Why do you suppose there is so much concern about putting FAT on our Labradors lately?

Isn't muscle on a sound structure the preferred goal any longer?

Because some dogs need more fat. That does not negate muscle on a sound structure. They work together. How much fat is debatable, but not the fact that a lab needs fat.

Besides being unthrifty or downright skinny, (ribs and hip pins showing) WHY would a labrador NEED fat?

Some people might say fat is needed for insulation in the cold weather, but I thought that is what their double-coat is for. I realize we don't want our Labs looking like Greyhounds, assuming that is what "Breeder" is referring to when he/she says "How much fat is debatable, but not the fact that a lab needs fat".

I am just concerned that new people are aspiring to the trend for overdone, fat, Labradors because that is what is being rewarded by some judges at Specialties.

For those of us that hunt with our dogs, a layer of fat under the skin is essential to insulate them in cold water during waterfowl season. The double coat helps, but a fat layer under the skin is the icing on the cake! And I'm not talking about outright blubber, but a thin layer......that is why proper Labradors have a rounded soft appearance; they aren't supposed to be angular with hollows and jut-outs.

Right, exactly. But, shouldn't you be able to look down and see a bit of a waistline when your dog is standing in front of you? Someone once told me that I shouldn't be able to see the ribs, but I should be able to feel them when I press on their ribcage. Is that still a good rule of thumb?

At certain specialties, particular judges seem to prefer a heavier dog. They like a dog with substance and a few extra #s. If I've heard it once I'ce heard it 100 tines "I gotta get some weight on my dog before showing to Judge Xyz or Show Abc."

Foreign judges dont like extra weight on a dog but these are Anerican judges. They like muscle too but want those #'s of extra weight too.

Then if the dog competes in hunt tests, JR, SR or MH they trim them down & muscle them up where you almost can't recognize the same dog.

A few rare judges will mention getting weight off an overweight dog to the handler but it happens less often then ever.

I fight Mother Natur to keep my dogs as trim as possible and muscled but not everyone feels the same way.

Wondering, you are right, they should have a bit of a waist. There is a trend right now in the show ring where people have their dogs and young puppies,(which really concerns me), grossly overweight. They are so obese I don't know how the judge can feel their bone structure. I wish people would get over it cause their dogs look awful and it is really hard on their joint health.

Boy, don't get me started! The standard says that dogs should be in working condition. Most of the dogs you see at a specialty could not work in the field in the condition they are in. I know, because I show a MH in conformation, and I have to put 15 pounds on him in order to show him, at least according to my handlers. He runs at 65 pounds and shows at 80 pounds. I'm giving up on conformation. It is too hard to yoyo back and forth weight wise. At 80 pounds he is not able to do a triple plus blind and walk away from the line in good shape. He does it, but it takes a lot out of him. I also am training toward his CDX. I won't jump him with that much weight. Insulation, my eye. That's a lot of insulation! I've been doing conformation, obedience, and field for 25 years. There are some judges who reward the fit dog, but usually they don't pull entries because everyone else has their dogs so fat. The field dogs here in Wisconsin go hunting without that blubber on them.

This is exactly why, although I am sure most of them don't know they are doing it for this reason. All they know is that they think the dogs look better.

Think about it.... fat hides length in the loin as it makes the dog deeper and wider, fat hides a straight shoulder as fat deposits on the chest give the illusion of more shoulder layback, fat hides a perceived lack of thigh as fat between the muscles makes the muscle group look bigger...

Most just want to pretend that their dog has more substance than it does (or needs to have).

I have to disagree about fat making a shoulder look more laid back. In fact fat will appear as a roll over straight shoulders. The more weight the bigger the roll is. A good judge is not going to be fooled at all by excess weight if the intent is to hide a fault. If they think the dogs look better heavy then they need to get a more objective point of view in my opinion.

It's not for nothing that most of them are called Pigadors.

I have a dog who quickly finished an AKC championship in strong competition while in working condition (mostly-it is hard to stay in working condition when the dog is not worked regularly and this dog runs at the MH level), so there are plenty of judges who do reward it. In fact, he received numerous compliments on his condition. There is no reason to put excess weight on a dog for shows - a nice dog is a nice dog and will be rewarded if everything else is there.

What you're discussing is the way it 'should' be. Unfortunately all judges aren't looking at the right end of the lead.

I've seen repeatedly, on the Central East Coast; a particular severely obese, black dog win when the other dogs in the class were in great condition and had proper conformation.

It's not just the breeders, it's the judges expectations too.

What I am discussing is the way it actually was for me. Are there judges who like a big dog? Yes. There are also judges who will only put up yellow, judges who like upright structure, etc. But overall I think a nice correct dog is going to be rewarded more often than it is not. I am not going to put weight on a dog just to try and win under a judge who likes BIG, and it has been completely unnecessary anyway.

I have seen and heard judges tell a competitor that his/her Lab was too fat on more than one occasion, even at Specialties. So, not all judges out there reward a fat dog.

In judging, it is very distracting to see a younger dog toting around a roll of blubber.

When i see it, I immediately think about the way the dog is conditioned or if conditioned. They look anything but athletic. Sporting dogs are just that, athletes. They need to be athletic and sound. Not chubby.

I feel the dog and immediately know if the dog is in condition. It is a shame to see. It not only looks so bad, it contributes to the dogs chances to develop joint issues.

It hides nothing.

You're right. I find no use for fat on a dog. Even if they have the best conformation they look horrible with more weight on them. An extra 2 to 3 #'s isn't a problem but over 7 #'s extra or more makes a big difference. I've seen that roll between the shoulders of plain old fat.

Some newer breeders don't understand that some Labs put on weight easily and don't all muscle the same as each other. I have a dog I swim daily in proper weather, has an acre of fenced in land to run on and still puts on weight easily.

At over age 3 it's easier but when 1 to 2 years, it was impossible to keep weight off and see muscle as well as today. Today is different thankfully.

There may be hope for the all around Lab yet! I'm glad to hear a judge commenting, and I agree with the idea that too much weight on a youngster hurts their joints. There are well made dogs that can move out and win without carrying extra blubber; some of them have been specialty winners in recent years. That being said, they don't show at field weight. A Lab does tend to carry a slight layer of fat and a layer of undercoat, but they sure shouldn't roll into the ring as some do!

My champion has been shown at field weight, but with really good muscle conditioning, his working weight is 80 pounds. He stands at just around 23". Out of training he has been as heavy as 90 pounds (although even then, no one ever described him as fat although that is a bit heavy for my liking) but no one would ever guess he weighed that much. He has very dense bone (as opposed to being massively boned)and even when not in tip top working condition maintains good muscle mass, which weighs more than fat. His ideal weight is around 86-87 pounds.

Every dog is an individual and people need to do what is right for their own dogs. I have never understood why anyone thinks a dog with fat is attractive or is indicative of "bloom" - I think a dog with good substance and good conditioning is the athletic dog described in the standard - nothing about the standard describes a "soft dog" and fat does not replace substance by any stretch of the imagination.