I hasve just been watching the video of the working group at Birmingham and have to say (As I have commented before on how much I hate the loose skin on Neo's) this has got to be one of the best I have ever seen, He is such a fit healthy looking lad with no sores on his hocks and just the right amount of skin to be able to live his life in comfort.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWBSns8KUmg
I would love to see the breed as a whole get to his standard.
Aileen

PS its about 24 mins into the vid..

I agree, he looks great. Another dog that I thought was fabulous and not too exaggerated was the Basset that was 2nd in the Hound Group. Full of breed type but with ground clearance and his eyes looked ok.

If these 2 BOBs are anything to go by things are definitely moving in the right direction :-)

Basset is here at 09.40 

Gosh, what a handsome chap, and I thought he moved really well too.

Oh gosh, no! That's not the way champion Neos look in Italy and god forbid all Neos start being bred to look like that! I like the heavy skin on Neos; that's what makes them unique. The heavier bone and skin, the better. That dog looks too much like a Cane Corso or a gray American Bulldog to me.

> I like the heavy skin on Neos; that's what makes them unique.

That's also what causes eye problems and sores and the excessive bone and size makes for joint problems. But hey if you like the look of it why care how uncomfortable the dogs life is.

I'm sorry but for me, dogs exist for human pleasure and enjoyment. I prefer the more unique breeds that have something about them that makes them very different from all other breeds. I'm not a softy animal rights nut who thinks breeding extreme traits is a bad thing. Beauty before comfort for me, thanks. I know that may appall some but I don't care.

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Beauty before comfort for me, thanks. I know that may appall some but I don't care.

So you don't live up to your user name then?

> I'm sorry but for me, dogs exist for human pleasure and enjoyment.

How can anyone take pleasure in your dog knowing that he is in constant pain from joint problems, Has irritated eyes and is going to die years earlier than he could have done because he was bred him for his looks?
If you love dogs then you would surely want them to live a happy painfree life.

This has to be a troll surely - no decent human being could come and say (a) that they think the massively exaggerated type is beautiful, and (b) they would prefer their idea of 'beauty' to the dog's comfort?? They are either a troll or a very cruel person. Either way I am putting them on ignore. :-(

Because I want dogs not just for companionship, but also the pride I feel when I look at a gorgeous purebred specimen that fits the type that I consider ideal. It's more important to me that breed traits are preserved than for bleeding hearts to feel better about themselves by succeeding in meddling with my preferred sport (showing dogs)! If looks didn't matter so much to me, I'd like purebreds and mutts equally, but I don't.

No, I think not a troll, but an idiot who is one of those intent on bringing disgrace on the whole  of the dog showing world.
Admin I think this is not the sort of person Champdogs should support as a member. Put your money where your mouth is and remove them...
Aileen

There are a number of thoughts in my head, a troll, a cretin, or perhaps just the sort of person who likes pulling legs of insects what ever can you imagine anyone selling a dog to them, well anyone but a puppy farm or a BYB which may be why this person has become used to looking a deformed dogs - if that is the case, really sad.

Agree admin this is a sight for those would love and respect animals do not think this is the place for this poster.

I think this person comes from a country where dogs are crated all day while owners are at work.  They tend to look upon dogs as a commodity.

I agree, this is not the sort of person we want posting on here, or people will think we condone their views. You can admire a dog for its looks without compromising its health.

Why am I being vilified? I am not a troll nor am I an abusive dog owner! I love and care for my dogs and give them the best my money can buy. I just don't want standards to be altered. I LIKE the way show Neos, Basset Hounds, Pekingese, Shar Peis, Clumbers, etc., etc. look and I greatly resent that animal rights idiots are getting their way with the KC yielding to their pressure and changing standards. I don't WANT moderate-looking dogs! The more unique, extreme features are what set show dogs apart from pet-quality dogs for crying out loud! At least the AKC has more of a backbone and doesn't cower every time someone complains about perceived cruelty. God forbid we ever ban cropping and docking in the U.S. because annoying animal lovers think it's not nice to do that to poor wittle doggies! Rant over.

Why am I being vilified?

May be because you care more about the way an animal looks than their health and well being - most if not all the members on this forum love animal and would never voice the opinion that looks are more important than health and comfort. The exaggerations you seem to admire were developed by people before they became aware that the breeding for such excesses was detrimental to the health of the animals and are now doing their best to return the animal to its original state so that if needed the animal could still do the work it was originally bred to do.

The more unique, extreme features are what set show dogs apart from pet-quality dogs for crying out loud!

In the UK it is very common for top quality dogs from top breeders to be sold as pets -they cannot all go as showdogs. Long before I was showing and later breeding I always bought my pet dogs from top show breeders. There is ONLY a definite difference between a pet dog and a show dog when the pet dog has been bred by a back yard breeder or puppy farmer.

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">I'm sorry but for me, dogs exist for human pleasure and enjoyment. I prefer the more unique breeds that have something about them that makes them very different from all other breeds. I'm not a softy animal rights nut who thinks breeding extreme traits is a bad thing. Beauty before comfort for me, thanks. I know that may appall some but I don't care.

<img title="Quote selected text" class="qButton" alt="Quote selected text" src="/images/mi_quote.gif" />

May appall some ?-- I would hope this would appall any right thinking human being. Not only are you cruel ( and I don't use that word lightly) you are also ignorant. The extreme "beauty" which you admire so much is a comparitively recent thing, bred into the dogs by people very like you, to some deluded ideal of their own.These dogs were never meant to have such exaggerated characteristics. It is admirable that the majority of dog breeders, certainly in this country, are putting the dogs' health and comfort first, and breeding back to how dogs were before weird humans like you messed them up so badly.

Like I said, I don't want moderate-looking dogs. I love the way these breeds look as they are; they're like beautiful works of art and I feel it would be very unfortunate to see these breeds change. A Peke with a longer muzzle and longer legs is just a Tibetan Spaniel to me. Wrinkles are the defining characteristic of Shar Peis. Take that away and they're no longer show-quality Shar Peis, just your average faulty breed specimen you'd find in a rescue. If you make Bassets lighter with less drooping in the eyelids, you get a Basset artésien normand. Do you people not see how tragic it would be to lose these unique breeds as we know them?

At least Poochlover....(oxymoron for sure) is honest.

So many people secretly believe all that twaddle to a greater or lesser degree ...otherwise we wouldn't have the extreme features we see today.
Most just make excuses for why the dogs are disabled...this poster just tells it like it is....she likes them that way!

Sad but true.

Well, I suppose it is refreshing to hear it is believed that most show breeders are breeding dogs to be fit for function. Perhaps we should introduce PL to JH and may I be a fly on the wall please. :-)

Perhaps we should introduce PL to JH and may I be a fly on the wall please. :-)

No need to be a fly on the wall as it will be all over the internet, with PL being described as "a member of a UK forum for owners of showdogs"!!

Sadly you may well be right, have already pointed out to admin that using the ignore button in this case does not really help but it seems they think this member is fine to be thought as a valid member of our community - can only hope they are not available and will be back soon, admin that is.

Poochlover is in the US were some seem to believe that they have a doG given right to do what they like to achieve success in the show ring-Look at the travesty that is the American Showline GSDs :-O

Sad thing is Tommee that the OP does not think they are exaggerated enough :-(

Poochlover, do you really want them to look like this?

http://retrieverman.net/2012/05/10/qualzucht-in-india/

Unfortunately not everyone gets a dog for the love of dogs but for their own ego instead.  Some people would happily let a dog be in pain/discomfort just to have it look good or boost their own ego. People like this are a sad fact of life.

MsTemeraire the dog in that link was awful, I can only imagine the putrid stench and infection that must come from that amount of wrinkle and the poor thing must be blind most of the time.

Poochlover says  'how tragic it would be to lose these unique breeds as we know them?' but they have only been known like this for a short amount of time.  Some of these breeds have spent hundreds of years looking a certain way and they looked that way for a purpose.  To preserve the uniqueness of these breeds we need to stop over exaggerating them.

I can't believe some of you! I'm entitled to my views and I don't think I've broken any rules so why should I not be allowed to post comments on this forum?  The Neo from India was ugly and not typey to me. If you want a good example of the breed, look at this dog:

http://www.westminsterkennelclub.org/2011/photos/breed/WS16876603.html

I just want to keep dogs the way I'm used to them as seen in U.S. shows. I'm not saying I want them to be bred to have freakish proportions, only that I don't want them to deviate from their modern look.

Sorry, but to me that USA dog - Westminster winner or not - is also freakish.

I think some breeds need a Roswell Eldridge to appear and offer a cash price for dogs looking most like the old version! (Cavalier history.) Funny how it was an American who managed to get the old type of dog back there.

How do you feel about the way the working dog looked, as in here  http://midgardkennels.wordpress.com/1156-2/

Surely you agree that the greatest aesthetic pleasure comes from the perfect marriage of form and function- one complementing the other? These old dogs are to most of us I suspect far more pleasing to the eye because they look fit and they look as though they can work. Aside from our interest as humans, what of the poor wretched animals? It is common sense to see that they must suffer, barely able to see, if at all, carrying around those huge folds of skin- it's quite heart-rending.

I doubt the dogs are bothered by not being able to see, just like deaf Dalmatians and dogs with missing limbs don't seem bothered by what they lack. Do you think Neos, Bulldogs, Pekes and other heavy-boned breeds wish walking wasn't so laborious? Come on! They don't know any different.

Those dogs from your link are bad quality in my opinion. There need to be striking differences among the breeds. That's what makes purebreds beautiful and unique. Many of those dogs could be confused with other mastiff or bully breeds.

I'll take the U.S. show type of every breed over any traditional examples, thanks. You don't have to like them, but allow others the choice to breed how they see fit.

In my view the dogs you call Neos have no right to that name, or rather their breeders have no right to call them that. The breeder of gross exaggeration is riding on the mystique and glamour of the working dogs of the past, it is that history that they use to underpin their 'pedigrees' and which they flag at every opportunity to prop up their endeavours.

As you point out, the real working Neos and the poor beasts you espouse, have little in common....they might as well be a different breed. A mastiff should be able to do a job and there is something called behavioural conformation whereby the 'design' of the dog' is intimately involved with the job it does, mess with that and you lose type....real type, I mean, where body and mind, structure and drive, come together to form a whole.

The 'quality' you refer to is a modern invention. You have divorced the look of the dog from its role. It is half a dog, and a very poor half at that. Where's the skill in that?

You have the privilege of messing with nature but instead of doing something truly worthwhile and beautiful, you play with dogs and genes as flies to the gods...dispensable trinkets for your immediate gratification. I feel sick to think that there are people like you that genuinely think its okay and brush off the possibility of suffering because creating a winning 'quality' dog just feels so good. It's the worm in the showing world a sort of cultural personality disorder, zero empathy meets pure ego.


I'll take the U.S. show type of every breed over any traditional examples, thanks. You don't have to like them, but allow others the choice to breed how they see fit.

But the traditional examples are how the breeds were ment to look, what the standards were originally written on, so anything not resembling the traditional examples would technically be a fault.

But either way looks like no one will ever be able to convince you that the dogs quality of life should be more important than excessive features.

>I doubt the dogs are bothered by not being able to see, just like deaf Dalmatians and dogs with missing limbs don't seem bothered by what they lack. Do you think Neos, Bulldogs, Pekes and other heavy-boned breeds wish walking wasn't so laborious? Come on! They don't know any different.

But we do know different, assuming we are thinking, caring human beings (you appear not to be one), and it is our responsible as caring breeders to move away from these over exaggerated specimens that cannot see or walk properly.

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">deaf Dalmatians and dogs with missing limbs don't seem bothered by what they lack. Do you think Neos, Bulldogs, Pekes and other heavy-boned breeds wish walking wasn't so laborious? Come on! They don't know any different. <br />

But a deaf dog or one that is missing a limb is not in pain. The type of dog you are promoting has health issues that cause pain and discomfort. Skin fold dermatitis, entropian, joint disorders all cause pain. The dog that labours simply while walking is in constant discomfort. Just because you do not want to acknowledge it does not mean the poor dogs are not suffering for your lack of concern.

If you look at the AKC standard for the Neo, you'll see that the dog from my link that won best of breed at Westminster conforms to that standard. The AKC standard calls for heavy folds and drooping lids that expose the haw, etc. All I'm saying is that I don't want current show standards to change. I don't care what purpose breeds were originally bred for because I will never breed for work, only show and companionship. Of course, I believe in breeding for good health as well, but that doesn't mean sacrificing the dog's looks. Watch YouTube videos of Neos with excessive skin and tell me if those dogs look like they're unhappy or in pain!

> I don't care what purpose breeds were originally bred for because I will never breed for work, only show and companionship. Of course, I believe in breeding for good health as well, but that doesn't mean sacrificing the dog's looks.

Im astounded and sickened that you think this is acceptable :(

Why? I don't see ANYTHING wrong with breeding for good looks, temperament and health, even if you are a breeder of a "working" breed. Not everyone wants a dog for the same purpose! Do most people use their Great Danes for what they were traditionally bred for? Or their Cocker Spaniels? There are plenty of spaniel breeders who only breed for show and companionship; they are not horrible people! I'm not callous. I do care about the dog's health but like I said, you can have health without sacrificing beauty.

I think it was your comment "beauty before comfort for me" that probably sparked much of the reaction you have received here. Perhaps it was a throwaway comment made in haste, and perhaps not what you really meant, because that, to me, says the way the dog looks is more important than their health, ergo an unhealthy dog is more likely to feel uncomfortable.

I don't think it matters whether a dog is worked or not, the standards were very much written around the behavioural conformation of a dog that could and did work and that is what breed histories are, for the most part, based on. We cannot just discard that. The standard reflects a history and a role, it is not plucked out of the sky....though you might think so when we consider some interpretations.

Anyway, I am glad that you now state that you believe in breeding for health and temperament as well as looks..on that we can agree.

Lets face it folks everything in the US is bigger & better than anywhere else in the world-look what they have done to the GSD, American Showline must be better than German Working line ??

Prefer the topline on the American dog, (despite that awful universal show stance) though would like to see shorter more compact body and less overangulation, but then I am used to moderately angulated breed, where you have a dog that won't fall over cornering, and can't easily be knocked off four feet..

The working line dog though is much better than the overexagerated german/euro showlines.

The origianl GSD was much more like the Malinois in balance and angles, a normal canine shape.

No that is where there needs to be a standard that keeps the welfare of the dogs a the forefront of anything rather than the athesetic requirement to please the selfish nature of humans.

You prefer the mega sloping topline of the American showline dog to the working line dog :-O Really, you do realise that they cannot stand 4 square & thet they are terribly unsound both rear & fore  ?? They gait with their rear pasterns on the floor & stand cow hocked, The German working line GSDs don't

So the US do have better GSDs than the Germans I stand corrected they must be right about all the rest too :-O

It's a matter of personal preference. I, too, prefer American show GSDs to German show GSDs. For me, the most perfect example of a GSD is the U.S. bitch, Ch. Altana's Mystique:

http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/german_shepherd_dog/dog.html?id=526813-altanas-mystique

I don't care if a GSD can work; I only care that it's beautiful (healthy, too!) and that it can be a mentally-sound, loving companion. What is with some people's concern with whether dogs can still work? We don't need dogs to perform the same tasks that we used to need them to do!

Can you quantify healthy based on that you think not being able to see is a see is acceptable ?

It is like the Ceasar mentality here. Lets blindfold you and see how you like it and adapt to it.

So you think it's OK for a dog to be totally unsound as long as it wins in the ring ?? Well as you are american & as we all know everything american is better so you must be right-just as well I don't live in the USA otherwise I would have to hide my awful unshowable dogs

BTW my link was NOT to a German showline GSD but a working line GSD

poochlover,

I quote the AKC standard for the GSD verbatim

The ideal dog is a working animal with an incorruptible character combined with body and gait suitable for the arduous work that constitutes its primary purpose.

And you say you don't care if the dog can work? Your own standard demands that it could work and that is the point.

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">I don't care if a GSD can work; I only care that it's beautiful (healthy, too!) and that it can be a mentally-sound, loving companion. What is with some people's concern with whether dogs can still work? We don't need dogs to perform the same tasks that we used to need them to do!

Your idea of "beauty" is so warped. The Neos and GSDs which you admire for their "beauty" are in no way "healthy". You are attempting to backtrack somewhat from your original statement of beauty being more important than comfort  by now saying you want "healthy" dogs but the "beauty" which you so admire causes health problems and great discomfort to the dogs. Some of your statements in this thread strike me as so outrageous that I fervently wish you were a troll. Alas you are not, and sadly there must be many like you in the show world for you to feel able to voice your opinions at all-- you must know others who agree with your views. Very sad indeed.