One of the other threads referred to dogs who finish early (as puppies) who don't mature into what we would hope. So I'd like to start a (hopefully NICE!) discussion about this topic. I know in the UK and Europe, a dog cannot finish a championship until an adult - I think they are required to win a certain number of times after the age of 2? Is this good/bad/otherwise? I personally think this isn't a bad idea at all - the dogs who finish can stand the test of time this way.

But I'd like to hear other people's opinions on this!

The dogs are judged on which is the best dog in the ring on that day. If the dog that best fits the standard on that day is a puppy then the puppy should win, IMO. Not all the winning puppies, do not mature into an outstanding adult dog, some do. I feel the best dog on that day should win and age should not be a factor.

I don't think the question is, should a puppy win a match but rather should a puppy be awarded a championship.

I don't think I said a anything about a puppy winning a match. I think I clearly posted my opinion on the best dog winning on that day no matter the age of the dog. Winning meaning winners points in the AKC ring which equals championship.

The Kennel Club (UK) awards the JW to younger dogs, and the Championship title needs one CC earned after 12 months of age. I personally think this is a nice distinction. Of course it's way harder to finish a dog in the UK since you have to basically go BISS 3 times to finish!

Junior Warrant

The Junior Warrant is an award which a dog can achieve through winning certain awards at open and Championship shows, when the dog is between 6 and 18 months of age. Also a Junior Warrant enables your dog to gain a Stud Book Number. Once achieved you may enter your dog at shows with the title JW.

a. Title of Champion (Ch) The following dogs shall be entitled to be described as Champions:
(1) Any Hound, Terrier, Utility,Working, Pastoral (except Border Collie) or Toy Dog awarded three Challenge Certificates under three different Judges, provided that at least one of the Challenge Certificates was awarded when the dog was more than twelve months of age.
(2) Any Gundog which has fulfilled the requirements of 2.a.(1) and had obtained either of the following.
(a) An Award, Diploma of Merit or Certificate of Merit under the Regulations of the Kennel Club or under the Regulations of the Irish Kennel Club.
(b) A ShowGundogWorkingCertificatewhich conforms to the
conditions set out in the Kennel Club Regulations or the Rules of the Irish Kennel Club.

I've seen this so many times and often wondered about whether it was right that a puppy could have a Championship and then as an adult some fail to reach breed standard.
I know of several who are below the height for standard and some are just bad examples of the breed lacking type.
Maybe it's time for AKC and CKC clubs to explore a more exact system.

I think the biggest problem is the boys who get way overdone as adults. I personally think it's a bit disturbing when puppies win all the time at the specialties, but not adult dogs. So the question is - do they win because the adult boys are overdone, or is it because the nicest dogs finish young, so all that are "left over" to compete as adults are the "seconds"?

This is not specific to any particular dog! This is just an observation from going to recent specialties.

I have also wondered if many puppies are winning because they look more size-appropriate (more ideal per the standard) vs. their overdone adult counterparts.

I know some people value extremes for correcting things in their breeding programs, but I personally have a hard time with rewarding extremes with points or calling them Champions. A Champion should best represent the standard, not resemble the extremes of the breed.

I also feel a Champion should also have a good temperament and a solid work ethic. Unfortunately, there are no easy ways to ensure this but it would be ideal.

Or are they shown by a well known handler and the wins are just pure politics?!! Seen that more than I would like to. I would like to see those dogs compete with the adults in the large open classes compared to the small puppy classes and see if they can still win the points without the well known overpriced handler.

interesting question! How many of the ones that finish young do we see again! I have seen dogs move beautifully when they are young and get quite cloddy later.

I think that this issue is not unlike lots of other issues that seem to some, to be unfair, to pick a word.

I would prefer not to see a puppy win at a big specialty - when there certainly could be as nice an older dog there in competition.

For smaller shows, I don't have a problem with a puppy winning, if it is the best. So, there could be a time when a dog finishes very early in life, but it still wins under multiple judges.

If we were to say that all dogs must be 2 to receive their CH., why compete as a youngster? AKC would lose entries, that would not be popular. In addition, there is no guarantee that any dog that wins his CH. will pass OFA or Cerf Or Heart or ? Would we need those clearances to compete?

The ring is for competing on that day with what you have and if it is the best - so be it.

I agree.
The best dog on the day should win. You are judging dogs on the day, not 6 months from then. Anything can happen to the dog down the road be it good or bad. It's only the day of judging that should matter.

A championship might be awarded to a young dog who has not finished growing. When the dog grows, he often changes, sometimes for better, sometimes for worse. Then you might be left with an adult dog with a championship, who, if in competion, would not be worthy of points. I think the best solution would be to require one major win after the dog reaches maturity (an age as determined in the standard).

Showed a 6-9 puppy bitch at a major point show recently. She was awarded reserve winners. After the judge marked her book she said that she just loved my puppy but she just can not ever put a puppy up for points. I asked her if my puppy was the best bitch that day and her answer was yes.

Now, was that fair?

When I saw a puppy win WD last year at Potomac and another take RWD, I thought it was a political statement by the judge. IMO, he was sending the message that the labs in the US have just gotten too big to satisfy him. Only a puppy in the US (on that day, of course) fit his definition of a labrador.

I believe that if the youngster is picked by a judge, then, on that day, that dog was his or her most deserving. To limit a judges choices to a dog over 2 years is to reduce his/or opportunity to pick the best dog.

I think Jill should erase this thread. It's the same as the TVD thread, bashing and trashing the same dog, just in a different topic. What a shame, go people get a life.

That is absurd. Can we not discuss anything anymore without some "people" pointing fingers and whining that comments are all about "Me, Me, ME"? Get over yourselves and let the rest of us participate in good discussions. This is a legitimate topic as posted by the OP. Valid thoughts and opinions have been made. It would be wrong to pull a thread based upon the selfishness of a few "people" who can't see past their own pinocchio noses, and then pull some of the BS that has gone on here and at Jill's own home.

I'll add my 2cents worth to the mix.

If the AKC decides to limit the awarding of a championship title to a dog who has reached maturity (as defined in the standard), then a dog may rack up as many majors as possible while still a puppy. That way, he can win BOB at 5 specialities with 5 point majors, and nothing would limit any judge from awarding that puppy more. However,
one major win would be required after the dog reaches maturity in order for that dog to win his championship. Seems simple to me.

I agree.....

Seriously, this is a great discussion and is a totally separate issue than the other. This thread has everything to do with the trend toward puppies going up more and more at Specialties across the US.

I also felt as if the Potomac judge was making a statement by putting more moderate puppies up for WD and RWD with so many nice, mature dogs there. I have also seen a 6 month old bitch win a 5 pt major at a Specialty too. It was with mixed feelings. She was a STUNNING puppy, but she was a BABY, beating gorgeous mature bitches.

In every case I can't help thinking how that puppy will look in 2 or 4 or 8 years.

I love to see puppies win if they are more deserving than their competition, but would never breed to a CH puppy based on photos from younger days. That's the can of worms that gets opened. When a dog finishes so young, everyone rushes to breed to him. They want to have the first puppies from him. Like there's an expiration date on him.

I would much rather breed to a veteran dog if possible. One who has proven longevity. One who still looks good and moves well after 8.

That being said, I don't think an awesome puppy should be penalized by not allowing them to finish.

Let them have and keep the award they earned. Let them finish at 6 months, but where breeding is concerned, do research into what the dog looks like and moves like in a few years.

There are many dogs/bitches out there I would breed without a CH, and there are many CHs out there that you couldn't pay me to breed to.

I also have problems with everyone breeding to prelims. (General statement, not meant to point fingers at any particular dog) I just think that is asking for trouble.

Is there a time I would breed to prelims? Yes, I would if the bitch is old, it's her last litter, and the pedigree of the young dog is just what I am looking for.

But I have seen people breed 2 year old bitches to 12 and 15 month old dogs simply because they are the flavor of the month. I would breed a young girl to a mature stud and wait until the puppy dog grew up and had his final clearances.

MHO

In Iceland dogs simply can't finish their Championship title's until they are at least 2 years of age. In Iceland only BOB and BOS get the points. They can get a point when they are out of puppy classes which is at the age of 9 months of age, but they won't finish until they are 2 years. Here in Iceland dogs have to earn 3 CAC from 3 different judges and they have to earn one of these points after 2 years of age. Some youngsters can have over 3 CAC but if they don't earn one after 2 years of age they wont be able to become a champion.
I am in favor of this idea as I've seen puppies or youngsters that where gorgeous as puppies but didn't turn out as everyones hoped for as adults. Championship titles should not be easy to get and it sure isn't easy to get it in Iceland

Seriously?? You think it's easy to finish a dog in the US! I would love to show in Iceland! How many dogs do you have to beat again? Where I live, majors are very hard to come by.

If the purpose of dog shows is to evaluate breeding stock it seem the dogs that are rewarded with Championship titles are at least of age to be breeding stock. The methodologies used in Europe make more sense from this perspective.

The point of puppy sweeps is to recognize the best of the up-and-comers/future of the breed. It seems championship points should be focused on the best of the breeding stock. That is not to say puppies are not deserving of points, but ideally they would be fully developed adults when they finish to ensure they are worthy champions.

I have seen some very nice young dogs out there, but many young dogs are getting more and more substantial, to the point that they no longer look age appropriate - is the 6-9 class meant to exhibit 6-9 month old dogs that most resemble full grown adults or to truly exhibit Labrador puppies? Should extremes be rewarded or is this just promoting the trend to overdone adults?

Well I never said it wasn't easy to finish in USA, so you can breath in and breath out
And if you care to know dogs that I have to beat to win a point are like from 50 up to almost 80 dogs in each show So don't think you would have an easy win here

I can understand the view that the best dog on the day should win regardless of whether it is a puppy. Unfortunately, many deserve to win when they are 12 - 18 but don't deserve it when they are full adults. Why? Because they are overdone.

I think it is definitely valid to consider if it is a good idea to require that at least 1 major be won after 2 years of age. If one of the major purposes of a show is to evaluate and showcase breeding stock, then making that official decision (by awarding points) prior to seeing how that animal will mature seems contradictory to that goal. Don't we want to know what traits the dog will be potentially throwing to its offspring?

Maybe every show should have 2 winners, a puppy winner which would include up to 18 months, and an adult winner which would be over 18 months??? Both would be awarded points, but a puppy can never earn more than 2 points (no majors allowed) until they are over 18 months. Of course, the point schedule would have to be adjusted.

Maybe this would be too tough on bitches and who mature earlier anyway. Would it make it too complicated to consider that a bitch is an adult at 12 months and a dog is an adult at 24 months? I don't know.... just brainstormin'

I think that would be too complicated. There are so many other things to consider, that the CH. before a name, isn't the end all. Take a look at how some of the champions got their titles - look at the judges and the shows - weigh your decisions on who judged, what other dogs were there and a host of other criteria, before breeding, but I would not limit the way a dog can finish - anymore than the system that we have.

It wouldn't be any more complicated than getting your majors under different judges. AKC changes rules all the time. They used to require a CD with Q's earned under three different judges. You could have qualified under the same judge twice, and even though you may have won your class and gotten credit for the dogs defeated, that qualification would not count toward the requirment of "different judges" necessary for the awarding of the title. They changed that rule last year, and now you only need two different judges for your three qualifying scores.

It is true that you have to judge the dogs in the ring on the particular day. But, puppies grow. They do not all grow the way we want them to grow. If, as an adult, his conformation is not an indication of his ability to produce quality puppies, it makes sense to at least wait and see if the dog is truly deserving as an adult and an asset to the gene pool.

So if you say puppies shouldn't win championships because they change with maturity and may not be worthy as an adult, what about inferior adults who finish and that lack breed type? Face it, some of the gripes on here make no sense. What happened to minding one's business instead of telling people their beautiful puppies shouldn't be champions, especially if they are worthy? Both this thread and the Canadian Majors reeks of sour grapes. I see nothing wrong with winning puppies and Canadian champions. Can't we be happy for each other's success and stop tearing each other down?

What are YOU reading?

I see no sour grapes at all - just people trying to have a discussion. It would be nice to see a system that rewards breeders who breed for overall quality of breeding stock rather than breeding for show wins, because that is not the same thing. The obsession with winning and desire for a rapid ascent to the top seems to outweigh a good long term breeding strategy.

No one here begrudges a nice puppy a win - the question is whether or not puppies are really deserving of the title Champion given they are not fully developed.

Differing opinions have nothing to do with sour grapes.

Whether there are adult dogs lacking quality that finish is an issue for judges education.

I totally agree!

I agree 100% with No and Hildur
It seems to me that whenever some "people" want to derail a particular thread, they start these nasty campaigns and try to deflect the attention onto others, blaming them for being the schoolyard bullies. Hopefully, intelligent people can see through these tactics and put an end to them. These discussions are open, stimulating, honest, and interesting. This one certainly is. And what a breath of fresh air to enjoy. Open your windows, doors and gates and take a deep breath.

I know, who is that person. Talking heavy dogs, trying to turn the discussion into old news. I love to see a pup win at smaller show. Not at a big specialty where the older bitches look so good and the pup, just looks like a pup. That I do not understand. Then I wonder. Pups can change alot and like someone said for the good or the bad.

Personally I don't care which dog wins what. I am responsible for my own judgements on a dog/bitch and if they should be/how they should be, used in a breeding program. If a puppy finishes before it is one or two years old, all the more power to the owner, handler, and breeder.

Thank you Darcy! This is exactly how I feel.

Pups finishing is fine IMO because I don't breed to champions just to breed to champions. I look for pedigrees I like and know to be pretty clean. I have passed on several studs whose pictures are beautiful and whose wins are impressive because of known health or temperament issues.

I don't care which people are awarded for what. I do what my conscience tells me to and am not stupid enough to breed to the flavor of the month.

It is a dog show. The best dog on the day should win. I don't think it is appropriate for a judge to NOT put up a puppy because he/she envisions it being overdone as an adult. That would be the reverse of putting up a dog with no coat, thinking it will look better once the coat comes in.

I don't believe anyione is suggesting that a judge should do anything other than judge what is in the ring on the day. What I read from this thread is that some people are wondering if there should be an age restriction (as in many other systems) before the title of champion could be awarded. I know of dogs who have become AKC champions before the age of one and then go on to be disqualified as adults because they have grown beyond the height limits for the breed. A puppy may be forgiven for not having all his teeth in. Many adults are severley penalized for missing teeth. A puppy might look mature prior to one year of age and be rewarded, but as he grows and as an adult, that same dog would have a difficult time against his peers. I know of a number of people who like to show their nice puppies early just for this reason.

I am reading a pretty good discussion. However, I am also reading some snipiness in some of the posts by a few people still jealous from another thread. More subtle hints about a certain dog and/or his owner/breeder being a liar~which was never proven. Here is a direct quote by brdr1: "it would be wrong to pull a thread based on the selfishness of a few" people" who can't see past their own pinocchio noses, and then pull some of the BS that has gone here and at Jill's own home." Again not to open the other thread, but this the same sour grapes that led to the trashing of a breeder and her top winning puppy. That's what I was referring to. It's just sad to see others trying to tear others down because they have a personal vendetta. That's all I'm saying. And yes, some of the comments on this thread have taken personal snipes at others (even against Hildur).

On another note, talking about winning puppies, congrats to Shelah Frey for picking up another 4 point major with her pretty puppy girl, Mainland's Pembroke Phinny. She also went WB/BOS at the HDLRC. Both times from the 6-9 month class.

You don't quit do you? Can we please continue our discussion without you running off at the mouth. This is not the website argument between you and J, or your knocks of a well known, respected LT breeder and her dog. Things were nice and quiet here until you came back.

Stop pointing your finger at others and either discuss the topic or don't.

I also feel an age restriction for the *last* major *could* be a good rule. Dogs change as others have said. So, what if the big boy at 8 mo. then becomes a 26.5 in. in height, oversized dog later? People breed to the flavour of the month too early or to a photograph later. They wouldn't know he was that size if no longer shown after finishing very young would they? Especially if he was kept with the gates closed or in a satellite home.

Congratulations Shelah, I heard about your wins too! Way to go girl!

To SO

This is your 2nd post complaining about "jealousy", "snipiness", "lying", "selfishness", "sour grapes", "gripes", "trashing a breeder", "minding one's business", "personal vendetta", etc. It is amazing to see what you are writing, since I can't see these things anywhere in the thread but in your own posts. No one rose to take the bait the first time, hopefully, no one will be foolish enough to take it this time.

You can't see it because you and your other anonymous aliases and/or friends are the ones doing it. LOL. Knocks on LT well-respected breeders? You must have me confused witth some one else. I've never said anything that was cruel, mean or untrue about anyone.-unlike a few of you who go out of your way to cause trouble for others on this forum. You know; the ones who insight all out bashfests that will go on for days without moderator intervention. No I can honestly say I've never partaken in a personal all out warfare to trash someone. If you want to start something about someone who you think this might be, it will just refleect poorly on you. Those who have been personally trashed on here have developed thick skin. We all know where and who it stems from. We all know what they say is not true. And oddly enough, we just get stronger and make even more friends. Strange how that backfires on those who think they are so smart and try to cause trouble.

My second post complaining? No sorry was just putting in a little clarification since someone asked what was I reading. What did I strike a nerve? So this means I never quit because I posted a second time to answer a question? Me thinks you all doth protest too much. You are the ones who can't let go can you.

I am letting go. It's a gorgeous day outside and my dogs would love for me to take them some place fun.

Have a great day to all the nice people out there who do make the forum interestting, informative and worthwhile.

Why can't Jill just remove the offensive posts rather than taking down the entire thread? We try to keep the thread on track with the discussion when someone like "SO" comes on. Pointing out that these are So's words (that's why they are in quotation marks) doesn't seem to do any good. Very frustrating. I really have a much greater sympathy for Jill now!!!!

I think you just proved So's point. I was just reading this thread when I refreshed and saw virtually the same post by "wondering" that is now gone and then reposted by "xhibitr" taking his/her dig at So. I saw nothing wrong with So expressing his/her opinions based on their observation. In fact, So appears to be calling for unity and this type degradation to stop.

I think someone again is trying to make this thread come down like others have recently. I would normally say *please stop* but I can't given what we're dealing with.

Every time a post gets started *someone* thinks it's about them. Ridiculous already, they are giving themselves too much credit. We have better things to discuss. That was old news if it's what I think it is.

Does anyone have suggestions about changing a rule to have a dog finish later than a pup? What age should we consider them pups? If you don't agree, you don't have to and please voice your opinion why you feel that way. If you agree, some good ideas would be helpful. I feel it's time for the 2 to 4 year olds to have a chance against pups that are full grown at 6 to 12 mo.'s.

I recently read about an 8 year old stud dog that finished.

Is it such a bad idea to have the last major over 15 or 18 mo's for example?

No flames please. Voice your opinion so the thread can continue normally.

To wondering/xhibitr/et. al

You are 100% wrong. My sympathy for Jill is growing even greater.

There is merit to thinking about a system which provides a "maturity" provision before bestowing a championship. Is it practical or even within the realm of possibility with the AKC? I don't know.

Thanks for your ideas xhibitr, a system of maturity sounds great. This is right where this thread should be. Full of ideas! I'm impressed.

The discussion is about Labradors and how to continually improve the breed. This should be the goal of us all. This is not about tearing each other down.

I have seen plenty of 12 - 18 month olds who look beautiful. At first look, they deserve to win the show on that day and are exactly what I want my dogs to look like at 4 years old. If I owned one of them (I have never won a major out of the 12 - 18 class), I would be proud. But if they end up being overdone when they mature, I would want to make sure that I breed them accordingly.

I do not know the answer. But it is worth considering the general idea that the AKC procedures for awarding championship points maybe should somehow favor adults. Maybe it is just a cultural thing and judges should just consciously favor adults. But that doesn't seem fair to the younger dogs and their owners and handlers. That is why I like the idea of awarding puppy points and adult points and requiring that at least one major, maybe all, need to be won as adults.

Keep in mind, this idea includes that Puppy Best of winners gets points at every show. It would be fun as well as nice for 4 dogs(puppy bitch, puppy dog, adult bitch, adult dog) to take points home on any given day. It is just the puppies are not awarded majors even though it would be easier to accrue single points. Maybe Puppy Best of Breed and Best Opposite can go into regular Best of Breed and can take all the points if they win that.

Again, just brainstormin'. Considering new ideas can just be a fun thing to do. Every discussion does not need to be intense. I am sure the AKC has considered this a million times and it is not likely to change anyway. I am not sure how many other breeds are having problems with dogs looking beautiful as pups and ending up overdone as adults.

As of 2008 there were 84 countries which follow FCI rules for dog shows. I believe the AKC recognizes the stud books for all these countries, but I am not certain.

Under FCI rules, wins in a Puppy class - age 6 to 9 months do not count toward a championship and wins in the Junior class – age 9 to 18 months only count toward a "junior" championship. In order to be eligible for a Championship, the dog must be at least 18 months of age.

FCI member countries - as of 2008: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belgium, Belarus, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Gibraltar, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malaysia, Malta, Mexico, Moldavia, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Puerto Rico, Romania, Russia, San Marino, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Ukraine, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela

I do understand where some of you are coming from. It is your right to express your opinion about being in favor of a dog getting it's AKC Championship after age 2. While I can see your point, like others have said, AKC would not gor for it. I think Great Discussion is probably closest to having and idea AKC and other breeders would go for. And that is to have a" Junior Champion". I don't think since GD wants to include the 12-18 Months class that it should be called a puppy champion. AKC considers a dog a puppy only through the 6-9 & 9-12 month class. However, if that were the case, all dogs would have to be shown in their respective age class. I for one would not like to see that as I will put a dog in open at all-breed shows if I feel it is mature enough, if the show is a small show, or because I rather dislike showing in the 12-18 class.

Another thing to consider is the new Grand Champion title. Since this is a new title and takes a little longer to achieve, most of said dogs who became champions at an early age will come back as mature dogs in order to win this title. Heck one of the greatest producers in our breed at the moment just finished his GCH from Veteran's class! Talk about withstanding the test of time.

I didn't realize that the FCI (and all those countries who follow that) had a junior champion title. What a great idea and since that goes to 18 months, the name is a much more appropriate name than puppy champion.

I think having junior champions, regular champions, and grand champions would be an awesome progression. This certainly might encourage more people to show at all ages. The AKC would like this as well as being more fun for us. It is a good idea at many levels including the concerns or the OP.

But in the FCI shows, do junior dogs and adult dogs both take points away from a given show? I would like to know more details.

Personally, the general concept of being consistent with FCI always intrigues me. I think many people like the FCI standard much more than the AKC standard anyway.

I don't think there is a point to having a puppy or junior "champion". That puppy may be "all that and a bag of chips" as a baby, but unless he has what it takes to be a quality adult, and earn a "championship", that puppy has little or no value to me in a breeding program. According to the AKC, the purpose of a dog being a "champion" is to have had his conformation evaluated and "judged" to be an indication of his ability to produce quality puppies.

Puppies go through a lot of different stages before they reach maturity. No matter what the dog looked like as a puppy, if the adult dog is not of the quality to reflect the purpose of a "champion" as described by the AKC, the the fact that he earned a "championship" as a puppy has little meaning.
In this regard, the FCI system makes a good deal of sense.