A Discourse on Conformation Judging

I think that I can speak for all my readers when I say that I love dogs.  However, having grown up around the sport of conformation dog shows, I have developed an appreciation for breed type, canine structure and temperament that helps me to appreciate the product of a purposeful breeding program that produces a specimen that is a classic example of the breed. As an academic, I understand that only knowledge can truly elevate our understanding of any domain, so one must throw away their personal biases and seek out the knowledge that is required to be the architect of a breeding program and an objective part of the dog show world. In my previous articles, I have written extensively about the psychological difficulties that arise in both judging dogs and evaluating one’s own dog, but I am taking this opportunity to discuss the problems that I see that are marginalizing the domain of conformation dog shows and perpetuate mediocrity in the ring.

I was blessed to have had a family who bred and showed Standard Poodles when I was growing up, it truly taught me the value of dogs as well as providing a deep dive into grooming, coat maintenance and conditioning. My parents breeding program netted some excellent dogs, but they didn’t have the money to campaign dogs or the knowledge of how to get the funding necessary. The most valuable thing that I received was a hard-core education on canine structure from the amazing mentors who I spent time with under the grooming tent. It was a magical time to show dogs in the Northeastern United States, spending my days under the tent with Peter Green, Jane and Robert Forsythe, Anne and James Clark, and a young Kaz Osaka and Margery Good. When you get to be amongst your heroes at a young age, it is truly a blessing. I have always asked as many questions as I could so I could gain as much knowledge as I could about canine construction, coat, condition and the nuances of breeding selection and evaluation. I had the opportunity to make dogs my lifetime profession, but I chose the more conventional path of education and spent many years focused on raising kids while keeping a peripheral interest in dogs.  With the kids grown, I circled back to the dog show world, reconnecting with old friends and continuing to grow my knowledge. 

It became evident that dog shows were shockingly different.  Gone were the grooming tents that sheltered the who’s who of the dog world, alongside the breeder owner handlers, gone were the judges of my youth, with a critical eye for a dog. There are far more “professional handlers,” and an owner handler subculture, that has changed the landscape and expectations in many breed rings. There are boxes of conformation dog show magazines, that are distributed for free, where exhibitors can advertise their dog’s achievements for the world to see and some judges who use this as a knowledge base. While purposeful breeding is supposed to improve our breeds, I have seen many breeds that have regressed in quality, and dogs with structural faults being presented in the ring and at times being awarded with wins and titles.

 As a young owner handler, my proximity to professional handlers granted me access to an education on all things involved in conformation showing.  I was able to build relationships with professional handlers and top breeders and was included in their discussions regarding their dogs and their breeding programs. My inquisitive nature brought me into many great discussions and afforded me a great deal of learning.

For people who have not been involved in the world of conformation dog shows for four decades, what they see today is the only reality that they know.  Unfortunately, this is hardly the case and the sport as well as the quality of the average dog has gone downhill. As you read on, my thoughts may appear to be an indictment levied against AKC conformation dog shows, but it is not.   It is a plea directed at all involved to fix the culture that we have created and make showing dogs a level playing field, where the best dogs and breeders are rewarded for their efforts.  Many say sport is dying, if it is, I believe that these are the reasons.

Judging

Aristotle said the law should be “reason without passion,” I would argue that this ethos should extend into the world of conformation dog shows. To create a rational platform, we need to look at our current practices and seek out ways to improve. In the past two years, I have seen more bad judging than I did at any other point in my life.  I can’t unsee many of the decisions that I have seen some of our “esteemed” judges make. I hear people talk about “fault judging” or the idea that a judge should not disqualify a dog for its faults?  Is that to say a judge should award a dog with faults over dogs that are correct according to the breed standard? If this is about breeding stock, would a credible breeder use a dog with discernable faults in her breeding program when they know that these faults will appear downstream in other dogs?  Unfortunately, within our dog show community, there are not enough quality mentors who can guide new breeders and explain the nuances of structure, type, and movement, so that they can avoid the mistake of using a sub-standard dog that wins more than it should.  In the end, many of our breeds have gone downhill over the last forty years and it has become acceptable to exhibit sub-par dogs, since judges award them over better dogs. The following is a simplified methodology that can be used for judging all breeds of dogs.

Structure

When applying to become an AKC judge, the first course that one must pass is “Canine Structure.” Structure is the key component that determines whether a dog can perform its intended job and is critical for breeding healthy dogs without orthopedic problems. From the breeder perspective, structure is the starting point when doing puppy evaluations, with dogs with obvious structural faults being relegated to being a happy pet who will live out its life on someone’s sofa.  If we agree on this premise, why is it I see dogs with obvious structural faults being awarded with wins, earning titles, and beating other dogs with more correct structure?  I was taught that the first question that a judge should ask about her selection is would I use this dog in my breeding program if I bred this breed?   As I stated previously, dogs with obvious faults become pets that are sold with a spay and neuter contract, so dogs with inferior structure should not be rewarded, or in my mind presented. The downstream effect of awarding dogs with poor structure is that we see a regression of quality across many breeds and breeders are not forced to do a better job in their own breeding program. Going back to the early 1980’s, I do not recall judges awarding dogs with obvious faults, they showed a critical eye for a dog in their actions. I find myself standing ringside with some of the most noted breeders and handlers in our sport, and I get an eyeroll, a chuckle, or an elbow in my side when the judge awards a dog that is simply not structurally sound.

Standards

When I began showing dogs over forty years ago, there were six groups and one hundred and eighteen breeds, today there are seven groups and over two hundred breeds.  From my perspective, it is nearly impossible to believe that one can master all the AKC standards. Judges need to continuously review the standards of the breeds that they are judging, since as exhibitors, we are entrusting them to make the right decision.  This is easier if a judge must judge a specialty show where you can focus on the standard of one breed, but at an all-breed show the task becomes decidedly harder.  In my earlier article, “The Psychology of Dog Show Judging,” I discussed some of the complexities of judging from a psychological perspective as well as memory perspective.

Key Aspects of Breed Judging

  “While we expect a judge to mentally access the entire breed standard, hold the standard in their “working memory,” and award each dog according to their merit, this is almost impossible. Studies have shown that an individual can only hold between three and four items in their “working memory.”” Psychology of Dog Show Judging, Showsight Magazine April, 2022.  In discussing the complexity of this task with all-breed judges, I found that there is a simplified approach that is better can help judges make better decisions. Every breed can be discussed in terms of the following points.

  1.  Hallmarks
  2.  Faults
  3.  Movement
  4. Breed Type
  1. Breed hallmarks are the specific facets of a breed that differentiate that breed from other breeds.  A judge first considers the general structure of a dog to ensure that her selection is sound.  She must next look at to see if the dogs have the characteristic hallmarks of that specific breed.  Recently, I have taken an interest in learning about Chow Chows because the breed has a structure that is unique and not like any other breed I know. I have spent a great deal of time talking to Chow breeders and handlers to understand what judges should be looking for in their breed. The hallmarks of the breed are square, stilted and scowl. By utilizing this mnemonic, one can understand the features that they should observe in the Chow.  Square refers to the proportions of the dog, if you were to look underneath a Chow, the area between the legs outlined by the chest and loin should be square.  Stilted refers to the gait, which is the next item on my list, but it is so important in the Chow that it becomes a hallmark of the breed. Since Chows are not angulated in the front and rear, they are not supposed to have the reach and drive that is characteristic of many other breeds. Stilted gait refers to a pendulum motion between the front and rear legs. The scowl refers to the dog’s expression that is created by a marked brow with a padded button of skin just above the inner corner of the eye.
  2. Once we have established that a dog has the hallmarks of the breed, a judge needs to determine if any of the dogs in the ring have faults or disqualifications that are listed in the standard. For the Chow, disqualifications include, drop ears, spotted nose, nose colors other than those allowable for different color dogs and red or pink markings on the tongue.  Serious Fault – Profile other than square. . Serious Faults Entropion or ectropion, or pupils wholly or partially obscured by loose skin. Serious Faults – Labored or abdominal breathing Serious Faults – Unsound stifle or hock joints.
  3. With the Chow, I covered the movement as one of the “hallmarks,” since their movement is a hallmark of the breed.  Two words that we hear in reference to movement are the terms “reach and drive.”  While these words provide a descriptor that states that movement should be efficient, the manner that it is expressed across breeds can be very different. When I think of a current dog that I see that exhibits reach and drive, I think of one Australian Sheperd.  You can see from the dog’s efficiency of motion; it can work in the field all day long. For the sake of comparison, I find that judges in my own breed, American Staffordshire Terriers, there is some confusion as to how they should be moved in the ring and their style of gait.  In the past twenty years, it has become common to see AmStaffs shown at run like a sporting dog, and judges have seen pictures of top winning dogs displaying “open side gaits.” The AKC breed standard states that the AmStaff should have a “light springy gait.” Light springy gait” implies a powerful dog, that shows ease of motion, but these dogs are not herding dogs or distance runners.  They are sprinters, whose power is exerted in an anaerobic fashion.  From a structural standpoint the AmStaff should have a short loin and a low croupe, that enables the dog to drive off its rear and elevate easily.  A dog with a short loin can’t have a sporting dog open side gait. The importance of this explanation is that judges need to understand the movement as it is relevant to the breed.  Thank you to the judges who ask AmStaff exhibitors to move slowly and deliberately.
  4. Type- Breed type should mean that a dog is a visual representation of the breed standard. If we know the standard, we should be able to select a dog with breed type.  This can however be complicated as many breeds have more than one style with one style being in vogue over the alternative style, and when we see a top winning dog from that style, it drives the direction of the judging decisions. I would like judges to have better knowledge of breeds when this is the case and perhaps, we need to look to our breed clubs and the AKC to see that continuing education is used to improve judging across all breeds.

Oversight and Testing

If my candor offends you, it might imply that you are more part of the problem than a person who desires to fix the problem.  I do not see leaving well enough alone as a viable option, as we have marginalized the value of showing in the conformation ring, which causes us to degrade, rather than preserve many of our breeds. As the “psychologist,” I have witnessed many judges prance around the ring as if their decision was an irrefutable truth, that should be beyond question. Insert eyeroll here! There is a psychological relationship to a person’s title or job description that causes them to behave in the manner that they believe they are supposed to behave.  If you are curious, information can be found here https://www.prisonexp.org/ . Recently, I had a judge yell at me for not hearing the steward call my number. I assure you this same short overweight judge would not have done the same if we were in the “real world,”
 where he is not protected by a code of conduct that I believe is important and he doesn’t acknowledge. I have witnessed judges behaving poorly as exhibitors when they were unhappy about outcomes, berating other judges and complaining about them outside the ring. (Yes, I know these incidents were reported to the AKC, but was anyone censured?) If judges are beyond reproach, how do we as a community foster accountability. Accountability should extend to the judging of dogs as well.  There should be no combination of a dog and handler that should be awarded wins, if the dog does have the qualities necessary to win. Unfortunately, there are some “top dogs” in some breeds that are awarded group wins and best in shows that should be on their owner’s sofa as they lack quality. Additionally, when a dog wins enough, other judges will gladly perpetuate the mistake as either a function of “monkey see- monkey do,” or by virtue of political leverage that should not be part of this sport.

I know that I have given my readers much to think about.  I have opened many cans of worms, but in truth, I am only writing about the topics that I am hearing exhibitors and handlers discussing.  I look at judging and I ask myself, which of the dogs would I use in a breeding program, without bias to who is on the lead, and I often walk away perplexed. While I have touched on a number of topics, there is much more to discuss.  Please follow my page on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogshowpsychology add to the discussion.  Fixing the problems begins with having an open dialogue.  Additionally, reference my previous articles that will add to your understanding of psychology and culture of conformation dog shows.

Pursuit of Mediocrity?

I think that I can speak for all my readers when I say that I love dogs.  However, having grown up around the sport of conformation dog shows, I have developed an appreciation for breed type, canine structure and temperament that helps me to appreciate the product of a purposeful breeding program that produces a specimen that is a classic example of the breed. As an academic, I understand that only knowledge can truly elevate our understanding of any domain, so one must throw away their personal biases and seek out the knowledge that is required to be the architect of a breeding program and an objective part of the dog show world. In my previous articles, I have written extensively about the psychological difficulties that arise in both judging dogs and evaluating one’s own dog, but I am taking this opportunity to discuss the problems that I see that are marginalizing the domain of conformation dog shows and perpetuate mediocrity in the ring.

I was blessed to have had a family who bred and showed Standard Poodles when I was growing up, it truly taught me the value of dogs as well as providing a deep dive into grooming, coat maintenance and conditioning. My parents breeding program netted some excellent dogs, but they didn’t have the money to campaign dogs or the knowledge of how to get the funding necessary. The most valuable thing that I received was a hard-core education on canine structure from the amazing mentors who I spent time with under the grooming tent. It was a magical time to show dogs in the Northeastern United States, spending my days under the tent with Peter Green, Jane and Robert Forsythe, Anne and James Clark, and a young Kaz Osaka and Margery Good. When you get to be amongst your heroes at a young age, it is truly a blessing. I have always asked as many questions as I could so I could gain as much knowledge as I could about canine construction, coat, condition and the nuances of breeding selection and evaluation. I had the opportunity to make dogs my lifetime profession, but I chose the more conventional path of education and spent many years focused on raising kids while keeping a peripheral interest in dogs.  With the kids grown, I circled back to the dog show world, reconnecting with old friends and continuing to grow my knowledge. 

It became evident that dog shows were shockingly different.  Gone were the grooming tents that sheltered the who’s who of the dog world, alongside the breeder owner handlers, gone were the judges of my youth, with a critical eye for a dog. There are far more “professional handlers,” and an owner handler subculture, that has changed the landscape and expectations in many breed rings. There are boxes of conformation dog show magazines, that are distributed for free, where exhibitors can advertise their dog’s achievements for the world to see and some judges who use this as a knowledge base. While purposeful breeding is supposed to improve our breeds, I have seen many breeds that have regressed in quality, and dogs with structural faults being presented in the ring and at times being awarded with wins and titles.

 As a young owner handler, my proximity to professional handlers granted me access to an education on all things involved in conformation showing.  I was able to build relationships with professional handlers and top breeders and was included in their discussions regarding their dogs and their breeding programs. My inquisitive nature brought me into many great discussions and afforded me a great deal of learning.

For people who have not been involved in the world of conformation dog shows for four decades, what they see today is the only reality that they know.  Unfortunately, this is hardly the case and the sport as well as the quality of the average dog has gone downhill. As you read on, my thoughts may appear to be an indictment levied against AKC conformation dog shows, but it is not.   It is a plea directed at all involved to fix the culture that we have created and make showing dogs a level playing field, where the best dogs and breeders are rewarded for their efforts.  Many say sport is dying, if it is, I believe that these are the reasons.

Judging

Aristotle said the law should be “reason without passion,” I would argue that this ethos should extend into the world of conformation dog shows. To create a rational platform, we need to look at our current practices and seek out ways to improve. In the past two years, I have seen more bad judging than I did at any other point in my life.  I can’t unsee many of the decisions that I have seen some of our “esteemed” judges make. I hear people talk about “fault judging” or the idea that a judge should not disqualify a dog for its faults?  Is that to say a judge should award a dog with faults over dogs that are correct according to the breed standard? If this is about breeding stock, would a credible breeder use a dog with discernable faults in her breeding program when they know that these faults will appear downstream in other dogs?  Unfortunately, within our dog show community, there are not enough quality mentors who can guide new breeders and explain the nuances of structure, type, and movement, so that they can avoid the mistake of using a sub-standard dog that wins more than it should.  In the end, many of our breeds have gone downhill over the last forty years and it has become acceptable to exhibit sub-par dogs, since judges award them over better dogs. The following is a simplified methodology that can be used for judging all breeds of dogs.

Structure

When applying to become an AKC judge, the first course that one must pass is “Canine Structure.” Structure is the key component that determines whether a dog can perform its intended job and is critical for breeding healthy dogs without orthopedic problems. From the breeder perspective, structure is the starting point when doing puppy evaluations, with dogs with obvious structural faults being relegated to being a happy pet who will live out its life on someone’s sofa.  If we agree on this premise, why is it I see dogs with obvious structural faults being awarded with wins, earning titles, and beating other dogs with more correct structure?  I was taught that the first question that a judge should ask about her selection is would I use this dog in my breeding program if I bred this breed?   As I stated previously, dogs with obvious faults become pets that are sold with a spay and neuter contract, so dogs with inferior structure should not be rewarded, or in my mind presented. The downstream effect of awarding dogs with poor structure is that we see a regression of quality across many breeds and breeders are not forced to do a better job in their own breeding program. Going back to the early 1980’s, I do not recall judges awarding dogs with obvious faults, they showed a critical eye for a dog in their actions. I find myself standing ringside with some of the most noted breeders and handlers in our sport, and I get an eyeroll, a chuckle, or an elbow in my side when the judge awards a dog that is simply not structurally sound.

Standards

When I began showing dogs over forty years ago, there were six groups and one hundred and eighteen breeds, today there are seven groups and over two hundred breeds.  From my perspective, it is nearly impossible to believe that one can master all the AKC standards. Judges need to continuously review the standards of the breeds that they are judging, since as exhibitors, we are entrusting them to make the right decision.  This is easier if a judge must judge a specialty show where you can focus on the standard of one breed, but at an all-breed show the task becomes decidedly harder.  In my earlier article, “The Psychology of Dog Show Judging,” I discussed some of the complexities of judging from a psychological perspective as well as memory perspective.

Key Aspects of Breed Judging

  “While we expect a judge to mentally access the entire breed standard, hold the standard in their “working memory,” and award each dog according to their merit, this is almost impossible. Studies have shown that an individual can only hold between three and four items in their “working memory.”” Psychology of Dog Show Judging, Showsight Magazine April, 2022.  In discussing the complexity of this task with all-breed judges, I found that there is a simplified approach that is better can help judges make better decisions. Every breed can be discussed in terms of the following points.

  1.  Hallmarks
  2.  Faults
  3.  Movement
  4. Breed Type
  1. Breed hallmarks are the specific facets of a breed that differentiate that breed from other breeds.  A judge first considers the general structure of a dog to ensure that her selection is sound.  She must next look at to see if the dogs have the characteristic hallmarks of that specific breed.  Recently, I have taken an interest in learning about Chow Chows because the breed has a structure that is unique and not like any other breed I know. I have spent a great deal of time talking to Chow breeders and handlers to understand what judges should be looking for in their breed. The hallmarks of the breed are square, stilted and scowl. By utilizing this mnemonic, one can understand the features that they should observe in the Chow.  Square refers to the proportions of the dog, if you were to look underneath a Chow, the area between the legs outlined by the chest and loin should be square.  Stilted refers to the gait, which is the next item on my list, but it is so important in the Chow that it becomes a hallmark of the breed. Since Chows are not angulated in the front and rear, they are not supposed to have the reach and drive that is characteristic of many other breeds. Stilted gait refers to a pendulum motion between the front and rear legs. The scowl refers to the dog’s expression that is created by a marked brow with a padded button of skin just above the inner corner of the eye.
  2. Once we have established that a dog has the hallmarks of the breed, a judge needs to determine if any of the dogs in the ring have faults or disqualifications that are listed in the standard. For the Chow, disqualifications include, drop ears, spotted nose, nose colors other than those allowable for different color dogs and red or pink markings on the tongue.  Serious Fault – Profile other than square. . Serious Faults Entropion or ectropion, or pupils wholly or partially obscured by loose skin. Serious Faults – Labored or abdominal breathing Serious Faults – Unsound stifle or hock joints.
  3. With the Chow, I covered the movement as one of the “hallmarks,” since their movement is a hallmark of the breed.  Two words that we hear in reference to movement are the terms “reach and drive.”  While these words provide a descriptor that states that movement should be efficient, the manner that it is expressed across breeds can be very different. When I think of a current dog that I see that exhibits reach and drive, I think of one Australian Sheperd.  You can see from the dog’s efficiency of motion; it can work in the field all day long. For the sake of comparison, I find that judges in my own breed, American Staffordshire Terriers, there is some confusion as to how they should be moved in the ring and their style of gait.  In the past twenty years, it has become common to see AmStaffs shown at run like a sporting dog, and judges have seen pictures of top winning dogs displaying “open side gaits.” The AKC breed standard states that the AmStaff should have a “light springy gait.” Light springy gait” implies a powerful dog, that shows ease of motion, but these dogs are not herding dogs or distance runners.  They are sprinters, whose power is exerted in an anaerobic fashion.  From a structural standpoint the AmStaff should have a short loin and a low croupe, that enables the dog to drive off its rear and elevate easily.  A dog with a short loin can’t have a sporting dog open side gait. The importance of this explanation is that judges need to understand the movement as it is relevant to the breed.  Thank you to the judges who ask AmStaff exhibitors to move slowly and deliberately.
  4. Type- Breed type should mean that a dog is a visual representation of the breed standard. If we know the standard, we should be able to select a dog with breed type.  This can however be complicated as many breeds have more than one style with one style being in vogue over the alternative style, and when we see a top winning dog from that style, it drives the direction of the judging decisions. I would like judges to have better knowledge of breeds when this is the case and perhaps, we need to look to our breed clubs and the AKC to see that continuing education is used to improve judging across all breeds.

Oversight and Testing

If my candor offends you, it might imply that you are more part of the problem than a person who desires to fix the problem.  I do not see leaving well enough alone as a viable option, as we have marginalized the value of showing in the conformation ring, which causes us to degrade, rather than preserve many of our breeds. As the “psychologist,” I have witnessed many judges prance around the ring as if their decision was an irrefutable truth, that should be beyond question. Insert eyeroll here! There is a psychological relationship to a person’s title or job description that causes them to behave in the manner that they believe they are supposed to behave.  If you are curious, information can be found here https://www.prisonexp.org/ . Recently, I had a judge yell at me for not hearing the steward call my number. I assure you this same short overweight judge would not have done the same if we were in the “real world,”
 where he is not protected by a code of conduct that I believe is important and he doesn’t acknowledge. I have witnessed judges behaving poorly as exhibitors when they were unhappy about outcomes, berating other judges and complaining about them outside the ring. (Yes, I know these incidents were reported to the AKC, but was anyone censured?) If judges are beyond reproach, how do we as a community foster accountability. Accountability should extend to the judging of dogs as well.  There should be no combination of a dog and handler that should be awarded wins, if the dog does have the qualities necessary to win. Unfortunately, there are some “top dogs” in some breeds that are awarded group wins and best in shows that should be on their owner’s sofa as they lack quality. Additionally, when a dog wins enough, other judges will gladly perpetuate the mistake as either a function of “monkey see- monkey do,” or by virtue of political leverage that should not be part of this sport.

I know that I have given my readers much to think about.  I have opened many cans of worms, but in truth, I am only writing about the topics that I am hearing exhibitors and handlers discussing.  I look at judging and I ask myself, which of the dogs would I use in a breeding program, without bias to who is on the lead, and I often walk away perplexed. While I have touched on a number of topics, there is much more to discuss.  Please follow my page on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogshowpsychology add to the discussion.  Fixing the problems begins with having an open dialogue.  Additionally, reference my previous articles that will add to your understanding of psychology and culture of conformation dog shows.