Perceptions and Realities

The seasoned (and successful) veterans in any breed have, I believe, a responsibility to educate the newer owners/breeders in the general and finer points of the breed. Over four decades I have seen a number of changes in the overall picture we see in the ring today. Some good, some not so much. Keeping the improvements and making changes to areas that may not be as strong as desired is everyone's job. But, in order to make any progress towards these common sense and necessary goals we must break the paradigms inherent to the dog world in general. These barriers are usually built around suspicions, small mindedness and, far too often, the inability of an individual to make an HONEST and IMPARTIAL assessment of their dogs. Let's look at some of the perceptions and realities of showing dogs...

Owners - The fact that you own a dog that was sold to you as a show quality specimen may not be the opinion of the judges. Given enough time and money almost anything is possible with regards to obtaining a CH prefix. Believe me guys, I realize that every finishable dog is not going to do so in a few shows. The truly great dogs often achieve this level of success but the good (not great) dogs should not need to be campaigned to the extent that some are doing in order to get 15 points. Having to pick your show because you know that certain people will not be attending is not exactly the mindset we need to improve our beloved Danes. Traveling long distances to show under one of the very few judges that has given your dog points is another practice best left undone. A truly good dog will win or, at least be in contention, under the majority of judges. There is sometimes a pecking order when you are in an area with stiff competition where one or two super dogs take everything over a period of a few shows and then the remaining good dogs get their necessary points. It is true that you only have to be as good or better than your competition. However, too often (in certain areas in particular) a judge makes selections on the basis of the lesser of evils. Some dogs that do very well in their area of the country cannot get looked at in another area. It is vitally important that you develop an eye for greatness and strive to that end. Compiling a rogue's gallery of champions that are, at best, mediocre, is a common pitfall. Ego and records be damned!

Breeders - Here is the life's blood of the sport. This is also a dangerous venue when discussions (a gentle word for what sometimes occurs) take place about the merits of a breeding program. Most anyone that has had a good track record is happy and proud of what they produce. Many of these programs are justified in that thinking. These top-of-the-line programs are known throughout the Dane world. There are other very low profile individuals, that are not necessarily household names, but their efforts and results have improved our breed (just maybe on a smaller scale than the big guys). The one thing I have never understood is how many people spend so much money showing their dogs (let's face it, this hobby has gotten a lot more expensive) but, when it comes time to breed, they won't get out of their own back yard. I have watched friends of mine continue this mind set for decades. Their rationale was usually along the lines of..."we produced a CH in the last breeding so we're going to repeat it" or they would go into a convoluted 5 generation pedigree explanation of why this was the right stud dog for them to use even though the proposed stud dog and, sometimes, their bitch, either was unable to finish or did so after 2-3 years of hard campaigning. Everyone has their own way of approaching their selection of a stud dog. Getting into a discussion of line breeding or out-crossing is the veritable gallon can of worms which, at this time, will remain unopened. People are often happy with results in the form of statistics and ribbons and just refuse to see the untapped potential they have at hand. Many "generic" champions might be good foundations for a truly wonderful program but you have to acknowledge the weak areas and not focus on the awards.

Judges - This has always been the most controversial aspect of dog shows. In a recent article on an on-line chat room we saw another attempt to paint judges into categories. Most of these would depict the judge as being less than honest or having insufficient knowledge or a combination of these factors. To try to defend every judge would make as much sense as defending every politician. As long as the best we have to deal with is human beings then the opportunity for situations to be less than desired is a given. However, to place most of the judging community into some form of negative categorization needs a rebuttal. Honest guys, I showed a lot of dogs over a long period of time and I also experienced situations which could really not be explained in any manner other than to put the judge into one of the negative categories. I always practiced the theory that everyone gets one bite of the apple. If, however, questionable decisions became the norm then we wouldn't support that judge at future shows. This is pretty common practice for most individuals. The other side of that coin is that judges are only as good as their last assignment. I have handled judge's selection for my Specialty club for the last several years. I also was involved in this task when I lived in Florida. The fickleness and opinion modifications about judges never ceases to amaze. The person that we "had to have" on the next available panel is treated like a pariah 6 months later because of his/her selections at a certain show. I don't really think that judges change their abilities or preferences too much over the years. If you honestly don't think that a judge is capable or honest then you should save the entry fee. But just maybe the reason that another dog won is that the judge honestly felt that the winner was the best one in the ring and just maybe that judge really does understand the breed. If evidence is compelling with regards to a judge's ability or voracity then do what you must. Please don't jump on the bandwagon that a judge is "bad" because he put up one mediocre dog over another. I distinctly remember finishing someone's dog with a 4 or 5 point major and thinking to myself... "I hope they don't want pictures." But that is what we need to correct. Championships should, at the very least, be reserved for good dogs. Sometimes what comes into a Specials ring is beyond belief. I'm satisfied with "good", delighted with "great" and not too happy with "mediocre".
Summary -
1. Dogs that win in some areas are not necessarily good dogs, they're just better than their competition.
2. Propogation of so-so dogs may garner you more ribbons and CH's but may not be doing anything positive for our breed.

BILL