Priorities, Priorities
Just as not all exhibitors or professional handlers like all their counterparts or competitors, just so does the same situation exist among judges. I must admit there are a few judges I greatly admire, am proud to call my friends, and readily speak with about dogs — and I learn from them. They know who they are, and they are precious to me. I hope I do my part and pass along a little knowledge to others from time to time. It is in this vein that I share some recent conversations. Of course, there are others whom I do not admire so much.
We have just gone through the time of year in which it seems a great many national specialties are held across the country. Some of my friends have judged these nationals, and some have attended as spectators or ringside mentors. It is always interesting to discuss the specialties with them, and to get an idea of where some think various breeds are headed, and what the general overall quality was at these very important shows. I have heard a variety of opinions ranging from the very positive about the breeds and the judges at these nationals to a concern about breed temperament and “He wouldn’t know a good Poofenhound if it bit him in the butt!”
I recently judged a good-sized specialty of Spinoni Italiani, another of our breeds that generally do not have large entries at all-breed shows. Like many of these breeds — some of which embrace their versatility by entering more in various performance events than conformation competition — judges don’t necessarily get a good feel for the breed because of limited experience with them. Then, when we get to judge a specialty in which we get to judge both more quantity and quality, we truly appreciate the breed. I was well pleased with the general quality of the Spinoni shown to me. Like most other breeds, there are areas of conformation to which breeders need to pay more attention, but general breed type was good, and it was fun to have this many to judge, as it offered some good choices and options to me.
I have often talked about the fact that I believe a lot of judging comes down to priorities. A recent general discussion among some judges at ringside, lunches and dinners was how do each of us prioritize what is most important to us. I absolutely love these opportunities to share ideas, and I think we all benefit — as do the exhibitors who show to us.
My first priority takes place as I look at the entries from a distance — looking for the proper outline of silhouette. To a great degree, many breeds can — and should — be identified by looking at their silhouettes. A partner to this are the proportions I see as I start moving closer to the dogs. Proper proportions are described in essentially every breed standard, and incorrect proportions are the downfall of many breeds. I believe it is a characteristic that is difficult to correct in a breeding program once it is lost, and so it perpetuates. Since judges see so many incorrect proportions in the ring, those who do not have the experience, knowledge — or maybe just integrity — continue to reward incorrect breed specimens. This continues the negative trend of the breed and is diametrically the opposite of what a judge is supposed to be doing.
Judges often disagree about what a proper head is on various breeds. One might describe the dog’s head as elegant while another will say it does not have enough head. Some might talk about the proper divergent head planes on a specific breed, while others — who maybe should read the standard again — talk about the fact that the head planes were not parallel.
Speaking of this, how important is a proper head on a breed? Can a good Irish Setter have a head that is closer to a Gordon Setter or even a Golden Retriever? Can a Golden Retriever have a narrow back skull and lack of muzzle strength? So, while you may — correctly — say that such and such is not a head breed — and should not be judged solely on the dog’s head — a proper head goes a long way to describe correct breed type.
I believe that some judges — who know the breed standard — may judge the way the standard is written. By that I mean that they evaluate the dog in front of them in pieces — as standards are written: head, neck, front assembly, rear assembly, gait, etc. If that works for them — great — but it doesn’t work for me. I have the standard in my head, but I look at the dog as a whole entity. To me that is a subtle difference, but each of these different styles of judges could easily come up with two vastly different dogs, and neither of us may be wrong. It is all a matter of priorities. Of course, the dog in motion is the true test of structure. I also believe proper movement is not just whether the dog moves close behind or with proper reach in front and behind. To me, proper movement includes timing, cadence, foot placement, effortless (not pounding), and holding topline and silhouette in motion.
When the class is competitive — and we would wish they all were — important nuances help me (and I assume other judges) make final decisions. Of course, different judges might look at different nuances. One might lean more toward length of ear or tail carriage while another might put greater emphasis on the delicate chiseling along the muzzle, around and below the eyes, and along the cheeks. As we always say, all things are a trade-off.
I wonder if the differences in how judges are educated and approved now compared with the days of yore has led to the wide discrepancies in judging and the perception of judges. If we go to the way back (like when I started) I don’t remember a specific — box-checking — system of approving and educating judges. After moving up from being an AKC-approved assistant handler, I went out on my own. Although I was not what I would consider a top handler, I was relatively successful handling many Sporting breeds and a few hounds. It was at this time that an AKC VP contacted me and said he would like me to start judging and he would start me off with the three Setters (Irish Red and White had not yet been approved). From there it was a natural progression through breeds, and following the many different iterations of judges training. It may be very egotistical, but I think the AKC execs were closer to the day-to-day show activities, and were able to identify who they felt knew dogs, and invited those to apply to judge.
My basic training as a judge was being immersed in dogs every week, travelling with — and talking dogs with — people such as Laddie Carswell, Bill Trainor and the Forsyths. Additionally, as my initial breed was Irish Setters, I also spent a lot of time with Joyce Nilsen and the Brodies, as well as competing with and spending time with many of the successful Irish Setter breeders of today. No, we didn’t have a pro forma syllabus, or boxes to check, but what we had was knowledge, experience and a passion for our breeds. Maybe that is why I judge more holistically than piecemeal. You can decide which method is better. I know which one I would choose.
I recently was blessed to spend time with some of my favorite people as we drove together from Denver to Laramie, Wyoming, and spent the weekend together. I wish exhibitors could have been privy to many of the conversations we had, because they would then have a greater appreciation of how judges think — as well as some of the humorous times of the past. I think this complete immersion into just thinking about and living with dogs adds to our education through our hearts and souls.
Today we have many three-month experts who denigrate judges on social media — questioning if they even know the standard. To be honest — and you might not like it — I don’t think there are enough exhibitors who really care enough about their breed to really want to learn it. Ribbons and ratings are all important.
I know you didn’t ask, but here is some advice anyway — and we all know what free advice is worth: Open your mind and close your mouth, and listen to as many successful breeders as you can. If you truly want to learn — and if you have a passion for your breed — ask the recognized breed experts — some of whom are icons — to just sit and talk with you. Understand that when we do not give your dog the win, we are not saying anything personal about your dog; we are just doing our job in trying to identify the dogs and breeding programs that should be followed. You make the decision if you want knowledge or ribbons.
As that great Denver Broncos philosopher Shannon Sharpe said, “Stop window shopping for greatness – open the door.”
What do you think?