Conformation 101 by Kathy Lorentzen
Withholding Awards
I recently had an experience as a judge that I want to share with you. I learned a good lesson, and I’m hoping that I can pass what I learned on to other judges so that you don’t make the same mistake that I did.
While judging at a multi-breed show, a dog of a particular breed entered my ring. I won’t name the breed, but will tell you that the standard for that breed states that the breed has a harsh, double coat, and that the coat texture is achieved by stripping. The standard also states that the ears may be cropped or natural, and that when natural the ears should tip over just above the line of the skull and lie close to the head.
So into my ring walks a lady with a class dog of this breed that was, without question, clipper trimmed. The dog had a skin-tight clipper trim on its entire body, and its leg furnishings were sparse and very soft. The dog also had natural ears that were ‘flyaway’, not at all what the standard describes.
When the lady put the dog on the table for me to go over, I asked her if she understood what the breed standard said about stripping. She said that, “she showed in UKC instead of AKC because UKC didn’t require the dogs to be stripped” and that she “was going to start stripping”. I struggled with this response and with the dilemma of what I should do. Yes, the dog was obviously recognizable as a member of its breed. It was the correct color, the correct size, and basically the correct proportion. It was not terribly sound, did not have a correct topline, did not have a correct coat or correct ears. Against my own better judgment, I awarded the dog first place and Best Male, as it was the only class entry.
The woman exited the ring and returned with a class female. This one, again, was clipper trimmed and had non-matching, fly-away ears. It was also undershot.
There are no disqualifications in the standard for this breed for any of the ‘unpardonable sins’ mentioned above. They are faults that go against the requirements of the standard and have to be weighed by each individual judge as to their relative importance in the overall scheme of things. Again, I struggled with what I should do and eventually awarded the female first place and best female.
Then, of course, the two dogs came back in the ring for Best of Winners and Best of Breed. As I stood in the middle of the ring looking at them, I decided that there was no way that I could award either of them a competition win by giving one Best of Winners and therefore Best of Breed. I walked over to the lady who owned the dogs and told her, in the nicest way that I could, that due to the faults that her dogs possessed, and the fact that their coats were completely inappropriate according to the breed standard, I was going to withhold the competition win for lack of quality and would not award either of the dogs Best of Winners and Best of Breed.
She was extremely angry. I could see that she wanted to really go off on me but she managed to contain herself and left the ring, which was certainly the correct thing for her to do. I figured that wouldn’t be the last I would hear from her, and I was right.
Monday morning I sent a note to the UKC office about my experience with this breed and I received a reply stating that the woman had already called the office and complained that one of the judges had ‘disqualified’ her dogs. She declined to name the judge, just went on about how her dogs have won other awards at UKC shows and she did not understand how the one judge could ‘disqualify’ them. I had to explain to the office that there were no disqualifications in the breed standard for coat, ears or bite, and that I had carefully explained to the exhibitor that I was withholding the competition win due to lack of quality. I never made an attempt to disqualify either dog as there were no grounds for me to take that action.
But I made a big mistake. By awarding each of the dogs a first place and Best of Sex, I gave them each 25 points towards their Championship titles, and I should never have done that. What I should have done was give each of them a second place ribbon in their class and mark my book ‘1st place withheld for lack of quality’. That way no points would have been awarded.
I made this mistake for two different reasons. The first is that nobody likes to be the bad guy who withholds awards and upsets exhibitors, and when these two dogs came into the ring individually in their class, though I knew I shouldn’t award them a first place, I talked myself out of withholding so that I wouldn’t be the bad guy. The second reason I made the mistake is that I grew up in a venue where if there is no competition, there are no points, and so when I got the two dogs back in the ring together, I figured that if I withheld at that point, there wouldn’t be a competition win and no damage would be done. But the damage WAS done because those 25 points that I awarded each of those sub-standard dogs could have been the final points that they needed to complete their Championship titles.
A few weeks later I received a letter from the UKC office telling me that the exhibitor in question had filed a complaint against me for ‘disqualifying’ her dogs. (She apparently never figured out the difference between a DQ and an award that is withheld.) UKC upheld my decision to withhold on her dogs by quoting her the requirements of the breed standard and telling her that I was completely within my rights as a judge to do what I did.
But then I got reprimanded for NOT withholding at the class level, as I knew I should have. I deserved the reprimand and wrote back to the office and told them so. And I thanked them for reinforcing what I had known in my head was the right thing to do, but had talked myself out of.
It won’t happen again. From now on, when a dog enters my ring that I feel does not deserve to be a Champion, I will withhold at the class level, and no points will be awarded. I am not going to contribute to a poor quality dog earning a title that it doesn’t deserve. It is up to us as judges to protect the integrity of the UKC Championship title by taking our responsibilities seriously when awarding points. Judging is not a popularity contest, and we have to be thick skinned enough to do the right thing, popular or not. Not every dog was meant to be a Champion, and we have to go into our rings with that thought in mind every time we judge a show.
Correspondence is invited at vincefan@centurytel.net.
|
