Thread: Very interesting food for thought.

I've got pure breds EB They are the hardest to keep down at a good work weight and I have no idea why.

What weights are the show ring dogs generally kept at, and what fitness level?

Originally Posted by Wirehunt

I've got pure breds EB What weights are the show ring dogs generally kept at, and what fitness level?

@Wirehunt, the quote of the day around the show ring is 'fit for purpose'...I laugh myself silly when I hear that...there is the quantitive 'show condition' slogan...I have had judges berate my dogs for not being in show condition (in other words they did not have enough condition...ie not fat, all muscle etc)...I told a judge that my bitch had taken a mob of steers off the crop that morning before the show when he told me she was not in show condition...he replied I do not care what she does or how many cattle she moves she is not in show condition...you should see some of the Labradors...went to a show in Taupo last year...one judge from the US favoured the more 'fit for purpose' type (of Labrador)...you get a real picture of just how we have arrived at the working and the show types...I believe, for the pedigree dogs, it is very sad testament...I have shown my dogs to prove that a gundog can be a trialist and rough shooters dog but still be correct to standard I have had a challenge point refused on account of the judge not knowing what breed my Epagneul Breton male was...to be fair he had probably never seen one before...

Which has really nothing to do with HD...

Originally Posted by EeeBees

@Wirehunt, the quote of the day around the show ring is 'fit for purpose'...I laugh myself silly when I hear that...there is the quantitive 'show condition' slogan...I have had judges berate my dogs for not being in show condition (in other words they did not have enough condition...ie not fat, all muscle etc)...I told a judge that my bitch had taken a mob of steers off the crop that morning before the show when he told me she was not in show condition...he replied I do not care what she does or how many cattle she moves she is not in show condition...you should see some of the Labradors...went to a show in Taupo last year...one judge from the US favoured the more 'fit for purpose' type (of Labrador)...you get a real picture of just how we have arrived at the working and the show types...I believe, for the pedigree dogs, it is very sad testament...I have shown my dogs to prove that a gundog can be a trialist and rough shooters dog but still be correct to standard I have had a challenge point refused on account of the judge not knowing what breed my Epagneul Breton male was...to be fair he had probably never seen one before...

Which has really nothing to do with HD...

In the vast majority of instances, if it is in a show ring it is not fit for purpose. How long would Thoroughbreds last as "fit for purpose" if we changed the Melbourne Cup to the horses simply walking into the birdcage having someone pick the prettiest one and we all go home. Performance of any performance animal must always be the first benchmark. The reason we have so many of these genetic anomalies in some many breeds is because they are predominantly judged to a written standard with no performance needed. It's an absolute catastrophe for just about any animal a written standard has ever been applied to. Meanwhile... the people working their animals have few problems, it's no rocket science. Showing of dogs as a benchmark of any kind should be considered fraud.

The fact we know bugger all remains and anyone trying to claim something definitive in its regard is going against all of the scientific information we have at hand.

bieng a conspiracy theorist from way back i wonder if there is any combined vet will to solve hd it must be quite a money spinner??
if as you say ruff xrays are practicly useless in diagnosing it i imagine like doctors vets are welded to a collective theory and practise with little financial gain or will to be the whistle blower.

the surprising result was the irish wolfhound,such a low percentage for such a large breed. even allowing for variance in human interpretation of xrays, what is the explanation for the difference in breed results other than the fact their is a genetic element?are there any other conclusions? i was surprised at the NZ brittany result although this was based on 2 dogs. as my own dog was recently evaluated(the xrays were sent to australia for evaluation)he scored 1 in each of the six components for a total of 6 against a stated breed average of 11.9.all 4 generations of ancestors have been hipscored and all have been rated good or better.