Question of the Week

Terry Hundt

Sandy Hook, Connecticut

First of all, I do not condone what the judge did. However, there were many ways to get the info. We live in a media world. Anytime, anywhere, one can get wanted info. I certainly hope, as judges, we do not care who won anything before we judge anywhere. I might add that I feel the national assignment that was taken away was a bit harsh.

Richard F. Sedlack

Middlefield, Ohio

In the "old days," people used the telephone for information. Any judge wanting to know something could call someone and find out what they wanted to know. Social media, especially Facebook, is a double-edged sword. It keeps people in touch, and people can get free advertising for their wins, which is handing everyone results in real time, etc. On the other hand, it also has done a lot of damage, some say being the worst thing to happen to the dog game ever. My point is, you can find out what you want on Facebook; knowing does not change your honesty or integrity as a judge. Good judges have minds of their own. Not-so-good judges can be swayed by this information. She should not have lost the assignment. She's the same person and judge you gave the assignment to in the first place. She's not new at this, so if you now think so little of her, maybe you shouldn't have hired her in the first place. We have bigger fish to fry in the dog game than a person's curiosity about a win.                                                                

Beverly Vics

The Villages, Florida

There may or may not be an actual impropriety, but the appearance is blatant. If she wanted to check out who won yesterday, she should have kept it quiet and simply looked up the results.

Maria Arechaederra 

Silverado, California

Bad decisions made with good intentions are still bad decisions. This was a classic example. The judge's mistake was innocent and inconsequential. She should not have been removed.

Virginia Rowland

Templeton, Massachusetts

This seems to be a very rushed and unreasonable decision. The judge was voted on by the membership. Who exactly made the decision to remove her? Was it done by vote of the board of the parent club or of the show committee? Was she interviewed/asked for an explanation before this decision was made?

Sylvia Arrowwood

Charleston, South Carolina

I do not know what the deal was between and betwixt the club and judge, but posting anything on Facebook is moronic and reeks of not being neutral. Why be concerned and solicit another's opinion? It would have been posted in ample time.  

Mark Threlfall

Merrimack, New Hampshire

It seems to me there is clearly more to the decision to replace this judge than meets the eye. 

I know the judge who has been replaced. She was involved with her chosen breed when I first met her while I was still in high school, some 56 years ago. She has a long and varied experience in our sport. I am sure that her selection as the judge to award Best of Breed at her national specialty was an honor and a fitting crowning event to her career in dogs. 

I think it is a shame that she has been removed. Surely there is more to this decision than meets the eye. She will get past this. The only loser in this circumstance is the club and, ultimately, the breed.

Susan Kwiatkowski

Lebanon, New Jersey

Let’s be realistic: This is not the first time a judge asked for results. If it wasn’t done on Facebook, would anyone be the wiser? Did we ask why she wanted to know? Can anyone say the results would influence her next judging assignment? A judge picks who they like when they are judging. If the owners do not like the choice, they don’t have to show under the judge again. The internet isn’t always a good thing.

Peggy Kotin

Avon, Connecticut

If the judge is someone who judges the actual dog — not the handler or wins or owner or money spent on advertising and pictures with the winning judge — then it makes not one ounce of difference. (Although I must say it looks pretty bad to ask on Facebook who won!)

I would also suggest that only those judges should be asked to judge a national specialty — any class. Those specialties are the key to a breed's survival.

Doug Johnson

Bloomington, Indiana

It was unfortunate. I know this judge and she is so independent in her adjudication process. It is my opinion that the question shouldn't have been posted to Facebook, but her abilities are beyond being questioned.  She is a breed enthusiast and breeder with deep roots in the breed for decades. She knows the players, the pedigrees and the breeders all too well.  To question her integrity is ridiculous. Sounds like an overreach on the part of the parent club.  As a general rule, exhibitors should not even begin to question the operation of an expert's decision. Often when you judge you do see other judges in an entry you have just done or will judge over the weekend, and you are most certainly not influenced by their opinion. We really admire our own opinion the most! I am sad for this judge. I believe she was unduly replaced; after all, they more than others know her fierce integrity.  

Diane C. Stille

Thomasville, Georgia

This sounds like overkill.

While probably providing poor optics, results are readily available online from show superintendents’ websites. Many judges of national specialties are involved in the breed they’ll be judging, so I wouldn’t find it unusual for someone to ask who won a specialty.

Allan Reznik

Eureka Springs, Arkansas

It sounded like a hasty, knee-jerk response made under pressure by the board of the parent club. Very disrespectful to a longtime breeder-judge, and disappointing, I’m sure, to a great many exhibitors who were looking forward to showing to her.

John Arvin

Barnegat, New Jersey

Unfortunately, this is a lose-lose situation for the judge. What would happen had that judge looked at the regional results, then put up the same winner, or winners going all the way down the classes? Even shifting the placements probably would not have helped. Even worse for the judge, should the same winners deserve to be placed, it's still going to cause an uproar. Sadly, the question I really would like to see answered is why the judge wanted to see the results.

The following statement comes from the Rules, Policies and Guidelines for Conformation Dog Show Judges, amended to March 2024.

"GRAY AREAS

Judges are often singled out for critical observation by the fancy. Therefore, always keep in mind that perfectly innocent actions or statements can be misconstrued. This includes conduct in public forums and social media. Actions that bring embarrassment to the AKC could be subject to disciplinary action to affect one’s judging privileges."

Given the situation, I agree that the judge should have been replaced.

Jeanne Nonhof

Plymouth, Wisconsin

Muddy waters! More judges get themselves in trouble with their big mouths and actions. If the results of the regional were posted for all to read, why was he or she censored?

Nikki Riggsbee

Valrico, Florida

A similar thing happened at the Great Dane national some years ago, and it shouldn't have happened then as well. 

Joan Zielinski 

Olympia, Washington

In this day of multi-media postings, it would be pretty difficult to keep sequestered throughout a national week while waiting for our judging day to arrive without knowing the winners of any pre-show activity. 
It’s often that we judges are at ringside during groups and can see which dogs were winners on a day before judging those breeds. Are we expected to wear blinders and earplugs?
Judges work very hard to just judge the dogs before them and to do a credible job. Let’s give them some credit for being honest.

Connie Card

Tucson, Arizona

This is an example of the gray area spoken of by AKC. The judge should be honest with themselves first and foremost. This might be a very ethical question just out of curiosity, but it is how it is perceived by others. I recently judged the breed at a national. I did not want to have any idea what happened before and sequestered myself from all Facebook viewing. We all know who the top dogs are: Just look at Dog News or the Chronicle a few months before the event
AKC judges should always think of those gray areas.  It is sometimes difficult to do, but we must at least try.

Barb Ewing

Las Vegas, New Mexico

Judge was dumb to ask that in a public forum, but the club was insane to replace her for it. With superintendents putting catalogs online early in the morning of a show, do they think judges aren’t looking there?

Editor’s Note: Early reports on social media erroneously stated that the replacement judge had been in attendance at a previous satellite show. Responses have been edited to reflect this corrected information.