Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:59 pm Post subject: confusion with breed standards, crufts etc...
hello, watching crufts currently, and it made me think about the whole breed standards etc with labs... im not causing an arguement just after some opinions from others more experianced than me
Im hearing alot about breed standards and to show, your dog should be as close to breed specifics as possible/as close to what the breed is used for etc....
Saying that, why for example, will bailey be rubbish in the ring? i would never show him, but have been told a number of times by a number of people (nice and not so) that bailey isnt right for the ring, Why? i see the trend, especially at crufts of chunky labs, even thoes on the forum here that show are chunky 'big' so to speak (if you understand what i mean) where as bailey is skinny (but perfect weight) leggs, tall, lean, everything you would think a labrador should be, as they were bread for retrieval, swimming, beating, etc etc (sporty fast, etc)... surely a sporty lean looking lab is closer to the breed purpose than a chunky lab?
Im only using bailey as an example so im not wanting people to say oh you could try showing him, i wont... but i did notice at crufts i saw no lab like bailey, or for example, Vickys ruby, or Lucys pheebs, or maggie....
so my point (in there somewhere) - is there something im missing to say even though labs were meant for retrieval, swimming, running etc - the chuinky type is much more popular? and if so - then surely this talk about the dog being as close to the breed and its purpose isnt right?
will be really interested to hear thoughts on this
I imagine it will be something to do with maintaining the 'original' shape and size of the style originally around way back when the breed standard was first drawn up? I'm not sure but I know what you're saying.
My Rolo is super fast and agile, but she too wouldn't even qualify.
Yeah I noticed the same thing, especially as I prefer the "skinnier" type of lab rather than the chunkier type. Again, not trying to start an argument, just my personal preference.
I wouldn't show Toby but I would consider doing something "working" with him as he is from working lines and his parents both work regularly. I did notice that none of the labs on crufts looked anything like my gangly Tobes or his parents who are both sleek and small with long legs...
" so my point (in there somewhere) - is there something im missing to say even though labs were meant for retrieval, swimming, running etc - the chuinky type is much more popular? and if so - then surely this talk about the dog being as close to the breed and its purpose isnt right? "
The Labrador was neither originally designed nor currently is meant to be a streamlined, skinny, leggy dog. It is meant to be a middleweight businesslike dog which can go all day at a steady workmanlike pace, not a fast speedador
The breed standard since early this century as asked - as a general description - for:
Strongly Built dog, Broad in Skull, Broad and Deep through chest and rib, Broad and strong over loin area and hindquarters.
And that is basically word for word.
That standard was not drawn up by 'show' people but the original consistantly dual purpose folks who worked and showed their dogs.... some just worked them.
The Labrador is meant to be a light - middleweight hunter. Not a Cob but not a tall lean leggy Thoroughbred. It is meant to be able to take the extremes of temperature that a days shooting in the highlands asks of it, with enough substance to within stand zero temperatures and lots of freezing swimming at a steady pace.
Spaniels are there to charge around like bombs, the job of the Labrador is to plod through the day at a 'working trot' or steady canter collecting after drives NOT chasing and flushing birds up for hours at a time. The original beating dogs, and indeed most today are NOT labradors its just some take them beating as they do not have the desire or control to pick up, their original use in the shooting field.
Field trial breeding has gone as extreme away from a medium sized broad and substantial dog (with leg, for example about the same length as the depth of body when viewed from the side) as some show lines have gone 'blocky' 'Cobby' and Rottie like in head.
Does that help? The idea that a Labrador should be lean fast and like a slightly heavier framed whippet is incorrect even though many many pet lines go this way by using a lot of FT blood then tipping in random dashes of show and pet lines indiscriminately.
Ditto pet bred dogs of show decent, no thought, leaving a mixed bag of incorrect dogs out there in great great numbers meaning people think that the majority are correct, they are more so than either extreme but they still do not fit the bill of what a Labrador should be if you look at the original dog.
Di
____________
The boys!
Read: Wylanbriar Dog Blog on the website: Updated! 1st February 12´!
No dog is perfect of course, and yes the Lab is meant to be active, or capable of activity, and many show Labs are not, but many pet and trial lines absolutely do not fit the middleweight hunter label in any way shape or form.
;-(
Di
____________
The boys!
Read: Wylanbriar Dog Blog on the website: Updated! 1st February 12´!
There is talk of it in the States....unfortunately.
There are just not enough people willing to breed carefully to maintain one type. It can't all be blamed on heavy show breeders and whippety field trial breeders, the pet breeders with no thought to type and look at all are equally to blame
I don't think the breed will split here, there is an interest growing again in working show bred labradors with promotion of various working certificates and schemes and general gundog training, but sadly no interest to improve looks exists on the field trial side, or to improve their dogs adhesion to the standard anyway for various reasons so I don't think the split will get any worse... there will be showbred heavy dogs, moderate show dogs, pet dogs of all shapes and sizes, moderate sized field trial bred dogs and whippet field trial dogs... for ever and a day i think.
Di
____________
The boys!
Read: Wylanbriar Dog Blog on the website: Updated! 1st February 12´!
We have working labs, but i would like to try and show one of these and see how we get on, i am originally from a showing family and am puzzled by the difference in build between the two types, i find the working labs are more similar to labradors of yester year, going by old pictures that i have seen.
Is there anyone out there that has working lines and shows them, and could you give me any advice as i have never showed labradors before. (have showed Setters, PBGV and Beagles).
All times are GMT Goto page : 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Next
Page 1 of 9
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
and there I was thinking my Toby was a perfect specimen 
