http://www.infodog.com/misc/winbrdstat.htm

LOL, I have used handlers and not entered their names on the respective entry forms. Those figures are definitely skewed IMO.

Interesting, but the numbers are skewed by the fact that I am not sure every Agent is listed on every entry form. In my area, we have several ladies, who have done professional handling at one time or another, that handle labs for other folks in classes where they don't have their own dogs entered themselves. I am pretty sure they don't list these handlers as agents.

How many folks that do ring-side drop off list the agent as well?

The stats are for dogs sent out with handlers. Most people do not list the agent if they are at the show.

Thanks for posting these, skewed or not. I think they are still interesting facts and I like how it is a bit of a mix.

Pro or not: Keep up your amazing efforts. This is a fun sport, and without everyone involved - we wouldnt have it at all!

And for those that don't think that you can be just as great as a pro - Watch exactly what they do in the ring, and you do the same. I promise you that you will pick up very easily and be winning with confidence in no time

I agree on agents often not being listed. Another factor- I have been to many small shows where there were no professionally handled Labs. Obviously, the points and breed were given to nonprofessionally handled dogs- I've gotten some BOBs myself at such shows. I don't think there would be many shows around here with all professionally handled dogs so that there is no possible way for a nonprofessionally handled dog to win, although there certainly are judges that don't get many owner-handled entries. It would be interesting to compare the proportions of winners to total entries with an agent listed vs winners to total entries without a listed agent. That is the really telling comparison. The reasons agent-handled dogs might win more could include factors other than bias of judges toward professionals such as the expertise of the handler, a superior knowledge of the likes and dislikes of various judges, and the fact that people might take young dogs into the ring themselves to give them experience and then hand them off to a pro when they are ready to win.

I hand over at shows alot, never list the handler. They don't seem to care.

I would like to see a division by division break down. Lumping the whole country together does not seem right. Is it fair to compare the north east to a place like Minnesota? Or the west coast to a place like North Dakota? I think not.

And all the while I thought we were supposed to be judging the canine in the ring. The very fact that this subject comes up tells me otherwise. If it is even suspected that judging depends on the handler is a sad commentary on the sport. And on the advancement of a breed.

Many owner handlers in the Labrador ring are as well-recognized as the handlers, especially when their fellow breeders are judging. Isn't that the same thing as recognizing a handler? You know it's true. Plus, handlers just handle better than many of the owner handlers, that's why they are professionals--they are good at it!

To be valid, the analysis should have selected data only when at least one agent was listed. I'd be curious to see the percentages in that scenario. The question that I believe that MB-F was trying to answer is this: when there is a choice, do more of the wins go to the dogs handled by an agent?

It's rather like saying that a judge "only puts up black dogs? without looking at what was entered that day.

I think Observer you are absolutely correct. If a professional handler would not handle a dog better than the average person, why would they be considered a professional and have people pay them to show their dogs?

Besides that what really should be noted is that a pro handler makes (or should make) any dog they have show to the best of their ability. This still is not to say that if there is a better dog in the class, the judge would not spot that dog. A handler may make a mediocre dog look good, but it still won't beat out a better dog in the ring if a judge is really on their toes.

For those who say well a judge will put up their breeder friends who are showing, chances are a breeder judge is being shown to by multiple breeder judges in the same class. So then the whole argument falls apart. What does a breeder judge do to please all their friends? They can't put them all up in first place or give them all BOW, BOS, or BIS. Although some will never believe it, they may actually be putting up the dog they think is the best example of the breed. This is just how I look at it.