Do you know any american type golden retriever showing in Britain?
Do you think that the american type must have equal oportunities showing in Europe as the english type?
Sorry about my english

Can you explain the differences between the American and the British type? Hopefully someone else will be able to post a link to the breed standard here (UK) and you can see how this compares to the american one.

The UK standard is here http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/108 but I know nothing of the American type if there is such a thing.

What i do know in relation to a difference is that the American Goldies tend to be very much a darker golden while the British ones seem to be a lot lighter, almost white in colour.
As for the breed standard,http://www.akc.org/breeds/golden_retriever/, i don't know if this is similar to the UK one or not, never owned a Goldie.

There seems to be a fashion for the pale ones at the moment which is a shame as I like to see goldens that are golden but it is not my breed so it is not my call, do think there are some over done heads about at the moment too and that is a shame. Will go and look at the akc standard as comparison is always interesting.

Bums, link not working can you try again please :-)

This is a picture of a American show golden if that helps show the difference, http://www.gold-rushgoldens.com/spencer.html and http://www.rushhill.com/Bistro/index.htmlI think they tend to have much longer, straighter coats and not as 'blocky' in the muzzle as English type golden retrievers. Im not sure on the proper terms for the differerences but English goldens also look much heavier in bone and not as compact somehow...also much paler in colour in general I think.

Don't wish to be rude but where are his legs?

Not sure why the AKC link didn't work.
Hope this link works, from the Goldie breed club of the USA
http://www.grca.org/StandProgs/standard.htm

I would like to explain the diferences, but my english is very limited, so i show you a letter i have received from a person who knows a lot about the golden retriever standar

Dear Sr. Vazquez:

As to the last paragraph of your note, regarding breed standards, I would point out that the Standard in use in the UK currently is rather different itself from the original Standard for the breed. It has been altered a number of times over the years.  So, which of these several documents most accurately describes the "ideal" Golden Retriever?

Indeed, there are several notable deficiencies in that document.  (a) It does not give any indication of body proportions such as a ratio of height to length, or of leg length compared to height.  (b) there is no mention of a typical range of weight for height. (this was elimanted sometime before 1986).  Some other breeds at the same heights might weigh as little as 30 pounds or as much as three times that.  (c) there is no mention of the correct texture of the topcoat: silky, soft, hard, wiry, or--?  There are a number of other areas lacking, but that would take far too much space for this note.

The American standard was originally (1932-1955) identical to the British stndard.  It has been revised twice, around 1955 and again around 1982.  These revisions were specifically to address areas that were lacking in the previous document, to clarify and to expand upon the earlier standard.  Yes, it is more detailed than the British standard(s) have been, in order to make clear to all, both experience persons and those not familiar with the breed, what is appropriate.

As for the American Standard versus the original British standard, the dog (the hypothetical ideal)that both attempt to describe is very much the same; it is in peoples' interpretations of the Standards that the paths have diverged!  The British have gone towards one sort of dog, the  Americans (USA) towards a different sort.   And I must also say that not all British, and not all Americans, are fixated on these divergent sorts, and  that there are also many dogs in each country that are much the same and either could do well in the other's show rings-- even though they may not be "popular" and "top winning" dogs, they often are excellent Golden Retrievers.

In breeding for "show", and in judging at shows, people too often tend to reward  exaggerated features instead of the less-spectacular, well-constructed, balanced animals. ('If "this" is good, than "more of this" must be better', they think). This in turn leads to departure from the "ideal" of the breed.  One has only to review photographs of Golden Retriever champions over the years from 1911 to the present, to see remarkable changes in the breed.  Some changes for the better, many that were not-- in both countries. 

Any breed standard must leave room for a certain amount of variation WITHIN the desired range of variation for the breed.  A certain amount of diversity is healthy for any breed.  However, when variations become departures outside of this range of variation, that becomes faulty and should be penalized.  The skill is in knowing the breed well enough to understand the differences, and the similarities.