RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

How Labradors are Supposed to Look? (pics)

51K views 178 replies 78 participants last post by  RJW 
#1 ·
A brief reminder. According to all records, Jay Carlisle was responsible for first popularizing the Labrador Retrievers to the U.S. As a matter of fact in the 1950s, the LRC itself recognized him as "singly the most important person responsible for the Labrador's popularity in America."

Jay Carlisle got his first Lab in 1933 and founded Wingan Kennels. To operate the kennel and train the dogs he imported a master dog trainer from Scotland named Dave Elliot. Dave was revered by his peers for his understanding of every element about dogs -- how they think, how they learn, how they work, how they should look. (Trivia: It was Elliot that introduced whistling and handling to retriever trials).

Three years later Elliot wrote and Carlisle published a book called The Labrador Retriever. The book contains four short chapters and is illustrated with photos of the champion Labradors of the time. The first chapter is the breed standard. The second chapter are some insights into training the breed. The third chapter is a presentation on why there should never be a split in the breed between dogs used for trials and dogs used just for hunting. The final chapter is advice to judges for finding the best dogs at trials.

So what can we extrapolate so far. The Labrador Retriever was, is, and always was intended to be a WORKING animal. That was their function.

Form follows function. When the football coach needs someone to protect his quarterback, he looks for a very big, strong man. When he looks for a running back, he looks for someone with speed and quickness. Similarly when beauty contest judges are looking for a winner, they look for exaggerated beauty features like big toothy smiles, large breasts, slim waist and toned legs.

According to Richard Wolters in his book Duck Dogs the split in the breed between field and show began in the late 1950s and early 1960s, when the guardianship of the conformation side of the breed was turned over to people who paid lip service to the working side but had no actual involvement, in particular Helen Warwick. Under her powerful tutelage as the breed columnist for twenty years of the AKC Gazette, the show side of the breed became anglophiled -- enamored with how British show Labs (the split had already occurred over there) looked, importing studs and dams from England, and importing judges from England to judge at Labrador specialties.

So what do we take from this? When the function of the Lab became winning conformation shows (read "beauty contests") those fanciers moved the form of the Lab to accommodate that function. It was the show side that derivated from the original breed type, not the field side.

And so now I show you scans from Carlisle's and Elliot's book The Labrador Retriever.
 
See less See more
#41 ·
I wonder if the FT people are to blame in part because as the FT's became progressively harder over the years the show dogs could no longer compete unless they changed there standard and thus gave up and went there own way.
 
#44 ·
Did you even read my first post? Why do you think Wolters was mistaken in his reasoning?

I agree on the CH but I wouldn't doubt that they could be competitive today.
I was thinking the same thing.

That is another debate we have around here frequently, and the consensus is, while we never will know for sure, it is quite likely to the great dogs back then would likely be great dogs now.
 
#43 ·
Ironman,

According to Wolters in his book I quoted above we have to differentiate somewhat between British field-breds (which included DCs at the time) and American of the same. Back then, while our trials were similar to over the pond, our hunting was different. The British emphasis was on upland, the American on waterfowl. This is also why Carlisle felt a need, even back in 1936, to argue that there should not be any difference between trial and hunting dogs. It was becoming a concern.

That Ch. Earlsmoor Moor of Arden is a handsome, HANDSOME dog! I am old enough to remember some show Labs from the 1960s that still looked like that.
 
#45 · (Edited)
I don't mean to pick a fight here, but, is my perception that the West Coast seems to have better conformation in their performance dogs, as a whole, then elsewhere in the country off base? I have in mind Barracuda Blue and Cuda's Blue Ryder. Then there are the Merganser dogs, for instance.
 
#46 ·
I don't mean to pick a fight here, but, is my perception that the West Coast seems to have better conformation in their performance dogs, as a whole, then elsewhere in the country off base? I have in Barracuda Blue and Cuda's Blue Ryder. Then there are the Merganser dogs, for instance.
That sounds like a good idea for a new thread!
 
#48 ·
I agree on the assessment of Moor of Arden, looks to actually fit the Labrador Retriever Breed Standard quite well IMO, not over done, not snipey, just moderate!
I recognize the 9 DC's are UK, not US, however most of these UK dogs are close, if not directly behind the first US show and field champions. So the difference was not so much in type, but rather the emphasis of the trial they competed in as was pointed out.

Someone mentioned field trials getting harder possibly playing into this split. I think there may be some truth behind that. Here is an excerpt from Sprake 1933.
A few years ago the suggestion that retrievers must be specially trained to win at a Field Trial may have contained a grain of truth, but nowadays the majority of judges esteem a competitor's worth entirely from a shooting man's point of view, and it is quite usual for a dog which has not competed previously to win a Stake at a Field Trial; and those of us who are interested in Field Trials can only wish that the ordinary shooting man would realize this fact, and be encouraged to enter his dog-which has proved his competence in the shooting field-at a Field Trial.
This is again from the English perspective, but it was generally this kind of level that all the DC's posted won their Filed Championship. A first time, minimally trained dog that shows up and can finish the event, is what we see with Junior Hunters at hunt tests in the US today. Maybe it is apple to oranges with the US and the UK, but in the 1930's when the Lab started to get a foot hold here in the US, the dogs themselves and level of events they ran seem to have been similar.
 
#49 ·
That Ch. Earlsmoor Moor of Arden is a handsome, HANDSOME dog! I am old enough to remember some show Labs from the 1960s that still looked like that.
That's what I thought too. He looks like I think labs should look like. Then, I got to thinking, he's pictured here with a bunch of DC's. I'm wondering if he wasn't all beauty and no brains. Guess I'll never know.
 
#52 ·
You are hard pressed to find show labs that have the structure to work, despite everyone's claims to the contrary. The show people haven't convinced me they understand form and function yet despite all the lines and angles that draw on pictures.
Ya think? :p :p
 
#53 ·
pretty much all (lab) show people understand is that they need a dog which follows the type of what is popular and what wins in the ring......In the end, it is the judges who put up the overweight, short legged labrador. I'd love to see a show overrun with a bunch of field bred labs, whose conformation is more true to the type of 'yesteryear'....

One thing the show folks DO have going for them is a 'truly' proper coat...something which I have noticed a LOT of field bred labs are missing.
Juli
 
#54 ·
One thing the show folks DO have going for them is a 'truly' proper coat...something which I have noticed a LOT of field bred labs are missing.
Juli
I agree. My field bred dog totally lacks undercoat. His coat is beautifully glossy and shiny, and I live on the we(s)t side of the state so it doesn't get too cold, but he wouldn't hold up in a really cold climate. My halfer does have a nice coat, and he seems neither too hot or too cold ever.

I have seen a decent number of field dogs with coat, but they tend to be of the same lines so someone is doing it right.
 
#55 ·
My field bred dog has a nice coat, but I'd sure like to get that tail back in the breed. Tank is back there in his pedigree. 4 generations back.

Gay tail regards,
 
#60 ·
from my limited research there are at least 3 dogs in the RHOF that are Dual CH...including this beautiful gal...a multi National Finalist, and double header winner..and may have been the last to capture the Dual titles




Dual Ch.AFC Royal Oaks Jill of Burgundy


owned and handled by Lanse Brown
 
#67 ·
I do agree the dogs in 1930 would have a tough time competing today. And there are many who argue a O/H Qual at a HT is easier due, in large part, to less dogs running those events. Personally I would like to see more O/H Quals at FTs.
 
#69 ·
I do agree the dogs in 1930 would have a tough time competing today. And there are many who argue a O/H Qual at a HT is easier due, in large part, to less dogs running those events. Personally I would like to see more O/H Quals at FTs.
the only thing wrong with that is that you will cut your fields in Quals by half if not more, because the pros would have nowhere to run, except the Open and the derby
 
#68 ·
And there are many who argue a O/H Qual at a HT is easier due, in large part, to less dogs running those events. Personally I would like to see more O/H Quals at FTs.
The ones I have worked and have seen are judged the same and can be just as tough because the judges are FT judges. In fact, usually a lot more people don't make it through the first series because it is their first stab at it, and the last series is just as tough.
 
#75 ·
We are dealing with a closed genetic system. There are no new genes being added. If we look at such a system in light of the law of entropy, we will be doing good if we can occasionally repeat the greats of the past. I'm not sure where the genes are going to come from to "improve" the breed. What I see all the effort doing is "to do no harm".
 
#81 ·
We are dealing with a closed genetic system....I'm not sure where the genes are going to come from to "improve" the breed.
Yes it is a closed genetic system, but K-9s and mammals have a large capacity for mutation of DNA. The selective breeding and resulting diversity of K-9s is really remarkable. I don't know of another species that has such capacity for change. Humans have bred the wolf to become the Chihuahua, Great Dane, hairless, long hair, wrinkled, short, tall.

http://www.canine-genetics.com/Mutation.htm
 
#77 ·
Kevin Humans like dogs were created by nature so maybe nature is using Humans as a tool to improve the breed though selective breeding are do you think humans are only improving the breed though training and not breeding?
 
#93 ·
Kevin Humans like dogs were created by nature so maybe nature is using Humans as a tool to improve the breed though selective breeding are do you think humans are only improving the breed though training and not breeding?
Maybe if I go to the post office tomorrow some lunatic postman will go postal on me and shoot me. Therefore I better not go to the post office tomorrow. :roll:

You can't reason with hypotheticals. ;-)
 
#88 ·
I totaly understand what you guys are talking about when it comes to all show and no go but and thats a big but. In the standards of a lab I have'nt found a speed limit a dog has to be able to run in any standard. everyone says well the the show dogs can be trained but are slower on the field. I never new it was a race ( though i like a dog with some go!) straight lines, form, handling, marks, blinds but no radar gun. This is a perfect example of why and how both ft dogs and show dogs have changed and evolved over the years. we've just bread them in a direction WE think they should be. fast is nice but not necessarily better. i dont like fat dogs i also dont like black greyhounds some of you call labs either. some people like yellows some like chocolate some like blacks. well some like skinny scrawny greyhounds (labs) others like fat over weight ones. I personally like a dog around 75-85lbs with a semi stocky build. you can see my 9month old in my avatar. just my .02cents and i know it dont mean much.
 
#90 ·
I totaly understand what you guys are talking about when it comes to all show and no go but and thats a big but. In the standards of a lab I have'nt found a speed limit a dog has to be able to run in any standard. everyone says well the the show dogs can be trained but are slower on the field. I never new it was a race ( though i like a dog with some go!) straight lines, form, handling, marks, blinds but no radar gun. This is a perfect example of why and how both ft dogs and show dogs have changed and evolved over the years. we've just bread them in a direction WE think they should be. fast is nice but not necessarily better. i dont like fat dogs i also dont like black greyhounds some of you call labs either. some people like yellows some like chocolate some like blacks. well some like skinny scrawny greyhounds (labs) others like fat over weight ones. I personally like a dog around 75-85lbs with a semi stocky build. you can see my 9month old in my avatar. just my .02cents and i know it dont mean much.
I don't think anyone referred to "fast" as THE desired criteria. I think we want dogs that can do the work as a first priority and then have correct form too. Today's bench stock could not possibly do the work, even if in field shape. They likely could not hold up under the stress of daily FT training and we have no idea if they have the desire, intelligence, tractability, and style would be a long shot for sure.
 
#97 ·
Hey...all I want is my dog to quarter, flush, and retrieve...which she does. I have an English lab which is stocky and creamy in color...but she hunts like a demon. There's a blind man at my fitness club whose guide dog is a lab that is easily twice as tall as my dog..almost looks like two different breeds. For me it's about energy level and hunting drive.
 
#99 ·
Thanks for bumping this thread. We have field labs from field labs -- a mother and daughter. They looked like they just stepped out of the pages of The Labrador Retriever of the 1930s, 1940s. See the head study of Banchory Night Light on page 1 of this thread. That's the head I look at every day. It's the head that seems to appear in our Carbon daughter's litters. Not all of the puppies, but a lot of them. I have been attributing that "look" to Carbon.
 
#101 ·
I just did a Google search on NFC Banchory Night Light of Wingan who was born Jan 1, 1932. It was a male which surprised me as the head study looks feminine to me. Probably because I have bitches who seem to me to have a striking resemblance. See my avatar. That's Ruby.
 
#106 ·
I've said it before, it's hilarious to me that field bred dogs don't do well at dog shows because "they don't have the correct form to be able to do things they excell at doing their whole lives." Can't swim without that otter tail, can't run very far without that deep chest and extra "muscle."

The show bred dogs are built perfectly to do things they don't want to do.
 
#107 ·
Al McKean had a young dog he sold to Blair Down that I thought to be very representative of what a dog should look like, never saw him perform but Rorem had him as a performer. Roy McFall also had a dog that was representative - I believe it was Jaguar, Howard would know that one.

Looking at the pictures they resemble Carbon & Chopper to some extent, I always (personal preference) preferred a dog more on the line of Watergator Sam, more agile, slightly smaller & tend to hold up better over the long haul. Though I only saw Super Chief once at the McCall National Am I always felt him to be a little too chesty, but many of the Paha Sapa Chief (his sire) line , were very nice looking dogs. But definitely in the in the longer muzzle class rather than the hound style muzzle.

There aren't many really good otter tails any more & usually on a poor performer, but that's about the last thing most are looking for in a performance dog. As for coats, they seem to be an area thing, hot weather does not contribute to a luxurious coat.

I have always considered smooth gaited frame & agility under 80 lbs, preferably 70ish as the ideal lab. The other stuff is a bonus :), Martens Black Powder Kate comes to mind!!!!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top