Do you think a fair way to improve the quality of all indiviual breeds would be to double the numbers required to gain championship points? [310 votes total]
YES (44) 14%
NO (239) 77%
NO OPINION (27) 9%

Post Info  Comment
Posted By: Sean

Posted On: 11 days ago
Views: 164

Meant to say Champion not Litter...

Posted By: Sean

Posted On: 11 days ago
Views: 173

Oh but Scot, I think you need to read a little further...

""" If applicants do not meet the litter and or champion criteria in the initial breed (s) they may apply under the 60-Point System.""

I will not go into all that here. But it is not a requirement to have bred a single litter to become a Judge. You can gather all your so called "experience" and points Exhibiting dogs.

Posted By: Scot Billings

Posted On: 11 days ago
Views: 180
Look/Eagles + Judging & Breeders

Regarding "The Look Of Eagles" it was best known of Thoroughbreds first but it is used to describe many things.

Regarding Judging & Breeders: It was stated: "That's where our system is flawed IMO it leaves out the one thing I think all judges should have; Experience in the whelping box.".

If you look at the requirements for a judge the system is NOT flawed.
Per AKC requirements an applicant MUST:
"Have bred & raised 5 or more litters..."
"Have bred 4 or more Champions..."
"Litters must have been whelped & raised on applicants premises..."

I would think that would give them "Experience in the whelping box".

Posted By: Chantel O. Johnson

Posted On: 12 days ago
Views: 194
Look of Eagles

No....not mixed up. I was not 'quoting' from the Great Dane (or any other) breed standard. I was using a well-turned phrase to more simply state me....the Great Dane should radiate class and majesty and be possessed of confidence. An undefinable royal air, regalness hard to describe but unmistakable when present. An uncommonness combined with symmetry, elegance, size and power. An undeniable spirit and courageousness. An attitude which gives me the feeling of strength and beauty when I view him (or her). No ordinary canine. Having personally worked hands-on with several species of falconiforms from Andean condors to kestrels, in my opinion the phrase borrowed from presence of such grand birds applies well to my image of a Great Dane in stature and attitude. That's all. :)

Posted By: Sean

Posted On: 12 days ago
Views: 204
Judging and Breeders

""Breeders making sure only the top potential pups are going to show homes.""

I think you touched on a very good subject. Gone are the days of keeping only the best, ushering in an era of people claiming that entire litters are show quality or placing dogs in show homes just because of their color...

To take on one of Mrs. Trotters suggestions. I think going to a FCI like format or tiered system would be a good thing. One reason why... There are no Professional Handlers turned Judges in FCI competition, there is virtually no such thing as a "Pro Handler". That's where our system is flawed IMO it leaves out the one thing I think all judges should have; Experience in the whelping box.

Posted By: Ron

Posted On: 12 days ago
Views: 215
A little mix-up

"The Look Of Eagles" is from
the German Shepherd Dog Standard.

The Great Dane is discribed as
"The Apollo Of Dogs."

Posted By: Kathy Anaya

Posted On: 13 days ago
Views: 250
Educating Judges & Breeders

Very well put Chantel. I could not have agreed more with your post.

Posted By: Myra Stusek

Posted On: 13 days ago
Views: 267
educating judges and breeders

Educating judges on our breed and making sure these guidelines are followed.
Breeders making sure only the top potential pups are going to show homes.

Posted By: Michelle

Posted On: Jun 15
Views: 519

Wouldn't it be easier to just reduce the number of dog shows held? The same thing would be accomplished without putting everyone up in arms. Except of course the show giving clubs who will be losing their shows. But then again, if they are only able to put on one show a year, they might be more inclined to cluster which in turn could bring in more exhibitors, more competition.

Posted By: GMJ

Posted On: Jun 12
Views: 698
Increasing points

You could increase to 100 and the ''politics'' would still be in play ! Anybody that can read can become a judge nowadays. The guidelines for becoming a judge need some very serious revamping , the process stricter & not so lax.

Posted By: Wayne Peterson

Posted On: Jun 10
Views: 893
"...double the number required to gain Ch. points"

My previous post regarding " Do you think a fair way to improve the Breeds would be to double the number required to gain championship points?" may have been misunderstood. Sorry if there was any confusion as to the clairity of my post. The premise, to requiring a higher scale of points to obtain a championship I'm sure most understood. I think the original verbage may have been confusing ("double the number required to gain championship points".) Thank-you Ray for brininging it to my attention.

Wayne Peterson


Posted On: Jun 9
Views: 969

In case some of you have misinterpreted the issue, the premise of the suggestions put forth by Mr. Protos and Mrs. Trotter was not to increase the amount of points required to become a Champion. The number of points required would still be 15, however the number of dogs required for each segment of points would be increased. In other words, if it took 15 dogs for a three point major under the old system, it would now take 30 dogs to make the major. This would be an attempt to correct the underlying problem of too many dog shows and restore the integrity of these competitions.

Posted By: Zee

Posted On: Jun 9
Views: 982
More points to make up Ch.

VERY well said Chantel!! I agree wholeheartedly!

Posted By: Wayne Peterson

Posted On: Jun 9
Views: 1019
Double required points for CH

Well said Judy Harrington

Posted By: Sean

Posted On: Jun 8
Views: 1237
Improving Quality

As everyone already knows a Champion does not denote quality. You could change the rules to whatever you wanted and you would have Danes finishing or specialed that are average at best.
As for blaming breeders for bringing inferior-mediocre animals? The Judge is still the one who has to put them up...The only fair way to improve breeds would be to have stricter guidelines for judging and cull a whole heck of a lot of them from judging all together IMO.

Posted By: Chantel O. Johnson

Posted On: Jun 8
Views: 1249
More Points To Make Up Champions

No. If it took a million points for a dog to become a Champion there would still be those animals of lesser quality which would finish. We all have known of Champions or even Top 20 animals which have NOT been the best representatives of their breeds and still they went on to win. Often it seems like given enough travel, money, determination, advertising, the 'right' circumstances and yes even the dreaded politics....etc.....anything can finish. You get the picture.

As others have said, I feel education begins before that breeding ever even takes place. Of course health and disposition are very important as is conformation. We do need to maintain all those ingredients. But in addition, newer breeders must learn to understand 'bloodlines' and I don't mean just how things look scrawled out on 'paper'. Older breeders must take the time to truly mentor the new breeders....AND...the new breeders must allow themselves to be mentored. There are far too many 'automatic experts'. If breeders keep putting only mediocre animals into the ring...even if those animals are the best they have...I can see quality just going down over-all...Champions or not. Those mediocre dogs will finish and then because they are Champions they will be bred from. And it all goes on again from there. I'm afraid in many cases the true "line" has nearly disappeared. Pedigrees are all over the place. Yes it is good to 'go out' now and then to bring in the new or needed to a pedigree. However, I am willing to bet many of the newer folks do not really understand what line-breeding actually is. One dog's name appearing twice on a pedigree in 6 generations is not line-breeding. Consistency is being lost. Breed type is making way for the more generic "show dog". One should never have to do a double take to realize he is looking at a Dane and not a Ridgeback, Dalmation, Greyhound or Mastiff. Rarely do I see a Dane at the shows exhibiting that breath-taking "Look Of Eagles". Our breed should give an aire presented by no other breed. Common and plain does NOT apply here. I am pretty certain many judges do not understand this and sadly it seems many breeders don't get it, either.

Judges can only judge what we bring to the ring. However, new judges (and some old ones!) would benefit from being taught the many subtleties of our breed. Beyond just picking the squarest, straightest legged, cleanest trotting and best free-baiting dog in the ring, judges should know what truly makes a Dane a GREAT Dane. There is so much judging which seems to be based on the adding up of failings rather than looking for the complete picture. Find the dogs in the ring which scream "I am a Great Dane"...then reward the soundest of those with true breed type. If we lose breed type it will be very hard to get it back., I do not feel that Champions would be of any better quality if they had to earn more points in order to finish. But I have given thought to the idea of Champions needing to be 18 months or older before they can attain their official title....

Posted By: Scot Billings

Posted On: Jun 8
Views: 1270
Wording of the Poll ?

I first read the Poll as: "Do you think a fair way to improve the quality of all individual breeds would be to double the numbers required to gain championship points?" & responded to the 'improvement of the quality of the breeds' which, IMO, has no direct relation to "Ch.". The "Ch." is supposed to be a recognition of accomplishment of "improvement of the breed", which I agree may not be what is happenning.
IMO others have read the Poll question as "...improve the quality OF CHAMPIONS of all individual breeds...". If that was the intent of the question, then my previous response was not applicable but, no matter how many times I read it I do not see the "of Champions" even being inferred. I am sorry if I have been misreading the question.

Posted By: Zee

Posted On: Jun 7
Views: 1332

No it needs to start with education before the whelping box and with judges. The judges are the ones awarding less than quality animals, the ones that look like 'deers' instead of Great Danes. I could go on and on cause I am just INFURIATED at judges, and breeder judges alike, whom I thought would do a better job than they do, AND to top it off the lame excuses they give for not choosing some dogs.


Posted By: Judy Harrington

Posted On: Jun 7
Views: 1338
Poll #53

Championship points are accomplished by going winners dog or bitch. There are breeds with very low numbers that still have outstanding champions finish. It is the quality and knowledge of the judging community that determines the level of quality of champions in a breed. Witholding can accomplish a great deal. Good judging can be accomplished when quality entries are present. Breeders, exhibitors and handlers sending their best to the ring for judges to judge result in top quality champions in a breed - IN A PERFECT WORLD. You see the wheel goes round and round.

Posted By: Scot Billings

Posted On: Jun 7
Views: 1349
Improvement ?

In my opinion the greatest effect of doubling the numbers would be the reduction of the number of dogs being shown. I don't feel that Championships have as much effect on improvement as Line Breeding does anyway. Just my opinion.