# Cream Golden Retrievers



## Florabora22 (Nov 30, 2008)

I know this may sound dumb, but I'm confused. Are you saying cream goldens are "better" (or whatever word you want to use) than regular goldens, or that European goldens are "better" than American goldens?

I'm not being snippy or anything here; I'm genuinely bewildered.


----------



## Lucky's mom (Nov 4, 2005)

I think it isn't possible to say that "American" is more wild and "British" are more laid back because there is no real statistics to get that from. Its all about personal experience and that depends on who you have experience with. Lucky is laid back. And he comes from a very poor breeder. 

I know some American types raised for hunting may be more energetic. In that case perhaps they are better at field work?

It might be that the number of Goldens in the US out number the UK so much that their is more diversity?

I'm just betting that one of our well-established American Breeders might not consider their dogs "nutter". Well, obviously I disagree....I don't think that a sweet, laid back temperament is "rare" here. Heck the reason why we got Lucky is because of a couple of people we know with Goldens (who I am sure didnt' go to the highest end breeder) raved about the temperament.


----------



## GoldenOwner12 (Jun 18, 2008)

I have noticed that there starting to change the breeds the way they look,act etc.Like the labrador there breeding them to look like a weimanraner more then a lab. Labradors are meant to have a blocky head, thick coat, solid look to them but still able to do the work there meant for. The ones i see have small narrow heads,long legs,not much coat, have a weimraner look to them. I reckon a golden retriever should be able to win in shows etc and still be able to hunt and the job it was breed to do. People just seem to take things in there own hands and have made 2 diferent looks in the same breed. Like goldens you have the beautiful bear type ones blocky heads,thick coat,heavy bone build, short legs then you have the field long narrow heads,thin coat,smaller bone build,longer legs. Theres a person here who has field golden i'm not friends with but Einstein did play with her dog. In the water Einstein was betterthen the field golden, Einstein didn't feel the cold where this field golden did. But on land the field golden was a better runner. Einstein had the stamina to keep going tho he didn't back down and eventually caught up to him. Some filed dogs could have a thick coat for all i know but the ones i've seen haven't.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

I'm sorry. But this is unfounded. In the US, The PARENT clubs of the breeds are the most stringent in their requirements of health testing of any country in the world. The AKC is a club of clubs, and a registering body. The GRCA will not even allow a dog to be advertised in the club magazine unless it has all of the required clearances. 

BTW, I owned a Golden Retriever imported from England - Rossbourne Sabre in Love. He was moderately to severely dysplastic at 10 months of age. I have seen any number of European imports with such poor rears as to barely be able to walk, let alone gait properly for the time required to fetch up a bird (straight stifled with luxating patellas). I've known European Goldens with cardiac disease and who have failed CERF eye clearances.

As far as temperaments go, I've not met a Euopean Golden that was not sweet, but HAVE met several that were not the least bit "laid back". Did I blame breeding? No. I believe it was purely how they were raised. 
And the same could be said for any dog, bred in any country. There ARE dogs with poor temperaments, of course. In ANY country. To make a blanket statement such as you have is incorrect. As is your assessment of what a correct temperament should be. The Golden Retriever is _primarily a hunting dog. "A symetrical, powerful, *active *dog" (both US and UK standard)..._This is true no matter the country, and in order to be an effective hunting companion, they must be active and energetic. 

US - "Friendly, reliable, and trustworthy. Quarelsomeness or hostility towards other dogs or people in normal situations, or an unwarranted show of timidity or nervousness, is not in keeping with the Golden Retriever standard.

UK - "Kind, friendly, and confident".


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

I can't offer any big picture response, but only non-kennel blind(no kennel!) anecdotal experience. I own/owned 7 "american "goldens, plus 2 more from childhood. Not one was/is a "too high energy, jumpy, wild nutter" On the contrary, these are mannerly, affable dogs who can go to four English classes, then soccer practice, go for a big hike, then attend a black tie dinner( weird but nice life for a golden!) 9 goldens:7 healthy, 1 elbow dysplasia, 1 mild epilepsy.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

I am not sure why I decided to reply to thisbut here goes against my better judgement. 


CreamGoldens said:


> The true personality of a golden character is calm, gentle, and laid back. Eager to do its Master's bidding, confident, and intelligent. This is NOT what the majority of American goldens have become. With great apologies to the few excellent breeders who are trying very hard to maintain temperament, the rule has become a too high energy, jumpy, wild nutter. While there is the exception from time to time in the 'Creams'; anyone who has actually been exposed to them is amazed at how different they are. I know so many of you have the wonderful, American goldens and may find offense with my statement; and to you I say that I agree - you probably got the rare, calm, sweet one. The Golden of my childhood is different than the goldens we see today.


I do not find offense to your remark I find it TOTALLy without foundation. Your generalizations are mind boggling. 




CreamGoldens said:


> Further, I will contend that the health standards among breeders in Europe, Australia, and almost every other major country with a club - calls for very stringent health testing. The AKC requires none and never has so what you get is an animal that has compounded health problem after health problem upon itself for generations thus expotentially increasing the occurrence of the problem. We see this in hips, CANCER (the new plague of Americans accounting for 60% of the mortality rates in goldens!!), and now a new eye disease that is sweeping through kennels starting in the northeast and now, sadly spread throughout breeding circles of both high note and backyard (pigmentary uveitis - look it up!).


This is the Code of Ethics of the Kennel Club (England). You will take note in the COE that their is nothing mention of any health screeninbg being required. They do have what they call an "Accredited Breeder Scheme" that is jpined voluntarily by breeders. The health screens required for Golden Breeders to become part of it are just hip and eyes. They also "recommend" elbows. Not really what I would call stringent. 
*The Kennel Club General Code of Ethics*

_30-May-06_


_All breeders who register their puppies, and new owners who register ownership of their dogs with the Kennel Club, accept the jurisdiction of the Kennel Club and undertake to abide by its general Code of Ethics._
*Breeders/Owners:*


_Will properly house, feed, water and exercise all dogs under their care and arrange for appropriate veterinary attention if and when required. _
_Will agree without reservation that any veterinary surgeon performing an operation on any of their dogs which alters the natural conformation of the animal, may report such operation to the Kennel Club. _
_Will agree that no healthy puppy will be culled. Puppies which may not conform to the Breed Standard should be placed in suitable homes. _
_Will abide by all aspects of the Animal Welfare Act. _
_Will not create demand for, nor supply, puppies that have been docked illegally. _
_Will agree not to breed from a dog or bitch which could be in any way harmful to the dog or to the breed. _
_Will not allow any of their dogs to roam at large or to cause a nuisance to neighbours or those carrying out official duties. _
_Will ensure that their dogs wear properly tagged collars and will be kept leashed or under effective control when away from home. _
_Will clean up after their dogs in public places or anywhere their dogs are being exhibited. _
_Will only sell dogs where there is a reasonable expectation of a happy and healthy life and will help with the re-homing of a dog if the initial circumstances change. _
_Will supply written details of all dietary requirements and give guidance concerning responsible ownership when placing dogs in a new home. _
_Will ensure that all relevant Kennel Club documents are provided to the new owner when selling or transferring a dog, and will agree, in writing, to forward any relevant documents at the earliest opportunity, if not immediately available. _
_Will not sell any dog to commercial dog wholesalers, retail pet dealers or directly or indirectly allow dogs to be given as a prize or donation in a competition of any kind. Will not sell by sale or auction Kennel Club registration certificates as stand alone items (not accompanying a dog). _
_Will not knowingly misrepresent the characteristics of the breed nor falsely advertise dogs nor mislead any person regarding the health or quality of a dog. _
_Breach of these provisions may result in expulsion from club membership, and/or disciplinary action by the Kennel Club and/or reporting to the relevant authorities for legal action, as appropriate._




This is from the Australian National Kennel Council. No where in this COE is health screening "required". There is a world of difference between "should" and must. 

*National Code of Practice for Hereditary Diseases*

*Section 1 - Compliance *
_This Code of Practice has been developed to conform to the ANKC Code of Ethics by which all members of each controlling body are bound, and represents the commitment of all members to breed only for the purpose of improving the quality of the breed. This Code of Practice for hereditary diseases shall apply in addition to any code of ethics which is in force in each state. _
*Section 2 - Practical Application *
_(1) Members will take responsible action to reduce the incidence of hereditary diseases in their breeds._
_(2) Where there is a control program, approved by the ANKC, covering a breed for disease(s) known or considered to be inherited, then breeders within the breed should participate in and comply with the requirements of the program._
_(3) Where an hereditary disease is recognised by the ANKC in consultation with the official breed club(s) to be a designated problem in a breed, and where there is a screening procedure or test for that disease approved by the ANKC:-_
_(a) The owner of a stud dog should, before making the dog available for stud duty -_
_(i) have a current official evaluation or test result for the dog for such hereditary disease: 
(ii) provide the official evaluation or test result to the owners of the bitch to be mated._​_(b) The owner of a bitch should, before mating her to a dog -_
_(i) have a current official evaluation or test result for the bitch for such hereditary disease: 
(ii) provide the official evaluation or test result to the owner of the stud dog_​_(4) The ANKC recognises that before approving a screening procedure or test for an hereditary disease that procedure should be:-_
_(a) scientifically validated 
(b) reliable 
(c) readily available 
(d) cost effective_​_(5) Before any puppy or adult animal is sold, the prospective owners should be advised that the seller has taken all reasonable steps to comply with the Code of Practice._


If you ask our British and Austalian friends they sadly will tell you that cancer is a major problem in their dogs as well unfortuantely. 
Pigmentary uveitis is appearing in Goldens in the US over the last few years. It appears to be a hereditary, immune-mediated disorder but there is still much research needed to confirm this and find a sceening test to predict it. 



CreamGoldens said:


> I could go on and on, but I won't bore you. And you are welcome to respond, but I can tell you goldens are my passion and I spend hours and hours a week (if not a day - I'm really golden OCD!) researching this. I just had to set some realistic comment about the facts that though, yes they are the same breed - it is much the same as the fact that humanity came from the same place; but look how different we as distintive peoples are.
> 
> Thanks for listening! Kennel blinds need not reply.


Again your comments are far from "realistic" and not based on any facts I can find. Please provide them if you have them. But then again I have a feeling if you believe in what you write then your "Kennel blinds need not reply" will mean you have nothing more to reply.


----------



## Jackson'sMom (Oct 13, 2007)

I have to wonder, do some people just join this forum and make one or two posts simply to create a stir? I know nothing about breeding and all of my goldens have been rescues, so I can't and won't take sides in this argument. But we seem to have a lot of new folks joining lately whose first thread is, by design or otherwise, stirring the pot. Just my observation.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Jackson'sMom said:


> I have to wonder, do some people just join this forum and make one or two posts simply to create a stir? I know nothing about breeding and all of my goldens have been rescues, so I can't and won't take sides in this argument. But we seem to have a lot of new folks joining lately whose first thread is, by design or otherwise, stirring the pot. Just my observation.


That is exactly why I hesitated to respond. I think that is exactly what it was about. But even so, if people read it and do not see some members question or refute the statements does that not is a way validate it.


----------



## Lucky's mom (Nov 4, 2005)

oops...should have thought about what I was saying before I pushed the enter button.


----------



## NuttinButGoldens (Jan 10, 2009)

All I know is this. All 4 Goldens I've had were American Goldens, and all of them were just as happy playing Tenne-Ball Catch, find the glow ball, catch the frisbee, walk with the master.

They have all been just as happy to kick back on the couch with daddy and watch TV on a Sunday morning


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

As a follow up to Hank's great post, here is _just part_ of the GRCA Code of Ethics:

GRCA members are expected to follow AKC requirements for record keeping, identification of animals, and registration procedures.
Animals selected for breeding should:
(i) be of temperament typical of the Golden Retriever breed; stable, friendly, trainable, and willing to work. Temperament is of utmost importance to the breed
and must never be neglected;
(ii) be in good health, including freedom from communicable disease;
(iii) possess the following examination reports in order to verify status concerning possible hip dysplasia, hereditary eye or cardiovascular disease, and elbow
dysplasia:
a. _Hips _– for U.S. dogs, a report from Orthopedic Foundation for Animals; or PennHIP at 24 months of age or older. For dogs outside the U.S., report from
a health registry approved by the Golden Retriever club of that country (e.g. Canada - Ontario Veterinary College; Great Britain - BVA/KC Hip Score) A
report from the accepted health registry of another country may be used for U.S. dogs that are 24 months of age or older when x-rayed.
b. _Eyes _– appropriate report from a Diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Ophthalmology (ACVO) or from a BVA/KC approved ophthalmologist
(Great Britain), or a report from the Canine Eye Registry Foundation. For dogs outside the U.S., a report from an ophthalmologist as recommended by
the Golden Retriever club of that country after 1 year of age. Examinations must be done within 12 months of a breeding..
c. _Hearts _– appropriate report from a Diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Medicine, Cardiology Specialty or a certification by the Orthopedic
Foundation for Animals by a cardiologist (the number will be followed by a C) at 12 months of age or older.
d. _Elbows _– for U.S. dogs, a report from Orthopedic Foundation for Animals at 24 months of age or older. For dogs outside the U.S., report from a health
registry approved by the Golden Retriever club of that country at 24 months of age or older. A report from the accepted health registry of another country
may be used for U.S. dogs that are 24 months of age or older when x-rayed.
Breeders of Goldens in the U.S. who use health registries from other countries should fully reveal their reasons for doing so. Consideration should be given also
to other disorders that may have a genetic component, including, but not limited to, epilepsy, hypothyroidism, skin disorders (allergies), and orthopedic disorders
such as osteochondritis.
(iv) Assuming all health and examination reports are favorable, the age of the breeding pair also is of consideration. Generally, a Golden Retriever is not physically
and mentally mature until the age of 2 years; an individual dog’s suitability as a breeding animal is difficult to assess until that time.  _Adopted: April_​_20, 1997, by GRCA Board of Directors; revised to include elbow clearances in May, 2001_


Not stingent, eh? :doh:

I think it should also be noted that the GRCA has been extremely diligent in their funding and also submission of DNA , blood and tissue samples for cancer research. 

I certainly hope the OP's "Dig and Dash" was a "joke". I also want to clarify to our UK and other European members that this has nothing to do with how I feel about them or their wonderful dogs.


----------



## Kohanagold (Nov 5, 2008)

Jackson'sMom said:


> I have to wonder, do some people just join this forum and make one or two posts simply to create a stir? I know nothing about breeding and all of my goldens have been rescues, so I can't and won't take sides in this argument. But we seem to have a lot of new folks joining lately whose first thread is, by design or otherwise, stirring the pot. Just my observation.


I too thought the same thing. I almost replied (being that Paige is a blend of English and American lines) but chose not to. But then, Hank and Laura did a far better job of replying than I ever could have. BJ


----------



## tintallie (May 31, 2006)

My first thought is, "Don't feed the trolls." As I read more, my next thought was that it was going to lead to some website or advertisement for British Cream or Rare White Golden Retrievers.


----------



## IloveGQ (Nov 15, 2008)

Hows bout that SUPER BOWL!!!!


----------



## jwemt81 (Aug 20, 2008)

Jackson'sMom said:


> I have to wonder, do some people just join this forum and make one or two posts simply to create a stir? I know nothing about breeding and all of my goldens have been rescues, so I can't and won't take sides in this argument. But we seem to have a lot of new folks joining lately whose first thread is, by design or otherwise, stirring the pot. Just my observation.


I have noticed the exact same thing. I find it strange.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Many of the UK Goldens I met were, indeed calm... but they also were huge, overdone, too much bone, not enough drive, and compared to my US dogs, could barely keep up when playing. They had NO reach and no drive, ridiculous huge heads, and looked as though they'd be completely useless in the field. Recently, a Brit who saw my Golden was in awe of her, and said the Goldens back home (in England) that she knew were "big lumps" compared to my "beautiful athlete" (her words, not mine). 

Now, I lived in the UK, and I saw several nice dogs with spunk (but not hyper) and enough leg and lack of body fat and enough moderation to appear to be totally useful, normal Goldens. I admired them. But, I saw maybe a dozen Goldens out of hundreds at shows in the UK that I would have even considered owning, even as a pet only.

Another theory I have on why UK dogs may be so well adjusted and calm is that Brits actually WALK their dogs- as in an hour or more of off leash exercise EVERY DAY, rain or shine, in countryside and fields and paths. 

Unless you live in the middle of nowhere, Americans do not have that joy or privilage. There are no woods or fields or any other place a dog can go off leash within 100 miles of where I live. I have to sneak them illegally off leash on beaches, or go to dog parks the size of a backyard. 

Certainly, dogs that grow up with UK style exercise and socializing daily with other dogs out walking are going to be a lot better behaved than the American dogs who rarely leave their gardens or only see other dogs from a distance, on leashes.

None of the above is based on any study or fact either- it's just my observations.

I do not think little bitty red Goldens are exactly the original... but I also do not think huge cream monsters are either- LOOK at photos of the original Goldens... they FAR resemble a US born, fairly dark colored, "average" pet Golden more than any other type. I think the ideal is a range... but that neither extreme is correct. When it comes to extreme red field dogs and extreme cream huge UK show dogs, it is personal preference... I can accept that, as I, too, have personal preferences.


----------



## Tinsley (Nov 11, 2008)

Well I can fix the stir! I live in the UK and have been exposed to British goldens, think I have met two american golden's. I think I can go pretty well from personal experience, and to be honest, from being on this forum for a little while now I think I can say the differences I am aware of.

The American's seem to be leaner than the British, and the KC say this too, and apart from that the only difference I see is that the Americans tend to be very dark in colour!
I think how calm a dog is depends on how you bring it up. My Mum's friend has an 8 yr old english golden, and she is pretty darn calm, you could have a party over the top of her and she probably wouldn't care or be bothered! Whereas the golden down my road used to play with my 3 year old cousin, but would still go for a game of football/soccer with my 14 year old brother and become very hyper, it depended on the circumstances.

And as for the 60% die of cancer in America, that statistic is precisely the same in the UK.


----------



## jaireen (Feb 25, 2008)

jwemt81 said:


> I have noticed the exact same thing. I find it strange.


it has occured a lot of times lately....just wondering could it be the same person under different handles?....hmmm...


----------



## paula bedard (Feb 5, 2008)

I'm sooooo close to adding a funny quip about dental standards too...:--smirk:


----------



## Golden Leo (Dec 3, 2008)

You all say about "*first goldens*", then lets look at the prime purpose of the goldens. Lord Tweedmouth created breed that will *RETRIEVE* animals - not to hunt, not to search, not to kill, not to jump around the field or compete in highest jump etc. In that time hunters hunted with *TWO* dogs- *pointer* or another breed wich purpose is to find animals and *retriever* so he brings back dead animals. So how retrievers day looked like? He layed behind hunter ALL TIME so his temper must be *extremly calm* not to react on other animals, sounds (GUN SHOT!!!!- that's why they're tested for gunshots at few weeks old). Then after hunter kills animal he gives a retriever an order to retrieve- that is the only time that dog is allowed to leave his place! Next he must be able to pick up animal- some of the killed animals are really heavy! Specialy if they fall into water! So his build MUST fit so he can carry heavy animals so does his mouth have to be large enough to pick up an animal - BUT his *bite* has to be *gentle*, extremly gentle so he doen't damage skin of a dead animal - *he is not allowed to kill an animal, any animal!* He grabs it soft enough she doesn't escape but without hurting her. Why is heavy bone important? In hunting during a winter time - if animal falls in frozen lake, and dives under the ice- dog must break the ice and follow the animal- and of course dive in to catch it. 
They are not HUNT dogs in sense of jumping and running the field whole day but to* retrieveing* on his owners command. 
*Personal prefrences are irrelevant. *
From my own experience "field dog" is just an expression for an ugly dog that barley fits the standard. Go to the world dogs show and take a look at "work dog" class, they can't compare to those that are called "field type".
And for health I recommend you to learn on Austrian experience- their dogs must have all ideal for breeding no matter on build and in decades they got extremly ugly dogs and illnesses came back even with generations of clears!
In England all dogs can be bred no matter on health and they have same amount of problems as Austria but their dogs can't compare, and we all still admire English goldens.
Evolution is a nice thing... How would you like to look like- like **** neandertalensis or **** sapiens sapiens? I guess we should go back to that looks, after all they are FIRTS humans!! That is how God imagined it- who are we to change this?! So all humans who look like **** sapiens sapiens shouldn't be bred. Oh, and of course we should destroy civilisation we made and go back to nature, to original plan....


----------



## JohnTIZ (Jan 9, 2009)

I wonder, somewhere in doggieville, is there is a www.our-humans.com forum where all the golden retreivers log on their computers and discuss what shade of skin produces the best human beings?


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Golden Leo said:


> You all say about "*first goldens*", then lets look at the prime purpose of the goldens. Lord Tweedmouth created breed that will *RETRIEVE* animals - not to hunt, not to search, not to kill, not to jump around the field or compete in highest jump etc. In that time hunters hunted with *TWO* dogs- *pointer* or another breed wich purpose is to find animals and *retriever* so he brings back dead animals. So how retrievers day looked like? He layed behind hunter ALL TIME so his temper must be *extremly calm* not to react on other animals, sounds (GUN SHOT!!!!- that's why they're tested for gunshots at few weeks old). Then after hunter kills animal he gives a retriever an order to retrieve- that is the only time that dog is allowed to leave his place! Next he must be able to pick up animal- some of the killed animals are really heavy! Specialy if they fall into water! So his build MUST fit so he can carry heavy animals so does his mouth have to be large enough to pick up an animal - BUT his *bite* has to be *gentle*, extremly gentle so he doen't damage skin of a dead animal - *he is not allowed to kill an animal, any animal!* He grabs it soft enough she doesn't escape but without hurting her. Why is heavy bone important? In hunting during a winter time - if animal falls in frozen lake, and dives under the ice- dog must break the ice and follow the animal- and of course dive in to catch it.
> They are not HUNT dogs in sense of jumping and running the field whole day but to* retrieveing* on his owners command.
> *Personal prefrences are irrelevant. *
> From my own experience "field dog" is just an expression for an ugly dog that barley fits the standard. Go to the world dogs show and take a look at "work dog" class, they can't compare to those that are called "field type".
> ...


Whew! I sure hope that Swapcollie, or Jim S, or someone with more than occassional weekend hunting experience could address this. I believe that there is a language barrier and that I _think _I agree with some of it. 
First, as regards "extremely calm", Lord Tweedmouth wanted a dog that was loyal and kind, while at the same time spirited and energetic. A dog with a love for water, a strong swimmer, and able to withstand cold water. He needed a dog enthusastic to retrieve, but also capable of tracking wounded game. All this equates to a "biddible" dog - one that is readily trained, not "extremely calm". The Golden was an active, energetic, and enthusiastic dog - he had to be to do his job. "Calm" means, IMO, well trained.
The dog was a "medium-sized" dog. Large enough to pick up and carry a goose, but not so large as to be cumbersome in either field or water.

I am not understanding this:

"And for health I recommend you to learn on Austrian experience- their dogs must have all ideal for breeding no matter on build and in decades they got extremly ugly dogs and illnesses came back even with generations of clears!
In England all dogs can be bred no matter on health and they have same amount of problems as Austria but their dogs can't compare, and we all still admire English goldens."

It is contradictory to me - again, perhaps a language barrier, but what what I am getting is that Austrian dogs have all the same problems as UK dogs, healthwise, but are "ugly" but the English dogs can't compare to Austrian dogs - does this mean you think that they are uglier? I am just not sure how to read this...

My main concern is the premise promoted by the OP, as _absolute fact_, that European dogs are healthier/smarter/calmer/better, etc, backed by statements with no foundation.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> I am not understanding this:
> 
> "And for health I recommend you to learn on Austrian experience- their dogs must have all ideal for breeding no matter on build and in decades they got extremly ugly dogs and illnesses came back even with generations of clears!
> In England all dogs can be bred no matter on health and they have same amount of problems as Austria but their dogs can't compare, and we all still admire English goldens."
> ...


I believe what Golden Leo was saying, and I may be wrong is thtis.
That in Austria they do have a very stringent mandatory policy that all dogs must pass certain health screenings or they may not be bred. This has led to, in his opinion, the Austrian Goldens being "ugly" because no matter how strong the dog is in other traits if they do not pass the required screenings.
As for the comparrison to the UK dogs I believe he feels the UK dogs have no more health issues compared to the Austrian dogs even though the UK dogs are not required to under go certain health screenings in order to be bred. 
So I read his post to agree with what you and I both wote in principal.
Was I close Leo?


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

AmbikaGR said:


> I believe what Golden Leo was saying, and I may be wrong is thtis.
> That in Austria they do have a very stringent mandatory policy that all dogs must pass certain health screenings or they may not be bred. This has led to, in his opinion, the Austrian Goldens being "ugly" because no matter how strong the dog is in other traits if they do not pass the required screenings.
> As for the comparrison to the UK dogs I believe he feels the UK dogs have no more health issues compared to the Austrian dogs even though the UK dogs are not required to under go certain health screenings in order to be bred.
> So I read his post to agree with what you and I both wote in principal.
> Was I close Leo?


 
Thanks, Hank. I'm sure there is a language barrier. Shoot, I barely understand English.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

I think it really is personal preference and interpreting.

I have studied the history of Goldens extensively since I was a young teen, and I will never think a 90 or 100 pound cream colored dog that looks like it's part Saint Bernard is what the breed was meant to be. They do not resemble even slightly the founding dogs of the breed. Any Golden book is full of old photos which demonstrate my point very clearly.


----------



## SoGolden (Jul 17, 2008)

*Cream Goldens*



CreamGoldens said:


> I realize that this may not be a popular thing to say.


*You should have stopped there... you're gonna get creamed on this site.*


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

AquaClaraCanines said:


> I think it really is personal preference and interpreting.
> 
> I have studied the history of Goldens extensively since I was a young teen, and I will never think a 90 or 100 pound cream colored dog that looks like it's part Saint Bernard is what the breed was meant to be. They do not resemble even slightly the founding dogs of the breed. Any Golden book is full of old photos which demonstrate my point very clearly.


Now I think you are doing the same as the OP but in reverse. I know for a fact that not all Goldens in the UK are "90 or 100 pound cream colored dog that looks like it's part Saint Bernard".


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

SoGolden said:


> *You should have stopped there... you're gonna get creamed on this site.*


 
Pun intended? :bowrofl:
I don't think the OP was "creamed" but was taken to task because what was writen is it not based on ANY fact. It has no basis of truth. :nono:


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

No, and I never stated that they were, by any means.

However, Golden Leo and I have had this conversation before- about whether or not a 100 pound dog is acceptable. I say NO, it's not. I should have made that more clear


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

AquaClaraCanines said:


> No, and I never stated that they were, by any means.
> 
> However, Golden Leo and I have had this conversation before- about whether or not a 100 pound dog is acceptable. I say NO, it's not. I should have made that more clear


Of course it isn't, and that doesn't take extensive study of the history of the breed, all it takes is a quick glance at the standard. No matter WHAT country you are in.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

AquaClaraCanines said:


> No, and I never stated that they were, by any means.
> 
> However, Golden Leo and I have had this conversation before- about whether or not a 100 pound dog is acceptable. I say NO, it's not. I should have made that more clear


 
Sorry but I did not see him say that in any fashion in his post to this thread. :sorry:


----------



## SoGolden (Jul 17, 2008)

AmbikaGR said:


> Pun intended? :bowrofl:
> I don't think the OP was "creamed" but was taken to task because what was writen is it not based on ANY fact. It has no basis of truth. :nono:


well, just keepin' a sense of humor... it makes for a much better day.


----------



## KatieandAngie (Dec 24, 2008)

JohnTIZ said:


> I wonder, somewhere in doggieville, is there is a www.our-humans.com forum where all the golden retreivers log on their computers and discuss what shade of skin produces the best human beings?


LOL.... BTW, That's actually true, but they don't based on skin color but instead on place of birth with Texans being the hands down favorite... :rockon: 
:curtain:


----------



## Kohanagold (Nov 5, 2008)

AmbikaGR said:


> Pun intended? :bowrofl:
> I don't think the OP was "creamed" but was taken to task because what was writen is it not based on ANY fact. It has no basis of truth. :nono:


ROFL... Hense the creaming? I know myself that I'm not always very good at conveying the message, but it really appeared to me that the OP was written to come across as factual and "scientific" but didn't have the science or fact to back it up or like they perhaps have some "inside knowlege" that nobody on this group is priveleged to, or has the intellect to comprehend (hense the assumption that it wouldn't be the "popular" thing to say). Not really a smart assumption to be made here. Not to mention, starting of their very first post with "I realize that this may not be a popular thing to say."? As though in their first post they're going to "educate" all the rest of us on the history of and differences between a European golden and an American one? I also think that people that understand even a basic history of the breed know better on certain accounts. Truthfully, I know nothing about how the KC operates or even their standard really (at least not like I know ours), but I know enough about many of the imported dogs and they're "style" and despite looking different, that they are prone to the same genetic disorders that the Am. lines are. Come on... really? Cancer exists only in American lines and not European ones? I suppose next you're going to tell me that humans cant get cancer either? Or maybe they "catch" it from their American bred dogs? Okay, sidetrack. Sorry.

BTW, I loved the pun. LOL. BJ


----------



## SoGolden (Jul 17, 2008)

> BTW, I loved the pun. LOL. BJ


thank you.:--smirk:


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Well, I agree, though there isn't a written weight limit to my knowledge in the UK standard, I think it goes without saying that 90 or 100 pounds is WAY TOO HUGE for a Golden that is not overweight or far too tall. I can't find the thread now, but there was one where photos of 90 pound UK bred dogs were being posted as ideal examples of the breed, and a discussion about whether or not such size was acceptable was going on. I saw absolutely loads of huge dogs like this over there, in and out of the ring, and often heard US show Goldens called "little brown dogs" by UK exhibitors. 

Anyway, I'll back off because nothing I say no matter what it is will be interpreted correctly or valued here anyway, and it also appears the OP only posted to ruffle feathers, then disappeared.


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

The statements made in the original post were misguided at best and antagonistic at worst...I have no idea how someone can make such sweeping statements, I am sure they were only made only to rile people. 

I am sure most people have a picture of the perfect golden retriever in their heads and like has been mentioned it is more down to preference and interpretation of the breed standard that dictates they way the breed looks in different countries...and to say weather one is 'better' than the other is down to that preference of appearence and the dogs capability to do what it was bred to do. So to come on a GR forum and start making ridiculous and unfounded statements about health and temperament is just silly. 

Just to add about the converstaion since the OP...every golden in the UK that has achieved it's Championship has also passed a Show Gundog Working Certificate and therefore has the abilities for which retrievers were originally bred. I have no idea if other European countries or the US and Canada have that...maybe others will be able to tell me...it seems to me like it should be a standard part of the process.

I don't particularly take offence that some do not like my 'style' of golden (each to their own) but I must add, in my (limited) experience I have not seen huge goldens in shows that would weigh in at 90 to 100 pounds or look like some kind of golden/St bernard hybrid...nothing like that infact. My golden is 21 inches at the withers and weighs just less than 70lbs and I actually thought that most goldens, at the last championship show I attended, looked smaller than her...the females looked very compact and petite in comparison to Tilly I distinctly remember thinking! I certainly agree that a dog that IS that HUGE is very much out of standard and should not be winning in shows.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Emma&Tilly said:


> Just to add about the converstaion since the OP...every golden in the UK that has achieved it's Championship has also passed a Show Gundog Working Certificate and therefore has the abilities for which retrievers were originally bred. I have no idea if other European countries or the US and Canada have that...maybe others will be able to tell me...it seems to me like it should be a standard part of the process.


Unfortunately not here in the US or Canada. Many have felt it would be a GREAT thing to emulate here on this side of the pond but I am afraid it will neever come to pass in the US.


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

AmbikaGR said:


> I am afraid it will neever come to pass in the US.


Why is that do you think? It seems a shame as it is at least a little link between the show and working world.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

AmbikaGR said:


> Unfortunately not here in the US or Canada. Many have felt it would be a GREAT thing to emulate here on this side of the pond but I am afraid it will neever come to pass in the US.


 
It is cost prohibitive to do so for a majority of exhibitors. Even so, I will always maintain that there are more (_far _more) "show dogs" with titles on the other end than there are "field dogs" who can even get a point in the breed ring, let alone finish. THere is another thread where I posted many example of dogs who prove that. I just don't think that the argument that "show dogs" can't hunt is a valid one. They can, and do, and if it were not so cost prohibitive, and time consuming, there would likely be far more people who would do both conformation and performance with their dogs.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> It is cost prohibitive to do so for a majority of exhibitors. Even so, I will always maintain that there are more (_far _more) "show dogs" with titles on the other end than there are "field dogs" who can even get a point in the breed ring, let alone finish. THere is another thread where I posted many example of dogs who prove that. I just don't think that the argument that "show dogs" can't hunt is a valid one. They can, and do, and if it were not so cost prohibitive, and time consuming, there would likely be far more people who would do both conformation and performance with their dogs.


Now this is a point you and I will never agree on. :no: And that is fine. :smooch:
I do not think it is that cost or time prohibitive to train a dog for a WC. And seeing that the Breed Standard's second sentance starts with "Primarily a hunting dog" I do not think it is asking too much that a Golden denoted a "Champion" as based on the same Breed Standard in some way prove it is a "hunting dog". And I assure you that if this was a requirement you would be amazed how many of these folks would find a way to get it accomplished. :agree:
Lastly, I think you are quite aware that I do know that many "show" dogs and dogs from "show lines" can hunt. I have a couple that sleep with me every night. So there! :nana:


----------



## DUSTYRD2 (Feb 28, 2007)

With regards to the weight issue, dear Dusty's show weight at the height of his career was 93 pounds. It was at that same weight he earned his WC and his junior hunter and went back in the show ring and went Best in Specialty and Best Gun Dog 2 years running. His weight may not have been in standard but it never stopped him from getting his birds in fine style.


----------



## Debles (Sep 6, 2007)

AmbikaGR said:


> Now this is a point you and I will never agree on. :no: And that is fine. :smooch:
> I do not think it is that cost or time prohibitive to train a dog for a WC. And seeing that the Breed Standard's second sentance starts with "Primarily a hunting dog" I do not think it is asking too much that a Golden denoted a "Champion" as based on the same Breed Standard in some way prove it is a "hunting dog". And I assure you that if this was a requirement you would be amazed how many of these folks would find a way to get it accomplished. :agree:
> Lastly, I think you are quite aware that I do know that many "show" dogs and dogs from "show lines" can hunt. I have a couple that sleep with me every night. So there! :nana:


You are in fine and rare form tonight Hank! I agree and still love ya though. : )


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

AmbikaGR said:


> Now this is a point you and I will never agree on. :no: And that is fine. :smooch:
> I do not think it is that cost or time prohibitive to train a dog for a WC. And seeing that the Breed Standard's second sentance starts with "Primarily a hunting dog" I do not think it is asking too much that a Golden denoted a "Champion" as based on the same Breed Standard in some way prove it is a "hunting dog". And I assure you that if this was a requirement you would be amazed how many of these folks would find a way to get it accomplished. :agree:
> Lastly, I think you are quite aware that I do know that many "show" dogs and dogs from "show lines" can hunt. I have a couple that sleep with me every night. So there! :nana:


I don't disagree, actually, about the WC, which I think is valuable, and can be obtained relatively easily. It is much like the Natural Ability Test for the North American Versatile Hunting Dog Association (which I was an active participant in with my Pointers, and a board member of the local chapter). There is quite a lot of debate as to whether either are a sound measure of a dog's _actual _"natural ability", because they are "trained" for. People with dogs having higher level titles, and field trialers, tend to really look down their nose at them. My point is that because it is so expensive to earn a championship, often a person has to make a choice and do ONLY one or the other. We can't win for losing with pretty dogs, eh?

And I DO know that you are well aware that "show dogs can hunt" - my comment truly was not directed at you, Hank.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Hey, does anybody else really miss the OP, CreamGoldens? Gee whiz. I thought we were going to get to know him/her...:sadwavey:


----------



## Debles (Sep 6, 2007)

Maybe the OP will come back and participate in the discussion.


----------



## SoGolden (Jul 17, 2008)

(I am editing out this post. It doesn't really contribute anyway....)


----------



## Rhapsody in Gold (Dec 22, 2007)

Hey, hey, hey sweet Golden people. I cannot say I understand all of what has been discussed here, but I am trying to learn something.

I hope this forum is a place where one could expect an open and respectful exchange of ideas and opinions . . . . I sense a little mob action going on here and that is so beneath you.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Marty's Mom said:


> Hey, hey, hey sweet Golden people. I cannot say I understand all of what has been discussed here, but I am trying to learn something.
> 
> I hope this forum is a place where one could expect an open and respectful exchange of ideas and opinions . . . . I sense a little mob action going on here and that is so beneath you.


You are quite right, and I apologize for my comment about the OP. I do, though, stand by my reasons for disagreeing with the OP's assessment.


----------



## Kohanagold (Nov 5, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> You are quite right, and I apologize for my comment about the OP. I do, though, stand by my reasons for disagreeing with the OP's assessment.


I dont think its unfounded. I really try and give people the benefit of the doubt and try not to judge. However, I'm sorry to say it, but I really felt something was up at the start of this conversation. I feel more "sure" now. Where did they go? If there was a feeling of need to come here and clear up the differences between Am. and English lines, where's the response? Where are the published facts (or even theories) this is all based upon? While there are posts here where one can "learn", I strongly believe that the OP isn't one of them (kind of the opposite actually). Perhaps if there was some clarification, I might think differently, but there hasn't been.

On the titles at both ends thing, I know that is really the reason I haven't pursued field titles. Not just money, but accessibility and time (between conformation, agility, obedience, tracking and yes, the FT job to support it). If it were just one dog, that would make it easier, but not for me when I have 2 at the moment. I cant imagine competitors that have a dozen or so different dogs. Maybe when I'm retired?? But hey, how many times can you look through a show catalog and see a dog with a Ch and a TD.... I AM pretty proud of that. So its not that I dont do more with my dogs, just that I haven't done the field stuff.

But having said that, I do believe that they should be capable of it. You dont need field titles to prove that, IMO. Besides, I'm not much for dead things, and even less for injured or dying things. Ask my cats about the response they get when they bring me a bird... having the dogs join in on the fun... well.... maybe someday but that will be a hurdle for me.


----------



## Golden Leo (Dec 3, 2008)

AmbikaGR said:


> I believe what Golden Leo was saying, and I may be wrong is thtis.
> That in Austria they do have a very stringent mandatory policy that all dogs must pass certain health screenings or they may not be bred. This has led to, in his opinion, the Austrian Goldens being "ugly" because no matter how strong the dog is in other traits if they do not pass the required screenings.
> As for the comparrison to the UK dogs I believe he feels the UK dogs have no more health issues compared to the Austrian dogs even though the UK dogs are not required to under go certain health screenings in order to be bred.
> So I read his post to agree with what you and I both wote in principal.
> Was I close Leo?


Yes darling, that is what I meant. My english isn't so well.
Nature is tricky thing and we know so little about it. Austrains didn't cared about dogs build, only for health and after a while they got dogs with tons of illness and that barley fit the standard ( I used word ugly, it's rough and I aplogize), they barley look like GRs. And last few years they realized what they did and now they don't have so stricked rules about helath. But they are far far behind other countries concerning quality and in the same place with health. My friend owns a dog that has all clear in 5 generation pedigree and has horrible type of dip dysplasia. With this I want to say- you should find the balance between build, helath and temper. Lots of people got carried and focus on one or two things ( you have inbreeding- gorgeous dogs- no focus on temper and health, great health - no focus on build and temper, great temper (usualy "field type") - no focus on build and health)
All I'm trying to say - there is only one type of goldens. Standard fits to ideal golden. There is no need for descusions on color/health or anything. Standard is very precise. For me, every dog that fits the standard is gorgeous! Unfortunatley many, many champions don't fit in the standard, so I wonder who are those judges who give those dogs that kind of results? And who are the people who look at the dogs results when they want to breed them?
For me, dog can have thousands of titles BUT if I see that his build is far from ideal - all I can say- either the judges are blind or they like money! 
When I first got into the kinology I was very joung and naive. First shock to me was when famous GR jugde and breeder gave away all her dogs (some of them are seniors) - and people who got them said that they were so skinny, full of fleas, worms, with terrible coat, all in all horror. She kept another breed she breeds. In one big show, jugde wanted to throw out a dog when he was with his owner, when handler took him over she recognized handler and the dog won. These are only two examples of dissapointment.
There is no supremacy in kinology, we all have our problems. All lines carry something no matter if they are in Europe, US, Canada, Australia, Asia....
I must admit that I have noticed only that US has much more problems with front angles than europe, also I noticed more dogs that have "falling back" ( i'm sorry I don't know right english term). And I guess we both have problems with long dogs.
Good dog is a good dog, no matter of orgin, color, breeder, field trial or anything.... And I hate markings "english, cream, american, red, overbuild!!, too heavy, overdone?! - what is taht supposed to mean?!".
And I must admit I don't understand how can there be two standards for the same breed?


----------



## Golden Leo (Dec 3, 2008)

> Just to add about the converstaion since the OP...every golden in the UK that has achieved it's Championship has also passed a Show Gundog Working Certificate and therefore has the abilities for which retrievers were originally bred. I have no idea if other European countries or the US and Canada have that...maybe others will be able to tell me...it seems to me like it should be a standard part of the process.


Yes, all dogs In Europe have to pass that to be a Champion, these are the FCI rules. And every dog from 9 months to 2 years MUST pass inborn ability test to get breeding licence - that includes- reaction on gunshot, bring back duck from high grass and from deep water. I think that is for the most countries. "Working exam" is far more complicated....


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

opening myself up to disagreement here, so I want to preface this by saying I'm not a breeder, never have been, never will be....so it's just an idea that probably has a million reasons why it wouldn't work...
that said,
What I'd love to see is a "conditional championship" issued by AKC that can only be made into a full championship when ALL proper health clearances for that particular breed as defined by the parent club, have been submitted to the parent club.
At that time, and that time only, should the championship become a full championship.
Just my opinion.




AmbikaGR said:


> Unfortunately not here in the US or Canada. Many have felt it would be a GREAT thing to emulate here on this side of the pond but I am afraid it will neever come to pass in the US.


----------



## GoldenOwner12 (Jun 18, 2008)

Austrains is that a spelling mistake or a actuall town or state. I keep thinking that Austrains is meant to be Australians. If that is the case i find nothing wrong with Australian golden retrievers i admit there are a few goldens that i don't like the look of. Einstein came from all australian champions exept his mum. If you say Australian goldens are ugly that means your calling Einstein and Shelley ugly as there Australian goldens. My 2 reasable spelling the golden retriever in every way in my eyes.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

I suspect he means dogs from Austria, which is much closer to him.



GoldenOwner12 said:


> Austrains is that a spelling mistake or a actuall town or state. I keep thinking that Austrains is meant to be Australians. If that is the case i find nothing wrong with Australian golden retrievers i admit there are a few goldens that i don't like the look of. Einstein came from all australian champions exept his mum. If you say Australian goldens are ugly that means your calling Einstein and Shelley ugly as there Australian goldens. My 2 reasable spelling the golden retriever in every way in my eyes.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Golden Leo said:


> Yes darling, that is what I meant. My english isn't so well.
> Nature is tricky thing and we know so little about it. Austrains didn't cared about dogs build, only for health and after a while they got dogs with tons of illness and that barley fit the standard ( I used word ugly, it's rough and I aplogize), they barley look like GRs. And last few years they realized what they did and now they don't have so stricked rules about helath. But they are far far behind other countries concerning quality and in the same place with health. My friend owns a dog that has all clear in 5 generation pedigree and has horrible type of dip dysplasia. With this I want to say- you should find the balance between build, helath and temper. Lots of people got carried and focus on one or two things ( you have inbreeding- gorgeous dogs- no focus on temper and health, great health - no focus on build and temper, great temper (usualy "field type") - no focus on build and health)
> All I'm trying to say - there is only one type of goldens. Standard fits to ideal golden. There is no need for descusions on color/health or anything. Standard is very precise. For me, every dog that fits the standard is gorgeous! Unfortunatley many, many champions don't fit in the standard, so I wonder who are those judges who give those dogs that kind of results? And who are the people who look at the dogs results when they want to breed them?
> For me, dog can have thousands of titles BUT if I see that his build is far from ideal - all I can say- either the judges are blind or they like money!
> ...


 
Here we most certainly agree - the standard is the blueprint for a breed, and should be held to. Yes, it is subjective on many levels, but when a breed loses type and cannot even be recognized as what it is supposed to be, there is a problem. And because an awful lot of BYB don't even know that a standard exists, more dogs are being produced that don't look like their breed, and because many uninformed buyers don't know a standard exists, there is a market for them. 
Problems such as poor front assemblies, rears, toplines, size, etc, are cyclical, and this is true in every country. I see fronts improving dramatically here in the US. I think toplines are currently more of a problem, and also length of leg. In the European dogs, while fronts are good, rears are sorely lacking, and toplines suffering for it. Also eyes - I am seeing round eyes in many European dogs, while here in the US there are some bloodlines with small, "pig" eyes. 
There really is very little difference in the standards from country to country, if one reads them. And a good dog is a good dog, color aside. However, when a breed's color is part of it's type, and even it's very name, it must be considered.

And Golden Leo doesn't need to call me "darling"; I know that "he" is really a "she" (in case Hank was worrying!)


----------



## Rhapsody in Gold (Dec 22, 2007)

I chose my breeder because of their reputation for breeding Goldens with a strong genetic background. They are very beautiful dogs and are from champion show lines - - - but what was most important to me was health and temperment. 

Still, I think it would be very interesting to see pictures of Goldens that meet the standards or exceed them in your view. Perhaps there is a book but I am curious about some of these comments such as "pig eye", "rears sorely lacking", and "toplines are currently more of a problem". Could you show us examples of what you mean by some of these comments? I think it would be helpful to some of us who are learning.


----------



## CreamGoldens (Feb 1, 2009)

Hi! Well I'm back, clearly not waiting with baited breath for all you guys to get defensive. I will leave your site and clearly you will be thrilled to be rid of any form of opinion other than "Wow, what a great job you all do maintaing the integrity of American Goldens!". I aimed at opening an honest discussion about the real differences not being the coat. You guys stir it up or abuse my comments as much as you want. I think my point was made in the true defensiveness of most people's reactions.
I wouldn't even begin to post all the statistical data that is available. You all can control what is seen and how it is discussed - delete the thread if its so offending. Here is an easy place to see the cancer statistic http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/download/1563/hsgoldenretriever.pdf Look it up if you like an honest response. If you want to maintain your arguments back don't look and see the quoted cancer mortality rate of 38%. Clearly I am the one who was wrong to think that trying to show the differences would result in anything here.

If anyone does wonder about the differences, I suggest you just google it. Any website who has been actually been exposed to a cream will tell you the difference is not the coat, but the temperament. 
And thanks for the warm welcome. I knew it wouldn't be popular, should have not bothered.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Marty's Mom said:


> I chose my breeder because of their reputation for breeding Goldens with a strong genetic background. They are very beautiful dogs and are from champion show lines - - - but what was most important to me was health and temperment.
> 
> Still, I think it would be very interesting to see pictures of Goldens that meet the standards or exceed them in your view. Perhaps there is a book but I am curious about some of these comments such as "pig eye", "rears sorely lacking", and "toplines are currently more of a problem". Could you show us examples of what you mean by some of these comments? I think it would be helpful to some of us who are learning.


http://www.grcc.net/GRCCIllustratedBreedStandard.pdf

The GRCC’s illustrated standard is very well done.

The illustrated standard in the below link is one of my favorites:

http://www.ausngrc.org/assets/23114goldenretrieverbse.pdf

The Golden Retrieve’s expression is extremely important, and they eye is an enormous part of it. They should be soft, and kind looking. If you go to the illustration of eyes using the second link I provided, you will see .The first eye is correct. The second two are not. A “pig eye” would be a small, round eye, black and hollow looking in color. 

When I refer to toplines being a problem, I mean that rather than a straight, strong topline (the back from neck to tail) we are seeing sloping toplines like Setters, and “soft” toplines – that while straight and not sloping, are inclined to dip and sway.

“Rears sorely lacking” means that rather than being well angulated, are straight stifled, cowhocked, and even sickle hocked. http://www.grcc.net/GRCCIllustratedBreedStandard.pdf


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

I'm not sure why you even mentioned the color, if your focus is more on the country of origin or over all type. I have seen the odd dark colored UK lines dog from almost all cream pedigree, and the other way around. When you start a post talking about "cream goldens" it's going to stir the pot, what with all the careless people breeding such Goldens JUST to make a buck off the color and charging tons for them.


----------



## CreamGoldens (Feb 1, 2009)

Ah, someone from outside the AKC. Australia also has a standard and tradition on maintaining the original character. Breeding health requirements and a focus on a good dog. Hope to get an Australian golden one day!


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

CreamGoldens said:


> Hi! Well I'm back, clearly not waiting with baited breath for all you guys to get defensive. I will leave your site and clearly you will be thrilled to be rid of any form of opinion other than "Wow, what a great job you all do maintaing the integrity of American Goldens!". I aimed at opening an honest discussion about the real differences not being the coat. You guys stir it up or abuse my comments as much as you want. I think my point was made in the true defensiveness of most people's reactions.
> I wouldn't even begin to post all the statistical data that is available. You all can control what is seen and how it is discussed - delete the thread if its so offending. Here is an easy place to see the cancer statistic http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/download/1563/hsgoldenretriever.pdf Look it up if you like an honest response. If you want to maintain your arguments back don't look and see the quoted cancer mortality rate of 38%. Clearly I am the one who was wrong to think that trying to show the differences would result in anything here.
> 
> If anyone does wonder about the differences, I suggest you just google it. Any website who has been actually been exposed to a cream will tell you the difference is not the coat, but the temperament.
> And thanks for the warm welcome. I knew it wouldn't be popular, should have not bothered.


 
I find this to be an interesting viewpoint of the post that you started this thread with. There are cancer statistics all over the internet, of which you show only one, and as the GRCA is deeply involved in funding and researching the most prominant studies, I believe that we are well aware of them. What many of the statistics do not indicate is that many of the dogs included were also very advanced in years, and would likely not have lived much longer anyway. So, while there is certainly concern over cancers causing early deaths, the mortality numbers need to be looked at in depth to be accurate. 

I stand by my belief that you are misguided in that the "cream" dog (a misnomer in the first place) is different in temperament. 
As I stated, I have been "exposed to a "cream" " - not only the one that I owned (imported directly from England) but many others. At shows, in classes, and in their homes. They were Goldens, pure and simple, and exhibited many different personality traits and temperaments, as one would expect of many different individuals. 
(Additionally, you stating that this is the only difference is not what you stated in your original post.)

When a first time poster to this, or any other forum, comes on with a post that is a "hot-button" topic, and makes blanket statements that are unfounded (if not unequivocably false and provable as such), and then does not engage in the ensuing discussion,he or she cannot possibly expect to get a reaction other than what was given here.


----------



## Loboto-Me (Nov 13, 2008)

PG, thank you for those links, I kept them in my favorites. This is the first time I have gotten a chance to actually SEE what is meant by expression, length of leg etc etc.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Loboto-Me said:


> PG, thank you for those links, I kept them in my favorites. This is the first time I have gotten a chance to actually SEE what is meant by expression, length of leg etc etc.


You are most welcome. I think both are great, even given the differing nuances from country to county (as I said, the differences are really minute...)

I will go out on a limb here and speak for other breeders/exhibitors when I say that the language and terminology that is so much a part of our everyday vernacular as "dog people", is often a foreign language to some. I'm glad that the sites helped you to "interpret".


----------



## goldieduo (May 10, 2008)

First, i'll say that I am TOTALLY guilty of posting a thread about a topic w/out looking thru the million and one other posts to see if/when the particular topic was introduced and what the out come was. 
Secondly, I can't say I agree or disagree w/what the "op" has said. I own a "cream" coated golden who is an absolute spaz! I also own a redder coated golden who is very mild mannered. I DO agree w/the fact that while the temperament of the golden does have _some_ to do w/the breeding, the MAJORITY of it (imo) comes from the way the dog is brought up. Again, just my opinion.

My proof: Pumba (my cream) was a puppy when we got him. The bulk of the "impressionable" time of his puppyhood, I was dealing w/infant twin girls. Thus, I was not able to give him the one on one time he deserved/needed. He was left outside most of the time unless he was gated in the kitchen. I am not proud of that fact. Because of the lack of hands on time, he is very hyper. More hyper then the usual hyper golden.  We are now, going back and pretty much starting over w/him. When Brandi was a younger pup, she was handled a lot and had a TON of attention. It wasn't until the original owner got tired of the "responsibility" that she became neglected and even slightly abused. That's when we rescued her. However, because the original owner spent those first few months treating her right, she's laid back, calmer than Pumba. Bottom line, we're now more educated and doing our best to give them the best home possible. 

As far as the response the "op" has gotten, unacceptable..imo. I understand that a "newbie" shouldn't just bust open a thread w/a bunch of stuff that isn't founded. However, could all of you moderaters/supreme members,etc. handle it w/out sounding demeaning? I understand that all of you pros know your stuff and have researched every possible resourse. But, a few of us (me included) started this "golden journey" w/out knowing everything there is to know. I regret that..I really do. 

creamgoldens...you'll learn to take things that the moderaters/supreme members say in stride. My advice, walk very humbly because you're in the presence of kings and queens when it comes to this forum. : 
I developed an appreciation for them, in time, you will too.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

CreamGoldens said:


> I realize that this may not be a popular thing to say. I keep reading posts, and whether you agree or not; I do wish to set some clarity to the record of Golden Retrievers which we now differentiate by citing American Golden or English (European) Golden.
> Both are the same breed. That is true. The AKC calls it a golden retriever and the KC (EKCU,DKK,FKC, and so on and so on lets face it they have a lot of clubs in Europe!) also calls it a golden retriever. Scotland is where the Golden Breed that we know today was developed. The majority of clubs in the WORLD have a standard that matches the KC standard. It is the AKC whose standard is different. But that, in my opinion, is not where the differences between the two distinctions lie. The difference is in what generations of careful breeding, careful safeguarding of health, and an honest review and love for what a pet is. Americans love their Goldens - as well they should. But I would tell you from having had both 'types' for years that there is a huge difference in personality and health. The coat is not the difference and I totally agree, that breeders who only see the difference as a coat and claim it to be 'rare' 'white' 'platinum' or whatever made up branding, are totally wrong and chasing a marketing ploy for profit.
> 
> The true personality of a golden character is calm, gentle, and laid back. Eager to do its Master's bidding, confident, and intelligent. This is NOT what the majority of American goldens have become. With great apologies to the few excellent breeders who are trying very hard to maintain temperament, the rule has become a too high energy, jumpy, wild nutter. While there is the exception from time to time in the 'Creams'; anyone who has actually been exposed to them is amazed at how different they are. I know so many of you have the wonderful, American goldens and may find offense with my statement; and to you I say that I agree - you probably got the rare, calm, sweet one. The Golden of my childhood is different than the goldens we see today.
> ...





goldieduo said:


> As far as the response the "op" has gotten, unacceptable..imo. I understand that a "newbie" shouldn't just bust open a thread w/a bunch of stuff that isn't founded. However, could all of you moderaters/supreme members,etc. handle it w/out sounding demeaning? I understand that all of you pros know your stuff and have researched every possible resourse. But, a few of us (me included) started this "golden journey" w/out knowing everything there is to know. I regret that..I really do.
> 
> creamgoldens...you'll learn to take things that the moderaters/supreme members say in stride. My advice, walk very humbly because you're in the presence of kings and queens when it comes to this forum. :
> I developed an appreciation for them, in time, you will too.


We ALL started this "golden journey" w/out knowing everything there is to know. And I do not regret it. it is just the way life is, we learn as we go along. Please re-read the first two sentences of the original post in this thread. And there lies exactly why I felt I needed to reply to this post. The OP presents his opinon as if it is fact. And continues through out the post to say things as being fact when in fact they are not. Of all the things I questioned the OP has responded with a single link to a report from the Kennel Club (England) that starts out "_Warning: The results of this survey and particularly the breed-specific analyses __should be interpreted with caution."_
It goes on to state of the a total of 3282 questionaires were sent out to Golden owners and that ony 16.4% responded. Thus the reason the KC says to use caution when interpreting the numbers. The OP also states in the same post as the link to the KC report that _"I wouldn't even begin to post all the statistical data that is available."_ Why if you have the proof on "your side" would you not share it and enlighten others. I also do not think it is "demeaning" to ask one to stand up and support what they profess as fact. Also the OP clearly states they are not newbies. Lastly the OP asked for responses "_And you are welcome to respond, but I can tell you goldens are my passion and I spend hours and hours a week (if not a day - I'm really golden OCD!) researching this. I just had to set some realistic comment about the facts that though,"_ That is why I posted what I did. If you did the research and have the passion, again why would you not share? 
And for the record I don not consider myself a king or queen and have learned plenty on this forum from the newbies as well as the experienced among us.


----------



## Debles (Sep 6, 2007)

AmbikaGR said:


> We ALL started this "golden journey" w/out knowing everything there is to know. And I do not regret it. it is just the way life is, we learn as we go along. Please re-read the first two sentences of the original post in this thread. And there lies exactly why I felt I needed to reply to this post. The OP presents his opinon as if it is fact. And continues through out the post to say things as being fact when in fact they are not. Of all the things I questioned the OP has responded with a single link to a report from the Kennel Club (England) that starts out "_Warning: The results of this survey and particularly the breed-specific analyses __should be interpreted with caution."_
> It goes on to state of the a total of 3282 questionaires were sent out to Golden owners and that ony 16.4% responded. Thus the reason the KC says to use caution when interpreting the numbers. The OP also states in the same post as the link to the KC report that _"I wouldn't even begin to post all the statistical data that is available."_ Why if you have the proof on "your side" would you not share it and enlighten others. I also do not think it is "demeaning" to ask one to stand up and support what they profess as fact. Also the OP clearly states they are not newbies. Lastly the OP asked for responses "_And you are welcome to respond, but I can tell you goldens are my passion and I spend hours and hours a week (if not a day - I'm really golden OCD!) researching this. I just had to set some realistic comment about the facts that though,"_ That is why I posted what I did. If you did the research and have the passion, again why would you not share?
> And for the record I don not consider myself a king or queen and have learned plenty on this forum from the newbies as well as the experienced among us.


:appl::appl::appl::appl::appl::appl:


----------



## goldieduo (May 10, 2008)

ambikagr...i consider all of you who have been thru it all and give SO much advice and help, king and queens. i mean that good heartedly. (haha if that's even a word) 
i don't have a high horse to sit on or an agenda to promote. 

ok, so the op isn't a newbie. i still stand by the fact that the way some of us are responded to, isn't necessary. i'm not defending the op. just trying to justify the _passionate_ responses. and please, by all means profess what you think/know is fact. just try to do it a little more gently.  please....


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

You know, I just can't sugar coat things, especially not regarding fact based debate. (Those who really know me know that I am deeply emotional, particularly when it comes to the love of these dogs, and I share that privately when appropriate, but even then without "sugar coating". ) So, if my response was considered "unnacceptable" by anyone, it is what it is. I apologized for the comment I made regarding the op - it was tongue in cheek and not meant to offend. I will NOT apologize for posting my thoughts on the issues, which are based on well documented fact, contrary to the op's statements.
As for thinking that I am a "king or queen", nothing could be further from the truth.
As with Hank. I've learned much here on GRF, and hope that I have been able to help others do the same in some way.


----------



## Selli-Belle (Jan 28, 2009)

If you look at the Australian guide, the pictures of the dog moving and all the images from the Canadian standard are by Marcia Schlehr, from Michigan, who breeds under the Kyrie kennel name. She breeds for a multi-purpose dog, breed, performance and field. I think it goes to show that a good golden is a good golden!

I have a friend who had an English golden (English import) that she loved, but he died of a heart problem at eight years old. She also has two Meadowpond goldens (Selli's 1/2 aunt and uncle). She decided that she wanted another English golden, because she said "I don't have the energy for another Meadowpond." Well....as you can guess at about eight months old, she was shocked by how energetic her English puppy was.

My final thought is about what a "proper" golden should be! In the most recent GR News, there is an article that discusses the landscape of Scotland that Goldens were bred to go through and how that reflects on a Goldens physical form. It is a great article as were the articles written about historic field trials in England in recent issues. I think anyone interested in goldens should read these articles.

O.K., one more thought...Well bred goldens should be energetic and active, but also have an off switch. You can get this temperament in a field dog, a performance dog or a show dog. I think that is the joy of a golden.


----------



## goldieduo (May 10, 2008)

I don't think any of you actually think that you are a queen or king. That's just how I look at you. I look up to the fact that you are all so full of experience and knowledge. 
My opinion is that some people always look at a thread and if it's not fact, take it offensive and then feel justified in expressing true facts in a far from amiable way. 
So what that the op obviously posted a hole filled thread. 

Its just the principle of the matter....


----------



## Loboto-Me (Nov 13, 2008)

Well I certainly think my "Kings and Queens"  have taught me tons, and personally? I don't care for saccharine ... only a touch of sugar will do but only when it comes to emotional issues not when I'm hoping to learn something or trying to see where I might have gone wrong. (hmmm now THAT was a run on sentence if I ever saw one)


----------



## goldieduo (May 10, 2008)

lol...I'm with you on learning a TON from the folks here. My parents always give me a hard time whenever I'm with them because I'm always talking about the things I've learned here.


----------



## Debles (Sep 6, 2007)

I appreciate appropriateness and think people here should be courteous.
But both Hank and Laura have set me straight on a few things in a very blunt way and I appreciate it. My dogs health is at stake. I respect their knowledge and experience.
I came to learn and make friends with others who love goldens.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

goldieduo said:


> I don't think any of you actually think that you are a queen or king. That's just how I look at you. I look up to the fact that you are all so full of experience and knowledge.
> My opinion is that some people always look at a thread and if it's not fact, take it offensive and then feel justified in expressing true facts in a far from amiable way.
> So what that the op obviously posted a hole filled thread.
> 
> Its just the principle of the matter....


 
The problem is people who do not know the "facts" will read a post like the OP and if no one questions it they accept "IT" as fact. 
As for the "amiable way". If my post had been the OP and CreamGoldens post was the reply then by your post I would have to assume you would take that post as less than "amiable". Just bcause someone does not agree or questions another's opinion does not make it "far from amiable". And a lot of times we tend to "read" things and attitude into posts that are not there. And your "kings and queens" is a perfect example, as I truly thought you we taking a shot at me. I apologize for doing so, obviously now I see it was not what was meant.


----------



## goldieduo (May 10, 2008)

Truce?


----------



## Ivrygld (Oct 22, 2005)

*Golden Response...*

What happened to the good old fashioned, "Welcome to the forum"? Not once in the 8 pages so far of discussions did I see any forum member do so. 
The purpose of this forum is to feel welcome and comfortable to share opinions, share information and learn about our wonderful breed. 
I apologize to the OP "Creamgoldens" for not giving him/her the golden welcome they deserve. We should take lessons from the dogs we own....don't we all get welcomes fit for a King or Queen when we return home?
Just my 2 Cents...


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Ivrygld said:


> What happened to the good old fashioned, "Welcome to the forum"? Not once in the 8 pages so far of discussions did I see any forum member do so.
> The purpose of this forum is to feel welcome and comfortable to share opinions, share information and learn about our wonderful breed.
> I apologize to the OP "Creamgoldens" for not giving him/her the golden welcome they deserve. We should take lessons from the dogs we own....don't we all get welcomes fit for a King or Queen when we return home?
> Just my 2 Cents...


Conversely, what happened to the "HI, I'm __________ and I am new here." Those are the posts that get the warm fuzzy welcomes.

The "You people don't know anything and are wrong about creme dogs" not so much... :uhoh:


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Ivrygld said:


> What happened to the good old fashioned, "Welcome to the forum"? Not once in the 8 pages so far of discussions did I see any forum member do so.
> The purpose of this forum is to feel welcome and comfortable to share opinions, share information and learn about our wonderful breed.
> I apologize to the OP "Creamgoldens" for not giving him/her the golden welcome they deserve. We should take lessons from the dogs we own....don't we all get welcomes fit for a King or Queen when we return home?
> Just my 2 Cents...


And of course you are right. When this thread started I did not know the OP was new to the forum. At no time did they identify themselves as such, the thread is not from the "Member Itroduction" section and the OP started with _"I realize that this may not be a popular thing to say. I keep reading posts," _. I do not look at the number of posts a poster has made as I do not think it indicates anything more than the number of posts they have made. It is in no way an indication of their experience in the breed. 

So to Creamgoldens, welcome to the forum. :wavey:


----------



## goldieduo (May 10, 2008)

Ivrygld said:


> What happened to the good old fashioned, "Welcome to the forum"? Not once in the 8 pages so far of discussions did I see any forum member do so.
> The purpose of this forum is to feel welcome and comfortable to share opinions, share information and learn about our wonderful breed.
> I apologize to the OP "Creamgoldens" for not giving him/her the golden welcome they deserve. We should take lessons from the dogs we own....don't we all get welcomes fit for a King or Queen when we return home?
> Just my 2 Cents...


Holy Cow!! I couldn't say it better myself. And I'm a guilty party......I apologize.......


----------



## Ivrygld (Oct 22, 2005)

Pointgold said:


> Conversely, what happened to the "HI, I'm __________ and I am new here." Those are the posts that get the warm fuzzy welcomes.
> 
> The "You people don't know anything and are wrong about creme dogs" not so much... :uhoh:


 
Point taken, however a little "golden welcome" goes along way. Ask my dogs. They treat all visitors the same even when they aren't greeted first. Puts everyone at ease.


----------



## Debles (Sep 6, 2007)

" Kennel blinds need not reply."

What does this mean?


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Debles said:


> " Kennel blinds need not reply."
> 
> What does this mean?


 
My interpretation
"If you do not agree with what I wrote you must be kennel blind so do not waste my time by responding"

"Kennel Blindness" is a term used to describe a person who thinks they are the only one producing correct dogs. They see NO faults in their dogs and plenty in others.


----------



## Debles (Sep 6, 2007)

Thanks Hank. Since I don't breed, show or have a kennel, a little ignorant there.

But everyone here on GRF knows Selka and Gunner are perfect in every way! : )


----------



## Wilson's REAL Mom (Nov 10, 2006)

Interesting website Brighton Goldens.

Just throwing this out there and then running for cover!


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Wilson's REAL Mom said:


> Interesting website Brighton Goldens.
> 
> Just throwing this out there and then running for cover!


WHY?
Do you want to discuss some part of it? If so what part?


----------



## *~Pry&Kasper~* (Dec 25, 2008)

Why categorize by color ?!? :
I am sure everyone here loves their golden, thats all that matter:--heart:



just felt like trowing this in there lol :curtain:

*Quote* Divisions are imaginary lines drawn by small minds. 
Paramhansa Yogananda


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

AmbikaGR said:


> WHY?
> Do you want to discuss some part of it? If so what part?


Yeah, put up yer dukes... LOL (just kidding...)


----------



## laprincessa (Mar 24, 2008)

JohnTIZ said:


> I wonder, somewhere in doggieville, is there is a www.our-humans.com forum where all the golden retreivers log on their computers and discuss what shade of skin produces the best human beings?


 Shhhhh, Max is very upset that you've mentioned this in public!!!!!!!!!
:no:


----------



## magiclover (Apr 22, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> http://www.grcc.net/GRCCIllustratedBreedStandard.pdf
> 
> The GRCC’s illustrated standard is very well done.
> 
> ...


Thank you for this. I really enjoyed reading through this.


----------



## Loboto-Me (Nov 13, 2008)

Well I read the Brighton Goldens site and I find it really biased in her commentaries since she sells "English Styles" The part that raised a red flag was "Darker European Goldens have a much lighter color in their undercoat then their outercoat. American Goldens coat color is more or less uniform on the whole hair shaft. Maybe to hide clipping and trimming? " Yes she shows the differences in the standards called for in different countries which was nice to read, but her commentaries on these differences seems to point in the direction trying of to sully the American Style Golden. She even goes as far as saying the American coat is way too thick, meanwhile I've seen pictures of European Goldens that look like sasquatches and other that look almost like labs. I don't understand where the standards lie in that case. I do agree with her comments on the straight back though (going by her picture comparison of both goldens) I feel that the american champion's back should not have been a winner.

This is all in the point of view of a huge newbie


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Loboto-Me said:


> Well I read the Brighton Goldens site and I find it really biased in her commentaries since she sells "English Styles" The part that raised a red flag was "Darker European Goldens have a much lighter color in their undercoat then their outercoat. American Goldens coat color is more or less uniform on the whole hair shaft. Maybe to hide clipping and trimming? " Yes she shows the differences in the standards called for in different countries which was nice to read, but her commentaries on these differences seems to point in the direction trying of to sully the American Style Golden. She even goes as far as saying the American coat is way too thick, meanwhile I've seen pictures of European Goldens that look like sasquatches and other that look almost like labs. I don't understand where the standards lie in that case. I do agree with her comments on the straight back though (going by her picture comparison of both goldens) I feel that the american champion's back should not have been a winner.
> 
> This is all in the point of view of a huge newbie


 

She shows American dogs that are in poses that are not an accurate depiction of the true structure of the individual dogs, in one there is a shot of the dog with it's tail down which does not mean that it always is (go to a show - those tails are wagging...) Another of a young pet whose eyes she calls "reptilian" and while I do not disagree, that is NOT the norm. 
It's most assuredly a biased site, and with some inaccuracies - ie the bitch that she says would be too small for an AKC ring - the AKC standard makes an allowance - deviation of height MORE than one inch either way will be disqualified. Do the math...

*Size*
*AKC: Males 23-24 inches in height at withers; females 21½-22½ inches. *
*KC: Height at withers: dogs: 22-24 ins; bitches: 20-22 ins*

Which makes her following statement seem even more unfounded. 


"Although all correct American male dogs would be in spec on European shows statistically only half of good European males will qualify on American shows or be penalized.
The situation with females is even worse: 
Statistically only half of correct American female Goldens will be in spec on European shows and only a quarter of good European females will qualify on American shows or be penalized."


It's an interesting site, to be sure.


----------



## Loboto-Me (Nov 13, 2008)

Well I see that she imports polish puppies, no wonder the biased info. Yeah, I think this site should be used more for opinions rather than information.


----------



## Rhapsody in Gold (Dec 22, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> http://www.grcc.net/GRCCIllustratedBreedStandard.pdf
> 
> The GRCC’s illustrated standard is very well done.
> 
> ...


Thank you for taking the time to share this information. It is quite helpful in following the discussion.

As a side note - the opinions in this thread are very interesting and clearly there are some very knowledgeable people on this topic. What I find disappointing as a new comer (and I have seen it here and in a few other threads) is where a few individuals will suggest something about a poster (such as how many friends a member has) then others pile on. I know this is a very passionate group of people, but there is a way to make your point and be diplomatic. I have a great deal of respect for many of you. I read what you write and even though we have never met, I feel I know you and like you - - - but, but, but, innuendo contributes nothing - - - if anything, a little credibility is lost.

Please accept this post as friendly and earnest advice.


----------



## GoldenOwner12 (Jun 18, 2008)

> O.K., one more thought...Well bred goldens should be energetic and active, but also have an off switch. You can get this temperament in a field dog, a performance dog or a show dog. I think that is the joy of a golden.


Can someone please tell my Shelley she is meant to have an off switch lol. Shelley is very energetic and active even after a good 1 and half hours run and swim. She comes home has a 5 minute rest and is ready to go again. Could someone also tell her shes meant to be asleep at night time not digging holes, Yep thats right she has started to dig again. Shelley does these things at night when she can't be caught doing it.


----------



## Lucky's mom (Nov 4, 2005)

Marty's Mom said:


> Thank you for providing this information. This is quite helpful in following the discussion.
> 
> As a side note - The opinions in this thread are very interesting and clearly there are some very knowledgeable people on this topic. What I find disappointing as a new comer (and I have seen it here and in a few other threads) is where a few individuals will suggest something about a poster (such as how many friends a member has) then others pile on. I know this is a very passionate group of people, but there is a way to make your point and be diplomatic. I have a great deal of respect for many of you. I read what you write and even though we have never met, I feel I know you and like you - - - but, but, but, innuendo contributes nothing - - - if anything, a little credibility is lost.
> 
> Please accept this post as friendly and earnest advice.


I know what you are saying, but I think there is a responsibility for a newcomer to not... in essence... insult American Goldens _with the first post..._and then state that that _its our responsibility_ to start googling facts to back her opinion. Thats not nice.

New members should introduce themselves and allow us to get to know them first . Even then, I would take offense to "Blind Kennels need not reply" JMHO


----------



## Rhapsody in Gold (Dec 22, 2007)

Yes. I agree with you (Lucky's mom). Diplomacy goes a long way.


----------



## John G (Dec 27, 2008)

Welcome CreamGold. Although I disagree with several of you opinions that you consider as "facts" I hope you stick around to maybe sway or be swayed. Maybe you will just have to agree to disagree with me or others, but in so doing will enlighten others or pause to think.

I agree that passionate breeders/owners can be "kennel blind". What does a look in the mirror reveal?

A lump of coal or a jar of molasses can both be "calm". I don't know of any performance field dogs whose standard is to be "calm". Quiet, perhaps, not hyper or mean, but also-not calm. I think you have taken liberties with certain characteristics of the breed standard(s). FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION!!!

Look at the earliest paintings and photos of the first Goldens. NONE looked like the bench Champions of today. Even the CH's of 50 years ago don't look like those currently being put up. Has the Standard changed that much? NO!!!! The first Goldens and even eary Champions looked more like todays field Goldens and BYB pets!

I don't know of anyone that cares about the breed that thinks that dogs with poor temperament are acceptable. This includes those that raise for performance. Likewise health. We all want healthy dogs.

Health is not absolute or perfect. It is art and science. The art of breeding to produce the good traits while minimizing or eliminating the bad. Not easy to do, much less fully understand. The perfect dog with perfect health and perfect clearances does NOT exist. If you think it does, it is probably because it hasn't been tested completely. New tests such as the PRCD PRA test for Goldens come and go all the time.

I would love to see more Dual Champions. But even then, there are pitfalls. Push is the only DC in many years. He achieved this in Canada. A tremendously difficult achievement. He would have a much harder time (maybe impossible) accomplishing this in the US. He is a wonderful dog. He has health issues too. This does not mean that he should not be considered for breeding purposes. You must decide what he brings to the table and if the good outweighs the bad.

I also take exception with those taking the high rode that the bench dogs are somehow "better" overall than field dogs because they can have bench points or titles and still easily also attain field "titles" such as WC and JH. Field dogs meanwhile are usually unable to receive any bench points.

I take great offense at this. Remember form follows function. Most conformation dogs are physically and often mentally not able to perform at the highest levels in the field all day. Driven shoots, even in the day of Lord Tweedmouth could mean perhaps as many as 100 retrieves or more for a dog. How many can handle that regularly?

A trained GSD, Rottie, Doberman, Cocker, Beagle or Collie could be taught to pass these minimums as could most breeds of dog. This does not mean the dog is born with these skills. They are taught like most obedience skills. Other animals from those in the barnyard to birds such as hawks can be taught to retrieve. Pretty cool, but SO WHAT?!?!?

If you want to see if your dog really has the function for which is the main purpose of the breed, then I feel a Senior Hunter or Finished (UKC) should be the bare minimum. They are not very hard at all if your dog has minimal drive and brains. One of my favorite fluffy Champion was Sabre. He squeeked by in the show ring and never achieved his field champion titles but he was a smart athletic dog that was 100% Golden. He is the closest we have come in the US to a DC in the last 30+ years.

Chessies and Flat Coats are much closer in not deviating from their breed standard which like the Goldens is to retrieve game. The US LAb Club does not recognize the title of CH until the dog has at least shown it will retrieve game. Maybe the GRCA should adopt this too?

Color of coat is often a personal thing. I think we all agree that while a Flat Coat is a beautiful dog, it is not a Golden. Certain colors are deal breakers in the breed. I personally think that both very light and very dark examples are both good looking, I think they are a little too extreme for the breed. Others might (will) disagree. Look at old pictures and photos. Some were a little darker, some a little lighter. Many had some white on the chest, face or feet.

Same thing with coat texture. Shouldn't look or feel like Labs, Setters or Poodles! Old pictures and photos of Goldens never show these big blocky heads. They never show big fluffy dogs with big puffy flat blown open coats that would soak up water and slow them down like a sponge in a stream. 

If you want to really work to improve the breed then you should breed and train as best you are able to create dogs that are the best at what the breed has for it's PRIMARY PURPOSE!!! The top titles awarded for this are FC-Field Champion and AFC-Amateur Field Champion. The toughest country in the world to attain these titles is the US. It is also probably judges with the least corruption.

Fewer than one Golden per year earns the title of FC, while AFC is bestowed upon usually 2 or 3 in most years.

In conclusion I agree that environmental shaping and training methods have a lot to do with how a dog turns out. DNA plays a big part too. Most US field dogs have a very heavy influence (many are line bred) from English and Scottish imports. Think Barty. Yet they have overall become darker in color. Does the color make them less calm? I don't think so. Nor does their trip from Europe make them more or less "calm". Many Lab people avoided Chocolates for serious field work because they felt that the "color" gene also influenced intelligence. Some still do. It may to some small degree, but as in Goldens, I think such generalizations are too broad and do more harm than good.

I know many will disagree with some/much of what I have posted. I only hope that they look at and discuss with an open mind and an honest heart. Facts would be nice, too!

Goodnight
John


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

John G said:


> Welcome CreamGold. Although I disagree with several of you opinions that you consider as "facts" I hope you stick around to maybe sway or be swayed. Maybe you will just have to agree to disagree with me or others, but in so doing will enlighten others or pause to think.
> 
> I agree that passionate breeders/owners can be "kennel blind". What does a look in the mirror reveal?
> 
> ...


I actually think that this is a great post, and disagree with very little of it. In a previous post, I mentioned that while I think WC is valuable, I know that it is not considered a good measure of a dog's talent in the field. 

I loved Sabre, too, and had the good fortune to spend much time with him at a couple of Nationals with "Team Sabre" helping prepare him for the ring. He came close, didn't he...

I think that what we see today, just as with coat color, is an extrem to either side - some "overdone" conformation dogs, and some field dogs that are rather more like large spaniels with long tails. There doesn't seem to be a middle ground. I have "show dogs". They have correct coats, and I don't blow them open. My husband and sons do hunt with them on weekends. I don't believe that field trials are an accurate simulation of todays hunting situations, and that a bit larger dog that is not running hellbent for election all day to fetch up a hundred birds is needed. So, "evolution" does occur. That doesn't mean that I don't appreciate and enjoy trials - I do, very much

I really hate the divisivness within the breed (and GOldens are not the only one dealing with it) and wish that some meeting in the middle could occur.


----------



## Golden Leo (Dec 3, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> Here we most certainly agree - the standard is the blueprint for a breed, and should be held to. Yes, it is subjective on many levels, but when a breed loses type and cannot even be recognized as what it is supposed to be, there is a problem. And because an awful lot of BYB don't even know that a standard exists, more dogs are being produced that don't look like their breed, and because many uninformed buyers don't know a standard exists, there is a market for them.
> Problems such as poor front assemblies, rears, toplines, size, etc, are cyclical, and this is true in every country. I see fronts improving dramatically here in the US. I think toplines are currently more of a problem, and also length of leg. In the European dogs, while fronts are good, rears are sorely lacking, and toplines suffering for it. Also eyes - I am seeing round eyes in many European dogs, while here in the US there are some bloodlines with small, "pig" eyes.
> There really is very little difference in the standards from country to country, if one reads them. And a good dog is a good dog, color aside. However, when a breed's color is part of it's type, and even it's very name, it must be considered.
> 
> And Golden Leo doesn't need to call me "darling"; I know that "he" is really a "she" (in case Hank was worrying!)


Golden Leo is my dog - golden for the breed and Leo for the name. I am Iva, female. And darling is meant to Hank - for understanding what I said and explaining it  But I like you too. You know that I respect you. 
When it comes to color- "any shade of golden and cream", those "white" dogs perfectly fit, while US standard says that light is undesirable. And there is no regulation of weight in british standard - I think maybe nothern european dogs would fit in US standard about weight. And that is just maybe since my friend has dog from Netherland ( the light bone kind) that weights about 40 kg. 
I wonder how many jugdes follow the standard when judging? Excellent would mean that dog fits the standard ( has proper angulation, lenght, head etc). Even worse if he gots BOB - is this dog real representative of golden retriever breed? Is he really best of breed? Or he's just not so bad like other ones in the show? I was at the shows when jugdes refused to give CAC, CACIB, BOB if dog doesn't deserve it- and I respect that! There was only few of them but still it's a progress. I think that breeders would have to think why their dog can't get excellent in shows if all goes by regulations. And BYB are not the problem, these dogs end up like pets, but those untypical dogs from breeders I see at shows... 
When I first came to this forum I asked someone to show me what top american goldens are since I have heard that they are so different than europeans and since I love this breed I wanted to learn. The dogs I saw were nothing like dogs I see on european show, different head, head expression - this is the first thing I look since they truly are the only dog with human look, they were all puffy, it looked to me that they have different type of hair, they had great rear angulation, but no front at all, only lots of hair and falling back. These dogs are presented to me as top dogs with titles 10 times longer than it's name. Later on while investigateing I found much better dogs. 
But I guess it matters on what we are used to. To me, there are no more beautiful dogs in the world than over here (Lucky Man de RV, Paudell, Zampanzar... and my Leo!  ) and I suppose it's the same thing with you and your dogs. They are different but the love we give them is the same.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

Very, very well said. That's the most important thing of all.




Golden Leo said:


> and I suppose it's the same thing with you and your dogs. They are different but the love we give them is the same.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

This is usually a friendly forum, but the OP came with a precanned message looking to draw battle lines. The response from expert forum members who have worked with Goldens for decades, handling dogs at Westminster, etc, breeding proven champions, and working in many venues successfully like obedience is completely appropriate. When you are brand new to a forum, it is just good manners to participate a little and introduce yourself before pushing an an entire agenda. 

The Brighton site: " additionally this has produced a generally more vicious dog". Is this trying to say the angulation of the GSD makes it vicious as a cause&effect? Sites that just rant and rave crazily presenting iffy opinions as straight up facts arent too persuasive. Do you think they had official permission to comandeer and publish the photos of the dogs they insult?

I agree with John G in many ways, except that the FC/AFC is the definition of what the golden should achieve. Master/Senior Hunter, yes, but field trials demand far more specialized training/ adaptive temperament/conformation to withstand than the gentleman's hunter of yore upon whom the standard is based. Field trials are extreme compared to even the toughest day of hunting with a human companion. I grew up with goldens from the "pre-split' days, with a granddaughter and a greatgrandson of Quar, Dual CH AFC Tigathoe's Funky Farquar CD TD OS FDHF . Both lived to be over 15, with good health and great tempermants, rugged, sturdy athletes who delighted in hunting a long weekend with my grandfather in and out of Maine's freezing cold water and also loved to be brushed and petted for hours by little girls. These dogs formed my inner image of what a golden retriever "is" long before I learned to study the breed standard. My inner image of a golden is not overdone show dog but is yes majestic and aethetically beautiful, joyfully atheltic and a stylish retreiving fool, with good bone and presence and feathering, not a toller-sized dog either.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Golden Leo said:


> Golden Leo is my dog - golden for the breed and Leo for the name. I am Iva, female. And darling is meant to Hank - for understanding what I said and explaining it  But I like you too. You know that I respect you.
> When it comes to color- "any shade of golden and cream", those "white" dogs perfectly fit, while US standard says that light is undesirable. And there is no regulation of weight in british standard - I think maybe nothern european dogs would fit in US standard about weight. And that is just maybe since my friend has dog from Netherland ( the light bone kind) that weights about 40 kg.
> I wonder how many jugdes follow the standard when judging? Excellent would mean that dog fits the standard ( has proper angulation, lenght, head etc). Even worse if he gots BOB - is this dog real representative of golden retriever breed? Is he really best of breed? Or he's just not so bad like other ones in the show? I was at the shows when jugdes refused to give CAC, CACIB, BOB if dog doesn't deserve it- and I respect that! There was only few of them but still it's a progress. I think that breeders would have to think why their dog can't get excellent in shows if all goes by regulations. And BYB are not the problem, these dogs end up like pets, but those untypical dogs from breeders I see at shows...
> When I first came to this forum I asked someone to show me what top american goldens are since I have heard that they are so different than europeans and since I love this breed I wanted to learn. The dogs I saw were nothing like dogs I see on european show, different head, head expression - this is the first thing I look since they truly are the only dog with human look, they were all puffy, it looked to me that they have different type of hair, they had great rear angulation, but no front at all, only lots of hair and falling back. These dogs are presented to me as top dogs with titles 10 times longer than it's name. Later on while investigateing I found much better dogs.
> But I guess it matters on what we are used to. To me, there are no more beautiful dogs in the world than over here (Lucky Man de RV, Paudell, Zampanzar... and my Leo!  ) and I suppose it's the same thing with you and your dogs. They are different but the love we give them is the same.


And I like you, too! We've had good conversations, I've learned more about European dogs, and you have provided examples of some glorious dogs - dogs that I would take home in a heartbeat. And as I've said before, I covet the dog that won at Crufts - he is superb! 
It is unfortunate that you have seen so many poor fronts in US dogs - I feel that fronts have improved for the most part, and that it is rears that are more of a problem. And toplines soft - I cannot stand tosee a dog lose the topline on the move  Aside from some small eyes, I thnk heads are good - I like our American dog's head and expression, I fnd them to be soft and "happy" looking. Coats are getting better, too, with texture becoming more correct - harder topcoats and more dense undercoats. 
I too am happy to see judges withhold ribbons when they are not deserved. Part of what I have seen, at least in our area, is new judges, mostly provisional, who get a large entry because no one knows what they like and figure it's anyone's opportunity. As a result, many dogs of marginal quality are in the ring - more actually than the the really good dogs, and the new judge seems to figure that those good dogs are so different from the others that they must not be the ones to put up. So, marginal dogs are winning, and thus bred. (I am referring here to all-breed shows. Most of these dogs are never seen at specialties, and if they are, are not winning or placing.) This didn't happen with the "oldtime" judges, many who have sadly passed or retired. On the other hand, I am generally happy as a breeder when I go to specialties and see more dogs that I wish were mine than not. Bitches are getting bigger - for a while they were tiny, and dogs are becoming more moderate - they were too big. 

There certainly are differences throughout the world, but for the most part, I do not find them to be as extreme as some would have you think, and yes, we do love them the same way.


----------



## paula bedard (Feb 5, 2008)

I would like to thank all of you for such a compelling read. I'm waiting for the next chapters.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

John G said:


> Welcome CreamGold. Although I disagree with several of you opinions that you consider as "facts" I hope you stick around to maybe sway or be swayed. Maybe you will just have to agree to disagree with me or others, but in so doing will enlighten others or pause to think.
> 
> I agree that passionate breeders/owners can be "kennel blind". What does a look in the mirror reveal?
> 
> ...


 
Hello John and welcome to the forum :wave:

While I also agree with a LOT of what you wrote I will and do take a different veiw on some points.

*New tests such as the PRCD PRA test for Goldens come and go all the time.*
Actually tests like this are here to stay. and I for one look for the day when similar tests are available for Cancer, SAS, HD, ED and so on.

*This does not mean that he should not be considered for breeding purposes. You must decide what he brings to the table and if the good outweighs the bad.*
Tests such as the prcd-PRA test make this possible. We know not to breed two carriers and it is easy to determine who are carriers. Imagine the possiblities for other diseases!


*Most conformation dogs are physically and often mentally not able to perform at the highest levels in the field all day. Driven shoots, even in the day of Lord Tweedmouth could mean perhaps as many as 100 retrieves or more for a dog. How many can handle that regularly?*
I truly think you over generalize here. And we are starting to see ore "conformation" dogs striving and attaining higher field titles. Look at the number of CH/SH and CH/SH in the last 5-10 years.

*The top titles awarded for this are FC-Field Champion and AFC-Amateur Field Champion. *
Agreed 100%. However how many of the FC/AFC Goldens of decades gone by would be able to attain that same level today? No way to know for sure but the "game" is not the same as it was back then. It would be similar to trying to think how the great ballplayers of long ago would do today. Sure the Ruths, Cobbs, Cottons and Bartys would but what about the lesser ones?

I again thank you for the thought provoking post and look forward to seeing you in additional threads down the road.


----------



## Debles (Sep 6, 2007)

Ljilly28 said:


> This is usually a friendly forum, but the OP came with a precanned message looking to draw battle lines. The response from expert forum members who have worked with Goldens for decades, handling dogs at Westminster, etc, breeding proven champions, and working in many venues successfully like obedience is completely appropriate. When you are brand new to a forum, it is just good manners to participate a little and introduce yourself before pushing an an entire agenda.
> 
> The Brighton site: " additionally this has produced a generally more vicious dog". Is this trying to say the angulation of the GSD makes it vicious as a cause&effect? Sites that just rant and rave crazily presenting iffy opinions as straight up facts arent too persuasive. Do you think they had official permission to comandeer and publish the photos of the dogs they insult?
> 
> I agree with John G in many ways, except that the FC/AFC is the definition of what the golden should achieve. Master/Senior Hunter, yes, but field trials demand far more specialized training/ adaptive temperament/conformation to withstand than the gentleman's hunter of yore upon whom the standard is based. Field trials are extreme compared to even the toughest day of hunting with a human companion. I grew up with goldens from the "pre-split' days, with a granddaughter and a greatgrandson of Quar, Dual CH AFC Tigathoe's Funky Farquar CD TD OS FDHF . Both lived to be over 15, with good health and great tempermants, rugged, sturdy athletes who delighted in hunting a long weekend with my grandfather in and out of Maine's freezing cold water and also loved to be brushed and petted for hours by little girls. These dogs formed my inner image of what a golden retriever "is" long before I learned to study the breed standard. My inner image of a golden is not overdone show dog but is yes majestic and aethetically beautiful, joyfully atheltic and a stylish retreiving fool, with good bone and presence and feathering, not a toller-sized dog either.


Jill, I so relate to you and the goldens of the 70's and 80's. My Major Max born in 1987 was a grandson on one side of Holway Barty and a grandson on the other of Tigathoe's Funky Farquar (my personal favorite of all time)
My husband and I did not have the money or time to invest in field trials but I have no doubt that Max would have excelled. Like Jill's grandpa's goldens , he could hunt with my husband from dawn to dusk and then love us up at night.Max was not a hyper field dog at all as people today refer to them. He was darker but the most mellow and loving to all , children and animals alike. He developed hypothyroid later on, though he lived to be 12. If his illness had been treated correctly I feel he could have lived much longer.

I am no conformation expert like many of you in this thread but Max was a beautiful golden, people stopped us when out walking every day to comment . He was also strong and well toned. He had a gorgeous head. Boxy for the 1980's. It seems golden's heads are getting bigger and bigger, more boxy than ever. I am wondering if we will even recognize the golden retrievers of earlier years in them soon. That concerns me.
I too wish our breed could move back to the middle and be a well rounded beautiful sporting dog again. and not become further and further divided to the extremes.

Here is Max in his later years.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Max was stunning! Now there's a real Golden if you ask me. He sounds like a wonderful dog!


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

PS my avatar dog was not unlike him- same temperament, similar breeding, same era- amazing dog


----------



## paula bedard (Feb 5, 2008)

Deb, I definitely see a resemblance. He is my All Time Fave too. This pic is on the back cover of my Golden Retriever Handbook. Lucky You!


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

I have that book too, and I love that dog!


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Awesome post... and welcome to the forum.



John G said:


> Welcome CreamGold. Although I disagree with several of you opinions that you consider as "facts" I hope you stick around to maybe sway or be swayed. Maybe you will just have to agree to disagree with me or others, but in so doing will enlighten others or pause to think.
> 
> I agree that passionate breeders/owners can be "kennel blind". What does a look in the mirror reveal?
> 
> ...


----------



## Golden Leo (Dec 3, 2008)

I already posted photo of this dog. He's the most influential dog for really many, many lines.... He's base for many amazing dogs and kennels. This is the dog I wish for, my Leo looks a lot like him. Those deep black round eyes and that sad/wise look.... 
He's the one and only (please note the years when he lived):
*Eng. CH. Nortonwood Faunus (2/15/1974-1987)*











For field trial, I will take photos in October when my puppy will go to his exam of inborn abilities. (many dead animals..... that is the part I hate the most ). This is usual pracitise- to go at least once a week "work" with the dog- sometimes with dummies sometimes with dead ducks... I mostly use dummy but have dried wings and now I need to get rabbits skin...


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

His eyes do not look round there- they look correct (not round) and quite pleasant. His head is too big for MY taste and he has too much big body, even looks fat over the shoulders. Definitely a massive looking dog to me- not so much the bone, but every thing else. Is he pretty? Certainly... and I can appreciate he is a valid type to many the world around. He is just not the type I would favor. And that's okay


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

PS he most certainly has a GOLDEN hue to him, so I would not consider him the "white" or too light color. His color is within the range of correct, even in America, in MY opinion.


----------



## Golden Leo (Dec 3, 2008)

Oh, I forgot to answer Pointofgold, when I said calm I meant that they don't react on gunshots and all sounds/events that are included. Of course that will for work is the base of their temper.
You can tell that english is not my first language.... lol


----------



## Golden Leo (Dec 3, 2008)

AquaClaraCanines said:


> His eyes do not look round there- they look correct (not round) and quite pleasant. His head is too big for MY taste and he has too much big body, even looks fat over the shoulders. Definitely a massive looking dog to me- not so much the bone, but every thing else. Is he pretty? Certainly... and I can appreciate he is a valid type to many the world around. He is just not the type I would favor. And that's okay


Well I am glad that you don't breed and that breeders over here don't follow your taste. I appriciate more opinions of Mrs. Joan Gills, Mrs. Joan Tudor, Mr. & Mrs. R. Bradbury.... They are SOMEONE in GR world, and who are you?
I must admit that you are funny.... I wonder what would 90% of breeders in europe say on this statement, if they catch their breath between the laughs. Since ALL retrievers in europe (at least dogs who have made something) lay on those lines.


----------



## dannyra (Aug 5, 2008)

I think the good debates are finally starting to be articulated in this thread and it's interesting to read. Several great posts.

I may get a little blasted for this, but when I see some of the english cremes and look at average american golden. I sometimes think the cremes look more like Great Pyrenees in color, size, and coat than they do of the avg american golden.
I personally think that there is something wrong with the gravitation towards that type of breeding. Don't get me wrong. I think they are beautiful, they are not my preference however. Then again, goldens and great pyrenees are some of my favorite breeds. Maybe I could get the best of both worlds (that last line was joke, before you start blasting me).


----------



## Debles (Sep 6, 2007)

Excuse me, I don't think you have to be "SOMEONE" in the golden world to have an opinion. 
I have had goldens for 35 years and know what I like and don't like in a dog. 
AquaClaraCanines said good things about the dog also. You got very defensive.
This had become a well balanced discussion again, please don't make personal attacks.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

I am no one- I just had an opinion and shared it. I wasn't rude (if I was it was not intentional). Plenty of people here have said they do not care for the type of Golden I like, which has also been shown in photos here in this thread.

This is friendly discussion... or it should be... I absolutely believe there is room in this world for that beautiful dog you shared and as well as for the American dog someone else posted.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

dannyra said:


> I think the good debates are finally starting to be articulated in this thread and it's interesting to read. Several great posts.
> 
> I may get a little blasted for this, but when I see some of the english cremes and look at average american golden. I sometimes think the cremes look more like Great Pyrenees in color, size, and coat than they do of the avg american golden.
> I personally think that there is something wrong with the gravitation towards that type of breeding. Don't get me wrong. I think they are beautiful, they are not my preference however. Then again, goldens and great pyrenees are some of my favorite breeds. Maybe I could get the best of both worlds (that last line was joke, before you start blasting me).


This is sort of how I feel, too, and I fully admit it could be because the dogs I grew up being told and viewing as correct are the US type.


----------



## Jackson'sMom (Oct 13, 2007)

Golden Leo said:


> Well I am glad that you don't breed and that breeders over here don't follow your taste. I appriciate more opinions of Mrs. Joan Gills, Mrs. Joan Tudor, Mr. & Mrs. R. Bradbury.... They are SOMEONE in GR world, and who are you?
> I must admit that you are funny.... I wonder what would 90% of breeders in europe say on this statement, if they catch their breath between the laughs. Since ALL retrievers in europe (at least dogs who have made something) lay on those lines.


I'm not a breeder and have no interest in breeding, but I find the comments above to be offensive. ACC expressed her opinion of the dog in question. She did not deserve to be told she is 'no one' and that her comments are "funny." We can have a disagreement without being rude. Just my opinion.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

I said he was pretty, and I meant it. I also said things I like about him- including his color (which is not too light at all to me) his eyes... he's just not my type. That's all 

I would happily pull apart my own two GORGEOUS well bred Whippets if this was a Whippet discussion. I haven't seen the perfect dog yet... from any country.

Oh, and I DO agree completely that a calm, stable dog is one who is not gunshy or nervous of sounds, sights, and so forth. This to me is important in any dog, of any breed, be it a pet or a working dog. Temperament is everything!


----------



## Golden Leo (Dec 3, 2008)

Jackson'sMom said:


> I'm not a breeder and have no interest in breeding, but I find the comments above to be offensive. ACC expressed her opinion of the dog in question. She did not deserve to be told she is 'no one' and that her comments are "funny." We can have a disagreement without being rude. Just my opinion.


To be clear HER post was offensive. I didn't asked her opinion cause it's irrelevant at least for this dog. This dog has proven him self trough all his progeny. And It is more than offensive toward "the legends", the people who bred those dogs that are base for all goldens in europe. I wasn't the one who made them legends or pronounced them as that. It isn't opinion of one man, it is opinion of 90% breeders, judges in Europe. So it is offensive to all of them. If you judge legendary persons then either you have "beaten them" or that other...


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Golden Leo said:


> To be clear HER post was offensive. I didn't asked her opinion cause it's irrelevant at least for this dog. This dog has proven him self trough all his progeny. And It is more than offensive toward "the legends", the people who bred those dogs that are base for all goldens in europe. I wasn't the one who made them legends or pronounced them as that. It isn't opinion of one man, it is opinion of 90% breeders, judges in Europe. So it is offensive to all of them. If you judge legendary persons then either you have "beaten them" or that other...


Iva, here in the US, we are allowed to voice our opnions even if we are the only one in the country that happens to feel that way. I didn't find ACC's post offensive, at all, simply an offering of her opinion of the dog. On an open forum, one does not need to be asked prior to doing so, and your posting of the photo opened it up for comment. It is not irrelevant for the dog you posted, or any other. We do the same with dogs that are "legends" here. And differences of opinion are not viewed as insults to those who do not hold the same one as you. Nor are they necessarily judgements. 
I think that this situation is entirely cultural.


Hey - what happened to the 10% of the judges who didn't like the dog? :curtain:


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

Golden Leo said:


> I already posted photo of this dog. He's the most influential dog for really many, many lines.... He's base for many amazing dogs and kennels. This is the dog I wish for, my Leo looks a lot like him. Those deep black round eyes and that sad/wise look....
> He's the one and only (please note the years when he lived):
> *Eng. CH. Nortonwood Faunus (2/15/1974-1987)*
> 
> ...


A lovely dog, but to me, if you visualize a shorter coat, he'd look like what is often shown here in the US in the Lab ring. JMO.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

AquaClaraCanines said:


> Max was stunning! Now there's a real Golden if you ask me. He sounds like a wonderful dog!


I agree. Max is exactly what my heart sees when someone says Golden Retriever. I also like Yogi's head a whole lot, lol.


----------



## Selli-Belle (Jan 28, 2009)

I think Max is gorgeous as is Nortonwood Faunus. What I think is interesting is that Faunus looks a lot like Gold-rush Great Teddy Bear in the head. See this picture










There are a number of American Goldens that have Faunus and close relatives of Faunus in their pedigree and we all know how many American Goldens have Teddy in their pedigree. Selli has both (her great-great Grandfather was Camrose Betimmy).


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

I had a Timmy son, out of a Bardfield Boomer granddaughter. He was little, wiry, and RED! When outcrossing, you really never know what you'll get.







Selli-Belle said:


> I think Max is gorgeous as is Nortonwood Faunus. What I think is interesting is that Faunus looks a lot like Gold-rush Great Teddy Bear in the head. See this picture
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Debles (Sep 6, 2007)

Thank you, you guys, I am crying reading this about my sweet boy, whom I still miss so much. He'll be gone ten years next Wed. I can't believe it.


----------



## Rhapsody in Gold (Dec 22, 2007)

My favorite champions are "Gambler" Am./Can. Ch. Amberac Dichi Face The Odds and "Victor" Am. Ch. Dichi Go Unchallenged. Victor is the father to two of my Goldens. If you have a moment, here are the links to their pictures and pedigrees. Gosh these dogs are so beautiful to meet in person and such sweet dogs. 

http://www.dichigoldens.com/gambler.html

http://www.dichigoldens.com/victor.html


----------



## diana_D (Jan 27, 2008)

First of, I must say I feel very insulted by some comments related to cream color and European lines. And not just in this thread. While I understand there are unscrupulous breeders in US that promote cream GRs as something rare, I highly doubt they have the high quality present in Europe. 

Nortonwood Faunus was an amazing dog, as was his sire, Camrose Cabus Christopher. The most of influential lines in Europe and not only come from these two dogs. 


Here's another amazing Golden Retriever. 
http://www.standfastdata.co.uk/standfast-standfastangus.html


----------



## ioana_fiso (Dec 10, 2008)

Hi there:wave:.
I have to say that i like much more the british Golden Retrievers.I say that because de british GR have a very kindly expression.Fanus have a good proportions,the head is balanced and well chiselled,the body is not fat but full of substance which is different from being fat.He has great posterior and anterior angulation and a good level topline(Eng. CH. Nortonwood Faunus )
The second pictures is with a nice british female,i love it even she's not perfect like Faunus,but she inspired me confidence,love and happyness.








1 years old british female


----------



## diana_D (Jan 27, 2008)

ioana_fiso said:


> Hi there:wave:.
> I have to say that i like much more the british Golden Retrievers.I say that because de british GR have a very kindly expression.Fanus have a good proportions,the head is balanced and well chiselled,the body is not fat but full of substance which is different from being fat.He has great posterior and anterior angulation and a good level topline(Eng. CH. Nortonwood Faunus )
> The second pictures is with a nice british female,i love it even she's not perfect like Faunus,but she inspired me confidence,love and happyness.
> 
> ...



She is gorgeous! What an amazing head!


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

changed my mind


----------



## agoldenliferanch (Aug 1, 2008)

diana_D said:


> First of, I must say I feel very insulted by some comments related to cream color and European lines. And not just in this thread. While I understand there are unscrupulous breeders in US that promote cream GRs as something rare, I highly doubt they have the high quality present in Europe.
> 
> Nortonwood Faunus was an amazing dog, as was his sire, Camrose Cabus Christopher. The most of influential lines in Europe and not only come from these two dogs.
> 
> ...


While everyone here is entitled to their preferences to coat, color and lineage, there is little doubt that to us that own a Golden from European lines here on the forum, there remains a bias against our dogs. Sometimes its subtle, sometimes it's not. How many times have you seen as an answer to a cream colored Golden question - that you should look for a "golden" retriever as if that's the only acceptable option.

Golden Retrievers originated from Scotland after all and there isn't an "American" dog that doesn't have a European Golden somewhere in its pedigree.

Our Goldens are not Kuvasz' or Great Pyrenees, they are Golden Retrievers, just as much as yours are and while I don't agree with comments that say ours are more mellow than yours, it can become a defensive game as we feel so called out here on an almost daily basis.

So, I say stand tall and stand proud if you own one of these blonde beauties! If we have to, we can start our own forum where we can discuss and celebrate our European babies without ridicule.

Here's mine - and I also have one who is an "American" with deep European heritage and she came out cream as well, is she also to be shunned?

Here are Cooper and Sophie - Let's see yours!


----------



## Jersey's Mom (Nov 25, 2007)

agoldenliferanch said:


> How many times have you seen as an answer to a cream colored Golden question - that you should look for a "golden" retriever as if that's the only acceptable option.


Personally I don't see that particular response as insulting toward your dog or others of British/European descent. If you look at the context of those posts, it's usually followed by a warning against unscrupulous breeders who will sell you any light colored dog, regardless of lineage or quality, for big bucks under the banner of "Rare English Creme." Then comes information about health clearances, and then usually a reference or 2 for reputable breeders who sell English type goldens here in the US. The "Golden" in that sentence refers to the name of the breed, not a dig against lighter colored dogs. Just my opinion.

Julie and Jersey


----------



## magiclover (Apr 22, 2008)

Now I understand that this thread is about the standard of the breed and I am not even close to being an expert but IMHO no matter what each individuals preferences are, all that matters to me is the feeling that I have at the end of the day when my dogs are curled up at my feet. Pure love. I don't think that would change a bit if they were a different color or size. We certainly all feel very passionate about a breed that we all love.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

You know, no one here has said that they don't like Golden Retrievers from England. My objection is people here in the US who market extremely light colored dogs as being something that they are not, ie "rare", "British Whites/Cremes/Platinums" or any number of other monikers. Many, if not most, are not even imported. They may have Canadian dogs in their pedigree, or European dogs further back. My other objection is that these people claim that these dogs are somehow "better" or worse yet, "healthier", when it simply is not true.
There are British dogs, and other European dogs that I think are spectacular, and have have been quick to say so. They are quality dogs, and look nothing like the dogs that are being marketed here as "XXXXX" and being bred, producing marginal quality dogs that most European breeders would not claim as being quality dogs. I appreciate the good dogs, just as I appreciate a GOOD US dog, and am concerned with those who are randomly breeding poor quality US dogs as well. 
The photos below are all from sites breed "European", or British, or English dogs. Frankly, while they might all be lovely pets, I wouldn't breed one of them, and not simply because of color, but because of structure - make any of them a deeper gold and I still wouldn't. Yet everyone one of them is being bred and puppies being sold for rather large sums of money.
































Conversely, there are dogs such as these, which are beautiful examples of the European type, and not at all like what are being marketed here:























So please, don't complain about how the European dogs are being insulted, it simply is not true.


----------



## agoldenliferanch (Aug 1, 2008)

Thank you for this response is highlighting all the flaws in European dogs. How poorly bred they are in this country. Do you have corresponding threads that have been posted here that show flaws in American Goldens? Because if there has been discussion on what to avoid in American breeding I haven't seen them and I'm sure that would be as educational for those looking for the more traditional and accepted Golden Retriever.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Self-editing, one more time


----------



## twinny41 (Feb 13, 2008)

Golden Leo said:


> *Eng. CH. Nortonwood Faunus (2/15/1974-1987)*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## CreamGoldens (Feb 1, 2009)

So, against my better judgement, I'll add one final, final post. If you go back to the original message - my point was that the difference did not lie in the coat color. For some reason, people wanted to make it be that as the point. I specifically acknowledged that we all love our dogs, and allowed as how that there were kennels who were doing a good job. I made my statements based on the general populous of each 'type' of dog. Perhaps wrong or not.
I thought this was a discussion forum and I started a discussion. Clearly it did fill an interst niche or it would be still a live thread. I even asked the moderator to remove it as it had created such a problem. I get tired of people claiming that the difference is the coat color - it is not. And I wouldn't choose an animal because of coat color. But I do have a great amount of confidence in the health of the dogs because of their heritage of health and temperament.
And I nearly died biting my tongue yesterday as the GREATS Nortonwood Faunus et al, were shown and not acknowledged (well by some - thanks) Camrose Cabus Christopher was the finest, most accomplished golden to have walked on the earth. Without the work of the great Joan Tudor, I doubt we'd even have the Goldens of today. Standfast Angus and Augustus also greats. Ritzlyn, Erinderry, Majik, and so many others (Kennels I mean) - I could talk all day; but I won't.
Thanks to the few who did want to carry on the thread as intended. Thanks to those who did say it was piling on. Great respect to those who 'own' this forum - I was unaware when I signed up that I was to sheepishly enter and walk on eggshells with my original postings. If someone does start a thread for English enthusiasts - I'm all in, just post the link as to where.
I think there are some great kennels here producing Americans. But they are far too few. I'm not certain they alone can repopulate the breed and fix the current problems. I get anecdotal calls all the time from people who do have dogs from some of the more famous kennels (though I won't include them among the greats) who have had horrible issues of health, notified the kennel, and they continued with them as breed stock.
Ahhhhh, that felt better.


----------



## twinny41 (Feb 13, 2008)

CreamGoldens said:


> _Camrose Cabus Christopher was the finest, most accomplished golden to have walked on the earth. Without the work of the great Joan Tudor, I doubt we'd even have the Goldens of today. _
> 
> Here, here!! Thanks to Joan Tudor without whom I would never have known my beautiful Meg!


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

I like this one- if he was not trimmed so severely, he'd look even better (to me). They look off balance TO ME with their neck ruff cut off, but I can still see he's a beautiful dog...










I never said the dog above that I replied to was not a real Golden, or was even a bad example. Simply that he was not the type I prefer. I have no doubt there are some here who do not prefer the type that *I* like. I don't think that's insulting...


----------



## Selli-Belle (Jan 28, 2009)

I don't think anyone here is trying to deny that Joan Tudor was incredibly important to the Golden Retriever breed all over the world and I am not only saying that because her dogs figure into Selli's pedigree . However, it would be nice if the English Golden fans could acknowledge the great American dogs too (like Barty or Funky Fahquar).


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

agoldenliferanch said:


> Thank you for this response is highlighting all the flaws in European dogs. How poorly bred they are in this country. Do you have corresponding threads that have been posted here that show flaws in American Goldens? Because if there has been discussion on what to avoid in American breeding I haven't seen them and I'm sure that would be as educational for those looking for the more traditional and accepted Golden Retriever.


If you'd read what I posted you would see that I was not "pointing out all the flaws in European dogs" at all. Again, my objection is dogs being marketed here in the US as _______________________(fill in the blank with any variation of Rare British/English/European XXXXXX) that are supposedly better/healthier/calmer etc, for large sums of money when in fact they are structurally incorrect and unsound examples of Goldens from ANY country. And again, many, i not most, are not imported.

As for threads about the flaws in US dogs, there have been plenty. And the flaws are nearly identical, again, having nothing to do with color - poor rears, poor toplines, incorrect fronts.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

PG herself posted once a great thread (or post within a thread- I forget which) showing both DARK *and* light dogs and asking us to name which ones were actually Goldens. It was *not* a slam on any one type. It was very interesting, and clearly showed that a lack of type can occur in many directions.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

AquaClaraCanines said:


> PG herself posted once a great thread (or post within a thread- I forget which) showing both DARK *and* light dogs and asking us to name which ones were actually Goldens. It was *not* a slam on any one type. It was very interesting, and clearly showed that a lack of type can occur in many directions.


 
That was within a thread, and was a really interesting exercise to me. It was very telling that so many people here - even people with experience (from not only the US but some of our European friends as well) - could not distinguish dogs being marketed as some sort of European Golden Retriever from Kuvaszok and Great Pyrenees. Now, I would have to assume that the reputable and caring breeders of Golden Retrievers in Europe would find THAT offensive, because I know that they do not produce dogs that look like what we are seeing here in great numbers and for "great" prices. 

I don't know how many times I can say this before it is understood by some - *I love and appreciate a good dog no matter where it was bred. Even if a particular style is not my cup of tea, if it is a GOOD EXAMPLE of the style, I appreciate it. PERIOD. *


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Agreed.

If you can remember what thread it was, it would be worth sharing here maybe. It was really interesting and educational.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

CreamGoldens said:


> So, against my better judgement, I'll add one final, final post. If you go back to the original message - my point was that the difference did not lie in the coat color. For some reason, people wanted to make it be that as the point. I specifically acknowledged that we all love our dogs, and allowed as how that there were kennels who were doing a good job. I made my statements based on the general populous of each 'type' of dog. Perhaps wrong or not.
> I thought this was a discussion forum and I started a discussion. Clearly it did fill an interst niche or it would be still a live thread. I even asked the moderator to remove it as it had created such a problem. I get tired of people claiming that the difference is the coat color - it is not. And I wouldn't choose an animal because of coat color. But I do have a great amount of confidence in the health of the dogs because of their heritage of health and temperament.
> And I nearly died biting my tongue yesterday as the GREATS Nortonwood Faunus et al, were shown and not acknowledged (well by some - thanks) Camrose Cabus Christopher was the finest, most accomplished golden to have walked on the earth. Without the work of the great Joan Tudor, I doubt we'd even have the Goldens of today. Standfast Angus and Augustus also greats. Ritzlyn, Erinderry, Majik, and so many others (Kennels I mean) - I could talk all day; but I won't.
> Thanks to the few who did want to carry on the thread as intended. Thanks to those who did say it was piling on. Great respect to those who 'own' this forum - I was unaware when I signed up that I was to sheepishly enter and walk on eggshells with my original postings. If someone does start a thread for English enthusiasts - I'm all in, just post the link as to where.
> ...


Your point was quite clear in that you stated, AS FACT, that European dogs are better/healthier/calmer, etc. And I continue to take exception to that blanket statement as being simply untrue. 

"Camrose Cabus Christopher was the finest, most accomplished golden to have walked on the earth." This is an opinion. Not a fact. I owned one of his grandsons, and certainly appreciated him and his accomplishments, and also had some wonderful correspondence with Joan Tudor. Her contributions are not to be scoffed at, but it is again opinion to say that we would not have the Goldens of today without her. 

Just as in the US, there are breeders in Europe who are less than reputable/responsible, but to say that the majority of US breeders are irresponsible is, well, irresponsible, unless you are to qualify the statement by pointing your finger at BYB's and puppy millers.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

agoldenliferanch said:


> How many times have you seen as an answer to a cream colored Golden question - that you should look for a "golden" retriever as if that's the only acceptable option.


I'm sorry but I have not seen this since I have been on this forum in the context you seem to be implying. Have I seen people express "their" preference, absolutely, just as I have seen folks who prefer the lighter end of the spectrum.



agoldenliferanch said:


> Our Goldens are not Kuvasz' or Great Pyrenees, they are Golden Retrievers, just as much as yours are and while I don't agree with comments that say ours are more mellow than yours, it can become a defensive game as we feel so called out here on an almost daily basis.


Why feel defensive? There are threads everyday on this forum, and most Golden forums, that "call out" different line. "Field line" dogs that are too small, too large, too dark, not enough coat, too hyper, too fine boned and are not what a "Golden Retiever" was meant to be. And then there are those who have those "conformation lines" whose dogs have too much coat, too much bone, too big, no natural instinct for field, could never hunt all day in the field and are not what a "Golden Retriever" was meant to be. 
The problem being that folks LOVE to generalize their comments and opinions. 



agoldenliferanch said:


> So, I say stand tall and stand proud if you own one of these blonde beauties! If we have to, we can start our own forum where we can discuss and celebrate our European babies without ridicule.


This next response is NOT meant to imply anyone should leave this forum, uite the contrary honestly. 
There is an excellent e-list for those who enjoy Golden Retrievers of English background. Although low volume, there are some incredible breeders of "Golden Retievers" on that list that have more knowledge about the breed then exists in any book. And a few have written "those books" litterally. This list is not meant for people looking for a Golden of English background but for those already involved with them in some form. 
http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/EnglishGoldens/



agoldenliferanch said:


> Here's mine - and I also have one who is an "American" with deep European heritage and she came out cream as well, is she also to be shunned?
> 
> Here are Cooper and Sophie - Let's see yours!


I think they are really lovely and you should be proud of them.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

So, who are you Cream Goldens- I am curious? Do you breed Goldens? Do you live in the US or what? 

I agree Christopher was a great dog with many contributions, but I also believe it's an opinion to state he was the greatest Golden to walk the earth. We have a thread here somewhere where people list their "greats" or favorite Goldens of all time. Almost everyone had a unique answer/view. And that's okay... why isn't that okay to everyone?


----------



## agoldenliferanch (Aug 1, 2008)

Jersey's Mom said:


> Personally I don't see that particular response as insulting toward your dog or others of British/European descent. If you look at the context of those posts, it's usually followed by a warning against unscrupulous breeders who will sell you any light colored dog, regardless of lineage or quality, for big bucks under the banner of "Rare English Creme." Then comes information about health clearances, and then usually a reference or 2 for reputable breeders who sell English type goldens here in the US. The "Golden" in that sentence refers to the name of the breed, not a dig against lighter colored dogs. Just my opinion.
> 
> Julie and Jersey


 Quote:
Originally Posted by *Pointgold*  
_No, I didn't. Because our standard states, and rightfully so, I feel, that TOO pale or TOO dark is to be penalized (the breed is, after all, a GOLDEN Retriever) dogs that are either will be discounted. If you want to talk semantics, then yes, in that respect it does "matter". However, I maintain that a* good *judge will not sacrifice the better dog DUE to color, as long as he is not TOO pale or TOO dark, which the standard requires be penalized. Structure is far more important than color.
People who are touting English and European dogs are making color the issue. Far too many of the dogs that they say are not winning because of their color have weak rears, poor toplines, and are course overall. Put a lovely dog like the Crufts winner in the ring and believe me, he's going to be in the ribbons._

uh huh 
sure 
I think you would be wrong but we will never know will we. I attend Crufts every year... and if you haven't gone you should. This will be the first in a few that I am not going opting for the Flat Coat Champ show instead. 

There are poorly bred American type dogs and poorly bred english type dogs.... there are breeders who breed for color and there are breeders like myself that breed for the whole shebang... structure, type, working ability health and temperament...the fact is that there is a wide range of variety in the golden retriever breed.... it is one breed.... and the GRCA accepts a very small bit of that range. At the tea this year at the national there were some absolutely gorgeous English type dogs... most of whom were very light in color... yet you don't see them in the ring down here .... you see them in Canada all the time ... but hardly ever here... and there is a reason for that... and perhaps its time to look at how our standard is written... so that it is more inclusive... so the best GOLDEN RETRIEVER has a chance to win regardless of type and color but really because they have the best overall structure and coat and movement and all else that goes into making a superior dog.
__________________
Shalva and the Milbrose Retrievers, cat and cockatoo
http://www.milbroseretrievers.com

I got the reference to "golden" from this thread last year.


----------



## Debles (Sep 6, 2007)

You have got to be kidding when you say there have been no threads here on GRF criticizing the American golden!

I have read many here, maybe within a thread but many posts about unethical breeders, health issues, poor conformation etc here in the U.S.

Most breeders of any quality are willing to critique their own dogs and always strive for a better, healthier golden.

This forum has been very open to opinions about all kinds of goldens and we each have a right to our own. I don't take it personally if someone doesn't prefer my "type" of golden and I don't get why you do either. It seems no matter what is said by some of the experts here, you choose to take offense.

I do have to say that when you state that the golden was developed in Britain and compare your dogs to those earlier goldens, they look nothing alike. But that is just my opinion.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

I have told people who come to this forum asking if they should get a "British Creme" or an "American" to "get a Golden". In the context that (and I have qualified it as such) THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A BRITISH CREME, nor is there an AMERICAN. They are GOLDEN RETRIEVERS. PERIOD.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Debles said:


> .
> 
> I do have to say that when you state that the golden was developed in Britain and compare your dogs to those earlier goldens, they look nothing alike. But that is just my opinion.


YES, that! I have been saying that like a broken record. The argument that since the breed came from the UK, the extreme modern UK Golden is correct holds no water *TO ME* since those dogs look NOTHING like the original Goldens.

As John G stated, those original Goldens look a LOT more like a US BYB or field bred dog than like any type of modern show Golden (American or otherwise).

Now, I'm not necessarily saying they're correct either... but the "we have the original" argument doesn't fly to me, since the dogs look nothing at all like the foundation stock for the breed.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Pointgold said:


> I have told people who come to this forum asking if they should get a "British Creme" or an "American" to "get a Golden". In the context that (and I have qualified it as such) THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A BRITISH CREME, nor is there an AMERICAN. They are GOLDEN RETRIEVERS. PERIOD.


Yup, exactly.


----------



## agoldenliferanch (Aug 1, 2008)

This next response is NOT meant to imply anyone should leave this forum, uite the contrary honestly. 
There is an excellent e-list for those who enjoy Golden Retrievers of English background. Although low volume, there are some incredible breeders of "Golden Retievers" on that list that have more knowledge about the breed then exists in any book. And a few have written "those books" litterally. This list is not meant for people looking for a Golden of English background but for those already involved with them in some form. 
http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/EnglishGoldens/

Thank you Hank for that link...I'm going to check it out and maybe those of us who either own, breed and adore our "CREAM" with gold Golden Retrievers from European lines can find a safe harbor to discuss and celebrate our dogs. Funny, the argument has always been that Goldens come in all shapes and sizes and colors but for some on this forum...we don't have any business being here with our dogs because this is the United States, not Europe.

BTW...I have always appreciated your level headed posts and depth of knowledge concerning our breed


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

CreamGoldens said:


> I thought this was a discussion forum and I started a discussion. Clearly it did fill an interst niche or it would be still a live thread. I even asked the moderator to remove it as it had created such a problem. I get tired of people claiming that the difference is the coat color - it is not. And I wouldn't choose an animal because of coat color. But I do have a great amount of confidence in the health of the dogs because of their heritage of health and temperament.


And when I attempted to discuss this with you, what has been your response?
_"I aimed at opening an honest discussion about the real differences not being the coat. You guys stir it up or abuse my comments as much as you want. I think my point was made in the true defensiveness of most people's reactions."_
The only true response was a link to a survey in 2003 that was comprised of 538 responses from Golden owners that the author warns _"should be interpreted with caution" _. 




CreamGoldens said:


> Thanks to the few who did want to carry on the thread as intended. Thanks to those who did say it was piling on. Great respect to those who 'own' this forum - I was unaware when I signed up that I was to sheepishly enter and walk on eggshells with my original postings. If someone does start a thread for English enthusiasts - I'm all in, just post the link as to where.


Considering your very first lines to start this thread were

_"I realize that this may not be a popular thing to say. I keep reading posts, and whether you agree or not; I do wish to set some clarity to the record of Golden Retrievers which we now differentiate by citing American Golden or English (European) Golden._

I believe you were well aware what you were doing.



CreamGoldens said:


> I think there are some great kennels here producing Americans. But they are far too few. I'm not certain they alone can repopulate the breed and fix the current problems. I get anecdotal calls all the time from people who do have dogs from some of the more famous kennels (though I won't include them among the greats) who have had horrible issues of health, notified the kennel, and they continued with them as breed stock.
> Ahhhhh, that felt better.


Is that what you wanted to say when you started this thread? That there are _"some of the more famous kennels (though I won't include them among the greats) who have had horrible issues of health, notified the kennel, and they continued with them as breed stock."_

Then why not just say that and you could have felt better days ago??


----------



## Debles (Sep 6, 2007)

"we don't have any business being here with our dogs because this is the United States, not Europe."

Who has EVER said anything like this?


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Just for fun, here's a site with pics of many foundation/original Goldens.

http://www.shilohpark.net/GoldenHistoryoriginsGallery.htm


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Just a side note: Doolin is a respected member/breeder who gives very caring responses and good, concrete information to those seeking british lines.



> If you are looking for a reputable breeder in your area of this style of golden retriever visit www.englishgoldens.net there are some in your area who are dedicated to producing goldens that both conform to the standard and would meet all of your health requirements of a reputable breeder.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

agoldenliferanch said:


> Funny, the argument has always been that Goldens come in all shapes and sizes and colors but for some on this forum...we don't have any business being here with our dogs because this is the United States, not Europe.


Again, I'm sure, a twisted reference to words of mine. I have said that rather than complain if you have a dog that does not fit the US standard, show it were it does fit. If our standard ever changes and your dog then is within it, go for it. If it is a good dog, go for it and good luck. I would say exactly the same thing if I were in Europe and a US exhibitor were complaining that their dog didn't win there. But _never _have I said that anyone has "no business being here." 
There are too many "breeders" who hang their shingle and produce litters of puppies out of poor quality dogs, and many without a solid history of clearances (no need to name kennels, there are pleny, and they've been discussed here) and then complain that it's the color, or the country of origin that we are "bashing". It's simply not true. It is the quality, structure, lack of type, etc, that is an issue and we have the same issues with strictly US dogs as well.


----------



## solinvictus (Oct 23, 2008)

Opinion. 


My favorite dogs of the past are CH Speedwell Pluto and his dad CH Michael of Moreton.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

agoldenliferanch said:


> and the GRCA accepts a very small bit of that range. At the tea this year at the national there were some absolutely gorgeous English type dogs... most of whom were very light in color... yet you don't see them in the ring down here .... you see them in Canada all the time ... but hardly ever here... and there is a reason for that... and perhaps its time to look at how our standard is written... so that it is more inclusive... so the best GOLDEN RETRIEVER has a chance to win regardless of type and color but really because they have the best overall structure and coat and movement and all else that goes into making a superior dog.


This is the good and bad of being in the US. It is a democray where "usually" the majority rules. I am afraid it will be quite a while before the mindset of the majority here in the US will accept the extremes in color on either end. I always tend to equate it to your mother's cooking. You grow up eating her way of making your favorite certain dish. And when you eat it somewhere else your mind says "Yuk, that's not what it is suppose to taste like" even though it may have been prepared by a 5 star chef.It iis different, thus wrong. Well I think the same can pertain to peoples "taste" in dogs and like it or not the first thing the mind sees through our eyes is "color". And it takes a lot for our minds to get around that imprint we have. 




agoldenliferanch said:


> __________________
> Shalva and the Milbrose Retrievers, cat and cockatoo
> http://www.milbroseretrievers.com
> 
> I got the reference to "golden" from this thread last year.


The link did not make it through sorry.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Pluto:


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

I might add that at a National, if you even get a sniff, let alone a placement or a win, it's huge. (So huge that you get an "I made the cut" button...) Many people enter simply for the exposure without even a dream of winning, knowing that the judge is not going to like their dog, but that another breeder or exhibitor will - it's "networking" so to speak. I've done well at National, and I've spent months preparing only to get my 2 minutes and walk out with nothing. It is the nature of the game.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

AmbikaGR said:


> This is the good and bad of being in the US. It is a democray where "usually" the majority rules. I am afraid it will be quite a while before the mindset of the majority here in the US will accept the extremes in color on either end. I always tend to equate it to your mother's cooking. You grow up eating her way of making your favorite certain dish. And when you eat it somewhere else your mind says "Yuk, that's not what it is suppose to taste like" even though it may have been prepared by a 5 star chef.It iis different, thus wrong. Well I think the same can pertain to peoples "taste" in dogs and like it or not the first thing the mind sees through our eyes is "color". And it takes a lot for our minds to get around that imprint we have.
> 
> 
> > As I have said, a GOOD dog is a good dog, no matter the color, BUT, our standard (and the very name of our breed) requires that GOLD be present.
> > And in this country we have the freedom to express our opinions. I happen to prefer a medium gold colored dog. I don't like pale coats. Never have, likely never will. However, I have really appreciated and even loved individual dogs with coats far lighter than I like. I'd use them in my breeding program. Ditto some dark dogs. I won't apologize for my preference in color, but nor will I throw away a great dog if it's not the color I like.


----------



## Loboto-Me (Nov 13, 2008)

I guess I'd better leave the forums too.... Just got my Sophie's papers today and she's got half Brittish ancestry. She still getting pretty red though because her grandfather4 generations away was Rush Hill's Haagen-Dazs. By the way, her registered name is funny.... Tasmara's Night Tea Night LOL! when I read it, it took me a few tries on the tongue to "get the play on words". 

Ok back to the topic


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Loboto-Me said:


> I guess I'd better leave the forums too.... Just got my Sophie's papers today and she's got half Brittish ancestry. She still getting pretty red though because her grandfather4 generations away was Rush Hill's Haagen-Dazs. By the way, her registered name is funny.... Tasmara's Night Tea Night LOL! when I read it, it took me a few tries on the tongue to "get the play on words".
> 
> Ok back to the topic


Oh dear. I'd better leave, too. There are plenty of UK dogs in my pedigrees, and some not so far back. And (gasp) I even KNEW it!

You know, these "rare, British whites" etc etc, are not new. Great American breeders have incorporated UK dogs into their breeding programs for quite some time. Anne Bissette, of Beaumaris, for one. Eric Bergishagen of Jagersbo for another. The difference is that they did it with an express purpose, using quality dogs, and didn't market them as something that they are not.


----------



## agoldenliferanch (Aug 1, 2008)

Ah, finally, we're at the mocking stage! 

I for one am not a lurker, joined 6 months ago and have been a contributing member focusing many of my posts on nutrition which is a huge obsession of mine. I have purposely not responded to many of the English Cream threads knowing that in the end this is where I would wind up. Mocked and dismissed as a lurker. 
I made an attempt yesterday to thread the needle and offer some sound suggestions for those seeking info on English Goldens who wouldn't immediately be chased away. It's hopeless here. There is no home here for people who seek information on English Goldens. And what a shame that is as our goal, as is yours, is to educate and warn against the profiteers and millers. Too bad we never seem to get past that to celebrate.

I'm done discussing English Goldens here, it was a mistake to even try. For those who opined that we English Golden owners are defensive, you're darn right. It has not been a welcoming place for many of us.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Do you mean me? I do not PERSONALLY care for the English type (though there are some UK bred dogs here that I love, as in here on this forum). That doesn't mean I hate the dogs, the owners, or wish they didn't exist! I simply enjoy discussion of all types of Goldens and their flaws and strong points. I have read many rude comments about field bred dogs on this forum over the years as well as about US show bred dogs.

Like PG said, most of us have a problem with mass marketing "creme" or "white" dogs for ridiculous prices- dogs of poor quality! Dogs that are poor quality because they're poorly bred for money, NOT because they're British in pedigree. We feel the same sadness towards US bred puppy mill dogs.

That has NOTHING to do with a fancier of the breed who lives overseas or has European lines dogs here in the US.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

agoldenliferanch said:


> Ah, finally, we're at the mocking stage!
> 
> I for one am not a lurker, joined 6 months ago and have been a contributing member focusing many of my posts on nutrition which is a huge obsession of mine. I have purposely not responded to many of the English Cream threads knowing that in the end this is where I would wind up. Mocked and dismissed as a lurker.
> I made an attempt yesterday to thread the needle and offer some sound suggestions for those seeking info on English Goldens who wouldn't immediately be chased away. It's hopeless here. There is no home here for people who seek information on English Goldens. And what a shame that is as our goal, as is yours, is to educate and warn against the profiteers and millers. Too bad we never seem to get past that to celebrate.
> ...


No mocking, just tongue in cheek, trying to lighten it up.
I must have missed where you were dismissed as a lurker... I certainly never said that, nor do I think it is the case.

I don't see on your site that you own an English dog. As for providing information on true English (and other European dogs) to say that this forum isn't doing a good job is false. We have UK breeders, and ther eare breeders with English/European imports of quality who do post factual, useful information for those interested, as opposed to coming here with unfounded claims designed to do nothing more thanstir up hornet's nests.
Again, as your post appears to be directed at me, read what I have posted about appreciating many Euopean dogs, in this thread and others, and having owned an import myself.


----------



## Lucky's mom (Nov 4, 2005)

I'm kinda amazed that English Dog owners feel that the english type has been mocked. I've been in the midst of all those threads warning people away from the bad breeders using color as the reason to not be responsible and get the big bucks. Mocking the English type has not happened.

I think people are getting too sensitive.


----------



## Jackson'sMom (Oct 13, 2007)

Lucky's mom said:


> I'm kinda amazed that English Dog owners feel that the english type has been mocked. I've been in the midst of all those threads warning people away from the bad breeders using color as the reason to not be responsible and get the big bucks. Mocking the English type has not happened.
> 
> I think people are getting too sensitive.


I agree. I have been following this thread as a disinterested outsider, and I am amazed at people's reactions. I find it appalling that some breeders try to capitalize on the 'rare English creme' goldens, but I have never felt that any type or color of golden has been mocked or disparaged on this forum.


----------



## Loboto-Me (Nov 13, 2008)

I think you are refering to my statement that I should also leave the forum due to Sophie's half English Ancestry. I was just trying to make the point that if we all thought that way, many of us would not be here because of the English lines. I don't feel the need to defend Sophie's place on these boards, and truthfully, I feel someone's a little overly sensitive as NOBODY here said that english goldens are inferior to american goldens. They're all goldens, some well bred, some not so well bred.

My preference? American style, but I still embrace Sophie's English side.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Loboto-Me said:


> I feel someone's a little overly sensitive as NOBODY here said that english goldens are inferior to american goldens. quote]
> 
> It was quite the other way around, actually.


----------



## goldieduo (May 10, 2008)

18 pages...are you kidding me? someone should start a TV show and this be the first script! i'm say all of that in good fun, of course. :

for me, in this particular case, "ignorance is bliss". when dh and i decided we wanted to add a dog to our growing family, we wanted a dog that would be good inside or out and with kids. getting a golden retriever was a no brainer for us. we DID research and found that the golden retriever was the best! we have 2 now. we got ours from a byb. YIKES!!! before we knew better. thankfully, no health problems. 
i don't know the bloodlines, although i wish i did because they're absolutely gorgeous! WHAT I DO KNOW is that they are fabulous, loving, playful, emotionally sensitive creatures AND we wouldn't trade them for ANYTHING in this world!

Can we all agree on that? please don't say "i agree that we all love our gr's. what i don't agree with is....." we all already know the disagreements. there's 18 pages worth. 

the flawless lines of golden retrievers are a minority, unfortunately. thank you to those of you who are trying SO hard to maintain, establish or get us back to those lines both here in the US, in Europe and all other countries.


----------



## goldieduo (May 10, 2008)

OH!!! And welcome, John G!


----------



## Emma&Tilly (May 15, 2005)

There have been countless threads started on this forum that are entitled something along the lines of 'should I get a rare English creme/cream or a regular golden' as some puppy buyers genuinely feel that they are too different breeds and are actually prepared to pay an extortionate amount of money because they think they will get a 'rare' or 'better' dog. It makes me cringe. I am so thankful to the folks on this forum that are prepared to help direct people to responsible breeders of golden retrievers whether they breed goldens with European lines or not. Im sure what everybody wants is to avoid breeders making a quick buck from breeding less than quality dogs because of their pale coat colour...and that is unfortunately what seems to be happening with some breeders in the US.

During my time on the forum I have never felt that anyone has been derogatory towards european goldens or vice versa...only people stating opinions about the style they personally prefer or the faults they see in that particular dog, whether it be an american dog or European dog.


----------



## goldieduo (May 10, 2008)

emma&tilly...that picture is CLASSIC!!


----------



## Ashivon (May 3, 2008)

Just got to this...and it's deep reading.

Lisa meets some "types" and not others. She's german bred, and cream colored (finally). LOL 
She's a bit hyper but since she's still a baby we're having fun. But like any other big dog she'll be content to sit and lick my toesies under the desk all day to. 

She'd love to hunt and chase (went after some deer last weekend for like six hours) and bike running skills are like no other. (I did taper it off last summer cause I read on a thread she'd still be growing and didn't want to hurt her but she was lovin it)'

Oh...and conformation wise she seems sound as a whistle. 

I'll keep reading!!!


----------



## Ashivon (May 3, 2008)

Emma&Tilly said:


> There have been countless threads started on this forum that are entitled something along the lines of 'should I get a rare English creme/cream or a regular golden' as some puppy buyers genuinely feel that they are too different breeds and are actually prepared to pay an extortionate amount of money because they think they will get a 'rare' or 'better' dog. It makes me cringe. I am so thankful to the folks on this forum that are prepared to help direct people to responsible breeders of golden retrievers whether they breed goldens with European lines or not. Im sure what everybody wants is to avoid breeders making a quick buck from breeding less than quality dogs because of their pale coat colour...and that is unfortunately what seems to be happening with some breeders in the US.
> 
> During my time on the forum I have never felt that anyone has been derogatory towards european goldens or vice versa...only people stating opinions about the style they personally prefer or the faults they see in that particular dog, whether it be an american dog or European dog.


And thats what lisa looked like after her deer hunt:wavey:


----------



## buckeyegoldenmom (Oct 5, 2008)

Emma&Tilly said:


> There have been countless threads started on this forum that are entitled something along the lines of 'should I get a rare English creme/cream or a regular golden' as some puppy buyers genuinely feel that they are too different breeds and are actually prepared to pay an extortionate amount of money because they think they will get a 'rare' or 'better' dog. It makes me cringe. I am so thankful to the folks on this forum that are prepared to help direct people to responsible breeders of golden retrievers whether they breed goldens with European lines or not. Im sure what everybody wants is to avoid breeders making a quick buck from breeding less than quality dogs because of their pale coat colour...and that is unfortunately what seems to be happening with some breeders in the US.
> 
> During my time on the forum I have never felt that anyone has been derogatory towards european goldens or vice versa...only people stating opinions about the style they personally prefer or the faults they see in that particular dog, whether it be an american dog or European dog.


Emma & Tilly. Thank you for stating so well how I feel about this topic as dealt with on this forum.

And I do love you sigy picture!!


----------



## BeauShel (May 20, 2007)

I like this picture that shows the great colors that goldens come in from light to dark. And nothing about "rare creme". Just listed as Golden Retrievers. 

Does a country that shows more o the creme colored like Great Britain advertise their red goldens as "rare"? Just wondering. 
In my opinon, the breeders that advertise here in the states that they have "rare" creme or white goldens and charging twice as much, are breeders that are in it for the money and not the love of the breed. And that is what I think people actually have a problem with, not so much the color. 
We all joined here because of our love of goldens and it doesnt matter what country the goldens are from or what color they are. As long as we can educate new puppy buyers about what to look for when looking for a quality breeder, it should not matter what color they are as long as the price is the same for each color. Some people like the creme some like the red and there are quality breeders out there for every color in the rainbow. 
I love all goldens no matter what color and one day would like to have a golden in every color like the picture. 

JMO


----------



## magiclover (Apr 22, 2008)

Emma&Tilly said:


> There have been countless threads started on this forum that are entitled something along the lines of 'should I get a rare English creme/cream or a regular golden' as some puppy buyers genuinely feel that they are too different breeds and are actually prepared to pay an extortionate amount of money because they think they will get a 'rare' or 'better' dog. It makes me cringe. I am so thankful to the folks on this forum that are prepared to help direct people to responsible breeders of golden retrievers whether they breed goldens with European lines or not. Im sure what everybody wants is to avoid breeders making a quick buck from breeding less than quality dogs because of their pale coat colour...and that is unfortunately what seems to be happening with some breeders in the US.
> 
> During my time on the forum I have never felt that anyone has been derogatory towards european goldens or vice versa...only people stating opinions about the style they personally prefer or the faults they see in that particular dog, whether it be an american dog or European dog.


I am in total agreement.


----------



## Susan6953 (Jun 9, 2008)

I love that "golden rainbow". Jamie is somewhere in the middle and like most dog parents I think he is perfect!


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Emma&Tilly said:


> During my time on the forum I have never felt that anyone has been derogatory towards european goldens or vice versa...only people stating opinions about the style they personally prefer or the faults they see in that particular dog, whether it be an american dog or European dog.


I believe that this is why there was such a reaction to the original post - it is the first time that I can remember in my time here that anyone hs been derogatory in this way. Those of us who do appreciate American as well as European dogs, and have been so far able to discuss opinions about both, were shocked and surprised, especially at such a blanket statement that European dogs are "better". 
I'll say this, Emma and Tilly's girl is definately better, if not the BEST, at utilizing European mud to her advantage, although The Missouri Crew can show her a thing or two about good ol' US of A mud...


----------



## Golden Leo (Dec 3, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> Iva, here in the US, we are allowed to voice our opnions even if we are the only one in the country that happens to feel that way. I didn't find ACC's post offensive, at all, simply an offering of her opinion of the dog. On an open forum, one does not need to be asked prior to doing so, and your posting of the photo opened it up for comment. It is not irrelevant for the dog you posted, or any other. We do the same with dogs that are "legends" here. And differences of opinion are not viewed as insults to those who do not hold the same one as you. Nor are they necessarily judgements.
> I think that this situation is entirely cultural.
> 
> 
> Hey - what happened to the 10% of the judges who didn't like the dog? :curtain:


They own puppy mills

And I can see she shows no respect for anyone.... No wonder her comments are like that....


----------



## Golden Leo (Dec 3, 2008)

BeauShel said:


> Does a country that shows more o the creme colored like Great Britain advertise their red goldens as "rare"? Just wondering.


We don't have red goldens since red or mahagony is not allowed color... And if it happenes once in a while red goldens show up they are disqualified.

I notice that Americans are more obssesed with color and weight than Europeans and they still import dogs from Europe.
I know descrimination by type of breeder but I couldn't imagine the discrimination by color or orgin. These kind of fights in Europe are riddiculos, we only "fight" about build and heath quality and what is the best way to work with your goldens. Color is irrelevant.
And if I, from Europe, menaged to find good quality pale goldens in United States, I don't see where is the problem? It's not our fault for those BYB it is problem with poor education of people. So instead of fights go and educate people! When I made statement of poorly bred goldens I was attacked - the breeder was great I suppose because he didn't write he has "english creams".
But my posts were about breeders and not BYB or puppy mills. They were about representatives of the breed.


----------



## Jersey's Mom (Nov 25, 2007)

I don't understand the difference. You're saying in Europe the red/mahogany dogs are disqualified, here we disqualify extremes on both ends of the spectrum. I'm willing to bet if a large number of BYBs (specifically irresponsible ones who don't breed for health, temperment, and overall soundness of the dog) and millers popped up in Europe marketing the "Rare Red Retriever," we would see similar outrage across the pond (at least I would hope so). No one here has any problem with responsible breeders who happen to work with English/European lines, but only as you yourself stated with certain types of breeders who abuse the current popularity of light colored goldens at the expense of the dogs. That doesn't mean we can't all have our own preference for a particular type of golden while still respecting the merits of those we do not prefer. It really seems like we all agree more than not, so why all the fighting?

Julie and Jersey


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

There seems to be some generalizing/stereotyping about what Americans think or don't think. That seems about as productive as worrying about coat color.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Golden Leo said:


> We don't have red goldens since red or mahagony is not allowed color... And if it happenes once in a while red goldens show up they are disqualified.
> 
> I notice that Americans are more obssesed with color and weight than Europeans and they still import dogs from Europe.
> I know descrimination by type of breeder but I couldn't imagine the discrimination by color or orgin. These kind of fights in Europe are riddiculos, we only "fight" about build and heath quality and what is the best way to work with your goldens. Color is irrelevant.
> ...


This I can appreciate - but, our "fight about color" is NOT about color, but rather the poor quality dogs being marketed by those who see dollar signs in their eyes coming from the uneducated who buy into the "rare British/European white" sales pitch. There are many of us attempting to educate people as to the truth of this. And the majority of us do in fact appreciate a good European dog - no matter the color, even if it is not our preference. You know that I really admired the dogs that you presented in another thread, and particularly one of them. And I have stated several times that the dog that won Crufts is stunning. I am just as critical, if not more so, about our own American dogs and their health and quality because it affects me as a US breeder.
My issue, as well as the marketing of "rare white dogs", etc, is when statements such as the one made to start this thread are laid down as "fact", when there is no foundation behind it, and can be readily disproven. I have to believe that most of the dogs whose photos I have posted on this forum, which have come directly from the websites of some of the "breeders" touting "British Creams", etc, are of such poor quality that no respectable European fancier would consider them worthy of breeding, no matter the country.
This is not being said with any disrespect, because I have the utmost respect for breeders all over the world who do work hard to maintain the integrity of the breed and who promote sound, healthy, good looking dogs meeting the standards from where they are bred.


----------



## Elisabeth Kazup (Aug 23, 2008)

I didn't read all the responses but that won't stop my 2 cents worth. :no:

I suppose Penny would be called a 'nutter' by this person as she can get quite excited and playful. BUT in her playfulness, she is very sweet, loving, and gentle. Misguided at times, but that is OUR fault, not hers. She's just a dog.

If laid back means being a dud, then I don't want one. I wouldn't trade her for anything. She loves everyone, especially kids. Her life is playing with us. And napping. And biscuits. 

She came from a hobby breeder with no in- or line-breeding.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

I have no respect for anyone because I am willing to say when I don't personally care for traits of a certain dog (or any dog, of any breed?). Wow.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Golden Leo, I hope we can be friends. I never meant to be offensive. Maybe it is cultural and a bit of my personality. I am smiling when I post here- not hateful at all. I want to learn and I am honest and open as a person. I'm not afraid to share my views, and I enjoy hearing back from others. If I posted my own Golden, I would not be offended if you did not like her at all- or even said bad things about her. I love her, and I can appreciate the things about her which are quality and the things about her which are not, and NO ONE will ever convince me she is not beautiful. I hope and believe you feel the same way about your Leo. I know that my own two show bred Whippets are as different as night and day, and yet both have outstanding traits and bad traits. Just because I can admit the faults in them does not mean I disrespect their breeders. Their breeders can and do admit the faults also! 

I do not believe ANY breeder famous or not, is the GOD (or GODDESS) of that breed, and knows everything. I also do not believe ANY dog who ever lived is perfect, or would please everyone. I'm glad for that... if there were perfect Goldens, then there would be little to strive for. 

I never said I was an expert on Golden conformation... but I am educated and I do have an opinion. There is not a person here that doesn't have a right to his or her opinion, no matter what the experience level. I haven't shown Goldens more than casually as help to others, but I have attended many shows in Europe and all over the USA, and had the luck and blessing to see and study many amazing dogs. My interest in art and love of drawing has also helped me to learn and appreciate structure, too, as has in depth study of working dogs. 

So, I am not disrespectful- merely honest- about any dog I see. I don't care if it's a rescue dog or the most winning show dog of all time. All dogs have something to teach me.


----------



## SoGolden (Jul 17, 2008)

*The Rainbow*



BeauShel said:


> I like this picture that shows the great colors that goldens come in from light to dark....
> I love all goldens no matter what color and one day would like to have a golden in every color like the picture.
> 
> JMO


Harry is about 3rd from the right


----------



## Golden Leo (Dec 3, 2008)

As I said we don't have red goldens like we don't have goldens with black markings in fur, they are both treated as "disqualifying faults". Our standard says " any shade of gold and cream, nor red or mahagony are allowed". We have really dark gold goldens and very light cream goldens but they are treated equaly in shows and in breeding and selling. We don't have "rare" goldens. Only top, good and low quality. Our BYB "stand out" with multi ch of countries where is very low quality of breedeing so any dog can be CH. That is how they attract buyers.

Laura, I know we agree in all points and those words were not meant on you. This is the key I'm looking for


> This is not being said with any disrespect, because I have the utmost respect for breeders all over the world who do work hard to maintain the integrity of the breed and who promote sound, healthy, good looking dogs meeting the standards from where they are bred.


ACC showed no respect. I could put critique on that Tigathoe's Funky Farquar that someone said it was his favourite retriever of all time. But for the respect for that person I held my tounge. And I could say many, many build faults, instead of talking bad words I posted european dog from the same period. And yet that american dog was "the greatest" and european with proper build was dog with many faults. You are breeder and you know fault when you see it. 
I guess she picked me up on tooth when we discussted about wieght since there is no limit in weight in UK standard...  

This is the proof that people from American continet recognize good dog when they see it, no matter of color.
*Can & Bda Ch Mjaerumhogda's Kyon Flying Surprise, CDX (OS)*









*"Top-producing sire in Canadian breed history. Top Golden Retriever 1985. Ten all-breed BIS. Sire of numerous guide dogs.*​ *Shea continues to live on in his many outstanding offspring.*​ * He was a once-in-a-lifetime dog."*
​And his breeder is jugding here in april!!! yaaaaay!!! I can't wait!!!


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

I actually love that dog you just posted.

And, I would be curious to hear your views of Funky Farquar. He is a "great" and one of my favorites. I wouldn't be offended to hear what you have to say. It would be educational.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

I think many posts have crossed a line of mutual respect, and that is too bad. Hopefully, it is out of passion for the dogs. I really don't agree with the singling out of ACC, bc she has been topical to the dogs, and not attacking to you specifically, and she has repeatedly offered olive branches with a generous energy. 


> We don't have red goldens since red or mahagony is not allowed color... And if it happenes once in a while red goldens show up they are disqualified.





> I notice that Americans are more obssesed with color and weight than Europeans


European standards seem as anti-red as Americans are anti-light/white? That makes it appear as though the preoccupation is the same, but the choice of color to disqualify is different. If red is a disqualifying fault in your country and white/very light cream in ours, I can't see a material difference in the underlying concept. The implication is that Americans are shallow and fall for fads rather than competent at evaluating dogs for good structure and working ability. If coat color is so shallow a concern, then red should be just fine. 

I don't understand why it bothers you so much if a different country has a contrasting taste in goldens? You seem to deeply believe that European goldens are superior to American goldens, and have many reasons and example to support this view. Would I sign onto a German forum and be extremely offended if Kirby was challenged or if red coat colors were not embraced? Maybe it would hurt my feelings or maybe I would say to myself each to his own. . . If you were deluged with red goldens of inferior quality being marketed slickly under the term "American Golden" for twice the usual price of a puppy, it would be like what we have with poor breeders misusing the term"British Golden". I am interested in what you have to say, and eager to admire the style of golden you present. However, it is PointGold's Zoom that makes my heart skip beats, and the the american goldens with whom I share my actual life that I love the way you love yours. How is that not natural and why is there not room for fantastic examples of both styles?


----------



## JohnTIZ (Jan 9, 2009)

Everyone! Group hug! LOL.

At our first house, our neighbour across the street had one of those American goldens and ours was closer to our preference,the English type. Both dogs loved to play with each other. It was a blast to watch. One of my fondest memories is Kodiak who would show up on our front door looking for Maggie. Just like kids. Their differing shades of coat colour mattered not to each other (or to us). Each dog meant the world to both families. They were pets first, not conformation material. Goldens are beautiful dogs not matter what shade of gold - and what draws us to them is what's inside - their beauty, intelligence, kindly nature, or as the owner of the pet store we deal with calls them "the teddy bear of dog breeds".


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Golden Leo said:


> As I said we don't have red goldens like we don't have goldens with black markings in fur, they are both treated as "disqualifying faults". Our standard says " any shade of gold and cream, nor red or mahagony are allowed". We have really dark gold goldens and very light cream goldens but they are treated equaly in shows and in breeding and selling. We don't have "rare" goldens. Only top, good and low quality. Our BYB "stand out" with multi ch of countries where is very low quality of breedeing so any dog can be CH. That is how they attract buyers.
> 
> Laura, I know we agree in all points and those words were not meant on you. This is the key I'm looking for
> 
> ...


And here is where we disagree  ACC and I have certainly had our "issues", but in this case I firmly believe that she was not disrespectful at all. I don't know, but maybe the meaning of opinion is different here. Here, someone can say that Ch. Studly Joe Macho XYZ, LOL was the greatest dog to ever walk the face of the earth. And while that person may passionately believe it is true, another can say "I don't think so. I think Ch. I'm Hotter Than Snot, NIT, WIT is. I think that he is WAY better." And it's all good. They may debate the merits of both, and then go have a cyber Cosmo together. It's not disrespectful at all. Now, it WOULD be if the person were to say "What are you, crazy? Ch Joe Studly Macho is a flea-bitten yard dog and he should have been neutered the minute he was born! He's ugly, he's stupid..." See? Here in the US we embrace diversity.
My Ch Birnam Wood's Expedia.com is by Ch. Pebwin's XPDNC, National Specialty Winner, Westminster BOB winner. I adore the dog, although frankly, he is not my normal "cup of tea". BUT, what he has offered to the breed, in the way of fronts, ROCK solid toplines, and a lot of OFA excellents, among other things (temperament, especially) I wanted. You have to be open minded in this "game", or you can paint yourself smack dab into a very small corner. 

Just as an aside, My Lyric was Best of Opposite to the above dog, Shea's (who was a Norwegian import), grandson, AmCan Ch Kyon's For Valor and Victory, at the Canadian National, and the next day at the Regional in Toronto, took the Breed and he was BOS to her. She also beat Shea from the classes.  He was a great dog, and produced well for Karin and Wally.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Amen! Not just because you understood that I was in no way trying to be disrespectful, but because also you made me laugh with those names and titles!!!  I just snorted milk through my nose. And, because you said what I am trying to say, but couldn't get right I suppose. 

I also feel that thinking ANY one dog or kennel is perfect can ultimately shortchange a person (and the breed, in a sense).


----------



## Golden Leo (Dec 3, 2008)

> And, I would be curious to hear your views of Funky Farquar. He is a "great" and one of my favorites. I wouldn't be offended to hear what you have to say. It would be educational.


I'm sorry but this is link on standard, open it and conclude what is wrong on that dog. http://www.thegoldenretrieverclub.co.uk/



> she has been topical to the dogs, and not attacking to you specifically, and she has repeatedly offered olive branches with a generous energy.


It wouldn't matter if she attacked me, but she attacked the people who made the goldens the way they are. It's lack of disrespect for anyone. Some people should learn manners. I am not accepting apologize from anyone who doesn't know what they did or why they apologize. That how I know they are not sincere. And no, she doesn't know why is she wrong or why am I offended.



> If red is a disqualifying fault in your country


Not in my country, in whole Europe and by standard that is set by country of orgin of that breed.I didn't set the standard or gave breed the name. And by the way as far as I've read light color is UNDESIRABLE in US and not diqualifying falut.



> The implication is that Americans are shallow and fall for fads rather than competent at evaluating dogs for good structure and working ability. If coat color is so shallow a concern, then red should be just fine.


I didn't say that. Since I came I read about "english creams" like plague. And there are at least dozen topics open on color theme and same amount on weight but i don't see any on conformation. If there is please post me a link so I can learn- what was the main purpose that I joined this forum. So I come on conclusion that these are more important things as you classify your dogs by color. Color is explained in upper pasus.



> I don't understand why it bothers you so much if a different country has a contrasting taste in goldens?


It doesn't, but it does offence me when someone think they're superior.



> You seem to deeply believe that European goldens are superior to American goldens, and have many reasons and example to support this view.


Where did you get that from? I didn't write that first post and I didn't write anything until ACC started to bad mouth generaly european dogs ( not "cream", "white" or whatsoever- but ALL european dogs). I believe you would do the same if you're on british forum where someone said that not "red" goldens are bad but ALL American dogs. And I never ever said that european dogs are superior... When making accusations like that you should read my posts.



> and the the american goldens with whom I share my actual life that I love the way you love yours


The same thing I said 10 pages ago.



> How is that not natural and why is there not room for fantastic examples of both styles?


And that is the reason I joined this forum. 

Laura, I wouldn't put you in the same pot with ACC.  You know that there are certain dogs and breeders that influenced the breed in positive way. Not im my eyes, not in Đuro's or Pero's eyes- but in eyes of all breeders in one continent. And if making bad comments I suppose you breed something better so you can criticise. 

And I am very, very glad that you have better dog than Shea is!!! That is great for kinology and breed!!! I mentioned this dog just beacuse I noticed him, he has eye catching head, old and gorgeous type I long for. Later on I looked at his name and recognised kennel.


----------



## Jackson'sMom (Oct 13, 2007)

Time to move on. This thread is going nowhere but downhill.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Golden Leo said:


> I'm sorry but this is link on standard, open it and conclude what is wrong on that dog. http://www.thegoldenretrieverclub.co.uk/
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I honestly do not think any attack was made, and that a lot of how you have viewed what has been said really goes back to a language barrier, and for that I am sorry that we cannot make it clearer.

As for having a "better" dog than Shea? I don't know about THAT! All I know is that on any given day, a dog will win, or he will not. Because judging is to a point subjective (and opinion factors heavily) a "great" dog in one person's eyes may be beaten by what that person feels is a lesser dog. Lyric is gone, but left her mark in a small way. She was beautiful, and the consumate show dog. In my eyes she was "perfect", although I always could, and still can, point out her faults. Some judges judges loved her and said thatthey couldn't see another dog in the rng when she was there, and others hated her and wouldn't give her a ribbon to save their lives. That is the nature of the game. And it i not so different from our debates here.


----------



## arcane (Sep 18, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> Ch. I'm Hotter Than Snot, NIT, WIT


NOw that name would catch some attention now wouldn't it!!!!!!!!!!lmao


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

arcane said:


> NOw that name would catch some attention now wouldn't it!!!!!!!!!!lmao


 
Yeah, well, don't be surprised if you see it with the Nitelite prefix...:FIREdevil


----------



## arcane (Sep 18, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> Yeah, well, don't be surprised if you see it with the Nitelite prefix...:FIREdevil


can't wait to see a puppy that would carry that handle!!!! well done


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

I like that name too!  My dogs looked up because I was laughing out loud when I saw it!!!


----------



## Mandy's Dad (May 27, 2008)

Okay now, I've finally gotten through ALL of the posts on this thread and just figured that I'd add my two cents worth...

It is really too bad that the OP presented an 'opinion as fact' post for their initial post to the GRF that has stirred up such controversy. By the way - WELCOME!

MOST of what I've read has been entertaining, and some of it educational. One problem that I've detected in here is a cultural/language barrier between a couple people. I don't believe that there was ever ANY disrespect shown by ACC toward ANY dog or ANY breeder or ANYONE! As was previously stated, in the USA we each have opinions and state our opinions about things that we like or dislike. Just because my opinion is that I don't like green socks doesn't mean that I am disrespecting the person who designed and made the green socks. This is the same with Goldens. Golden Leo, you stated that you would not comment on Funky Fauquar because it would "disrespect" the person that had this Golden. In the USA sharing your opinion is not a sign of disrespect as long as it is done without malice (intent to harm).

As far as people leaving this forum because of not agreeing with others here, wouldn't it work better to stay and help educate the rest of us through posts and discussion without animosity.

Just my humble opinions.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Mandy's Dad said:


> Okay now, I've finally gotten through ALL of the posts on this thread and just figured that I'd add my two cents worth...
> 
> It is really too bad that the OP presented an 'opinion as fact' post for their initial post to the GRF that has stirred up such controversy. By the way - WELCOME!
> 
> ...


 

*NO, no, no, no, no... you are wrong. Green socks are the best.*


----------



## Penny & Maggie's Mom (Oct 4, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> *NO, no, no, no, no... you are wrong. Green socks are the best.*



LIME OR FOREST???????:--big_grin:


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Penny & Maggie's Mom said:


> LIME OR FOREST???????:--big_grin:


As long as they are a lustrous shade of GREEN, and neither TOO PALE nor TOO DARK.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

As stated, I'd have no problem evaluating my OWN dogs... and amazing ancestors of my own dogs that are Whippet breed greats, top dogs in history, and top producers. It's not disrespect... at least here in the US. I love and adore those Whippets (mine and the ancestors, the great dogs like Ch Starline's Reign On), but you can BET they have flaws and I can see them. Some traits of them I like and another person does not like. If you did not like my type of Whippet, I would not be offended. Chances are good you wouldn't, in fact, as mine are very extreme American style Whippets. And that's okay. I have also owned a top bred British Whippet. TOTALLY opposite type. I loved many traits he had, that I feel the American dogs are lacking in, even though I over all prefer an American type Whippet. 

For example, I LOVE the super long necks on my Whippets. A very successful breeder (American) with another line says they're too extreme... that's her view... I don't disrespect her just because I (and some others) happen to prefer longer necked Whippets. Many Brits have called my Starline Reign On grandson a "pencil neck" because they tend to like shorter necked Whippets in the UK. So what? I don't think the fabulous breeders of the dogs like mine should be offended that some people in the UK (and here) think that type of Whippet is too extreme in the neck. Few would would ever doubt the ancestors of my dogs' contribution to our beautiful breed... at the same time, I mean no disrespect when I say I do not care for the whippets with light eyes (a fault in our standard, but not in the UK Whippet standard). That is not a slam on the amazing breeders of fine UK Whippets... it is just a preference (shared by almost every US Whippet breeder I can think of). Neither is CORRECT- it's just an opinion. MANY UK Whippets would not win a thing here, because they are smaller, have light eyes, or (sadly, since our standard says "color immaterial") are a color that is not fashionable here. Same if you took US dogs over there. Some win, some do not. 

Any good breeder IMHO would be open to a discussion of that nature and say his or her view too. That's how I learn. If I had a quality Golden, I'd post him or her and say "HAVE AT IT" and enjoy the following comments, and I wouldn't think it was rude if someone said my dog was poor quality. I may or may not agree- ultimately, it's up to me to decide what I think is a nice dog. I only have rescue Goldens... and even they have qualities that are good and correct. And some that are far from it!


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Well I have rainbow colored socks, so... there


----------



## BeauShel (May 20, 2007)

I have golden retriever socks. Better then green, red, blue or orange.


----------



## Golden Leo (Dec 3, 2008)

This is first post that I reacted. And because of this post I "joined" "discussion":


> Many of the UK Goldens I met were, indeed calm... but they also were huge, overdone, too much bone, not enough drive, and compared to my US dogs, could barely keep up when playing. They had NO reach and no drive, ridiculous huge heads, and looked as though they'd be completely useless in the field. Recently, a Brit who saw my Golden was in awe of her, and said the Goldens back home (in England) that she knew were "big lumps" compared to my "beautiful athlete" (her words, not mine).





> several nice dogs with spunk (but not hyper) and enough leg and lack of body fat and enough moderation to appear to be totally useful, normal Goldens.


Like first post was offensive to US goldens this is offensive to UK goldens, saying that there are several "nice dogs" that "appear to be totally useful, normal Goldens". And that post is was what I was replying all this pages (until it came to Faunus). I think they are useful enough - they need to have proper build, good looks, good health and inborn abilities to get breeding licence and they have to pass gundog test to be champions. My puppy is from his first weeks tested for gunshots and from 6-7 weeks old he's retrieving wild ducks and rabbits (of course first were skin and wings and now we'll get dead animals) and he's going on shows and getting excellent results for now but he just started. He is normal, useful golden. Like all of his family and much more than "several nice dogs".
I won't use any hard words since I don't think anything globaly about "american" goldens.

And for commenting on other people's dogs- I avoid that as much as I can. I have my opinions, I share them with my friends to see if I'm right or wrong. For educational purpose only- to see if I notice if dog is long/short in body, have proper angulation, head etc. On this forum I commented 3 times on others dogs - on h4d's - that I shouldn't because no opinion was asked and I aplogize for that, I am truly and deeply sorry. On one kennel's dogs when opinion was asked for. And for one puppy that I liked his build better than the other one, opinion was asked. And from this day on I refuse to say on forums that anything is wrong on any dog. I don't care what kind of goldens people breed. I respect all breeding, specially when someone dedicates their lives to dogs! I will always prefer good angulated dogs with that gorgeous heads with kind and warm expression, good short bodies and deep chest, big bones and golden color, my deepest wish is color of honey but that is the last thing I see on dog. And of course with that amazing temper that makes them so gentle they carry live chicken without hurting her! And energy to retrieve till my hand hurts...
And I will never, ever again get into any discussion. It is bad, it brings prejudice and hard feelings. 
I am very passionate about everything I do. And goldens are huge part of my life and they will always be, so I apologize to everyone that feel offended by my posts. It wasn't my intention and I reacted with heart and not mind.
I'll do what I did when I first signed in on this forum- I'll ask you to show me all beauty of golden retrievers in US and if you want I can show you the most famous lines in Europe.
I always say- if you don't have anything nice to say don't say anything at all. I failed in this so once again I apologize.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

I actually agree with almost everything you said there that you love in a Golden. I hope we can be friends, as I never intended to offend you.

I was only posting a view of what I saw, as compared to the vastly different looking dogs I grew up around and being taught were correct at shows here (US). 

I'm very sorry that I upset you


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Golden Leo said:


> And there are at least dozen topics open on color theme and same amount on weight but i don't see any on conformation. If there is please post me a link so I can learn- what was the main purpose that I joined this forum.


http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/showthread.php?t=36882&highlight=lessons+breeders
http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/showthread.php?t=50905&highlight=short+upper


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

American http://video.westminsterkennelclub.org/player/?id=217183
British ww.youtube.com/watch?v=q5-_vyA017E

Beautiful goldens, all.

Edit: I can't get the Crufts golden link to work. Maybe someone else has a good video of the class????

Anyone know who the westminster golden is at 11:42???


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Ljilly28 said:


> Anyone know who the westminster golden is at 11:42???


That's Nicolas - Ch Easthill Broxden Pop Star, with Laurie Jordan-Fenner, he was BOS.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Thanks, PG! I have been wondering all year who he is, since the video came out. Are you in NYC?


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Ljilly28 said:


> Thanks, PG! I have been wondering all year who he is, since the video came out. Are you in NYC?


I am. We had a great dinner last night, and I was up early to take a walk (it's WARM here, and NO SNOW), and we are going to contribute to NY's economy today with a little retail therapy 
(Mostly we have all of our dinner reservations made!) 
I'm going to spend some time in the AKC library on Monday, have lunch with some friends, help out the economy a little more, there are a few breeds I want to watch, and then we'll watch Monday's Groups. Goldens are Tuesday.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

That's really just glamorous! Being inside the dog show world- knowing the people and goldens. . . The models, actors, writers,musicians, and debutantes in NYC? I'm blasé. The dogs at Westminster? Shameless fan!


----------



## goldengirls550 (Jun 12, 2008)

Jackson'sMom said:


> I have to wonder, do some people just join this forum and make one or two posts simply to create a stir? I know nothing about breeding and all of my goldens have been rescues, so I can't and won't take sides in this argument. But we seem to have a lot of new folks joining lately whose first thread is, by design or otherwise, stirring the pot. Just my observation.


LOL. I was wondering the same thing. It seems like alot of these threads get started by the "newbies"


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Ljilly28 said:


> That's really just glamorous! Being inside the dog show world- knowing the people and goldens. . . The models, actors, writers,musicians, and debutantes in NYC? I'm blasé. The dogs at Westminster? Shameless fan!


LOL. It's funny, because we are all the same people who trudge around at 5:00am ex-ing dogs, scooping poop, hauling our butts and a million pounds of equipment to itty bitty shows in Timbuktoo. Westminster is just a chance for everyone to pretend to be glamourous! Westminster and National Specialties - everyone cleans up nice!


----------



## moverking (Feb 26, 2007)

Ljilly28 said:


> Are you in NYC?





Pointgold said:


> I am.


And your camera is where???


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

moverking said:


> And your camera is where???


In my purse? :curtain:

I'm still lounging in my room, soon will walk uptown and meet Sylvia. 
I swear I plan to take pics. Maybe Times Square at night? And of course, the dog show.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

You are not too many hours away from me! Have Fun! I love NY...


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Kimm said:


> You are not too many hours away from me! Have Fun! I love NY...


I do too, Kimm - NYC is just a wonderful, crazy, fun, diverse fishbowl of humanity. I love it, and always have a great time here!


----------



## Rushell (Nov 13, 2008)

I have had all colors, and love them all! 

I have been curious about this for a while...The initial problem seems to be that the breed standard for color was written differently for AKC than the previous countries, do anyone know why this was done in the first place? Does this difference in breed standard occur in many other breeds?


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

I do know there is a difference in the Whippet standard. Dogs with light eyes and less than black nose pigment are faulted here. In the UK, it is acceptable for dogs to have eyes/pigment to match their coat color. In both places ANY AND ALL COLORS are 100% equally acceptable in Whippets, including dilute shades, which genetically *cannot* have black pigment- so while I do not prefer light eyed Whippets for myself, though I have owned one, I have to side with the UK standard. Ours has unfair discrimination against perfectly accepted colors. Larger Whippets are also accepted in the US, and dogs here tend to be taller. A small male here would (at least a decade ago) have been a large male there. With some recent US blood being included in the UK gene pool, I'm not sure if that's still the case there or not. 

I can't speak for any other breed... and I don't know why the differences are there in Whippets either- my guess on the eye color issue would be that a dark eye is crucial for the soulful, warm expression that is a hallmark of Whippets to many people (while others appreciate a more fire eyed, predatory look for this breed)... including those who must have written that. But I don't know if that is fact or just my theory. 

As for size, I have read that many great Whippet dogs with good movement and structure were a bit larger... so the standard was rewritten to allow these quality dogs to succeed. In the early days, many smaller ones had an almost Italian greyhound like appearance, which is very incorrect in a Whippet.

I think that's how such changes can occur.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gS6aEg8ByuU&feature=related


----------



## Ashivon (May 3, 2008)

:wavey:


SoGolden said:


> Harry is about 3rd from the right


Thanx for the new wallpaper!!!!!!:


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Rushell said:


> I have had all colors, and love them all!
> 
> I have been curious about this for a while...The initial problem seems to be that the breed standard for color was written differently for AKC than the previous countries, do anyone know why this was done in the first place? Does this difference in breed standard occur in many other breeds?


There are several breeds whose standards, while for the most part requiring the same structure and movement, have subtle differences in acceptable colors, tails, ears, etc. from one country to the next.
Some might divide a breed into variety by color, for example, others consider what we have as seperate breeds (ie Belgian Sheepdog, Tervuren, Malinois) as one breed.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

Wilson's REAL Mom said:


> Interesting website Brighton Goldens.
> 
> Just throwing this out there and then running for cover!


An interesting update: Several breeders, in the last few days, have found these photos of their pet and show dogs on this site ( an reproduced on others like Recherche), and asked for their dogs to be taken off the website immediately, but without success. Can the Brighton site just filtch pictures of Shakespeare and Benny and the others without permission? Is that legal??? The owners did not give permission and have now requested they come down from the site. Is there any recourse for the owners or law-abiding way we could help??


----------

