the only time I don't handle my own dogs is if I am lucky enough to have more than one dog win it's lass and need another handler for the challenge, then I will give the easiest dog to a friend to handle.

Occasionally there are dogs that seem to handle better for another person (someone they know and like).  My Jozi I always liked her sire's owner to handle for me in her later years, as she could do it well, and she enjoyed it, and she reminded her of her lad who was no longer alive.

I have shown dogs I have bred for their owners, because they lacked confidenc3e or needed to see their dog being shown, and of course will handle for others who need a pair of hands when they have more than one winner for the challenge.

I hate handling and only do it when there is no choice such as when we have too many dogs in the challenge -funnily enough took BOB twice in recent months despite me handling. But I have my family handle and could not imagine anything else. Husband, son and daughter all handle. A professional dog handler US style would be like just owning a share in a racehorse. Nothing to do with the dog at all, just glory.

> because I prefer the flashier-looking Dalmatians and I honestly believe US-bred Dals have sweeter expressions than European Dals.

> I would definitely trade the spots on the Crufts winner with the Westminster winner's. I think US Dals have very mottled spots compared to the ones in the UK/Europe.

Poochlover I agree with the recommendation that you ask someone to talk to you about, and show you with a 'hands-on' lesson, about conformation.  You cannot judge the construction of a dog by photographs alone.

I know you rate appearance very highly (hence your previous posts about ear cropping) but I do wonder if you really understand what the judges role is?  It's well worth taking the time to read the breed standards for both the US and UK in all those breeds you have compared...

>I would like to see one of the GSDs from the past(when the popular name was still Alsatian) do the endurance test, tracking, >protection work & control-they simply would not have been able to do because they were not physically or mentally sound >enough

Utterly fascinating!

German Shepherd Dog    Deutche Schafer Hund       should mean that they work with a shepherd and help to herd and guard the sheep.      I'd love to see whether any of the pictured dogs could work sheep all day.

>Elmo is not roached back as his back is not above his withers(as in the Bedlington Terrier )

The Bedlington Terrier is not supposed to have a roached back :-(   although sadly, this years Crufts winner does appear to have this in her photographs.   Of course, this could simply be the way she is standing.   The judge certainly doesn't breed roached backed dogs. 

From the breed standard.  Note, the arch is supposed to be over the loins, not from the withers
"BODY
Muscular and markedly flexible. Chest deep and fairly broad. Flat ribbed, deep through brisket which reaches to elbow. Back has natural arch over the loin, creating a definite tuck-up of underline. Body slightly greater in length than height.

HINDQUARTERS
Muscular and moderate length, arched loin with curved topline immediately over loins. Hind legs have appearance of being longer than forelegs. Hocks strong and well let down, turning neither in nor out. "

Hope this clarifies things :-)

> Back has natural arch over the loin, creating a definite tuck-up of underline.

Maybe that's the misunderstanding? It's possible to get a tuck-up with a level topline.

I'm an all-breeds aficionado, dogs a babe; I don't have the desire to memorize every breed's standard. I've read the US Dal standard, but don't know it by heart. My years of watching dog shows and seeing what the top dogs look like give me all the expertise I need to recognize a quality specimen when I see one. If you want to know what a Dalmatian should look like, Google 'Ch. Spotlight's Spectacular'. Second to that bitch is 'Ch. Tuckaway Winged Foot'. I still think this year's Westminster winner is better than the Crufts.

>I still think this year's Westminster winner is better than the Crufts.

In what way (according to the relevant standards, of course)?

Westminster has only recently opened entries to non-Champions.   And although it's compared to Crufts, there has never been anything like the volume of entries there are at Crufts.  

Secondly yes, using a handler to campaign a dog is far more regularly done in N.America.   However, I handled my own home-bred dogs in Canada.   You had to get past those judges (who out there tend to come from the ranks of handlers) who only look at the professional handler - sometimes with good reason as if nothing else, they know how to condition and present the dogs they take on, to get the wins!   But there were some judges who liked to buck the trend and would put up an owner-handler.   My black book worked overtime out there.   I made up all the hounds I showed despite not using a prof.handler.   There was also the fact that in order to campaign at Group Level, with the distances involved over there, putting a dog with a handler who is travelling across the country and beyond, just make sense, for many.   I wasn't that bothered, as long as I made a dog up over there. 

>If you want to know what a Dalmatian should look like, Google 'Ch. Spotlight's Spectacular'.

Or Ch Dvojica Voodoo - a bitch whose movement was perfection, and was BoB at Crufts several years running (no pun intended).

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">My years of watching dog shows and seeing what the top dogs look like give me all the expertise I need to recognize a quality specimen when I see one.

An armchair expert.

I don't know enough about Dalmatians to make a really informed comment but the US ones  seem very upright in shoulders and upper arm and all seem to have no forechest at all.

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">My years of watching dog shows and seeing what the top dogs look like give me all the expertise I need to recognize a quality specimen when I see one.>

I have watched many classes of my breed over the past 14 years but still it only allows me to say what I like the look of as I have never gone over them and would never be asked to judge.

>the US ones  seem very upright in shoulders and upper arm and all seem to have no forechest at all.

Accentuated by the way they're strung up.

My years of watching dog shows and seeing what the top dogs look like give me all the expertise I need to recognize a quality specimen when I see one.

Some dogs can look great until you get your hands on them -in particular dogs whose coat hides a lot. What breeds have you yourself handled in the show ring and won with and bred?

Watching dog shows and seeing the winning dogs in the ring 'for years'  is no education really,'without the depth of knowledge of reading the standards and getting your hands on the dogs.

As has been said previously, much can be 'improved' by careful trimming of the coat and  expert handling.    In addition, what is put up isn't necessarily what is correct.  It may simply a version which the judge prefers.   Then  there is  the weight of numbers.   Eg. If  a class contains ten dogs which are oversized, the one dog that is  correctly sized will look too small,  making it unlikely  that the judge will choose it.

Andrew .brace explains this far better than I could in his piece in Dog's World...

Different opinions and the Dangers of Numbers by Andrew Brace

http://www.impromptucollies.com/TheGenericShowdog.pdf

It seems if breeders in the US are worried about the development of the generic show dog.

To quote Bonnie Threlfall of the Edgewood Cocker Spaniels - 'What we see the average dog show judge paying attention to is the silhouette! The great American show dog with the straight front and sloping top line and the rear legs way behind it, long neck... When you have a correct Cocker it wins specialties, but when you take it to the all breed shows they think it's coarse, common, or chunky, and they put the dog up that if it fell on its side, you could slide under the door!'

I'm sure I read somewhere that a judge believed it was time that the American Springer Spaniel was recognised in the same manner the American Cocker Spaniel, an entirely separate variety to their English forefathers.

I'm sure I read somewhere that a judge believed it was time that the American Springer Spaniel was recognised in the same manner the American Cocker Spaniel, an entirely separate variety to their English forefathers.

That would certainly seem to make sense!

I know I read somewhere that as so many American showdogs are shown with the hindlegs stretched too far back that breeders now breed for that attribute, which of course in many (or all??) breeds is totally incorrect.

>I'm an all-breeds aficionado

>I don't have the desire to memorize every breed's standard

>My years of watching dog shows and seeing what the top dogs look like give me all the expertise I need to recognize a quality specimen when I see one.

This is the problem by and large with the US and in some cases the European system, of small breed entries where the emphasis is on the group and BIS and the development of the 'Generic Showdog' is the result with many of the top dogs lacking essential breed type (that which makes each breed distinct from any other).

http://www.westminsterkennelclub.org/2014/photos/breed/SR57616207.html

http://crufts.fossedata.co.uk/Breed.asp?ShowYear=2014&GroupID=GUN&ScheduleID=175

The difference between 'types' here is astounding to the point that they could be separate varieties themselves, I much prefer the Crufts BOB winner in terms of appearance alone.

yet another gundog breed that the americans have ruined. :( definitely they are becoming generic. Stretched hind legs  straight shoulder with absolutely no angulation at all. I wouldn't think the dog could cwork for long with a front like that.. and then the long fringed of straightened hair carefully cut to shape underneath If the dog was liver coloured you could probably get away with calling it a springer and no one would notice.

A caricature of the breed. :-( Walt Disney has a lot to answer for.

Gosh yes, that Westminster setter is horribly exaggerated, much prefer the Crufts one. Though I do take slight exception to the 2 or 3 people who have said the Americans ruined gundogs, hinting that American cockers are awful dogs - I own one who is a fit healthy happy dog at nearly 12, and Pearl who won the Group this year was superb, yes they have a lot of coat but you can see by her movement how beautiful her construction must be underneath it.

The Gordon is no better

>The difference

http://www.westminsterkennelclub.org/2014/photos/breed/SR57616207.html

http://crufts.fossedata.co.uk/Breed.asp?ShowYear=2014&GroupID=GUN&ScheduleID=175

The difference between 'types' here is astounding to the point that they could be separate varieties themselves, I much prefer the Crufts BOB winner in terms of appearance alone.

and here we have some in Sweden: http://www.engelskasetterklubben.se/index.asp?Sida=18 on their club website.  In Scandinavia the show dogs have to have working qualifications and work.

>Though I do take slight exception to the 2 or 3 people who have said the Americans ruined gundogs, hinting that American cockers are awful dogs

bu5t they started out as 'cocker' as in English cockers as they term it, and changed them so much they then became a separate breed, here called American cockers and there called cockers.

It just goes to show how far some breeds can be changed, so they are no longer the original. 

They are no longer capable of being a 'true' sporting/working Gundog, (not unless you took most of the coat off and worked on pretty small game) and would be more suited to the Utility Group for function, on a par with the Cavalier in the toy group.

It would appear that English Springers have very nearly reached that stage in the USA.

> Ch Dvojica Voodoo[/url]

Oh WOW she's beautiful

> I do take slight exception to the 2 or 3 people who have said the Americans ruined gundogs, hinting that American cockers are awful dogs -

Not at all. I am sure your dog is lovely but  his breed went over to the US as our cocker  Spaniel and was transformed in to something totally unrecognisable. I don't understand why the Americans change the breeds to such an extent they bear no resemblance to the original and then criticise the rest of the  world for not liking the way they have changed the breed from the original dogs. Someone mentioned Disney and yes these dogs do look like the exaggerated picture perfect dogs in the disney animations.

>My years of watching dog shows and seeing what the top dogs look like give me all the expertise I need to recognize a quality specimen when I see one.

Sorry, I didn't realise that you're an expert.

Oh dear - the so called English Setter is awful :( What a very strange shape :( http://www.westminsterkennelclub.org/2014/photos/breed/SR57616207.html

>>My years of watching dog shows and seeing what the top dogs look like give me all the expertise I need to recognize a quality specimen when I see one.

>Sorry, I didn't realise that you're an expert.

LOL @ JeanSW :)

Expert in grooming styles, maybe? Even ringside at UK shows you can't really know what the dog is like under the coat unless hands-on, but you can certainly see structure & movement when it's not obscured by all that sculpting, fluff and pizzazz..... If you know what to look for in the first place ;)

The whole thread is a windup, surely?

So many of the American dogs are painful to look at. It's the canine expression of the Little Miss Sunshine mentality. It may sound extreme, but I actually feel physically sickened by what they've done (both by breeding and grooming) to some of their dogs.

The original poster does tend to throw a "hand grenade" in and enjoy the blast.

>I thought the dogs at Westminster were so much better, I'm not saying this because I'm American.

But of course you are - your 'eye' is adapted to the norms in your country.

You see scruffy where I see natural

You see normal and tidy and I see over sculpted freak show

It's entirely normal to see things differently but I do think it a terrible shame that the dogs pay the price.  The difference in coat prep probably doesn't matter overall to the health and wellbeing of the dog but when extreme changes are made to the the dogs conformation it will affect movement, heart room, ability to whelp naturally, propensity to hip dysplasia...    I could go on

Does anyone have a link to some judges discussing the breed differences between the UK and US - I read the Andrew Brace article and wondered if there was anything else that specifically looks at our two countries.   I'd be interested to read it from someone who has their hands on the dogs.  Sometimes it's a little difficult to tell from the photographs just how much is presentation and how much is physical.  Actually some debate about form v function from an American perspective would be interesting too.  Ta

>They are no longer capable of being a 'true' sporting/working Gundog, (not unless you took most of the coat off and worked on pretty small game) and would be more suited to the Utility Group for function, on a par with the Cavalier in the toy group.

I grant you the coat (though lovely to me) is excessive for actual working, but my American cocker can even at nearly 12 happily do a half day walk up and down hills and across stiles and over walls and could do a whole day in his younger days, he would do very well at working if he could be persuaded to stop scavenging for food! (oh yes, he once retrieved a pitta bread in a London park that was nearly as tall as him, so if channeled I'm sure the breed could physically pick up decent size game, at least just as well as an English cocker) His only vet visits have been for boosters, one sore eye, and one sore foot after a day's walk on shingle.

What's your complaint about the Cavalier? They seem well suited to the Toy group to me, yes they can work (again, mine do a half day walk with no trouble) and I know some that do working trials, obedience and even picking up. But at home they love nothing better than to snuggle on a lap, true toys even if they are a little larger than the other Toy breeds. :-)

'Afghan Hounds in America are fast evolving into a different breed, and most of the judges who appreciated the sound structure and carriage of our "old-fashioned" Afghans are either retired or dead.  When I judged the 1998 Afghan Hound Club of America National Specialty show  I enjoyed judging them almost like a new breed. None of the Afghans that were presented to me would fit in at the great OM kennels in Europe (either past or present).  I found some very pretty elegant dogs with great reach and drive, but they lacked the outline, power, substance and good set-under fronts that I associate with the best of our own line.  Afghans are just one breed of "generic showdogs"  that are becoming prevelant in many breeds in America today... case in point... American Dobermans...need I say more?'

http://users.skynet.be/vdomafghan/INTERVIEWS/INTERVIEW%20LILA%202002.HTM

An interview with a lady in Afghans, I found the whole thing fascinating to read. From what I can tell there's a load of US breeders who are worried what is becoming of their breeds.

>Does anyone have a link to some judges discussing the breed differences between the UK and US

I haven't found any direct comparisons between American and British versions of the breeds, but the following are very interesting

The Reason Breeds Change - by Andrew Brace

Balance is the key to Conformation - Simon Parson

>What's your complaint about the Cavalier?

No complaint about the Cavalier, they quite rightly belong in the toy group.

I was trying to say that the American, after being bred so far away from their 'Function' no longer belong in the Gundog group, as they are not a working Spaniel, due to these changes, they have been bred from/down and away from a working gundog.

Just thinking about the am cocker, look at this site :- http://afterglowdogs.com/americo.html and look at the pictures at the top, let them run through and you will see an am cocker as retrieving a dummy :)
Lea :)

well said Christine! Fit for function...the US ESS are like cloned dolls

The breeds I'm involved with are Shih Tzu and Dandie Dinmont Terriers; however, I have studied breed types since I was a child, reading every magazine and book I could get my hands on, and I've also studied illustrated breed standards of many AKC-recognized breeds, so I am as much an expert and adept at recognizing correct specimens as the best of judges. You people can try to mock that all you want, but the fact doesn't change, thank you very much. And you people's comments have confirmed what I've known for a while: The Europeans and Brits like rough-looking dogs, while the Americans prefer the more refined dogs. 

>I have studied breed types since I was a child, reading every magazine and book I could get my hands on, and I've also studied illustrated breed standards of many AKC-recognized breeds, so I am as much an expert and adept at recognizing correct specimens as the best of judges.

Until you've actually had your hands on and physically examined many hundreds of dogs then no, you're not a 'real' expert, any more than someone who ardently follows motor racing and reads all the magazines ican drive as well as an F1 driver, or somone who's followed a football team all their life and been to every match is good footballer.

>The Europeans and Brits like rough-looking dogs, while the Americans prefer the more refined dogs. 

The Europeans and Brits like real, natural dogs; the Americans like cardboard cut-outs. All froth and no substance.

Gosh, nothing like blowing your own trumpet lol.

The original poster does tend to throw a "hand grenade" in and enjoy the blast.

Tooolz, you have hit the nail on the head.

>The breeds I'm involved with are Shih Tzu and Dandie Dinmont Terriers; however, I have studied breed types since I was a child, >reading every magazine and book I could get my hands on, and I've also studied illustrated breed standards of many AKC->recognized breeds, so I am as much an expert and adept at recognizing correct specimens as the best of judges.

I have studied breed types since I was a child.   I have also studied anatomy and construction.   I am a professional artist and paint dogs, as well as Botanicals.   I have been trained to observe and measure in ways most people haven't.   If anyone could judge something on sight I could.   But I would never claim to be able to judge a dog without handling it and seeing it move naturally, not strung up.   I would say that I know enough, to know I don't know nearly enough.

Even the top judges,  who are in demand all over the world, would never claim to have nothing further to learn.   And they certainly wouldn't claim to be able to judge a dog without putting their hands on it. 

I'm curious,  what makes you so special?

>Even the top judges,  who are in demand all over the world, would never claim to have nothing further to learn.   And they certainly wouldn't claim to be able to judge a dog without putting their hands on it.

That's why dog shows involve the presence of the actual animal! Otherwise everyone would just send in a photo of their dog and save the time and petrol of actually attending.

The Europeans and Brits like rough-looking dogs, while the Americans prefer the more refined dogs. 

We prefer real dogs, which is also why we don't cut bits off them to suit us, such as vocal cords. We don't cage them all day long and refuse to walk them offlead, we let them live like dogs. We handle them in the ring ourselves. We have the hardest system in the world to make up Champions with. And we still manage to win at the greatest and BIGGEST dog show in the world -ten times bigger than Westminster.

My grandmother always used to say 'all fur coat and no knickers'. That's exactly what the majority of american dogs are, all pizazz and style and lacking what makes them that particular breed. Pale imitations of their former selves.

>Just thinking about the am cocker, look at this site :- http://afterglowdogs.com/americo.html and look at the pictures at the top, let them run through and you will see an am cocker as retrieving a dummy :-)

Thanks Lea, that was lovely! (actually my Yankee doesn't retrieve, though my Cavaliers do!) He does however get beautifully muddy and horrible on his walks. :-) I have friends in America whose cockers do obedience, rally, and even tracking!

>We prefer real dogs, which is also why we don't cut bits off them to suit us, such as vocal chords. We don't cage them all day long and refuse to walk them offlead, we let them live like dogs. We handle them in the ring ourselves. We have the hardest system in the world to make up Champions with. And we still manage to win at the greatest and BIGGEST dog show in the world -ten times bigger than Westminster.

Now that I can fully applaud and agree with - where's that 'like' button!

The OP sounds like they would be the worst of judges, full of self admiration, but lacking any real knowledge, or desire to learn.

I don't believe they actually care what people's opinions are of the relative merit of the dogs involved. They just want to cause commotion and gain our attention.