FOOD
FOR THOUGHT
Lisa Warren
(MORE "F" WORDS)
In my book, one of the
worst things for a judge to be called (after, of course, the very obvious
undesirable labels such as "crook" and "complete blathering idiot") is "fault
judge". By necessity, all thoughtful
judging makes note of the faults
encountered. But the "fault
judge" designation implies a reliance on finding faults and eliminating
the dogs that have them rather than a sure-minded search for virtues and
quality and then paying tribute to the dogs that possess the best of those
blessings. To be sure, fault
judging is the easier approach, a fact attested to by the number of judges
that seem to rely on it as their main operating mode, and by the number of
ringside experts always on hand to enumerate the shortcomings of whichever
dog has just won.
Faults are usually
pretty easy to find since all dogs have
them. Early in our dog careers
we all learn to recognize unsound movement, bad toplines, light eyes, dogs
that are outside of the ideal size range, and other obvious undesirable
traits. Alas, many dog-showing
enthusiasts, some judges among them it seems, remain at just that level,
never learning to recognize the virtues that set the good dogs apart from
the mediocre ones or the fine shadings of type, structure and carriage that
set the great dogs apart from the good ones.
Once the vast area
of easily discerned canine faults is left behind an even larger world of
subtleties is entered, and here is where that famous "eye for a dog" becomes
essential if one is to be able to select the best animal, whether it is the
judge making a decision based upon less than two minutes of time per dog,
or a breeder deciding which stud dog to use or which puppy to keep from a
litter. Many good puppies have
been sold as pets by breeders who saw only the shortcomings and failed to
believe that they might be outgrown, while overlooking the virtues of structure
that would in time transform the gangly youngster into a fine, balanced dog
of superior quality.
In the ring, time after time, a judge can
be observed ignoring a sound animal of good structure and superb breed type
because of some factor that obviously, for that judge, renders the entire
animal unworthy of serious
consideration. Such a judge
is likely to end up with a winner of so-so overall quality, one with few
faults that are easily found but with no sterling
virtues. Yes, of course judges
must judge the "parts" of a dog, but problems arise when the whole dog gets
lost for the judge because of a shortcoming in one of the parts, or because
of the judge's inability to forgive a few minor but obvious
imperfections. And we see the
other side of the coin from time to time as well: the judge
that so falls in love with one part of a dog, perhaps the head or the shoulders,
that the fact that the dog has serious problems of type, structure, proportion
or movement seems to get lost. In
either case, what the judge seems to lack is either basic ability or a commitment
to finding the best overall dog, the one that most exemplifies the breed's
unique characteristics while exhibiting the soundness, balance, and condition
expected in every worthy show dog.
Judging is very much about compromising and forgiving; I submit that
the shared traits of the best judges, along with integrity, courage, objectivity
and, of course, "the eye", include having a sure idea of what makes up an
all-round good dog, and the ability to weigh the importance of the various
virtues and failings found in each animal.
In the rarified world
of breeding and showing dogs, judges' opinions are a very important element,
no question, and fault judging, as well as "single part" judging, does have
its ill effects on breed evolution since breeders, especially the novices
and perennial novices, are often influenced by the outcome of what happens
at dog shows. But finding fault
can be a larger problem when breeders rely heavily on it as they make their
selections of stud dogs. Make
no mistake, it is not being suggested here that genetic diseases and
disqualifying faults should be overlooked, but too much fault-finding might
find a breeder entering a state of near-paralysis, finding it impossible
to locate a perfect dog to which to breed a good bitch, or a bad bitch, for
that matter. For many breeders,
venturing off the familiar territory of their own bloodlines creates a big
problem: surely any faults in that other bloodline are worse than those in
one's own! Such a breeder might
do well to consider the axiom, I believe it was Valery's, that our best ideas
are sometimes the ones that are at odds with our
emotions. Notice though, that
emotion has been singled out, not intuition, a gift which is surely shared
by the best breeders, as are those traits attributed above to the best
judges.
Now, I know that this is a big simplification
of the ideal process of stud selection, but the thing to do, of course, is
to find the dog who has virtues that might achieve a genetic coup over the
bitch's failings, and whose faults are not the same as
hers. Beyond that, consideration of every minor problem that
might be inherited from the breeding because of observed flaws in the dog
or some of his ancestors is probably going to contribute more to the breeder's
eventual insanity than it is to the actual outcome of the
mating! I'd be willing to bet
that almost every successful breeder that could be interviewed on the subject
would remember a significant mating, one that was instrumental to the ongoing
success of the bloodline, that was done because of the virtues and in spite
of the faults of one or both of the dogs
involved. And as for the dams,
have not some of the best animals and the biggest winners in the histories
of many breeds been the offspring of untitled
bitches? A gifted breeder will
not let a good bitch with something outstanding to contribute go unutilized
simply because she has a flaw or two: I disagree with the adage that "no
dog should be bred from if it is not good enough to
finish." To my mind, that is a very good way to throw the baby out with the
bath water, a good way for a breeder to "fault select" the bloodline right
into a state of mediocrity, just as so many judges "fault judge" their way
to mediocre winners.
© Lisa and Andrew Warren, all rights reserved