The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 7 of 16 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 159

Thread: Biggest Labrador Show in North America / Potomac

  1. #61
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    2,989

    Default

    Swack-

    The events surrounding the standard in the 1990's are fairly complex. The standard was rewritten and went to AKC for approval. The Board approved it and when it went to the Delegate body they said, "Whoa." I forget all the issues that were raised but the lawsuit played into the situation plus there was a very suspect vote on the standard by the LRC membership. The LRC was then required by the Board to withdraw their standard as presented and to re-accomplish the vote. When the standard was finely adopted, there was some disconnect about the height that sent all the conformation judges to the wicket for about 6 months. Maybe it was the minimum height? Dunno.

    There was also some question on coloration that would have affected yellows. Here I'll say it was a long time and 5 mini-strokes ago but I think the issue related to words to the effect that Labs had to be a solid color and judges were questioning whether darker ears and patches on the elbow and hock joints had to be that way. If so, a lot of yellows would be toast.

    I don't know all of the ins and outs but there was a period that really had the conformation folks in a tizzy. As I said, George often said that they should just have two varieties ... the Labrador Retriever and the American Field Retriever ... and be done with it. I also know the story about the setting of the height to be what he said though I maybe confusing then 1994 version for the earlier version.

    And that's about all I can contribute.

    Eric
    Eric

    WRC HR Lennoxlove's Run with Wolves JH, WCX ("Cheyenne") ... still so fondly remembered
    HRCh Struan's Devil's in De Tails SH, WCX ("Lucy")
    SR CH Struan's Flight of Fancy JH ("Muse")
    Struan's Master of the Hunt JH, WC ("Charlie")
    Struan's Just Plain Perfect ("Jane")
    Struan's Driving Us Crazy ("Daisy") ... the baby in charge

  2. #62
    Senior Member Bridget Bodine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Lake Winola, Pa
    Posts
    2,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    Swack-

    The events surrounding the standard in the 1990's are fairly complex. The standard was rewritten and went to AKC for approval. The Board approved it and when it went to the Delegate body they said, "Whoa." I forget all the issues that were raised but the lawsuit played into the situation plus there was a very suspect vote on the standard by the LRC membership. The LRC was then required by the Board to withdraw their standard as presented and to re-accomplish the vote. When the standard was finely adopted, there was some disconnect about the height that sent all the conformation judges to the wicket for about 6 months. Maybe it was the minimum height? Dunno.

    There was also some question on coloration that would have affected yellows. Here I'll say it was a long time and 5 mini-strokes ago but I think the issue related to words to the effect that Labs had to be a solid color and judges were questioning whether darker ears and patches on the elbow and hock joints had to be that way. If so, a lot of yellows would be toast.

    I don't know all of the ins and outs but there was a period that really had the conformation folks in a tizzy. As I said, George often said that they should just have two varieties ... the Labrador Retriever and the American Field Retriever ... and be done with it. I also know the story about the setting of the height to be what he said though I maybe confusing then 1994 version for the earlier version.

    And that's about all I can contribute.

    Eric
    I was actively showing two dogs during this period. The uproar was because of disqualifications. I was made an example of at the specialty in Raleigh one year ( my dog was) She was a beautiful yellow bitch that had specialty placements previously. Sam was DQ'd for thoroughly lacking pigment . She had a pink winter nose (show was in November in those days) her nose never fully got black after she was 3, BUT she had black eye rims that people would have sworn I used a liner pencil on. That is not a dog that is thoroughly lacking pigment. (Dudley dogs are thoroughly lacking pigment)
    I, of course was shocked and mortified that we were disqualified and excused from the ring and immediately started questioning what happened . I was told by several people that my bitch was being used as an example of why the disqualifications in the standard were not a good thing......THAT was the beginning of my lack of love for the show ring....
    BB
    Sight To Sea Labradors
    Southern Cross at Sight to Sea SH "Crosby" (by NAFC FC AFC Cody Cut a Lean Grade)
    Tealwood's Willing at Sight to Sea JH ( by CH I am Able)
    Briarglen's Running on Faith JH (by FC Fish River's Out of the Park)
    Glendair's Come Home to the Sea ( By Ch Topform's Edward MH, QAA)
    Sight To Sea's Take Aim SH (by Sight to Sea's Southern Comfort SH )Aug 23 2003-Feb 2013 Go get em , Man!

    Manager of www.DeCoverlykennels.com

  3. #63
    Senior Member .44 magnum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,461

    Default

    The original intent of showing was to judge your breeding stock against others in the same breed. The Labrador was a everyman and women dog. No longer. That is sad.

    A breeder who has a moderate show dog can't win today with what gets put up for victory in the States. A moderate show dog can't compete in the Field Trials for victory either.

    At the least the Field Trial dogs still perform their function. At the weights the Show dogs are being shown they can't. That is not to say they can't hunt, but they are not being shown in working condition. They are out of breath just trotting around a ring. And I just can't get over the lack of leg. That is just terrible breeding.

    The idea of todays Show Labradors being in the Sporting/ Gun dog class is a joke. Mary Roslin Williams is not walking through the door. My apologies for the thread, it's just an old timer wanting Labradors as they were just 20 years ago. Let alone 50. When you get old, you forget times are always changing. It may not be for the better, but it is a big waste of time longing for the past.
    I like one-shot kills where possible and prefer to do all my hunting before I shoot. ..... Elmer Keith



  4. #64
    Senior Member Todd Caswell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Brainerd, MN
    Posts
    1,132

    Default

    I personally have a hard time understanding the breeding for looks thing, if we breed for performance whether it be for FT,HT or just gun dogs and it doesn't fit your expectations it can always be sold to someone who has lower expectations allowing the dog to still perform what it was breed for at some level, say one of the dogs issues may be his marking ability, well he may never be a great marker there are things that can be done to enhance this and he may become a good marker over time, but if the whole intent of the breeding is looks, well either you got it or you don't, not much can be done after that.. Seems strange to me but what do I know or really care for that matter..

  5. #65
    Senior Member luvmylabs23139's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by copterdoc View Post
    Breeding selection is 100% about picking your priorities and selecting for them.

    The Conformation folks don't care that their dogs can't perform in the field. As long as they can win in the ring.

    The Field folks don't care what their dogs look like, as long as they can win in the field.

    If you really want to win in either world, you have to not care about the other.
    You have to ONLY care about the world that matters.
    What happens if both worlds matter?
    NO ugly labs in this house! I'd rather be dumped in both worlds than rewarded in one!
    Hihope Hiland Heathen of Perth CD, RE, CGC, TDI

  6. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    2,989

    Default

    Bridget-

    After a night to think about it, I came to the same conclusion. The issue that I was talking about that caused all the uproar on size was the new DQ for being not meeting the height standard. This was the aspect that the committee went to the backyard and measured the 4 (?) dogs of the owner and came up with the wording for the standard.

    Rather than a DQ, they could have just put a minimum height in the standard and then just left it at that for the judges to deal with.
    Eric

    WRC HR Lennoxlove's Run with Wolves JH, WCX ("Cheyenne") ... still so fondly remembered
    HRCh Struan's Devil's in De Tails SH, WCX ("Lucy")
    SR CH Struan's Flight of Fancy JH ("Muse")
    Struan's Master of the Hunt JH, WC ("Charlie")
    Struan's Just Plain Perfect ("Jane")
    Struan's Driving Us Crazy ("Daisy") ... the baby in charge

  7. #67
    Senior Member Jeffrey Towler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Perry MI
    Posts
    537

    Default

    I feel the best way to look at it is there are show labs and field labs. One is not better than the other. If you want to do hunt tests, get a field lab. If you want to do AKC breed ring events, get a show lab. The divide is to great to expect an all purpose lab, meaning field and show. Yes, there are exceptions, which I am sure someone will pointe out to me. But generally speaking, chose your game, then chose your lab.

    It is futile to try to change show breeders opinions, as well as guys like me that like field labs.


    JT

  8. #68
    Senior Member copterdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NW IL
    Posts
    2,514

    Default

    The conformation ring does nothing but destroy the genetics of good working breeds.
    History has borne this out time and time again.

    The traits that they select for, and consequently exaggerate, are both absurd and irrelevant.
    A functional Retriever, bred for what it can DO is a beautiful and healthy animal.

    A modern day show bred Lab is a disgraceful abomination. It's the opposite of attractive.
    Considering the fact that God limited the intelligence of man, it seems unfair that he did not also limit his stupidity". -Unknown

  9. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    105

    Default

    I agree, a lot of them are as you said but there are others that are not. I normally have field trial dogs but dabbled in show dogs as well and found some good ones. I bred one show litter that produced 2 master hunters - one is an HRCH MH and youngest dog to make it to the 2nd or 3rd series of the ESPN super dog trials (remember - even with field trials dogs running he was the youngest to make it that far) and one of the master hunters has 8 show points with a best of breed win and one boy I am messing with - nice dog just slow trainer (me) has 2 senior legs on him but would be farther if I actually trained more. I love to train with this boy! He is a bundle of energy and has a lot of go. The sire of these boys is a GRCH CH Can CH MH UD dog and mom was show pointed. Yes, you can find them.
    Last edited by SPEED; 04-21-2014 at 07:34 PM.
    Julie (High Voltage Retrievers) Life is to short to hunt with an ugly dog. Hunting is more fun with a good dog no matter how ugly it is.

  10. #70
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    105

    Default

    I looked at the one picture you linked... that is one LOOOONG little doggy.
    Julie (High Voltage Retrievers) Life is to short to hunt with an ugly dog. Hunting is more fun with a good dog no matter how ugly it is.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •