# A conformation primer: What makes a good dog good?



## avincent52

I've been hanging around here for a year, and I must say, I don't really have the foggiest notion about what makes a good dog good, conformation wise.

Would one or more of the experts care to enlighten me (and others?)

Can you post pictures of two properly stacked dogs, one BIS-league super golden and one that's, well, less perfect, and point out the differences?

I realize that much of this needs to be seen in 3-D, but I think we could, at least, start from photos. We've had any number of "analyze this dog" threads, but never one that visually compares that dog to the standard.

thanks in advance
Allen


----------



## Thor0918

I have no Idea but, I'll bring this back on the board because I'm interested!


----------



## esSJay

I would be interested to learn this as well.


----------



## moverking

I've always wanted a thread pertaining to this....Thinking video would be the best way to show movement and even hands on explanations. And both poor and good examples....I can supply vids of what I think are confirmation issues with mine.....


----------



## K9-Design

If the answer could be summed up in a message board thread, then we wouldn't need books, videos, seminars, mentoring, judges' education or heck, even dog shows. In the dog show world, it's like asking why the sky is blue or which came first, chicken or the egg. Good luck!


----------



## avincent52

K9-Design said:


> If the answer could be summed up in a message board thread, then we wouldn't need books, videos, seminars, mentoring, judges' education or heck, even dog shows. In the dog show world, it's like asking why the sky is blue or which came first, chicken or the egg. Good luck!


Kurt Vonnegut said that any scientist who can't explain his work to a 12-year old is a charlatan.

Okay. I don't expect to learn everything from this thread. But in any of the things I really know--guitars, or sports statistics, just to name two--I could write a post that would give an interested novice a grounding in the basics. And then I'd be happy to answer some basic (and not so basic) questions. And in short order, the interested novice would have a basic understanding and appreciation for a subject I care passionately about. 

The idea for this thread came in the "English Goldens" thread where a poster is talking about fronts and flews and rear angles and toplines, and I realized I didn't have the foggiest idea of what she meant, despite hanging around here for almost a year. I've read the breed standard and that didn't help much at all. 

If you're saying that conformation is too arcane for a smart, interested amateur to understand, then it raises the question of whether why I should care.

I want to care. Please help me do so. 

To ground this a little, here's Andy, a Westminster Breed and Group winner (and Tessie's great grandfather). Can someone look at this photo and tell me what the judges saw that makes him special. Can someone provide a photo of a less-well conformed golden in a similar stack and explain what makes Andy better?

If there's a problem with Andy or this photo, feel free to provide another. 












> In the dog show world, it's like asking why the sky is blue or which came first, chicken or the egg. Good luck!


Why is the sky blue? Because midday sunlight is actually made up of all colors of the rainbow--as you can see with a prism or a rainbow. Blue light has the shortest wavelength and is the most easily scattered by the gases and other particles in the atmosphere. That's why the sky is blue.

As for the chicken or the egg, experts tend to agree that the egg came first. 

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/05/26/chicken.egg/


----------



## K9-Design

Really, trust me -- people spend lifetimes learning how to tell a good dog from a bad one. Every point on a dog is good or bad depending on someone's opinion of 1000 grey areas on one animal. You have to learn how and why on these things which is way way way beyond the scope of a website like this, especially if asking "WHY" on a global scale.
It's like asking, "Can you explain to me how to play football?" and expecting someone on a message board to give a concrete answer. 
But hey, if someone else wants to tackle the question, go for it! (pun intended)


----------



## K9-Design

May I suggest any number of golden retriever books that break down the standard into pieces, mainly Marcia Schlerr's Blue Book, and books on general dog structure, starting with Pagey Elliott's Dog Steps. That'll get you started on terminology. Beyond that you need someone to help show you by comparing dogs in real life. Even then, it's THEIR opinion.


----------



## gabbys mom

May I suggest breaking it down into separate sub-threads? Ie, this week, we look @ elbows, the next week shoulders, the third, tail sets, the fourth, ears, etc.. Another forum I am on did something like that and it was very informative without being so overwhelming as looking at the total dog.

Also, the WHY is easy to answer: conformationally sound dogs have less orthopedic issues and are better able to perform the jobs that the breed was designed to do. Conformation is there to ensure that Goldens look like Goldens, Tollers look like Tollers, and Labs look Labs.


----------



## Pointgold

avincent52 said:


> Kurt Vonnegut said that any scientist who can't explain his work to a 12-year old is a charlatan.
> 
> Okay. I don't expect to learn everything from this thread. But in any of the things I really know--guitars, or sports statistics, just to name two--I could write a post that would give an interested novice a grounding in the basics. And then I'd be happy to answer some basic (and not so basic) questions. And in short order, the interested novice would have a basic understanding and appreciation for a subject I care passionately about.
> 
> The idea for this thread came in the "English Goldens" thread where a poster is talking about fronts and flews and rear angles and toplines, and I realized I didn't have the foggiest idea of what she meant, despite hanging around here for almost a year. I've read the breed standard and that didn't help much at all.
> 
> If you're saying that conformation is too arcane for a smart, interested amateur to understand, then it raises the question of whether why I should care.
> 
> I want to care. Please help me do so.
> 
> To ground this a little, here's Andy, a Westminster Breed and Group winner (and Tessie's great grandfather). Can someone look at this photo and tell me what the judges saw that makes him special. Can someone provide a photo of a less-well conformed golden in a similar stack and explain what makes Andy better?
> 
> If there's a problem with Andy or this photo, feel free to provide another.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is the sky blue? Because midday sunlight is actually made up of all colors of the rainbow--as you can see with a prism or a rainbow. Blue light has the shortest wavelength and is the most easily scattered by the gases and other particles in the atmosphere. That's why the sky is blue.
> 
> As for the chicken or the egg, experts tend to agree that the egg came first.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/05/26/chicken.egg/


 

Learning the anatomy of a dog is fairly easy, as is learning terminology.
Asking someone to explain why a judge put up Dog X over the rest of the dogs in the ring, with only a photo of the winning dog, is impossible on several levels. Unless I had first hand knowledge via a conversation with the judge and he or she TOLD me why he put that dog up, I would only be guessing, at best. And without even having photos of the other dogs in competition, I could not even make a guess based on MY opinion of the entire entry. Hands on, and seeing movement, is the only way that can be done, and ten judges could offer you ten different opinions. And even seeing the same dogs in a ring, the same judge may not put the same dog up the next time. Dogs are judged "on the day" and there are many variables that come into play.

While Andy was winning Westminster, I was watching it on television and whelping a litter of his grandpuppies.


----------



## avincent52

Elsewhere on GRF, we discuss dog behavior and training, not knowing the dog or the owner or having seen the behavior. 

On guitar forums, we discuss the tone and playability of guitars that most of us haven't played, using nothing but words.

And in this thread I explained why the sky is blue in two sentences.

If you'd like me to explain football, I can do that. I can't make you a football coach, but I can explain the game so that you'll have more fun and understand it better when you watch one. And I don't want to be a dog show judge, but I would like to look at a golden retriever and have some general appreciation of its strengths and an understanding of its weaknesses. 

I guess I fail to see why golden retriever conformation is so complex and unfathomable that it defies this kind of explanation. 

Especially when you've got at least five enthusiastic newbies, and who knows how many lurkers, as an attentive audience. 


allen


----------



## LibertyME

I picked up a copy of 'the blue book' A Study of the Golden Retriever, by Marcia R. Schlehr. 
It was from Golden Retriever Club of America...it is a terrific gem - packed with information! It really helped me _begin_ to get an understanding... It was $8.50 plus a few bucks for shipping - worth every penny.


----------



## tippykayak

Like Allen, I'm a little confused by the mysticism. Maybe the question was a little too big for anybody to have time to tackle all at once?

How about we break it down a little? Can somebody post a picture of a dog that demonstrates one piece of particularly good conformation, like a great head or great rear angulation and try to explain it a little?

I can't believe that's impossibly complex. Perhaps it's the English teacher in me.


----------



## Tahnee GR

I think we can all say what we like and don't like about a dog but it is the part about why one dog wins over another that is difficult.

Andy has wonderful structure and a lovely head but more than that (and not apparent in pictures) are conditioning and showmanship, that indefinable something that draws your eye to a dog, or takes your breath away. I have seen dogs every bit as nice as Andy but who have a difficult time finishing or maybe never finish. And I have seen the opposite. I am minded of a particular dog who was a huge winner, was bred to a lot and honestly, was not a good example of what a Golden should look like, or how one should move. But, he had a beautiful head and was one of the greatest, if not the greatest, show dogs in his prime I have ever met.

So, can we tell you what we like about a dog's photo? Sure. Can we tell you why he is a BIS winner and another dog isn't? No, and especially not from a photo. The photo of Andy is a hard one, as it is at an angle. Photos are a picture of how a dog appears at a particular moment in time, from a particular angle. I had a lovely girl who couldn't take a decent photo to save her soul, and I have seen other dogs whose photos were great but any resemblance to the actual dog was purely accidental.

To quote Denise Richards (!) "It's Complicated."


----------



## avincent52

> I can't believe that's impossibly complex. Perhaps it's the English teacher in me.


While people write whole dissertations on Melville, I'm sure you could give me two paragraphs on what _Moby Dick_ is about and why it's important as a way to start the conversation.



> To quote Denise Richards (!) "It's Complicated."


I'm asking for something pretty simple, actually. The kind of thing a curator in a museum might use to explain Manet's Folles Bergere (using a slide rather than the real painting) or a baseball fan might use to explain Willie Mays to a friend from England (relying on old video footage.)

I can't imagine that someone here can't look at that picture of James, problematical though it may be, and find something to admire and articulate that. I'm not looking for an inside baseball analysis of why he won Westminster. 
But can't someone explain why his conformation is better than some cute puppy mill puppy in a pet store? 

Or provide a different dog, and a better picture or maybe even a video. 

I feel like we're talking about the conformation of the Loch Ness Monster. 

allen


----------



## Pointgold

Where'd you get "mysticism"?


----------



## Pointgold

avincent52 said:


> While people write whole dissertations on Melville, I'm sure you could give me two paragraphs on what _Moby Dick_ is about and why it's important.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm asking for something pretty simple, actually. The kind of thing a curator in a museum might use to explain Manet's Folles Bergere (using a slide rather than the real painting) or a baseball fan might use to explain Willie Mays to a friend from England (relying on old video footage.)
> 
> I can't imagine that someone here can't look at that picture of James, problematical though it may be, and find something to admire and articulate that. I'm not looking for an inside baseball analysis of why he won Westminster.
> But can't someone explain why his conformation is better than some cute puppy mill puppy in a pet store?
> 
> allen


 
Part of it is that you are asking so many different things. Are you asking for someone's opinon as to why they think Ch Stud Muffin is pretty? We do that all the time. Why is his conformation better than "some cute puppy mill puppy in a pet store?" Usually fairly obvious.

It _is _complicated, actually. And part of why the average "lifespan" of a dog show exhibitor is 5 years. And why the requirements to judge are so extensive.

I may simply be exhausted, and way off base, but somehow, the way these questions are being posed seem somehow confrontational. I'm going to step back, get some sleep, and look again.


----------



## K9-Design

Okay, here's your curator's version.
Every breed has a standard that describes the perfect specimen of that breed. This is the "type" that judges look for that makes a dog an unmistakable member of it's breed. Combined with proper soundness and structure of the bones and muscles it makes for a dog who is capable of it's original function whether that be hunting rats or herding sheep. The way a dog is conditioned, fed, trained, groomed and handled plays a major role in it's success in the show ring. A dog who has type, structure and top-notch handling may be very successful at dog shows."
There. Now did that tell you anything you didn't know before?


----------



## Lucky's mom

I'll have to find that thread where some dogs (including a forum member's dog) was analyzed and critiqued in great detail on neck length, anglelation, body length and stop. No one seemed to have an issue applying conformation information then. So I'm a bit puzzled on this thread.


----------



## GoToLeep

I was initially excited about this topic. But am just puzzled at the suggestion that we just won't be able to understand the intricacies and "technical talk". Or is it that it "cannot" be explained properly in your opinion. Here's my thought for what it's worth!! 

Now if I am looking at a full length picture of Cindy Crawford and one of Susan Boyle (Britains Got Talent) the differences are pretty easy to explain, but take Cindy Crawford next to Jennifer Anniston, a little more difficult. Both are beautiful (also intelligent, talented) women, but I can surely tell you differences between them. I like Cindy Crawford, my standard ... And I could TELL you in detail what those diifferences are as could anyone else who prefers Cindy. As could all the women on here tell you the differences between George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matthew McConaughey or whomever their "favorite" celebrity is as compared to another. It's not that hard to describe the differences between the preferable dog that are found to the most appealing to the standard.

Just my humble opinion!


----------



## rictic

K9-Design said:


> Okay, here's your curator's version.
> Every breed has a standard that describes the perfect specimen of that breed. This is the "type" that judges look for that makes a dog an unmistakable member of it's breed. Combined with proper soundness and structure of the bones and muscles it makes for a dog who is capable of it's original function whether that be hunting rats or herding sheep. The way a dog is conditioned, fed, trained, groomed and handled plays a major role in it's success in the show ring. A dog who has type, structure and top-notch handling may be very successful at dog shows."
> There. Now did that tell you anything you didn't know before?


 

a non confrontatiobal question.

why are the slops of the backs so different then? i thought the straight level back was better for running and working.

a bit like the gsd's whos ass is so low they cant walk normally on their back legs.


----------



## Tahnee GR

A sloping topline is incorrect. It can occur due to incorrect structure or poor stacking. I saw a lot of sloping toplines back when extreme rear angulation became a fad, and shoulder angulation did not match the rear.

A slight slope to the croup is correct however.


----------



## tippykayak

Pointgold said:


> Where'd you get "mysticism"?


From the old French, "mystique," via Latin from the Greek, "mustikos."



In all seriousness, I was using it to describe the replies that seemed to indicate good conformation was about an ineffable quality of a dog, rather than about elements of physical structure that can be examined, demonstrated, and explained.


----------



## hotel4dogs

my 2 cents....
I don't think good conformation is at all mysterious, but that's not what the original question was.
I think ALL the good breeders on here can answer the question of what good conformation is, but that question is answered by the breed standard as well as the "blue book".
The original question, if I remember back that far, is why one dog wins over another one on any given day, or consistently. THAT'S the question the breeders/show people are finding impossible to answer. 
There is no answer. It's purely subjective. My dog may win under judge X because he has the "nicest feet I've ever seen on a golden, and I'm into feet" (honestly, something I was told by someone who is a provisional judge) and on the next day not even get looked at because he doesn't have a real long, flowing coat and that particular judge might LIKE long, flowing coats. My dog may get first the following day because that judge LOVES sweet, loving faces and then the following day not get looked at because the judge really likes huge heads and bulky front legs. 
ALL the dogs I just described were to the standard. The conformation was correct on all of them. But what causes one dog to win over another one? The phase of the moon, the eye of the judge, the handler's mood, all kinds of things. If anyone could answer that question with 100% accuracy, their dogs would finish all the time in consecutive shows.


----------



## avincent52

> Are you asking for someone's opinon as to why they think Ch Stud Muffin is pretty? We do that all the time. Why is his conformation better than "some cute puppy mill puppy in a pet store?" Usually fairly obvious.


First off, it's not obvious to me (or to 99.7 percent of the world's population) exacty why and how Stud Muffin is conformationally superior to the pet store puppy.

And while I've read threads that discuss particular conformation topics, it's usually discussing a litter of puppies or a less-than champion grade dog that's often badly stacked in poor quality pictures. I've never seen anyone talk in detail about a really super dog who comes close to embodying the breed standard. (If it's there and I missed it, I'd love to see a link.)
More importantly, I (and many others, seemingly) are coming in to the middle of the conversation. Tahnee is talking about why a "sloping topline" is incorrect and I don't know exactly what a topline is, and what you mean by slope. (I look at the pic in her avatar and I see something that a math geek would call a "slope." What am I missing?) 

What I'm looking for is the Susan Boyle vs. Cindy Crawford-level comparison. And I was about to do it to prove a point, but quite frankly, it becomes offensive in a big hurry.

How about a Pontiac Aztek vs. a Ferrari Lusso?



















I'm not a car designer, nor is there a "conformation" standard for automobile styling, but I think I could explain to that smart 12-year old why the Aztek is considered one of the ugliest cars ever built and the Lusso is one of the most beautiful.

I'm really asking a very simple question. What are the most important aspects of the breed standard for a golden retriever and show me a high-quality dog that exemplifies them and how.


----------



## Romeo1

GoToLeep said:


> Now if I am looking at a full length picture of Cindy Crawford and one of Susan Boyle (Britains Got Talent) the differences are pretty easy to explain, but take Cindy Crawford next to Jennifer Anniston, a little more difficult. Both are beautiful (also intelligent, talented) women, but I can surely tell you differences between them. I like Cindy Crawford, my standard ... And I could TELL you in detail what those diifferences are as could anyone else who prefers Cindy. As could all the women on here tell you the differences between George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matthew McConaughey or whomever their "favorite" celebrity is as compared to another. It's not that hard to describe the differences between the preferable dog that are found to the most appealing to the standard.
> 
> Just my humble opinion!


So basically it is subjective? Like your example, you would choose Cindy Crawford because you find her more physically attractive whereas someone else might choose Jennifer because she is is brighter and more personable? Like that?


----------



## Pointgold

http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/showthread.php?t=46493&highlight=Understanding+Breed+Standard


I'm tired and crabby and while I really do enjoy discussing the breed standard, conformation, structure and movement, right now I am the charlatan who cannot explain my work to a 12 year. Writing a dissertation _on Moby Dick_ if you've read it, or being a curator at a museum and explaining a work of art from a slide, honestly, is not the same as explaining the structure of a dog that is not a flat image on a piece of paper.


----------



## gabbys mom

I think this link may be helpful: www.grcc.net/GRCC*Illustrated*Breed*Standard*.pdf

I tried to copy and paste certain sections, but I am just not technologically good like that. I would totally try and answer, but for someone who is just getting their first conformation puppy soon, that's the blind leading the blind  

I really think the question might be overbroad for people to sit down and answer- if you gave them seven pictures of ears, some of BISS dogs, some of a puppy mill dog, it would be easier to compare and understand ears. But the whole dog is a lot to type out - lotta time!


----------



## avincent52

Laura
First off, thanks for your honesty. "I'm tired and crabby" is a perfectly valid explanation.

That said, the last thing I was trying to be in starting this thread was confrontational. I was sincerely and genuinely hoping to get some experts to fill in the vast gaps of my knowledge so that I can read a post in this sub-forum and understand what a good topline looks like or how to identify proper (or superior) hip or front structure. 

And judging from the fact that we've got 10 other newbies posting on this thread, I'm not alone. (The first three replies were "I'd love to hear the answer too.")

The responses I've gotten have been, well, less than informative. We're 28 posts into the thread and I really don't know anything I didn't know before, with people having typed several thousand words--a New Yorker-length magazine feature--arguing about just how difficult this is to explain while not actually explaining anything.

If I'm asking a question you can't quite answer, please help me ask the right one. And with all due respect, if I can understand sub-atomic physics, I think I can understand the basics of dog conformation.

As I've said before, elsewhere on GRF, we get plenty of basic newbie questions, and on other boards it happens all the time. Usually the members revel in the chance to try to explain something they understand well and feel strongly about, and maybe even "convert" someone in the process. 

Maybe it's the way I'm asking the question. Here's something like the answer I was looking for. 

One of the first things that a show judge looks for in a golden is topline. Topline is the _______________ from the dog's __________. What's most important is the angle from _________. As you can see from the picture above, Stud Muffin's topline is quite straight if not completely parallel to the ground, while BYB's topline is much __________. Outside the show ring, topline is important because ______________. Flaws in a dog's topline can be concealed by careful grooming which is why judges will watch the topline as the dog moves and touch the dog to understand its underlying bone and muscle structure... 

Can anyone fill in the blanks for me, and add a few other basic things that judges look for when assessing a golden? 

thanks in advance
Allen


----------



## avincent52

gabbys mom said:


> I think this link may be helpful: www.grcc.net/GRCC*Illustrated*Breed*Standard*.pdf
> 
> I tried to copy and paste certain sections, but I am just not technologically good like that. I would totally try and answer, but for someone who is just getting their first conformation puppy soon, that's the blind leading the blind
> 
> I really think the question might be overbroad for people to sit down and answer- if you gave them seven pictures of ears, some of BISS dogs, some of a puppy mill dog, it would be easier to compare and understand ears. But the whole dog is a lot to type out - lotta time!


Gabby's Mom.
Thank you so much for providing that very informative link and your attempts to help us to figure this out. 

That very nice article doesn't answer all my questions (most of them are nuts and bolts like defining terms like "withers") but after spending 10 minutes reading it, I now have a much better understanding of how the conformation standard might be applied in practice. 

Good luck with your pup. Your enthusiasm is contagious. 

BTW, your link was dead. Try this:

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

thanks again, 
Allen


----------



## arcane

On* topline* ...I am going to post a couple pics of the same dog ...He has a dead level topline, but as you shall see from the photos, whether he is freebaiting or how *I* have him stacked, etc,can play a part in what he looks like on that given day at that particular moment ....not sure if this shall help you in any way but I hope it does ...In the freestacks and the first photo he looks to have a sloping topline, where in the hand stacked he is more correct...I think this illustrates that pictures can give a very different view of the same dog. Some good some not so good


----------



## Thor0918

I see said the blind man. Now I can go look at my dogs and check out what I think about their slope! Even though I may not be showing it's fun to compare! Thanks!


----------



## arcane

Thor0918 said:


> I see said the blind man. Now I can go look at my dogs and check out what I think about their slope! Even though I may not be showing it's fun to compare! Thanks!


Now I never see that *slope*  here in my yard, as he moves around or is relaxed...Incorrect stacking or whether the dog is on unlevel ground etc can distort what a photo comes out as...I am my dogs worst handicap!!! LOL


----------



## mylissyk

It would help me to know what the the terms themselves mean.

What is a:

Topline
Wither
Stifle
Pastern
Hock (and what does "well let down hock" mean?")

Etc.


----------



## arcane

mylissyk said:


> It would help me to know what the the terms themselves mean.
> 
> What is a:
> 
> Topline
> Wither
> Stifle
> Pastern
> Hock (and what does "well let down hock" mean?")
> 
> Etc.


this is where the Blue book would help anyone wishing to learn about individual parts of the dog, and basic structure ...well worth the $10 ....I read mine over and over and over


----------



## Bradh2238

So does this mean we aren't going to point out the differences between the Aztec and the Ferrari? How many points can we deduct for the Ferrari not having cup holders?


----------



## Emma&Tilly

arcane said:


> On* topline* ...I am going to post a couple pics of the same dog ...He has a dead level topline, but as you shall see from the photos, whether he is freebaiting or how *I* have him stacked, etc,can play a part in what he looks like on that given day at that particular moment ....not sure if this shall help you in any way but I hope it does ...In the freestacks and the first photo he looks to have a sloping topline, where in the hand stacked he is more correct...I think this illustrates that pictures can give a very different view of the same dog. Some good some not so good


Thanks so much, that was really informative...that was just the type of explanation and examples I was hoping would come out of this thread...

Allen...I have often wanted to start a thread like this and have mentioned it in just about every conformation topic I have ever tried to join in with but just never know how to start it off. I am just an eager bystander wishing to understand more about what the breed standard means relating to actual pictures with possibly a little explanation. I can totally understand how that is difficult for one subjective person to talk about this huge topic based on photos alone but any info/explanations/pictures at all would be great! I guess this discussion gets 300 times more complicated when you throw in the conformation of goldens from different countries! Maybe some Europeans involved in conformation could add some of their expertise to the mix...(just to get a view from a different perspective)


----------



## Pointgold

*Judging The Golden Retriever*​*By Jeffrey G. Pepper *​One of the most popular breeds today both in the ring and outside, the Golden Retriever entry always seems large in comparison to many other breeds. Indeed, it often is, and as a result the numbers needed for a major are high. The question is, how does one correctly sort through the large entry to find the best dogs. Hopefully, this discussion of the standard will help you when you judge the breed. 
It has always been my feeling that in order to judge a breed properly, one must know the history of the breed and its original function. The Golden Retriever was developed in the late 1860’s in Great Britain as both a land and water retriever. Like all members of the Sporting Group, he started out as a functional working dog. A descendant of the same stock that produced the other four retrievers, all of which were created to retrieve game on both land and in water. The Golden traces its history back to a cross between a yellow wavy-coated retriever (probably what we now call a Flat Coated Retriever) and a now extinct breed called the Tweed Water Spaniel. The sire was the only yellow in a litter of blacks. The four bitches produced in this litter are the root stock from which all Goldens descend. Unusually for his day, Lord Tweedmouth ,the originator of the breed, followed a careful plan of line breeding to develop the Golden. His pedigrees are available for study today. Because of the excellent breed records kept by Lord Tweedmouth, we know that with but a few judicious outcrosses, all Goldens can be traced back to this one litter. 
When judging the Golden, one must keep this heritage in mind. The breed standard states quite clearly that the Golden is “Primarily a hunting dog….” When looking at the dogs in the ring, the judge must always keep in mind the question "does this dog look capable of spending a full day working in the field?” In order to make this judgement, it goes without saying that every Golden judge will find it helpful to watch a Golden Retriever doing what he was developed to do at least one time prior to judging the breed A dog that does not look like it could hunt should be faulted. 
The Golden is a medium sized dog, with males ranging from 23 to 24 inches at the withers and weighing 65 to 75 pounds, while bitches stand 21 ½ to 22 ½ inches and weigh 55 to 65 pounds. A deviation in height of more than one inch either way is a disqualification. This is not a heavily boned, nor clumsy breed. In proportion, the Golden is slightly longer than tall in a ratio of 12 to 11. While one may occasionally see a Golden that is too square, you are much more likely to see a dog that is too long in body. Personally, I will be more forgiving of a bitch that is slightly long in body than I would be of a longer dog, as I feel this extra length allows the bitch to better carry a litter. 
The standard asks for a broad skull that is only slightly arched laterally and longitudinally without a prominent forehead or occipital bone. The head should appear somewhat flat on top. In my opinion, there are a number of problems with heads in the breed today. Many Goldens seem to have too round a skull, sometimes giving an apple-headed appearance to the head. Others have a skull that is too narrow in comparison to it’s length, or show too much slope toward the sides on the top of the head. The stop should be well defined, yet many dogs you will see in the ring have much too gradual a stop. The muzzle should be nearly as long as the skull in order to allow the dog to carry a large game bird. A short “bear like” muzzle might be cute looking, but it is quite incorrect and not in keeping with the function of the breed. A Golden with a muzzle that is not straight in profile (one that shows a Roman nose, for example) or one with heavy flews is also incorrect. The lips should show good pigmentation. Overall, the Golden’s head should present a soft, intelligent and kindly expression. It should never be narrow in skull, short in muzzle or have a harsh looking expression. It is, unfortunately, not all that unusual to see heads lacking in breed type. 
Properly sized and placed eyes and ears help define the correct soft Golden expression. The eyes should be fairly large and dark brown, the darker the better, with a medium brown acceptable. Light colored eyes seriously detract from the correct soft Golden expression. There should be good pigmentation around the eye. In shape, the eye appears to be slightly almond shaped. Round eyes, slant eyes, and narrow, triangular eyes, all of which can be seen in the ring today, should all be faulted as they also detract from the correct expression. 
You may often note relatively long and large ears on some Goldens in your ring. Ears should be short. When pulled forward the tip of the ear should just cover the eye. The ear is set on high, just above the eye when at rest, and should be carried close to the cheek. Ears that are too large or set too low on the head allow water to enter the ear when the dog is swimming. Low set, hound-like ears and ears that are too long should be faulted. 
The teeth should meet in a scissors bite. An undershot or overshot bite is a disqualification. You will sometimes see a misalignment of the lower incisors, which is common in certain lines. This, if it affects the bite, is undesirable, as is a level bite. However, neither should be confused with an undershot or overshot bite. Full dentition is required under the standard with obvious gaps to be faulted. This does not, however, mean you need to open the mouth and count teeth. What is desired is that an obvious gap caused by missing molars or pre-molars be considered a fault with the seriousness dependent on the size of the gap – that is the large gap is more faulty than the minor one. In my experience, this is not a problem you will see that frequently in the ring. When examining the dog one must lift the lips on the sides of the mouth to check side dentition so as to insure there are no such gaps. 
The body of the Golden should not appear coarse or overdone. The neck is “medium long, merging gradually into well laid back shoulder, giving a sturdy, muscular appearance.” Remember, the neck needs to be long enough to pick up a bird with out the dog having to stoop to reach the bird, and strong enough for the dog to carry the bird easily. The backline is strong and level from withers to slightly sloping croup whether standing or moving. A sloping, setter-like topline might make a pretty picture, but it is undesirable, although you might see it in your ring. There is little tuckup and the loin is short. The tail does not come directly off the back but springs from the croup. It should be noticeably thicker at the base than at the tip. The function of the tail is to act as a rudder both in the water and on land, not as a sail. As such, the tail should be carried with a merry action, level with the back or with a slight upward curve. It should never be over the back nor between the legs. 
As in all sporting dogs, overall balance is critical and is more important than individual strong or weak points. Angulation in front should match that of the rear assembly. I’m sure I need not go into correct structure of the body here. As with so many other breeds, straight shoulders and an upper arm that is too short, are problems with many Goldens. Another problem that has recently developed is the Golden that is too short on leg, giving an almost dwarfed appearance to the dog when seen in profile. As a swimming dog, the Golden should be well up on leg with a deep body. The chest should be broad with a well developed forechest. The feathering on the front of the dog may give the appearance of a good chest, but this must be checked by the hand when going over the dog. 
The color of coat of a Golden should be rich, lustrous golden of various shades. Feathering is often a lighter color than the body coat. The shade of gold should not be a consideration when judging the breed, so long as it is within the requirements of the standard. Basically a coat that is so light that it appears to be cream-colored (what I tend to call a “vanilla retriever”) or so dark that it approaches an Irish Setter red should be faulted. After all, the breed is called _*Golden*_ Retriever. You might even see the occasional Golden whose coat almost appears brown. This should be considered a serious fault, as should any off color such as black or white which should be faulted as well. Don’t confuse graying on the muzzle or in the coat of an older dog as being a fault. In my experience, the darker colored dogs tend to gray later than the lighter colored ones. You might encounter a dog that has started to gray in your open class, and this should not be considered faulty. By the way, I have never judged a class where the only way to reach a decision between two dogs was based on color. I doubt I ever will. 
Coat can become somewhat of an issue with many Goldens today, but not in terms of color. The standard is very clear in asking for dense and water-repellent coat with good undercoat. The outer coat should be “firm and resilient, neither coarse nor silky, lying close to the body.” It may be straight or wavy, with neither preferred over the other. Despite what you see in the ring today, only moderate feathering is called for in the standard, with excessive length considered to be “very undesirable”. In other words, too much coat or feathering, though eye-catching, is a fault. In terms of grooming, a Golden Retriever’s outline should never be altered by cutting or clipping the coat. It should always look natural. Remember the correct coat lies flat against the body, not standing out from it. 
It will appear that many of the exhibitors in your ring today have not read the section of the breed standard regarding coat. As a result, what has become an issue for many serious breeders is the _quality_ and _quantity_ of the coat. A soft, fluffy, profuse coat can be very pretty looking, but it is very incorrect. The same is true of excessive feathering on the body, tail and legs. All this hair can be quite striking in the ring, but long, soft coat is a clear detriment to the intended function of the breed. Remember, the Golden is first and foremost a hunting dog intended to be used on both land and water. On land, excessive coat can get caught on brush. It will tend to pick up all manner of debris that can take hours to brush out of the coat. In the water, excessive coat, especially soft coat, will absorb a considerable amount of water, making it more work for the dog to swim. He will tire much more easily as a result of dragging all that extra weight around. Yet I see many exhibitors blowing out the coat of their dogs, thereby making what might have been a correct water-resistant jacket into a totally incorrect open coat. This is done in the name of beauty and is often incorrectly rewarded by judges. Please remember, this is the _exact opposite_ of what is called for in the breed’s standard. Breeders do not want to see the Golden’s coat go the way of the Cocker Spaniel. 
Some exhibitors whose concern is winning may even breed for this excessive coat. They will excuse the amount of coat, saying that Goldens with heavy coat are what win in the ring today, or that many Goldens are now used for a number of occupations other than hunting, and therefore the amount of coat should not be a strong consideration when judging the breed. I must disagree. Not only does the breed standard fault excessive coats, this extra coat can be a burden to those who do not show their dogs. For example, Goldens are often used as assistance dogs to the blind, deaf and handicapped. These owners certainly do not need excessive coats to worry about. The same is true of Goldens used in drug detection, bomb detection and many other useful activities. Needless to say, Goldens used as hunting dogs or obedience dogs do not benefit from excessive coat either. And, as with all pure-bred dogs, most Goldens are sold as pets. Pet owners certainly do not need the additional work created by an excessive coat. Therefore, excess coat should not be rewarded in the show ring. 
As is true in so many other breeds, some exhibitors tend to move their dogs too rapidly and do so on a tight lead. As you already know, this results in movement faults. The standard asks that dogs be “shown on a loose lead to reflect true gait”. It is good ring procedure to follow this recommendation. If they are moving too fast, do not be afraid to ask exhibitors to slow down and use a loose lead. And, please remember that correct reach and drive is not related to the rapidity with which the legs move, despite what some exhibitors seem to think! 
Finally, a word about temperament. The Golden Retriever’s popularity is a direct result of the breed’s wonderful temperament. The breed has long been recommended as a family pet by most experts and for good reason. The Golden Standard says the dogs should be “Friendly, reliable, and trustworthy. Quarrelsomeness or hostility towards other dogs or people in normal situations, or an unwarranted show of timidity or nervousness, is not in keeping with Golden Retriever character.” This is not a hyperactive “wired” breed. The breed has lost a major and most important characteristic if it looses it’s friendly, outgoing nature. Please, do not reward incorrect temperament in the ring. 
This article first appeared in _The Bulletin_, the publication of the Dog Judges Association of America.


----------



## Pointgold

*BACK:* The portion of the topline between the loin and the withers. 
*CROUP:* The muscular area above and around where the tail connects to the body. 
*DEWCLAW:* A fifth claw which is located in the inside of the front feet, and is higher than the other toes. Some dewclaws are removed as a puppy to prevent injuries (dewclaws can get ripped or torn - always keep your golden's dewclaws trimmed short). 
*HOCK:* The joint on the rear of the back legs, between the rear pastern and stifle. 
*LOIN:* The section of the body located on both sides of the backbone between the ribs and the hips. 
*MUZZLE:* The front part of the jaws. 
*PASTERN:* The section of the leg below the knee of the front leg or below the hock of the hind leg. 
*STIFLE:* The knee joint of the hind leg. "Hindquarter Angulation" refers to the angle formed at this joint. 
*STOP:* The frontal portion of the skull between the eyes and the top of the head. 
*WITHERS:* Located just behind the base of the neck. A dog's height is measured at the withers.


----------



## Thor0918

arcane said:


> Now I never see that *slope*  here in my yard, as he moves around or is relaxed...Incorrect stacking or whether the dog is on unlevel ground etc can distort what a photo comes out as...I am my dogs worst handicap!!! LOL


 I was going to take a picture of Leo his slope looked perfect. Although,,,, he was laying in the bathroom against the tile wall. Perfectly straight


----------



## avincent52

Bradh2238 said:


> So does this mean we aren't going to point out the differences between the Aztec and the Ferrari? How many points can we deduct for the Ferrari not having cup holders?


Who drinks in a Ferrari?

But if Lusso owners are bemoaning the lack of cupholders, I'll be happy to find a minty Aztek to trade. 

allen


----------



## Thor0918

Wow! Now I'm learning all kinds of stuff. I love it!


----------



## avincent52

Thanks so much, everyone. Now I really understand a few things, and at least know what I don't know.

Heather,
One question about the very interesting topline discussion. 
Upon looking at the photos, I assumed that topline referred to the angle between the neck and the back. In the first photo, there's relatively little angle. In the last photo, the angle is quite pronounced.

But then I found this diagram of a pit bull (link below) that suggests that I'm wrong and that the topline is a straight line drawn from the top of the dog's head to its tailbone. 

Not to be stupid about this, but the dog's head is going to be higher than it's butt, so every dog's topline will slope, wouldn't it? In short, what am I missing?

http://www.apbtconformation.com/topline.htm


----------



## Pointgold

avincent52 said:


> Thanks so much, everyone. Now I really understand a few things, and at least know what I don't know.
> 
> Heather,
> One question about the very interesting topline discussion.
> Does topline really refer to the angle between the neck and the back? In the first photo, there's relatively little angle. In the last photo, the angle is quite pronounced.
> Am I focusing on the right thing, here?
> 
> allen


 
As in the post with the photo of the Golden with the lines pointing to the parts and the parts identified the topline refers to the "back". Which is the are between the withers and the loin. In general terms "topline" includes that line and the tail when held out.


----------



## arcane

avincent52 said:


> Thanks so much, everyone. Now I really understand a few things, and at least know what I don't know.
> 
> Heather,
> One question about the very interesting topline discussion.
> Does topline really refer to the angle between the neck and the back? In the first photo, there's relatively little angle. In the last photo, the angle is quite pronounced.
> Am I focusing on the right thing, here?
> 
> allen


_Laura posted the illustration of the individual parts _...no the topline is the back of the dog, what I was trying to point out with my pics is that there are varying factors that can distort what is or isn't ...The 1st pic shows a very sloped topline, the bottom photo shows his true topline. If a judge was looking at him such as he was in the 1st photo he would be faulted for the degree of slope ...


----------



## Pointgold

Head: Length of muzzle approximately equals the length of skull.
Height: The distance from withers to elbow should approximately equal the distance from elbow to ground.
Height to Length ratio: approximately 11:12 when measured from withers to ground and from prosternum to
pinbone.
Bone lengths: The scapula and humerus should be approximately equal in length, as should the pelvis, femur
and tibia/fibula in the rear. As a guideline for the eye, the angulation between the scapula and humerus and
pelvis and femur should approach ninety degrees.
A vertical line drawn from the pinbone to the ground should drop through the nails of the rear foot.
A dog with the correct proportions and angulation can thereby achieve static balance


*It should go without saying that this is as regards to a dog within the breed standard for height. Just because the distance of your dogs wither to elbow is equally distant as from elbow to ground and your dog is 29" from wither to ground does not mean that he is correct.


----------



## tippykayak

Hooray! This thread just took off into exactly what I was hoping for. Thanks everybody for your patience and information.


----------



## avincent52

Thanks again everyone, these references and examples are exactly what many of us are looking for. 

So in short, Heather and Laura, the topline is essentially the back extending to the tail, and it should be straight and as level as possible, but on any golden it's never going to be completely parallel to the ground when the dog is stacked?

(And I shouldn't trust what I read on pitbull sites?)

thanks again for sharing
Allen


----------



## tippykayak

Here's a question that's been on my mind. I know a Golden can have an undesirably round eye, but what does that really mean? Comet's eyes, for example, are less heavy-lidded than a lot of the show dogs I see, and I think they may be rounder. Are Comet's eyes undesirably round? If not, what does that really mean?

And yes, I can take criticism of my non-showing, non-breeding dog. He also needs his ear hair thinned.


----------



## arcane

tippykayak said:


> Here's a question that's been on my mind. I know a Golden can have an undesirably round eye, but what does that really mean? Comet's eyes, for example, are less heavy-lidded than a lot of the show dogs I see, and I think they may be rounder. Are Comet's eyes undesirably round? If not, what does that really mean?
> 
> And yes, I can take criticism of my non-showing, non-breeding dog. He also needs his ear hair thinned.


_*I personally don't see a problem with your boys eye.*.. _here again I am going to send a pic of a smaller than ideal eye, my poor Bos is being picked apart piece by piece!!! lol see us breeder snobs can look at our guys without rose colored glasses!!!


----------



## Pointgold

#*13*  







11-23-2008, 06:46 PM 
*Pointgold*








You're kidding, right?
  Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,836 
Images: 28


*The Golden Eye* 
This is a good illustration as to correct eyes. "Reptilian" eyes would be too light, and either "squinty" or overly round.
Attached Thumbnails 

__________________








_You can tell the quality of a person by how they treat animals._ 
​


----------



## Pointgold

tippykayak said:


> Here's a question that's been on my mind. I know a Golden can have an undesirably round eye, but what does that really mean? Comet's eyes, for example, are less heavy-lidded than a lot of the show dogs I see, and I think they may be rounder. Are Comet's eyes undesirably round? If not, what does that really mean?
> 
> And yes, I can take criticism of my non-showing, non-breeding dog. He also needs his ear hair thinned.


 
I don't see it as being incorrect in shape. Somewhat light in color and this is more emphasized by lighter eyerims.


----------



## tippykayak

Pointgold said:


> I don't see it as being incorrect in shape. Somewhat light in color and this is more emphasized by lighter eyerims.


Thanks! And what's haw when you're talking about eyes?


----------



## arcane

tippykayak said:


> Thanks! And what's haw when you're talking about eyes?


Haw is any white showing ...more so in dogs with loose rims


----------



## Thor0918

arcane said:


> _*I personally don't see a problem with your boys eye.*.. _here again I am going to send a pic of a smaller than ideal eye, my poor Bos is being picked apart piece by piece!!! lol see us breeder snobs can look at our guys without rose colored glasses!!!


 And I have to say I love the look of those eyes. Maybe even more that the rounder eye. Shows what I know.:doh:


----------



## Pointgold

arcane said:


> Haw is any white showing ...more so in dogs with loose rims


 
Not exactly. The haw is actually the nictating membrane, or "third eyelid". In dogs and cats it is usually only seen if there is an injury, or illness, or if the conformation of the eyelids are incorrect.


----------



## tippykayak

arcane said:


> Haw is any white showing ...more so in dogs with loose rims


So Comet doesn't have any, even though you can see white sometimes depending on where he's looking or what face he's making? Haw would only be a problem if it showed when the dog had a typical expression and was looking forward?

Like in this picture, Comet is pleading with me to take him back out in the snow, and I can see a little haw around the edge. A fault? Or just normal?


----------



## Pointgold

Thor0918 said:


> And I have to say I love the look of those eyes. Maybe even more that the rounder eye. Shows what I know.:doh:


I dont' mind a dog "squinting" when happy and excited, but if the eye looks like that normally, it is too small. A too small eye will compromise the dogs vision.


----------



## arcane

Thor0918 said:


> And I have to say I love the look of those eyes. Maybe even more that the rounder eye. Shows what I know.:doh:


While I love my guy to pieces ...I do think his eye is a tad small, and yes he squints as well!!! LOL Now with that said he doesn't seem to be producing it


----------



## arcane

Pointgold said:


> Not exactly. The haw is actually the nictating membrane, or "third eyelid". In dogs and cats it is usually only seen if there is an injury, or illness, or if the conformation of the eyelids are incorrect.


thanks Laura...I should have just let you respond!!!!!!! :


----------



## avincent52

Pointgold said:


> Not exactly. The haw is actually the nictating membrane, or "third eyelid". In dogs and cats it is usually only seen if there is an injury, or illness, or if the conformation of the eyelids are incorrect.


AKA the Zombie Dog Eye that I show the kids when Tessie is sleeping.
Ewwwwwwww! Grooooooooss!

allen


----------



## hotel4dogs

A question on stacking in the ring....I see a few goldens stacked with their back legs pulled pretty far back. Doesn't this give an incorrect picture of the "line" described below? It certainly gives an awful impression of their topline.
Is this just the work of incorrect amateurs?




Pointgold said:


> A vertical line drawn from the pinbone to the ground should drop through the nails of the rear foot.


----------



## hotel4dogs

can parts of this thread be re-done into a sticky? some REALLY good information here.


----------



## rictic

omg,just a thought, but how we all stack up in conformation?


rictic:

too tall and angular.

face out of proportion to head

teeth, some acrylic with underbite.

legs: way too long and skinny.

feet: see coco the clown.

well at least the dogs all stack better than me.


----------



## Pointgold

hotel4dogs said:


> A question on stacking in the ring....I see a few goldens stacked with their back legs pulled pretty far back. Doesn't this give an incorrect picture of the "line" described below? It certainly gives an awful impression of their topline.
> Is this just the work of incorrect amateurs?


IMO a lot of dogs way are over-stretched. And it does seem to be a novice mistake. The rear pasterns, when the dog is viewed from the side, should be vertical - STRAIGHT up and down -
*l* not *\. *And, when viewed from the rear, the pasterns should be STRAIGHT and parallel - *l l *not */ \ .*
A good handler will know how each dog needs to be set up to be shown to his best advantange.


----------



## hotel4dogs

Thanks, that's what I *thought*, but I'm too new to it to really know these things for sure. It seems like that's how it should be, because that's how he stands naturally when he's in the yard just hanging out.



Pointgold said:


> IMO a lot of dogs way are over-stretched. And it does seem to be a novice mistake. The rear pasterns, when the dog is viewed from the side, should be vertical - STRAIGHT up and down -
> *l* not *\. *And, when viewed from the rear, the pasterns should be STRAIGHT and parallel - *l l *not */ \ .*
> A good handler will know how each dog needs to be set up to be shown to his best advantange.


----------



## arcane

rictic said:


> omg,just a thought, but how we all stack up in conformation?
> 
> 
> rictic:
> 
> too tall and angular.
> 
> face out of proportion to head
> 
> teeth, some acrylic with underbite.
> 
> legs: way too long and skinny.
> 
> feet: see coco the clown.
> 
> well at least the dogs all stack better than me.


there are many of us that should have been spayed or neutered at maturity! :


----------



## Pointgold

hotel4dogs said:


> can parts of this thread be re-done into a sticky? some REALLY good information here.


 
For as much fuss was made, I'm glad _someone _got something out of it! (Pretty much all of it was discussed in other threads, too.)


----------



## goldengirls550

Pointgold said:


> *BACK:* The portion of the topline between the loin and the withers.
> *CROUP:* The muscular area above and around where the tail connects to the body.
> *DEWCLAW:* A fifth claw which is located in the inside of the front feet, and is higher than the other toes. Some dewclaws are removed as a puppy to prevent injuries (dewclaws can get ripped or torn - always keep your golden's dewclaws trimmed short).
> *HOCK:* The joint on the rear of the back legs, between the rear pastern and stifle.
> *LOIN:* The section of the body located on both sides of the backbone between the ribs and the hips.
> *MUZZLE:* The front part of the jaws.
> *PASTERN:* The section of the leg below the knee of the front leg or below the hock of the hind leg.
> *STIFLE:* The knee joint of the hind leg. "Hindquarter Angulation" refers to the angle formed at this joint.
> *STOP:* The frontal portion of the skull between the eyes and the top of the head.
> *WITHERS:* Located just behind the base of the neck. A dog's height is measured at the withers.


Laura, thank you SOO much for your post and the other one (I thought it would be nice if I didn't quote the long post). I spent forever taking my time reading and examining both! I love them! I'm gonna print them out now!


----------



## avincent52

Pointgold said:


> For as much fuss was made, I'm glad _someone _got something out of it! (Pretty much all of it was discussed in other threads, too.)


Laura
Thanks again. I think that a whole bunch of us learned a lot, and while I'm sure that most of this was covered somewhere at some time, it probably wasn't assembled in one place.

Hope you're feeling less tired and grouchy.
Allen


----------



## Lucky's mom

I really appreciate this thread! I know Lucky has less then good conformation mainly because of the way he moves, trots and walks. But I never could put my "finger" on it. Now I know more of what to look for.


----------



## GoToLeep

Very good information flowing in this thread. I am learning a lot and taking notes. Thank to the experts and knowledgeable members for sharing.


----------



## molmotta

I think this is a great thread even for novice show people like myself. Often I find the problem I have is in some of the terminology and interpretation of the terms. I hope the senior members here can help...

Let's say I would pick a discussion on the head and I post here two examples.
#1 









#2









"_The head should appear somewhat flat on top. ... Many Goldens seem to have too round a skull, sometimes giving an apple-headed appearance to the head._"

Would these two pictures be a good illustration of what is being discussed by Jeffrey Pepper?


----------



## avincent52

"who you calling an apple head?"

But seriously, nice pics. 
A totally uninformed speculation: In looking at the ears on the two dogs, I wonder if that doesn't have something to do with it. Dog #1s ears seem more relaxed.

allen


----------



## hotel4dogs

a novice taking a guess here....
Are dog #1's ears too long? The standard calls for them to be short, and just touch the inside corner of the eyes. It looks to me like those ears ae too long, and possibly set a bit too low.
Dog #2's ears may be set a bit too high.
The muzzle on Dog #2 seems a bit too narrow in front or possibly too short, something seems not quite right with it, but that may well be just the angle of the photo.
Ok experts, how did I do???


----------



## molmotta

Here is another shot of #1. The ears are more "less relaxed"? :









Is that "_too round a skull_" or perfectly normal "_broad in skull, slightly arched laterally & longitudinally..._"?

Dog #2 again (ignore the tongue - he's just making a face at the camera)









Does his ears still look too high set?

"_The ear is set on high, just above the eye when at rest, and should be carried close to the cheek._"


----------



## AquaClaraCanines

Not one dog is perfect... and what one educated person thinks is an ideal dog may not be another equally qualified person's cup of tea at all. This makes such a discussion very difficult.


----------



## hotel4dogs

PLEASE remember I said I'm just a novice MAKING A GUESS, but I think the ears in #1 are set correctly, and in #2 they still look set too high. The standard calls for them to be set just above the eye, as in photo #1. In photo #2 they are set quite a bit above the eye, giving the appearance of a very flat skull.
And all of it is probably just the way the photo was taken!!!!




molmotta said:


> Here is another shot of #1. The ears are more "less relaxed"? :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that "_too round a skull_" or perfectly normal "_broad in skull, slightly arched laterally & longitudinally..._"?
> 
> Dog #2 again (ignore the tongue - he's just making a face at the camera)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does his ears still look too high set?
> 
> "_The ear is set on high, just above the eye when at rest, and should be carried close to the cheek._"


----------



## hotel4dogs

Here's a photo of a fairly well known golden stud that shows his ear set, for comparison. I don't think I'm violating any copyrights because the breeder emailed the photo to me, but if anyone thinks I am please let me know and I'll remove the photo.


----------



## arcane

Check size of ears by taking it and covering the eye...proper ears should cover. If they are too small they won't and if too large you could probably cover both eyes!!!


----------



## Finn's Fan

Heather, a question for you since you're picking on Boston's eyes Any other breeders, please feel free to weigh in with your experience/opinion. Whenever I go to a dog show (simply as an observer), it seems that many judges are awarding ribbons and points to dogs and bitches whose eyes look just like Bos's. Is this a current fad in the golden's appearance? I agree with you that they appear too small (to my very untrained eye), but I also think that a number of judges reward incorrect height (as in, I think many winning animals are too short)Finn, definitely not a show dog, is breed standard at 23 1/2 inches at the withers, and a pound light for dogs at 64 pounds. He looks like a giant compared to some of the dogs I see winning in the ring. What's up with that and the small/squinty eye look?


----------



## hotel4dogs

Just a comment on the size issue, it might depend on your area. It seems like here (in the MW) the judges prefer the bigger, more substantial goldens. Some of the ones being put up are at the very top end of the standard, close to DQ height (if not over it...).




Finn's Fan said:


> Heather, a question for you since you're picking on Boston's eyes Any other breeders, please feel free to weigh in with your experience/opinion. Whenever I go to a dog show (simply as an observer), it seems that many judges are awarding ribbons and points to dogs and bitches whose eyes look just like Bos's. Is this a current fad in the golden's appearance? I agree with you that they appear too small (to my very untrained eye), but I also think that a number of judges reward incorrect height (as in, I think many winning animals are too short)Finn, definitely not a show dog, is breed standard at 23 1/2 inches at the withers, and a pound light for dogs at 64 pounds. He looks like a giant compared to some of the dogs I see winning in the ring. What's up with that and the small/squinty eye look?


----------



## arcane

Finn's Fan said:


> Heather, a question for you since you're picking on Boston's eyes Any other breeders, please feel free to weigh in with your experience/opinion. Whenever I go to a dog show (simply as an observer), it seems that many judges are awarding ribbons and points to dogs and bitches whose eyes look just like Bos's. Is this a current fad in the golden's appearance? I agree with you that they appear too small (to my very untrained eye), but I also think that a number of judges reward incorrect height (as in, I think many winning animals are too short)Finn, definitely not a show dog, is breed standard at 23 1/2 inches at the withers, and a pound light for dogs at 64 pounds. He looks like a giant compared to some of the dogs I see winning in the ring. What's up with that and the small/squinty eye look?


Well although I don't prefer Boston's smaller eye, I certainly wouldn't throw him away b/c of it...there are many things much worse than the size of an eye, I do look closely at the girls I am breeding him too, I try not to breed like to like, He is on the shorter end of the standard as well, he is 22 - 1/2 in at the shoulder, NO dog is perfect, you have to take what you have and breed to improve, not every girl is a candidate for my guy, I think overall his good qualities outway his faults ...but again that is just my humble opinion!


----------



## Ljilly28

hotel4dogs said:


> Here's a photo of a fairly well known golden stud that shows his ear set, for comparison. I don't think I'm violating any copyrights because the breeder emailed the photo to me, but if anyone thinks I am please let me know and I'll remove the photo.


This isnt a conformation comment, but just an affectionate observation. Grampa Star has one of the same little idiosynchratic quirks as grandchildren Gracie, Tally, GabeJR, and Eve- the occasional appearance of one eye being a different size than the other bc of funny comical expressions and eyebrow lifting, lol. So many of Star's puppies and grandpuppies have his exact shape of eye too. I don't know if it is correct, but it is very distinctive.


----------



## Ljilly28

avincent52 said:


> While people write whole dissertations on Melville, I'm sure you could give me two paragraphs on what _Moby Dick_ is about and why it's important as a way to start the conversation.
> 
> Lol: Here is a student's rough draft, Allen
> 
> Deep-Divers: Melville’s Spiritual Pilgrims
> 
> _I love all men who dive; any fish can swim near the surface In 1849, but it takes a great whale to go down stairs five miles or more; and if he don’t attain the bottom, why, all the lead in Galena can’t fashion the plummet that will. I’m not just speaking of Mr. Emerson now—but of the whole corps of thought-divers that have been diving and coming up again with bloodshot eyes since the world began._—Herman Melville, Letter to Evert Duycinck, 1849
> 
> Herman Melville’s protagonists refuse to “swim near the surface” of things. Unable to accept simplistic or whitewashed explanations of their worlds, they plunge themselves into the murkiest realms of human experience. These “thought-divers” are all eagerness to see and understand, to forsake what Melville calls “a common happiness” in order to undertake epistemological journeys. Ishmael, stagnating on shore and yielding to a despair like November in his soul, embarks on a seafaring journey, believing that he will be enlightened in a grand sense if he watches and comprehends Ahab's motivations. However, when the journey ends, Ishmael is not transformed. That is when he utters the first words of the novel, and the crucial quest begins: to re-travel the same waters through language, to name. Through Ishmael's hopeful retelling of his tale, Melville contends that living a journey is not enough: stories must be told in order to illuminate human truths.
> 
> Ishmael stares into the face of Ahab's evil, sometimes left in wonder, sometimes stricken with terror, sometimes healed by grace. All Melville’s protagonists have been maimed and imperfectly healed, and Ishmael spends his narrative bravely exploring the mysteries he knows can cripple him or bring him to his feet in reveries of prayer. Unfortunately, Melville’s characters are nearly always left to wonder rather than being delivered into spiritual certainties, and Ishmael is no different. Melville no more rewards him for his writing than for his real experience of a journey by sea. Despite all Ishmael's eagerness to understand, he is left Job-like, in the dark. Deep-diving, the quest for the deepest possible comprehension of human experience, is something Melville requires of Ishmael yet also punishes him for. Deep-divers suffer yet may not turn away from the sea.


----------



## Pointgold

molmotta said:


> Here is another shot of #1. The ears are more "less relaxed"? :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that "_too round a skull_" or perfectly normal "_broad in skull, slightly arched laterally & longitudinally..._"?
> 
> Dog #2 again (ignore the tongue - he's just making a face at the camera)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does his ears still look too high set?
> 
> "_The ear is set on high, just above the eye when at rest, and should be carried close to the cheek._"


 
I prefer #1 and feel his head is the better of the two. His head is not "too round" (at least not as seen in the photos) and has a softer expression. Although his ears are set well, they are large. 
Dog #2 appears to be lacking in backskull, and his higher earset gives the impression of it being worse than it probably is.


----------



## Zoeys mom

What a great thread. Very informative.


----------



## molmotta

Pointgold said:


> Dog #2 appears to be lacking in backskull, and his higher earset gives the impression of it being worse than it probably is.


Can you elaborate on "lacking in backskull"? The article by Jeffrey Pepper had really piqued my interest in GR's head shape. 

Hotel4dogs - dont worry. I'm just trying to understand that particular statement made by the writer, "_The head should appear somewhat flat on top._" I know I seem to be nit-picking, but really, I'm just trying to analyse what he is trying to put across. 

Arcane - #2's ears are just nice in size, reaching the inner corner of the same eye... Darn photos... :bowl:


----------



## honeysmum

What a great and informative thread,boy it took some getting through, but good to hear opinions of novices and experts alike.


----------



## AmbikaGR

Finn's Fan said:


> Heather, a question for you since you're picking on Boston's eyes Any other breeders, please feel free to weigh in with your experience/opinion. Whenever I go to a dog show (simply as an observer), it seems that many judges are awarding ribbons and points to dogs and bitches whose eyes look just like Bos's. Is this a current fad in the golden's appearance? I agree with you that they appear too small (to my very untrained eye), but I also think that a number of judges reward incorrect height (as in, I think many winning animals are too short)Finn, definitely not a show dog, is breed standard at 23 1/2 inches at the withers, and a pound light for dogs at 64 pounds. He looks like a giant compared to some of the dogs I see winning in the ring. What's up with that and the small/squinty eye look?


 
The thing to remember is the judge is judging the entire dog. So although a dog may appear to have an obvious flaw to you (smallish eyes) it may be far superior in many other areas that are not as obvious to you, (front, coat texture, condition). That is why it is so hard to judge a dog by a picture.


----------



## arcane

AmbikaGR said:


> The thing to remember is the judge is judging the entire dog. So although a dog may appear to have an obvious flaw to you (smallish eyes) it may be far superior in many other areas that are not as obvious to you, (front, coat texture, condition). That is why it is so hard to judge a dog by a picture.


Exactly Hank! Why I shared the pics I did, Pictures can be very deceiving, on more that one occasion I have chosen a stud dog on pictures alone, & when arriving for the breeding was astonished that the dog in front of me was the same one!!!! An example was when I bred to Faera's Destiny Kodiak Kid, He looked like such a huge dog in his photos, when I got to Nancy's this wonderful moderate boy met me at the door with his woobie, I asked Nancy, "now who is this lovely dog" She laughed and said "why that is KODI"  He was smaller than I imagined but boy oh boy was he a package!!!! I loved that dog!!!!!!!


----------



## Tahnee GR

arcane said:


> Exactly Hank! Why I shared the pics I did, Pictures can be very deceiving, on more that one occasion I have chosen a stud dog on pictures alone, & when arriving for the breeding was astonished that the dog in front of me was the same one!!!! An example was when I bred to Faera's Destiny Kodiak Kid, He looked like such a huge dog in his photos, when I got to Nancy's this wonderful moderate boy met me at the door with his woobie, I asked Nancy, "now who is this lovely dog" She laughed and said "why that is KODI"  He was smaller than I imagined but boy oh boy was he a package!!!! I loved that dog!!!!!!!


Oh, I loved Kodi too! Nancy told me that the girl I sent to her was the only one who had ever been able to escape from her kennel set up  She was one of many excape artists I bred :doh:


----------



## tippykayak

Ljilly28 said:


> Lol: Here is a student's rough draft, Allen
> 
> Deep-Divers: Melville’s Spiritual Pilgrims


That's really quite an insight your student had. Woah.


----------



## Pointgold

AmbikaGR said:


> The thing to remember is the judge is judging the entire dog. So although a dog may appear to have an obvious flaw to you (smallish eyes) it may be far superior in many other areas that are not as obvious to you, (front, coat texture, condition). That is why it is so hard to judge a dog by a picture.


 
Fault judging. Focusing on a dog's faults without considering the virtues.


----------



## hotel4dogs

LOL, Tito does that too! 
If you look at my Avatar of Tito, and the photo of Grampa Star, you can see a very strong family resemblance (more so if it were a good photo of Tito!). The Faera dogs have very distinctive heads, IMO, and the males seem to throw very strong genes to the offspring.




Ljilly28 said:


> This isnt a conformation comment, but just an affectionate observation. Grampa Star has one of the same little idiosynchratic quirks as grandchildren Gracie, Tally, GabeJR, and Eve- the occasional appearance of one eye being a different size than the other bc of funny comical expressions and eyebrow lifting, lol. So many of Star's puppies and grandpuppies have his exact shape of eye too. I don't know if it is correct, but it is very distinctive.


----------



## Ljilly28

It's so funny that Tito does the one eye squint too. I LOVE it, and it is constantly amusing. I think this particular Faera line has amazing dispositions- funny, smart, tolerant, and feisty. Here's a Star kid .


----------



## hotel4dogs

tito, a Star grandkid....in a similar pose.....
As a side note, when we were at the IKC show in downtown Chicago, there were 28 golden males in Open. My daughter, who knows nothing at all about the breed, looked at one being posed and said, "Hey, I'll bet that's a Faera dog!" We checked the program, and sure enough, he was one of Rhonda's. They do have a distinctive look, like it or hate it.




Ljilly28 said:


> It's so funny that Tito does the one eye squint too. I LOVE it, and it is constantly amusing. I think this particular Faera line has amazing dispositions- funny, smart, tolerant, and feisty. Here's a Star kid .


----------



## damita

Would anyone like to continue this thread only breaking it down in new topics following the breed standard?

Eg - start a thread called Forequarters, start with the Breed standard and work from there with diagrams and pictures showing good and bad examples?

I know even for me I have been showing my own dogs consistently for over 5 years now and have finished several Champions but would still love to colaborate with others as I have never seen splayed feet before. I have a tendnacy to know more about the faults my own dogs have than things I haven't seen before.

Rebecca


----------



## Ljilly28

hotel4dogs said:


> tito, a Star grandkid....in a similar pose.....
> As a side note, when we were at the IKC show in downtown Chicago, there were 28 golden males in Open. My daughter, who knows nothing at all about the breed, looked at one being posed and said, "Hey, I'll bet that's a Faera dog!" We checked the program, and sure enough, he was one of Rhonda's. They do have a distinctive look, like it or hate it.


Holy smokes, that is similar; they DO look related!!!


----------



## arcane

damita said:


> Would anyone like to continue this thread only breaking it down in new topics following the breed standard?
> 
> Eg - start a thread called Forequarters, start with the Breed standard and work from there with diagrams and pictures showing good and bad examples?
> 
> I know even for me I have been showing my own dogs consistently for over 5 years now and have finished several Champions but would still love to colaborate with others as I have never seen splayed feet before. I have a tendnacy to know more about the faults my own dogs have than things I haven't seen before.
> 
> Rebecca


perhaps Pointgold can add you to the social group ...there may be more info there


----------

