• Amused
  • Angry
  • Annoyed
  • Awesome
  • Bemused
  • Cool
  • Crazy
  • Crying
  • Drunk
  • Geeky
  • Grumpy
  • Happy
  • Hungry
  • Innocent
  • Sad
  • Secret
  • Shy
  • Tired
  • Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
    Results 21 to 30 of 46
    1. #21
      Senior Dog
      Annette47's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2014
      Location
      Central NJ
      Posts
      1,756
      Thanked: 1588
      Quote Originally Posted by Labradorks View Post
      I think this is the same with obedience. It often does take certain breeding/temperament to obtain the precision and motivation required to be at the very top. Like hunting, obedience competition is above and beyond real life requirements. The dogs have to be trained, exposed to the different elements, etc. but there are certainly dogs that have a leg-up in this area due to their temperament (often due to purposeful breeding). If a top obedience dog does not meet the standard, they will still breed him or her to produce that temperament. Top obedience Labs do not generally meet the standard.
      While this is true, there are very few people that are specifically breeding for Obedience. Most of the top Obedience dogs come from field lines because many of the required qualities (especially drive to work and ability to handle pressure) are the same other than needing speed over long distances. That said, I know a woman campaigning a GCH towards her OTCH, as well as couple other people showing nice dogs (some working on the OTCH) from conformation lines.

      Some of the conformation line dogs I’ve seen showing in Obedience don’t immediately look like it because they are kept at a substantially lighter weight due to the jumping. Also, they may have been one of the lighter boned dogs in their litters and rejected for that reason, or perhaps look different because they were neutered earlier. Point being if you just look at them you might not know that they had CH parents or siblings.
      Annette

      Cookie (Jamrah’s Legally Blonde) 6/4/2015
      Sassy (Jamrah’s Blonde Ambition) 6/4/2015

      Chloe (HIT HC Windsong’s Femme Fatale, UDX, OM2) 6/7/2009


      Remembering:
      Scully (Coventry's Truth Is Out There, UD, RN) 4/4/1996 - 6/30/2011
      Our foster Jolie (UCh Windsong’s Genuine Risk, CDX, WC) 5/26/1999 - 3/2/2014
      and Mulder (Coventry’s I Want to Believe, UD, VER, WC, RN) 5/26/1999 - 4/20/2015

      Hidden Content

    2. #22
      Senior Dog
      barry581's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2014
      Location
      Dover
      Posts
      4,679
      Thanked: 4122
      Quote Originally Posted by dxboon View Post
      The picture represents an early example of the breed, who was great for his time. Why deviations? For the same reason the "normal" look at field trials doesn't look like the standard -- some breeders are breeding to what some judges are putting up and then perpetuating that look via popular sires.

      A few points to consider: should breeders simply be breeding to preserve the structure of early examples of the breed even if those structures could be improved upon from a functional perspective, as outlined in the standard? Should all breeds just be about creating carbon copies of the first recorded AKC CH in the breed? Sometimes, I feel that's what people are saying when they point to a dog from 1920/30 and say, "Why don't show dogs look like this?"

      Could any of those 1930s dual champs be a field trial champion in today's trials? My guess? Most likely, no.

      Are show champions today really all wildly different from early show dogs? Some are, but many are not. You will not witness this unless you get out to a lot of shows. You can google pix of all the top 20 Labs, and guess what? You'll have twenty examples of show dogs out of how many that are shown to their championships in the US?

      Many of the great Labs from yesteryear absolutely would finish today in the show ring. English vs American Breed Standard


      This girl is now a GCH (not just an AKC CH) MH, she might not be your preferred look, and won't be a FC/AFC, but this dog excels in the ring and is enough of a hunting dog IMO for anyone except the most intense trialer. CH Boynes Avian Investigator MH WCX CGC

      This moderate girl went winners bitch at Potomac in 2015 -- Potomac, the world's biggest Labrador show, literally more than a thousand Labs compete (counting performance sports, closer to 1500). I was there all week, saw her win, and the girls she beat. What's so radically different about her vs. many conformation bred dogs of 50 years ago? Atlantic Labradors - Atlantic's Haut-Brion

      Here's the judge's critique of her from Potomac -- and lest anyone think this is written by some biased US judge who likes big fat Labrapigs, Gary Johnson is a breeder judge from England, our breed's motherland: "My find of the show! Beautifully feminine bitch, moderate and unexaggerated and exudes classic breed type. Her head piece and expression are just gorgeous, giving a soft melting expression. Everything just flows, from her well placed neck and forehand, through correctly shaped ribs and over a short and strong loin, through well developed quarters. I liked her length of leg to body ratio and the fact that she was not carrying any excess weight. In super coat with a true otter tail. She moved like a dream at the correct pace. At this age there is nothing I would change about her, except perhaps her ownership to me. She was everything I was looking for and I was so pleased to award her Winners bitch. I thought her outstanding and she should have a great career ahead of her."

      She's gorgeous! I think she would be a winner on either side of the pond.

    3. The Following User Says Thank You to barry581 For This Useful Post:

      dxboon (03-12-2017)

    4. #23
      Senior Dog
      dxboon's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2014
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      749
      Thanked: 723
      Quote Originally Posted by barry581 View Post
      She's gorgeous! I think she would be a winner on either side of the pond.
      I'm sure she would do well overseas, whether in England, Scandinavia or other locations. I especially appreciate that in his Potomac critique, the judge talks about her movement "at the correct pace." I think a lot of people forget that Labs are not a running breed, they were not originally bred to accompany hunters on horseback. They were never coach dogs. They are a trotting breed, bred to accompany game keeps and gentlemen on estate shoots. They weren't bred for speed. If people want to selectively breed a body style geared toward high intensity field work, and running, and training in the heat, that's their choice, but the idea that these people somehow inhabit some moral high ground as true keepers of the breed vs all the show people just ruining the breed completely rings false to me.

      Everyone should just accept that at this point there is a Lab style being bred for every niche, and most Labs are bred for no particular reason at all. Most are pet bred, and the parents don't compete in anything.

    5. The Following User Says Thank You to dxboon For This Useful Post:

      barry581 (03-18-2017)

    6. #24
      Senior Dog
      dxboon's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2014
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      749
      Thanked: 723
      Quote Originally Posted by Meeps83 View Post
      I think a lot depends on the individual dog as well. Maverick comes from working lines of bench bred dogs. He was supposed to be more birdy, but has less than zero drive. In fact, we say that he is a failure as a labrador as he HATES being outside, getting his feet wet, swimming and has no interest in birds.

      Bear, on the other hand, who is strictly bench bred LOVES outdoors, swimming, and although we don't hunt is extremely interested in the birds (small and larger) in our area. He was introduced to water for the first time just a few weeks ago and it was like he'd been doing it forever. He even flushed a bunch of birds for us.



      This bitch shares a gigantic portion of her pedigree with the aforementioned Maverick. The one that fails at being a labrador. While it is in both of their genes, Maverick got the short end of the stick as far as drive goes. Again to my point, yes pedigree and breeding matter, but each dog individually will fall within a wide range of that spectrum. This is true as far as visually pleasing looks, correct type, color, drive, and personality go. The only time it really matters is when you are looking to perform a specific job.

      Realistically, there is a lab for everybody
      There is a Lab for everyone, and individuals from same/similar bloodlines can vary. Personally, I think it matters to try and breed a dog that resembles the standard in type and preserve the instinct to hunt and the friendly, happy temperament. I think dogs that don't show any natural hunting ability, are not the right temperament, shouldn't be bred no matter how much physical type they have.

    7. #25
      Senior Dog
      TuMicks's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 2015
      Location
      United States
      Posts
      1,610
      Thanked: 586
      I might be alone on this, but I look at the Dual CH as a Holy Grail. Just the Quest for it invigorates the culture and fires the imagination. The difference between the Grail and the Dual CH is that we know Dual CH's have walked the earth... even though it's been 40 years or so since it happened.

      It's not the standard that is an impediment to winning both titles. There really are Labs doing high end field work that meet the standard. For those dogs to have a chance to win a bench title, judges would have to appreciate what a working retriever will necessarily look like.

      The Holy Grail Lab probably won't have THE thickest coat... but it should be within a standard. It won't be the thickest because these dogs don't work in the dead of winter but during hunting season. A super heavy coat would be problematic in the field. He might be somewhat sleeker coat-wise than other Labs. To the degree that the "otter tail" is related to coat, his tail might be marginally slimmer, but perfect in relationship to his coat.

      Our prospect might be as heavy or heavier than the other dogs in the ring. But most of his weight will be in the muscles of his chest and rear. I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to get this dog well-fed enough to hide his ribs. But he will likely reek of power and "strong" appears several times in the standard. An experienced ring handler would probably know how to parlay that into an exciting ring performance.

      There may be some science to this dog's slightly longer looking skull and snout. I've heard some scientific speculation that the length of skull might influence the way ganglia are laid down in an animal's retina. And our Dual CH candidate will have to be a superior marking dog, so (and this is highly speculative... but possible) this may influence the shape of his head and muzzle. But any differences from his ring companions would necessarily be very, very subtle.

      I don't know whether this would be a factor or not, but this prospect will probably be older than the other dogs in the ring. It takes a number of years of intense training to become a FC, and it has to begin early. I don't think the potential Holy Grail will be campaigned in the ring until he has some Open All-Age points.

      Certainly the most compelling reason there are not Dual CH's is because it would just take so much money. But, hey... it was the Averill Harrimans and the Duponts that popularized the breed in this country, not to mention the titled folks across the pond.

      It's just a pipe dream. But wouldn't it be nice if someone was making the Quest*?

      *Everyone sing along...

      To dream the impossible dream...
      To fight the unbeatable foe...
      To bear with impossible sorrow...
      To run, where the brave dare not go.

      This is my Quest to follow that Star... (etc.)
      Man of La Mancha - YouTube
      Last edited by TuMicks; 03-17-2017 at 06:03 PM.

    8. #26
      Senior Dog
      dxboon's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2014
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      749
      Thanked: 723
      Quote Originally Posted by TuMicks View Post
      I think the problem is the ring judging. I doubt honestly that any of them have spent a day in the field hunting behind a dog (of any breed.)
      And you would be wrong. There are judges in our breed and who are licensed in our breed (but breed other hunting breeds) who hunt. One of my breeders is a licensed judge and hunts behind their Labs (that show). They in fact got into Labs because they were hunters first. My chocolate boy in my signature is linebred on my breeder's personal gundog.

      As I've said before, if folks don't like what's in the ring, bring your correct dogs, get your judging licenses, join the parent club, and all that it will take to change what is shown, since the problem is all apparently on the show side.

    9. #27
      Senior Dog
      Annette47's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2014
      Location
      Central NJ
      Posts
      1,756
      Thanked: 1588
      I think a huge part of the problem is the time and money it takes to pursue any of the CH titles ... FC, CH, OTCH, etc. Now that I am campaigning for an OTCH I see just how much goes into it, not just in training, but in travel, entry fees, etc, and I handle and train my own dog so if I sent a dog to a pro for either field or show, that would just add in more. I can’t imagine trying to pursue more than one venue to that level, even if I had a dog that was capable of it.

    10. #28
      Senior Dog
      TuMicks's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 2015
      Location
      United States
      Posts
      1,610
      Thanked: 586
      Quote Originally Posted by dxboon View Post
      And you would be wrong. There are judges in our breed and who are licensed in our breed (but breed other hunting breeds) who hunt. One of my breeders is a licensed judge and hunts behind their Labs (that show). They in fact got into Labs because they were hunters first. My chocolate boy in my signature is linebred on my breeder's personal gundog.

      As I've said before, if folks don't like what's in the ring, bring your correct dogs, get your judging licenses, join the parent club, and all that it will take to change what is shown, since the problem is all apparently on the show side.
      I stand corrected and repent in dust and ashes. In AKC HT's, (and FT, for that matter) the emphasis is absolutely on retrieving game, not finding it. A well trained lab of bench phenotype should not be at all disadvantaged. Judges will typically not set up a test that takes more than a few minutes for a dog to complete (time management when you're evaluating 50 dogs or more.)

      But a lot of hunters use their dogs to quarter ahead of them. (Grouse, partridge, pheasant.) Within gun range... not acres ahead like a pointer. They will however work a field for a long time... continuous movement for hours, sitting when the birds flush. On a moderate to warm fall day, even a sleeker Lab can overheat. That's why I believe you'll never see a ring style coat on a field Lab, no matter how carefully bred to standard.

      I will defer to Barry about whether this is consistent with the original standard with regard to a Gentleman's Gun Dog. Hunting in the US is very different than the UK. It just is. But our field labs really look a lot like theirs. I have no objection to being involved with the parent club. But they aren't the ones judging the dogs in the ring.

      I'll tell you what, though... when the day comes that a likely field lab is in need of a couple of points to get the bench part of the Dual CH... I believe the field folks will come out of the woodwork to enter their crazy looking dogs, just to help out the cause.

    11. #29
      Senior Dog
      TuMicks's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 2015
      Location
      United States
      Posts
      1,610
      Thanked: 586
      Quote Originally Posted by Annette47 View Post
      I think a huge part of the problem is the time and money it takes to pursue any of the CH titles ... FC, CH, OTCH, etc. Now that I am campaigning for an OTCH I see just how much goes into it, not just in training, but in travel, entry fees, etc, and I handle and train my own dog so if I sent a dog to a pro for either field or show, that would just add in more. I can’t imagine trying to pursue more than one venue to that level, even if I had a dog that was capable of it.
      It really is about time and money. Here's what I dread. I would like to take my dog SOMEDAY (from my lips to God's ears) to the Master National or the Master Invitational. In order to qualify, you have to get 6 Master Qualifying scores in one season. That is a lot of mileage when you live out west. And right now, I have a dog that kinda falls apart if she's run in consecutive weekends.

      Oh,well...

    12. #30
      Senior Dog
      dxboon's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2014
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      749
      Thanked: 723
      Quote Originally Posted by TuMicks View Post
      I stand corrected and repent in dust and ashes. In AKC HT's, (and FT, for that matter) the emphasis is absolutely on retrieving game, not finding it. A well trained lab of bench phenotype should not be at all disadvantaged. Judges will typically not set up a test that takes more than a few minutes for a dog to complete (time management when you're evaluating 50 dogs or more.)

      But a lot of hunters use their dogs to quarter ahead of them. (Grouse, partridge, pheasant.) Within gun range... not acres ahead like a pointer. They will however work a field for a long time... continuous movement for hours, sitting when the birds flush. On a moderate to warm fall day, even a sleeker Lab can overheat. That's why I believe you'll never see a ring style coat on a field Lab, no matter how carefully bred to standard.

      I will defer to Barry about whether this is consistent with the original standard with regard to a Gentleman's Gun Dog. Hunting in the US is very different than the UK. It just is. But our field labs really look a lot like theirs. I have no objection to being involved with the parent club. But they aren't the ones judging the dogs in the ring.

      I'll tell you what, though... when the day comes that a likely field lab is in need of a couple of points to get the bench part of the Dual CH... I believe the field folks will come out of the woodwork to enter their crazy looking dogs, just to help out the cause.
      If you care about this issue, which you seem to since you bring up the shortcomings of show bred Labs regularly, maybe you should get involved in the parent club. There are plenty of like-minded (to you) folks there. The parent club is largely made up of field people. There are also breeder judges who belong to the parent club -- so the parent club writes the standard, maintains it, and some are indeed "the ones judging the dogs in the ring."

      Estates, both in the UK, and when it became fashionable to bring over English/Scottish gamekeepers, also in the US, held hunts with a variety of gundogs. When you talk to older show breeders, who were mentored by those who have now passed on, you hear about Labs waiting in blinds or working from a heel position to their walking hunter. In the UK, as in the US, there is a divergence between field trial dogs and those competing in conformation. It's not surprising that the performance dogs on both sides of the pond look similar.

      The hallmarks of the Labrador breed are head, tail, coat. Are there some show dogs who are extreme examples? Yes. That is not correct and they should be penalized. However, a dense, thick, double coat IS a component of this breed.

      Now, if people are choosing to breed for more range, more speed, more endurance based on modern hunting/sporting preferences; for less coat for better warm weather performance, less otter-like tail, longer head-plane/snout for better vision like a sighthound -- GREAT, but that's not what the standard calls for and it is not reflective of the original formulation of this breed any more than a stumpy-legged, upturned, short snouted, open-coated example from the show ring is.

      I think the majority of people with Labradors of whatever persuasion are perfectly content with what they have laying at their feet. There's nothing wrong with that IMO.

    Quick Reply Quick Reply

     



    Not a Member of the Labrador Retriever Chat Forums Yet?
    Register for Free and Share Your Labrador Retriever Photos

    Posting Permissions

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