Some years ago, when I was quite young, I remember being privy to a

conversation that took place at a dog show where two quite elderly all-rounder

judges who had been kind enough to take me under their wing were explaining what

qualities were essential in an effective dog judge.

One comment that I never forgot – probably because at the time it puzzled me

to an extent – was “the dividing line between self-confidence and arrogance is as

thin as a piece of cotton”.

This observation had been made as the direction the conversation had taken

had brought the two sages to a point where they were discussing judges who prefer

to simply play follow-my-leader rather than actually JUDGING the dogs in front of

them without the advantage (or disadvantage, depending on one’s viewpoint) of

knowing what individual dogs have won, how they were bred, owned and such like.

They made the point that occasionally dogs do crop up in breeds that are very much

ahead of the majority with whom they compete at breed level and often such dogs,

with sensible campaigning, rack up mighty records of which they are entirely worthy.

However, it was stressed that all too often such dogs have only to walk into the ring

for them to be handed the Breed ribbon, regardless of their condition or performance

on the day, and regardless of the competition. Many big-winning dogs, although their

wins have been entirely deserved, do on occasion win automatically to reinforce their

record, when one of the “sheep” is judging.

I have written many articles in the past on the subject of the necessity to judge

dogs “cold”, without giving any consideration to previous form or any of the other

extraneous garbage that can cloud a judge’s mind if they let it. To many judges,

rubber-stamping a top winner is a safe option. In so doing they rock no boats and

join the band of the dog’s previous admirers. If the dog has been JUDGED and

found to be up to the mark, then the win is deserved. If it is not however, because

there is superior competition waiting in the wings to be discovered, then the

unremarkable judge has abandoned his obligation to the breed.

That said, it must be emphasised that adopting the role of giant killer and

going out of your way to demote the reigning superstar in a misguided attempt to

prove “honesty” is nothing short of foolhardy and morally wrong. Denying any dog an

award it deserves is more of a crime than making a dog win an award it doesn’t.

Some people fail to see the difference but it is there, albeit subtle. Judges often

subconsciously like to do something different, to find something new and thus avoid

the “well that was predictable” moans ringside, but discovering for discovering’s sake

when the requisite level of merit is not present to topple the opposition is highly

irresponsible.

So in my formative years I was well aware that it was necessary to judge

every dog as if it were a stranger, ignoring any information I may well have about it,

and as a result I have frequently added to the wins of great ones, but at the same

time not been afraid to raise eyebrows by finding something way down in the classes

and taking it all the way through when it simply was the “Best of Breed”.

However the need for self confidence is perhaps even greater in another

context, if we closely examine the responsibility of judges and assume that they are

not in the centre of the ring to merely hand out ribbons.

It is a fact of life that, whether we like it or not, breeds change. Not all breeds,

but most breeds with the passage of time undergo subtle (and sometimes not so

subtle) changes for a variety of reasons. Sadly few of these changes are function-

related improvements; the majority come about as a result of fads and fashions are

often fall into the category of unnecessary exaggeration.

Whether it is down to the success of a particular dog or an influential handler,

nothing inspires exhibitors more than success, such is their desire to win. It is said

that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery but unjustified imitation can also be

damaging when it becomes widespread.

Anne Rogers Clark coined a wonderful expression when she first started

talking about the “drag” of a breed, referring to a fault that has become so

widespread in a breed that it is almost endemic. Annie felt that judges should be

aware of any such faults and, when they judged, penalise them heavily. At the same

time she felt that dogs who excelled in the “drag” area should be looked upon

especially favourably, all things being equal.

One fault may well be considered a drag on a breed, but when several gain a

foothold a breed will see a complete shift in type as the breed takes on a new look.

This can be related to overall balance, to head shape, to expression or coat texture

and here we come to the need for self confidence when a judge faces a breed where

the majority of the entry have drifted away from typical.

The great judges of whatever generation had crystal-clear mental pictures of

breed type and what elements contributed to achieving it. They understood which

faults could be tolerated and which should be dealt with harshly for fear of the

consequences. Such judges invariably had stockman outlooks and both knowledge

of and success in breeding over a period of time. They could deal with the dogs

brought to them cold and would deal with each individual in direct relation to its

breed standard.

Sadly there isn’t exactly a surfeit of iconic judges around these days; they

have been in many cases replaced by those who fall into the “I know what I like”

category and whose idea of breed type is very much dictated by the majority of dogs

that are around at the time, and this is where we get into dangerous waters.

When faced with a class of 20 dogs, 19 of one shape and “type”, and just one

that looks different, the majority of judges will assume that the odd man out is wrong,

when in truth it could well be that this is the one dog that remains faithful to the breed

standard and it is the others, in numbers, that have drifted away from it. When faced

with this kind of situation it requires not just knowledge but great self-confidence to

put the “different” dog at the head of the line. I was put in that position not that long

ago, judging in a country, far from home, a breed which I have been around for close

to fifty years. It saddened me to see so many dogs that had completely untypical

heads, short legs and incorrect coats that were hideously barbered, yet in amongst

this jungle of mediocrity was one shining star, free of all these “drags”, and so the

words of my wise old mentors resounded in my brain as I made the decision to give

the odd man out not just the breed but the group. Sadly in a circuit of twelve shows

he won the breed on just one more occasion, being beaten in some instances by

dogs that had not be graded higher than Very Good under me.

Whenever we step into the ring to judge a breed we should be confident in our

own minds about breed type and all that it involves, and not just merely go with the

majority, because we could be doing the breed a great disservice and no self-

respecting judge would ever wish to be accused of that.

© ANDREW H. BRACE

(This article may not be reproduced in any form without the author’s

permission)