some one I know has the most fab cresteds who Is an imported can.ch .. she recently lost a tooth so wont go back Into the ring over here sadly.. But she has been bred, and produced nice pups doing well In the ring.

Yep not always based on the dog sadly! I sometimes I think I should hand my dogs over to certain people to handle!

Another thing I noticed Is bigger kennels also have litters out of dogs you never see or hear of. Some champions In cresteds, I have never seen the parents for, let alone In the ring. Sometimes a dog has so much to offer a breed, but has a few things or something little just letting It down, and when worked on correctly them little things can be corrected In off spring, to produce even better pups - and thats the beauty of breeding, you know what you have to do or where to go for a stud to aim at producing pups that dont carry the same faults as either parent. I agree with Its about knowing your lines, breed and dogs.

I'm not necessarily saying use champions (in fact I abhore the over use of individual dogs) but as I see it, breeders tend to look at a very micro level - they may be improving their own lines, but are they actually improving the breed as a whole? If your own dogs never get anywhere in the ring against others of the same breed, how can they possibly be improving the breed? or are the judges all wrong and the individual breeders know the breed standards better than the judges?

So if your dog never wins anything, how can you say it is not 'run of the mill'? Who decides what is not run of the mill, if not a judge?

To be quite honest, I find the whole debate on who should breed quite tricky and I can't help but think that there are many breeders who, once they decide to breed, will set their own rules/standards to justify it. IMO producing better dogs than you have previously bred is not usually good enough - breeding better dogs than the average is.

Perhaps each potential breeding bitch/dog should be scored for closeness to breed standard in a similar way to hip scores - so if they achieve a score better than the average for their breed, you should be allowed to breed from them.


But I havne't said that people aren't to breed, just that their dog should be better than the average for their breed to be able to do so. There are plenty of labs, gsds and JRTs in rescue to prove that more are being bred than have homes, so why breed from the mediocre?

ahh but Im not talking about a breeder that bases their whole breeding programme on dogs with little faults, not winning In the ring. Im talking about a breeder maybe using a dog In the breeding programme that lacks something.
Of course dogs should do well In the ring, I think thats the whole point of breeding show dogs, to have your name on good pups In the ring and enjoy what your doing. But sometimes things dont work like that, with Chinese Cresteds a hairless may drop one ear which Is a fault so cant be shown. These things can be improved on, and pups can be born with stronger ears, If you go to a stud from a line of strong ears. In the first generation you could work on that fault. Again Im not talking about someone just claiming to be a 'show breeder' but never getting placed with any dog, or known around the ring. Im just talking about breeders still using dogs In the programme when minor faults croop up, I wanted peoples onpions on If It was acceptable or not. As some thing only top winners should be bred from.

But why use this dog when you could use another that already had perfect ears? If the answer is that there isn't a better dog to use, then fair enough, but I think in most situations it is a case of 'because it is the best that is available to me'.

So, no, generally, I don't think it is acceptable. But if breeders are going to do it, I think they should stop using the line about breeding to further the breed because they aren't, though they might be furthering their own lines.

And how far do you carry the 'furthering your own lines'...I mean if you started off with a CC hairless that looked like a donkey but chose a really good stud dog, there is every chance that the pups would be better than the bitch...but is that still a good enough reason to breed when the results may still well be below average (although some could be above)? I don't think so.

Because the ears can drop for a number of reasons! or where just to weak to go up. You work on that, to better your line to go onto better the breed! You dont just wake up get two brilliant dogs mate them together and have a perfect litter, Like everything else you have to work towards It! - I wouldnt dismiss a dog because of a minor fault. All dogs have faults, the level of them Is whats the Issue for me not the fault Its self.

My Star who Im showing at the min, who Is doing well Is a fab example of the breed imo. and in the opinion of the judges that have gone over her and placed her. She has a great mouth for a true hairless, which Is great for us to Improve on true hairless mouths..But she has recently grown and extra tooth, Its a fault. I have still showed her with that fault. and she has took two firsts .. Buts Its a fault none the less. So should some one with a dog like Star never breed them? because their not 'perfect'? evening going back through her pedigree and speaking with many other people owning/breeding dogs from her lines, no dog from them have gone on to produce extra teeth. Her fault will highly likely not come down In her pups If she was ever to be bred - But then again no one knows what they will get In a litter for certain. Just have a damn strong Idea from watching and researching, dogs and lines before evening planning on breeding.

I think you may be taking It abit out of context Hali .. You wouldnt start with a dog that looked like a donkey and didnt resemble the breed you are breeding. You would take the best two dogs you could get and would be aiming to get better off spring. Im not talking about taking two random, poor bred dogs and mating them. Im talking about not dismissing a nice example of a breed because of a fault.

Yes, my example was extreme to make a point. I admire breeders (and there are several on dogsey) who have had high hopes of breeding but decided not to because the dog wasn't good enough.

It boils down to what is a minor fault and what is 'good enough'. To my mind, a fault is only minor if the dog has been judged by (supposedly!) independent experts to be better than others of the same breed. Not necessarily only champions of champions, but enough decent results to prove that the faults are in deed minor.

Again its the 'you take the best two dogs you can get'. What if the best you can get still is only mediocre? I guess the question for any breeder is, if it wasn't your own dog what would you think of someone else breeding that dog...would you think it good enough? Or is it because you have the dog, really want to breed and therefore dismiss the faults as minor, even though judges think otherwise (i.e. by not placing).

Showing is supposed to be the way of assessing which dogs most closely match the breed standards. If the judges don't like a dog, this would suggest that its faults aren't as minor as the owner would like to think in comparison with others of the same breed.

A minor fault will be different for each breed, Minor faults In cresteds (IMO) Just to give you an Idea would be things like, going slightly over standard size, dropping an ear after an accident or through teething.
Majour faults are things such as over/under shot mouthes, light eyes, health and tempermant Issue them examples I would never breed from. we have a stunning hairless here who is undershot she wont be bred because thats just to much of a fault to even risk It.

The two best dogs are what you like from the breed, that looked promisng for example (again a HL CC..sorry )... Minimal body hair, dark eyes, good strong erect ears - Set low: highest point of base of ear level with outside corner of eye, nice level top line, regular scissor bite, plume long and flowing high set tail, elegant moveer with good reach and plenty of drive and slightly rounded skull with cheeks cleanly chiselled that are lean and flat, Shoulders clean, narrow and well laid back. Legs long and slender, set well under body. Elbows held close to body. Pasterns fine, strong, nearly vertical. Toes turned neither in nor out. ect ect ect!

Not a dog that has a hunch back, with blue eyes, dropped ears, under/over shot mouth with a dome head ect!


Also what you describle Is what I would call 'kennel blindness' - Thats when a breeder see's no wrong In their dogs and thinks their perfect, just because its from their dogs or owned by them. Thats something a show breeder should never do and when/If they do they might aswell stop breeding.

Yeah you are right and I totally agree with that! But until some judges start playing fair some people with fab dogs dont stand a chance of ever getting placed.