I have heard a few people recently at shows saying that JW's are a hidnrance in later life for a dog/bitch when they are judged as it makes it harder for the dog/bitch to be placed. Surely (well in theoery anyway) the cream should always rises to the top and if a dog that looks good from 6-18 months can be rewarded then it should be. Likewise some puppies who have not done much by their 1st birthday come into thier own at 2-3 years old (depending on breed this may happen sooner or later) and go on to become mutli award winning Champions. Should the KC should change the title to something else or just scrap the JW system all together. Has anyone found it harder to win with a JW or does it make it easier to get picked out?

Haven't noticed a different in the way they are placed if they have their JW or not.  what people could be saying is that sometimes (well I think most) if a young puppy does well and is very mature by 9 months it is unlikly to do anything once it is out of junior.

If you have a puppy thats very immature its possible (not always) that by the time it reaches 2-4 years it is then when it does all its winning!

Rox

Well, can't see it makes any difference, when I have dogs in front of me the last thing that crosses my mind is if they have a JW, who cares, it does not really mean much more that the fact that the handler has the time and money to attend lots of shows. It may well be that dogs that peak early in their puppy and junior months, and therefore win JW's,  are not the sort that carry there winning abilities through to the senior classes, does that apply to all breeds, I have no idea.

my mum had a standard poodle and she found it no diffrent but he still won her her firsrt RDCC but her stock are winning more naw

This years top Pug has his JW, Sh CM & CH (in fact, three out of three).  so I dont think his JW hampered his career at all ;)  Also, a B & T Am. cocker bitch we bred took her first CC & Gr 2 just after gaining her JW.
bye
Gwen