http://slimdoggy.com/no-wonder-a-lab-has-never-won-at-westminster/

As much as i love my fellow breeders, and would love to be in the spotlight myself, there is truth to the above article. Additionally, how much bone is enough? I know some people that are breeding to bigger and bigger dogs to get bone so they can compete……Honestly, where are we heading with this? I have a new puppy that i have to keep "fat" so he will develop more bone! what about the health of the puppy? How does that fit in? Some of the heads i'm seeing are…i hate to say it…grotesque! Sigh. I've been in the breed for almost 20 years as a small time breeder, and with what i'm seeing, including such an increase in TVD, i really do wish I was in another breed……..Are we really in this for the best interest in our dogs? How does being fat benefit them? They aren't sea otters, living in the ocean…….sorry to rant…….but it's sad, IMO….

I will start by saying that she is a lovely girl. However very over weight and jiggling around the ring is not pleasing to the eye.

Years ago one of my girls got reserve winners bitch at a specialty. The judge when handing me the ribbon said, I want you to know she is the most fit dog at this show. She is what the standard is describing in breed type and function. I was so proud of her! I think as breeders we need to think of these dogs functioning in the field. I am not talking needle nosed weasel retrievers, either. There are a several typey CH MH out there. So dogs don't have to be ugly to hunt!!!!

My message to the blog: "Unless you've had your hands on these dogs, you have no clue about the dog's conditioning. These dogs are beautiful representatives of the show bred Labrador. I can see a tuck in the flank behind the rib cage which if you're looking over the top, they would have a "waist". I saw photos of the BOB winner over the top and from behind during benching and I assure you she is not fat. Labs, IMO, should not be ribby, they should have a thin layer of fat over the ribs to help insulate from icy waters when they retrieve. There is a huge difference between the show and field Labradors. A gap that has been widening from the 1950s. Field trials became more and more competitive and therefore the weedier, taller and lighter got up dogs were faster and would win. Likewise to win at shows and since the Specialty shows have become more popular, breeders hold more prestige by winning a specialty, under a breeder specialist than at Westminster. To stand out in the show ring, they bred Labs for more head, more coat, more substance and more bone. We've also bred to improve shoulder layback and improve fronts as well as improved rear angulation. We've bred only dogs that pass OFA hip and elbow clearances as well as a handful of other genetic disorders known to the breed. We now have several DNA test for specific diseases so that we can breed that out of the breed. Oh and the jiggly underbelly? She's an older bitch who has a litter or two and that is just flabby skin left over from lactation. Last year's winner, another lovely black bitch, is also an English Champion and works in the field too. I have had my hands on her and she's amazing! 2012's Cruft's BOB and Gun Dog Group 2 was an American Labrador. So to judge a dog on a picture or on TV (which adds 10 pounds) and say it's fat without putting your hands on the dog is ludicrous. The judges put their hands on the dogs and apparently were happy with their picks."

And with that said, I do tend agree with the OP where does it stop? When my specialty winning bitch stood next the winner the next day, that bitch was twice as wide as my bitch and with twice the bone and coat too. How much is too much?

It stops when people stop breeding for big Specialty wins under judges who like a heavily built dog and start breeding to the standard. Stop breeding for the oohs and aahs on Facebook and other sources. Half of the people clicking "like" have no idea what a correct Labrador is. I see pictures of stacked puppies with a ton of bone but poor shoulders and upper arms that people think are wonderful because they do not know what good structure is, and a ton of bone and coat seems to be the mantra of their mentors.

Have hands on experience (rather than theoretical knowledge)with what this dog was bred to do, because that should always be taken into consideration in breeding programs.

A dog can be fit and still have a wonderful head, coat and tail. And by fit I mean in condition with muscle tone and stamina (even dogs of correct weight can be unfit). A trot around the show ring should not wind a dog. With a few exceptions, dogs shown in the sporting group are shown hard and fit and look active. The Labrador is more often than not shown soft (fat or not). I think this has far more impact on why this breed does not do better in groups than any other excuse people like to give. And if your dog does not work there is no excuse at all for even having a small layer of fat as it is not necessary for working in a theoretical sense. Massive bone is also not necessary in this breed, nor is it part of the standard. A solid dog is not equivalent to massive. Which is why I have never understood people who brag about their 90-100 pound 6 month olds - why would they think that is something to be proud of? Obviously weight is important to many given how many people talk like this.

There are fit typey dogs who do win fairly easily, but they are few and far between because people are like sheep and will do what they are told to do to win, rather than what is the right thing to do. Lead by example and others will follow.

All of that said, I do think it is inappropriate to provide unsolicited opinions of specific dogs on the internet. Would you want pictures of your dog posted and critiqued like that? Everyone loves their dogs and has a right to show them to obtain a judge's opinion. That is the only opinion they asked for.

Much as I admire the winners, if they lived in my kennel the woud have to lose a few pounds.

Shame on the two pictured dogs owners for presenting them not in working condition.


Romeo from Italy is shown the way Labs are supposed to look. And I believe Romeo is not slight of build.

Yes, if Romeo was at Westminster he would have had a good chance to be top dog.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS2dUCZhmcs

Romeo is just fantastic. He has showmanship.

Everyone has their own opinion - based on what the judge was doing don't think he would have made it past the first cut. BTW - this was an all breed judge.

IMO, that judge should be reprimanded for putting up the FAT dogs she did. This IS a sporting dog w/ a function. What message are we sending to the general public? My own vets (one of whom WAS a lab show breeder) constantly complain about overweight labs. What you see is what you get.... Westminster etc are not good examples anymore. :(

It's funny when you can tell who's responding anonymously ;)

All of the dogs in the final lineup were lovely and I congratulate their owners, breeders and handlers!!

Before a big show, I never hear, "I need to get my dog into condition or increase muscle mass". Not in this breed. I hear all the time from breeders that they need to put weight on a dog to show them, especially at specialties. They often post on chat lists asking for quick ways to do so. Many are long time successful breeders. Many people use weight as a measure of the quality of the dog, posting things like "he is an incredibly substantial dog, weighing in at 100+ pounds", as if this is an attribute. Weight should not be a measure of quality, but the way people advertise it, one would believe it is, and this just encourages novices to follow suit. Weight and substance are not the same thing. And there is something as too much substance, even without the weight, which is subjective but many are really pushing the extremes and considering that ideal. Solid bone with good muscle tone provides the substance required for a working retriever, not weight. So if weight does not equate to breed type, then why do so many people keep their dogs heavy? It serves no functional purpose, especially for many of these dogs who have never worked a day in their life. Comments are made all of the time like "Even though overweight, she is still typey and deserved the win". If that is the case, she would have been even more typey and deserving if she were fit. A lot of these dogs ARE lovely underneath it all, but wouldn't they be even lovelier (and healthier) if they were fit? How does taking weight off a dog diminish breed type? They either have it or they don't.

Enough is enough.... Did you breed to Romeo or something? Surely his real owners wouldn't do this.

Another article: http://www.petconnection.com/2014/02/15/fatlab/

I think using the example of Romeo and the Crufts video is a good explanation of body condition.

Why?

You can actually see his ribs in a couple of parts of the video as well as the muscle definition in his thighs. Also his bottom line is correct. He is a perfect example for newbies to understand balance. He has quite a bit of air under him. His legs are neither too short or too long.

Many field breeders would considered Romeo fat. But for Show breeders this is how one should show your your dogs.

Romeo reminds me a lot of Receiver of Cranspire. A traditional English Labrador. You may respectively disagree. He forever changed American Labs. An Italian Labrador may once again bring balance back to the breed.

" I hear all the time from breeders that they need to put weight on a dog to show them, especially at specialties."

Wow! That says it all. I have heard those exact words, coming out of my very own mouth.

It is sort of funny being able to identify who is posting anonymously...hahaha

Anyway, I just want to say that I was mentored by an all breed person who drilled "conditioned" dogs into my head from day one. I am proud to show my dogs and watch the judges faces when they put their hands on my HARD dog. There face is hilarious...its like they say "I haven't seen a dog this fit in a long time" and they smile...

They need to have bone, substance, and good ribspring, but NEVER be overdone, and their topline should never roll...I must say I see over 50% of the toplines in the ring ROLL on the go-around...its really pathetic.

Ever hear of a treadmill, people? Or a peanut? How about getting fit yourself, and hike/walk with your dog? Use a harness to pull some light weight, as well. Feed them lean diets, and don't pile on carbs just for weight purpose. Lots of protein, greens, fruits, digestive enzymes, probiotics...Unfortunately, most Americans don't have a clue how to eat and be healthy themselves, let alone apply that knowledge to their dogs...such a shame.

Okay, the harness for me ? The fruit for my dog ? Am confused ? I hate skinny Labradors also. Healthy ? if you say so. Just let it go. Love the type you like and leave others alone. Not your business really. Really tired of hearing opinions on others nice dogs. The winning girl at Westminster was beautiful. Don't have a clue who else you are talking about and don't care. If you don't want a show dog, don't get one.

Have any of you taken a minute to think that this is someone's beloved pet? The nasty remarks are getting really out of hand :( I was not at Westminster, but watched the video and this particular judge sent many beautiful dogs out of the ring.They were not her ideal Labrador. She was hired to pick her idea of the best dog on the day, and that is what she did. If you have a problem with her choice, send your nasty letters to AKC. Be sure to include your name, not some fictional name that you can hide behind. Lastly, since only a sweet Labrador could love someone capable of such meanness, I suggest you go hug your Labrador and maybe, just maybe, some of the love and acceptance of your dog will rub off on you.

I posted this on my FB wall and think it needs to be said here too.

There are posts, articles and blogs out there since Tuesday regarding the bitch who went BOB at Westminster. I am distressed at the cruel words being thrown out there about this dog. " Awful", " a disgrace" "obese", "sausage with legs", "shameful", just to name a few. Really?

Now put yourself in the owners' place. You just did something the majority of Lab owners/breeders in this country will never do. YOU WON BEST OF BREED AT WESTMINSTER!!! However, all you are hearing and reading is how God-awful your dog is. How would you feel?

Whether or not the bitch deserved it, I don't know. I've never had my hands on her and couldn't really see her move due to the angle of the camera during breed judging. The judge who did both of these things and more thought she deserved it. Most of the people who saw her at ringside thought she was gorgeous and deserved this honor.

Was she overweight? I don't know. Again, I wasn't there and I didn't have my hands on her. All I know is that I don't keep extra weight on my dogs and I have been accused of having "fat dogs" by people who do not truly understand this breed. You cannot judge this breed without having your hands on it. The roundness can be deceptive because of the amount of coat the dog might be carrying.

Have there been heavy dogs who have won shows? Of course there has been. All you have to do is read the judging critiques to know this. Was this bitch one of them? Dunno, I (repeat with me here), didn't have my hands on the dog.

There are "types" in any breed. Obviously the judge at Westminster liked a heavier-type of dog, or so it seemed. Labs are not unique in having different "types". Look no further than the Quarter Horse to see that. You have the Foundation type, which I have and prefer. Then you have the more "athletic" type that aren't as heavy. Which type one prefers depends on that person's tastes.

I see the grumbling from people, "I didn't win when I showed my dog because I refused to put extra weight on my dog". *cough* bullshit *cough*. Your dog didn't win, not because it wasn't overweight, but possibly because the judges didn't think it was a good representation of the breed? Maybe it didn't move as well as it could have. Maybe you didn't do a good job of presenting the dog. Maybe you were kennel blind and the dog just didn't measure up. We've all done that.

Getting back to the bitch who won Westminster, my point is you may not like the type of dog, she may not be your ideal, but using nasty terms to describe her is hurtful. I dare you to walk up to her owners and say that to their faces. Just because this is the internet and you can hide behind your keyboard and anonymous names does not make your words any less hateful and hurtful. Put yourself in their place. How would you feel?

Think about it for a second. This bitch didn't not win the Group because she was heavy. A freaking hairy, flashy Golden has never taken the Group and consequently Best In Show either. What makes you think a Lab is going to? There have been moderate Labs put up in the past and yet they weren't able to do it.

The attack on the most recent BOB winner has distressed me and I call on all of you to stop it. Whatever happened to "if you don't have anything nice to say, then don't say it"?

You don't have to agree with the judge's decision, but be respectful to those that did win. Just lose the nasty, hateful words and say she wasn't your type.

Then lose the excuses, get your own dog out there and who knows......next time it could be yours.

Sheila and Laura, thank you for your posts with which I wholeheartedly agree. This no longer seems to be a sport anymore, but a "hazing" to survive. For those who continue to be anonymous, have the courage to use your names, so at least we can consider the source.

I agree. I challenge ANY of you anonymous posters to take credit for your comments and comment with your real names.

Better, yet, let's see any of you walk up to Nancy, Angela, OR Cindy, and share your comments with them.

Boy, some of you people really know how to suck the good time out of a fabulous win, for a very nice dog, and a wonderful group of owners, breeders, and handlers.

-Jill

The difference between this forum and Facebook is that not only do you have to use your name on Facebook, but you can also set your privacy settings so that only your friends, or people that have your same interests and opinions see your posts. It is soooo easy to come on this forum, make up a stage name and say whatever you want. The thing about using your real name is that there will be those that agree with you and applaud you for it and those that disagree with you but are adult enough to respect your right to your own opinion.
I highly doubt that a judge at Westminster would put up a dog that was the opposite of what he/she liked just to make a statement. It would be a great topic to take up with the AKC and the judge when you write your letter to them though.
You go right ahead and read your copy of MRW's book and breed to what she considers the perfect Labrador. That is your decision and I respect your decision in doing what you think is right.
When your dog wins, I will say congratulations on your big win. You better be prepared for the awful, mean things that others will say though.
I honestly do respect the fact that everyone has a right to their own opinion. I just don't understand people that won't own that opinion by using their own name.

I do work my dogs. My dogs have no extra weight on them. They do not have tuck ups because that is not correct. They do have a waist though. There is a big difference in the two. I am done arguing with fake people for the day though. I have MRW's book and also a CD of her speaking. I have read the book, understood her message, and also listened to the CD several times.
Come back on with another name to hide behind and maybe we can fight back and forth some more. On second thought, I will go play with my dogs and enjoy their company and the company of friends and family. That is what life is about after all.

Have to make this short, as i have not had power into the fourth dayand phone is goingdead..Laura, Sheila...wish there was a like butTon here. To those complAining..I agreewith Shelia...spend more time with your dogs and maybe some of their living nature will rub off.

Hard to argue with someone who is so delusional they think they're MRW. lol

I've got an idea: more CH MH Labs. Show them while campaigning their way to MH. Need more CH with working titles anyway; there are so few. After all, Labs have a purpose and should be continuing to be proven capable and willing to fulfill their purpose.

As the people who have shown with me the last year know, I've had a chubby girl. Trust me, the judges do not hesitate to chew you out about your dogs weight. I had been told a good 4 or 5 times. Now that we have her weight under control and she gets worked EVERY SINGLE DAY for her JH. The judges don't like how she looks. I had one judge tell me she was "muscular". Now she is tucked up which is a no no. I just can't make everyone happy. The top 2 dogs at Westminster are gorgeous. I have see them and touched both. Repeatedly. I would love to have either one. BOB Paulie did just have a litter of 8 in July. I still don't have my figure back from my last kid. That was 25 years ago!!

Here we go again. It’s that time of year when Westminster brings out the worst in some of us. This year’s winner was definitely a good one. She was in correct weight and she was shown as a Labrador should be shown. Let’s celebrate our friends’ enormous success rather than berate their beautiful bitch.


Labradors are a swimming breed, not a movement breed. This year’s winner was not shown flying around the show ring because Labradors are not supposed to do that. There is nothing in the standard that dictates her keeping up with the Setters, Pointers or Goldens. Ours are not supposed to be fast; they are supposed to use their bodies in an “efficient” manner to get their job accomplished as a gentlemen’s gun dog.

Their original job was to retrieve birds on water. They will have periods during the day while hunting when they will sit for long periods of time waiting for a retrieve and then a busy few minutes where they are working hard to bring back a bird or two to the blind. Then they will sit and wait again. That’s it. How do you translate that to movement on the ground? It gets translated by breeders who actually have hunted or competed in performance events over their own dogs, bred there own dogs and lived, breathed and dedicated the majority of their lives to the Labrador Retriever.

This year’s winner was not fat. The standard states that there shouldn’t be a tuck up in an adult Labrador Retriever. A quote from the standard: “The underline is almost straight, with little or no tuck-up in mature animals”

Labradors in good coat translates into meaning that they are well covered and that requirement is important so that when they are actually out hunting with their owner there is less chance of injury in the field. Their thick double coat is important for working as it insulates them from cold water and keeps burrs and stickers from tearing their skin. This needs to be considered when evaluating and judging the breed. A Labrador in full coat will appear heavier until you put your hands on him. The difference in appearance is due to his dense double coat.

Weight is a changeable thing. What you can’t change no matter how hard you try is their structure, balance, breed type and angles. The owners/breeders of this bitch are not novices. They recognize the difference between a fat dog and a dog in coat and good condition.

Not only have you insulted the dog, breeders, owners and handler but you have insulted the judge as well. Judge Bonnie Threlfall is from a family immersed in the hobby of purebred dogs. Her father bred Labradors and was very active in obedience. She worked for the famous handling team of Bob and Jane Forsythe for years before she and her then husband, Mark Threlfall went out on there own. They were some of the premier handlers in the country. Her knowledge of dogs, structure and type were learned by being immersed in the sport in a big and professional way her whole life. Anyone would be thrilled to have won under someone with such high credentials as this judge.

Don’t allow yourself to fall into that old problem of being kennel blind. Open your minds and look at dogs that are not just in your own backyard. You can’t judge a dog from seeing it on TV.

Why not congratulate the winners and enjoy their accomplishments. Be a sport.

OMG. The response from Faith is reason why Labs are shown out of condition.

You've never have taken your Lab upland hunting. One can have a big boned muscled Labrador. You just need to work them.

See what the RTF folks are saying.

http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?104732-westminister

Listen Show folks. Labradors are hunters. Not couch potatoes. I'll take a whippet like Field Lab over those two poor examples of the breed.

If you are going to breed at least read the standard.

Thank you Faith, so well said!

I don't know the dogs that won and have no intention of commenting on them as I think publicly giving an opinion on dogs when one was not requested is rude.

I hope everyone remembers this when foreign and other judges who like and reward a more moderate (and still correct) labrador at large prestigious shows. I am tired of hearing bashing of ANY judges just because they do not like your style of dog. It seems that it is hands off when it is a substantial dog, but when it is a more moderate dog with a more old fashioned coat (hard, short and tight) and traditional head, it is ok to berate the dog and judges for putting up a dog that has wonderful type but not the substance/style that a lot seem to like in this country. I see it on this forum all the time. If we are going to say there are different styles that are acceptable, including incredibly substantial ones, then their more moderate brethren should also be allowed some appreciation!

I went to Potomac for the first time in 2006 and was looking forward to seeing so many nice dogs up close and personal and meeting the breeders who created them. I was a bit taken aback at the poor sportsmanship exhibited by many, some of whom are breeder judges themselves. One breeder judge rolled his eyes at the judges' selections to the people sitting in the gallery as he stood in the ring. I have made it a point to never show to him as a result because in my opinion, people like that are not deserving of an entry themselves. Several others loudly criticized the judges for giving very nice but moderate dogs top honors, stating that these judges should put up what we prefer in this country. It left a sour taste in my mouth. It seems any time a more moderate dog wins, it is open season to critique judges.

I would love to show to judges who breed Champions who are proven in the field. People who are what I call lifelong dog people, who understand them in mind and body. Some of the best are ones who have raised multiple breeds and understand their differences. I do feel these are the people who have the best perspective on form and function and could give opinions based on good experience. Unfortunately, they are a dying breed.

Once the 'field folks' actually breed a dog that looks like a labrador and not a whippet, then I'll care what they are saying. Love when the field labs have to wear coats in winter cause they don't have the proper coat, among other things!

Sorry to burst your bubble STIR FRIED, but both BOB and BOS are NOT couch potatoes. Because neither one lives in the house. The BOB has 8 kennel mates that play all day long and in the summer they have unlimited swimming in a pond (which is frozen over now). Same with the BOS. Someone commented about BOB panting as she went around the ring. DUH!! These dogs are not use to heated buildings. They travel in unheated cars. This winter's Michigan weather has been single digits or sub zero. They all had thick coats. And to say that these two breeders don't know the standard shows you have no idea about English Labradors. Both women have judged all over the world. My gosh, BOB owner has been breeding for over 40 years and has traveled to the UK seeking the best in the breed.
And as for Romeo Lover. I watched Crufts live on my computer last year. Within seconds of winning, the owner was criticized for having a fat, out of shape dog. The criticizing still continues today.
These people complaining are either thinking these dogs should look like field dogs or they are jealous because they haven't achieve the success that these two owners have. They live and breath "Labradors". They have sacrifice every free minute (even family time) and incredible amount of money to make the breed perfect. SO GET OVER IT!!

All my dogs have a WC and/or JH on them and they have also placed and won at specialties. Unlike your example, I have been at quite a few hunt tests where the 'show' labs have outperformed the field dogs.

While I think it's important that Labs have and keep their retrieving instinct, it's also important to acknowledge that they can do so much more outside the conformation ring. Labs natural biddable and kind temperaments make them excellent therapy, service, bomb/drug detection, and obedience competition dogs. It's also important to remember that not all Labrador folks have the time, skills, or desire to pursue hunt titles. That's a personal choice. Personally, I'm happy to get a WC on my CH/GCH Labs, but fieldwork is not my forte nor my favorite activity for many reasons. I prefer to channel my dogs' abilities into other activities--therapy dog work and obedience/rally.
Labradors have evolved over the years, as have all breeds. Human nature dictates that there will always be those of us humans who take things too far, whether it be overdone Labs in the breed ring or the opposite end of the spectrum in field trials. Neither is good for the breed. Worse IMO is the petty nasty carping by others when they don't like the results of a show/trial.

Competition Conformation is a game of illusions. If you play this game, you play to win. If the winning dogs are carrying more weight, then you would be stupid to show your dog thinner.
Last year, I decided to go back to the obedience ring with my specialty style dogs. I took off 10 pounds from one girl and at least 5 pounds from two boys. They still have no tuck up, they still have plenty of bone, they still have beautiful coats. And. . . to be honest, I think they look a lot better. This was just my personal experience.

Like someone said, every year this time someone starts the show dog, field dog debate. And this sounds like a field dog person. They don't know the breeders/owners at all and are really not much of a person to put them and the pretty female down. I guess, they think those skinny, long leg, long nose, whippet tails could do better. Field bred Labradors don't even look like a Lab anymore. Yes, they can retrieve, but I don't want that energy in my house. There, take some of your own medicine.

I just took a quick look at the Spotlight Ads

I found 1 with a WC, 2 with JH's and one MASTER HUNTER. All of these dogs also have their CH's.

Please don't tell me that these dogs cannot work. They can and they do.

-Jill

My take on this rather nasty discussion is that the consideration given to the anonymous posters should be the due they deserve, which is to pay them no attention. Nothing constructive can come from such negative, mean-spirited and ignorant anonymous postings. Where is the round file button when it is needed?

IMO, these posters are jealous individuals who have either failed to read, or are ignorant of, the AKC Code Of Sportsmansip.

I can appreciate the talent it takes to earn a Field Trial Championship. I also appreciate the effort involved in earning an AKC conformation championship, and participating in the other AKC offered activities. If the field trial people were truly interested in what the conformation people were doing, then I think they would be entering their dogs in conformation events. I see many more conformation people entering the various AKC venues, including Hunt Tests, than I see field people being interested in doing more than field events.

I blame the judge. She did not understand the Breed standard. Maybe she has no idea about what a Labrador should be. For those arguing the pros of that winner, God Bless, you are good friends. The judge made a fool of every Labrador breeder.

Substance - Substance and bone proportionate to the overall dog. Light,"weedy" individuals are definitely incorrect; equally objectionable are cloddy lumbering specimens. Labrador Retrievers shall be shown in working condition, well-muscled and without excess fat.

Westminster is supposed to be the place the best of the best are rewarded. The judges should also be at least familiar with the breed standard.

The judge rewarded an "equally objectionable and cloddy lumbering specimen." It is what it is. Very objectionable to those who understand the breed that a Westminster judge would do this. Those saying the choice was correct must have very similar looking girls.

This is not about Sportsmanship, but an understanding of the breed standard.

Despite the negative tone and personal attacks in this discussion, I have found it interesting and one that we need to have. I got my first Labrador 40 years ago this year, have had champions, master hunters, RE and CDX dogs. I am now getting my feet wet in agility and doing pet therapy. All my dogs are from conformation lines, but not necessarily the lines that are dominating the specialty competition at this time. I agree that the dogs are shown too fat and that many are overdone and have been thinking a lot about why this might be. Of course, part of the equation is the huge influx of new people, some of whom have been successful with their first few dogs, do not do anything except conformation, and therefore think they know more about the breed than they do. But many people with at least as much experience in the breed as I have are perpetrating the same type. You did not see such overdone dogs 30 years ago, at least in California where I got into the breed or in the upper midwest where I moved in 1986. Some people must have changed their opinion about what a good Labrador looks like. British labs have become more moderate in recent years, so this seems to a phenomenon specific to the US and maybe Canada. So that's what I'd like to investigate.

Part of the problem goes back to the controversy over the standard in which a small segment of the conformation people forced through some changes that were not supported by the majority of the conformation people who would be affected by them. This resulted in a disrespect for the standard, and I suspect that new people coming in may have been told that the standard was flawed and that they could ignore at least some parts of it. However some people in this discussion have used the standard to support the changes that have occurred in the dogs, so that isn't the entire story.

I was not in favor of the new standard, but it is what it is, and we can't ignore it. So what in the standard supports the "new look"? The proportion of leg from elbow to ground to depth of body at the withers is clearly stated to be equal and does not support the overdone, short-legged type. Likewise the call for moderate bone. There has been a concerted effort to improve angulation at the shoulders, and maybe it's hard to get that without having short legs, or maybe longer legged dogs look less angulated. One thing that breeders seem to be ignoring is the description that the brisket should not extend significantly below the elbows. They consider this to be an error in the standard, and so do I. The dog needs a keel when he is swimming. However, if you have a ribcage with a low brisket, it's hard to get a level line from the brisket to hind legs. In other words, an athletic dog with a deep chest has to have a tuck-up. And the standard also says there is no obvious tuck-up. I think that breeders are ignoring the depth of brisket because they consider it to be an error in the standard, but they do focus on the lack of tuck-up. It's hard to fulfill that combination - brisket below the elbows and no tuck-up with a fit dog. The skeletal anatomy is against you, as the ribcage is deep, and the abdominal muscles aren't going to fill in that tuck-up. So you put some pounds on the dog to get what you want. The British standard does not specify either the depth of the brisket OR the lack of a tuck-up. That must have been done by the people who revised the AKC standard to try to get the type back to the type they liked, without a deep brisket. I haven't had the time to go back to the old standard to see if it had anything to say on this issue. I'll do that and edit this message to include that information.

Exaggeration in either direction is no virtue.

When both the BOB and BOS look pregnant, that is the look that makes a mockery of our dogs. It's a shame.

I want to make it clear that I m not making a comment on the Westminster winners, as I have not seen them in person and have not seen the Westminster judging. I am commenting on what I have seen myself in the ring and on my own experiences. I was told to put 15 pounds on my 65 pound MH by a conformation handler because otherwise "you would be wasting your money and my time." She probably was right, but the situation is not!

Judging at a dog show is subjective as is interpretation of the standard. It is wrong to call someone "ignorant" or "erroneous" just because they don't share the same opinion as you do and I don't feel the comments were made to be "deliberately hurtful" either. Obviously this is a subject worth discussing as it's been brought up all over the web and people are worried about where our breed is headed. Contacting a field representative and/or the judge herself is a good suggestion but please curb your nastiness, everyone is entitled to have an opinion.

Can we all at least agree many Labs being shown do not appear to be "well muscled"? And that presenting dogs as the standard calls for as "well muscled" and truly at their working weights would be a good decision.
Granted it is not particularly easy to keep dogs well muscled an in working condition year round. It is more than just letting them romp in the yard with kennel mates. It is actual regimented exercise; a Lab's favorite, and mine, is throwing them some marks and getting some hunt test training in.

*To anonymous PLEASE: You think these various statements are not deliberately hurtful, ignorant or erroneous? Just who is being nasty?*

No, I don't think hurtful was the purpose, they are opinions, strong opinions, it's how people feel, it doesn't make them ignorant. I don't agree with Obamacare, does that make me ignorant? erroneous? or am I being deliberately hurtful by saying so?

Gotta say it...the Westminster judge was not a breeder judge that I know of. And if she is judging sporting breed alot, for instance, it would be hard to not see the difference in condition of the lab vs. the other sporting dogs. I've been there myself. And the lab does sort of look clumbersome in comparison sometimes, and its hard for someone who does not breed the dogs they are judging, to truly know the standard like those of us who have been doing this for decades.

Great discussion here, but I feel badly for the winners. so many hurtful things said here, and you who say "take it up with the AKC rep"...so true, I mean if you truly have a problem with the judge. Or talk to her yourself in a kind, respectful manner.

Let it all also be a lesson to us to do a better job conditioning those labs. I love the challenge, and have loved being challenged in this area!

An overweight dog, regardless of the fact of it being overweight, that is dripping in breed type should defeat a dog that is in shape but generic & lacking of breed type EVERY single day. I can fix the weight issue and fitness but cannot give back breed type.

I do take my hat off to all of those who choose let one person, the judge, determine if my breeding skills meet their idea of what a particular breed should be. Most times you are going to lose.

Usually at Westminster TYPY does not win in the Labrador breed. That is more a specialty thing.

I make it a point to go to winners web sites and view their dogs of the past, present and their Pet owners dogs. It is a good indication that a breeder is intent of breeding to a Judge, or the standard. Many famous names in Labradors have changed the type of Labrador they now breed.

Anything goes at this point in breeding Labradors. From poor tail carriage with the tail raised like a flag, to flabby dogs. One has to ask why? The breed makes such a stink about the "Silvers", when many breeders are presenting dogs that do not resemble the standard.

It does seem in future years a Labrador could resemble a Monkey and it would be acceptable. Does not make it right, but those who are in charge of the breed are making the rules. If you want to win the dog must be over done.

Who is "in charge" of the breed? Someone forgot to give me their names. Please send me their e-mails and phone numbers.

The dogs who won were lovely - I'd take anyone of them home in a minute! I saw others exhibited that hurt my eyes. But their owners love them and as Sheila said, the lab loves them.

Having come from American Cocker Spaniels and German Shepherds, breeds change over the decades. The cockers today don't look anything like those shown in the 40's, 50's and 60's.

Breed for the type and function you want to see "in YOUR kennel." If they win, they win. If they are healthy, they are healthy. But please don't expect everyone else to change thier vision of the breed to please you and validate your opinion of what is correct.

IMO those that do the most bitching are those that aren't winning.

If you feel that I am wrong, then go on the road, set up seminars, show pictures of exactly what is wrong with our wonderful breed. Educate all of us idiots that are doing it incorrectly. The Potomac is always looking for people to educate breeders. Tell them you would like to volunteer and share your knowledge.

In other words - don't remain anonymous,as my dad used to say "Put up ot Shut up." And then "own it" don't hide.

JMHO,
Valerie Jones

"If you want to win the dog must be over done."

That is so NOT true! My dogs have won at specialties under breeder judges and have won at all breed shows as well. They are not overdone at all - they have good muscle tone too. Look at the WD from Potomac last year - a gorgeous dog - oozing type and not overdone.

Happy Tails,

And your point is what? Are you going to breed to him? or are you going to breed to produce that type? Or you want everyone to start breeding that type so you will be "Happy Tails" even more?

Valerie Jones

Someone help me. I have been told I am thick at times, but I have read and re-read this thread and just don't get some of the points. I thought I made some valid points and asked some good questions... just to get more rambling about this Romeo dog.

Is someone "pimping" him for all of us on this side of the pond to go and view him? Okay I bit, went and saw the video. Yep, lovely dog. Yep I am sure his owner is very proud. I might consider breeding to him after I laid hands upon him and if he met what I thought I needed. Too bad he's in freaking Italy!

Happy Tails, please remember, what you see is not always what you get. Review genotype and phenotype. It would be great if we saw a dog or bitch, bred her or to him and had all these little lovely carbon copies. Doesn't happen that way. It takes many years of hard work, blood, sweat and tears. Even then most breeders will not get their "Romeo".

Valerie Jones

Dear Susan and Valerie,

Shows like Crufts and Westminster are about $$$. revenue. The TV audience. Dogs presented at these shows make the viewers at home feel special about the dog sitting on the couch watching with their owners.

Why the uproar all over the Web about this years winner is that only a handful of breeders from Michigan can relate to the Victor. Windfalls started this Typy mess and without Annie being around to direct everyone, bigger is now better without all the other things she bred to. One can have Type, but not at the expense of function. Too much is too much. Her dogs were not lumberers. They were athletic big Labradors, much like "Arnold".

Romeo is what Annie would just go nuts over. A big Lab with balance. One that flies around the ring with style.

The Westminster girl who won is not balanced. Something a dog put up to represent the breed in the Sporting Dog group should have regardless of type. My gosh, some of the Labs shown at Westminster were Pet Quality at best.

To Romeo Lover;

I looked at the video as well. Yes, he is a very nice dog. Thought to myself, his type is very familar to me. Looks alot like what I started out with. Out of curiousity, I looked up his pedigree. Sure enough, he is sired by a import from the good ole USA. To be more specific, the import is from a kennel in the Midwest. Just maybe if you look hard enough, you actually can find his "type" in North America.

Romeo is a Top Lab in the World because he loves to show, as well as pedigree, and that his handler is his owner. It does make a difference.

That and Romeo is shown in tip top condition shuts up all the Field Lab lovers. A big Lab if balanced can move freely and effortlessly.

Just wishing one day the best dog in the world, the Labrador, could stand a chance at winning at Westminster. He's not going to do that if he can't beat the Sporting Dog competition.

Go back to the pet forums, Pete (Happy Tails, Huntsman, Romeo lover, Fromm lover or whatever else you'd like to be called).

"Happy Tails, Huntsman, Romeo lover, Fromm lover or whatever else you'd like to be called"

yeah, none of those.....