Border Collie structure evaluation

[PSmitty]

No you don't or you'd stop giving your money to an organization that has ruined every breed they get their hands on, and then rationalizing it by saying "it's the only game in town". If you were serious about doing other activities and not supporting the AKC, you'd host your own events sanctioned by someone else. That's how sheepdog trials work.

 

Pearse

 

Ok. Thanks.

[Eileen Stein]

I am sorry the group was deleted. I liked looking at the different type of border collie. I did HATE getting email clog with pixs though.

 

I am not really sure why it was an issue.

 

As people pointed out if you don't like conformation dogs don't look at them.

 

To some people, there is more to life than "like" or "don't like." A strange concept, I know.

 

But as Upton Sinclair said, “It is difficult to get a person to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.” Substitute "fun" for "salary" and that pretty much sums up the problem.

[juliepoudrier]

Eileen,

You have a wonderful way with words. Great post!

 

J.

[MaryP]

Oh geez. I saw on FB where Laura had joined this group and posted a picture of Craig. I wanted so badly to giggle over the comments with someone, but didn't think to look here. Duh! That FB page is just plain scary.

[SS Cressa]

Well if you want to have an "inpact" BCSA is looking for input on weither to revise the standard.

 

Instead of bashing people dogs why not try to change the standard or at least show them why a dog with fluffy coats, long bodies, no legs, etc... will have a bigger issue with working over harsher terrains. (I don't know if what was going on was bashing or not since I didn't read them just what was written hear seem to suggest there was bashing going on)

 

It didn't bother me since it was just for fun group. As kim had said you are really limited on what you can tell by the pixs.

[PSmitty]

Well if you want to have an "inpact" BCSA is looking for input on weither to revise the standard.

 

Instead of bashing people dogs why not try to change the standard or at least show them why a dog with fluffy coats, long bodies, no legs, etc... will have a bigger issue with working over harsher terrains. (I don't know if what was going on was bashing or not since I didn't read them just what was written hear seem to suggest there was bashing going on)

 

It didn't bother me since it was just for fun group. As kim had said you are really limited on what you can tell by the pixs.

 

The issue is that a physical appearance shouldn't be the standard at all for Border Collies. The work should be. That's the whole crux of the problem.

 

(see, I do get it)

[juliepoudrier]

Not to mention the fact that Cressa's suggestion was tried at the beginning, to no avail. And I believe the standard does actually allow a lot more than what you see in the show ring. It's the *judging* that sets a de facto standard that everyone then breeds to recreate because they, too, want to win.

 

Seriously, I don't think the standard requires those ridiculous tipped ears that don't look like any naturally occurring tipped ears. But that's what was winning, so now you can even find videos on YouTube that show how "you too can get those perfect show-winning ears."

 

Seriously though, I am on a list with a lot of folks (other herding breeds) who have been trying for years to change the AKC from within, and even they admit it's pretty much a lost cause.

 

J.

[SS Cressa]

Except no one was showing pictures of their dogs to say "look at my pretty dog," they were saying "lets use the conformation standard to evaluate these dogs for their structure and ability." You cannot use a written standard of form to determine function, thus many people (and not just people from here) posted to this effect and were subsequently labeled as "problem" people. So, rather than listening and maybe allowing dissension and learning something, the group was made private.

 

Its an issue because its depressing.

 

I don't remember it EVER saying you must judge against the written standard. When I was looking at dogs I would look at it angles and overall outline. I don't know the Border Collie standard nor do I care too research it since it open to interpretation. What I do look for is a dog that look like s/he could do agility efficient without breaking down. I enjoyed seeing working dogs(the very few I seen), along with the sport bred border collies, it would have been interesting to see working border collies from around the world and see if there was a difference or if there was a difference in cattle vs sheep vs geese dogs.

 

The group was about structure not about anything else. The group was about how well is this dog put together just for fun.

[rushdoggie]

I don't remember it EVER saying you must judge against the written standard.

 

Hmm, then I guess we were not looking at the same pictures and comments? There were several comments about how one only had to follow teh standard as it was written and they would have the perfect Border Collie.

 

What I do look for is a dog that look like s/he could do agility efficient without breaking down.

 

I get that POV and have a dear friend who is convinced that you can determine that via angles, etc (as it relates to agility and flyball). Except, as you could learn from teh commenst there and from experience, you can't always tell. Several people posted pics of dogs who were "too straight in teh front" or "too tall over too long" and then we found out said dog had a "alphabet soup of titles" and had been doing agility/flyball into their teens with no injury. I myself owned a dog who was supposed to be ripe for injury based on his structure who played agilty and daily frisbee with no injuries until his untimely death at 13 from cancer. So, sometimes looking at a skeletal structure can help you make decisions, but not always, and its too hard to tell from one still photo.

 

The group was about structure not about anything else. The group was about how well is this dog put together just for fun.

 

Again, we must not have been reading the same page because I saw comment after comment (some of which were copied and posted here) about how the physical structure as it was seen in the pics posted could be used to define teh ideal Border Collie and many of the show breeders were up in arms about how they were producing dogs that had the right "silhouette."

 

Its dangerous. It really is.

[G. Festerling]

But that is part of the problem. Yes, function can and even will follow form to a certain extend. But the part you can not judge EVER by looking at dog not working, is what counts.

It is the heart, the desire, the things that you simply can not judge unless they are tested in legitimate work environment.

[Pippin's person]

(see, I do get it)

 

Oh, silly Paula, apparently you just think you do...

[PSmitty]

[OurBoys]

The group was about how well is this dog put together just for fun.

But that's just it. The people who were judging those dogs knew absolutely nothing about how a Border Collie is supposed to be "put together". That comment someone made about why a Border Collie's eyes are set the way they are would have been funny if it wasn't so scary.

 

If you want to know how fast a dog is, send it on a 600 yard outrun and time it. If you want to know how agile a dog is, have it gather a 50 head herd of goats. (I used goats as an example since they don't flock like sheep do.) If you want to know how much endurance the dog has, send it out again.

[Maralynn]

Well if you want to have an "inpact" BCSA is looking for input on weither to revise the standard.

 

Instead of bashing people dogs why not try to change the standard or at least show them why a dog with fluffy coats, long bodies, no legs, etc... will have a bigger issue with working over harsher terrains. (I don't know if what was going on was bashing or not since I didn't read them just what was written hear seem to suggest there was bashing going on)

 

It didn't bother me since it was just for fun group. As kim had said you are really limited on what you can tell by the pixs.

 

Just how do you make a positive impact by trading one set of arbitrary standards for another?

 

Here is a breed that can offer you just about anything you want - work ethic, heart, drive, personality - why in the world do people want to objectify it in the politically charged, arbitrary show ring? it's the antithesis of a Border Collie.

[Eileen Stein]

Well if you want to have an "inpact" BCSA is looking for input on weither to revise the standard.

 

Instead of bashing people dogs why not try to change the standard . . .

 

Cressa, you do understand, don't you, that the problem is not what the standard says. The problem is breeding or judging to an appearance standard whatever it says.

 

As an excellent article elsewhere on this site concludes: "If we were to set the show standard to duplicate in every detail the appearance of the latest International Supreme Champion, this would no more guarantee us a working breed than any other conformation standard." Do you understand at all why this is so?

[Sue R]

The group was about structure not about anything else. The group was about how well is this dog put together just for fun.

I'm sorry to say this but based on your opinions in this topic and in other, similar topics, you *just don't get it*.

 

"For fun" is no justification to ruin a useful breed of dog (or any other useful breed of animal).

[jdarling]

STRUCTURE IN MOTION (The link extension is "bordercolliestructure" so it's probably the same group ... but I don't know that for sure...)

 

This group is for those with an interest in evaluating the structure of Border Collies in performance, or at work. Every flavor, style, color & type of BC is welcome.

 

Post with videos of your dog in motion at work or in performance, or still photos that show a dog in action and freestanding or stacked, are great. All will be analyzed in a friendly manner!!!! Please ask for specific input, if wanted.

 

First rule of the group: please find and mention a positive in eachother's dogs, analyze second. Discussions will be on angulation, movement, jumping style, shoulder layback, etc. Hopefully, there will be no need for verbal Kevlar.

 

We are all here to learn.

 

Thanks.

~your humble admin

 

Can someone please tell me what the obsession is with this? Why are people just dying to post photos of their dogs to have other people critique how their dog looks? Seriously. WTF??? "We are all here to learn." Learn what?????

[geonni banner]

STRUCTURE IN MOTION (The link extension is "bordercolliestructure" so it's probably the same group ... but I don't know that for sure...)

 

 

 

Can someone please tell me what the obsession is with this? Why are people just dying to post photos of their dogs to have other people critique how their dog looks? Seriously. WTF??? "We are all here to learn." Learn what?????

 

It's all part of the sickness. I remember back in my AKC Rough/Smooth Collie days we used to sit around and pick our dogs (and each other's dogs) apart, using words like "layback," "correct stifles," "angulation," and a host of others. It was usually without rancor or cattiness - Collie people seem less vicious than say, Afghan Hound or Poodle people. We all felt very high-minded and "for the good of the Breed."

 

What I came to realize was that most of us were compensating for personal problems. (And this is me putting on my flame-retardandt suit, now...) I came to the realization one day at a specialty show listening to a conversation between two women waiting at ringside with two impeccably groomed Collie bitches, talking about how they managed their dog's weight (to the ounce.) Both of these women were nearly spherical in shape. That was the moment the scales began to fall from my eyes.

 

I was involved in a breed that has (or had) few hideous inherited disorders and were primarily pets. They didn't have to do anything that required brains, guts or stamina. (And it was a good thing, too, because most of them were rather on the dim side and no great athletes.)

 

But when you are haunted by the idea that not only are you not perfect, you are riddled with flaws, having a dog that attracts rosettes like poop attracts flies can be very validating. And even if it never enters a show, if it is "correct" you can feel that you are somehow special by association.

[JohnLloydJones]

...listening to a conversation between two women waiting at ringside with two impeccably groomed Collie bitches, talking about how they managed their dog's weight (to the ounce.) Both of these women were nearly spherical in shape. That was the moment the scales began to fall from my eyes.

Yes, it's a beauty contest by proxy.

[Donald McCaig]

Dear Doggers,

Ms. Banner writes, ".. when you are haunted by the idea that not only are you not perfect, you are riddled with flaws, having a dog that attracts rosettes like poop attracts flies can be very validating. And even if it never enters a show, if it is "correct" you can feel that you are somehow special by association."

 

Interesting. At sheepdog trials one's own and one's dog's flaws are so painfully and publicly apparent, after someone has a particularly hideous wreck it's good manners to say, "Oh. I'm sorry, I didn't see it." Every handler and every dog will have such a wreck and probably more than one.

 

The Covenanters who created our dogs were exceptionally hardheaded and believed (among other things) in actual, visible Original Sin.

 

Donald McCaig

[ThunderHill]

After a fine run, I've often heard a handler respond to compliments off the field by saying, "My dog took good care of me out there." Or at chore time, in response to admiration: "I couldn't run the place without him/her." So in addition to lessons in humility, they also lend us grace.

 

I'm not a regular church goer, but I still show up now and then and the roof has yet to fall in on me. Since I've been keeping my own flock, Bible readings referring to the human flock as "sheep" have certainly rung with new significance on my ears. Humbling indeed.

 

Liz S in South Central PA

 

>>Currently wandering far off-topic -- apologies to the original poster.

[mbc1963]

Yes, it's a beauty contest by proxy.

 

My gut is to agree with this BUT, to be fair...

 

This judgment could apply to a whole host of human activities, from art shows to battles of the bands to almost every sport known to man. (How is it a positive reflection on me if my home team wins the world series? But, heck, they shut down whole cities for celebretory parties!)

 

So, say, if you have a dog who's a great worker, then what real need is there to go to a trial and show the world that your dog can work well? In the wrong light, that can be seen as exactly the same thing as an AKC show: a human's need to bask in the glory of the dog - for which the human likely paid great sums of money, and who was likely trained by someone other than the handler. It's some variation of the same thing: greatness by association.

 

Obviously, there's a difference in the value of working vs. the value of being pretty. But, I think we need to be careful about judging psychological traits based on people's interests in different hobbies - lest they judge our psychology based on our interests.

 

People like to compete in things they're interested in, and it seems to be a general human trait. ::Shrug::

 

Mary

[jdarling]

Mary, I can agree with you about handlers who buy dogs, have them trained by a professional, and have the professional trial them. To me, that's no different than buying a show dog, having it professionally trained, and having the trainer show the dog ... but this is material for a whole new thread.

 

And while there are the ego-driven individuals who trial dogs for the glory of it all, I think a lot of people trial to see how their training is holding up. All dogs are good at home. Put them on new sheep, on new terrain, and your training issues become painfully clear.

 

The biggest difference between the two ... Border Collies are working dogs by definition. The trial is a test of that work. Bench shows are a test of who has the most money to be able to hire he-who-hides-the-flaws-the-best while schmoozing with judge-who-thinks-they-can-tell-how-a-dog-should-be-built-to-do-work-they-can't-do-because-the-talent-has-been-strategically-bred-right-out-of-them-but-isn't-that-a-pretty-topline-and-a-gorgeous-shoulder-layback.

[rushdoggie]

The structure thing is taking something that has a grain of truth and going overboard with it. There are things dogs can't do without the right structure. Take my recently deceased bot Ross who was square as square can be. Laybacks? Didn't have them. Angles on his front end? Didn't have them. Therefore Ross did have a finite max speed when running agility. Could he still run agility? Yes. But was he going to beat the faster dogs? Never. So, on some level, I can appreciate people wanting to have their dogs structure looked at, especially if they are competing/training in some dog sport because knowing that my dog simple could not corner quick changed how I trained and how I ran him. I quit trying to "speed him up" because I now knew he was as fast as he was going to be. We shaved a few seconds off of course time by me learning how to rearrange his path resulting in fewer sharp turns. It was useful.

 

All that said, you can't make breeding decisions on structure alone. Should you breed a dog with a serious structural problem (say seriously deformed hips)? Of course not. The difference is, working dog people wouldn't breed him because he couldn't do the work, breed people wouldn't based on his "structure." I am far less bothered by the "working dogs structure group" (though I suppose the 'work' is probably defined more loosely than would be recommended here) than I am the other group if the comments are useful rather than catty and perpetuating the "if you have the right silhouette its a great dog" mentality. I don't know, I haven't read the page yet.

[PSmitty]

I keep swearing I'm not posting again, see how well that's going? I just wanted to say great post, Mary.