I must say that so far this year i have seen some terrible judging. Dogs that not only arent that brilliant but wont even show are winning. There are many times were a dog will say win the ticket then next day will get chucked! Some dogs winning one good thing then never even being placed again!! (Normally as they are friends of the judge or have the judges breeding in it).... Which brings me on tot the subject- Shouldnt the breed standard be more specific? Anyone can read it and their idea of what it means can be totally different to someone elses! Giving us what we see from the ringside- a dog winning high awards at one show then chucked at another. People say he wasnt the judges type, well maybe if the standards were more specific then type would be more constant in the breeds.
Anyone else got any thoughts???

The breed standard is there for the judge to work from.
  The construction and breed points  of the dog but in any breed there are different types for example in Labradors you would pretty much spot a Poolstead Lab,a Sandylands  a  Cambremer ,as in most breeds a differing type may appeal to one person and not another.
It wouldnt do for all dogs to look exactly the same as there would be no competition.
Its how the judge interprets the standard and apply it to their judging that is the task in hand.
The very worst thing that can happen is to get to your judging appointment and there be  nothing you really think is any good and beleive me picking the best from them is harder than say doing a show or breed club where the standard is so high you are nit picking.
For myself I go for the type I like and think to myself well if I never judge again Ive done my own thing.
 

Best thing is to put the said judge you think isnt any good in your diary and avoid them in future :)

That is what I thought when i first started, that there should be a very specific blueprint.

I have now come to rrealise that it is actually much healthier to have a variety in acceptable limits in type/style of dogs.

When one type starts to dominate within a breed (say a sire that everyone admired was overused) then it leads to exageration and the whole look of a breed can change.

My own breed is a breed of moderation. 

It is also required to be shortcoupled and cobby.  When trying to achieve this it can easily happen that you end up with stuffy dogs that are rather squat, with short loin, but short rib also. 

If there were not others who selected dogs for length of neck and leg, and perhaps forgave a little length of back, there would be nowhere to go to regain balance, and the opposite would be true with the rangy types needing the cobbier ones input to get the correct type.

Well said! I used to think there was a clearly defined right and wrong too. The main thing in my breed is a heavier type versus a more athletic leaner type. It tends to pendulum between them and I've come to realise it doesn't matter which is flavour of the year provided neither type is lost.

I have a breed that has foruntaely not changed that much over the years and the winners of the 60's would still look the part in the ring now.

I have a lot of old yearbooks and have noticed that there were the same types around then as now, though there may have been changes in fashion of the dogs winning, as you said the pendulum :D

Elkhounds probably haven't changed much because they have are an ethical group of breeders & they have never been excessively popular like Labradors, Yorkshire Terriers, GSDs etc there are some of the smaller(numerically)breeds that are the same & the main improvement has been in the health tests now done before breeding. Each breeding being done for a reason & not just to fulfill orders for the flavour of the moment breed. having seen Barbaras dogs photographs they are very much the same stamp as the dogs of the sixties & 70's & my friend who won BOB Keeshonden at Crufts this year still has the same type she had when i first knew her all those years ago in the 1970's

I can remember a top winning Elkhound bitch(I think)who impressed me with her attitude & ring present I knew nothing of her worth against the breed standard but i just had a gut feeling she was a good one I bet Barbara can name her but I fior the life of me I cannot other than she was from one of the older breeders

Some breeds have improved healthwise(like the Irish Setters)due to advances in science.

I smile sometimes when people talk about the KB BC breed standard(based on the Australian one) as the blue print for the breed, no regard is given to the fact that there are different types of dogs on the side working due to the terrain & sheep they are required to work with so it is as well that the standards are open to interpretation otherwise the half white faced bitch BC would not have been able to win a CC as she does not  meet the standard in the eyes of some KC BC breeders & exhibitors but to others she is a good type of BC(BTW i haven't seen her so cannot comment on her) I hope my next BC will also be a white faced dog 7 yes I shall dabble in the breed side for some light entertainment