Since a lot of people have been posting photos of Westminster winners, I do feel like now would be a good time to point out that the solid majority of the win photos taken at Westminster are pretty bad. The combination of poor lighting, crowds and the photographers being in a rush to get from ring to ring tends to result in photos that do the dog no justice. Watching the judging videos gives a bit of a better perspective but it's still nothing like having your hands on the dog. The grooming and presentation is different and in some cases breed type varies drastically, but in some breed it would be very interesting to see what would happen if American dogs were groomed for the UK show ring. Scottish Terriers are one of the lucky breeds that are pretty consistent around the world. American dogs win at Crufts and imported dogs win in America. Some of the grooming might be a bit different but that's about it.

As for the sweeping generalisations about the way that Americans treat their show dogs, the solid majority of show dogs in America are first and foremost pets. The very best handlers groom and handle the dog so that it best fits the breed standard. Unfortunately that doesn't always happen but there is something to be said for putting the time into giving the dog the best possible advantage in the ring if you're going to be shelling out loads of money in entry fees.

No criticism intended, and al dogs ought to be able to take exercise and certainly have the brains to do things.

My breed also excel at tracking (well they would as that is actually what they do when hunting) and Agility, formal obedience not so much but some are very good.

But their purpose is/was to hunt large game, and they should be capable of doing so, both in temperament and their construction.

Beautiful healthy etc American cockers maybe, but they are 'no longer' a true Gundog and I don't believe pretend to be, (the instinct may be their but their physical attributes make that function impractical, and it's more than just coat) so their being in the Gundog group is really historical, as they used to be Cocker Spaniels, but have been made over into a companion breed more suited to the Utility group.

I have to say that I am sure there are some truly great dogs in the USA, and that many breeders strive for dogs that are of breed type, and many of us am sure have imported dogs from the USA that can and do win/fit in here.

Unfortunately (in my opinion of course) the US show system encourages over presentation, generic movement and handling and the most typical dogs often do not win, except at breed specialties with breed specialist judges.

Due to the relative small breed entries due to the geographical vastness of the country, undue weight is given to wins beyond the breed.

Here we like to gain recognition at Group level and some even aspire to BIS, but for the majority of any breeds aficionados, it is competition within the breed that matters.

As for the sweeping generalisations about the way that Americans treat their show dogs, the solid majority of show dogs in America are first and foremost pets.

How can they be pets when they have to travel round the country with a professional handler? I dare say we are all under the impression here that the majority of American show dogs are NOT handled by their owners, but rather the minority. Is that incorrect?

>the solid majority of show dogs in America are first and foremost pets

and the majority of dogs and owners never get a chance for wider recognition, unless they have money and can pay pros to handle for them.

The distances preclude average people being able to show throughout the year due to work, and will be showing within their own location or taking holidays to do clusters.

So you never get to see a representative entry anywhere, so as a vehicle for researching and displaying breeding stock US shows in general, I would say fail (geography again), and are truly mostly Beauty pageants, as opposed to shows of breeding stock, Specialties excepted).

My dogs in the US are owner handled, one being made up in successive shows as soon as he landed.
Not everyone in the US feels the need to travel the entire country.

In my breed....Crufts - v -Westminster ...... Crufts 360 entries....Westminster only 14 turned up....and the BOB was a UK import.

A lot of our breed are owner handled, and that's fine to get them made up, but generally to go further as Specials it seems it is felt handlers are needed to get anywhere.

Quote Poochlover: " 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 are so funny! Obviously we who actually judge have completely wasted our time going to breed seminars and general judging seminars, and spending years watching the breeds we are interested in, visiting other kennels and talking to other experienced breeders and owners!

It does make me wonder why Poochlover frequents this forum at all, they obviously know all there is to know, so why hang around here with all the amatures ?.

Good quote I read recently..

"When asked what is the greatest invention....~~The Internet of course was the answer... ~ Access to the entire world of human knowledge.
Yet many use it to look at pictures of dogs and fight with strangers!"

Funny old world.:-)

I would say that depends on the breed and part of the country you're looking at, but you probably get about a 50/50 mix at most shows. You run into a bit of a grey area as well because some people have clients but mainly handle their own dogs. The AKC doesn't allow runners so people who can no longer make it around the ring tend to just send the dog with someone. Dogs that live with the handlers full time and travel around the country with them are definitely in the minority. Those are usually just the dogs that are winning big. The rest are just sent with the handler for the weekend or are brought to the shows by their owners so they are still living as pets.

Owner handlers can win big with dogs too but you need a lot of time and money to do that. I have assisted a breeder/owner/handler for a long time who handled one of her dogs to #1 in his breed, but America is so big that it takes way too much time and money for the average person to travel to all the shows where the big breed entries are. Americans still highly value top breed honours, but the professional handlers are the ones doing the advertising for top winning dogs so you see emphasis put on group/best in show wins because that's how they make their money. Among breeders, the number of breed specialty wins is just as important, if not more so, as the number of group and best in show wins.

One last point... I know a lot of people say they prefer their dogs to look natural but a little extra handling and grooming can make a difference to a dog's show career. You don't have to make the dog look like a barbie doll, but if you do little things like groom the dog to be as close to the breed standard as possible, target certain areas through exercise to improve faults and train the dog to do things like nail a freestand every time, you should have an advantage in the ring because you're giving the judge the best possible picture to go along with what they're feeling/seeing as they go over the dog. Likewise, bad grooming, conditioning and presentation can put a very nice dog at a disadvantage. You can have a perfectly nice dog and all it takes is the combination of those little changes to take a dog from never having placed at Crufts before to placing/winning in large, competitive classes under respected judges.

The yorkshire terrier had had its coat dyed too, they show you how to do this on U tube, the man showing this dog is a pass master at this job too.

but if you do little things like groom the dog to be as close to the breed standard as possible,

I haven't read the AKC breed standards for Springer and English Setter but do they REALLY ask for that amount of coat AND scissoring? If not then they aren't being groomed to the breed standard. On the other hand, somebody I know here in the UK with a Champion bitch with many CCs (double figures) found the coat of the bitch had grown so long it dragged on the floor, and so she cut some of it off simply to stop it from being dragged on the ground and getting dirty -white dog. At the next show the bitch was not placed well and the judge told the owner it was because of the scissoring which the breed must not have carried out!

The issue is not necessarily the standard saying you can scissor, so much as not saying that your dog will be penalized if you do trim it. In the case of the Setter, the AKC standard may enable trimming a bit more by saying that the coat should not affect the lines and movement but nowhere in either standard does it say that the coat should not be trimmed. That's the beauty (or the danger) of standards being left open to interpretation I guess.

Here are the breed standards for the English Setter:
AKC- "Flat without curl or wooliness. Feathering on ears, chest, abdomen, underside of thighs, back of all legs and on the tail of good length but not so excessive as to hide true lines and movement or to affect the dog's appearance or function as a sporting dog."

KC- "From back of head in line with ears slightly wavy, not curly, long and silky as is coat generally, breeches and forelegs nearly down to feet well feathered."

The AKC's coat description for the Springer is quite a bit more in-depth though. It specifically states that the dog may be trimmed but not overtrimmed whereas the UK standard says nothing at all about trimming. Left open to interpretation though, the AKC standard says trimming is ok and different people draw the line between trimming and overtrimming in different places.

Breed standards for the Springer:
AKC- "The Springer has an outer coat and an undercoat. On the body, the outer coat is of medium length, flat or wavy, and is easily distinguishable from the undercoat, which is short, soft and dense. The quantity of undercoat is affected by climate and season. When in combination, outer coat and undercoat serve to make the dog substantially waterproof, weatherproof and thornproof. On ears, chest, legs and belly the Springer is nicely furnished with a fringe of feathering of moderate length and heaviness. On the head, front of the forelegs, and below the hock joints on the front of the hind legs, the hair is short and fine. The coat has the clean, glossy, "live" appearance indicative of good health. It is legitimate to trim about the head, ears, neck and feet, to remove dead undercoat, and to thin and shorten excess feathering as required to enhance a smart, functional appearance. The tail may be trimmed, or well fringed with wavy feathering. Above all, the appearance should be natural. Overtrimming, especially the body coat, or any chopped, barbered or artificial effect is to be penalized in the show ring, as is excessive feathering that destroys the clean outline desirable in a sporting dog. Correct quality and condition of coat is to take precedence over quantity of coat."

KC- Coat: "Close, straight and weather resisting, never coarse. Moderate feathering on ears, forelegs, body and hindquarters."

http://www.telltalekennel.com/Images/Boys/Randy/Randysm.jpg

"...Above all, the appearance should be natural. Overtrimming, especially the body coat, or any chopped, barbered or artificial effect is to be penalized in the show ring, as is excessive feathering that destroys the clean outline desirable in a sporting dog. Correct quality and condition of coat is to take precedence over quantity of coat."

I'd say that's a fail for the dog above.  The question is, why wasn't it disqualified?

http://www.data-ess.cz/DOKUMENTY/crufts/2013/Good-Citizen-Dog/MEADOWDALE-CHAOS.jpg

Natural appearance and Moderate feathering illustrated above.  

Because people accept it and the ones who don't either choose another sport or another kennel club (such as UKC) to compete with their dogs. It's probably a case of someone started doing it at some point with a dog, they won with the dog (which may have had nothing to do with the grooming) and other people started doing it because they thought it would help them win. If you look back at photos of the breed from the early 90s, they still stripped out the body but the feathering was left much more natural. Excessive trimming is not a disqualifying fault, so the dog shouldn't be disqualified but also shouldn't necessarily be placed over a dog with a coat that is to standard. The problem for the judges comes when you have a structurally outstanding dog that has been groomed that way, and that is often where some of these trends start. The dog wins on other merits but people latch on to the grooming because they think that might be the reason the dog is winning.

>The problem for the judges comes when you have a structurally outstanding dog that has been groomed that way, and that is >often where some of these trends start. The dog wins on other merits but people latch on to the grooming because they >think that might be the reason the dog is winning.

It shouldn't be a problem though.   A judge who knows the standard isn't compelled to put up a dog who is incorrectly groomed or over groomed/trimmed.   In exactly the same way as an outstanding dog  presented dirty and scruffy would not be put above dogs who were clean and well-presented.

At the end of the day, the judges must accept responsibility for encouraging ridiculous grooming and trimming.   If they decided to treat over grooming in the same way as they would a dirty dog,  then we wouldn't have this situation.

>At the end of the day, the judges must accept responsibility for encouraging ridiculous grooming and trimming.   If they decided to treat over grooming in the same way as they would a dirty dog,  then we wouldn't have this situation.

Quite:  I have a US correspondent, and my dogs have naturally close lying coats so don't have hair on their bellies that hangs down untidly as it would on an open/overlong coat.  Yet my friend when she sees pictures always says why don't you trim the underline they do there and the males look al over exposed instead of neat and tidy as outs do ;)

I know why they do it, they do it to make the over mature heavy dogs (that win under the US system as dogs are generally made up as puppies) look to have more leg.  They trim the hair off the back of the tail to make tails look higher set etc.

It's all about creating an illusion of correctness rather than having a correct animal, and if not accepting that it isn't.

In the end a dog will breed on as what it is, not what it appears to be.  Some may think all this artifice is innocent enough, but where many will rely on, reputation, photographs and advertising when they make breeding decisions, to judge a dogs productive ability as they are unable to get their hands on a dog or successful progeny themselves, due to geography. We are lucky in the UK, we can always see the dog we choose to use on a bitch and go over them, and ditto their offspring.

>In the end a dog will breed on as what it is, not what it appears to be. Some may think all this artifice is innocent enough,

So very true !     Yet there are those, even in the UK who seem to think that once a fault is hidden by careful preparation, it's all that counts :-(     They seem to forget, it's easier to breed a fault into a line, than to breed one out :-(

> It's all about creating an illusion of correctness rather than having a correct animal, and if not accepting that it isn't.

Something, perhaps, that the judge thinks might do well in the group.... or even look flashy enough for BIS....