Ooh how I did love the GSD who was placed 1st in Pastoral.  Lovely chunky dog and a worthy winner.  Hardly got a glimpse of the BOB sheltie winner though (my passion).  The judge did choose some unusual  breeds for the final line up though.  Was surprised that none of the Belgians were chosen.

Snowflake

I liked the GSD too - he was an impressive animal, but not as nice as the Gundog Group winner!

I agree Malcolm,  not as striking as the lovely flatcoat - Jet I think he is  called.

Snowflake

Lovely GSD? Maybe, apart from its terrible back legs/hips.....i thought we were supposed to be encouraging the breeding-out of things like that? The KC says one thing then does something else...terrible!!

He moved effortlessly around the ring and is a wonderful example of the breed.  Not over exaggerated in any way.  Loved him!

Strange, people's interpretation of "not exaggerated"!

Absolutely LOVED him, very worthy winner but surprising- im glad the judge chose his worthy winner and not go with the recent bad press gsds have had.

He was a middle of the road dog, not exaggerated in any way. He also has working titles so is fit for purpose...his "exaggeration" cant hinder him too much ;-)

the gsd was amazing looking and like qwerty says fit for purpose ...in 1 word beautiful ;0)
xxxx

He,ll do for me.

Not bad at all I thought - I'm still not keen on the sloping back tbh but he was a lot better than some I've seen, you could see he had strength and drive in his back end as he went round. And a fabulous head too!

Beautiful front end, but the back end didn't do it for me. As previous post said, thought this type of rear end was supposed to be getting bred out?
Not my type at all. give me a good solid working type ie police or forces.

> As previous post said, thought this type of rear end was supposed to be getting bred out?
>

A canine generation is approximately 3 years so even if that were the case and the aim was a straight topline, which is not the aim (the standard calls for a sloping croup), then to see any major difference one would expect several generations to be bred, so 10 or 20 years to see a wholesale change.

Same with reducing wrinkle, lengthening muzzles, having less prominent or deep set eyes, longer legs in short legged breeds etc etc.

Did nobody clock the judge when he was feeling the spine in the GSD last night?

I agree with those who suggest the GSD sloping rear is something of an acquired taste -even in this winning dog, just not persuaded, even on an aesthetic level. On the other hand, the FCR was out of this world and the reserve was lovely too- a real show girl.

I was unable to see the terrier group- any views on the stand out dogs?

It was the heavy angulation that bothered me as it was not in balance with the front - think the standard calls for it to be in proportion to the front although it is somewhat difficult to understand it talks of a line drawn from the point of buttocks should cut through the second thigh and finish just in front of the foot. Not too sure that many GSD would meet this but certainly in the ring this one did not.

Mind you there was a shot of it with its family and the angulation was far less and he was moving in a natural manner  so I do wonder if GSDs change their natural gate when in the show ring - something I will watch for.

Hi Spender. what was the judge doing re the spine? i never saw it.
How are you by the way?
Anndee

Hi Anndee, I'm fine; haven't been on here in ages.  How are you?

Re the GSD, the BIS judge ran his hand down the spine, stopped halfway, felt the spot, and then went back up to the withers.  The dog has a hinge in his back.  When the dog moved, he was looking 'hinged' at times. 

He didn't look balanced to me,  hocks too low to the ground; doesn't have a clean top line and his movement wasn't flowing.  He wasn't toe tapping thou, but I would like more strength and muscle in the back end, and balance.  So I wouldn't rave yet, and I did think there were others more deserving to take the group IMHO.

I echo everyone's sentiments on here re the FCR.   A simply outstanding dog, happy expression, waggy tail, good ring presence, shiny coat, terrific mover, good rapport with the handler.  I could go on and on.....truly a well deserved win.  A credit to his breeder and breed.

Well the WFT won the group as I'm sure you know, but I rather fancied the Airedale who came 2nd.

> Re the GSD, the BIS judge ran his hand down the spine, stopped halfway, felt the spot, and then went back up to the withers.  The dog has a hinge in his back.  When the dog moved, he was looking 'hinged' at times.....He didn't look balanced to me,  hocks too low to the ground; doesn't have a clean top line and his movement wasn't flowing.  He wasn't toe tapping thou, but I would like more strength and muscle in the back end, and balance.

Interesting observation; and sums up what I felt too. Front end lovely, but surely the back end should be as strong as the front, or at least as wide? It's almost like two dogs cut & shut together.... a big strong one at the front and a skinny one at the back.... a locomotive pulling a wagon, rather than a complete entity. I do hope people won't get upset at my observation, as it's just my opinion and how I felt to see it. I was not there and have never seen this dog for real.

>It's almost like two dogs cut & shut together

A cut and shut - a perfect description. :-)

Loved the WFT but never watched all of Crufts and I am mad I missed the Terrier Group as the Airedale came second .
Maybe next year there  will be an Airedale in the final line up  that would make my day .

> Re the GSD, the BIS judge ran his hand down the spine, stopped halfway, felt the spot, and then went back up to the withers.  The dog has a hinge in his back.  When the dog moved, he was looking 'hinged' at times. 
>
>

That is an excelent description The top line suddenly took a dip and "hinged" is just the word I was looking for to describe it .
Beatifull dog  apart from that though, kind eyes and handsome face also looked very relaxed in the ring.

Re hinges and hocks there are alot of posters on here who are very biased
re the Gsds.
Having spent 40 years in this breed coming through from sloppy monsters to the present
day. Now retired.

First things first the breed judge of the day I hold in great esteem and to suggest he of all
judges would promote a poor quality Gsd not ever!!.

            The gsd is for my money the out standing Dog of his day.
Fit for purpose he certainly is. Could not have succeded in  Germany with a weak
rear end.

> Re hinges and hocks there are alot of posters on here who are very biasedre the Gsds.Having spent 40 years in this breed coming through from sloppy monsters to the presentday. Now retired.First things first the breed judge of the day I hold in great esteem and to suggest he of all judges would promote a poor quality Gsd not ever!!.            The gsd is for my money the out standing Dog of his day.Fit for purpose he certainly is. Could not have succeded in  Germany with a weakrear end. .Up Up and Away. .

The Gsd has changed a lot in 40 years and IMO the dog in the final at Crufts did look a bit "hinged " behind and did not look as strong behind as he did in front .  40years ago GSD's had a straighter topline and why breeders felt the need  to change it I dont know as there must be some effects on his movement and strength with conformation like this  to me it is just not natural but we are all entitled to our own oppinions and there are a few on here that agree with my thoughts .

Well I didn't think he was too bad, but my hubby commented that he looked crippled and it couldn't be comfortable to walk with the hind legs so far down. I pointed out he had working qualifications and hubby said just because he could jump didn't mean it wasn't hurting him to do so! So I would say even if the dog isn't as extreme as some, the average non-doggy person still thinks they look unbalanced.

Haven't been around for a while, but I have been following this debate:

40years ago GSD's had a straighter topline

40 yrs ago we acquired our 1st GSD (she was a stray, run over outside our house) yes, she had a straight topline - she was also as long as a train and had legs a Corgi would be proud of. Even worse, she  had a pretty appalling temperament - something that has certainly changed over the past 40 years.

hubby said just because he could jump didn't mean it wasn't hurting him to do so
Why on earth would it hurt him? The dog has good hips and elbows.

The average non-doggy person sees what they expect to see - "oh - a GSD, it must be crippled!"
I don't pretend to be a GSD specialist, but the breed has more Instant Experts than any other I've ever come across!

>>hubby said just because he could jump didn't mean it wasn't hurting him to do so
>Why on earth would it hurt him? The dog has good hips and elbows.

There are other places that can hurt besides hips and elbows - back trouble can be very painful but dogs are such stoics they often keep going despite it, especially if it's of long-standing.

> 40 yrs ago we acquired our 1st GSD (she was a stray, run over outside our house) yes, she had a straight topline - she was also as long as a train and had legs a Corgi would be proud of. Even worse, she  had a pretty appalling temperament - something that has certainly changed over the past 40 years.
>
>

Temperament is aquired through good handling and social skills and it is important to breed dogs that have this trait .This does not however involve altering a dogs conformation thank goodness ..

> hubby said just because he could jump didn't mean it wasn't hurting him to do so
> Why on earth would it hurt him? The dog has good hips and elbows.
>
>

As for altering the angle of the shock absorbing pelvis , just so that the dogs gait  can be made more efficient or so they assume ,to such a degree that it affects the spinal chord is just wrong. Having good hips and elbows ,the parts that create the power and forward movement , means nothing if the pelvis is at the wrong angle to absorb the jolts and knocks as the animal is made to stride out more to cover the ground  for longer periods.

> The average non-doggy person sees what they expect to see - "oh - a GSD, it must be crippled!"
> I don't pretend to be a GSD specialist, but the breed has more Instant Experts than any other I've ever come across! <IMG class=qButton title="Quote selected text" alt="Quote selected text" src="/images/mi_quote.gif" width=20 height=10>

They see what they expect to see .................. yes when they see the dogs back end practicaly slithering on the ground in a crawl and in some the wobbling back legs of course the average non-doggy person is going to assume the dog is uncomfortable but on here people are doggy people and they assume the same so it must be very obvious even to the non-doggy type .
The thing is that GSD's have been altered so much and the movement of the dogs are now so exagerated and strange looking ,People do not have to have knowlege or be instant experts to think these things.

> Temperament is aquired through good handling and social skills and it is important to breed dogs that have this trait .

I'm sure you didn't really mean the first part of your sentence?

Temperament is very much inherited, it's expression and a dogs behaviour can be hugely influenced by experience and training, but the basic temperament and drives etc are inherited.

it can be very difficult though to distinguish nature and nurture.  Lack of socialisation can leave one dog totally ruined for life where another with a very sound inherited temperament can overcome  this.

I have previously cited the dog friends and I brought into Quarantine at 9 1/2 weeks old (so can't have had too much socialisation), and two days after coming out at 9 months old he was able to cope well with a busy dog show, with benching, and obviously lots of strange dogs and people.

I have known other dog reared and socialised properly that are basket cases as their basic characters are so weak.

Temperament is very much inherited, it's expression and a dogs behaviour can be hugely influenced by experience and training, but the basic temperament and drives etc are inherited.

Certainly.  I've seen many examples that with handling you can make a good dog bad but you can't make a bad dog good - managable possibly but not good .... :(

Temperament is aquired through good handling and social skills and it is important to breed dogs that have this trait .
Sorry, that just doesn't make sense.

How can you breed for acquired traits? Temperament is inherited just as much as conformation, colour, size or anything else that is inherited from ancestors. Breed 2 nervous dogs together and, chances are, the pups will be nervous.
If temperament wasn't inherited, how would we have the vast diversity of "jobs" that dogs have been specifically bred to do over the centuries?

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">a dogs behaviour can be hugely influenced by experience and training, but the basic temperament and drives etc are inherited.

For me, this is common sense, there are inherited traits, which we, as owners/breeders develop or constrain through socialisation [so many threads on here about its importance - rightly so IMO].  Re-training rescues, of which I have had many, indicates to me that early years socialisation has a great influence but negative behaviours can be managed and trained, yet,  as dogs age the early behaviours etc re-assert themselves [2nd childhood] and the .breeding and early experiences show.
This is a HUGE debate - going on about humans and other animals alike - as someone else has said the nature vs nurture debate seems to be eternal. 
Just re-read this and am not sure it makes sense - hope so

>> Temperament is aquired through good handling and social skills and it is important to breed dogs that have this trait .
> I'm sure you didn't really mean the first part of your sentence?
>
>

Does sound stupid dosent it  ?? basically what I was meaning was that you would never breed from dogs who had a bad temperament as to try and lessen it being inherited by the offspring. I know this is not allways achieved but I believe it does help to a certain extent and it will also be influenced by the breed type and instincts.

I also believe That the way a dog is nurtured and socialised does have a very big influence on temperament but in all things there will allways be eceptions to this .

I was just making the comparison between breeding for temperament and breeding to change conformation which the latter I feel has gone slightly ott with some of the GSD's

> How can you breed for acquired traits? Temperament is inherited just as much as conformation, colour, size or anything else that is inherited from ancestors. Breed 2 nervous dogs together and, chances are, the pups will be nervous

And breed 2 good temperamented dogs and the chances are they will be good ! and along with being treated and trained correctly things should be fine  in most cases.Sentence just worded a bit wrong !

I do understand that all breeds have different instincts and drive that make them suited to the "Jobs " that they do .That is why people with Collies should know that there will allways be the herding instinct in the dog  or  with a Jack Russel they have allways got the hunting bit in them .

my wording was a bit off  but the point I was making is that to change a dogs conformation as in the GSD's is not right as it interfered with the skeleton , muscles , ligaments etc causing weakneses ,bad joints ,pain and so on .
This has obviously been done by breeding the  dogs  at some point with over exagerated sloping backs etc to get the topline that is so obvious in the breed today.

Also wanted to add

Also the posters now replying apart from maybe one has had something to say about the GSD in question and fair enough you are replying to my comments on temperament but we have went slightly of subject here as the post was about the dog being in the final line up at Crufts and how some of us did not like the look of the dogs exagerated back not to start picking faults on inherited temperament issues . The issue here is how breeders have totaly changed the conformation and top line of the GSD in general and how we feel it has affected the breed.
No one who has replyed to any of my posts has had anything to say on this matter ...... so what are your opinions  on this ?

Also wanted to add

Also the posters now replying apart from maybe one has had something to say about the GSD in question and fair enough you are replying to my comments on temperament but we have went slightly of subject here as the post was about the dog being in the final line up at Crufts and how some of us did not like the look of the dogs exagerated back not to start picking faults on inherited temperament issues . The issue here is how breeders have totaly changed the conformation and top line of the GSD in general and how we feel it has affected the breed.
No one who has replyed to any of my posts has had anything to say on this matter ...... so what are your opinions  on this ?

Also wanted to add

Also the posters now replying apart from maybe one has had something to say about the GSD in question and fair enough you are replying to my comments on temperament but we have went slightly of subject here as the post was about the dog being in the final line up at Crufts and how some of us did not like the look of the dogs exagerated back not to start picking faults on inherited temperament issues . The issue here is how breeders have totaly changed the conformation and top line of the GSD in general and how we feel it has affected the breed.
No one who has replyed to any of my posts has had anything to say on this matter ...... so what are your opinions  on this ?

Also meant to add

Also the posters now replying apart from maybe one has had something to say about the GSD in question and fair enough you are replying to my comments on temperament but we have went slightly of subject here as the post was about the dog being in the final line up at Crufts and how some of us did not like the look of the dogs exagerated back not to start picking faults on inherited temperament issues . The issue here is how breeders have totaly changed the conformation and top line of the GSD in general and how we feel it has affected the breed.
No one who has replyed to any of my posts has had anything to say on this matter ...... so what are your opinions  on this ?

Along with characteristics of many breeds I personally do not find the long sloping croups aesthetically pleasing.  But then neither do I find flat faced, short legged and floppy eared dogs, or anything 'jowly'  pleasing to my aesthetic sense.

I cannot see how it is supposed to aid efficient  locomotion compared say to that of a Siberian Husky's much more moderate angles and less sloping croup.

The actual dog in question appears to be much less exaggerated in this regard than many, and most of it's apparent slope does appear to come from the show stance, and it did appear much stronger in rear than others I have seen.

>most of it's apparent slope does appear to come from the show stance,

A sloping spine is all right; the standard calls for a straight back, falling away slightly from withers to croup, not a level one. The croup itself is required to slope gently, though. The show stance gives the banana-back in the stand (and this one appeared almost to have a 'break' at the thoracic/lumbar junction at times), but some even maintain this banana shape on the move too.

Like I said not a shape that appeals to me. 

On the other hand the over heavy Short legged over long in body type that many think is the correct alternative does not either and certainly doesn't fir the written standard either.

A GSD as I understand it should be a fit muscular working dog with close fitting skin, and good broad thighs (from above so many GSD's have no width in the pelvic region so are wide at the front and narrow behind. 

This may inadvertently have come about because the over angulation for the increased length of stride can only be accommodated with the inevitable over reaching by having the hind feet pass on the inside of the front feet.

A dog with a rear the same width as the front would not be able to move without interference with such angles.

It's certainly not a shape that Nature has adopted as suitable for distance-travelling wild canids.

Nice replys girls Thanks !

As I said before was nice dog in front just weird behind and I personaly still  think its wrong .

Not in reply to anyone in particular - the thread bought to mind a disturbing incident that I noticed when stewarding in the GSD ring. All exhibits bar one were the same type as the Crufts group winner - all front and narrow pelvis with long sloping back and one was a more moderate dog but heavier with straight back and less angle, in fact, the angles front and back were more balanced.

When the challenge was over (which consisted of the class winners running round and round and the last one still driving forward won) the exhibitor of the more moderate dog came into the ring and thanked the judge for actually judging her dog and giving it equal time because, as she said, I know you don't like my type.

I was surprised and angry that it would seem OK not to give all exhibits the same amount of time and consideration. :-(

And breed 2 good temperamented dogs and the chances are they will be good !
Oh if only it was THAT simple!  You need to know that you've got good temperament for at least 3 generations to stand a reasonable chance that temperament will be good.  Bad temperament frequently misses a generation or 2 before it rears its ugly head again.  So many think that because Dam and Sire are good natured then that will mean the pups will be sweet and are soooooo wrong.
Temperament can be a problem in my breed.  There was one dog with a particularly untypical temperament some years ago who produced quality puppies.  It came out 2nd, 3rd, 4th and if double up in the 5th generation too!  It happened time and time again as although he was a top winning dog, he was always kept apart at shows and few people had actually met the dog.

Of course you would have to look at the temperament further back in both dogs I did not mean that because you have a bitch that is good you would only have to see if the sire had a good temperament.
I do know that you have to go further back through the generations for health issues  so of course it would be obvious to look for temperament traits as well.

If this was followed by all breeders then things would be great but well some think that well as long as the dog is healthy and has the correct conformation etc what does it matter if the dog is a bit nippy ???

I have seen dogs winning at small shows and I know fine well that they are agressive and it really annoys me  thay should take that in to consideration when showing as well, how they would test for it well i Dont know ??

The thing is that I bet there are chmpions out there that have done well in the ring and what do they ( some unethical breeders) do ? they stud the dog out or let them have pups just because they have done well in showing .

It is a neverending battle IMO as I see some of my customers breeding their pets and I know that they have not researched in to anything what so ever . One particular Westie breeder has a litter a year from the same awfull dog who produces  horrid little things that would take your hand of as soon as look at you.

Oh if only we lived in a perfect world !

Not my type at all. give me a good solid working type ie police or forces.

Not aware that the police or forces have a "type" bearing in mind they get gift dogs, breed their own or buy in from in the UK and/or abroad?

Certainly if you go to any police trials, you will see a variety of "types" ;)