You the Judge ...

Well, maybe not.

As I have said so many times before, since my early teens I had been fantasizing about one day being able to show dogs in that great country across the pond where it was actually possible to have handling of show dogs as a full-time, well-paid job!

It never happened, but for decades we visited the country on a regular basis, spending months of the year in Florida, weeks in Michigan and many visits to Mackinac Island, plus trying to attend as many dog shows as possible. And the best part of it all was meeting and getting to know many longtime idols and heroes/heroines!

Then followed a number of judging appointments that I thoroughly enjoyed (even if I as usual lost a couple of friends) and had prepared well for, making sure I was well aware of the differences in standards as well as procedures.

Then to my surprise I was introduced to a lady who was said to be a field rep. She kindly guided me through the procedure, but then told me that she would observe me and my placings in certain classes and assess my decisions — and then after judging we would get together to discuss any discrepancies or any questionable decisions made …

I was initially rather pissed off and asked myself: “Why the hell have they invited me to judge here when they suspect I might not be up to the task?”

Anyway, the end result was good, and the lovely Connie Barton gave me a fabulous critique (which is what I would call it).

During that day, and even at the following shows, I had a few questions regarding things happening in the ring, rules, etc., but was told: The ring is your Domain for the Day! You’re the Master of the Ring — in other words, in charge.

But as time went by, I realized that was not necessarily the truth, and I discovered a number of rules that I still cannot understand. And I still wonder who the hell came up with these ideas?

At one show as a spectator watching the groups and Best in Show, I applauded every single dog as it entered the ring (and so did everybody else). A very kind and helpful lady took me aside and whispered in my ear that as an AKC judge I was not supposed to do that …

I first thought it was a joke, but it was then confirmed by another person.

So I take for granted it is to be found in writing somewhere …

I must admit that I do love the dress code suggested by the authorities, as what made the shows in this country so special was that judges as well as handlers dressed for the occasion. Where I come from, we still see judges dressed in T-shirts, jeans and even clogs. And exhibitors likewise. Not necessarily upgrading the overall feeling of the event.

My original experience with dog shows were the GSD shows – and as some of you might know, if you show GSDs in Northern Europe it is more like a marathon, and shirtless handlers were not uncommon. So on my first visit to Westminster, when I saw a German Shepherd enter the ring — handler in a suit and tie plus what looked like regular shoes — I was in shock. And I still wonder: Is no shirt for a handler against the rules, and no shoes for ladies acceptable?

Anyway, back to rules.

In Scandinavia as well as the U.K. and the Continent, you were the Master of the Ring.

Not many rules to obey, leaving it up to common sense and what would be considered acceptable behavior. Not always followed. If any of you have attended one of the major Sieger shows for GSDs, you will have experienced that at times the “double handling” and assistance from outside the ring can be crazy. Your grandmother in one corner with the family rabbit, your mother-in-law in another corner with the cat, your wife whistling a familiar tune, while your fittest, best friend who knows the dog well is circling outside the ring etc., etc. You would expect every judge to stop this, but for some it seems like part of the culture — and they enjoy it.

Shamefully, I must admit the few times I experienced this I thought it was great fun, although there was t-e risk of getting killed by those superfit runners (who outside the ring would of course have a higher speed than those inside …).

But even if there is a rule saying no double handling allowed, I have never heard anybody taking this up as a serious issue! It’s all in a good day’s fun.

Suppose that wouldn’t be accepted over here.

After having been told that you’re in charge here, you are instructed: If you want to re-examine anything on a “table dog,” it must go back on the table. A rule frequently broken by visiting judges – or even immigrant ones, as we simply forget … And shouldn’t any dog shown by a professional handler, regardless of size, tolerate the judge taking another look at the bite?

Also, you’re not supposed to ask a dog’s age, apart from in puppy classes, where you should ask your steward to do it for you.

Face facts: Some judges due to inexperience with certain breeds are skillfully able to scare dogs even on a table. Last week I had at least three handlers telling me that the previous days judge had scared their dog off! On the table!

One set of rules that I will never understand concerns bite and teeth. You have instructions from AKC, likely by breed-club recommendation, for which breeds you only check the front teeth, no side. My own breed, Wire Fox Terrier, has an issue with missing premolars — and I want to check that on every exhibit. Taking into consideration what this and closely related breeds are made for, premolars and a strong, complete set of teeth are important. So I just wonder, why? As for a very close relative, the Welsh Terrier, the instruction is to check front and sides. The same mystery also includes, for instance, Scotties and Westies: The first is front only, but for Westies front and sides …

Just by old habit you will find that most visiting judges will automatically check for all the 42 teeth — and I certainly cannot consider that a “faux pas”!

And finally one of my favorite topics: the wicket and use of it.

One of the gifts you received as a new judge in Sweden was your very own wicket, to use where and when you wanted at your own discretion. In this country you have to ask the superintendent to bring the wicket to the ring whenever you need it. At popular shows under popular judges there will normally be a “full load” for the day, which means that it seems a bad idea to slow things down. So instead of being measured some dogs will be kept out of the top placings – and on other occasions dogs that should really be DQed go to the top.

The instruction to use the wicket only in breeds where a DQ due to height is listed makes me wonder: What about all those breeds whose standards tell us that a certain degree of deviation from the ideal should be severely penalized …?

Maybe I am unique – as I don’t always feel certain that my eyes tell me the exact heights —

 and as we all know: The overall construction, balance or lack thereof can easily give you a false height impression. And for a number of breeds where height can lead to DQ, I have been told: If you start measuring this breed, you will most likely never get another entry. Maybe TKC and British breed clubs had a point when deciding: No DQs in any standard!

It might surprise you: I am not complaining! I accept the old saying “When in Rome, etc.,” but still wonder why so many of the European kennel clubs seem to believe that their corps of judges have the common sense, IQ and experience to be trusted to deal with dogs as well as their handlers without all these restrictions?

Until next time …