Just wondering if there are only a handful of us who are concerned w/ all the short legged dogs (and short in general dogs) in the conformation ring... I just can't help but have a tough time w/ that. If balance and athleticism is so important in our breed, why is this happening (besides the fact that they are appearing to be winning?)?

Another observation which is perplexing since I've been trying to improve on coupling is the trend toward long bodied dogs winning again. That said, I personally think my longer backed dogs move the best and have a more natural/effortless jumping style, but the standard calls for a short coupled, nearly square dog. I know the best dog is the winner for the day but..... this is very frustrating.

Anne

Not really, because the only place I see the short dogs cleaning house is at the Specialties. Sporting breed judges at all breed shows still pick dogs that look like they match the standard AND can work all day. And I show alot in UKC and know that the judges prefer what I'll call the "old style" labs that were thinner and had a little leg (but not what we're seeing as the fieldy badly bred labs...).

Longer backed dogs do move better, but it's not like you have to exaggerate the package to much when you add a little there. Give the dog 1/2 to 1" longer in the back matched with appropriate length legs should still present a nice picture. As long as the chest and loin area are proportionally correct for a lab.

I have been seeing a good # of shorter legs lately even at all breed shows. I think sometimes the legs aren't that short, but the chest hangs down lower making the legs seem even shorter!

Some don't even look tall enough, even bitches!

I actually love the look of the shorter leg when combined with a short coupled body, but it is a little off putting since my lab is less than square and has proper leg length.
At Potomac, there were 4 puppies/littermates from a very famous breeder that I found to be incredible, but they looked a little shorter in leg AND they placed in front of the English judge who I found to be very fair and focused on the right things. Several are really beginning to shine in the ring as young adults.

I can't say that I agree with your assessment of short legged dogs. It's not something I'm seeing.

Can you show me an example of what you are calling a short legged dog? Thanks

Short on leg or deep chest? I'm not seeing short legged dogs.

I will readily admit I do not know the lab standard but if there are no short legged dogs/bitches in the lab ring then the grass was very long at the show I attended today.

I needed to find a good place, out of sight of my boy, to watch English Setters show so I chose the lab ring. Saw a lot of short, heavy dogs/bitches with sway backs and bushy tails.

It was also interesting to see that labs don't ever really stand still in the ring. Lots of wiggly tail wags and jumping on the judge going on and it wasn't just in the puppy classes.

I do think that maybe it IS a visual thing where maybe the chest is deep therefore the legs look short. It could also be the difference between working weight and showing weight.

I do think that maybe it IS a visual thing where maybe the chest is deep therefore the legs look short. It could also be the difference between working weight and showing weight.

My Nessa is case in point. Deep chested and deep bodied ... long grass make her look short legged. Proportionally, she is correct.

I'm actually talking about those where you've got a nice photo (indoor or on solid surface) that you can take a clear ruler to, and measure that elbows to ground is significantly less than elbows to withers. I do see alot of dogs w/ chest extending much further below the elbows also, but this isn't what I'm referring to.

This isn't just at specialties that I'm seeing more and more of this. And I really don't think it's okay at specialties since we have one standard-- the fact is that the big specialty winners may have a huge influence on the future gene pool. I'm currently looking at studs for one of my girls who already is a tiny bit short on leg (looks leggy in comparison to those being shown though) and having a hard time finding the right package. Anne

I'm actually talking about those where you've got a nice photo (indoor or on solid surface) that you can take a clear ruler to, and measure that elbows to ground is significantly less than elbows to withers. I do see alot of dogs w/ chest extending much further below the elbows also, but this isn't what I'm referring to.

This isn't just at specialties that I'm seeing more and more of this. And I really don't think it's okay at specialties since we have one standard-- the fact is that the big specialty winners may have a huge influence on the future gene pool. I'm currently looking at studs for one of my girls who already is a tiny bit short on leg (looks leggy in comparison to those being shown though) and having a hard time finding the right package. Anne

You're not alone at all ... there are quite a few of us around here who do performance events (obedience, agility, hunt test) who prefer a nice looking, show style lab (as opposed to a field style - but that's another debate, LOL) that is sound and can move properly. We all complain about the short-legged, overweight "ticks" we see so much of the in the conformation ring. A late friend of mine used to ask "would you really want to haul that into a boat with you?"

We showed my male in breed a couple times when he was younger, but he is a bit long in the body so he got a few long looks but didn't do anything. The breeder who handled him (had bred his father and had encouraged us to show - we were only interested in performance when we got him) told us to put 10-15lbs on him as that would deepen up his chest and disguise the length of body. He is 24 inches and weighs about 82lbs ... there was no way in HECK I was going to put more weight on him. Oh, and a breeder who just used him on her girl chose to do so in part because he doesn't have short legs, LOL (she also does performance events though - not conformation).

I have been seeing a good # of shorter legs lately even at all breed shows. I think sometimes the legs aren't that short, but the chest hangs down lower making the legs seem even shorter!

Some don't even look tall enough, even bitches!


I wonder if this could be a regional thing? You and I are probably going to many of the same shows, LOL.

I wonder if this could be a regional thing? You and I are probably going to many of the same shows, LOL.


Maybe you 2 but I'm in the Pac NW!!! LOL. I know what my bitches measure at the withers and I swear we use different yardsticks. Many of the dogs I'm seeing aren't much taller than my girls who are BARELY 21" and that's if wicketed at a CC near a MH test w/ gunners shooting triples.

Perhaps you could PM me the info on the fit, athletic nice (and tall!!!!) dog you're talking about. I'm "a looking"... heck at this point, I'm not even picky about color or what they carry color wise if everything else is there. DNA/OFA tests are critical however. ;) Anne

Deep chested or short legged...whatever the case may be, it looks unappealing in a dog as large as a lab in my opinion. I have a friend who purchased a lab somewhat recently from show lines and she was so disappointed in the shortness of leg on her dog that she actually called the breeder to speak to her about it. She had people asking her if the dog was mixed based on it's height. Someone suggested basset hound. Most people don't know the breed standard but even to someone with an untrained eye the dog looked unbalanced and wrong.

Kudos for bringing this up. I will have labs for the rest of my life and I don't want to see the breed reduced to barrels on stump-legs. Otherwise I'll just move on to goldens. (oh god) ;)

I would be curious to see if anyone has any photos (you can hide the name of the dog for "security" reasons) to show your point of short-legged dogs.

I also wanted to add that it's really such a subjective topic. Jack just got her UKC CH. and the 3 judges that put him up recently all told me he was perfect, do NOT put another pound on him. People tell me he is a large dog. I look at him and see small and thin...he's 70#. I have folks who show in AKC telling me he needs to have a little more weight on him to be competetive...and these folks know what they are talking about because they have had winning dogs.

I would be curious to see if anyone has any photos (you can hide the name of the dog for "security" reasons) to show your point of short-legged dogs.

I also wanted to add that it's really such a subjective topic. Jack just got her UKC CH. and the 3 judges that put him up recently all told me he was perfect, do NOT put another pound on him. People tell me he is a large dog. I look at him and see small and thin...he's 70#. I have folks who show in AKC telling me he needs to have a little more weight on him to be competetive...and these folks know what they are talking about because they have had winning dogs.

Go on tkdogs.com and take a look at the photos from Potomac this year. You will see ALOT of short legged dogs and bitches. Obviously you can't wicket them from those shots, but I think you will understand the question.

I also wanted to add that it's really such a subjective topic.

It totally is. But in addition to the fact that more than a few of us on this forum have noticed this trend, there are entire websites devoted to this concern. I posted the link to it in another thread. Someone blew off the website saying that every one of the photos shown has been photoshopped. (there are a ton of them). What motivation would anyone have to do that? how would anyone benefit from that in any way?

Maybe if you're in the breed long enough you just don't notice how dumpy looking some of the show labs are. Dismissing it as "no that's just deep chested" is kind missing the point if the dog looks unbalanced. Happily though after visiting a few websites from breeders on this forum, it's apparent that this isn't everyone's preference. And as you pointed out, maybe one person's dumpy is another person's dream dog.

It totally is. But in addition to the fact that more than a few of us on this forum have noticed this trend, there are entire websites devoted to this concern. I posted the link to it in another thread. Someone blew off the website saying that every one of the photos shown has been photoshopped. (there are a ton of them). What motivation would anyone have to do that? how would anyone benefit from that in any way?

Maybe if you're in the breed long enough you just don't notice how dumpy looking some of the show labs are. Dismissing it as "no that's just deep chested" is kind missing the point if the dog looks unbalanced. Happily though after visiting a few websites from breeders on this forum, it's apparent that this isn't everyone's preference. And as you pointed out, maybe one person's dumpy is another person's dream dog.

Subjective and personal.

Give me the 'short dumpy' any day over the houndy, single coated, tucked up, long tailed, whippet-looking type Lab.

NEITHER extreme is good for the breed.

Maybe you 2 but I'm in the Pac NW!!! LOL. I know what my bitches measure at the withers and I swear we use different yardsticks. Many of the dogs I'm seeing aren't much taller than my girls who are BARELY 21" and that's if wicketed at a CC near a MH test w/ gunners shooting triples.

Perhaps you could PM me the info on the fit, athletic nice (and tall!!!!) dog you're talking about. I'm "a looking"... heck at this point, I'm not even picky about color or what they carry color wise if everything else is there. DNA/OFA tests are critical however. ;) Anne


CYPM!

Well, being someone that was publicly chastised on this board for saying that many of the show labs I've seen look like barrels, you can rest-assured that you aren't alone, Anne! :blush: :teehee:

I know exactly what you're talking about, and it is not directly related to depth of chest, as others have referred to. I wish I had taken some pictures (I wanted to.......gosh, I wanted to) at the AKC all breed show I went to a few weeks ago. I can tell you that the Labs that I saw there did not look anything like the Labs I've been used to seeing growing up. While I didn't walk around measuring the dogs, most, like at least 95%, only came to my knees at the withers (I am 5ft 3in tall). I bit my tongue, but I was thinking to myself, "Gosh, why are these dogs so small?!" Their width is another topic altogether, but that dumbfounded me as well. :yikes:

I guess now I understand why the 'show people' on this board thought Rosco looked better in the pics where he was 10lbs overweight. No offense intended. I need to take some updated pics of him if I can, this evening, and post them. He's a tad lighter than I'd like to see him right now, but he had all this loose skin where he'd lost the fat from underneath, that I wanted that to kind of resolve itself, so I continued with the weight loss program a little longer than usual with him. He'll be doing a LOT of swimming and running over the next few months, so he'll put the weight back on (in all the right places this time) no problem.

Subjective and personal.

Give me the 'short dumpy' any day over the houndy, single coated, tucked up, long tailed, whippet-looking type Lab.

NEITHER extreme is good for the breed.

No one is saying it is. I don't really have a vested interest in this. It's the breeders who are going to have to sell their dogs, not me. That being said, I don't really want to see them go down the road towards extremism the way some breeds have.

Go on tkdogs.com and take a look at the photos from Potomac this year. You will see ALOT of short legged dogs and bitches. Obviously you can't wicket them from those shots, but I think you will understand the question. I've seen the Potomac shots. But while I agree that there may be SOME dogs like that, on a whole I don't see it as a problem. So that's why I was curious if people has pictures of SPECIFIC dogs.

Also remember, there are breeders that soley breed for specialty-winning dogs, some that breed that never show, some that breed first for performance maybe not even for the breed ring, and those that want dual purpose dogs...those that match the standard and can work. Not that I have been in the breed all that long or have a long list of accomplishments, but with the pups I produced we have 2 conformation champions and 1 hunting titled dog.

I can tell you that the Labs that I saw there did not look anything like the Labs I've been used to seeing growing up.

And you might have identified your problem. When we're used to seeing something one way, day in and day out, we often accept that as the norm...whether it's correct or not. I have a jack russell, Scout. Scout's quite possibly the most incorrect jack russell known to man, but I love him to pieces, he does what I want to do with him (agility) and can do what the breed was created to do (LOVES to rat ;)). If I went to a dog show looking for a jack russell that looked just like him, I'd be sorrly dissapointed!! I'll be honest, I much prefer my short legged, ***** eared, longer than tall jack to those I see in the ring, but that doesn't make him CORRECT.

I too would like an example of all the "short on leg" dogs people are seeing....which is different than being short.


edit... lol I didn't realize I'd be censored...Scout has ears that stick up ;)

I've seen the Potomac shots. But while I agree that there may be SOME dogs like that, on a whole I don't see it as a problem. So that's why I was curious if people has pictures of SPECIFC dogs.


You really don't have to look hard for good side photos that you can accurately measure the proportions on. And I am almost positive that most of the dogs I am talking about wouldn't be within 15 lbs of the weight recommendations in the standard despite the fact they'd be on the short end (if not under sized) of the spectrum too.

And no, I don't like the whippet look either. Just the old fashioned, moderate athletic Lab w/ a head that says unquestionally, "I am a Lab" and a body that can stand up to whatever games we want to play-- for a long time. Anne

And you might have identified your problem. When we're used to seeing something one way, day in and day out, we often accept that as the norm...whether it's correct or not.


I too would like an example of all the "short on leg" dogs people are seeing....which is different than being short.

You could be onto something. A local puppy mill produces Labs that populate my valley. This is the Lab that the area is used to seeing. These dogs are long on leg and many of the them would wicket out on the top side of the height standard. My correct dogs look short and dumpy compared to the miller dogs and my dogs are thought not to be purebred.

Yes, specific examples would be nice.

Yes, specific examples would be nice.


And have someone contact the owner/ breeder who would get their panties in a twist? Yea, right....... :rolleyes:

I've had my patties slapped for saying NICE things about certain kennels. I'd hate to say something negative...

And have someone contact the owner/ breeder who would get their panties in a twist? Yea, right....... :rolleyes:

I've had my patties slapped for saying NICE things about certain kennels. I'd hate to say something negative...

I realize that. It's not a good idea, but it would be NICE to be able to critique and learn together.

[quote=DarwinsMom;1964238462]And you might have identified your problem. When we're used to seeing something one way, day in and day out, we often accept that as the norm...


Yep, the same reason my vet was amazed when I brought Cappy in. Hadn’t seen a lab around here in quite some time of his liking until he met Cappy.

The same reason not once has anyone asked me what type of dog Bailey is but I would guess over 25 people have asked me about Cappy - either is he full lab or what kind of dog is he?...

ETA – Don’t let these questions about Cappy be asked to DH – he doesn’t handle them well especially at events where it's mostly labs. ;)

You could be onto something. A local puppy mill produces Labs that populate my valley. This is the Lab that the area is used to seeing.

I would give us more credit than this. You're making it sound as if those who are concerned about short legs in the breed can't tell the difference between a well balanced conformation dog and one from a puppy mill. I can only speak for myself with any certainty... but that's not the case.

Proportion--Short-coupled; length from the point of the shoulder to the point of the rump is equal to or slightly longer than the distance from the withers to the ground.

I would give us more credit than this. You're making it sound as if those who are concerned about short legs in the breed can't tell the difference between a well balanced conformation dog and one from a puppy mill. I can only speak for myself with any certainty... but that's not the case.

Proportion--Short-coupled; length from the point of the shoulder to the point of the rump is equal to or slightly longer than the distance from the withers to the ground.

It's a sweeping generality on your part about short legs in the breed. I'm not seeing it as the norm ... the odd individual dog perhaps, and in fact, I own one that probably fits your 'short legged' description (spayed and never had a litter). I am not seeing ring after ring in show after show of dogs that have short legs.

I've had my patties slapped for saying NICE things about certain kennels. Okay now i want to know what a pattie is. :p:

It's a sweeping generality on your part

A sweeping generality that a lot of people have noticed. What are the odds?

edit to add: I'm not pointing the finger at anyone. I'm just perplexed.

[quote] Yep, the same reason my vet was amazed when I brought Cappy in. Hadn’t seen a lab around here in quite some time of his liking until he met Cappy.

The same reason not once has anyone asked me what type of dog Bailey is but I would guess over 25 people have asked me about Cappy - either is he full lab or what kind of dog is he?...

ETA – Don’t let these questions about Cappy be asked to DH – he doesn’t handle them well especially at events where it's mostly labs. ;)

I have worked many, many public education events with my AKC Ch. The public, for the most part, all thought she was too short (there's that word again), was too hairy (correct double coat), and wasn't hyper enough. Just because that's what they have in their backyard (up on leg, single coat, and a spaz) doesn't make it correct.

I'm with your DH. Oh please, oh please, don't ask me what kind of dog she is! LOL

Okay now i want to know what a pattie is. :p:

It may pre-date you (if so, am I ever feeling old!). :D It probably dates back to the Patty Cake Patty Cake game....

Didn't yer mama ever have to slap yer patties when you were naughty???? ;)

A sweeping generality that a lot of people have noticed. What are the odds?

edit to add: I'm not pointing the finger at anyone. I'm just perplexed.

Even some handlers are "noticing" and have been for quite some time. I was getting comments at our club functions from folks showing in Working, etc, classes as early as a few years ago. I don't think it's my progressive lenses that are distorting things, but then it did start about the same time my eyes began to change now that I think about it. :rolleyes:

The Golden folks are seeing the same trend, by the way. This in response to the comment about crossing over to the dark (or is that the swampy?) side...... :eek:

It's a sweeping generality on your part about short legs in the breed. I'm not seeing it as the norm ... the odd individual dog perhaps, and in fact, I own one that probably fits your 'short legged' description (spayed and never had a litter). I am not seeing ring after ring in show after show of dogs that have short legs.

I'm not seeing that around here as the norm either Jo-Anne. Would love to see pictures of the dogs that are in question.

I'm not seeing that around here as the norm either Jo-Anne. Would love to see pictures of the dogs that are in question.

I don't think anyone wants to single out someone's dog and hurt any feelings. But if you want an example of the dogs in question, as someone else mentioned, you can go to the Potomac pictures. Just look for the short ones. Those are the ones we're talking about.

I was at a show in June where the judge put up dogs with "alot of leg under them". It seemed to me that day that the Winners Dog (WD) was actually too tall! But I really think he was probably at the top end of standard and the others were at the bottom end of the standard. It can be a significant difference when shown next to each other.

I think the beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I was taught that if a lab is in balance, that was the most important thing (other than the holy trinity of head, coat and tail). So the shorter leg may be a real thing, but on a balanced dog, maybe it looks correct??

So the shorter leg may be a real thing, but on a balanced dog, maybe it looks correct??

I guess for me, the shorter leg makes them look out of balance and unwieldy .... added to the excess weight many are carrying it makes me look at the dog and question how athletic they could be in the field or while climbing in an out of a boat.

That's short legs on a dog with full-size body ... I have a friend with a TINY but proportional and balanced girl. I prefer a larger dog (I'm guessing she is below 18 inches), but I can see the beauty in her and she has short legs .... but the body to match, LOL.

A sweeping generality that a lot of people have noticed. What are the odds?

edit to add: I'm not pointing the finger at anyone. I'm just perplexed.


What constitutes a lot of people? The amount of people on this board? I don't think so. This would be a tiny amount of people in the grand scheme of things.

I show at all breed and specialties with dogs in shape and do well at both...imagine that. :rolleyes:

I have seen some bitches that are on the short side, but are "balanced". I own one!! If a dog is small, but balanced...and has correct temperament, biddability, as well as correct structure, coat, head and tail...I sure am not going to throw it out. Balance is key.

If I had to choose between a smaller bitch who is balanced or a taller bitch with more leg under her that is not balanced.....thats a no brainer. Give me that smaller girl!

Yes, I have seen some REALLY big dogs whose leg is not enough for their size or length of body, but to say that this is becoming the norm is a bit of an exageration IMHO.

eta: The majority of "show dogs" are not shown in the "fat" condition that some here are describing. Yes, some are, and I am the first to say when asked my opinion on their condtion that they are indeed FAT, but the majority are shown in good weight and condition. Just my observation from my experience in the show ring in the competitive Northeast Division 1.

What constitutes a lot of people? The amount of people on this board? I don't think so.

No. that's not what I said. Not only people here, but other people i talk to, friends who own labs and complete strangers I meet at dog shows who strike up a conversation with me. Why is this so hard to believe? If breeders would prefer to stick their heads in the sand that's their perrogative, of course.



I show at all breed and specialties with dogs in shape and do well at both...imagine that. :rolleyes:

This is off topic. I'm not sure why you even mentioned it

I have seen some bitches that are on the short side, but are "balanced". I own one!! If a dog is small, but balanced

This isn't what we're talking about. We're talking about dogs with short legs in relation to body size.

Brette- do you, your friends, complete strangers you meet show labradors? Successfully? Do you do anything with your dog(s)?

I've been through the Potomac pic many times (ordered pics of my own dogs), please point me to something you feel is too short on leg, ie elbow to ground is shorter than elbow to withers.

No. that's not what I said. Not only people here, but other people i talk to, friends who own labs and complete strangers I meet at dog shows who strike up a conversation with me. Why is this so hard to believe? If breeders would prefer to stick their heads in the sand that's their perrogative, of course.

Are you saying breeders as a whole stick their heads in the sand? Kind of a broad brush wouldn't you say? I don't like to be lumped like that. I am sorry that you can't understand that.

I guess I would need to know who these folks were to put much weight to their opinions. A person who has had Labs from BYB's all their life would think that a well bred correct Lab looks funny. Its all in their individual perception.

This is off topic. I'm not sure why you even mentioned it

Not really off topic. Someone mentioned that they see one "type" of Lab at Specialties and a much more correct Lab at All Breed shows. That was my point and I was using my own dogs as an example. I could have said hypothetically Jane Brown's dogs, but would rather use my own dogs since I would not want to discuss anyone elses dogs on a public forum. Its not good form to do so.

This isn't what we're talking about. We're talking about dogs with short legs in relation to body size.

Again...someone commented...I responded with my own comments. Fair enough? Thats a discussion as far as I am concerned.

I also did comment on the dogs with short legs issue...which seemed to have gotten lost in all your quotes.

The Golden folks are seeing the same trend, by the way. This in response to the comment about crossing over to the dark (or is that the swampy?) side...... :eek:

The Goldens have worse problems to worry about. Have you sat ringside and watched the fronts on the dogs being shown? :eek:

Brette- do you, your friends, complete strangers you meet show labradors? Successfully? Do you do anything with your dog(s)?

I was waiting for this from you.

I have had labs for over 15 years now. I compete with all of them and have several obedience titles on each. Agility also. My youngest lab has a nice pedigree who i bought from a reputable breeder who shows her dogs, many of which are canadian champions. I bought a dog from this breeder because probably like you, she breeds great dogs. Don't misunderstand... I'm not condemning all breeders. I'm VERY happy with my lab.


Dismissing everyone's concerns and assuming no one else might have a valid point unless they're part of the conformation world (which may not be doing the breed any favours) is bordering on myopic. Are you implying there isn't a chance that someone who doesn't breed dogs can spot a dog with short legs compared to rest of it's body? Give me a break. That's insulting.

Again, i'm not posting pictures because that would be cruel. There's a good chance that someone here might recognize the dogs

I have had labs for over 15 years now. I compete with all of them and have several obedience titles on each. Agility also. My youngest lab has a nice pedigree who i bought from a reputable breeder who shows her dogs, many of which are canadian champions. I bought a dog from this breeder because probably like you, she breeds great dogs. Don't misunderstand... I'm not condemning all breeders. I'm VERY happy with my lab.

Thats good to know!! :cool: I wish you many more years with them!

Many of the breeders here do multiple venues with their dogs so much of my opinion on things stems from that. I venture that is the same with others here, but I can only speak for myself.

Thats good to know!! :cool: I wish you many more years with them!

Thank you. I hope so too.

And you might have identified your problem. When we're used to seeing something one way, day in and day out, we often accept that as the norm...whether it's correct or not.

You know, that can go both ways. :o:

I was waiting for this from you.

I have had labs for over 15 years now. I compete with all of them and have several obedience titles on each. Agility also. My youngest lab has a nice pedigree who i bought from a reputable breeder who shows her dogs, many of which are canadian champions. I bought a dog from this breeder because probably like you, she breeds great dogs. Don't misunderstand... I'm not condemning all breeders. I'm VERY happy with my lab.


Dismissing everyone's concerns and assuming no one else might have a valid point unless they're part of the conformation world (which may not be doing the breed any favours) is bordering on myopic. Are you implying there isn't a chance that someone who doesn't breed dogs can spot a dog with short legs compared to rest of it's body? Give me a break. That's insulting.

Again, i'm not posting pictures because that would be cruel. There's a good chance that someone here might recognize the dogs

Just wanted to add that I have had numerous discussions with various people about this issue, and all of the people I talk to are people who do performance events with their Labs and are concerned that the trends in the show rings may be detrimental to the dogs ultimate ability to perform the duties they were originally bred to do.

So I would ask the reverse question ... how many people currently showing in breed also do any field or other performance work with their dogs to test whether that conformation they are working to develop is still functional for the animal?

Personally, I think in order to achieve a CH, all dogs should be required to have a WC, and in order to achieve an AKC performance title, all dogs should be required to pass a CC (do they still even offer those?). To be fair, just as I am not happy with some things I have been seeing in the breed rings, I am also not happy with some of what I am seeing in the performance venues ... both are straying too far from what I consider to be a correct dog.

Call me crazy, but I see the exact same thing.

I've been showing mostly in Canada this summer, and didn't notice much. I mosied across the water to the US and low and behold, shorties.

I think its really more of an optical illusion however. The dogs are built like coffee tables, huge huge bodies with tons of coat, fatty chest (that's not structure) so it makes it look as though their chest is lower than it is, giving the eye nothing but problems. Add to that the long backs and long couplings and its like looking at a magic eye, and I could never do those.

I love a dog with leg. I'm glad to own them, happier to work them. Unfortunately my puppy is built like the aforementioned table (like her mother) but has decent leg, so looks a bit wonky ;)

Its all about preference. Freedom of choice and speech. I do know both my side table and Ms Leggy MacWonky can endure a day in the field and cover enough ground efficiently and swim like the fishes they are. So I'm not concerned.

I'll post pictures, I'm not affraid. Granted these are in the grass. P.S. They are my littermates.

This short little gaffer (he really is) finished in 3 consecutive shows under a breeder judge and 2 well known US judges. Really, measure it, even guesstimate where his foot would be in the grass, and measure from the shoulder to the elbow and then the elbow to the ground he is like 2/3 body
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v336/luvmydog2much/IMG_5966.jpg

This leggy girl, a littermate...nada. I finally pulled her out of the puppy classes (the last one she competed in she got 2nd to an actual dwarf, and I am NOT KIDDING...but she's yet to lose an adult class, but is obviously too tall for the puppies, and yes I know she has other issues, namely a shortage of bone ;)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v336/luvmydog2much/August070.jpg

So I would ask the reverse question ... how many people currently showing in breed also do any field or other performance work with their dogs to test whether that conformation they are working to develop is still functional for the animal?

I do! My AM/CAN CH is running at his 2nd hunt test this weekend going for his 2nd leg! Again...using my own dogs as an example. Lots of others here do too!


Personally, I think in order to achieve a CH, all dogs should be required to have a WC, and in order to achieve an AKC performance title, all dogs should be required to pass a CC (do they still even offer those?). To be fair, just as I am not happy with some things I have been seeing in the breed rings, I am also not happy with some of what I am seeing in the performance venues ... both are straying too far from what I consider to be a correct dog.

I agree...and yes, they do still offer the CC. I believe you can check the LRC, INc. website for planned events.

I think the passionate debates that go on (from both sides!) stem from one side thinking the other side has gone too far. YES, there are extremes in this breed on either end of the spectrum, but I do think that the majority of the Labs today are somewhere in the middle. Again...just my opinion.

So I would ask the reverse question ... how many people currently showing in breed also do any field or other performance work with their dogs to test whether that conformation they are working to develop is still functional for the animal?


Absolutely, we've been taking a series of classes with arguably the best trainer in the area, Agility, Field, obedience, tracking...three times a week, 2-3 hours at a time, and my dog holds up better than the flat coats we're working with. She is an incredibly efficient swimmer, and powerful and agile enough to cover any ground she encounters.

I am always leery of my dogs jumping obedience heights, and we only do practice heights at home.

I think the passionate debates that go on (from both sides!) stem from one side thinking the other side has gone too far. YES, there are extremes in this breed on either end of the spectrum, but I do think that the majority of the Labs today are somewhere in the middle. Again...just my opinion.

I have actually enjoyed reading reading this entire 4 page thread. I have no stake in show/working/etc. I have never been to a show, although I do enjoy them on TV and always seem to miss the Labs on the broadcast. I am only an individual who loves Labs and always have. I am now going on 10 weeks as a Lab owner and I am amazed at how much I love it, so far.

I never knew there really was a difference between show vs working, English vs American, field vs whatever, but through this forum, I have seen so many different types of Labs that it is amazing as to how one breed can differ so much, and still they all kind of look alike with the similar features.

I thank everyone who has posted in this thread to keep it to a very civilized conversation, because I have seen too many threads where there are two VERY different opinions take on the role of 6 year olds.

I look forward to learning so much more from all of the threads on this forum.

I do think that the majority of the Labs today are somewhere in the middle.

Middle is a good spot to be. I just hope judges don't start thinking "lower is better" for whatever reason. Although I've heard there's a wide range of preferences among judges at the moment which may be a good thing.

So I would ask the reverse question ... how many people currently showing in breed also do any field or other performance work with their dogs to test whether that conformation they are working to develop is still functional for the animal?

I am not a breeder, but I run my short legged lab in hunt tests...I know Nicole has mutliple agility, and hunt titles on her dogs...and I know that at least two of her dogs have weight pulling titles...so...I'd like to ask how many of the field breeders are out trying to breed to the standard?

My show dog can hunt...can a field dog show? Not usually.

I am not a breeder, but I run my short legged lab in hunt tests...I know Nicole has mutliple agility, and hunt titles on her dogs...and I know that at least two of her dogs have weight pulling titles...so...I'd like to ask how many of the field breeders are out trying to breed to the standard?

My show dog can hunt...can a field dog show? Not usually.

And here we go, the show/field debate.

I am not a breeder, but I run my short legged lab in hunt tests...I know Nicole has mutliple agility, and hunt titles on her dogs...and I know that at least two of her dogs have weight pulling titles...so...I'd like to ask how many of the field breeders are out trying to breed to the standard?

My show dog can hunt...can a field dog show? Not usually.

Again, because of this attitude (on both sides) there will never be a middle ground.
I will say that I am out there with my "ugly" field bred dog at least 4 days a week. The pro trainer that I work with has mostly field bred dogs (obviously), but has a few clients with show-bred labs. A couple are actually pretty decent, but the others are doing it because they "have to" and are going through the motions not out of drive or desire, but because they have no choice - actually a pretty sad sight. Heck, my other dog - a non-retriever breed, has way more drive (hunt and retrieve), desire, and love of water than most of the showbred Labradors I have seen - though she is from hard-core working lines - traits she was bred for - similar to the field lab.
I agree that the conformation needs to be addressed in the field line folk, but the same goes (TITLES and not 10 passes to achieve a junior hunter) needs to seriously be addressed in the conformation folks.
If you look at any breed, there is no arguement that the dogs heavily bred with conformation and no working titles that the original instinct is for a large part bred out of them - heck - It is hard enough to find outstanding animals in the working side of the venue when bred out of working stock.
There is so much lost on both sides when neither conformation nor working ability is addressed. And not to offend anyone, but you could not pay me to take one of the top winning specialty labradors. Sorry, another example of extremism at it's finest. Forget the standard, its the judges that put the dogs up, regardless if the animal couldnt do more than a few long marks (regardless of the the animals desire).
Form follows Function.
Give me a moderate animal anyday of the week (though my idea of moderate and the show enthusiasts may differ as well):noidea:

My show dog can hunt...can a field dog show? Not usually.

Can he hunt or can he run JH tests (which are marking tests)? Just asking, as there is a difference there. JH tests are rather tame by comparison in most situations as the (better) judges try to ensure safety for all participants, dogs (who may be pre-growth plate closure like my 8 mo old) and people alike (the occasional 80+ yo or wheelchair bound handler), so not always a true representative hunting scenario. -- For instance, at JH we don't even carry a mock gun anymore as they want us focusing on keeping our youngsters w/ 4 on the floor instead. I heard a comment recently from someone watching a show Hunting Retriever class and was disappointed that the top placements had never actually hunted. It made me take a step back and really think about what this person was saying.

And yes, I have shown in AKC (admitting this is seldom), but attend a few conformation classes to ready my dogs for the IABCA (UCI-Intl) shows, so get plenty of feedback there. Also do CCs when available and have been secy/chair for those events on occasion. I'd love to do UKC shows, but there are no clubs here. Have thought about sending a dog or 2 to Canada but to be honest, am a bit busy w/ hunt test, obed, agility training and the like to really get excited about sending my dogs off. It doesn't mean I don't understand the intent of the standard, what balance is, etc.. I do know that my girls w/ correct leg are much more efficient, stylish workers than a (too) short legged speciman in all the performance venues I participate in and would say w/o hesitation that I'm not alone in that position-- especially once you move up to the mid and upper levels. The Nov/JH levels are doable for most dogs but I feel even at that, many dogs would be better served by their owners to use the Preferred agility classes. Anne

I'm sure short legged dogs can do many activities well. But functionality aside, I don't think a low set, unbalanced dog is the ideal for the breed. Am I missing something in the standard that says this is acceptable?

Am I missing something in the standard that says this is acceptable?

Nope, you're not, there are several things in the standard describing how the dog show look, proportions etc. but winning is more important that adhering to these guidelines.

medium-sized

athletic

substance without lumber or cloddiness

Distance from the elbow to the ground should be equal to one half of the height at the withers

brisket should extend to the elbows, but not perceptibly deeper

Labrador Retrievers shall be shown in working condition well-muscled and without excess fat.


too much bone is as undesirable as too little bone

short legged, heavy boned individuals are not typical

Labrador Retrievers shall be shown in working condition well-muscled and without excess fat.

How long should the legs be if your dog has to swim? Like duck hunting?

Isn't this a silly debate when dogs height is measured to the withers? Not leg length ....balance is the term you are looking for....

Here is a 98 lb pet quality Show breed Lab working in heavy brush... he was 22 " tall last year... Maybe 23 " tall today....watch that first part of the video..it's called ability to leap...and charge ahead...

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll16/uplander_2008/th_SatchTankMartinBurns11-24-08004.jpg (http://s284.photobucket.com/albums/ll16/uplander_2008/?action=view&current=SatchTankMartinBurns11-24-08004.flv)

How long should the legs be if your dog has to swim? Like duck hunting?

Isn't this a silly debate when dogs height is measured to the withers? Not leg length ....balance is the term you are looking for....



It specifically says, height from the withers to the elbow equal to the height from the elbows to the ground.

It has nothing to do with your dog (though your dog is out of the picture according to the standard anyways at 98lbs, this is about dogs in the ring. And yes, they are, for the most part. Short if we're looking at this description. They are also very long.

It specifically says, height from the withers to the elbow equal to the height from the elbows to the ground.

It has nothing to do with your dog (though your dog is out of the picture according to the standard anyways at 98lbs, this is about dogs in the ring. And yes, they are, for the most part. Short if we're looking at this description. They are also very long.

That's where balance comes in...it's the total package you look at...I mentioned my pups weight because that weight is made up of very large muscle mass in his hips and quads...To leap and charge.. As my pups breeder mentioned the only reason he wasn't kept to show was he was " TOO" He's a big boy in all ways and most likely would never win... but other than the weight he falls into standard....and from what I've been told many "Show dogs" weigh even more ...The shows have no scales...so if they fit into the wicket they would not be disqualified....But I don't show so I would not know ...I am just lucky he wasn't good enough for his breeder..He is an awesome pet dog...

That's where balance comes in...it's the total package you look at...I mentioned my pups weight because that weight is made up of very large muscle mass in his hips and quads...To leap and charge.. As my pups breeder mentioned the only reason he wasn't kept to show was he was " TOO" He's a big boy in all ways and most likely would never win... but other than the weight he falls into standard....and from what I've been told many "Show dogs" weigh even more ...The shows have no scales...so if they fit into the wicket they would not be disqualified....But I don't show so I would not know ...I am just lucky he wasn't good enough for his breeder..He is an awesome pet dog...

I couldn't see his proportions from the video, but my concern is not just about the overall height of the dogs, but about how that height is distributed - ie how much is leg and how much is body as a previous poster said, balance.

And sorry, but not all that excess weight looks like muscle to me ... I'm wondering just how easy it is to feel his ribs. My 24 inch male weighs 82lbs and I can find his ribs under a light padding so he definitely shouldn't be carrying more weight, and trust me, he has plenty of muscle ... The feedback I got on him the few times we tried to show was that he is gorgeous but too long in the body, and that if we wanted to finish him, we probably could have if we put another 10-15lbs to deepen/widen his chest and disguise the body length. No thanks ... I'd like my dog to avoid orthopedic problems caused by excess weight (and he has - he is 10 years old is sound as a bell and moves like a dream according to several breeders I know).

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0903/annette47/IM005032.jpg

I couldn't see his proportions from the video, but my concern is not just about the overall height of the dogs, but about how that height is distributed - ie how much is leg and how much is body as a previous poster said, balance.

And sorry, but not all that excess weight looks like muscle to me ... I'm wondering just how easy it is to feel his ribs. My 24 inch male weighs 82lbs and I can find his ribs under a light padding so he definitely shouldn't be carrying more weight, and trust me, he has plenty of muscle ... The feedback I got on him the few times we tried to show was that he is gorgeous but too long in the body, and that if we wanted to finish him, we probably could have if we put another 10-15lbs to deepen/widen his chest and disguise the body length. No thanks ... I'd like my dog to avoid orthopedic problems caused by excess weight (and he has - he is 10 years old is sound as a bell and moves like a dream according to several breeders I know).

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0903/annette47/IM005032.jpg

Lovely boy Annette! Very handsome! I am envious of his tail! Holly's hasn't come all the way down to the end yet! Maybe a "hair club for Labs" treatment will help, lol.

Let's not go back to Satch's weight, please. It's been discussed ad nauseam.

That's where balance comes in...it's the total package you look at...I mentioned my pups weight because that weight is made up of very large muscle mass in his hips and quads...To leap and charge.. As my pups breeder mentioned the only reason he wasn't kept to show was he was " TOO" He's a big boy in all ways and most likely would never win... but other than the weight he falls into standard....and from what I've been told many "Show dogs" weigh even more ...The shows have no scales...so if they fit into the wicket they would not be disqualified....But I don't show so I would not know ...I am just lucky he wasn't good enough for his breeder..He is an awesome pet dog...

No offence he wasn't good enough for the ring, therefore, your dog is excluded from this conversation, your breeder realized he did not fit the standard, he could be long, tall short, stout, colored pink, for whatever reason did not fit the standard. I can honestly say I've never seen a dog like Satch, as huge or as much head as him, and in my place that would have kept him out of the ring as well. I've produced pet dogs too, and I won't talk about them here. They, in one way or another, don't fit the standard, like many in the show ring.

But, yes, a lot of dogs are heavier than the standard, a lot of dogs are disproportionate to what the standard describes, once you start ignoring one thing, where is the line drawn?

I've always openly enjoyed a moderate dog. Moderate angles and moderate body, and that's what I'll try to breed towards. It doesn't always work, as evidenced in my tubbo that I posted. I got moderate bone and overdone body on my girl, some of the litter is more like mom, some like dad, or like my Gin, somewhere in between.

I always said if there was a CC close by, I'd attend, I know my boy, from field lines would qualify, this dog is as balanced as any I've ever seen in the show ring. He is a beautiful and clean mover, always. Does he have faults? Aboslutely, but his balance is what I would love to achieve at some point, a dog who moves so effortlessly it takes other breeder's breath away, quite literally. I've never seen a dog move this way in the show ring, my own girls do not move this way, and I've been to the Potomac, and seen the 1000 dogs in the ring, not one came close to his effortless movement. This dog does not pant, does not gasp, topline is rock solid. This is my boy, now he may be lacking coat and bone, but inately, this dog is balanced and according to the standard, his body is half his height and his height is his length. and he fits the standard at 23" tall and 68lbs

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v336/luvmydog2much/100_1316.jpg

Tell me, could he be described as "cloddy or cumbersome"?

He reminds me of some of the old time greats, the ones who USED to win in the ring.

Mardas Corn Barley
http://www.timlabs.ru/images/New%20Zeland%20Ch.%20Mardas%20Corn%20Barley.jpg

Sandylands Mark
http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/dogs/pictures/222131.jpg

How does this look like the dogs of today? And what on earth could they possibly look like in 20 years?

Freeze this frame at 57 -56 sec marker...and you will see what perfect condition he is in....
The female golden retriever he is chasing is 50 lbs lighter in weight... a small girl
http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll16/uplander_2008/july%205%202009/th_Mattsnewhouse030.jpg (http://s284.photobucket.com/albums/ll16/uplander_2008/july%205%202009/?action=view&current=Mattsnewhouse030.flv)

Thanks! - and sorry, I didn't mean to bring up past topics - I only joined a few days ago! :o:

And LOL about the tail - it did turn out nice, but at one point it was long and skinny and down well below his hocks and we thought he's never grow into it. When he was about 5 months or so he was all legs, ears, and tail and I remember thinking "at least he ought to be able to work in obedience", LOL. Even his breeder admits he went through a really AWFUL period.

Lovely boy Annette! Very handsome! I am envious of his tail! Holly's hasn't come all the way down to the end yet! Maybe a "hair club for Labs" treatment will help, lol.

Let's not go back to Satch's weight, please. It's been discussed ad nauseam.

Your boy is handsome, and looks incredibly fit! But where's his tail, LOL? For a minute I thought he'd been docked, then I realize he had wagged it out of the picture .... ;)

No offence he wasn't good enough for the ring, therefore, your dog is excluded from this conversation, your breeder realized he did not fit the standard, he could be long, tall short, stout, colored pink, for whatever reason did not fit the standard. I can honestly say I've never seen a dog like Satch, as huge or as much head as him, and in my place that would have kept him out of the ring as well. I've produced pet dogs too, and I won't talk about them here. They, in one way or another, don't fit the standard, like many in the show ring.

But, yes, a lot of dogs are heavier than the standard, a lot of dogs are disproportionate to what the standard describes, once you start ignoring one thing, where is the line drawn?

I've always openly enjoyed a moderate dog. Moderate angles and moderate body, and that's what I'll try to breed towards. It doesn't always work, as evidenced in my tubbo that I posted. I got moderate bone and overdone body on my girl, some of the litter is more like mom, some like dad, or like my Gin, somewhere in between.

I always said if there was a CC close by, I'd attend, I know my boy, from field lines would qualify, this dog is as balanced as any I've ever seen in the show ring. He is a beautiful and clean mover, always. Does he have faults? Aboslutely, but his balance is what I would love to achieve at some point, a dog who moves so effortlessly it takes other breeder's breath away, quite literally. I've never seen a dog move this way in the show ring, my own girls do not move this way, and I've been to the Potomac, and seen the 1000 dogs in the ring, not one came close to his effortless movement. This dog does not pant, does not gasp, topline is rock solid. This is my boy, now he may be lacking coat and bone, but inately, this dog is balanced and according to the standard, his body is half his height and his height is his length. and he fits the standard at 23" tall and 68lbs

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v336/luvmydog2much/100_1316.jpg

Tell me, could he be described as "cloddy or cumbersome"?

He reminds me of some of the old time greats, the ones who USED to win in the ring.

Mardas Corn Barley
http://www.timlabs.ru/images/New%20Zeland%20Ch.%20Mardas%20Corn%20Barley.jpg

Sandylands Mark
http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/dogs/pictures/222131.jpg

How does this look like the dogs of today? And what on earth could they possibly look like in 20 years?

I see labs like Sandylands Mark and Mardas Corn Barley win in all breed. Both, to me are still nice specimens.

This thread started with a good question about leg length and trends. We have gotten off message.

I think a discussion is always warranted about the breed standard and the distinct divergence to it to create a field only labrador. Others have mentioned that many breeds had had a similar divergence.

I don't hunt, but someone mentioned the idea that in order to become a Champion it would be an interesting idea to require a field test portion. Personally I like the idea. I think I will start a threat about this and see what you all think. Edie

I see labs like Sandylands Mark and Mardas Corn Barley win in all breed. Both, to me are still nice specimens.

I'd like to find a dog esp like the Mardas dog right now... well titled in performance venues and EIC/PRA/CNM clear please (with great ortho depth too!), lol.

Anne

And what on earth could they possibly look like in 20 years?


http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f62/Missquo/Clumber3.jpg

Clumbers. :p:

I will admit though, I really like these dogs.

LMAO - I made the same comment to my husband about the future of the breed earlier today. Nothing against Clumbers, but they're not Labradors.

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f62/Missquo/Clumber3.jpg



Clumbers. :p:



I will admit though, I really like these dogs.

This is the future I fear ... oh, wait, the future is now. I've seen this type of Labrador!

http://www.reneecarol.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/whippet437x_1191991464500.jpg

So have I which is why I said BOTH sides (field and show) are going too far.

This is the future I fear ... oh, wait, the future is now. I've seen this type of Labrador!

http://www.reneecarol.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/whippet437x_1191991464500.jpg

This is the future I fear ... oh, wait, the future is now. I've seen this type of Labrador!

http://www.reneecarol.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/whippet437x_1191991464500.jpg

Point taken, the extremes can go either way. I think a few people have mentioned that. However, I don't think I'm the only one here who would like to see both types adhere to the standard.

Double post

This is the future I fear ... oh, wait, the future is now. I've seen this type of Labrador!

http://www.reneecarol.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/whippet437x_1191991464500.jpg

I'd prefer it to be solid colored, but if it'll pick up a 400 yd blind after being fried with an ecollar for a couple of years, that's all that matters. Breed it and then complain that the puppies don't look like those you see in the show ring.

I'd prefer it to be solid colored,

Sorry, but I was only able to find a 'mismark'.

I'd prefer it to be solid colored, but if it'll pick up a 400 yd blind after being fried with an ecollar for a couple of years, that's all that matters. Breed it and then complain that the puppies don't look like those you see in the show ring.
:funny: :ibow:

Kelly

Originally Posted by DarwinsMom http://www.lab-retriever.net/board/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.lab-retriever.net/board/showthread.php?p=1964241075#post1964241075)
I'd prefer it to be solid colored, but if it'll pick up a 400 yd blind after being fried with an ecollar for a couple of years, that's all that matters. Breed it and then complain that the puppies don't look like those you see in the show ring.:funny: :ibow:

Kelly

+1

After reading through this, I do believe there are extremes in every breed. But as has been said previously, some dogs are in longer grass and appear shorter coupled than in person. We've went through a relatively wet and yucky couple of week a while ago and my son took some photos of Cody. He looks short coupled, but he really isn't. You can't even see my feet ;) Is he 24-1/2" tall? No.

http://i299.photobucket.com/albums/mm313/dlpierce_2008/002-11.jpg?t=1250896928

He doesn't look short coupled to me in that photo either.

I'd have to guess how tall your knees are ;), but he appears to be on the low end of the height standard for males anyhow. Am I right? Anne

He looks short coupled, but he really isn't. You can't even see my feet ;) Is he 24-1/2" tall? No.

http://i299.photobucket.com/albums/mm313/dlpierce_2008/002-11.jpg?t=1250896928

He doesn't look short coupled to me in that photo either.

I'd have to guess how tall your knees are ;), but he appears to be on the low end of the height standard for males anyhow. Am I right? Anne

He is definitely within standard ;) but still a puppy, 12 mos old in July -- My post was directed at the grass, not actually my dog, but he doesn't have 2 to 3 foot stilts either ;)

I am not a breeder and do not show my dogs, but my biggest concern is the number of labs around here that are HUGE! My mom's black lab is so tall he almost comes up to my hip! I am only 5'2" but still. And he has a German Shepard nose! When she brought him home at 5 years old, I said Oh I thought he was a pure bred! Well, she pulled out his AKC paperwork and shocked me.

I have a friend with a black lab male that Dixie barely had to dip down to walk underneath his belly! And then there are two labs that I doggie-sit for and the male is the size of a large Rottie and the female is twice the size of my girls. I have seen a ton of labs that are way too tall, some lanky tall and some tall but built like a brick. . . well you know, either way they are just too damn tall, not even close to breed standard. I mean, when my dog can walk underneath their belly and barely have to dip down, you know that is a tall dog!

I am not a breeder and do not show my dogs, but my biggest concern is the number of labs around here that are HUGE! My mom's black lab is so tall he almost comes up to my hip! I am only 5'2" but still. And he has a German Shepard nose! When she brought him home at 5 years old, I said Oh I thought he was a pure bred! Well, she pulled out his AKC paperwork and shocked me.

I have a friend with a black lab male that Dixie barely had to dip down to walk underneath his belly! And then there are two labs that I doggie-sit for and the male is the size of a large Rottie and the female is twice the size of my girls. I have seen a ton of labs that are way too tall, some lanky tall and some tall but built like a brick. . . well you know, either way they are just too damn tall, not even close to breed standard. I mean, when my dog can walk underneath their belly and barely have to dip down, you know that is a tall dog!

Well, one isn't going to get a tall dog from a show breeder.

Most likely your friends had purchased their dogs from a BYB, show breeders breed to dogs that fit the standard height.

R&R's Mum, you are exactly right. These are local people who have a dog, and think hey I've got a girl, you've got a boy, let's get them together and make some money. No thought to preserving the breed standard.

Heck, even I've got one that isn't even close to breed standard, Kallie is definitely a field bred dog, she is fine boned, smaller head, and hyper as heck! Dixie is closer to breed standard, and she actually had 2 litters before I rescued her. But I also don't breed or show my dogs, so it doesn't really matter too much to me how close they are to breed standard.

I'm glad there are those of you out there striving to preserve the breed standard, it certainly isn't something I could do. So thank you to all of you who work very hard and take your breeding programs very seriously!