Sorry if this has been talked about before.

How do ya'll feel about that?
Showing your dog to the breeder who happens to be judging the show? I saw this happen recently and she put the dog she bred up and it just felt wrong to me. He was a nice dog so it's not sour grapes but I know if I bred a dog and I liked him and I was a judge I would probably put him up to it’s only human nature but it seems very edgy if you ask me. There were many nice dogs there and in fact I wasn’t even showing that day.

What do you think?

Did the judge/breeder know what dog it was? Are you sure?
*Could have been that the judge liked the type because they breed that type.
How old was the dog and how long ago did the judge/breeder sell it?
*If it was more than six months to a year later, I do not see the problem.
Who was showing the dog? Someone the judge/breeder knew?
*If the handler was the owner and it is the only dog that person owned, that is on the line for sure.

Everyone has to make their own decesions about what feels right in this case. I have talked to judges about this very issue and they felt that
if it has been awhile and
the dog has grown and
you have more than one dog,
they would not mind if you showed to them.

I would never have entered him.

the judge knew the dog well and is very close friends with the owner and knows the dog and handler very well as a friend too. Very tacky if you ask moi

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

Did the judge/breeder know what dog it was? Are you sure?
*Could have been that the judge liked the type because they breed that type.
How old was the dog and how long ago did the judge/breeder sell it?
*If it was more than six months to a year later, I do not see the problem.
Who was showing the dog? Someone the judge/breeder knew?
*If the handler was the owner and it is the only dog that person owned, that is on the line for sure.

Everyone has to make their own decesions about what feels right in this case. I have talked to judges about this very issue and they felt that
if it has been awhile and
the dog has grown and
you have more than one dog,
they would not mind if you showed to them.

I agree with you Nancy!!!!

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

I would never have entered him.

The same day this judge placed her other best friend and brother to this dog second place!

Correction not the brother but a dog sired by her stud and another best friend was WD.
Second place was a dog she bred and is best friends with owner.
In bitches WB was another best friend but not from her breeding. shaking head

In Sweden we have regulations that will stop this for happening.
As a judge I often get the question from puppy byers if they can show under me, and I say offcourse not!!!
And if I had a dog of my own breeding in the ring I would excuse that dog...
But I can also see a situation where a dog has changed owners without the knowledge of the breeder and with the new owner comes in to the ring..!!???
Not all breeders keep total track of the puppies...
Pia

Good for you Pia

in poor taste....JMHO

I went to a show where I saw in the catalog before judging had started that one of the bitches that was entered had been bred by the judge. I asked the AKC Rep if this was allowed and he said that technically it was allowed, but that the AKC really frowns on it, and I noticed during the judging that the Rep was watching. I heard later that the judge got alot of flack about it from the AKC. In my opinion it is wrong, wrong, wrong.

I didn't even show under a judge who owned the sire of my dog. I just don't want to put anyone in that position.

If the AKC "frowns" upon it then they should change the technicality. While I agree that showing under the person who bred your dog is inappropriate, it seems to me that the AKC rep in this case was out of line.
Dawn

in finland its not possible either. as my daughter-in-law became a finnish kennel club judge, labs co-owned by my son, all were changed into my ownership as well, so she is free to do her judging without any problems, and i´m perfectly fine with that.
ritva

SECTION 13. No judge or any person residing in
the same household with a judge shall exhibit or act as
agent or handler at a show at which he is officiating as
judge and dogs owned wholly or in part by such judge
or any member of his household shall be ineligible to
be entered at such show. Subject to the foregoing,
members of a judge’s immediate family as defined in
this section who no longer reside in the same household
may enter or handle a dog at a show if the judge is
not officiating over any competition, including a group
class or Best in Show, for which the dog is entered or
may become eligible.
No entry shall be made at any show under a judge of
any dog which said judge or any member of his immediate
household or immediate family has been known to
have owned, handled in the ring more than twice, sold,
held under lease or boarded within one year prior to the
date of the show.
For the purposes of this section, the members of an
immediate family are: husband, wife, father, mother, son,
daughter, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, sonin-
law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister -in-law.
The above will apply to judges of sweepstakes or futurities
held with licensed or member shows exactly as it does to
judges of regular competition at shows.

Thank you to "no name" for posting the official statement about judges and dogs in the ring that they may know, etc.
I had never read that and found it quite interesting.
Now I know why a certain handler I know never shows to certain judges. He said that it would not be proper since he had bred to the judges dogs and had shown dogs for them before they were a judge.
Maybe I will go read some more of the rules and regulations on conformation showing.
I learned something today.
Thanks!

Why shouldn't the AKC rep say, as a way to educate his listener, that it's not well thought of and not good practice?

Our All Breed KC (Langley KC) has distributed the AKC rule book to each and every club member. Our Club AKC rep regularly reviews sections at each meeting. I have shown long enough to have permanent fur on all of my clothes, and I was embarrassed to find that things "I THOUGHT" were in the rules actually were not! Learning all the stuff in the book was more interesting than I thought it would be.

I would consider this to be bad form - there are plenty of situations in dogs as well as having nothing to do with dogs where people think if there isn't a written rule against it then it's just fine to do it... anything goes. There are laws, and there are rules, and then there's ethics which are generally not tightly documented. You may have heard this before, but if you don't want to see what you did spread out on the front page of the NY Times, or leading the ABC Evening News, then you probably shouldn't do it. Then again, there are some people who simply have no shame....