Quote:
Originally Posted by Mardelin  I find it very disturbing that some judge's never look what is at the end of the lead and continually put handlers, because of who they are. I've always wondered "if" ethics has fallen by the way side with handlers. Or if egos have gotten in the way and they do take such dogs in the ring just to prove a point.
One can only be responsible for one's own breeding program and only take the best of the best into the ring. If we don't then we are only fooling ourselves and short changing our breeding program. It is defeating the purpose of showing; to obtain approval of our breeding stock. We all know there is no perfect dog, but I was taught, if you see 3 faults in a dog, don't show it, the judge will find more. So, it's the 3 strikes your out. |
Also, if a handler can show anything, then what is it saying about he Judges? This happens more often than most might think I bet. Being so, where are the police to police them? Whos job it it? The AKCs? The mother clubs? The exhibitors? I say all of them. Someone has to complain to get the ball rolling.
This was years ago, but I watched a stunning Cocker in the ring, and was awed at the dog. Everyone was just staring at this guy strut his stuff. He was handled by his owner/breeder. Then a handler walks in with a Cocker that had obvious faults in the rear and not much confidence at all. But the handler is well known so guess which dog won? That was just one show I attended. I have been to about 30 in my life and that happened on about a quarter of them.