It's beginning to filter down to me that there's some heavier-than-usual dirty games being played by certain delegates with regard to the upcoming Board elections. Let's face it, these kinds of telephone antics have been going on for some time now. What concerns me about them now, as in the past, is that the general club members lose their power to at least advise, if not instruct, their delegates for whom to vote. Now, then, I realize when you get into a third or fourth ballot, you have to trust the instincts of your delegate's gut feeling, but at least on the first ballot, why have the vote predetermined by a minority power-hungry bunch of malcontents? The delegates should, on the first ballot, be beholden to his or her club and not to a prior arranged clique of individuals promoting their own programs. Furthermore, it is an absolute disgrace not to have all delegate votes, particularly for Board Directors, not be made public. These should be recorded and made public on every ballot for everyone to see. Some sort of accountability must be demanded for those people who in the last several years have been ignoring their duty to the clubs they represent, and work as individuals rather than through their clubs.
We had a very pleasant, albeit short, trip judging in Mexico City this past weekend. The show is called the TOREO DE CAMPEONE. This was the seventh such type show to be held by the Federación Canófila Mexicana. The venue was a rather luxurious event hall—black tie or at least dark suits for the men. Most women were intelligently and chicly gowned or in cocktail clothes. I may add that our charming fellow judge, the only woman of the 10 judges on the panel, Florence Males, looked smashing. She did our country proud. I never really knew Florence before, and I happily report that not only is she fun to be with, but she understands dogs on a level higher than most. No longer a field rep and pursuing a judge's life, it would not surprise me to find her on many a panel in the future.
The way in which this show runs, I think, is that 100 top group-winning dogs are invited. We had 62 entries. There were 10 judges, and the contest is divided into four levels. On the first level, three judges are selected at random. The judge for all the levels are randomly chosen, except, I would think, the BIS judge. The first level, of which I was a part, adjudicated upon all the dogs entered. Together with Robin Stansell (the other American on the panel) and the very charming Richard Saldana from Mexico, we were charged with the assignment, which really is meant to separate the wheat from the chaf. All of us were told to score from 80 to 100 on a scale with 100, obviously, the highest score. None of the American judges gave our scores of 100. We were to score each exhibit and hand each exhibitor a copy of his or her score, which was immediately posted on a large screen for everyone to see. Each judge's score was cumulatively added to that.The event was a true consensus of opinion, without anyone discussing the merits or faults with each other. Eventually, the field was narrowed down to nine exhibits—two Goldens (both of very high quality, I thought); two lovely but somewhat different Bulldogs; a more than adequate Doberman; a precious, lovely Pom; a beautifully colored Yorkie; a Beagle of the quality that one has come to expect from Mexican Beagles; and the winner, a very showy and impressive black-and-white Cocker Spaniel.
I was quite pleased with my scoring results. Since my lowest score was 92.5 for the nine finalists, whilst my highest was 97. Candidly, my lowest score went to the overall winner, and my highest score to the Pom, which did not place in the 1-4 BIS results. All the other high scorers of mine, I am happy to say, were in there—and high up, too. It's also very possible that since the scoreswere cumulative, the BIS winner did not receive the highest score from the BIS judge, Rafael de Santiago from Puerto Rico. I really don't know that, though, since it was 1:30 AM before it was over—get the picture? No matter which dog won was immaterial to the fact that they were all top-notch and of a very high quality.
The only problem with these kinds of events, I find, is that some of the dogs judged early on are more heavily penalized than the dogs judged later on. That may explain my score on the Cocker, but I must tell you, we had a great time in Mexico, as per usual. I would be remiss not to thank not only Dr. Payró but his sidekick and hardworking partner, Juan Luis Martinez Gutierre, as well. And, of course, what is a trip to Mexico without the help of Christina Hernandez and Oscar, too? Muchas gracias to all.
Many of you will be reading this on the benches at the Garden. We wish you all well at the “Big W” and look forward to a visit from you all at our booth there. Have a winning and good time in New York, for sure. Hasta luego! •