I spoke to a lady yesterday who use to breed. I told her how I showed my dogs and she said "I don't believe in showing" So it got me to thinking are there others out there who just do not show in conformation? I just thought it was a taken that if you were to breed you had to show or participate in obedience. Maybe some do one not the other? From what I got from her opinion was it was a complete waste of time. I never saw her dogs but sounded as if they were kept healthy.

I sure could save a lot of money if I did not show for a year. But, I think I have been bitten by the bug. I know I always bring home the best dog for me but do enjoy the social aspect of showing. I know a few of mine that do enjoy it also.

So, my question is why do you show or why do you "not believe" in showing?

TIA

Sometimes when someone says something as in , "they don't believe in...." it is a cover for something else.

I would bet this person does not have a competitive spirit or is not a breeder. A breeder wants to challenge his program so that he knows if there is improvement going forward. An exhibitor might be someone who enjoys going to the show with a dog or more and showing.

Either way, showing is certainly not for everyone. It is challenging to keep the dogs in show shape, challenging to learn the rules, challenging to play the politics and frankly, expensive. With gas nudging the $5 per gallon range (roughly 33 cents per mile for most vans). It becomes more of an investment.

Figure on taking 4 dogs to Potomac for instance. You live 500 miles away. The entries, the hotel and the fuel might run in the neighborhood $500 or more. Multiply that by several shows per year and soon, you may not believe in dog shows any more.

I think you are being very conservative in your estimates ... I factor $500.00 per weekend ... if you knew how much money I have invested in the past 5 years purchasing dogs, getting dogs out to shows, on breeding, feed and routine vet bills etc. it would curl your hair .. 100K is a conservative estimate ..

It is not for everyone or every dog. Some dogs don't enjoy it either.

It has taken me some time to come to the conclusion that it is ok if I don't do dog shows. I am shy by nature and really don't like being out there in the ring.

Curious, how do you evaluate your dogs, if you don't go to shows? How do you network with other breeders?

Ok, so if you don't believe in shows anymore, and you do not compete with your dogs in other events such as hunt tests, agility or obedience, but you still breed....does that make you a glorified BYB?

So what is that person's motivation for breeding? If it is not to produce a competitive dog, then the only thing left is money. Thumbs down

So where does that leave people who breed to provide high quality family companions or service dogs or even hunting? Face it, the purpose of competing is to make money for AKC while feeding your ego. Its not a noble. It only makes you feel self-righteous.

Exactly what I was told when I started out. "Only BYB didn't show." This is why I thought I had to do it. And to tell you the truth over the years to see what all breed shows put up I only now spend my money on specialities and obedience trials.

I enjoy the people. You have to let things bounce off sometimes. Some people are very competitive. But some like it that way.

That's what the other 5-7 puppies are for after you breed a nice litter from a dam and sire who actually DO something...conformation, obedience, rally, agility, hunting, dock diving....ANYTHING!!!!!!....

IMHO those who have no outward opinion of their dogs and just breed to breed are the ones that are sadly mistaken. You don't have to be a road warrior...a local specialty, a local AB show.....

Silly me, I thought the health certifications were what proved I was a good breeder. Now you say I need an outside opinion? Well, how about the outside opinion of the families who get puppies or the handicapped people who get service dogs or the hunters who get birds retrieved? I guess they don't count in your book.

I guess you think the 2 minute opinion of someone paid by a club as a way to make money means more than the opinion of the people who buy the puppies. How is it that the opinion of a judge probably influenced by the other end of the lead or the fad of the day matters so much? You really have drunk the AKC Koolaid.

health certificates are nice, but nicer still is the ability to show the dogs actually can DO something, rally, obedience, hunt tests, nosework, therapy dogs, agility, temperament testing,

sure lots of puppies from each litter go to pet homes where they do nothing, but if your dogs are great, then take the keepers to do more than lie on the couch... SHOW them in breed, agility, rally, obedience, hunt tests, or have them certified and WORK as therapy dogs.. Labradors are a working breed!! show your dogs can do the work...

encourage your pet people to do more than walk and pet the dog.. i was encouraged and now i have 3 very competitive labradors in multiple sports and multiple venues, they love it and so do I



ok the BYB and the lazy folks will roast me but you know what?? if your dogs are any good, you can put titles on either end...

My 2 cents

I don't think there is necessarily a problem with those who don't show. I think there is a problem with those who don't do anything but show. Especially now-a-days when so many people ignore the standard and therefore only show at specialties.

The giant contradiction I hear is those who whine when someone expresses that their dogs aren't real labs due to too much bone, or being too fat, or too many rear angles, or long coats (the list goes on and on)and say that they don't care and that they are going to "breed what they like". And then they criticize someone else for not going to shows by saying "how else do you know if your dogs are competitive and if you are improving the breed?" So which is it, do you want the opinions of others or not?

That said, I don't know too many people who have never shown in the breed ring or participated in performance events who know what a good dog or a good lab is. So yes, even if you stopped doing these things for whatever reasons, I think a good breeder has done those things at one point or another. Probably you aren't a good breeder unless you have at least dabbled in multiple dog activities at some point.

We then have those that show that are also P.M.'s. Just because someone shows doesn't not mean they are ethical or good breeders. Some have their A list and B list of dogs. List A is for keepers. List B is money making litters.

Over 18 litters a year and up to 50 means P.M. to me, showing with handlers and attending some of those shows to show their face. They bullsh-t other breeders, talk about their A litters only and tell their deep, dark secrets to a few who have big mouthes. If they only knew and if the rest only knew.

I found out alot and find it disturbing.

THANK YOU!!! Clearances are a given if you are reputable. I will stand by what I said, if you do NOTHING with your dog, you are just producing puppies for money. Sheesh, even a CGC is something.

You've got an answer for everything just because all you want to do is breed. I have met plenty of labs dumber than dirt, can't even learn basic commands. Is that the kind you are breeding since you think performance is stupid. Please let us know who you are so that we can make sure not to mix your lines in with our dogs.

ROTFL about your interpretation of what I said--talk about dumber than dirt.

If showing isn't for you, then you should enjoy your PET Labradors and shouldn't be breeding.

We have a breed to preserve, first and foremost. It is our responsibility to ensure that we do not lose the essence of the breed, and we do that by obtaining the opinion of those who are more knowledgable about the breed than we are, i.e. judges. I'll be the first to say that not all Labrador judges get it right, but many do.

Breeding Labradors to suit one's own preference is irresponsible and detrimental to the preservation of the Breed.

All-breed shows promote the generic show dog type (straight front, lots of rear angle) and if you haven't been to a specialty lately, you may not know that the fad right now is the mini-newfy. Huge bone, short legs, tons of long ooat - not sure what any of that has to do with a sporting dog standard that specifies a moderate dog.

If she does her health clearances, don't judge. The only money difference between her and a show breeder is what she spends the litter money on.

I guess I am weird because I have never bred to the standard in almost 30 years. I breed what pleases my eye. My dogs are specialty pointed or Champions and several hunting titles and they are never fat or sloppy or out of condition. I do prefer some of the qualities of the foreign dogs over ours because of bulk alone. I like an all around dog that is happy in any venue. I love dog shows and love to see what everyone else has out there. Showing has introduced me to a world of places and people and experiences I would have never seen otherwise.
Yes politics is "out there" but C'est La Vie.

I think we need to consider what is best for the breed and not worry that others don't care or do things we do not like - responsibility starts at home. In order to preserve the breed, it is necessary to understand it (all of it, not JUST conformation or JUST field work or JUST clearances). Participating in a variety events allows us to evaluate the whole dog against standards and see how they compare to the “cream of the crop”. We should all be striving to breed the best we can breed. While I do not always enjoy dog shows, I do believe it is necessary to see how my dogs measure up against the best of what others are breeding. I often use a handler so that I can sit ring-side and watch. If the only thing I have to compare my dogs to are the others in my kennel, it is very easy to believe that what I have is fantastic, especially if most of the dogs in my kennel are so-so (by comparison almost anything would look good); kennel blindness is an immediate route to mediocrity because one’s eye is never exposed to anything but what is in front of them. I find that many people do not have a good understanding of correct structure and therefore should get other opinions – it is unfair to the dogs to continually breed dogs that are not built well.

Dog shows are also helpful in selecting a stud dog – I do not “believe” in breeding to pictures or for pedigree alone, and almost any dog can be made to look decent in a picture or on paper. Also, movement cannot be evaluated from pictures. I prefer to see the dogs in the flesh and have the opportunity to put my hands on them.

While there are times when mediocrity and/or extremes are rewarded at shows, for the most part, a good dog will consistently be in the ribbons. A dog that is rarely/never in the ribbons at maturity most likely lacks breed type, good structure, or balance. If the dog is lacking in one of those areas, then why breed it? While I do think some people get far too caught up in titles and make more of them that what they are, participating in activities (shows, field events, etc.) is one way to evaluate our dogs against a standard we have set.

AMEN!!!

What about those of us relatively new to breeding who have quality dogs, have knowledgeable mentors behind us, are involved in all-breed or Lab clubs but just don't have that "it" dog just yet?

I'm curious how long it took for all of you longtime breeders to have that first dog that you felt confident enough to strut in the ring?

Some get it right from day one and others never do no matter where they get the dog.
Either it developes in you or it doesn't

Then go to shows, step into the ring and learn how to show your dogs so when you do have an "it" dog you are ready. You will learn all about pedigrees, what other dogs are throwing, network with other breeders, and see how you are progressing in your breeding program by evaluating how your dogs are coming along. "Strutting" in the ring is over rated, gait properly (and be polite to other exhibitors), and certainly don't strut yourself, showing is a very humbling experience.

You breed for what "pleases your eye" but at least you participate in hunting events as well as at conformation shows and are aware that a dog should be shown in good physical condition. (Have you considered breeding to the FCI Standard BTW?)

What newer exhibitors have to be aware of is to not fall in the trap of going to shows and learning from those who may win, but who learned from those who won only at dog shows, who learned from those who won only at dog shows, etc. This perpetuates a culture of breeding to what pleases their eye without knowing what the dogs are supposed to be able to do. This is as bad as a hunt person who breeds for drive only, who learns from someone who was successful only at field events, who learned from someone who was successful only at field events, etc. This results in exaggerated drive in dogs who structurally are highly likely to break down and who aesthetically .....

What I think many posters are saying is that good breeders need to have done (or working on doing) a variety of things with their dogs and may not be at the top of any of those venues. Some of the most knowledgeable dog people I know are not big "winners" in any of the particular venues. Is that because they have mediocre and generic labs not specialized for anything in particular, or do they have moderate labs specialized for water retrieving and family life? Are some of the breeders on the periphery of it all just less social or less financially well off but just, if not more, knowledgeable with just as good, if not better, dogs?

I don't know what shows you are going to, but they are clearly not the same shows I am attending.

The BOB and BOS at the recent SDLRC Specialties, as an example, were not "mini-newfs" by any stretch of the imagination. BOB (from the classes over specials) at Saturday's Del Sur show was a gorgeous bitch with a lovely front, under Judge (and former Labrador breeder) Carl Leipmann. Please stop with the generalizations and excuses for those who don't show.

And, by the way, I attend LOTS of Specialties. I agree there was a tendancy for a while to produce very large Labradors, but I think we're getting better about that. Probably because the sensible and respected judges were chatting it up with those who were going a little overboard...

And here's the deal, those of us who truly have the preservation of the breed as it was intended to be in our hearts DO get to judge those who are in it simply for:

A.) The money
B.) Producing what they like, regardless of whether, or not, it looks/acts like a Labrador (i.e. the money)
C.) Producing family companions (i.e. the money)
and so on...

The fact that our breed happens to do great work as search & rescue dogs, therapy dogs, assistance dogs, etc. is just the icing on the cake. They should still look and act like a Labrador. Those who are breeding the skinny, long-legged, snipey muzzled dogs for competitive field sport as just as bad as the people who are breeding the overdone Labs. Neither one of those groups have the integrity of the breed in their hearts.

Nothing "glorified" about it. They are just a BYB if all they do is breed and nothing else.

Breeding to produce healthy dogs is good.
Breeding to produce show dogs is good.
Breeding to produce Hunting dogs is good.
Breeding to produce Service dogs is good.
Breeding to produce performance dogs is good
Breeding to produce obedience dogs is good.
Breeding to produce an all around dog is better.
Breeding to produce a healthy all around dog is best.
Breeding to produce pets of unknown health background is not good and it will never be right.
It is not about the AKC, it is about breeding better dogs and give back something to the breed and the Labradors community.
This should be the end of the conversation.....for good...

All this senseless bickering and giving yourself a false sense of being good does not matter if the animal rights groups continue to come up with more and more legislation that is aimed at all breeders. There is no distinction between who is good and who is bad. It is all aimed to take away everyone's right to breed how they see fit.

Just because you don't agree with how someone wants to breed their dogs doesn't give you or anyone else the right to tell them how they should be breeding. In the end, it doesn't matter. What does matter is staying united and focused on defeating bad laws aimed at ALL breeders.

I'll leave you with a little quote, you can insert any derogatory breeder term where you see fit, until there is no one left to speak out for you.

First they came for the communists (Puppy Mills),
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist (Puppy Mill).

Then they came for the trade unionists (Backyard Breeder),
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist (Backyard Breeder).

Then they came for the Jews (Show Mill),
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew (Show Mill).

Then they came for me (self-righteous reputable breeder)
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

You just have to put your negative point of view out there, don't ya?

We are not talking about Laws and Animal rights. That is a whole world of its own, but one thing I can tell you, I am not going to sell my soul to the devil in order to be able to breed dogs.

I defend and stand with my statement.

I am not a puppy mill, nor a BYB. I run hunt test and show my dogs and I totally agree with this poster. It is kinda like a domino effect. One falls sooner or later the rest of us will follow no matter how right we can do things. Before we know it we will be importing purebred dogs for pets from other countries. Just like a lot of our other goods we buy each and every day.

We might go to the same shows and we might both look at the same dog and have a totally different opinion. I find it both fascinating and frustrating to see this all the time. I have had discussions with friends who will argue until they are blue in the face that their dogs are not overweight and are all muscle when in fact their dogs are obese with giant heads and quite incorrect coats. (BTW, they win more than me.) These people don't do anything but show and their eye is used to what their eye is used to. On the other hand, my hunting friends think my dogs are fat when in fact they carry less weight than most other dogs in the conformation ring. When I first look at the dogs of one particular hunting friend, my impression always starts off as "yuck". But after spending time and letting my eye adjust, I always realize that this person's dogs are well constructed. It just takes my eye time to adjust before I see the quality.

What makes you think that because someone does not show their Dogs that they are Pet dogs? Who are you to say dont breed your pet dogs? just because they are not shown does not mean they are not the standard. That they have top pedigrees and could go in the ring and win.

You make excellent points in your post. There is a fine line in getting your dog to look as if she can do both venues of show and field. It can happen. HT judges look at my dogs in horror as I approach the line. You should see the look on their faces. Then after my marks they remark at how well she performed. It makes my day.

opps - my response was to "breeder with a unique number after".

Breeding without competing means you never measure the results. You and your eye are god. You don't prove to yourself and others that your dogs have the phenotype to make them a logical choice for the next generation. I find it funny that BYBs choose CH sires. Is it so they can claim champion pedigrees? Why do Puppy Mills sneak and cheat to lay their hands on a show breeder's pup if they are all the same?

BYB have said it themselves. they breed for the market. If the market wants white, Rottie heads they will select for it. The clearances give them the ethics cover they need.

I don't want BYB 'shut down' but I do want buyers to know the difference and be empowered. When the BYB & PM's market dries up so will they. Educate buyers. Be polite on the phone, take the time even when you don't have a litter. Buyers can protect our breed. Buyers are the reason most BYB clear elbows now. It's getting harder for them to sell pups without heart clearances or DNA testing buyers are asking. Buyers can also start asking why everything in the litter is for sale. If the breeder doesn't want something why should they.

This statement is just silly. What makes you think that
if you don't compete (or, more likely, seldom compete) in conformation that you can't measure results and must rely only on your own eye to evaluate your dogs. What makes you think that a 2-minute opinion by a judge (highly influenced by fads and by handlers) is better than your own eye if you are an experienced breeder and see your dog in action all day? If what you said was true, you would have no way to evaluate which puppy you should keep from a litter.

She didn't say specifically conformation. It could be ANY venue. If you don't train/compete in obedience with your dogs, how do you know that you're producing good obedience prospects? If you don't hunt your dogs, how do you know that you're producing great hunt prospects? If you don't put Therapy dog certificates on your dogs, how do you know they're suitable for therapy work? When you evaluate a litter, you pick a prospect but how do you know it will be successful at whatever it is you chose it for, if you don't have some outside evaluation?

This is the way everything works in the world. If i'm a student and I go to class and study and review the material, I can say I've learned the material, but I won't know until I've been tested by an outside source. If my job is to build a house, I can build it any way I want, but I won't know if it's a good house unless it passes inspection.

No one is saying you have to hit the road to show every weekend...but if you're doing nothing at all, that is questionable IMO.

Well the time you spend at dog shows is hopefully more involved than "2 minutes" in the ring. Hopefully you are sitting and watching and learning. Fads come and go...structure and movement is there regardless. Stud dogs certainly can look different and move differently than you would expect from a picture online or in a mag.

Being able to sit ringside with a mentor you respect and learning about these things will only help you continue improve. The same as running dogs in hunt tests or hunting them...the light bulb starts to turn on when you see how much easier it is for dogs with correct fronts to swim and cover ground efficiently. Why it is so important for a biddable temperment.

Interacting and building relationships with others allows you to continue to grow and learn and hopefully that equates to a more sound animal that you produce.

That is why it matters...if you sit in your house and only look at dogs in your back yard and compare them to pictures on line you are not bettering your program or even being a good steward by increasing your knowledge...you are sticking your head in the sand. Interacting with others and sharing experiences and knowledge is priceless.

Without these tools that you have to build through experience and learning, can you produce anything but mediocrity? We don't need more mediocrity.

Well, have you trained your dogs in obedience lately? Big surprise! You won't find big name breeders congregating there. In fact, the Labs will be mostly pet quality. Or how about agility? You certainly won't find a big entry of conformation dogs. Or let's try a field trial? How many conformation dogs are actually bred to field dogs?

Competing is no way to test your dog's worthiness for breeding. It's a hobby about winning ribbons, not evaluating the dog. Did that judge say, "breed your dog" when he handed out the ribbons? Not.

Most breeders use dogs without an AKC championship of any kind--conformation or performance. Just look at the pedigrees. Lots of dogs without any titles and a few with titles.

Really? How many hunters would buy a dog from someone who has never shot a gun? The answer is zero. Why is it Pet families shouldn't seek breeders of accomplishment - people who have demonstrated they know what the Labrador should be? That's the silly part of this argument.

The Labrador exists today because wealthy game keepers watched them work and knew the difference between the St. John's dog and those they had at home. From the earliest days breeders gathered their dogs together to evaluate and work them. They decided which dogs were superior, which needed breeding up and which needed to be sold or culled by shooting over them and testing them against other breeders' dogs.
These breeders must not have had a BYB's eye. I must not have it either. I come home from a show with a good sweeps class and I have a fresh prospective on the pups in my kennel.

I've not heard a single explanation from a do-nothing that has merit. They trash AKC in favor of a beat-nothing FCI International or UKC CH and then advertise their championships without ever explaining the difference to their buyers. They cite every sin a breeder has committed in an attempt to indict show breeders. They impugn judges, specialties, all breed shows, type, litter numbers, motives, ad nauseam. But we dare not say they are not investing in their dogs or the breed.

I support a BYB's right to pursue their interests, but I can and do explain the difference between them and a top breeder. I also encourage buyers to question why their pups are priced just a little lower than my own. The cost of showing vs the cost of doing nothing is huge. The price difference in the whelping box isn't.

Honey, most people buy their dogs from puppy mills and BYBs. This is just a fact. I'm not saying I like it. But a huge number of people--and growing every day--think that showing is an exploitation of dogs. They get Labs, or just dogs, from rescue organizations. And they are quite moralistic about their choices. Wake up and smell the roses. The tide has turned against showing. Showing is only valuable, in any venue, to the extent that you want to "believe" in it. It's a fun sport for those who want to believe in it, but it is not the be all and end all of dog evaluation. It's one small piece. Well, one small piece in terms of importance, but one big chunk of cash for those who participate.

I agree about the wealthy game keepers--and that wasn't a conformation show. I'm sure those wealthy game keepers would be scratching their heads and laughing if they saw today's shows as a way of evaluating dogs.

If it helps you sleep at night, keep on telling yourself this nonsense. The rest of us don't buy it. And if we keep educating our puppy buyers, you won't be sellling anything either

I know plenty of breeders of good quality dogs doing rally and OB. But then again, how would you really know since you aren't at the shows? Just because the breeders you are picking your CH sires from haven't done OB/Rally/Hunting, doesn't mean that others aren't.

Get your head out of the sand.

Boy, your interpretations of what I say continue to give me a really good laugh. The fact that you think breeders of conformation champions are competing in rally and obedience makes me pretty sure you aren't at those trials.

It shows. It's why people ask, "What kind of Labradors do you have?". Anyone who travels to shows has had people stop them and ask about their dogs. Ppl do not see well bred Labradors often and are surprised about their size, coat, bone and beauty.

Before the Internet, PM & BYB sold through newspapers and pet shops. The market had nearly dried up. Buyers knew where pet shop puppies came from and that 'both parents on premise' equaled a cheap breeding. We now have virtual pet stores & newspapers with photos. Buyers do not know how to separate the good from the bad but they are becoming more wary and want to learn. The more the buyer knows the better choices they will make and the better it will be for the breed.

Right on!! I totally agree!!!

It is a quality judge in any venue who can look past an initial impression and look at a style other than what s/he is used to seeing and notice the quality. I have a style of dog that I prefer but try very hard to look past style to see fundamental quality (or lack thereof).

It would be nice to have a standard that is respected and followed so we wouldn't have such extremes in type. There should always be different styles, but at some point the style is so different that it is not even the same type anymore. I am one of those that believe there is only 1 acceptable type for any breed but there are appropriate styles within that acceptable type. The acceptable type is described by the standard.

If people think the standard of their particular country is unacceptable, they must then breed to the standard of the country of origin of their breed. My 2 cents is that I may not be able to tell you what a good breeder is, but I know what a good breeder isn't. If you don't breed to a recognized standard, you are not a good breeder.

So, take this back to the original post of the thread. Why would anyone want to show if the rules of the show are not being followed? What fun is competition if the players are not playing the same game? I understand why advanced marksmen want the challenge of a moving target, even if that motion is unpredictable. But is that what the stewards of an historical breed want? I loved Mary W.'s quote (and I am paraphrasing)... We should not just be breeding for more, we should be breeding for better.

Then how did conformation Champions get their other titles? By sitting in a kennel all day waiting for the next conformation show only? Look around, you're behind the times honey. Bitch owners like to use stud dogs titled on both ends. If you don't know why you're dumber then dirt.

ROTFL

It's a mess. When you've been around the breed as long as I have, there is no other word for it. Hunting lines that don't remotely resemble the standard and dogs winning in the breed ring because of who they know. A mess.

And that will never change in our lifetime.

It's true. Then to add insult to injury bad temperments are running rampant.

Should there be the consensus of three judges to determine a winner? Would this be more fair and solve some of the problems?

There should be a point system to the standard like they do in Rally and Obedience. Kind of like this: Head-10 points, Coat 5 points, Front 10 points, Movement 30 points, etc. When a dog is not conforming to a part of the Standard a NQ :)

Dog with the highest amount of points a blue ribbon. Let the Judges have to post the scores, like Obedience. Then it will be about the dog and not who is on the other end.

A point system would provide some feedback and that would help with the learning process. How much does one really learn about their dog in a dog show unless you specifically ask the judge for a critique.

Same old arguments over and over. No sense bickering! We all have our opinions and they are interesting.

My dogs are conformation winners and also hunt. Perfectly able to do the work they were bred for. In fact, my dogs take straighter lines through cover because they can power through easily with their good bone, coat, and strong musclature.

As for breeding, there's no excuse for not having your breeding stock evaluated in some way. I don't care if it's by performance events or conformation events. Prove to yourself that your stock is worthy by comparing it to others. If you don't, you are either kennel blind or your motives are questionable.

As for hunting lines - they already are a different breed, just nobody made it official yet. They have different pedigrees and do not resemble the standard. They are beautiful in that they have been bred for a specific purpose and they do it better than any other breed. If you have ever seen a field lab working look at the type - high ear set for better hearing. Long legs to cover ground quickly. Single coat to prevent overheating. Long muzzle to easily carry any size bird. They are ideally suited to the American Field Trial. I'd vote to make them a new breed in a heartbeat - the American Field Labrador Retriever or something like that. Cockers, foxhounds, other breeds have split based on American type. Why not Labradors?

I agree, there should be a new breed because what you just described isn't a Labrador, sounds like a mixed breed that can hunt. As for a point system, I believe that is how it's done at FCI shows, but unless a dog is "supposedly" competing against another dog to earn a CH. it's not considered valid. The only thing I know for sure is the current system isn't working.

Cockers are a mess of a breed these days - many health issues and coats not in line with function. Heads are a caricature of the original, functional head. Ewe necks are a huge problem in that breed (because they like the way it looks and are actually breeding FOR it) and no dog with a ewe neck should ever be placed in a working home (and if cannot, why breed it - either that or put them in the toy group). I would hate to see Labradors continue down the path of "well, I prefer it so I will breed it" and create another non-functional breed.

While I do think the wider muzzles and broader skulls are more to standard, the shorter muzzles we see in the show ring these days are not correct by any standard and are not functional. They are also changing the head type, and not in a good way. Can a dog carry a bird with one? Probably - I am sure almost any breed can carry a bird to some extent. Many breeds hunt, as do poorly made, pet quality dogs. This breed is supposed to do it efficiently, and the ones shown should be the best representatives of the standard, not the ones that are most in line with current fads.

Someone get a muzzle.

Someone doesn't like hearing the truth.

And medication!

You're awesome Juan

Just having fun! This topic gets so old!