I was wondering if someone could tell me who was the last yellow to win BOB at the potomac and has there ever been a chocolate win?

without going to Potomac website...my best guess would be yellow "Joss" in 2007
and chocolate "John Kaffee" in 2005

but maybe they went W/D vs BOB

I think you are right Bev...Joss.

What about CH Lubberline Chute? I am not sure on the year he won but he is definitely yellow.

I do think Joss was the last yellow - wasn't it Connie Barton that put him up?

BOB 2010: Big - Black
BOB 2009: James - Black
BOB 2008: Joss - Yellow
BOB 2007: Chance ( Ch. Copperstill Fors Fortis ) - Black
BOB 2006: Chute - Yellow
BOB 2005: Puffin - Yellow
BOB 2004: John Kaffe - Choco
BOB 2003: Dove - Yellow

and it was Connie that was judging in 2008.

Buzz went BOB in 2002 and he is yellow.

And don't forget Casey, Wiscoy Don't Sell Me Short, in 2000.

Well looks like more than we thought. But chocolate, not so much ? Nice to look back.

I am very interested in "Joss" what kennel is he located? Also does he produce nice offspring, from the one's here that have seen them?

Also couldn't find much on JOHN "chocolate" other than he is in china. Is he still available for stud there?

Thanks everyone for the replies

What yellow boy was brought back into the show ring after being in a pet home for many years? It was a Cinderfella story. His name is on the tip of my tongue. Maybe he took WD or BOW a few years ago, not BOB by the history above.

I just remembered, it was the 2007 Potomac. Name, Sure Shot Balloo but he was WD with a JAM finishing his championship at over age 10 1/2 at his next specialty I think.

Sorry, not BOB but a great, deserving win.

Joss is in Canada--Chablais Labradors

cinderfella = Ballou

Baloo's win was great and I was thrilled to see it - what a great dog and a great story...he was almost 8 when he won at Potomac. Got a Best in Specialty win at 10 years of age too

Did the handsome Baloo win BISS at Potomac or just WD?

"Just" winners dog at the Potomac LOL

Someone is being overly sensitive. You know exactly what the poster meant.

Don't ruin a beautiful story as you weren't even there.

I predicted that response when I replied. So congratulations you passed my test of "You are Crotchety!"

I certainly did NOT mean it like that. WOW. For Baloo to have done what he did, I am speechless. It certainly was breathtaking to see him do what he did.

However, the topic was BOB yellow, THAT is why I said 'just'

I did not take it that way at all. I thought you meant "just" WD meaning and WOW who wouldn't be so PROUD of that. WD at Potomac ! I would only dream.

Who really cares? You can look this stuff up. I think it is a cheap attempt to drum up more attention to the "Big P" and see if they can get more entries, more hype, more money! Has anyone wondered why there are no prepaid catalogs? Why ads are so much more expensive? Why the clinic fees are so high when the vets have much more reasonable fees at other clinics in the same time frame? Why everything is pay-pal? It's to get you to spend, spend, spend. There are a lot of fun specialties, and great dogs. I don't see the other specialties with their information thumbtacked to the top of the discussion board like anything and everything having to do with Potomac. Why doesn't every specialty have all their info stuck up at the top?
Just hype hype hype. Just like in years before, I'll bet the show chair will have a boatload of entries being shown. And I'll bet the same of the Judge's welfare person with dogs being shown. You would think that with all their members and all their money, they can give us lowly exhibitors an even break.

If you think that everything there is too expensive then don't participate. It takes a lot of money to put on a specialty and the club of course wants to make some money too.

I go to see all the gorgeous dogs in one place since I don't have the time or money to go to specialties in all the different states.

Well, actually I care. The Potomac is the best! I am not the only one who thinks so. People come from all over the world.

As for the catalogs, I can't imagine why the club would ask members to spend their time manning the catalog pickup table for a day or more. They would get less money and I am certain there are better things they could have their members do.

"I'll bet the show chair will have a boatload of entries being shown. And I'll bet the same of the Judge's welfare person with dogs being shown. You would think that with all their members and all their money, they can give us lowly exhibitors an even break."

I don't know why you chose to single me out (I am the judge's welfare person) but I have 4 personal entries, 2 old girls in veterans, 1 puppy and 1 gal in BOB. I would hardly call that a "boatload" of entries.

I have spent countless hours working already for the show and I will spend 6 days on my feet, running back and forth, taking care of the judges so they are comfortable.

I spend the same money as anyone else for hotel rooms, catalogs, entries and handling for the show, and my only return is I hope I do a great job and the judges come away thinking they were pampered and cared for unlike any other show.

Instead of griping, how about volunteering to help me (or anyone else) to make this a great show for everyone?

Bonnie

Any shows I know of, the judge's welfare person who is picking them up from the airport and wining and dining them does *not* then show *any* dogs under them.

Bonnie, you better brace yourself for many people complaining if you do it. It's plain wrong to show any dogs in your capacity.

Do what you want and you'll see how many will be highly disturbed. You do a job like that then you don't show your dogs under those same judges.

There is no written law, it's a moral obligation not to do both at the same show. If you want dogs of yours shown, you shouldn't have accepted the position.

AKC Guidelines



IV. Judging Behavior



C. Advise potential exhibitors not to enter under you when their presence or the presence of their dogs might give the impression of unfair advantage.

So is it correct for the exhibitor to put a judge in this uncomfortable position? No!

"Any shows I know of, the judge's welfare person who is picking them up from the airport and wining and dining them does *not* then show *any* dogs under them."

I am not picking up anyone at the airport, I am not wining and dinning anyone, I am running to buy muck boots if needed and keeping them in candy bars and such and being their alarm clock and making sure they stick to a schedule etc. I have helpers to go to lunch and dinner with the judges, none of whom are showing themselves either, who were kind enough to offer because finding someone who isn't showing themselves, or is willing to do any work, is mighty hard.

I am not showing any dogs myself. I have dogs entered, as I said, 4 of them, I asked if that was ok and I was told it was as long as I don't handle them and don't talk about them. In fact, in the past, according to what I was told, the people who worked the Potomac had their dogs entered and shown by others and not only was it considered ok, many of them personally knew the judges before hand so the judges knew their dogs specifically and well.

Believe me, none of these judges know me a whit as I have not shown my dogs except for twice in my life, years ago and I rarely go to dog shows, I don't know them from a hole in the wall, as opposed to many of the exhibitors who regularly have lunch, dinner and sometimes even breakfast , with the folks judging their dogs.

But I have discovered that I am fair game for criticism no matter what I do, which often is pretty much nothing. So fire away, over the years getting bonked in here has certainly thickened my skin to the noise.

Bonnie

This post wasn't to start trouble and im not even going to the Potomac. This being said I do respect the winners at the Potomac that compete against that many dogs and come out on top. I was just looking for a nice yellow boy and thought that I might could find one from some of the past Potomac winners.

If you have so many people doing the work of the judge's welfare position, why do you need to ask for more assistants?

You should check your facts before saying that the Judge's welfare people in the past have shown their dogs to the judges. When? Last year? The year before that? Before that?

It does not only look bad and give the wrong impression for the judge's welfare person to have entries under the judges they are serving, but improper. Anyone having more than the most casual contact with any judge before their entry is judged can be taken as trying to gain an unfair advantage over their competition.

Why do you think these guidlines were written?

AKC code of Sportsmanship:

• Sportsmen refuse to compromise their commitment and obligation to the sport of purebred dogs by injecting personal advantage or consideration into their decisions or behavior.

• The sportsman exhibitor declines to enter or exhibit under a judge where it might reasonably appear that the judge’s placements could be based on something other than the merits of the dogs.

• The sportsman exhibitor refuses to compromise the impartiality of a judge.

• Sportsmen spurn any opportunity to take personal advantage of positions offered or bestowed upon them.

c'mon people - you really think so little of the judges that they would give someone a placement just because they helped them out with arrangements during the week? It's difficult enough to get volunteers to begin with without excluding them from showing to boot!

"If you have so many people doing the work of the judge's welfare position, why do you need to ask for more assistants?"

I hardly have "so many people" I have two people and my husband to help. That's four people, including me, to cover twice that many judges in more than that rings. We will be pretty busy.

The judges are being picked up, and delivered back, by a car service. I assume none of them are showing their own dogs!! hahahaha

"You should check your facts before saying that the Judge's welfare people in the past have shown their dogs to the judges. When? Last year? The year before that? Before that?"

And so should you check your facts. I am so out of the loop I would hardly call what I was told, "facts" as I have no personal knowledge of anything about the inner workings of anything related to Potomac in specific or dog shows in general. I am just saluting, doing what I was told I should do and what was ok to do by guess who, present workers and past volunteers! Imagine that.

So much for agreeing to volunteer and work hard so others might enjoy the show.

I totally understand, no good deed goes unpunished.

Bonnie

It is no wonder people are so unwilling to volunteer for anything - instead of thanks they get attacked. People want a cream of the crop show, which requires a lot of work, but are unwilling to lift a finger themselves and want to point fingers at those who are willing to step up and make things happen. It is absurd.

If this (volunteers showing dogs) is the biggest worry people have in life, they are very lucky. If you cannot trust a judge to pick the best dog on the day, regardless of perceived politics, do not enter under them.

AMEN!!!!

I guess, if you took the job, you are expected to do the work. I would like a list of the shows that the judges welfare group showed their dogs to those judges whether it be husband or whoever. In the past 30 years I have not seen it. There is a lot of this crap going around anymore. What happened to honesty. The judge just might be embarrassed. just my opinion ellie

The person's name on the premium list who is in charge of judges welfare should not enter dogs at that show. The show chair at many shows also does not enter and show or have their dogs shown by others. The previous show chairs at Potomac did not enter or exhibit I believe. Some clubs do allow it as the chair does not have contact with the judges but the judges welfare person does. If your husband was the one taking them out then he should have been named to that position. As it is your'e name is on it. The right thing to do would be to cancel your entries to save the club embarrassment. Being on a show committee means your responsibility is to the club and the show. It is not politics it is ethics and sportsmanship.

So, what are clubs supposed to do when there are not enough willing workers to put their shows on? Everyone likes to go to the shows; very few are willing to devote the time and energy it takes to plan and run those shows year after year.
In an ideal world, a club with say 75 members would have 75 willing workers to share the load and rotate the responsibilities of show chair and hospitality chair. We all know that never happens. The same small group of members do the work year after year. If a club can sweeten the pot to get more folks to step up by allowing show chairs and hospitality chairs to show, then that's what they have to do. Our club allows it as long as those folks do not show their dogs themselves. If you think judges are going to be swayed to pick the chairs' dogs by this, I guess you don't have much faith in judges' integrity. And yes, I know stuff happens at shows on occasion that's questionable, but that's just the way it is. You shouldn't always assume the worst however. If you feel it's unfair, then skip that show.

This is so much nonsense. Across the pond, the judges and all the exhibitors socialize and enjoy each other before and after the shows.

Bonnie, you will never know how much you are appreciated, but I have to agree with you "no good deed goes unpunished". Please ignore the posts. According to AKC rules, only the Show Secretary cannot exhibit. So go out there and have fun and show those lovely dogs of yours. Thank you for your contribution to the LRCP and the breed.

Don't think I would bother to show my dogs if this is the outcome. If you show and didn't win anything, nothing would be said, but if you won. Hang on !! Sad but true. There are plenty of shows just show later. Sure you are appreciated as a volunteer, I am planning to attend, so thank you, for your time.

Oh sheesh, actually I was there, and further, I was joking, I just got a laugh out of the 'was her BIS or JUST WD'...not crotchety, just don't take everything so seriously. Sorry you had a bed bug bite you in the butt. Hope your day is better today.

Kate, Why should the exhibitors have to skip the Potomac specialty they plan for the year because *one person* doesn't want to follow the normal rules that at least 5 other members in a row have?

The past members that had her position, didn't have so many helpers that they only handed out candy bars. They picked up the judges from the airport and did take them for their meals along with other duties.

That is the job this member *accepted* but is still showing 4 of her dogs. She doesn't care that others are disturbed by the change in *at least* what 5 other members did in the past Potomacs in the same position.

They did not show their dogs to the judges they were having contact with!

For the past 5 consequtive Potomac shows at the least they all apparently knew it was improper to show under the judges they were involved with in this capacity. The members doing the same job that did not show under the judges included Jackie Mischou of Caerbren! Hats off to you Jackie, you gained even more respect for doing your job the proper way.

Why can't this breeder do it all herself, use proper etiquette and not show her 4 dogs while she has this position? If she must show her dogs then give up the position.

Remember, this is a full week of contact with the judges. It's not a 1 or 2 day show. It's a large show and as some call it, the most prestigious in the world. Contact with the judges will be constant.

I'm attending. Kate, don't tell me to *skip it* because this LRCP member is not following what the other club members have for at least 5 prior Potomacs. How about telling her to *skip it*?

I've said my piece. If you don't like it, look back at the history of at least, the past 5 Potomacs and see what others in her position did. They did not show their dogs!

One should assume that which ever dog the judge chooses is based on the dog's merit not on who owns it or is on the other end of the leash! If I ever thought otherwise, I would not enter.

Bonnie usually does not show her dogs. She hires a professional handler. So what's the gripe?

Exactly. There are a handful of Labs that most judges would probably recognize regardless of who was at the end of the lead. So most folks could hire a handler or have a friend show their dogs and the judge would be none the wiser. Unless someone blatantly tells a judge "my dog is in Open yellow with Handler X," I don't see any advantage here. And I'm betting that most judges would be disgusted with anyone trying to influence their decision so blatantly. Time to give judges some credit for doing the right thing and get the knot out of your undies.

Another way to look at this objectively would be to ask.."What if everyone" entered got to spend the same amount of time during the week with the judges as the welfare person does. It is absolutely improper to have a dog entered under a judge that you have "familiar" time with beforehand...especially days and days and days worth.

Well, unless "everyone" had their dogs with them during all that "familiar time," and then showed those same dogs to the judges, I don't see a problem or an advantage.
As long as people whose jobs putting on the show put them in direct contact with the judges don't show their own or anyone else's dogs to those same judges, no harm, no foul.

Then you don't know about all the commotion at Mid Jersey?

"Sweeten the Pot" - SO you ARE saying that there is an advantage to "volunteering" to be the Judges Welfare person................boy oh boy, doesn't anyone see the light here?

Club Specialties are to be beyond reproach and IF these types of things continue - you will find exhibitors from around the world and Canada who can't "volunteer" staying away. So how does that help the LRCP.

The LRCP is weakening it's reputation every year, as I have seen, by taking these types of steps and thinking that it will continue to thrive. I have heard many more complaints about their choices in the past three years, than ever before!!!! JMHO

I wasn't there but heard enough about it. Doesn't this person and her club realize if her dogs are put up, people that didn't know she has this position will be angry when they find out? They will feel after the fact, her and her *helpers* dogs were given an unfair advantage if they're put up deserving or not.

Someone needs to think before proceeding with this. I know I wouldn't be happy if her dogs won over mine after seeing her chitty chatty with the judges for 6 days.

[I have *no* dogs entered b/c of this, I made my final decision today.] I made my own decision
and won't blame her but I'm disturbed by the lack of action or stance on this.

Did anyone else see her dangle a young pup with broken leg over the gating to her handler a couple of years ago? She screamed out his name in middle of a Potomac class to show him a pink cast on the pup Handler rolled his eyes whether he knew it or not. It was wrong to interrupt a handler while showing a dog at any show and not his fault for it happening.

I'll be dogless for the Potomac by my own choice. I will enjoy the show except for the classes her owns & co-owns are in. That's the boat-load someone else mentioned. She *may not* be mentioning all of her co-owns that *might* be shown when stating only 4 dogs.

I'm not coming back on this posting. I'm also *disgusted*.

So basically those who are *disgusted* believe the judging panel is corrupt/corruptible and cannot make decisions based on the quality of the dogs? It is hard to believe that someone who provides transportation/candy/etc. has that much influence. Most judges know and are friendly with many of the exhibitors at shows and still manage to judge the dogs. Maybe those that are *disgusted* and who will not be showing their dogs over this situation would be willing to volunteer to help so that the person they are targeting is free to show theirs.

Please remove this thread.

Amen Kate!

I agree-Please remove this thread. It serves no purpose other than to inflame and throw mud onto others. I think some of you have gone too far when you start commenting that even the dogs that someone co-owns should not be entered. Good grief! How does that make sense?
Now the co-owners should not enter their dogs? Why?
Do not start trying to drag others into this that have no control over the situation.
Go hug your dogs and be happy!

I did not post the above statement (which someone anonymously attributed to me).

I quote directly from the only rule of the Wiscoy forum--in case some of you have forgotten it:

"This is a public Forum, and as such no disparaging remarks about other breeders and/or dogs will be tolerated. Any such inappropriate posts will be promptly removed and the offending poster will be banned from any further postings."

Many posts on this thread defame not only the honesty and integrity of a fellow breeder but also of well-respected judges.

So. Was there ever an answer about the last yellow to win Potomac's BOB?

With all the silly talk and requests for the thread to be removed there was never an answer that I saw.

TIA for a reply but I wasn't the original poster.

The answer is in the first few posts - CH Chablais Brookhill Joss 2008