Should altered dogs be allowed to compete in conformation?

For those of us that show or want to show our dogs.

Postby Patch O' Pits » June 13th, 2008, 7:51 pm

Leslie H wrote:I'm all for altered dogs competing alongside intact dogs. I'm a big believer at looking at how dogs reproduce, if I'm interested in a bloodline. That includes looking at as many relatives as possible. Therese, you know 1 reason I like Patcheeno is his brother, and vice versa. Many responsible breeders will sell show quality pups into pet homes, where they are s/n. There'd be many worthy of putting into the conf ring.
Also, those of us who compete w/females know what a PITA heat cycles are. In ADBA, you cannot compete in WP or conf w/ a s/n dog, and you can't compete in anything w/a bitch in heat. I'd be fine spaying Soleil right now, as I won't be breeding her. Instead, since I'd like to try (desperately) for her Grand in UKC, and anything in ADBA, she'll probably be intact for years. I think only permitting intact dogs punishes people for being responsible.


I see your point.

LOL Having intact dogs more so females is a huge PITA

Good arguments for both sides.
Patch O' Pits Pursuit-O-Perfection

Run Hard at the Rainbow Bridge My Angel Sock-M! I Love You Baby Girl! Now that your Mom Starlit is up there too, please help her learn the ropes, love and keep her company until I can see you both again. Starlit I love you!
http://i14.tinypic.com/2a8q345.jpg
User avatar
Patch O' Pits
Welcome Wagger
 
Posts: 4426
Location: Northeastern, USA

Postby RedChrome » June 19th, 2008, 6:15 pm

To keep along the same lines...What about those that have Bitches that spay them despite the fact they're being shown???

I have known quite a few people that have done this. The judges can't tell if the bitch is spayed or not especially since most that do that have the laser spay done. Just throwing that thought out there! lol

Courtney
Courtney
User avatar
RedChrome
Just Whelped
 
Posts: 59
Location: WA

Postby mnp13 » June 24th, 2008, 7:04 pm

I actually don't believe in an "altered" class. The dog is structurally sound or it isn't. Reproductive parts have nothing to do with it.

I don't understand why the breed clubs are soooo anti the idea, it would get more people into showing.
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17232
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby ellie@ny » June 25th, 2008, 6:05 pm

I actually can understand why people don't wan't to see altered dogs in the same ring with unaltered dogs.
Shows has been created for breeders to show off their breeding stock.And pretty much that's it. :|
But I would LOVE to see altered dogs having their own class at shows!!!

:)
Ellie
----------------------------------------
"Winners aren't born...they're made.And they're made just like anything else...through hard work.That's the price we'll have to pay to achive that goal."
User avatar
ellie@ny
Full of Bully
 
Posts: 1979
Location: NY

Postby mnp13 » June 25th, 2008, 6:23 pm

Yes, shows were created to show off breeding stock, but part of that stock is siblings and offspring - and altered or not, they show a lot about that line.

My show ring experience is admittedly limited, but I wouldn't have had a problem with altered dogs in the ring, the more compitition you have the more "valueable" the win is. Riggs lost to better dogs, the presence of testicals has nothing to do with it. :|

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the parents of a little get "credit" for the titles that their offspring earn? So altered or not, they "prove" the breeding.
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17232
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby ellie@ny » June 26th, 2008, 8:34 am

mnp13 wrote:Yes, shows were created to show off breeding stock, but part of that stock is siblings and offspring - and altered or not, they show a lot about that line.

My show ring experience is admittedly limited, but I wouldn't have had a problem with altered dogs in the ring, the more compitition you have the more "valueable" the win is. Riggs lost to better dogs, the presence of testicals has nothing to do with it. :|

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the parents of a little get "credit" for the titles that their offspring earn? So altered or not, they "prove" the breeding.


Oh no I agree with that of course! :)
But then again a responsible breeder should have future plans for years with his/her line.IMO.
They should know which dirrections they'll go with their breedings,which pup is show quality/which they might want to use in the future/,which is for working,and which is a pet.
You can't always produce out of 10 pupppies 10 show-working quality dogs.In the real world,maybe 5 would pass,the rest maybe not.
And then again a show CH is just a show CH to me,If it cannot produce well/healthy-balanced-high quality puppies in every way/,then it means not much.
:)
Ellie
----------------------------------------
"Winners aren't born...they're made.And they're made just like anything else...through hard work.That's the price we'll have to pay to achive that goal."
User avatar
ellie@ny
Full of Bully
 
Posts: 1979
Location: NY

Previous

Return to Conformation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron