I have been looking at labradors for about
a year now. Someone recommended this
forum to me. Could someone please
tell me the difference between AKC and
UKC champions.
Is one regarded better than the other?
Help would be appreciated.

Different standards, UKC is more lenient.

Don't want to get into an argument over this and this is my opinion but the quality and quantity at AKC shows is at a much higher level than UKC.

New Buyer - UKC does not allow paid handlers to handle the dogs, so titles and championships are put on by the owner or family. UKC looks for different things, they like functionality. An AKC championship is much more difficult to obtain than a UKC one. There is nothing wrong with a breeder who shows both, I know of many reputable breeders who do so. One thing which I would be sure of and that is that the parents are AKC registered, if they aren't, one would wonder why. Some people live in an area where there are more UKC shows than AKC, so they may choose that venue. Some of my dogs are registered with both, but I've never shown UKC as the AKC titles mean more to me. A UKC championship is relatively easy to get, you only need a few dogs in the ring for competition. This does NOT, however, mean a UKC breeder isn't reputable as they still most likely do clearances (Make sure hips/elbows/eyes/EIC is done on parents!) and the UKC breeder gets their dogs out into competition. They may just not like showing against a professional handler, etc. There can be many reasons to choose UKC, but it isn't as reputable as an AKC title. One weakness of UKC is that they'll give full registration to an AKC dog with limited registration, that's questionable at best ethically - the breeder didn't want that pup bred.

The UKC stud book which maintains the pedigree and registration information of its dogs is not recognized by the AKC, or by most, if not all other nations' registering bodies, nor by any FCI affiliated breed club any where in the world.

I have been showing in AKC conformation for over 30 years and entered a UKC show about a year ago. In my opinion, a UKC championship is rather meaningless. To become an AKC champion, a dog must acquire two majors, which means prevailing over at least 15 other dogs of the same sex in most of the US. That'll get you 6 of the 15 points you need. To get the championship you can pick up the other 9 points one at a time, but you have to have competition to get even one point.

For a UKC championship you need 100 points, but you can get those just by showing up, as you get points for winning a class and for going the equivalent of winners dog even if there is no competition. You do need 3 competitive wins, but there need be only one dog in competition. At one of the shows I attended there were no other males competing, while at the other there was a single other dog - pretty much pet quality. There were two shows that day, and we went WD in one of them. My boy accumulated 60 points and had one competitive win- about halfway to the championship after beating only one dog. If the dog had been there the next day and we had beaten him twice, we would have had our championship, beating only that one dog.

My boy has 7 AKC points, not quite halfway to his championship. I estimate that he has beaten 30 dogs to earn those points. He has won classes with 7 or 8 dogs in them many times and not gotten any points at all. I hope that gives you some idea of what the difference is.

Another difference- AKC judges go for judging credentials one or a few breeds at a time. Most Labrador breeders judge only Labs and a few other breeds like Goldens or Chessies. UKC judges judge every single breed! In which venue do you think the judges are best informed on breed type and the standard?

There are some areas of the US where UKC shows are more popular, so the title may be more meaningful. The Grand Champion title requires competition with other champions and is more meaningful.

We started in UKC to learn the ropes and get 'our feet wet' years ago. We have always shown both UKC and AKC. But to answer your question directly, it is much more prestigious and respected to obtain a AKC CH title. I do not think anyone could ever debate that. The UKC is a great way to get my dogs out, no fancy bells and whistles, no professional handlers, and just HAVE FUN. A fabulous venue for my puppies.

The UKC titles I get are for ME... because I enjoy the people and the atmosphere. But since I took the time to do something with my dogs and achieve an award, I display these titles on my website.

The United Labrador Retriever Association has an upcoming UKC Labrador Specialty in April. I invite those in the area to come check it out. You may be surprised what you see there and you might just have some fun!
http://ulra.net/Upcomingevents.html
or
https://www.facebook.com/events/397324727067633/

Thank you so much for all of the incredible enlightening information. It will certainly help me make my choices much easier. Thank you again.

I show in both. One does not mean more to me than the other. I have had dogs who have done well in AKC in "prestigious" AKC shows who did not find it easy to get a conformation championship in UKC. UKC emphasizes dogs who are shown in working condition.

Professional handlers can only show their own dogs in UKC so no advantage is given to the person holding the lead. Concern about bias in judging is greatly diminished in UKC, resulting in a more convivial atmosphere. I do not understand people who complain bitterly about the "politics" of AKC but still contend that the titles are more reputable or prestigious than UKC.

In many breeds UKC adheres more closely to the original "look" and function of the breed than AKC, and leaders in those breeds have resisted inclusion in AKC as a consequence. UKC President Wayne Cavanaugh has been giving a fascinating lecture for Judge's Education seminars about how breeds such as the Irish Setter have changed to suit fashion over function. UKC is currently undergoing rewriting of breed standards to emphasize the original function of breed and avoid rewarding fashion extremes.

UKC has made a great effort to reward dogs who compete in both performance and conformation sports. In terms of difficulty, many UKC performance venues are significantly more difficult than AKC. UKC offers more national rankings for sports than AKC does.

In UKC dogs who can compete successfully in both performance and conformation in the same show can earn recognition as a Total Dog. Those who can earn titles in 5 different areas (conformation, obedience, rally, agility and weight pull) will be recognized as a Super Dog. And UKC offers titles in a variety of sports that dogs love such as Nosework, Dock Diving, Lure Coursing, Weight Pull, etc.

In both performance and conformation many well-regarded judges judge both AKC and UKC. I find it fascinating to see what they reward in each
ring. I am particularly impressed by the amount of time that UKC judges might devote to their work and the way they manage to maintain a good attitude and patience with beginners. I always start my puppies in UKC because I can rest assured that they will not be traumatized by the judging.

AKC is not "versus" UKC. They have co-existed for over a century. Many staff who work at one once worked at the other. They are registries, and they offer different and complex venues to people who register their dogs with them. One does not determine what the other does. Both have ethical standards and expect judges and exhibitors to operate under those standards.

Alot of us have shown in both. Good things about both. UKC alot of fun without the professional handlers. Judges don't just look at faces instead of the dogs. Nice dogs in both. Just pick the right breeder, UKC or AKC some bad in both, some good in both. Asks around.

I have shown in both. When I first started showing I did UKC shows due to it being a much more relaxed atmosphere, friendly exhibitors and no professional handlers. I found UKC was the place to get younger puppies accustomed to the sounds, smells and sights of the dog show world. They can also have their first experience in the non licensed classes at 14 weeks of age. Many of the judges are also AKC judges. I have found the UKC judges are more apt to explain what you need to do to better exhibit your dog, as well as why they did or didn't put your dog up. I personally feel as long as you are doing something with your dog you both enjoy it should not matter which venue you choose to do so in.

Try both venues and make your decision yourself. Enjoy and love your pooch while doing it.

I interpreted the OPs question as dealing with how to value a championship earned in the two organizations, possibly titles advertised by breeders, not on how to compare the benefits of participation in the two venues. If the shows I went to are typical, (and I was told by exhibitors with more experience in showing in UKC that they were typical), then an AKC title means a lot more than a UKC title. As for the benefits of participation, you need to have more time on your hands than I do to enjoy showing in UKC shows. Admittedly there were two shows on the same day, but because the order of judging is not announced and because day-of-show entries are taken, you have no idea when you're going to be in the ring. I had to arrive at 8 or 9, and I didn't get in the ring until almost 5 for the first judge. I didn't even stay for the second one - I'd had it!

I do UKC here in Colorado, and there are a few clubs that run very slowly, but that's nothing to do with UKC, it's due to club problems (limited people to run the shows etc.) Yes, they ARE all day events, but you plan for them. I have put in from 7am-5pm easily. But it's also because the conformation rings will wait for the performance folks to finish...in our area, so many do everything with their dogs. Last UKC show I had the same dogs in conformation, obedience and rally.

My dog finished its AKC CH in hard working condition (field) and also earned a MH title. This dog went from show to field without issue, so I would say AKC also rewards dogs that compete in multiple venues. While this dog also participates in obedience and other dog sports, my expectation is that Labradors are built as a functional retriever and meet the breed standard as such. I think it is great that the Labrador has the biddability to compete in multiple sports (and many conformation dogs do - every dog in my household is certainly expected to work) and expect them to be structurally balanced and properly angulated so that they can do so without undue stress on their bodies, but I would not expect them to be built specifically to compete in agility or lure coursing something like that.

There may be several styles of Labrador, but breed type is based on the job for which they were bred, not misc. dog sports. Whether a Labrador can compete in a weight pull is not relevant to its breed type and I would not want a judge to take that into consideration when judging.

In judging a dog's conformation a UKC conformation judge does not have to take into consideration in what other dog sports a dog is competing--any more than an AKC judge does. A conformation judge uses the breed standard for judging conformation. If dog adhere to the breed standard and are shown in working condition, they are able to compete in multiple sports in the same day. Nothing about the breed standard prevents a dog from competing successfully in obedience, rally, lure coursing, weight pull, etc.--if the dog is in working condition.

In fact most AKC competitors in both field and conformation speak openly about the fact that they add or subtract weight to their dog so that they are able to compete in field and conformation. As a result in AKC, most dogs do not usually compete in both performance and conformation simultaneously.

Even if an exhibitor in AKC wants to compete in multiple sports in a dog, they would find it extremely difficult to do logistically. Competing in even both conformation and rally at the same show site is devilishly difficult logistically in AKC. Doing so isn't easy in UKC. BUT UKC judges in both conformation and performance sports in UKC adjust ring times so that dogs who have ring conflicts are able to compete in these sports. In fact, I have seen dogs compete in multiple sports on the same day in UKC.

It also takes a special kind of dog and human to go from one sport to another in the same day. Mentally and emotionally both dogs and people who compete in several kinds of sport in a day must train differently and with more focus than dogs who can only alternate what sport in which they compete (as in AKC).

I certainly regard UKC's Total Dogs and Super Dogs as far more worthy of recognition and praise than dogs who can only compete in conformation in a trial. And I am thankful to have a venue in which these Total and Super Dogs are recognized for the beautiful athletes that they are.

It absolutely is possible to compete in several sports in AKC on the same day. I routinely show dogs in conformation and obedience at the same show. Jake once got a WD in conformation, finished his rally title, and got a leg on his CD on the same day. He has run in a MH test one weekend and gotten a conformation point the next weekend. But the pro I used to try to get his majors made me put 15 lbs on him for conformation. Never again- it wasn't worth it. He got most of his points in working condition.

Seems like it might be best for someone new to showing and who wants to learn to handle their own dogs would be best to start in UKC. I have heard many times that a lean, working condition dog would need to gain weight in AKC to be competitive. But you can never be certain if that is just something that has been passed along without merit for years or maybe the dogs shown in lean, working condition were not great representatives of the standard. How many have attempted to show a dog is lean working condition to know if it really affects how the dog is judged. I have also heard weight helps cover up flaws, so that could contribute to dogs with less fat not doing as well in the ring.

In my opinion AKC is the real deal. A UKC champion title can be earned in 2 days, not a difficult thing to get. You may only even compete with a couple other Labradors, and they could be pet quality.
Compare AKC to UKC like the NFL to HS Football. Good for practice but if you are interested in excelling in your sport you will need to move into the big leagues.

Maybe you manage to compete in multiple events in AKC, but I have had incredible difficulty doing so and have missed classes because of trying. I've had to run back and forth between buildings hoping that I could do it and ended up worn out. No judges offered to do more than put me at the end of the rally or obedience queue. And I still missed a class. More power to you, if you are able to do it.

I can only recall one time when I missed a class because of a conflict between obedience and conformation. We had qualified in the individual exercises and had a 192 going and the conformation judge was incredibly slow. The obedience judge would not wait. And yes, the rings were in different buildings. Part of it is to choose shows at which the rings are not too far apart.

Hurrah for you, Peggy. I'm glad you are able to make AKC work for you.

I understand the original question, and how this thread has gone in an AKC vs UKC direction. There is no doubt that an AKC show title is much harder to obtain no matter how it is done. But if I was shopping for a puppy I would put a much higher value on the health clearances the parents have obtained rather then the titles.

and a good solid temperament to go along with good health!

Titles can be bought.

If the breeder is doing UKC that's better than doing nothing! I wouldn't buy a puppy from a breeder that does nothing with their dogs but breed them.

There is at least one Labrador breeder who was suspended from akc for 10 years for an animal cruelty conviction that just switched all her registrations to UKC so she could carry on with her puppy mill practices.
Anyone see anything wrong with that? UKC was happy to have her

In the interest of fostering understanding and cooperation, here is a link to UKC's official website. www.ukcdogs.com

The face page contains short videos from the recent Gateway Nationals and a particularly interesting editorial from Bloodlines about changes in breed standards to preserve the health and functionality of purebred dogs called Your Role in the Future of Purebred Dogs.


http://www.ukcdogs.com/Web.nsf/News/YourRoleintheFutureofPur12192013040824PM

You would have credibility if you posted your name.

It's only an opinion, credibility isn't necessary.

I don't know to whom you were directing this comment (innuendo) about UKC and AKC championships. I came to UKC long after I had my first AKC championship, my second AKC championship, my third AKC championship.... I know many other people who have come to UKC after AKC success because they like the UKC emphasis/rewards for dogs who are beautiful and talented in performance sports. I know many who have left AKC because of the "politics," not just at the ring level but at the club and administrative level. In fact, I know professional handlers who show their own dogs in UKC because they also like the atmosphere. I've seen quite a few talented and beautiful dogs whose owners advertise both their UKC and AKC titles in the Quarterly. Many quite well-regarded judges from AKC also judge UKC. Wayne Cavanaugh, president of UKC, was an AKC employee at one time. So was the head of the UKC Events department.

My hope is that those of us who love the sport of purebred dogs will simply rejoice in the beauty and accomplishments of our dogs without petty comparisons and ignorant side-taking.

Kate, how would you like it if you sold a pet quality puppy on limited registration and the owner registered it with UKC and then bred the hell out of it or sold those puppies to puppy mills or a silver breeder?

I find that careful screening and education of my puppy buyers (who usually become close friends) is the best deterrent to inappropriate breeding--or any other inappropriate care of puppies.

Limited registration is a relatively new approach to help breeders. In fact, I do not find that limited registration is a terribly effective strategy for limiting breeding. Those who bother to register an AKC limited registration with UKC may be the "good ones" because UKC has requirements for registry and offers conformation and performance venues to those who register their dogs with UKC. There are many other registries with nearly no requirements and no competition venues available to dogs who are registered. In fact, most of the public who buy from mills would rather have a "rare" dog than a registered one.

Again, nothing substitutes for screening and education of puppy buyers.

If you have a problem with the effectiveness of limited registration in limiting breeding, you need to address this problem with the organization who thought it would work--AKC. But the problem does not lie in the rule or in the alternative organizations who will register the puppies, the problem lies in people who do not want to be limited or follow the rules and the people who buy puppies from those people for a whole variety of poor reasons.

No voluntary organization will ever be able to limit people who do not want to be limited. Having one more organization support AKC's rules will not make AKC's rules even a little bit more effective.

As it stands, I screen and educate and maintain long-term good relationships with my puppy buyers. I register all litters my puppies with both UKC and AKC so that they can participate in canine sports and education. I encourage all my puppy buyers to participate in further canine and human education. I enable them to have great relationships with their dogs and be part of clubs and training. Works for me.