# Funny looking goldens?



## jackie_hubert

I'm really not much interested in show (I'll leave that up to the experts) but I have noticed since being on the forum that some goldens that members describe as "stunning" and/or win shows actually look quite...extreeme? With faces that almost look like Chow Chows - pushed in diamond shaped eyes that almost disappear under extensive brows, really short muzzles, tounges that are constantly hanging out a bit, giant heads and super short legs, etc. I'm not going to post a picture lest I offend someone or someone's lines without meaning to but perhaps you know what I mean?

I'm wondering what your opinions are on this.


----------



## goldensrbest

I have not seen any goldens on here like that, some on here have stunning goldens, that i admire greatly.


----------



## jwemt81

I can't say that I have seen any that look like that either, especially not any whose tongues are always hanging out.


----------



## lily101

I've noticed the same thing not on here but other places........ and i get what your trying to say i would also like to here other peoples opinions.


----------



## Megora

I've noticed the diamond or triangle eyes... and feel that's a shame, because it completely ruins the "golden expression".

But I kinda wanted to see a picture of the ott dog's in question...!


----------



## Tahnee GR

Hard to say without pictures as examples. I can't really say that I have seen that here either, but I don't always look at the picture threads.


----------



## The Trio

I don't feel you would hurt anyones feelings if you posted pics. You are just being investigative and not being mean.


----------



## Bender

Do you mean the really broad heads where they seem to have a lot of extra skin so the eyes are buried? 

I don't mind if it's not extreme, but there is a limit. I do like a nice broad head though, but like to see those eyeballs!


----------



## jackie_hubert

Bender said:


> Do you mean the really broad heads where they seem to have a lot of extra skin so the eyes are buried?


Yes, and the tip of the tounge is usually hanging out, perhaps because of the shape of the muzzle?


----------



## goldensrbest

Now all of us are going to be over at golden pictures, looking.


----------



## The Trio

I do have to say I don't know a single golden who can hold their licker in. It's always flopped out to the side or hanging out some how.


----------



## mag&bays mom

i get what you are saying esp. when you speak of the ones with faces that almost look like chow chow and the really short noses.

dont get me wrong i love my goldens! but i agree some of the show dogs look kind of funny and not what my ideal golden is...

however, im not into show whatsoever so my views are totally different compared to someone who is!


----------



## FinnTastic

Someone find pictures!!!!!


----------



## goldensrbest

Yes, i really don't remember seeing goldens like that, on here, i have noticed that some of the english people on here, have lighter colored goldens, but they are beautiful, and like the way they are built.


----------



## CarolinaCasey

I've not really ever seen a golden that looks like a chow in the face. I'm kinda unsure how that would look without a photo!  I think what you're seeing in win photos might be the dog stacked with the lead/collar pulled tight under the chin that when pulled up can make it look like a wrinkly jowl ?? I think the shape of the eyes in the standard are supposed to have good expression like you described.


----------



## BeauShel

In some of the show pictures it could be the way the handler is holding the lead.


----------



## lgnutah

I asked about the genetics of the shape of eyes on an earlier thread (which sparked some debate about PC words to use). I think the thread was titled Reptilian Slanted Eyes


----------



## FinnTastic

lgnutah said:


> I asked about the genetics of the shape of eyes on an earlier thread (which sparked some debate about PC words to use). I think the thread was titled Reptilian Slanted Eyes


So I'm guessing Reptilian Slanted Eyes are not PC 
That's a pretty funny description of them.


----------



## Megora

lgnutah said:


> I asked about the genetics of the shape of eyes on an earlier thread (which sparked some debate about PC words to use). I think the thread was titled Reptilian Slanted Eyes


Reptilian... Of course now I'm going to run off and search for that thread! 

This (pic below) is the "chow" type of head that I've seen here or there. I do see the choke chain/lead above the dog's head, so that might be making him have chubby cheeks I guess. :uhoh: <- And yes, he is completely adorable anyway. 

I do have a guy with a big head and I can appreciate goldens with bigger boxy heads, but one thing I'm not crazy about are some of the goldens that have more lab like features. That could be the furrowed brow that Jackie was talking about.

And then there was the triangle eyes and squinty eyes. For the squinty eyes I posted the pic of "Faera's Future Classic" like from k9data. 

And then whenever I wiggle Jacks' dangling jowls and clean his tear smudgies off, I do look at pics like the third below (Amberac's Mesmerizing Mickey) and feel a little better. 










​ 










​ 


​


----------



## jackie_hubert

Is it ironic that Faera's Future Classic is Cosmo great grandfather?


----------



## Jo Ellen

Boxy heads? I think that's politically incorrect too 

I've been searching for the reptilian eyes since I first heard the phrase ... still not sure what exactly that looks like.


----------



## Shalva

Honestly I have seen the heads you are talking about and I have seen them at shows... its all in degree and what you are used to seeing. I have see the wedge shaped heads with the squinty off set eyes and little stop.... Honestly heads and head shape are one thing I do prefer about my english/european type goldens (gosh I wish I didnt have to type that english/european thing all the time it would be so much easier to say english but then folks will play semantics wtih that) but I have seen the heads and it really is a shame. 

S


----------



## Jax's Mom

Hard for me to comment, since I love all, differences and similarities. I think we each have our own preferences. Sometimes even the "ugliest" of dogs is the cutest thing! (especially after you get to know their personalities. When I was much younger, I had a beagle/chihuahua mix. Of course, we had no idea what she would look like when we brought this little mutt home. I wouldnt have chosen Sheba to look like that, BUT I loved her with all my heart, as did the rest of our family. Lets just say she wasnt a very pretty dog  but what she lacked in looks she more than made up for with heart and personality.


----------



## Shalva

Jax's Mom said:


> Hard for me to comment, since I love all, differences and similarities. I think we each have our own preferences. Sometimes even the "ugliest" of dogs is the cutest thing! (especially after you get to know their personalities. When I was much younger, I had a beagle/chihuahua mix. Of course, we had no idea what she would look like when we brought this little mutt home. I wouldnt have chosen Sheba to look like that, BUT I loved her with all my heart, as did the rest of our family. Lets just say she wasnt a very pretty dog  but what she lacked in looks she more than made up for with heart and personality.


Nobody is saying they aren't cute or aren't deserving or sweet but this is a showing/conformation area and thus what is winning, what is being shown, does shape the future of the breed and the direction that the breed will go... I have a Yogi kid, Yogi is a very handsome boy... a lovely moderate dog... and when he was showing the style of dog that was being bred was similar to him. I remember seeing Montana at that time and thinking how different he was from Yogi, then Yogi retires and I notice that the heads start taking on the shape of Montanas head.... its about what is winning... I have noticed the heads that the original poster is talking about... honestly I don't like them, it is a style thing that I just don't like... 

While all the dogs are deserving and probably nice and make up for it in temperament and sweetness in a conformation thread, we are talking about hte future of the breed....we have all seen breeds destroyed by fads in the breed ring... german shepherds are a perfect example of that 
s


----------



## Jax's Mom

sorry...wasnt paying attention to the area this was posted to!


----------



## Megora

Shalva - I know who Yogi is (and I had a golden with a head like that and loved it), but who is Montana?


----------



## Shalva

Montana is a dog who was showing about the time that Yogi was showing... more towards the end of Yogi's career but they went head to head a few times.... I personally was never a fan of Montana's head as it seems very similar to some of the wedge shaped heads I see now... structurally he seemed a lovely dog but I wasn't a fan of his head (my two cents of course) 

My own mentor and I have discussed heads at length and we are both equally discouraged with the direction that head shape and eye set has gone... She is an old timer who has also moved in the English direction and we have talked about head shape at length. 
s


----------



## Megora

Found him -

http://snowshoegoldens.com/index.php?contentID=1176&recordID=517
http://snowshoe.accelhost.com/accelsite/media/mediaFile2069.pdf

*confession* I really like Snowshoe goldens. I met somebody at a show who had her 2 year old golden in Rally. Very "busy" and very high energy, but an absolute gorgeous dog. And he _did_ have a _huge_ head<:

I thought about Pointgold and a few other GRF people when I read the above article about Snowshoe. Or read this caption:


> Gracie looks on eagerly as Sue prepares
> her dinner. Snowshoe Golden Retrievers​
> 
> exclusively eat
> ​​​​​​_Purina Pro Plan _brand
> dog food.​


Heehee. ​


http://mirasol.org/ourdogs/yogi/yogi.htm <- Here is Yogi for comparision. Very pretty old man, and he's still alive.


----------



## Pointgold

Wow. To each his own, I guess. I happen to like the heads on my dogs, and their eyes. I find them very soft and sweet. They do their share of winning, and they also lose. 
I'm not going to complain when mine don't win, nor am I going to comment on what I think about some of the heads out there (pet or show), particularly not by name or breeder. We often find fault with anything that is not to our liking/style when it wins, and just as often are not objective about why it may have, only that we think it shouldn't have.


----------



## goldensrbest

the dog picture that was posted, i think he is very good looking, and yogi has a head very much like spencer had, i love that look, and to me , he was the best.


----------



## Enzos_Mom

Pointgold said:


> Wow. To each his own, I guess. I happen to like the heads on my dogs, and their eyes. I find them very soft and sweet. They do their share of winning, and they also lose.


I think she was referring to the part that said that the dog eats Pro Plan.


----------



## Shalva

Megora said:


> Found him -
> 
> Snowshoe Goldens - Montana
> http://snowshoe.accelhost.com/accelsite/media/mediaFile2069.pdf
> 
> *confession* I really like Snowshoe goldens. I met somebody at a show who had her 2 year old golden in Rally. Very "busy" and very high energy, but an absolute gorgeous dog. And he _did_ have a _huge_ head<:
> 
> I thought about Pointgold and a few other GRF people when I read the above article about Snowshoe. Or read this caption:
> 
> 
> Heehee. ​
> 
> 
> yogi.jpg <- Here is Yogi for comparision. Very pretty old man, and he's still alive.



I am not commenting at all about their lines or the whole of their dogs, they do have some really lovely dogs, like I said Montana in particular was a lovely dog structurally... but he had a very different head type to Yogi.... that is all I was commenting on... and it is a personal preference thing... 

In my opinion, I see heads coming around again more to a style and shape that I like, for a while I was pretty discouraged about head shape and eye set... I will be interested in seeing what they look like in a few years...


----------



## Megora

Pointgold said:


> We often find fault with anything that is not to our liking/style when it wins, and just as often are not objective about why it may have, only that we think it shouldn't have.


I didn't quite mean to say that the "lion head" or "puff ball" look for goldens is not to my liking, er, simply acknowledging that there are a lot of goldens out there who have that look. 

When I posted the picture of the one golden (a Green Acres stud), I did say he was adorable.  

And I like goldens with big heads. My guy has one after all... :

The "squinty" eyes - I've always thought that when I look at that pic of Faera Future Classic in k9data. It could just be a bad picture of the dog, I guess. 

One thing I did want to say... I think having eyes too close together is just as bad as eyes being set too far apart.


----------



## Pointgold

Enzos_Mom said:


> I think she was referring to the part that said that the dog eats Pro Plan.


And I wasn't referring to that post, but the theme in general.


----------



## Pointgold

Megora said:


> Found him -
> 
> Snowshoe Goldens - Montana
> http://snowshoe.accelhost.com/accelsite/media/mediaFile2069.pdf
> 
> *confession* I really like Snowshoe goldens. I met somebody at a show who had her 2 year old golden in Rally. Very "busy" and very high energy, but an absolute gorgeous dog. And he _did_ have a _huge_ head<:
> 
> I thought about Pointgold and a few other GRF people when I read the above article about Snowshoe. Or read this caption:
> 
> 
> Heehee. ​
> 
> yogi.jpg <- Here is Yogi for comparision. Very pretty old man, and he's still alive.


 
Yep. One more top winning dog fed Pro Plan. How 'bout that...


----------



## Debles

I think Montana is/was gorgeous!


----------



## Griffyn'sMom

I like them all but have found that even one single dog can look very, very different depending on the camera angle. 

Not sure what you meant about the tongue hanging out thing - they tend to do that when they are happy or panting.


----------



## kathi127

Now my Sammy is no show dog, that's for sure, but when we first rescued him last year I questioned whether he was a full Golden or not because of the shape of his head and his eyes. I thought maybe he was mixed with Chow. But after reading this thread and seeing some of the pics I think maybe my baby really is a full Golden! What do you guys think?


----------



## Claire's Friend

kathi127 said:


> Now my Sammy is no show dog, that's for sure, but when we first rescued him last year I questioned whether he was a full Golden or not because of the shape of his head and his eyes. I thought maybe he was mixed with Chow. But after reading this thread and seeing some of the pics I think maybe my baby really is a full Golden! What do you guys think?


Looks all Golden to me. But what ever he is, he is 100% handsome !!! Thank you for saving him:wavey:


----------



## kathi127

Claire's Friend said:


> Looks all Golden to me. But what ever he is, he is 100% handsome !!! Thank you for saving him:wavey:


Aww... thanks! He was a mess when we got him from the shelter, so thin you could feel every rib and his hip bones jutted way out, it was heartbreaking. He had a huge hematoma on his left ear and horrible skin issues. He had been found as a stray so no one knew anything about him. We think he is about 8 now but could be a little older. He's very laid back so that was another thing that made me wonder about him as my other Goldens are full of energy. He's a sweet soul and we are glad we can make the rest of his days comfortable and happy!


----------



## KaMu

Megora said:


> Reptilian... Of course now I'm going to run off and search for that thread!
> 
> This (pic below) is the "chow" type of head that I've seen here or there. I do see the choke chain/lead above the dog's head, so that might be making him have chubby cheeks I guess. :uhoh: <- And yes, he is completely adorable anyway.
> 
> I do have a guy with a big head and I can appreciate goldens with bigger boxy heads, but one thing I'm not crazy about are some of the goldens that have more lab like features. That could be the furrowed brow that Jackie was talking about.
> 
> And then there was the triangle eyes and squinty eyes. For the squinty eyes I posted the pic of "Faera's Future Classic" like from k9data.
> 
> And then whenever I wiggle Jacks' dangling jowls and clean his tear smudgies off, I do look at pics like the third below (Amberac's Mesmerizing Mickey) and feel a little better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> ​


Oh my goodness!!! I love the look of all them!! Each of the three are beautiful.


----------



## jackie_hubert

I too like the look of Yogi, hence we picked a litter that was fathered by a Yogi son.


----------



## RaeRae1706

I am preferential to long noses snouts or noses or whatever they are called (I obviously know nothing about them or showing) because Sunny has one. The more square, shorter nose dogs are not my favorite, but might be if Sunny looked like that LOL


----------



## Champ

I think I might know what you are talking about. Square shaped heads with the brows are my favorite


----------



## Megora

RaeRae1706 said:


> I am preferential to long noses snouts or noses or whatever they are called (I obviously know nothing about them or showing) because Sunny has one. The more square, shorter nose dogs are not my favorite, but might be if Sunny looked like that LOL


You never know.... Sunny might still grow into her nose. 

My Jacks had a longish nose when he was about 15 months old... he grew into that a bit since then.


----------



## Bryana

The wider, more exaggerated plush heads are not my cup of tea. I can however appreciate a square muzzle, well pronounced cheeks and a higher ear set, just in balance if that makes any sense? I know some people love the look and to-each their own. It is just not my vision of the breed and the direction I would personally like to see it go....


Sushi is a good example of what you are describing:
Pedigree: BIS. BISS. Golden Freedom X Catch Me If You Can


----------



## jackie_hubert

Bryana said:


> The wider, more exaggerated plush heads are not my cup of tea. I can however appreciate a square muzzle, well pronounced cheeks and a higher ear set, just in balance if that makes any sense? I know some people love the look and to-each their own. It is just not my vision of the breed and the direction I would personally like to see it go....
> 
> 
> Sushi is a good example of what you are describing:
> Pedigree: BIS. BISS. Golden Freedom X Catch Me If You Can


Yea I hope the breed is not going in that direction...


----------



## Chelseanr

I agree too, and I was reading on a breed standard somewhere that "slanted" eyes would be disqualified...


----------



## TuckersMom

jackie_hubert said:


> Yea I hope the breed is not going in that direction...



This dog looks like a chow to me!! I dont care for that look either. Nothing quite like the classic Golden look with those soft smiling eyes! That one just looks too...angry! 

Im biased, I know... but I love the longer snout like on my Tucker. I think that is just a classic beautiful feature









This is Tucker's father, Tucker Sr. He has a shorter muzzle, but not as short as a chow-type Golden









And his mama; she had the longer snout. I think this is what our Tucker will look like full grown


----------



## Ljilly28

I am at a show right now, and both days the judges put up a few different styles of golden. Each presents strengths and an interpretation of the standard that has merit. I did not see even one chow chow looking golden in the 44 present, and I can't imagine how one with huge obvious departures from the standard could win here as there are so many lovely dogs. 

Here is my Copley who is a Thunder grandson. The judge complimented his head specifically yesterday. 









If Copley's head is not someone's cup of tea, I am so cool with that bc I enjoy living with that face smiling at me!


----------



## Pointgold

Since the head is being discussed, here is the standard:
*Head*
Broad in skull, slightly arched laterally and longitudinally without prominence of frontal bones (forehead) or occipital bones. _Stop_ well defined but not abrupt. _Foreface_ deep and wide, nearly as long as skull. *Muzzle* straight in profile, blending smooth and strongly into skull; when viewed in profile or from above, slightly deeper and wider at stop than at tip. No heaviness in flews. Removal of whiskers is permitted but not preferred. *Eyes* friendly and intelligent in expression, medium large with dark, close-fitting rims, set well apart and reasonably deep in sockets. Color preferably dark brown; medium brown acceptable. Slant eyes and narrow, triangular eyes detract from correct expression and are to be faulted. No white or haw visible when looking straight ahead. Dogs showing evidence of functional abnormality of eyelids or eyelashes (such as, but not limited to, trichiasis, entropion, ectropion, or distichiasis) are to be excused from the ring. *Ears* rather short with front edge attached well behind and just above the eye and falling close to cheek. When pulled forward, tip of ear should just cover the eye. Low, hound-like ear set to be faulted. *Nose* black or brownish black, though fading to a lighter shade in cold weather not serious. Pink nose or one seriously lacking in pigmentation to be faulted. *Teeth* scissors bite, in which the outer side of the lower incisors touches the inner side of the upper incisors. Undershot or overshot bite is a _disqualification._ Misalignment of teeth (irregular placement of incisors) or a level bite (incisors meet each other edge to edge) is undesirable, but not to be confused with undershot or overshot. Full dentition. Obvious gaps are serious faults.


There have been comments made about disqualifying faults that are actually not. the _only _disqualifying faults are _Deviation in height of more than one inch from standard either way.
Undershot or overshot bite._

Long "snouts", snipey muzzles, "chow chow" heads/faces are not true to type and would not be awarded, but neither would they be dq'd. A judge could withhold ribbons, as well, for lack of breed type.


----------



## hotel4dogs

big blocky head


tongue hanging out

I don't find it offensive at all


----------



## K9-Design

Very funny looking golden...scuse me...half chow


----------



## hotel4dogs

yes, black tongue and all....
Love your boy!


----------



## Ljilly28

I took a picture for Jackie _ Hubert today:


----------



## TuckersMom

LJilly28, the first golden in the show looks very lab-like to me!


----------



## Pointgold

TuckersMom said:


> LJilly28, the first golden in the show looks very lab-like to me!


THIS dog looks like a Labrador to you?


----------



## goldensrbest

I have not seen a golden yet, that my heart does not skip a beat, yes i to have my favorites.


----------



## goldensrbest

I use to have a neighbor, that had a chow, bear was her name.


----------



## LibertyME

Trace's Chow-Chow imitation


----------



## TuckersMom

Yep lab. Maybe its because my family's lab is a bit pudgey in the face like that 


Hahaha Liberty I laughed out loud. Hilarious


----------



## cubbysan

LibertyME said:


> Trace's Chow-Chow imitation
> 
> View attachment 90812


 
Oh you have me laughing. I saw your chow picture on facebook and knew exactly why you took that picture.

I notice that the shelters around here have about half of their mix dogs labeled as a chow-mix. Such as Golden/chow mix, collie/chow mix. Now I have never seen a chow around here, so they are not common, and to me, none of these dogs looked to be part chow.


----------



## Pointgold

TuckersMom said:


> Yep lab. Maybe its because my family's lab is a bit pudgey in the face like that
> 
> 
> Hahaha Liberty I laughed out loud. Hilarious


 
This is interesting to me. I don't see that young dog as being "pudgey" in the face at all. And I see nothing but type there. Golden type.

Here is a Labrador at about the same age:
​


----------



## Megora

Holy cow. 

I apparently have never seen a show type chow chow, because the ones I knew (my old piano teacher had a wonderful chow and my neighbors have 2 chows) do not have those shar-pei type furrows on the face. Yucko. 








<- Seriously, I don't believe a little chubby-cheeked munchkin like this would grow up to have ROLLS on his face like the one above. O_O (puppy pic borrowed from Forestway Chows here in Michigan).


----------



## Belle's Mom

I LOVE Trace's imitation of a Chow!!! I am howling.


----------



## Megora

One thing I wondered a little when I saw this pic... WHY do they trim the head (ears) and neck so close with these goldens?


----------



## goldensrbest

Mary, i must say, that was so funny, glad i did not have anything in my mouth.


----------



## Merlins mom

I wonder why the whiskers are shaved/clipped? Is that standard in the show ring? I love their whiskers! This is a beautiful dog though.


----------



## Oaklys Dad

Trace makes for the most handsome Chow I have ever seen. Caue has a smooshable face like that too.


----------



## jackie_hubert

Wow that chow is in itself quite extreme!


----------



## Pointgold

Megora said:


> Holy cow.
> 
> I apparently have never seen a show type chow chow, because the ones I knew (my old piano teacher had a wonderful chow and my neighbors have 2 chows) do not have those shar-pei type furrows on the face. Yucko.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> <- Seriously, I don't believe a little chubby-cheeked munchkin like this would grow up to have ROLLS on his face like the one above. O_O (puppy pic borrowed from Forestway Chows here in Michigan).


 
Hard to say without hands on, but this dog looks to have "excessive" skin folds, which are not required or desireable. A judge will lift that to assess whether is it too much. The Chow IS required by the standard - both Smooths and Roughs - to have a "scowling expression" which is created by the skin folding over the brow. And the cute puppies that look like little teddy bears will grow up to have it as well.

This is a prettier head :


----------



## Titan1

LibertyME said:


> Trace's Chow-Chow imitation
> 
> View attachment 90812


Okay this one made me laugh out loud.. Funny and way too cute !
Michelle


----------



## Megora

Pointgold said:


> Hard to say without hands on, but this dog looks to have "excessive" skin folds, which are not required or desireable. A judge will lift that to assess whether is it too much. The Chow IS required by the standard - both Smooths and Roughs - to have a "scowling expression" which is created by the skin folding over the brow. And the cute puppies that look like little teddy bears will grow up to have it as well.
> 
> This is a prettier head :


*nods* Forestway has much prettier chows like that one. Even the adults have an almost teddy bear look to them.  Admittedly, the only time I had a golden retriever look like that, I went hunting for benadryl.


----------



## Bryana

I feel like heads are such an opinion oriented part of a dog and it isn't AS important if people like different styles or not. Yes, it is all a part of breed type but proper structure and having the ability to be a hard working dog is more important (in my head anyways). Heads are the last thing I look at and really care about. 

It just makes for an interesting discussion to see what everyone considers 'extreme'. We all have a different style of dog.


----------



## Megora

Bryana said:


> I feel like heads are such an opinion oriented part of a dog and it isn't AS important if people like different styles or not. Yes, it is all a part of breed type but proper structure and having the ability to be a hard working dog is more important (in my head anyways). Heads are the last thing I look at and really care about.
> 
> It just makes for an interesting discussion to see what everyone considers 'extreme'. We all have a different style of dog.


But for people judging companion dogs... it's a little different? If the original breeders of goldens (Tweedmouth, etc) only cared about proper structure and ability, we very well might be proud owners of dogs who look a bit like water dogs and water spaniels. No offense to water spaniels, but even the owners of these dogs don't feel they were bred for looks. 










When you have a companion dog and therapy dog... that kindly expression is the most important thing. I know, simply because I had goldens whose structure was a little iffy when they were in their golden years, but people still innately trusted and were attracted to them.


----------



## Pointgold

We all love our pets and we all think that they are beautiful. Which is as it should be.
But - there are standards.. They are the "blueprints" for the breeds. When a breed becomes popular and there is a mrket for them, people see easy money and make breedings indiscriminately. Much of the general pet owning public sees nothing but too large, or too small, or too long muzzles or too short muzzles, etc etc. and they come to believe that this is correct. When they see dogs bred with the standard in mind they believe that they are all wrong, or weird. Especially if they have heard the "show dogs are all overbred" mantra, or buy into the myriad of marketing ploys used by less than ethical, money driven breeders of the White Oaks, White Doves, etc of the world.


----------



## Retrieverlover

I am lucky to have a very good friend and mentor who takes her time to sit n watch with me at shows and explains all the dogs in the groups to me. She may tells me what her personal preferences are but when I pick up the AKC breed standard book and reread it says exactly what she pointed out to me. People have their personal preferences but that doesn't mean their preference is the standard.*

I know I own a breed that has been overbreed and isn't everyones favorite. Dalmatians do grow up and don't talk like in the Disney movie  BUT due to a lot of work and socialization I tricked my Dal into thinking he's a sporting dog (a rare Golden Pointer mix apparently)*


----------



## Megora

> Much of the general pet owning public sees nothing but too large, or too small, or too long muzzles or too short muzzles, etc etc. and they come to believe that this is correct. When they see dogs bred with the standard in mind they believe that they are all wrong, or weird.


But it's not necessarily just the ignorant masses who get confuzzled when they see some dogs. I think it's been mentioned before that some people get away with showing goldens that are outside the standard for some reason or other - like with height, or have such an exagerated head (or poor grooming job) that they have an expression that doesn't exactly look "kind". 

Another example would be what is going on with the collie breed and their gay tails!


----------



## hotel4dogs

I can't tell you how many times people have asked me what breed Tito is, and when I say "golden retriever" they either ask me when he's going to get bigger, or what he's mixed with since they have a golden that "doesn't look anything like that".
Sad.


----------



## tippykayak

TuckersMom said:


> LJilly28, the first golden in the show looks very lab-like to me!


I see what you mean. I think it's the way his hair has been trimmed, rather than the head shape itself.


----------



## tippykayak

Megora said:


> One thing I wondered a little when I saw this pic... WHY do they trim the head (ears) and neck so close with these goldens?


I've wondered that a lot. There seems to be a whole lot of scissor work that goes into many show dogs, even though the standard specifically states that the dog should be shown with his natural coat and only a couple of things neatened up.

From the standard:
"*Feet* medium size, round, compact, and well knuckled, with thick pads. Excess hair may be trimmed to show natural size and contour."

So the feet can definitely go through a substantial trim. 

"*Coat*
"Dense and water-repellent with good undercoat. Outer coat firm and resilient, neither coarse nor silky, lying close to body; may be straight or wavy. Untrimmed natural ruff; moderate feathering on back of forelegs and on underbody; heavier feathering on front of neck, back of thighs and underside of tail. Coat on head, paws, and front of legs is short and even. Excessive length, open coats, and limp, soft coats are very undesirable. Feet may be trimmed and stray hairs neatened, but the natural appearance of coat or outline should not be altered by cutting or clipping."

It seems pretty clear that the dog's head and ruff should not get anything more than "neatened," but if you look at closeups of many show dogs, it's pretty obvious that they've been trimmed really, really thoroughly and precisely.

I see some stuff in "show" dogs that doesn't seem indicated by the standard, and I find that my personal preference is for the older-fashioned dogs I see in the photos of the breed's history. To my untrained eye, they look pretty different from the winning Goldens of today. For example, the wavy coat seems very common in the famous dogs in the history of the breed, but I don't think I've seen a true wavy coat in any of the show dogs we've discussed in the thread. Maybe somebody with lots of show experience can common more accurately on how often they see a wavy coat dog winning or even entered.

I do see lots of more moderate, athletic dogs (like Tito, for example) that seem to have the best of both worlds, the show dog good looks and the more moderate build and coat.

So while I admire show dogs and show folks a lot, I wonder about a few things: dogs with excessively long coats who are trimmed substantially for show, sculpting the dog's look by trimming significantly around the head and neck, dogs with a lot of bone that seem more linebackerish than the standard seems to call for, dogs with more stop than the standard seems to indicate, the loss of the wash-and-wear short and/or wavy coat, etc.

Again, I'm definitely not an expert, just noting things that have occurred to me as I read through the thread.


----------



## GoldenSail

There are definitely plenty of show goldens with wavy coats. You won't see it in the ring because owners/groomers put a lot of work in training and making the coat lay flat. Yes it doesn't need to be flat, but it can affect the judges first opinion of the dog. And wavy coats can make the topline look off and that is not the first thing you want a judge to think. Sure, a good judge should be able to tell when he puts his hands on a dog but when you are competing with 20+ dogs I can imagine the need to try and stand out. I think this is why you see a lot of scissoring and work going into grooming. While it shouldn't be necessary or what the standard calls for (grooming wise) you can really enhance how your dog stands out to the judge. Judges are only human and I can only imagine it might be difficult sorting through a big class. You want the first impression to be a good one.

The cool thing about the standard is that while it is a great guide, there is room for interpretation. What is good bone? Excessive coat? What is too short a loin, too long, just perfect? Ribs should be well sprung--but how do you particularly decide what is too narrow or excessive? I think that is part of the artwork in breeding and judging. It's subjective after a certain point.


----------



## tippykayak

GoldenSail said:


> There are definitely plenty of show goldens with wavy coats. You won't see it in the ring because owners/groomers put a lot of work in training and making the coat lay flat. Yes it doesn't need to be flat, but it can affect the judges first opinion of the dog. And wavy coats can make the topline look off and that is not the first thing you want a judge to think. Sure, a good judge should be able to tell when he puts his hands on a dog but when you are competing with 20+ dogs I can imagine the need to try and stand out. I think this is why you see a lot of scissoring and work going into grooming. While it shouldn't be necessary or what the standard calls for (grooming wise) you can really enhance how your dog stands out to the judge. Judges are only human and I can only imagine it might be difficult sorting through a big class. You want the first impression to be a good one.
> 
> The cool thing about the standard is that while it is a great guide, there is room for interpretation. What is good bone? Excessive coat? What is too short a loin, too long, just perfect? Ribs should be well sprung--but how do you particularly decide what is too narrow or excessive? I think that is part of the artwork in breeding and judging. It's subjective after a certain point.


That makes a ton of sense. I guess it just feels unfortunate that what people do to a dog in order to win in the ring (and even what they sometimes seem to breed for) seems sometimes far away from what a dog looks like when he's ready to go out and work in the field. And I worry that it's more than just grooming but actually a divergence of what's necessary for show from what the dog's purpose is as a companion retriever.


----------



## HiTideGoldens

GoldenSail said:


> There are definitely plenty of show goldens with wavy coats. You won't see it in the ring because owners/groomers put a lot of work in training and making the coat lay flat. Yes it doesn't need to be flat, but it can affect the judges first opinion of the dog. And wavy coats can make the topline look off and that is not the first thing you want a judge to think. Sure, a good judge should be able to tell when he puts his hands on a dog but when you are competing with 20+ dogs I can imagine the need to try and stand out. I think this is why you see a lot of scissoring and work going into grooming. While it shouldn't be necessary or what the standard calls for (grooming wise) you can really enhance how your dog stands out to the judge. Judges are only human and I can only imagine it might be difficult sorting through a big class. You want the first impression to be a good one.


I just wanted to add to this. Part of the reason is that the judges doing the judging for goldens do not always have a background in goldens. So while a judge who has bred and shown goldens his/her whole life may be able to watch a dog move and see that the dog has a wavy coat versus a topline issue or have a nice length of neck versus looking like professional wrestler, someone whose background is in breeding/showing chihuahuas but is judging goldens may not be able to see that it is just the coat and not a topline issue or structural issue (I realize this is a generalization, that's why I said "may"). So (my understanding of) the reason behind the grooming that is that you need to theoretically make it as easy as possible for the judge to see what they need to see (within reason of course).

Like RetrieverLover, I've been very lucky to have a great mentor who has been breeding/showing goldens since before I was born. I have noticed the same thing, that when she goes over dogs and points out things to me at shows, I can always take what she says and go back to the breed standard and find it in there. But, given the wide range of the styles of dogs I see at shows, it made me realize that there is definitely a difference between personal preference and what is "correct."


----------



## Pointgold

goldenjackpuppy said:


> I just wanted to add to this. Part of the reason is that the judges doing the judging for goldens do not always have a background in goldens. So while a judge who has bred and shown goldens his/her whole life may be able to watch a dog move and see that the dog has a wavy coat versus a topline issue or have a nice length of neck versus looking like professional wrestler, someone whose background is in breeding/showing chihuahuas but is judging goldens may not be able to see that it is just the coat and not a topline issue or structural issue (I realize this is a generalization, that's why I said "may"). So (my understanding of) the reason behind the grooming that is that you need to theoretically make it as easy as possible for the judge to see what they need to see (within reason of course).
> 
> Like RetrieverLover, I've been very lucky to have a great mentor who has been breeding/showing goldens since before I was born. I have noticed the same thing, that when she goes over dogs and points out things to me at shows, I can always take what she says and go back to the breed standard and find it in there. But, given the wide range of the styles of dogs I see at shows, it made me realize that there is definitely a difference between personal preference and what is "correct."


Whether a judge has a background in a particular breed or not, they must complete extensive training before they can judge it. Many judges were professional handlers and do have considerable knowledge about breeds other than "their own" if they were also breeders.

Most people focus entirely on their own breed/breeds, and some only one aspect of it. Certainly, the general public does. Some people, myelf included, consider themselves to be "students of dogs". All breeds. And have recognized that what they learn from other breeds can be extremely helpful to them with their own.
I'm amazed, frankly, how many long time "dog people", if they actually take the time to do it, sit through all the groups and cannot even identify many of the breeds.


----------



## HiTideGoldens

Pointgold said:


> Whether a judge has a background in a particular breed or not, they must complete extensive training before they can judge it. Many judges were professional handlers and do have considerable knowledge about breeds other than "their own" if they were also breeders.


Point taken, and thank you for correcting me. I didn't mean to imply that they had no knowledge of the breed. I meant that they don't have the extensive knowledge of every breed that they may have of certain breeds. 

Like the topline issue, do you not think that a judge with a background in breeding/handling/showing goldens will be more apt to know if something that looks like a topline issue is just coat when the dog moves or is truly a topline issue? Or in your experience, if someone is judging goldens they know that it is coat, regardless of what their background is, when they put their hands on the dog?


----------



## Pointgold

goldenjackpuppy said:


> Point taken, and thank you for correcting me. I didn't mean to imply that they had no knowledge of the breed. I meant that they don't have the extensive knowledge of every breed that they may have of certain breeds.
> 
> Like the topline issue, do you not think that a judge with a background in breeding/handling/showing goldens will be more apt to know if something that looks like a topline issue is just coat when the dog moves or is truly a topline issue? Or in your experience if someone is judging goldens they know that it is coat, regardless of what their background is, when they put their hands on the dog?


It's all about hands on. Particularly with coated breeds. I know very few, if any, judges who are fooled by hair - no matter their background.


----------



## GoldenCamper

Pointgold said:


> We all love our pets and we all think that they are beautiful. Which is as it should be.


Amen to that!



Pointgold said:


> Much of the general pet owning public sees nothing but too large, or too small, or too long muzzles or too short muzzles, etc etc. and they come to believe that this is correct. *When they see dogs bred with the standard in mind they believe that they are all wrong, or weird. *


I have run into this with Fiona. She is 21.5 at the withers and 55lbs. Everyone thinks she is a puppy. Granted she is on the small side and lighter in color, not showing the sugar face as much. Very active and exuberant for a 8yr old girl too. But I do get the "she is too skinny or small" comments. I say she is in standard for the breed but no one gets it. Half the people I meet think I'm nuts and just defending my dog. I try not to comment on how one could land a small aircraft on the back of their morbidly obese dog.:curtain:











I never got those comments with Tucker being "wrong", he was 23" and 68-70lbs also within standards . I have always rescued/ adopted and would not let standards get in the way regarding my decision for any future rescue/adoption companion. I do praise responsible breeders that do the right thing for keeping clearances,standards,health and longevity always in mind.

I knew nothing about standards when I rescued my first girl, doubt it would have made a difference anyway. But she was more like 23.5"-24'" 72-75lbs and probably a product of a puppy mill or irresponsible breeder. She had numerous problems and a very expensive dog. She was my heart girl and I wouldn't change a thing and have no regrets. I admit when I adopted Tucker I wondered why he was so "small" He had perfect health until the last year of his life.


----------



## Megora

> I'm amazed, frankly, how many long time "dog people", if they actually take the time to do it, sit through all the groups and cannot even identify many of the breeds.


They can in my family.... 

My baby sister's first book she ever read from was the AKC dog book. Same thing with my niece. I even have a video of my niece at a dog show (cobo) when she was a toddler having a full conversation about the dogs in the BIS. 

FWIW - I like the straight fluffy coats on goldens. I don't mind a little wave at the shoulders/ruff... but I understand why that is thinned or groomed away for shows. It keeps the dogs from looking like they have squat necks and shows the lines without the judge feeling for them. I'm going to guess that is hugely important when you are standing in the line up. 

What I'm not sure if I like or not is the super sculpted heads and necks you see sometimes. Where the heads have that "up periscope" look to them. The ears on that golden, for example - I swear I did that by accident to my golden when I used straight scissors and chopped off too much fur trying to even out the bad cut job. <- My mom accused me of trying to make him look like a lab. o_I


----------



## Pointgold

Megora said:


> They can in my family....
> 
> My baby sister's first book she ever read from was the AKC dog book. Same thing with my niece. I even have a video of my niece at a dog show (cobo) when she was a toddler having a full conversation about the dogs in the BIS.
> 
> FWIW - I like the straight fluffy coats on goldens. I don't mind a little wave at the shoulders/ruff... but I understand why that is thinned or groomed away for shows. It keeps the dogs from looking like they have squat necks and shows the lines without the judge feeling for them. I'm going to guess that is hugely important when you are standing in the line up.
> 
> What I'm not sure if I like or not is the super sculpted heads and necks you see sometimes. Where the heads have that "up periscope" look to them. The ears on that golden, for example - I swear I did that by accident to my golden when I used straight scissors and chopped off too much fur trying to even out the bad cut job. <- My mom accused me of trying to make him look like a lab. o_I


That's great. My youngest son used to love to watch the groups and name the breeds, and he had really great questions regarding their standards, even as a little kid. 

As far as "super sculpted" anything... trust me, it is _rarely _rewarded (other than in Poodles), and there are several judges who are quite well known for being pretty vocal about it. And NOT just in Goldens. If you are going to do a lot of grooming you'd better be REALLY good at it - good enough so that it doesn't look like it was done.

"Fluffy" coats in Goldens are not correct, either. That would be open, which would allow water to the skin. Fluffy, soft, excessively long coats are not correct, and I'm happy to say that the fad of blowing coats open seems to be diminishing. Blowing them straight(er) is fine.


----------



## GoldenSail

tippykayak said:


> That makes a ton of sense. I guess it just feels unfortunate that what people do to a dog in order to win in the ring (and even what they sometimes seem to breed for) seems sometimes far away from what a dog looks like when he's ready to go out and work in the field. And I worry that it's more than just grooming but actually a divergence of what's necessary for show from what the dog's purpose is as a companion retriever.


It is sad what *some* people do but with any competitive sport you will see things done for the sake of winning. You also have to realize (and probably do) there are breeders out there breeding dogs that are not in excess that finish in the ring and can do the field work. My bitch is conformation bred and she's doing fantastic with her field training and does not carry a ton of bone and coat, but she has nice structure and breed type. Is it it enough to win in the conformation ring? I don't know, but I know I have a structurally sound dog from conformation lines that can do field work.


----------



## Pointgold

GoldenSail said:


> It is sad what *some* people do but with any competitive sport you will see things done for the sake of winning. You also have to realize (and probably do) there are breeders out there breeding dogs that are not in excess that finish in the ring and can do the field work. My bitch is conformation bred and she's doing fantastic with her field training and does not carry a ton of bone and coat, but she has nice structure and breed type. Is it it enough to win in the conformation ring? I don't know, but I know I have a structurally sound dog from conformation lines that can do field work.


Those who will do anything to win are by far a minority. What is sad is that there are so many who seem to believe that the cheating and tricks and "anything to win" attitude prevails. It does not. And while I abhor _any _of it, I'm fairly confident that it is scarce enough to not be hugely detrimental.


----------



## Megora

> "Fluffy" coats in Goldens are not correct, either. That would be open, which would allow water to the skin. Fluffy, soft, excessively long coats are not correct, and I'm happy to say that the fad of blowing coats open seems to be diminishing. Blowing them straight(er) is fine.


I'll take a look when we go to watch the Novi show this weekend and the Cobo show in March. <- The last Cobo show I went to (2 years ago), the goldens were really fluffed out. Especially the puppies. It seemed the shorter their coats were, the fluffier their coats looked. 

Something I've always wondered... when you or other people say "open" coats, what do you mean?

I was under the impression that an "open" coat is one that lacks sufficient undercoat. Where you can run your hand over the coat and easily see the skin.


----------



## HiTideGoldens

Pointgold said:


> Those who will do anything to win are by far a minority. What is sad is that there are so many who seem to believe that the cheating and tricks and "anything to win" attitude prevails. It does not. And while I abhor _any _of it, I'm fairly confident that it is scarce enough to not be hugely detrimental.


That's nice to hear, considering the amount of experience you have in conformation. I like to try to see the good in people and situations but there are definitely a lot of jaded people out there who (unintentionally, I'm sure) can influence those of us who are less experienced. 

On another note, I tried to find the rules and requirements for the training that judges must go through before they can judge a specific breed. All I found was the Rules and Regulations for Judging, which, while interesting to read, wasn't really what I was looking for. Is there such a document out there? If so, do you know what it's called so I can try to find it?


----------



## Pointgold

Megora said:


> I'll take a look when we go to watch the Novi show this weekend and the Cobo show in March. <- The last Cobo show I went to (2 years ago), the goldens were really fluffed out. Especially the puppies. It seemed the shorter their coats were, the fluffier their coats looked.
> 
> Something I've always wondered... when you or other people say "open" coats, what do you mean?
> 
> I was under the impression that an "open" coat is one that lacks sufficient undercoat. Where you can run your hand over the coat and easily see the skin.


 
Yes, it can mean lacking sufficitent undercoat, which means it is lacking the protective qualities required. It can also be blown "open" - the practice of using a dryer to blow the coat up and away from the skin to give the impression of more coat / bone - "fulffy". Dirt, debris, water would all go right through that. This is why the coat is supposed to lay close to the skin - the protectice "jacket". And soft coat absorbs water vs repelling it.


----------



## Retrieverlover

Pointgold said:


> Most people focus entirely on their own breed/breeds, and some only one aspect of it. Certainly, the general public does. Some people, myelf included, consider themselves to be "students of dogs". All breeds. And have recognized that what they learn from other breeds can be extremely helpful to them with their own.
> I'm amazed, frankly, how many long time "dog people", if they actually take the time to do it, sit through all the groups and cannot even identify many of the breeds.



Agreed. The more breeds to handle the more comfortable you get. I may show my Dalmatian different than the Pointer but I can take bits n' bites and use them with both.

Watching professional handlers and listen to their input is very important. Watching for example Amy or Phil Booth is amazing - the way they turn the dogs into showdogs is just wow.


----------



## Pointgold

goldenjackpuppy said:


> That's nice to hear, considering the amount of experience you have in conformation. I like to try to see the good in people and situations but there are definitely a lot of jaded people out there who (unintentionally, I'm sure) can influence those of us who are less experienced.
> 
> On another note, I tried to find the rules and requirements for the training that judges must go through before they can judge a specific breed. All I found was the Rules and Regulations for Judging, which, while interesting to read, wasn't really what I was looking for. Is there such a document out there? If so, do you know what it's called so I can try to find it?


 
Maybe this will help:
http://www.akc.org/pdfs/pjdg02.pdf


----------



## HiTideGoldens

Pointgold said:


> Maybe this will help:
> http://www.akc.org/pdfs/pjdg02.pdf


That is exactly what I was looking for, thank you. 

It's interesting that once a new judge is approved under the New Breed application requirements, it seems to be a much simpler process to be approved for additional breeds. Although the New Breed application requirements are so challenging, that I imagine very few people actually are able to meet those requirements as it is.


----------



## Ljilly28

cubbysan said:


> Oh you have me laughing. I saw your chow picture on facebook and knew exactly why you took that picture.
> .


That is so funny that you read my mind. I glimpsed the chow chow on the grooming table, and the forum discussion popped into my mind right away.


----------



## tippykayak

GoldenSail said:


> It is sad what *some* people do but with any competitive sport you will see things done for the sake of winning. You also have to realize (and probably do) there are breeders out there breeding dogs that are not in excess that finish in the ring and can do the field work. My bitch is conformation bred and she's doing fantastic with her field training and does not carry a ton of bone and coat, but she has nice structure and breed type. Is it it enough to win in the conformation ring? I don't know, but I know I have a structurally sound dog from conformation lines that can do field work.


I really like dogs that can do well in both venues. I would rather see a dog with a CCA and a working title than a dog with just a working title or just a CH. And I of course admire those dogs who have a CH and also a serious sport title.

I think it's really difficult to get titles in multiple venues, even if the dog has great potential. It's a lot of expense, training, and travel. That's why I like to see a CCA on a working dog. It seems like a reasonable compromise that shows that the dog is at least within standard and a good example of breed type.


----------



## Ljilly28

Beyond how much breed type the judges see in my dog and who does and doesnt like his head is the simple fact of how much dedication, planning, learning, saving, traveling, and prioritizing it takes to even step foot in the show ring with a properly conditioned, trained, and presented puppy or dog. It is hard! For me, an Am CH title for Copley and a UD for Tally, if we can earn them eventually, will represent untold hours of socializing, training step by step, handling/obedience classes,treat and bait baking, brushing, kisses on the nose, driving and staying in hotels while scouring local maps for places to take Finn hiking too, early mornings&late nights, learning the ropes, making friends and participating in the really nice buddy system of the kind core group of golden people by helping out and being greatly helped in return, and many more dollars than I can comfortably afford, lol. A title, to me, signifies an enormous amount of time, love, and training more than having an extreme dog with a huge chow chow head who can't work.


----------



## Pointgold

Ljilly28 said:


> Beyond how much breed type the judges see in my dog and who does and doesnt like his head is the simple fact of how much dedication, planning, learning, saving, traveling, and prioritizing it takes to even step foot in the show ring with a properly conditioned, trained, and presented puppy or dog. It is hard! For me, an Am CH title for Copley and a UD for Tally, if we can earn them eventually, will represent untold hours of socializing, training step by step, handling/obedience classes,treat and bait baking, brushing, kisses on the nose, driving and staying in hotels while scouring local maps for places to take Finn hiking too, early mornings&late nights, learning the ropes, making friends and participating in the really nice buddy system of the kind core group of golden people by helping out and being greatly helped in return, and many more dollars than I can comfortably afford, lol. A title, to me, signifies an enormous amount of time, love, and training more than having an extreme dog with a huge chow chow head who can't work.


I'm quite sure that you'll have your champion.


----------



## Sunkota

> Something I've always wondered... when you or other people say "open" coats, what do you mean?
> I was under the impression that an "open" coat is one that lacks sufficient undercoat. Where you can run your hand over the coat and easily see the skin.


An "open coat" is hard to describe and even a picture of an open coat would not be sufficient. Most dogs I see with an "open coat" do have plenty of undercoat. As someone said, some coats are blown out so they look open. An open coat looks like someone blew them out like that but that is how their coat is naturally, the coat never lays down properly. A open coat like that would not keep a dog warm and would not be somewhat water repellent like a good Golden coat.

When a dog with a good coat jumps in a pond and swims out their skin stays fairly dry. The under coat and top coat keep them warm. When you bathe a Golden in full coat it takes forever to get them wet and get the shampoo down to the skin, then the rinse takes time too. An open coated dog the water goes right thru to the skin.


----------



## tippykayak

Sunkota said:


> When a dog with a good coat jumps in a pond and swims out their skin stays fairly dry. The under coat and top coat keep them warm. When you bathe a Golden in full coat it takes forever to get them wet and get the shampoo down to the skin, then the rinse takes time too. An open coated dog the water goes right thru to the skin.


That's well said.


----------



## Megora

Sunkota said:


> An "open coat" is hard to describe and even a picture of an open coat would not be sufficient. Most dogs I see with an "open coat" do have plenty of undercoat. As someone said, some coats are blown out so they look open. An open coat looks like someone blew them out like that but that is how their coat is naturally, the coat never lays down properly. A open coat like that would not keep a dog warm and would not be somewhat water repellent like a good Golden coat.
> 
> *When a dog with a good coat jumps in a pond and swims out their skin stays fairly dry.* The under coat and top coat keep them warm. When you bathe a Golden in full coat it takes forever to get them wet and get the shampoo down to the skin, then the rinse takes time too. An open coated dog the water goes right thru to the skin.


Thanks for this explanation. 

I clearly misunderstood even after reading this the first time (not surprising for me being a ditz).  

Uhm, here is what my obviously slow understanding put together )): The "open coat" means whether the top coat is of the wrong type, blown open, or whatever which allows the dog to get soaked when walked out in the rain. If you have a dog (like my guy) with a good enough coat, the top coat should stop the most of the water from soaking through to the skin. My guy has one of those coats where if you pour water over his back, it mostly pours down the sides instead of soaking in. I gather that isn't the definition of an open coat.


----------



## willip

I've always been confused about undercoat etc...so thankyou to all who explained so well!!
We jokingly say that Chester is water proof as when he shacks after a swim its only the tips of the hair that stay wet and the rest appears dry. Now I know why!!


----------



## SunGold

.......................


----------



## Pointgold

SunGold said:


> .......................


 
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing.


----------



## Megora

Pointgold said:


> Yeah, I was thinking the same thing.


Meaning what?


----------



## Sunkota

I knew I had seen a good description of open coat somewhere - found it. Written by Marcia Schlehr she describes a correct coat as a "closed coat" and that sort of helps you understand open.

“The Golden's should be a "closed coat" (new term) - the tough, resilient topcoat overlies the undercoat and protects it, forming a neat covering over the entire body-- like a duck's feathers overlie the insulating down. The dog's feathering is only enough to form a nice "drip edge" that helps water run off and away from the body and legs. Coat on the back of the thighs and on the tail is especially thick, in order to insulate these areas when the dog is sitting on cold wet ground. Thick coat on the neck and chest also protects the dog when going through tough cover. (If you've had the opportunity to experience wild heather on the Scottish hillsides or brambles in North America, you'll realize why this sort of protection is needed). “
- Marcia Schlehr


----------



## hotel4dogs

wow, excellent description, thanks




Sunkota said:


> I knew I had seen a good description of open coat somewhere - found it. Written by Marcia Schlehr she describes a correct coat as a "closed coat" and that sort of helps you understand open.
> 
> “The Golden's should be a "closed coat" (new term) - the tough, resilient topcoat overlies the undercoat and protects it, forming a neat covering over the entire body-- like a duck's feathers overlie the insulating down. The dog's feathering is only enough to form a nice "drip edge" that helps water run off and away from the body and legs. Coat on the back of the thighs and on the tail is especially thick, in order to insulate these areas when the dog is sitting on cold wet ground. Thick coat on the neck and chest also protects the dog when going through tough cover. (If you've had the opportunity to experience wild heather on the Scottish hillsides or brambles in North America, you'll realize why this sort of protection is needed). “
> - Marcia Schlehr


----------

