THOSE DARNED JUDGES
by
David Arthur,
Show Scene Editor -
TheDogPlace.org
May 2011
People always have
a reason why their dog didn’t win, and usually it implicates a judge.
Whether in AKC, UKC, ARBA, etc. dissatisfaction ranges from judges selecting
handlers to outright incompetence. While some of it is likely deserved, the
truth is, most judges work very hard to identify and place the most
deserving dogs.
So before beating
up a judge, remember that your $25 entry is a ticket into the great forum of
learned “opinion”, where you willingly subject yourself to someone else’s
interpretation of your breed standard. Thus, if you want big rosettes, then
chase down the most favorable judges. If you want the best “opinion” skip
the show, find a trusted breeder and chat about the finer points of
conformation over a Starbuck’s. Seriously, accept that there are always
tidbits that you may consider more valuable than the all-rounder can see or
appreciate.
I
once returned from a judging weekend to find my reputation being shoveled
into a heap of steaming judgment on the internet. Obviously I didn’t meet a
person’s lofty expectations, and when it was all said and done, they not
only slandered me, but also dug a pit for their own demise. Conversely, at
another show, I queried a handler who had bred two Whippets I was
considering. I made my selection and went on with the day. Afterward, the
exhibitor found me and we discussed those finer points that excite Whippet
breeders. I learned a lot, and it made for a wonderful experience.
The point is that
judges are not messengers from God. By approaching politely, you really do
have the opportunity to discuss their evaluations. When that happens, not
only may you help a judge, but you also might learn from their insight.
Those momentary encounters benefit both judge and exhibitor, thus bettering
the sport as a whole.
It’s also a good
idea to try and view the evaluation process from the judge’s perspective.
The UKC follows the concept of “positive
judging”, looking for exceptional quality instead of simply counting faults.
The dog with the fewest faults is usually the most mediocre, whereas the dog
with something spectacular, regardless of faults, might make the greatest
contribution to their breed. Unless the standard says “disqualification”,
all faults should be evaluated in relation with the whole.
Good judges also
“look” with their hands. This is particularly important to note while
ringside judging. As a spectator, I always keep in mind that I don’t have
my hands where the judge does. Everyone knows that a decent pair of shears,
some chalk, and a marker pen can make nearly any dog look perfect. But
place your hands on it, and you may well encounter a deeper truth.
|
Even between
breeders, and especially between the regions, there is
disagreement under the standard.
And yet, we, as exhibitors, expect that “expert” in the middle
of the ring to intuitively know exactly what is correct or
incorrect |
Movement also betrays what’s beneath the coat. The
bones may be in their right places, but if the muscles aren’t, that
statuesque demigod may turn into Frankenstein’s monster during the
down-n-back. Dogs must be able to perform the function of their breed,
and all things being equal, a movement or structural fault should be
weighted to a much greater degree than mere cosmetics.
We are
all slave to our breed standards. Take a dog with a horribly sloped
backline, straight rear, oversized head, and that moves like a
traffic accident,
and overall, you probably have a very nice
Neapolitan Mastiff. An Epagneul Breton with a beautifully soft brushed
coat or a Shiz Tsu with a scissors bite should be one of the first
eliminated. You can’t generalize on what’s right or not, because even
though there is commonality, each breed has its own distinctions
according to their standard. Again, unless the evaluator is a
tenured breeder, the whole process still boils down to that person’s
interpretation of your standard. What may seem rather rangy to you, to
the judge’s eye is only “slightly longer”. “Medium” to one person is
monstrously huge to the next, and exactly how deep, round, or domed is
“moderate”?
This also
forms a good caution for judges; choose your mentors well, lest you be
led down the track of fads and misconceptions. Not all successful
breeders are breeding in-line with their standard. More than enough
consternation oozes ringside when the discussion turns to which dogs are
little more than well-campaigned pets.
It happens,
and no dog is perfect. But any judge who does little more than peruse
Showsite between assignments is also one who should reconsider
their vocation. Admittedly there is safety in numbers, but bravery and
verification of the standard to what you see in the ring will go a long
way toward making you respected by the exhibitors.
And as for
the “throwaway breeds”, unfamiliarity is no excuse for passing over them
in Group. Granted, you may not have the greatest degree of experience
with them but that’s no excuse for not giving the same level of
consideration and study as you would to the more popular breeds.
Oh, and since
I do love a good controversy, who really does have the best judges?
While AKC has the more rigorous qualification process, the UKC allows
for far more experience. Granted, the UKC should probably have a
stronger apprenticeship program, but would going to AKC’s extreme do
much better for a judge’s abilities? You either have the eye, or you
don’t, and in both registries, those judges who are truly conscientious
can usually fish-up the cream from the common. In fact, there are a
number of judges who have dual approval, which I personally believe
makes for a much better judge.
Lastly, let’s
not forget about that dreaded disease... kennel blindness! Before
dragging some poor judge through the mud, please be honest about your
stock in relation to what you’re facing in the ring. It’s always a
blessing to hear an honest exhibitor walk away with the phrase, “I don’t
mind losing to something that good.” You will further your reputation
and the direction of your breeding program if you honestly applaud the
judges when they make the right selections... even when it’s not your
dog being placed.
But what about
those times when you do bring the best dog, have it groomed to perfection,
and you can clearly see outright politics or ineptitude? Aren’t we still to
be sportsmen? Granted, there are those judges who occasionally... or for
some, often... need a good beating! But leave that to those exhibitors who
care little for their status. No one can ever fault you for being gracious,
while not being so can easily place your show career in jeopardy. Nobody
likes a sore loser, even when they’re right.
So please give
that darned judge the benefit of the doubt. The ones I know and show to
regularly have spent years in study, and they really do know which end of
the lead has the loop and which has the clip. And most of all, remember...
You only paid for
an opinion!
