What Price
Glory: What Happens When Winning is Everything
First
published in Double Helix Network News, Fall 1999
by
C.A. Sharp
Nearly twenty years later, I remember baiting Shadow with an empty hand in a
Best in Match ring lit only by streetlights. I ignored the crisp November air
as, with one eye on the judge, I concentrated presenting my dog at his best.
Australian Shepherds were not AKC recognized. Only at matches like this could
they go head-to-head with the other breeds. Shadow had a shot at the top prize
in one of the largest all-breed matches in our area, and I’d run out of liver
half way through Working Group.
Soon we were at the head of the line. The judge examined Shadow and moved us.
As we circled the ring to the end of the line, the watchers applauded. These
were no semi-organized group of friends and admirers. Most the Aussie people
had long since gone home. Shadow’s progress was cheered by strangers who
appreciated a good dog.
The judge continued with the individual exams. I kept Shadow “on,” in case she
glanced our way. My handsome black tri kept his gaze intent on my liverless
hand. I thanked the gods of dog shows that he was an incurable food-hound.
The judge finished with the Toy Group winner then motioned us all to gait
around the ring once more. The Borzoi lead off,
followed by the Pointer. I moved Shadow out, easily keeping pace with the
leggier beasts while the smaller dogs scribed a narrower circle behind us. The
judge held her hand overhead, watching us intently. Shadow didn’t’ miss a beat.
I hoped I wouldn’t.
Her hand dropped. She was pointing to me! Shadow had won Best in Match.
Winning that show was one of the highlights of my years in conformation
competition. I can relive those heady emotions a score of years later. To win,
and win something big, is a wonderful experience. But it was, after all, only a
dog show.
===
Exhibition
of purebred dogs started about a century and a half ago as an outgrowth of
stock shows, where breeders would exhibit their finest cattle, sheep and hogs.
As with the stock shows, the intent was to showcase fine breeding stock. But
over the years the emphasis has changed from providing a showcase to a major
criterion for determination of “breeding quality.” The old adage “breed the
best to the best” has subtly changed in meaning toward breeding the
best-looking to the best-looking. Success in the conformation ring has become
so important that a few will subvert the process to ensure greater success.
Today, the conformation show system in the
A good judge will recognize physical quality in a dog, but due to its nature
the conformation ring offers little opportunity to evaluate a dog’s mental
acuity and physical stamina. Even in breeds where gait is emphasized, a few
laps around the ring can only point out the extremely unfit. A good breeder
should be equally competent to evealuate a dog’s
physical atributes and shouldn’t require outside
opinions, in the form of show wins, to bias his judgement. In addition, the
wise breeder will make an opportunity to observe and interact with dogs away
from the shows to gage their mental and physical mettle.
Breed-oriented Internet discussion lists go on at length about the importance
of breeding to titled, dogs, especially Champions .
Special emphasis is put on pedigrees which feature the titled “greats” of the
breed. Titles are the tail that wags far too many dog breeders..
Conformation shows have become an end rather than a means. People are breeding
dogs to win dog shows instead of using the shows to present their breeding
efforts. If a dog does not win, is it without question unworthy of breeding? If
it wins a lot, should it necessarily be bred a lot? While on the surface this
might seem to make sense, the reasoning is flawed.
A dog’s worth as a breeding animal is dependent upon its genetic makeup. It’s appearance and behavior in
the ring can give an indication of its potential, but all the ribbons and
trophies in the world won’t help if it doesn’t pass those qualities to its
offspring.
In the
Winning has become so important to some people that they employ a number of
practices to improve their odds of winning. Some are as simple as carefully
studying judges and choosing which to exhibit a dog under. Others will alter
their dogs to better conform to the standards or the current winning fashion,
taping or gluing of ears to correct the set, dying of coats to cover color faults, tattooing pink skin that should have been
pigmented, straightening crooked teeth, surgically altering tail sets or other
physical features, and a variety of other practices. All of these alterations
disguise the dog’s phenotype—the look that his genes gave him. In spite of
this, the genes remain what they are. The prick ears, gay tail or bad bite will
come out in the progeny. Unfortunately, the person who bred to the dog or
bought its pup may be ignorant of the alterations and assume she is buying
genes to produce what she sees in the ring.
Even when a top winner is equally outstanding as a sire, the emphasis on his
wins can lead to the popular sire syndrome. No matter how good the dog, he will
have a few bad genes. The wide use of a popular sire and subsequent inbreeding
and linebreeding on him will increase the frequency
not only of the genes everyone wants, but those they don’t want as well. If a
dog and his near kin are used too extensively, particularly in breeds with
small populations, there may be few places to go when the unwanted genes make
their presence known.
And what of the dog that doesn’t win, or maybe never sees the inside of a ring?
Is it, of necessity “not breeding quality?” Dogs are as individual as people.
Some do not like shows and will not show well. If the animal is in other
respects an excellent example of the breed, why pass it by? What of the bitch
scarred by some accident, precluding her from any chance at a win? That scar or
injury won’t be inherited. If she’s a good quality, why not breed her?
Occasionally a fine animal will belong to someone who hasn’t ever shown it and
doesn’t want to. In most cases, such dogs will belong to people who acquired
them as pets. Pet status is not synonymous with poor quality. A knowledgeable
breeder who knows the dog’s pedigree background and how it’s
near relatives have produced may be able to make excellent use of that dog in
his breeding program.
The relative success of any two dogs in the ring has no dependable correlation
with their success as breeding animals. The big winner can be a dud stud while
the dog with a more modest competitive record may throw marvelous
puppies. The youngster who seems to be winning everything and has thrown
puppies with promise is a greater gamble than the mature dog with a less
stellar career. You will know what that older dog is and probably what he has
produced, but a few years down the line that big-winning wunderkind could
mature into mediocrity or develops a late-onset hereditary disease.
Winning is great fun and it doesn’t come easy. Those who are successful deserve
to be congratulated for their efforts. But those wins should never be a prime
consideration when making breeding decisions. What that winner is, what he does
and what he produces outside the ring are far more important to breeding than
even the highest titles or top honors from the most
prestigious events.
Copyright 1999 C. A. Sharp. All rights
reserved. C.A. Sharp
is editor of the "Double Helix Network News", the quarterly
newsletter for those interested in genetics and hereditary disease in the
Australian Shepherd.