# Nearly time for the Gundog group



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

Cant wait, been there all day and Im still wanting to see more dogs

Would love the Lab or Goldie to get the group


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

I'm watching at home, really impatient to hopefully see some nice looking Labs.


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> I'm watching at home, really impatient to hopefully see some nice looking Labs.


The best of breed Lab is foreign, one Ive not seen before but looks lovely


----------



## something ridiculous (Mar 9, 2013)

That lab is NOT a gundog!!!


----------



## sharloid (Apr 15, 2012)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> I'm watching at home, really impatient to hopefully see some nice looking Labs.


I'm no expert but isn't that one on the live feed at the moment a little pudgy?


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

That Lab is 

The Goldie isn't too bad 

Vizlas look good and capable of work :thumbup:


----------



## SamanthaGoosey (Jan 26, 2013)

Love this group! Also it's nice to hear some of them are actually working


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Ooo the Chessie wasn't bad, I don't usually like her dogs, far to heavy normally.

Is it me or does that Flat coat seem a bit light in the back end?


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Lab so fat it couldn't move properly.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

I'm glad it's not just me that thinks the Lab is a bit, er, chunky......

He has no waist.

That being said, he has a lovely face and more personality than the other dogs, I think. Not that I'm remotely baised, of course 

The Golden has a really sweet face too.


----------



## sharloid (Apr 15, 2012)

rona said:


> Lab so fat it couldn't move properly.
> Dreadful just dreadful


At least it was running on a loose lead.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

sharloid said:


> At least it was running on a loose lead.


That's a bonus I suppose.

It did look as if it enjoyed it.

Think it might enjoy it more with about 10kg loss


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

I didnt like the lab either but found myself strangely attracted to the Chesapeake. The lab was just way too heavy. I know they are supposed to be a bigger boned dog but is anybody fooled into thinking that particular dog could do a full days work? Not fit for function IMO.


----------



## sharloid (Apr 15, 2012)

rona said:


> That's a bonus I suppose.
> 
> It did look as if it enjoyed it.
> 
> Think it might enjoy it more with about 10kg loss


I bet you're not happy with that then...


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Lovely Weimaraner


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

Oh yes, GSP, GWP and HWV in the line up! Go Sharon (GWP)!!!

I really, really want one of the HPR's to win best in group.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

sharloid said:


> I bet you're not happy with that then...


??? Why


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

The Lab won!!!


I'm really happy EVEN though yes I think he's a bit on the chunky side. But he had more personality than all the other dogs put together 

And as someone else rightly noted, wasn't he the only dog being walked on a loose lead? Nice to see


----------



## Izzysmummy (Oct 12, 2011)

sharloid said:


> I'm no expert but isn't that one on the live feed at the moment a little pudgy?





rona said:


> Lab so fat it couldn't move properly.
> Dreadful just dreadful





Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> I'm glad it's not just me that thinks the Lab is a bit, er, chunky......
> 
> He has no waist.
> 
> ...





Leanne77 said:


> I didnt like the lab either but found myself strangely attracted to the Chesapeake. The lab was just way too heavy. I know they are supposed to be a bigger boned dog but is anybody fooled into thinking that particular dog could do a full days work? Not fit for function IMO.


So glad I'm not the only one thinking this. Thought maybe I had a warped view with owning my little skinny Minnie!

Saw some lovely nicely built working labs today, how could that fatty have won the group over those lovely pointers?!


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Surprise surprise  

Just What I'd expect


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

something ridiculous said:


> That lab is NOT a gundog!!!


Obviously not


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

something ridiculous said:


> That lab is NOT a gundog!!!


It's an insult to working Labs the world over.

Why do the majority of show folk equate fat to substance?? And the allegation that they are "agile"? Just because it can run around a bit does not mean it is any way fit, agile or workman like. And the argument that they "don't have an ounce of fat on them"....:frown2:.

Sorry for the rant, but it really makes me cross when the entire essence of the working Lab retriever is lost in a cosmetic world of fanciful misinterpretation of the breed standard.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Who was that judge?


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Alas I didn't see any of the other Labs that this one had to beat.

This one was very heavy, I totally agree. But maybe he won on sheer personality....? 


And the Lab, Romeo, does have a lovely head.


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

rona said:


> Who was that judge?


Why you going to tell her off


----------



## something ridiculous (Mar 9, 2013)

Kinjilabs said:


> Why you going to tell her off


I will :thumbup:


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

something ridiculous said:


> I will :thumbup:


Ill let her know for you


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Kinjilabs said:


> Why you going to tell her off


Just wondered if it was the I'll scratch your back etc at work again. 
Can't see how else that beat all those other dogs


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

rona said:


> Just wondered if it was the I'll scratch your back etc at work again.
> * Can't see how else that beat all those other dogs *


On sheer personality perhaps...?


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

There were truly dual purpose dogs in that group - GWP, Pointer for example - truly fit for function dogs, and yet the heaviest, lardiest dog got chosen who has probably never even had a dummy in it's mouth before.

I didnt even like the Clumber, thought that was far too heavy and cumbersome (or should that be clumbersome? )


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> On sheer personality perhaps...?


personality makes a sweet dog not a Crufts winner.....or it shouldn't!!

Kinjilabs....She's a Lab person then?

If so, god help the Labrador Retrievers of the future 

So many of those breeds were the best I've seen for years and the Labs have got worse


----------



## 5headh (Oct 17, 2011)

Wasn't a fan of the labrador retriever either


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

rona said:


> Just wondered if it was the I'll scratch your back etc at work again.
> Can't see how else that beat all those other dogs


We'll never know, but hey Im happy and dont even own a Lab


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

It took a bit of doing, but finally got the breeders and showing people in the village to admit that they keep their labs on the heavy side in order to show their good points. Mind you I also see him doing a lot of road work with his dogs especially prior to Crufts to build up muscle. If you compare their labs to the working bred dog that lives next door, you can hardly believe they are the same breed.


----------



## SamanthaGoosey (Jan 26, 2013)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> On sheer personality perhaps...?


I agree, it must have been his personality; putting his weight aside, he seemed like a very very lovely dog  bless him.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Kinjilabs said:


> We'll never know, but hey Im happy and dont even own a Lab


You're happy that your breed is going down the pan?


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

A labrador retriever is supposed to be SOLID!!!!  Since when - can't see anything in the breed standard about them being solid! Haven't these show folk ever seen an old photo of a labrador? And what happened to 'very agile'? These are heavyweights


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

rona said:


> You're happy that your breed is going down the pan?


Its not my choice is it and Im sure they wont change if I ask them to


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

rona said:


> You're happy that your breed is going down the pan?


Thankfully the working side of the breed is doing very well


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Siskin said:


> It took a bit of doing, but finally got the breeders and showing people in the village to admit that they keep their labs on the heavy side in order to show their good points. Mind you I also see him doing a lot of road work with his dogs especially prior to Crufts to build up muscle. If you compare their labs to the working bred dog that lives next door, you can hardly believe they are the same breed.


They do, it's true, but for me it's not just the weight in terms of extra coverage / fat, they are too heavyweight - too much bone. They are supposed to be 'very agile' according to the breed standard. A look at any old photo of labradors will show you that the show dogs have become over done and exaggerated.


----------



## Julesky (Feb 10, 2012)

5headh said:


> Wasn't a fan of the retriever either


Agree with this.

Clumber, sussex and american cocker too.

And the chunky lab

Flat-coat retriever was a total babe- if it was personality that dog was winning in leaps and bounds


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Kinjilabs said:


> Its not my choice is it and Im sure they wont change if I ask them to


But what are you happy about?


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

I wonder if another breed had won what would be said now??? someone somewhere would slate it lets just be happy for the Lab and his owner please


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

ZENA THORN ANDREWS


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

rona said:


> But what are you happy about?


Im happy to see a Lab win the group, is that not allowed


----------



## Tillymint (Nov 2, 2010)

I liked the IWS, he got through last year & has grown up a bit & the flattie was def full of personality


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Kinjilabs said:


> Im happy to see a Lab win the group, is that not allowed


Just don't know how you can be 

I thought the Goldie was ok, but I'd be almost as disgusted if that had won above some of those other good dogs!!

Just because I love a breed or more because I love a breed, I'd be so disappointed if a less than brilliant example had won at any show, let alone Crufts.

Some of the breeds have gone too far down the exaggeration track, I certainly wouldn't be happy to see them go further. Which will happen when this dog goes to stud


----------



## Guest (Mar 9, 2013)

A dog has won ,that some people like and some don't. 

Tough tits either way.


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

rona said:


> Just don't know how you can be
> 
> I thought the Goldie was ok, but I'd be almost as disgusted if that had won above some of those other good dogs!!
> 
> ...


Well I am happy nothing I can do about it winning didnt even see the Labs today either


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

rona said:


> *personality makes a sweet dog not a Crufts winner.....or it shouldn't!!*
> 
> Kinjilabs....She's a Lab person then?
> 
> ...


But personality must play a part, no...?

Please do correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I've heard the commentators in the past refer to a dog having a good personality or looking 'happy' or 'lively'.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Kinjilabs said:


> Well I am happy nothing I can do about it winning didnt even see the Labs today either


Well I'm so disgusted I'm going to at least drop a few emails


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

rona said:


> Well I'm so disgusted I'm going to at least drop a few emails


Who to?


----------



## Guest (Mar 9, 2013)

rona said:


> Well I'm so disgusted I'm going to at least drop a few emails


I am starting to think that you may be a wind-up merchant. :lol:


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

lurcherowner said:


> i am starting to think that you may be a wind-up merchant. :lol:


:d:d:d:d:d:d


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

rona said:


> Well I'm so disgusted I'm going to at least drop a few emails


Who to?  
He is an international champion so I'm sure they will take your e mail seriously.

You didn't have your hands on him so for all you know he could be solid muscle.

He had the most gorgeous face and expression.

I thought the group was really good, there was one at the beginning I was surprised wasn't shortlisted, I can't remember the name but he was a beautiful red dog.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

emmaviolet said:


> *Who to?
> He is an international champion so I'm sure they will take your e mail seriously.
> 
> You didn't have your hands on him so for all you know he could be solid muscle. *
> ...


The people ultimately responsible for these exaggerations in breeds are the judges by awarding such overdone dogs. It's irrelevant if he has solid muscle, he is still overdone.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

rocco33 said:


> The people ultimately responsible for these exaggerations in breeds are the judges by awarding such overdone dogs. It's irrelevant if he has solid muscle, he is still overdone.


But I doubt they will listen to someone who was watching on tv.


----------



## Kitty_pig (Apr 9, 2011)

I thought the lab was beautiful


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

rocco33 said:


> The people ultimately responsible for these exaggerations in breeds are the judges by awarding such overdone dogs. It's irrelevant if he has solid muscle, he is still overdone.


He has won the group now, no going back, there are dogs that have won that a lot of people dont like, or disagree with, but what we say wont change a thing, let them have their day we wont change the world on here


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

It's not just the bulk of his frame (and as an aside solid muscle just doesn't look like that), his head is so overdone to the point that he almost looks like a mastiff!

This dog is supposed to be a representative of Labrador breed type - if this is the way show Labs are going the chasm between working and show will never be bridged, despite the efforts of the few true dual-purpose kennels.

A Lab is supposed to be a middle-weight hunter and to quote the breed standard "*very agile (which precludes excessive body weight or excessive substance)*".

People will be breeding more towards this type if this is what wins the silver in the ring. Very sad, and ultimately signals the demise of a true retriever.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

shamykebab said:


> *It's not just the bulk of his frame (and as an aside solid muscle just doesn't look like that), his head is so overdone to the point that he almost looks like a mastiff!*
> 
> This dog is supposed to be a representative of Labrador breed type - if this is the way show Labs are going the chasm between working and show will never be bridged, despite the efforts of the few true dual-purpose kennels.
> 
> ...


*

I'm sorry but in no way did Romeo the Lab resemble a Mastiff.

Yes, he's a chunky Lab. Lots of 'show' type Labs are, they are also healthy and that's what counts.

My brother's Lab is exactly the same; he has a big head, big neck and is a really big boy! He's now 12 and a half and touch wood, thus far has more energy than all the other dogs put together *


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

shamykebab said:


> It's not just the bulk of his frame (and as an aside solid muscle just doesn't look like that), his head is so overdone to the point that he almost looks like a mastiff!
> 
> This dog is supposed to be a representative of Labrador breed type - if this is the way show Labs are going the chasm between working and show will never be bridged, despite the efforts of the few true dual-purpose kennels.
> 
> ...


Very true, although only if you actually take the show lab to be representative of the breed - a quick look in the Gamekeepers Ring at Crufts will show you the real labs. Personally, I'd rather have teeth pulled than go to Crufts


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

shamykebab said:


> It's not just the bulk of his frame (and as an aside solid muscle just doesn't look like that), his head is so overdone to the point that he almost looks like a mastiff!
> 
> This dog is supposed to be a representative of Labrador breed type - if this is the way show Labs are going the chasm between working and show will never be bridged, despite the efforts of the few true dual-purpose kennels.
> 
> ...


You cant tell from just watching a dog on tv what its like, no way like a Mastiff in head tho! but as for weight to muscle ratio you have to be hands on

When it went around the ring you could clearly see its rib cage which you wouldnt if it was too "fat"


----------



## BessieDog (May 16, 2012)

I was so pleased! My friend bred the English Pointer BOB! Shame it didn't get to the final 10.


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

I totally didn't like much about the winner at all tbh. His head was far too broad for me and then tapered at the muzzle quite a bit 'Staffie-ish', as for his frame - well Kali looked like that before she lost weight! 

I'm sure there must have been better examples in the breed group and I've seen far better looking Labs on here from Swarthy, Sleeping Lion and Dex - all look far more like real Labs to me. Very disappointed, I only hope they choose a decent looking Mal tomorrow! 

ETA - I wish they would show some working Labs, I bet they're pretty smart.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> Yes, he's a chunky Lab. Lots of 'show' type Labs are, they are also healthy and that's what counts.


I dont' think anyone is suggesting that the exaggerations of the show labradors have led to health problems as this is not true - they are a healthy lot, but the show bred dogs have become exaggerated and overdone - too 'chunky', too blocked headed etc to bear any resemblance to the original breed.


----------



## Thorne (May 11, 2009)

They do say the camera adds 10 pounds! :lol:

Would love to get my hands on Romeo, or other winning show Labs for that matter, to see just how much of a fat covering there is. Looked like quite a lot, there was a fair bit of jiggle and not much in the way of tuck or waist. Seem to think I saw a flash of the last couple of ribs but could have been wrinkles? 
He looked like a real character though, think how much more bounce he'd have if he was leaner!

I was rooting for that stunning Chesapeake and Bracco. Would have loved to see the little Kooikerhondje place but he looked slightly lame? Hopefully just a minor twist or stiffness for him.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Malmum said:


> I totally didn't like much about the winner at all tbh. His head was far too broad for me and then tapered at the muzzle quite a *bit 'Staffie-ish',* as for his frame - well Kali looked like that before she lost weight!
> 
> I'm sure there must have been better examples in the breed group and I've seen far better looking Labs on here from Swarthy, Sleeping Lion and Dex - all look far more like real Labs to me. Very disappointed, I only hope they choose a decent looking Mal tomorrow!
> 
> ETA - I wish they would show some working Labs, I bet they're pretty smart.


Can't see this at all myself. Honestly can't.

I do agree Romeo could have done with a bit of a waist. But again it puts me in mind of my brother's Lab who is a really 'blocky' boy. But it is sheer muscle - 100%.

I do agree it would be nice to see some working Labs at Crufts!


----------



## Kitty_pig (Apr 9, 2011)

Thorne said:


> *They do say the camera adds 10 pounds!* :lol:
> 
> Would love to get my hands on Romeo, or other winning show Labs for that matter, to see just how much of a fat covering there is. Looked like quite a lot, there was a fair bit of jiggle and not much in the way of tuck or waist. Seem to think I saw a flash of the last couple of ribs but could have been wrinkles?
> He looked like a real character though, think how much more bounce he'd have if he was leaner!
> ...


I was just going to put this :lol: they were all beautiful dogs but the lab had a certain twinkle in his eye. You cant please everyone


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Kitty_pig said:


> I was just going to put this :lol: they were all beautiful dogs but the* lab had a certain twinkle in his eye*. You cant please everyone


Absolutely. Well said


----------



## Kitty_pig (Apr 9, 2011)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> Absolutely. Well said


And im not biased....Im a westie and bulldog girl :lol:


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

BessieDog said:


> I was so pleased! My friend bred the English Pointer BOB! Shame it didn't get to the final 10.


And in my mind the winner..... he is absolutly stunning...
I also really liked the Red/White Irish Setter..
The Longhaired GSP and ESS were a bit tasty too.

The winner was really a rather unattractive example, very disappointing IMVHO


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

rocco33 said:


> I dont' think anyone is suggesting that the exaggerations of the show labradors have led to health problems as this is not true - they are a healthy lot, but the show bred dogs have become exaggerated and overdone - too 'chunky', too blocked headed etc to bear any resemblance to the original breed.


Oh really?



















Personally I think there is more of a resemblance between these two than if you were to compare the top dog to a very slight, whippety field trial dog.

There are extremes at both ends of the scale (show and working) but Romeo is not an extreme example of the show type at all.

People suggesting that he overweight have NO idea unless they have physically felt the dog in person.


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

Does he look fat here? dont think so


----------



## Kitty_pig (Apr 9, 2011)

Kinjilabs said:


> Does he look fat here? dont think so


Id still blow raspberries on that belly!


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> I'm sorry but in no way did Romeo the Lab resemble a Mastiff.
> 
> Yes, he's a chunky Lab. Lots of 'show' type Labs are, they are also healthy and that's what counts.


His muzzle is short and the stop over-pronounced; that is not a typical Lab head. No one has suggested that he's not healthy.



labradrk said:


> Personally I think there is more of a resemblance between these two than if you were to compare the top dog to a very slight, whippety field trial dog.
> 
> There are extremes at both ends of the scale (show and working) but Romeo is not an extreme example of the show type at all.


There are far fewer "whippety field trial" dogs out there than people seem to suggest; if you take a look at the dogs competing in last year's IGL there are very few snipey dogs there, if any.

Far more are the overdone, heavy show Labs who've lost most retrieve instinct.


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Thorne said:


> They do say the camera adds 10 pounds! :lol:


To quote Chandler from Friends - 'How many cameras were on him?!'


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

rona said:


> You're happy that your breed is going down the pan?





rona said:


> Just don't know how you can be
> 
> I thought the Goldie was ok, but I'd be almost as disgusted if that had won above some of those other good dogs!!
> 
> ...





Kinjilabs said:


> Does he look fat here? dont think so


Oh yes, morbidly. 

It does make me laugh when people insult a dog because it is not to their personal tastes. There are certain dog breeds I am not a fan of but I would NEVER describe them as "gross", "disgusting", etc.


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

labradrk said:


> Oh really?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So true, you have to feel the dog to see if its fat or muscle


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> but Romeo is not an extreme example of the show type at all.


Well, that is very worrying if he's not considered an extreme example! 

You can only tell fat by putting hands on, but I know enough show folk to know they do keep their dogs 'well covered' 

Of course, if you currently show, you would be used to seeing dogs has solid has him and think it's normal. But the difference between gundogs and other breeds is that they are still a working dog. For many breeds, their original uses no longer exist, but gundogs generally, and retrievers and spaniels in particular, still do what they were originally bred to do. The show dogs bulk would not make them any good in the field except for the most basic picking up (and that assumes they still have the ability and knowing quite a few show dogs that work, much has been lost).


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

shamykebab said:


> His muzzle is short and the stop over-pronounced; that is not a typical Lab head. No one has suggested that he's not healthy.
> 
> There are far fewer "whippety field trial" dogs out there than people seem to suggest; if you take a look at the dogs competing in last year's IGL there are very few snipey dogs there, if any.
> 
> Far more are the overdone, heavy show Labs who've lost most retrieve instinct.


Unless you know most "heavy show Labs" personally, how do you know they have "lost most retrieve instinct"? I find statements like this a bit bizarre. My Labs sire was a "heavy show Lab" and yet he somehow managed to win an all-aged field trial.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

labradrk said:


> Unless you know most "heavy show Labs" personally, how do you know they have "lost most retrieve instinct"? I find statements like this a bit bizarre. My Labs sire was a "heavy show Lab" and yet he somehow managed to win an all-aged field trial.


I know quite a few show labs that 'work', and do an ok job on a small shoot where not much is expected of them. They are harder to train and are lacking in good working instincts. And congratulations to your lab's sire, and unless you trial you won't understand, but trial wins are not quite as straightforward as they may appear. 

PS - I have worked on a shoot with mainly show bred dogs, and it was always my working bred dogs that had to pick the hard runners - who could get over and under fences that they bulky show dogs were too big for and into difficult cover..... I could go on.


----------



## something ridiculous (Mar 9, 2013)

labradrk said:


> Unless you know most "heavy show Labs" personally, how do you know they have "lost most retrieve instinct"? I find statements like this a bit bizarre. My Labs sire was a "heavy show Lab" and yet he somehow managed to win an all-aged field trial.


I'd be interested to know which dog that is. Didn't know any show type labs had won field trials?


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

Yes, who is this dog? Genuinely curious!


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Just to add, I don't have a problem with show dogs working, in fact, I think it's great that those owners are trying to do it, but, unless they are heavily into showing, the vast majority who start with a show dog, invariably get a working bred dog for their next dog once they understand what is required


----------



## SpringerHusky (Nov 6, 2008)

As someone who does not care for labs, I actually liked Romeo. I liked his colour, face and personality. My husband turned his nose up (but then he only cares about springer spaniels) but I said,"Actually he's one of the better looking show labs i've seen come up for BOB". I usually pay no heed to labs but he actually caught my eye.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

rocco33 said:


> I know quite a few show labs that 'work', and do an ok job on a small shoot where not much is expected of them. They are harder to train and are lacking in good working instincts. And congratulations to your lab's sire, and unless you trial you won't understand, but trial wins are not quite as straightforward as they may appear.


I am well aware of the differences, thank you.

This never ending argument happens every single year when Crufts is on. I understand that the show types of dogs are not to everyone's tastes'. However, the insults that some members have made towards this dog are uncalled for in my opinion.

The show people are not going to chance their tastes. The working people are not going to change their tastes. So why do either party care? baring in mind that the vast, vast majority of Labradors are strictly pets only, why are working instincts of the utmost necessity to show type dogs? they are not. Most people just want a family pet and could care less about the working instincts of the dog.

There is no right or wrong here. It is purely down to person tastes.


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

labradrk said:


> Unless you know most "heavy show Labs" personally, how do you know they have "lost most retrieve instinct"? I find statements like this a bit bizarre.


There is no argument there to be honest: most show Labs have very poor retrieve instinct.

A good friend of mine (a very established breeder in the show world, having bred many SH CH and CH) has put a trialling dog over one of her bitches, just to bring back some instinct, trainability and length of leg. Those pups have gone to a mix of homes, trialling and show, should be interesting to see them on the working and show circuit soon.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

something ridiculous said:


> I'd be interested to know which dog that is. Didn't know any show type labs had won field trials?


Monarch, he passed away last year: http://www.leospring.co.uk/


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

Ah, Oakingham Monarch Of Leospring - he wasn't entirely show bred.

Leospring are another show kennel that have gone to trialling dogs to add a bit more to their dogs.


----------



## something ridiculous (Mar 9, 2013)

Nowhere near as heavy set show type as you have lead us to believe...


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

labradrk said:


> Monarch, he passed away last year: http://www.leospring.co.uk/


I know Joy and Chris and their dogs. While she does show them (mainly in the Field Trial and Working classes), they are dual purpose bred rather than show bred and have a lot of FT bred dogs behind them. She is a champion (one of very few) of the dual purpose dog, but her background is really working gundogs and I wouldn't class her as show kennel or her dogs as show dogs.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

rocco33 said:


> I know Joy and Chris and their dogs. While she does show them (mainly in the Field Trial and Working classes), they are dual purpose bred rather than show bred and have a lot of FT bred dogs behind them. She is a champion (one of very few) of the dual purpose dog, but her background is really working gundogs and I wouldn't class her as show kennel or her dogs as show dogs.


Yes I am aware that the kennel is dual purpose one.  All I am pointing out is that some of these so called heavier set dogs with lots of show breeding are also capable of winning things.

Anyway, I must retire for the evening....my bed is calling me.


----------



## GertrudeJekyll (Sep 4, 2010)

Yes, Monarch was capable of winning things in the field, Romeo is not.

Monarch was a middle-of-the-road Lab whereas Romeo is completely over the top. The two can't be compared so that argument holds no weight, I'm afraid.

Dogs like Romeo should not be the figurehead of the breed. Many congratulations to his handler and breeder, but I'm sorely disappointed today.


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

I wasn't looking for the 'twinkle in his eyes' I was looking at his build and think its a shame that now even show Labs are acceptable while looking chunky. That's the very look that put me off the breed over the years but previously have only seen it on Labs I've seen as pets. His flesh even juddered as he moved. 

I know from looking at Mals from various parts of Europe, Canada and the US how some differ from over here and do well in those Countries but put them all side by side and you see a huge amount of variation with some small heads and necks, not complementing the breed at all. I think this boy is the same kind of example. 

Yes he's a lovely boy but to beat all the others in his breed I don't think so and reckon there are a lot of trimmer, fit for function contenders who's owners must be gutted. 

I think the various German Pointers and the Weimarana out shone him massively but then I've always thought the working type Lab looks better than many show types. When he trotted round the ring two of my daughters said what a 'chunder' he was, too square and stocky for a Lab even his head shape was out, although we all thought he looked a character. I just hope he doesn't win BIS!

Does anyone know the nationality of the person who judged the Lab group because even with breed standards the eye of that judge will determine what look is best and seeing some Champion Mals from abroad I know some see good points where others see bad.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

I would have picked them, because the dog looked really happy and bouncy and so did his owner, got to love that run. What's a few pounds between friends, he wasn't that bad for a show lab. :devil: Considering how many labs are bred in the UK though, it's quite surprising that an Italian lab won. Well, I thought it was. 

I have just got to have a Kooikerhondje and call her Kookie. I suppose the breed is too rare for me to find one, unless one of my Dutch friends can organise it for me. I've not seen the breed before, but it's just my type, so cute.  (with reservations about the one actually on show)

What possible reason, other than looks, is there for those black ringlets though?


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Not sure why one or two folk are saying Romeo's muzzle 'was too short' and that his head was 'wrong'?

When I saw him, I was immediately reminded of a top UK show Lab kennel that I had the pleasure of visiting a few years back. Lots of gorgeous yellow blocky Labs, and they mostly looked like Romeo.

I thought also that Romeo was one of only two dogs that looked actually happy to be trotting round that ring. Several of the others were having their heads tugged up on those very high, tight lead/collar sets. Romeo was on a loose lead and I liked seeing that. 

I agree the Weimaraner was really lovely too.

I doubt that Romeo will win BIS - if he does, I can only imagine the outrage from some quarters.....


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

Thorne said:


> They do say the camera adds 10 pounds! :lol:
> 
> Would love to get my hands on Romeo, or other winning show Labs for that matter, to see just how much of a fat covering there is. Looked like quite a lot, there was a fair bit of jiggle and not much in the way of tuck or waist. Seem to think I saw a flash of the last couple of ribs but could have been wrinkles?
> He looked like a real character though, think how much more bounce he'd have if he was leaner!
> ...


I thought that as he was going round, limping ever so slightly on his front right.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Sigh!

The Kennel Club


----------



## 2Hounds (Jun 24, 2009)

Must admit i was wondering how the lab would match up to the condition chart they showed the other day. I liked the orangy eyebrows on wirehaired pointer  and the GSP was gorgeous. I think many of the handlers were concerned about dogs getting distracted by the smelly carpet to do a nice loose run. 

I surprised myself by liking the curly coated retriever & noticed it laying with legs in the air at one point. The munsterlander was another favourite.


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

So, what is all this 'fit for function' people keep going on about, the KC themselves have made this their mantra, yet we're not seeing that philosophy being taken up by the judges.

Regardless of what I think of the lab, it was not fit for function in the slightest. It was just far too heavy set to do the work that is expected of labs nowadays. I find it so difficult to grasp that Romeo won over all those other dual purpose dogs who actually have tested working instincts as well as correct conformation.


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

How does this compare with the modern winner:

http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/download/8658/1927_1.pdf

(Crufts 1927)


----------



## Thorne (May 11, 2009)

shamykebab said:


> How does this compare with the modern winner:
> 
> http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/download/8658/1927_1.pdf
> 
> (Crufts 1927)


Not the best pair of photos to judge - the black Lab isn't stacked and the yellow Lab hasn't reproduced well at all. Tar of Hamyax is obviously a lighter framed dog which I do prefer to the big chunky type like Romeo, but there's something almost houndy about him? If it was a stacked photo and a clearer reproduction it would be easier to compare.

I do agree that Romeo is overdone though, but as I mentioned previously it would be interesting to be able to see and feel him in the flesh.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Interesting that is has been mentioned that show bred gundogs don't work we'll in the field, that they have lost the ability.
I've had three golden retrievers. Numbers one and three had a little working lines on the dams side. Number two was entirely show bred and having recently checked her COI out somewhat inbred as far as I'm concerned which could have accounted for a number of things.
Dogs one and three showed strong signs of a natural talent for working, number three in particular had a good nose and if there was a pheasant hiding in cover would scent it and flush it out, stop and watch, absolutely no training from me to do that. Both one and three retrieved well either exposed or hidden lures and were oblivious to gunshots.
Number two loved to chase and hunt small furries, but most dogs do. Apart from that she couldn't be bothered to retrieve very much, got bored with trying to find a lure, was totally gun shy and was unbelievably scatty. Have any other gun dog breed owners found this?


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

And this is why I don't watch Crufts rrr:

My lab might have dodgy ears and no papers but at least he isn't fat :001_unsure:

I dislike showing and winning things on the basis of looks and conformation which you're born with. Largely why I never showed the horses and can't think I ever would. I love my dogs because of who they are and I still think health should be absolute paramount over absolutely everything


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

But don't people advise pet owners to buy show bred dogs and not working ones because of the drive? Would it be fair to have high drive dogs suitable for working in the field living as a pet and competing at shows?

A working bred collie is fine for me I think. Given our situation I really wouldn't want the chunkier, shorter, heavier coated show border collie, but from a drive pov I would expect the bench bred to be more suitable as pets than a working collie? Same with spaniels?

I personally have more of a problem with the dogs being bred to extremes that mean they can't breathe properly and have skin problems that kind of thing, than a show lab being chunkier than a field lab and not very good at retrieving (if he's not). I thought the winner was a bit chunky and wouldn't be my cup of tea, but I didn't think he looked grossly overweight? A less chunky working lab would be fat if he was a big as the show one, but should show and working dogs have the same drive and conformation?


----------



## HandsomeHound (Sep 1, 2012)

Having only recently become the owner of a gundog, I certainly don't profess any knowledge of gundogs as a whole. Based solely on looks, I liked the Bracco, the Munsterlander, the Curly coated retriever, the Weimaraner, the Red and White setter, the Wirehaired German Pointer, and of course the rather humungous looking Spinone, I can't say I liked the look of the winner, but I know nothing about the breed at all.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Siskin said:


> Interesting that is has been mentioned that show bred gundogs don't work we'll in the field, that they have lost the ability.
> I've had three golden retrievers. Numbers one and three had a little working lines on the dams side. Number two was entirely show bred and having recently checked her COI out somewhat inbred as far as I'm concerned which could have accounted for a number of things.
> Dogs one and three showed strong signs of a natural talent for working, number three in particular had a good nose and if there was a pheasant hiding in cover would scent it and flush it out, stop and watch, absolutely no training from me to do that. Both one and three retrieved well either exposed or hidden lures and were oblivious to gunshots.
> Number two loved to chase and hunt small furries, but most dogs do. Apart from that she couldn't be bothered to retrieve very much, got bored with trying to find a lure, was totally gun shy and was unbelievably scatty. Have any other gun dog breed owners found this?


Alfie being a show bred dog has the best nose, though lacking experience due to being a rescue than my working bred dogs. It is unusually good Wonder if it's because that's all he had before I got him.
Plenty of drive too 



Elles said:


> But don't people advise pet owners to buy show bred dogs and not working ones because of the drive? Would it be fair to have high drive dogs suitable for working in the field living as a pet and competing at shows?
> 
> A working bred collie is fine for me I think. Given our situation I really wouldn't want the chunkier, shorter, heavier coated show border collie, but from a drive pov I would expect the bench bred to be more suitable as pets than a working collie? Same with spaniels?
> 
> *I personally have more of a problem with the dogs being bred to extremes that mean they can't breathe properly and have skin problems that kind of thing, than a show lab being chunkier than a field lab and not very good at retrieving (if he's not).* I thought the winner was a bit chunky and wouldn't be my cup of tea, but I didn't think he looked grossly overweight? A less chunky working lab would be fat if he was a big as the show one, but should show and working dogs have the same drive and conformation?


That's how all those deformities started though, just little differences with each generation 

Though these never got anywhere near as bad as many I've seen, this site shows the slow decline 
Take particular attention to length of leg and tuck up
History RE


----------



## princeno5 (Jun 5, 2010)

hi,ben comes from pure working lines,his pedigree is mostly champions,but, he isnt interested in fetching,flushing,nothing.he would rather play with other dogs or just bum tuck round the fields,no drive at all,thats why breeders sold him.he can clear a 5ft gate though and is a skinny minnie full of muscle,


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

I kind of agree rona. I wouldn't like to see them any more chunky or short legged as I think that would start to compromise their health and ability to be dogs. If the breeders start to take them back to being a little less chunky it wouldn't be a bad thing.

What I'm trying to say I suppose is that I don't think drive and working ability is necessarily important for a show dog, I think it's more important that the show dog can be a dog and I don't agree that all of them can.

When looking at the lab in the show ring as an only vaguely interested bystanding Jane Bloggs, I would be looking to see whether he appears 'normal' lol, so hard to explain what I'm meaning, but not whether I think he'd do great out in the field with the guns.

I thought the dog looked pretty normal and quite happy really. 

If I was looking to actually buy a pure bred labrador, I'd be looking closely at health, lines, breeder ethics, temperament etc. and I doubt I'd look at show dogs, but I thought as a show dog he wasn't terrible and deserving of too much criticism about his size tbh. I could be wrong of course and if I poked him my finger might disappear into folds of fat, I don't know.  But I'd say although I'd prefer a longer legged, slimmer, lighter dog myself, I'm not sure how much that particular personal preference would impact on this breed's health and whether it would be appropriate criticism and comparison regarding this particular dog.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Elles said:


> I kind of agree rona. I wouldn't like to see them any more chunky or short legged as I think that would start to compromise their health and ability to be dogs. If the breeders start to take them back to being a little less chunky it wouldn't be a bad thing.
> 
> What I'm trying to say I suppose is that I don't think drive and working ability is necessarily important for a show dog, I think it's more important that the show dog can be a dog and I don't agree that all of them can.
> 
> ...


I don't look at it as just the individual. He looked a delightful character and will probably have a long healthy life, but he is just the next step in the decline of the Labrador as a breed as a whole.
He will stud many many puppies and he's just not right


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Crufts 2013 Best Labrador Puppy - Swanslake Melissa - YouTube

What do you think of the one they picked as best puppy? The video only has the final 2 I think.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

I liked the one that came first


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

If you look at this Kennel, the opposite seemed to be happening, albeit with the odd blip :thumbup:

SH CH Poolstead Pleased as Punch

Website_Caccia

Such a shame this influence is lost


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Elles said:


> Crufts 2013 Best Labrador Puppy - Swanslake Melissa - YouTube
> 
> What do you think of the one they picked as best puppy? The video only has the final 2 I think.


Quite nice :thumbup:

Love her movement 

The whole kennel seems pretty good 

Labrador Retriever : Females | Swanslake | Labrador Retriever


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> Not sure why one or two folk are saying Romeo's muzzle 'was too short' and that his head was 'wrong'?
> :


It looked verging on domed to me which is a definite nono


----------



## Thorne (May 11, 2009)

Elles said:


> Crufts 2013 Best Labrador Puppy - Swanslake Melissa - YouTube
> 
> What do you think of the one they picked as best puppy? The video only has the final 2 I think.


She's lovely! solid but moderate, one of the nicest-looking show Labs I've seen 


rona said:


> If you look at this Kennel, the opposite seemed to be happening, albeit with the odd blip :thumbup:
> 
> SH CH Poolstead Pleased as Punch
> 
> ...


More beautiful dogs here too, really like the look of Swanslake Rjanna and Magicrose.


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

Thorne said:


> They do say the camera adds 10 pounds! :lol:
> 
> Would love to get my hands on Romeo, or other winning show Labs for that matter, to see just how much of a fat covering there is. Looked like quite a lot, there was a fair bit of jiggle and not much in the way of tuck or waist. Seem to think I saw a flash of the last couple of ribs but could have been wrinkles?
> He looked like a real character though, think how much more bounce he'd have if he was leaner!
> ...


Yes I thought that...his back leg wasn't it?


----------



## Izzysmummy (Oct 12, 2011)

Malmum said:


> I totally didn't like much about the winner at all tbh. His head was far too broad for me and then tapered at the muzzle quite a bit 'Staffie-ish', as for his frame - well Kali looked like that before she lost weight!
> 
> I'm sure there must have been better examples in the breed group and I've seen far better looking Labs on here from Swarthy, Sleeping Lion and Dex - all look far more like real Labs to me. Very disappointed, I only hope they choose a decent looking Mal tomorrow!
> 
> ETA - I wish they would show some working Labs, I bet they're pretty smart.





Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> Can't see this at all myself. Honestly can't.
> 
> I do agree Romeo could have done with a bit of a waist. But again it puts me in mind of my brother's Lab who is a really 'blocky' boy. But it is sheer muscle - 100%.
> 
> I do agree it would be nice to see some working Labs at Crufts!


For those wanting to see some working labs at crufts here's the gundog display we watched yesterday! Gorgeous dogs, I loved Monkey and little Secret is adorable, such a little character and definitely my preferred look for a cocker over the show type.



Elles said:


> Crufts 2013 Best Labrador Puppy - Swanslake Melissa - YouTube
> 
> What do you think of the one they picked as best puppy? The video only has the final 2 I think.


I think she's a stunner!


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Leanne77 said:


> So, what is all this 'fit for function' people keep going on about, the KC themselves have made this their mantra, yet we're not seeing that philosophy being taken up by the judges.
> 
> Regardless of what I think of the lab, it was not fit for function in the slightest. It was just far too heavy set to do the work that is expected of labs nowadays. I find it so difficult to grasp that Romeo won over all those other dual purpose dogs who actually have tested working instincts as well as correct conformation.


I don't believe that Fit for Function has anything to do with working ability, but rather health.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

rona said:


> I don't look at it as just the individual. He looked a delightful character and will probably have a long healthy life, but he is just the next step in the decline of the Labrador as a breed as a whole.
> He will stud many many puppies and he's just not right


Could you explain why you feel this dog is the 'next step' in the decline of Labradors?

Personally, I would say the tens of thousands of backyard bred Labradors produced each year, bred with NO regard to health, temperament or conformation, are responsible for any 'decline' in this breed. Not a well bred, health tested, structurally sound dog with the classic Labrador temperament.

Odd statement.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

labradrk said:


> Could you explain why you feel this dog is the 'next step' in the decline of Labradors?
> 
> Personally, I would say the tens of thousands of backyard bred Labradors produced each year, bred with NO regard to health, temperament or conformation, are responsible for any 'decline' in this breed. Not a well bred, health tested, structurally sound dog with the classic Labrador temperament.
> 
> Odd statement.


Well said indeed. I could not agree more!

And having recently seen some Labs that have been used as breeding machines on a puppy farm, I too feel this is FAR FAR more of a worry.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

labradrk said:


> Could you explain why you feel this dog is the 'next step' in the decline of Labradors?
> 
> Personally, I would say the tens of thousands of backyard bred Labradors produced each year, bred with NO regard to health, temperament or conformation, are responsible for any 'decline' in this breed. Not a well bred, health tested, structurally sound dog with the classic Labrador temperament.
> 
> Odd statement.


Well as long as the BYB produces skinny labs that's fine I'm sure.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

labradrk said:


> Could you explain why you feel this dog is the 'next step' in the decline of Labradors?
> 
> Personally, I would say the tens of thousands of backyard bred Labradors produced each year, bred with NO regard to health, temperament or conformation, are responsible for any 'decline' in this breed. Not a well bred, health tested, structurally sound dog with the classic Labrador temperament.
> 
> Odd statement.


A BYB Lab isn't held up as the best though is it?
It's not going to influence anyone!

That dog was seen by tens of thousands of people  

As I said, just another step 

The same can be said of any breed, so why bother to improve at all?

I thought the Pedigree show people are trying to tell people how wonderful they are and how they are all for improving the breeds?


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

emmaviolet said:


> Well as long as the BYB produces skinny labs that's fine I'm sure.


Yep. I have seen many awful looking BYB Labs with terrible conformation. Many of them to my eye look like generic black dogs as they have lost all breed type.


----------



## something ridiculous (Mar 9, 2013)

labradrk said:


> I don't believe that Fit for Function has anything to do with working ability, but rather health.


Just yesterday you were claiming that they could work. Since it was pointed out that the dog you were referring to was not a very heavy set show dog, you are now claiming they don't need to work! Make your mind up.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

emmaviolet said:


> Well as long as the BYB produces skinny labs that's fine I'm sure.





labradrk said:


> Yep. I have seen many awful looking BYB Labs with terrible conformation. Many of them to my eye look like generic black dogs as they have lost all breed type.


Mmm Working dogs have such bad conformation that they can work a full day 3-4 times a week for up to 13 years 

Not all slim dogs come from BYB


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

rona said:


> A BYB Lab isn't held up as the best though is it?
> It's not going to influence anyone!
> 
> That dog was seen by tens of thousands of people
> ...


This dog being seen by tens of thousands of people is surely a GOOD thing. It means that people may actually research this breed and look for a decent breeder rather than the nearest litter off Gumtree.

Would you not rather see people buying a well bred pup from a health tested background with a classic temperament? because apart from the show types you have the working types, which may not suit the average person looking for a family pet. Then you have the BYB's which are not a good choice for obvious reasons.

Fact of the matter is that many people DO like this type of dog and it DOES suit many people when 95% of dogs are required to be nothing more than loved pets.


----------



## something ridiculous (Mar 9, 2013)

labradrk said:


> Yep. I have seen many awful looking BYB Labs with terrible conformation. Many of them to my eye look like generic black dogs as they have lost all breed type.


Fistly nobody is claiming that BYB labs are a good example of the breed.
Secondly your eye is obviously not that great anyway as you think that Romeo and Monarch look the same.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

rona said:


> A BYB Lab isn't held up as the best though is it?
> *It's not going to influence anyone!*
> 
> That dog was seen by tens of thousands of people
> ...


Oh, but they do, unfortunately.

i.e. when I was looking after a rescue dog recently who was from a really bad puppy farm. She was adorable but nowhere near any breed standard for the Lab, and she was smaller than any female Lab should be. But because she was so cute and friendly, plenty of people at local parks were asking me where she was from - and could I tell them which breeder and give them the number....?:mad5:

So while of course this is different to a dog at Crufts who is seen by millions, dogs from puppy farms can still have an influence.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

rona said:


> Mmm Working dogs have such bad conformation that they can work a full day 3-4 times a week for up to 13 years
> 
> Not all slim dogs come from BYB


I don't believe anyone said that working dogs have bad conformation?

Or that all slim dogs come from a BYB?

You misread those posts. I was commenting on BYB dogs not working bred dogs.


----------



## something ridiculous (Mar 9, 2013)

labradrk said:


> apart from the show types you have the working types, which may not suit the average person looking for a family pet. Then you have the BYB's which are not a good choice for obvious reasons.


Why can't a working type be a family pet?


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

something ridiculous said:


> Fistly nobody is claiming that BYB labs are a good example of the breed.
> Secondly your eye is obviously not that great anyway as you think that Romeo and Monarch look the same.


Your eye for reading posts is obviously not that great because I am pretty sure I have not said anywhere that Romeo and Monarch look the same. Please don't put words in my mouth, thank you. :thumbup1:


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

labradrk said:


> I am pretty sure I have not said anywhere that Romeo and Monarch look the same


I think you'll find that you did.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> Oh, but they do, unfortunately.
> 
> i.e. when I was looking after a rescue dog recently who was from a really bad puppy farm. She was adorable but nowhere near any breed standard for the Lab, and she was smaller than any female Lab should be. But because she was so cute and friendly, plenty of people at local parks were asking me where she was from - and could I tell them which breeder and give them the number....?:mad5:
> 
> So while of course this is different to a dog at Crufts who is seen by millions, dogs from puppy farms can still have an influence.


But no ones telling them that that dog is the best are they?

You all seem to be missing the point here and I don't know any other way to put it over.

The dog was delightful, probably sound, healthy and will live a long happy life, *BUT* surely no one can want the Labrador of the future to get any shorter, fatter or barrel like?
This dog was the next step toward that, and it makes me sad for the breed as a whole


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

labradrk said:


> I don't believe anyone said that working dogs have bad conformation?
> 
> Or that all slim dogs come from a BYB?
> 
> You misread those posts. I was commenting on BYB dogs not working bred dogs.





labradrk said:


> Your eye for reading posts is obviously not that great because I am pretty sure I have not said anywhere that Romeo and Monarch look the same. Please don't put words in my mouth, thank you. :thumbup1:


Oh it's everyone else?


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

something ridiculous said:


> Why can't a working type be a family pet?


I am starting to feel like a broken record here. PLEASE read my posts properly before putting words in my mouth. I did NOT say that a working type can't be a family pet. My previous two Labs were working bred and family pets, my current one is Monarch x a FT bred bitch and is a pet. I know a lot of working bred Labradors in pet homes.

What I did say was a working type _may not_ suit the average person. May not and average being the operative words there. I don't know about you, but when I think of many 'average' dog owners I know of, a working type Labrador does not suit. A lot of dogs that live around here are lucky to get a lead walk around the block.


----------



## something ridiculous (Mar 9, 2013)

labradrk said:


> Your eye for reading posts is obviously not that great because I am pretty sure I have not said anywhere that Romeo and Monarch look the same. Please don't put words in my mouth, thank you. :thumbup1:





> Unless you know most "heavy show Labs" personally, how do you know they have "lost most retrieve instinct"? I find statements like this a bit bizarre. My Labs sire was a "heavy show Lab" and yet he somehow managed to win an all-aged field trial.


Granted you did not say these exact words, however it was implied. Monach was a dual purpose lab and Romeo is a VERY heavy show lab. The two are not comparable on any level.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

However, everyone agrees that the winner of the lab puppy class is a step in the right direction and is lovely?

I swear I didn't know when I posted, I just looked to see what was up and coming and liked her too, but look at her breeding. 

If you follow Rona's link to her kennel, she's the last one pictured, click on her name and it takes you to her pedigree. Her dam is the girl pictured above her.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

rona said:


> But no ones telling them that that dog is the best are they?
> 
> You all seem to be missing the point here and I don't know any other way to put it over.
> 
> ...


I do agree with you that Romeo was on the upper degree of 'solid'.

I do also agree that I would not want to see any Labs any heavier.

That said, I don't think Romeo is some harbinger of doom who is set to usher in the end of healthy Labs 

Also, until and unless any of us have the pleasure of meeting Romeo, we can't really claim that he's terribly overweight. To reiterate: my brother has a Lab from a very good show kennel and he too is huge - but honestly, it's solid muscle.


----------



## something ridiculous (Mar 9, 2013)

labradrk said:


> I am starting to feel like a broken record here. PLEASE read my posts properly before putting words in my mouth. I did NOT say that a working type can't be a family pet. My previous two Labs were working bred and family pets, my current one is Monarch x a FT bred bitch and is a pet. I know a lot of working bred Labradors in pet homes.
> 
> What I did say was a working type _may not_ suit the average person. May not and average being the operative words there. I don't know about you, but when I think of many 'average' dog owners I know of, a working type Labrador does not suit. A lot of dogs that live around here are lucky to get a lead walk around the block.


And don't put words in my mouth either. I NEVER said that you said they can't be. But you did say that the options were show, BYB or working but working doesn't suit most. Therefore I was asking why you think that?


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

something ridiculous said:


> And don't put words in my mouth either. I NEVER said that you said they can't be. But you did say that the options were show, BYB or working but working doesn't suit most. Therefore I was asking why you think that?


I answered that in my last post.


----------



## something ridiculous (Mar 9, 2013)

labradrk said:


> I answered that in my last post.


I'm fully aware of that.


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> That said, I don't think Romeo is some harbinger of doom who is set to usher in the end of healthy Labs


Nobody but you has mentioned a detriment of health in the breed. Romeo is a perfect representation for why there is such a huge split in Labradors. The full name of the breed is Labrador Retriever. I wonder where that element of his breed "type" was displayed yesterday.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Elles said:


> However, everyone agrees that the winner of the lab puppy class is a step in the right direction and is lovely?
> 
> I swear I didn't know when I posted, I just looked to see what was up and coming and liked her too, but look at her breeding.
> 
> If you follow Rona's link to her kennel, she's the last one pictured, click on her name and it takes you to her pedigree. Her dam is the girl pictured above her.


:lol::lol::lol:

Rep for that. I didn't notice


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> I do agree with you that Romeo was on the upper degree of 'solid'.
> 
> I do also agree that I would not want to see any Labs any heavier.
> 
> ...


Muscle , fat what's the difference 

They shouldn't be blocks


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

shamykebab said:


> *Nobody but you has mentioned a detriment of health in the breed.* Romeo is a perfect representation for why there is such a huge split in Labradors. The full name of the breed is Labrador Retriever. I wonder where that element of his breed "type" was displayed yesterday.


Well, when people suggest or imply that the Labrador breed will go into decline after viewers see such an 'overweight' dog winning, it rather implies a decline in good health too, doesn't it...?

As for your last comment - how do you know he's not fab at retrieving? You're making an assumption.


----------



## something ridiculous (Mar 9, 2013)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> Well, when people suggest or imply that the Labrador breed will go into decline after viewers see such an 'overweight' dog winning, it rather implies a decline in good health too, doesn't it...?
> 
> As for your last comment - how do you know he's not fab at retrieving? You're making an assumption.


But you said that the lab was er... chunky with no waist!


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

rona said:


> Muscle , fat what's the difference
> 
> They shouldn't be blocks


I'd say there's a big difference. Muscle is healthy. Fat is not.

Nor would I describe Romeo as a _'block'. _

In fact he reminded me very much of two gorgeous Labs my own Lab plays with sometimes at a local park. The two are half brothers and again, very big, solid dogs. I guess you'd refer to these boys as 'blocks' too:


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> Well, when people suggest or imply that the Labrador breed will go into decline after viewers see such an 'overweight' dog winning, it rather implies a decline in good health too, doesn't it...?
> 
> As for your last comment - how do you know he's not fab at retrieving? You're making an assumption.


:lol: If that Lab has done a day's work in its life I'll use him at stud :lol:.

I may be making an assumption but it's a very accurate one. There is a reason why there is a special "working" (in the loosest sense of the word) certificate for show dogs - I don't think I need to expand on that.

That dog was bred for one thing and one thing only.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> I'd say there's a big difference. Muscle is healthy. Fat is not.
> 
> Nor would I describe Romeo as a _'block'. _
> 
> In fact he reminded me very much of two gorgeous Labs my own Lab plays with sometimes at a local park. The two are half brothers and again, very big, solid dogs. I guess you'd refer to these boys as 'blocks' too:


Dunno. Can't see their bodies :confused5:


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

something ridiculous said:


> But you said that the lab was er... chunky with no waist!


Even Clare Balding questioned his chunkiness! :lol:


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> In fact he reminded me very much of two gorgeous Labs my own Lab plays with sometimes at a local park.


As "gorgeous" as these dogs may be, they are not in the position of having something to contribute to the breed. They are, therefore, irrelevant.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

shamykebab said:


> As "gorgeous" as these dogs may be, they *are not in the position of having something to contribute to the breed.* They are, therefore, irrelevant.


In your opinion.

Are not a wonderful temperament and good health things that contribute to the breed...? Just asking 



shamykebab said:


> :lol: If that Lab has done a day's work in its life I'll use him at stud :lol:.
> 
> I may be making an assumption but it's a very accurate one. There is a reason why there is a special "working" (in the loosest sense of the word) certificate for show dogs - I don't think I need to expand on that.
> 
> That dog was bred for one thing and one thing only.


But I didn't say they were working Labs...

Actually, if you saw them move, you might revise your view a bit. They certainly seem like very fit dogs to me. Not that I'm an expert at all.

My point was simply that despite some folk here claiming that Romeo resembles a Mastiff  etc, or having a 'domed' head or whatever was said, in fact he's a typical show Lab - and I was simply posting the pics to try and illustrate this point.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

> That dog was bred for one thing and one thing only.


Does it matter, if he's happy, healthy, of good temperament, enjoys his job, and looks like a labrador? Pet dogs, PAT dogs, guide dogs, assistant dogs, sniffer dogs, chances are none of them have retrieved out in the field either. 

If the dogs are having their health compromised by being bred shorter and more chunky and being presented overweight in order to win at showing, then that's a separate and more important issue (to show dogs) than whether they can retrieve or not surely?


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> In your opinion.
> 
> Are not a wonderful temperament and good health things that contribute to the breed...? Just asking
> 
> ...


For goodness sake! In my opinion? Are these dogs that play in the park going to sire hundreds of puppies? Are they held up as the bench mark for the breed? They are nothing but happy, healthy pets and long may they stay that way!

Why should there be a discrepancy between show and working? Isn't it one single breed? As a committee member of one of the Labrador breed clubs who are trying very hard to inculcate more show members into the working side of things views such as yours make me very sad.

The essence of the Labrador is its job to RETRIEVE. That dog couldn't do a day's work in its life. It shouldn't have won the group, and seeing dogs like that win BOB over the last two years is a depressing indication that the breed is going backwards once again.

I thought we were out of the slump of the 90's and that show breeders were breeding dogs that at least _looked_ capable of carrying out a Labrador's job. It's sickening that we're heading back to the extreme once more.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Elles said:


> *Does it matter, if he's happy, healthy, of good temperament, enjoys his job, and looks like a labrador?* Pet dogs, PAT dogs, guide dogs, assistant dogs, sniffer dogs, chances are none of them have retrieved out in the field either.
> 
> If the dogs are having their health compromised by being bred shorter and more chunky and being presented overweight in order to win at showing, then that's a separate and more important issue (to show dogs) than whether they can retrieve or not surely?


Doesn't matter if he's being judged as just a dog, but it does matter if he's being judged against a breed standard as best of the breed. Labradors are not supposed to be as heavy as this, they are a moderate breed, not a heavyweight one. The problem is that the breed standard is open to interpretation and it is these 'interpretations' that are responsible for the exaggerations that have plagued other breeds. Those of us who love labradors do not want to see the breed go back to the extremes that were common 20+ years ago. Unfortunately, by rewarding this dog in the ring, that is exactly what is likely to happen.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> Are not a wonderful temperament and good health things that contribute to the breed...? Just asking


Of course they are, but if they were the only criteria there are plenty of goldies, flatcoats and many other breeds that could contribute to the breed


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

I didn't like the Lab that won, too heavy and overdone, lots of wobble and muscle doesn't wobble like that when they move. 

Thankfully there were some nice dogs in the gamekeepers rings, and I had fun in the morning handling one for a friend in a couple of classes, he won with the dog he handled for the fourth year in a row. So there are some good dogs still involved with Crufts. 

The bracco had it for me, moved absolutely superbly, the flatcoat was nice but nothing was a patch on the bracco when they were moved.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

shamykebab said:


> *For goodness sake!* In my opinion? Are these dogs that play in the park going to sire hundreds of puppies? Are they held up as the bench mark for the breed? They are nothing but happy, healthy pets and long may they stay that way!
> 
> *Why should there be a discrepancy between show and working? Isn't it one single breed? * As a committee member of one of the Labrador breed clubs who are trying very hard to inculcate more show members into the working side of things views such as yours make me very sad.
> 
> ...


Oh, do calm down.

Am I responsible for the show/working divide? Answer: NO.

It shouldn't have won in *your* opinion. Clearly the judge, an expert, and many others choose to disagree with you.

And having never met any of the Labs in question in this thread, you're really not in any position to state that they couldn't work. And even IF they couldn't, they are not being presented AS working Labradors.

Goodness knows what you'll be posting if Romeo wins BIS. Not sure you'll be able to type at all actually - you'll probably be too busy yelling in frustration


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

> Doesn't matter if he's being judged as just a dog, but it does matter if he's being judged against a breed standard as best of the breed. Labradors are not supposed to be as heavy as this, they are a moderate breed, not a heavyweight one.


Oh sorry, I didn't really mean the specific dog in question, but questioned that there's something wrong with 'bred for one thing only' as though breeding only for showing is a bad thing. I don't think it is, so long as the dog's health, temperament, etc isn't compromised in the process.

I don't believe that dogs initially bred to work (eg the Border Collie) should necessarily demonstrate that same ability and drive if they are bred 'just' for the show ring. To my mind that might even be detrimental to the individual show dogs who aren't having that drive and instinct satisfied.

So possibly when it comes to working ability and drive I could be convinced not just that there is a divide, but that there should be a divide. :confused5:

I wouldn't agree that a show dog should be fat and waddling and a working dog slim and fit though. Not when slim and fit would be better for the dog regardless of what he does. :thumbup1:


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> how do you know he's not fab at retrieving?


Interview with the winner here:

Crufts presented by the Kennel Club

You might get your answer in the background. :lol:


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Elles said:


> Interview with the winner here:
> 
> Crufts presented by the Kennel Club
> 
> You might get your answer in the background. :lol:


No, not really, you have the same over enthusiastic dog running in for retrieves, which does not prove he can work  

A collie, terrier or Labradoodle could do exactly the same!!


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

I thought it proved he couldn't retrieve, not that he could. lol


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Elles said:


> I thought it proved he couldn't retrieve, not that he could. lol


I couldn't see tbh, but I've answered more thoroughly on the other thread hen, not trying to be a party pooper but I am a bit anal retentive about the retrievers


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

well..it seem that they will follow the fate of basset hounds...

maybe the judge thought they were lardbradors?


even owner looked rather surprised to get so far...


but it has good side..I feel positively streamline now...so does Scrip...


----------



## Poddington (Mar 10, 2013)

Being completely honest here ... a lot of the Labradors in the show ring are incapable of working as a true gundog. They may retrieve dummies and pass the field trials but actual working? Pfft.

Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of dual purpose dogs who can do well in the show/working world, and some who continually prove people wrong about the 'whippets'/'mastiffs' not being able to show/work effectively, but really most people will pick *one* area and concentrate on that. They'll dabble in others, but generally it's a dog for work or a dog for show, not a dog to work and show.

I'm going to make myself exceptionally unpopular in my first post and state that whilst he is far from a dog I would personally take into the field with me he is not completely incapable of working. As far as I'm aware Mr Barberi does not actively work his dogs so you're quite right, he probably is as incapable as your next typical* show Labrador at retrieving.

Heck, I've seen Labradors whose sire and dam were prized by topnotch gamekeepers for their working abilities fail miserably at being working dogs either due to their own lack of interest or the basic inability of their owner.

The amount of people putting up posts about their happy, healthy fit for purpose Labradors and I've sat there holding my tongue because yes they're wonderful and marvelous and fabulous for their job but they go too far the other way. They're these lean, leggy dogs which do a fantastic job but do not show any of the broadness that the standard calls for.

I am curious though... how many people have actually seen Romeo in the flesh? Or are we all basing our judgments on what we have seen from Crufts highlights?

*I say that, and I know that some show Labs are quite adept at work and show. Generally it's the owner that cannot dedicate the time to both...


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

Having just read backwards through the last few pages, I think we need to remind ourselves of what the working side of a Labrador actually entails. Yes, in it's essence it's retrieving but with that task comes a whole host of different scenarios. Ok, so Romeo might have a good retrieving instinct but i'm afraid thats not all that should be taken into account. Whilst retrieving, a gundog is going to encounter, and expected to overcome all kinds of obstacles. These could be stiles, gates, ditches etc to jump over, hedges, fences etc to go under, vegetation to negotiate and of course swimming huge expanses of water if the dog is a wildfowling dog. But even if it isnt then it's still expected to be a good, capable swimmer.

I'm afraid that looking at Romeos build, whether he's fat or so called muscle, his huge frame just doesnt lend itself to retrieving in the conditions, and under the circumstances in which Labradors are expected to work. Can anybody imagine him swimming a river, running 300 yards up the side of a steep, bracken and bramble covered valley, jumping first a dry stone wall, then maybe some sheep fencing to fetch a cock pheasant, and then repeat it all on the way back? Seriously, does anybody think Romeo is capable of doing that? He might be able to carry something round in his mouth but he couldnt handle the terrain.

The Germans have the right idea IMO where most of their working dogs cannot be bred until they have past aptitude and natural ability tests.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

Romeo is a show dog. Gun dog is really just a classification at Crufts, it shouldn't mean the dog has to be top gun dog in the field. I can't imagine that most people really would want to take their top gun dogs around the showing arenas and get into the showing scene anyway.

Same with horses. There are various hunter classes divided by weight. Top show hunters don't hunt. They wouldn't be fit enough to hunt and they'd get blemished. Out in the actual hunt field you'd see anything from hairy cobs to ex racehorses. Even those who compete in working hunter classes are rarely actual hunters. Show hunters compete in conformation classes following a breed standard, pretty much the same as show labradors.

They are also fatter and less fit than real hunters. :smilewinkgrin:

For myself I don't see the problem. If people want to take their excellent gun dog shooting, or their good looking labrador showing. Horses for courses. 

Health and conformation issues in show dogs is far more relevant to my mind than whether a show dog could actually be a gun dog, though it's clear even if everyone agreed that the lab was fit, slim and healthy it still wouldn't be good enough.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

If they want to breed short fat block dogs that have no chance of ever working in the field as intended then they should be renamed as a different breed.
Any Lab, pet show or working should have the physical attributes to be capable of doing what the breed was intended for.

Could you really imagine half the show dogs being able to go after a slightly pricked Cock pheasant that ends up 3 fields away? :nonod:

The breed standard is there for a reason......to protect the integrity of the breed.......and in the Labradors case, that integrity is being pushed to the brink


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

Elles said:


> Romeo is a show dog. Gun dog is really just a classification at Crufts, it shouldn't mean the dog has to be top gun dog in the field. I can't imagine that most people really would want to take their top gun dogs around the showing arenas and get into the showing scene anyway.
> 
> Same with horses. There are various hunter classes divided by weight. Top show hunters don't hunt. They wouldn't be fit enough to hunt and they'd get blemished. Out in the actual hunt field you'd see anything from hairy cobs to ex racehorses. Even those who compete in working hunter classes are rarely actual hunters. Show hunters compete in conformation classes following a breed standard, pretty much the same as show labradors.
> 
> ...


I see your point, and i'm not saying all gundogs that are shown should also be worked in the field. However, where does the KC's 'Fit for Function' come into it then if dogs are being bred that could never do their intended function (and i'm only talking about breeds whose original function still exists today)?


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

I think I'd like to see fit for function mean function as a dog tbh. Many show dogs can't manage that one imo.

Fit for function as a gun dog out in the field should be proved out in the field and not really matter what the dog looks like imo. Showing is showing, it's a different hobby with different dogs. They are called something different. Show labrador and working labrador. 

The border collies in the show ring would be unlikely to be able to round up sheep and run 120 miles a day either and I don't have a problem with that. 

jmho though. If people think differently c'est la vie.


----------



## LexiLou2 (Mar 15, 2011)

Elles said:


> Romeo is a show dog. Gun dog is really just a classification at Crufts, it shouldn't mean the dog has to be top gun dog in the field. I can't imagine that most people really would want to take their top gun dogs around the showing arenas and get into the showing scene anyway.
> 
> Same with horses. There are various hunter classes divided by weight. Top show hunters don't hunt. They wouldn't be fit enough to hunt and they'd get blemished. Out in the actual hunt field you'd see anything from hairy cobs to ex racehorses. Even those who compete in working hunter classes are rarely actual hunters. Show hunters compete in conformation classes following a breed standard, pretty much the same as show labradors.
> 
> ...


But people with field trial champions and working gun dogs DO enter crufts, but they have different classes and are never shown on TV. The gamekeepers ring is as it says for working dogs, dogs that are worked out on a shoot, that have contributed to a shoot for a minimum of a season. Then you have the best field trialling bitch class (only one entry this year) and best field trialling dog (i think 8-10 dogs) in the gamekeepers ring best working labrador dog there were over 30 entries (there were classes for the other breeds too i just didn't see these) and in the team class 22 entries so there are a lot of working bred, working dogs at crufts you just never see them on TV.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

rona said:


> If they want to breed short fat block dogs that* have no chance of ever working in the field as intended then they should be renamed as a different breed.*
> Any Lab, pet show or working should have the physical attributes to be capable of doing what the breed was intended for.
> 
> Could you really imagine half the show dogs being able to go after a slightly pricked Cock pheasant that ends up 3 fields away? :nonod:
> ...


But then you're saying that the only benefit or value of a Lab is the work they do in the field. What about all the other roles Labradors fulfill so well - guide dogs, assistance dogs, medical detection dogs, drug detection dogs...?

Yes I'm well aware, before anyone tries to point it out again, that the breed's full name is Lab Retriever. But Labs do so many other jobs that, IMHO, to suggest that any who don't work out in the field or can't work in the field should be recategorised as another breed is not sensible.

Also, and this is just an analogy - weren't Dobermans originally created as protection dogs for their 'creator', who was a tax inspector/collector...? So would you then say that any Doberman who didn't have the aptitude or temperament for this work should be 'reclassified' as a different breed....?

Just my thoughts.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Leanne77 said:


> Having just read backwards through the last few pages, I think we need to remind ourselves of what the working side of a Labrador actually entails. Yes, in it's essence it's retrieving but with that task comes a whole host of different scenarios. Ok, so Romeo might have a good retrieving instinct but i'm afraid thats not all that should be taken into account. Whilst retrieving, a gundog is going to encounter, and expected to overcome all kinds of obstacles. These could be stiles, gates, ditches etc to jump over, hedges, fences etc to go under, vegetation to negotiate and of course swimming huge expanses of water if the dog is a wildfowling dog. But even if it isnt then it's still expected to be a good, capable swimmer.
> 
> I'm afraid that looking at Romeos build, whether he's fat or so called muscle, his huge frame just doesnt lend itself to retrieving in the conditions, and under the circumstances in which Labradors are expected to work. Can anybody imagine him swimming a river, running 300 yards up the side of a steep, bracken and bramble covered valley, jumping first a dry stone wall, then maybe some sheep fencing to fetch a cock pheasant, and then repeat it all on the way back? Seriously, does anybody think Romeo is capable of doing that? He might be able to carry something round in his mouth but he couldnt handle the terrain.
> 
> The Germans have the right idea IMO where most of their working dogs cannot be bred until they have past aptitude and natural ability tests.


But he ISN'T a working gundog, much like 95% of other Labradors out there. I cannot imagine many of the other dogs in the gundog category are actual working gundogs either. I could not imagine many of those dogs (American Cocker, Sussex Spaniel, Gordon Setter, etc etc.) being functional in the field at all. And on that note, what about the "Working" category? how many of those dogs work? or the Pastoral category? I bet most of those dogs have never even seen a sheep never mind herded anything.

In the grand scheme of things, provided the dogs are happy and healthy, does it actually matter? we have the breed split in many breeds and realistically, very little is going to change that. People who prefer a more agile, worky dog can get a working bred dog. On the other hand people who just want a family pet realistically do not care. If you asked the average dog owner how high working ability sits on their list of priorities when looking for a companion, 9 times out of 10 you will be met with a blank expression. They want a dog to walk, play with, love, etc., and do not care whether the dog can do a 300 yard blind retrieve and jump a 5 bar gate.

Luckily we have freedom of choice when it comes to picking dogs. Fact is plenty of people DO prefer the chunkier variety of this breed and DON'T care about working ability. I don't know why this offends some working dog people. Seriously, who cares? what is wrong with diversity within breed type? we all want different things and provided no one (or dog) is being hurt in the process, I just don't get what all the fuss is about.


----------



## GertrudeJekyll (Sep 4, 2010)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> But then you're saying that the only benefit or value of a Lab is the work they do in the field. What about all the other roles Labradors fulfill so well - guide dogs, assistance dogs, medical detection dogs, drug detection dogs...?
> 
> Yes I'm well aware, before anyone tries to point it out again, that the breed's full name is Lab Retriever. But Labs do so many other jobs that, IMHO, to suggest that any who don't work out in the field or can't work in the field should be recategorised as another breed is not sensible.


And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why the breed is splitting into two.


----------



## GertrudeJekyll (Sep 4, 2010)

labradrk said:


> I don't know why this offends some working dog people. Seriously, who cares?


The people who care are those who want to maintain a historic breed. It's not about offending "working dog people", it's about ensuring a popular breed who's original purpose is still being used today (unlike most other breeds) doesn't lose its very core.

It's astonishing how some people are unable to see the bigger picture.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

GertrudeJekyll said:


> The people who care are those who want to maintain a historic breed. It's not about offending "working dog people", it's about ensuring a popular breed who's original purpose is still being used today (unlike most other breeds) doesn't lose its very core.
> 
> *It's astonishing how some people are unable to see the bigger picture*.


Contrary to your rather insulting comment, some of us simply disagree with you. It's not an inability to see a 'bigger picture'.

We simply feel differently to YOU.


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

Just to clarify my point, i'm not saying that all gundogs should work, and all collies should work because thats plain unrealistic. What i'm saying is that, at the very least, they should _look_ like they are capable of work.

Labradors that have huge round bodies and short legs arent going to be capable of any kind of work, whether that be as guide dogs or drug detection dogs, if their joints have been compromised.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Leanne77 said:


> Just to clarify my point, i'm not saying that all gundogs should work, and all collies should work because thats plain unrealistic. What i'm saying is that, at the very least, they should _look_ like they are capable of work.
> 
> Labradors that have huge round bodies and short legs arent going to be capable of any kind of work, whether that be as guide dogs or drug detection dogs, if their joints have been compromised.


Did Labs or did they not originate as water fowling dogs? I am pretty sure the function the are expected to perform now is not exactly representative of what they were originally intended for.

It did used to make me chuckle at gundog training, some of these 'fit for purpose' working bred dogs with single coats shivering away. Some of them had to wear neoprene vests for water work because they couldn't handle the cold. So much for being representative of the breeds original purpose in these dogs case!

What correlation is their to being slightly shorter in leg and compromising their joints?

Also, Guide Dogs breed their own dogs, but most of them descend from show type Labradors rather than working ones.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

I reiterate my point about the Doberman.

Please someone correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this breed created by a tax inspector/collector who wanted the 'ultimate protection' dog...?

So does that mean that if Dobermans today who enter Crufts, don't have the aptitude for protection work, that they are not 'fit for purpose' and should be reclassified as a different breed...?

Seems like a fair question given that's what some folk are saying about Labs.


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

labradrk said:


> Did Labs or did they not originate as water fowling dogs? I am pretty sure the function the are expected to perform now is not exactly representative of what they were originally intended for.
> 
> It did used to make me chuckle at gundog training, some of these 'fit for purpose' working bred dogs with single coats shivering away. Some of them had to wear neoprene vests for water work because they couldn't handle the cold. So much for being representative of the breeds original purpose in these dogs case!
> 
> ...


The correlation I made was between big, heavy bodies, short legs and joints. Surely it cannot be good for the joints to carry such a frame? Is this not part of the argument against fat dogs (I mean fat dogs in general, not pointing the finger at any breed here)?

And I totally agree with you about single coated dogs. I will never understand why the GSP who originates in temperate Germany, has a single coat that does not protect it from cover or cold weather. Why it hasnt got a coat like a Lab is beyond me. Same goes for the Weim, Vizsla etc.

I picked up on the Guide Dog point because somebody else mentioned it so I used their example.

TBH, I dont even know why I care, I have no interest in Labs so it makes no odds to me how they look at the end of the day.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> But then you're saying that the only benefit or value of a Lab is the work they do in the field.


No, not at all, it is the most versatile breed out there which is why it is used in so many different areas. But, it is the breed standard that states certain traits are required for it to be a good working dog. It is, after all the show folk that go on about the breed standard and judge against it. 

TBH, I don't really care how the show folk think labradors should look, but it is an example of how showing produces exaggerated dogs. Something that has been seen in most breeds and which Pedigree Dogs Exposed highlighted some years ago. Fortunately, these exaggerations haven't led to health problems in labradors like the have in some other breeds yet, but they are still an exaggeration of the breed and shows that breeding for the show ring leads to exaggerations in a breed.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

> But people with field trial champions and working gun dogs DO enter crufts, but they have different classes and are never shown on TV. The gamekeepers ring is as it says for working dogs, dogs that are worked out on a shoot, that have contributed to a shoot for a minimum of a season. Then you have the best field trialling bitch class (only one entry this year) and best field trialling dog (i think 8-10 dogs) in the gamekeepers ring best working labrador dog there were over 30 entries (there were classes for the other breeds too i just didn't see these) and in the team class 22 entries so there are a lot of working bred, working dogs at crufts you just never see them on TV.


I presume these dogs don't have to be campaigned at numerous dog shows to qualify for Crufts? 

If the KC run separate competitions with different priorities for the actual working dogs, then I *really* don't see what the problem is. These dogs will maintain the breed from a working pov as it was meant to be etc. and the show dogs can carry on being show dogs, the guide dogs can carry on guiding etc.

Just as there's your beautified KC show collies and your not so beautified ISDS working collies.  Plus a multitude of other fit 'working' dogs of all types and sizes, agility, obedience, flyball etc.

Just because there's a small number of dogs competing at shows in pure showing, it doesn't mean that generally gundogs will lose their ability to be gundogs or border collies will lose their ability to herd sheep.

So long as they aren't killing the dog with breathing difficulties, shorter lifespans, inbred genetic disorders, fat bodies on small joints, etc I still don't see why show folk can't just carry on showing. 



> Labradors that have huge round bodies and short legs arent going to be capable of any kind of work, whether that be as guide dogs or drug detection dogs, if their joints have been compromised.


Agreed. The dogs aren't functioning well as dogs then, regardless of whether they look like they can work or not.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Given the size of the entries compared to the number of working dogs in the UK, you're absolutely right  The vast majority of working folk have absolutely no interest in showing, in fact, I'd say they don't like it because it leads to exaggerations. The Field Trial bitch class at Crufts had one entry this year , out of the many bitches awarded field trial awards up and down the country  If they had to show to qualify too, the numbers would be even smaller. 



> If the KC run separate competitions with different priorities for the actual working dogs, then I really don't see what the problem is.


They do... Field Trials  Unlike any other working competition they are only open to the relevant breed and only dogs on the breed register.


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

.....did'nt the lab originate from the St John's water Dog and had the same founding ancestors as the Newfoundland even at one stage being called 'little Newfoundlands' - given that, should they not be somewhat chunky ?

Here's a photo from the 1850's - although the dog is lying down it is clearly a heavy set animal

Their original job was working for fishermen and so it could be said that it is the 'working ' gundog world that has changed the shape of the original breed 










I loved Romeo - such a free moving balanced dog just oozing with Labrador bonhomie


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Some others.








- 1819 - from Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire and Frédéric Cuvier's Histoire Naturelle des Mammiferes (Volume I)

http://retrieverman.net/2010/12/14/st-johns-water-dog-1819/








- "Tip was an imported "Labrador" whose descendants were top field trial flat-coated retrievers, Pitchford Marshal and Monk."

Tip, a St. John's water dog | The Retriever, Dog, & Wildlife Blog










- http://retrieverman.net/2012/02/04/a-st-johns-water-dog-from-norway/

~1840 - Brindle! -










- http://retrieverman.net/tag/st-johns-water-dog/page/2/

Long coat -








-








- St John's Labrador

sourced - Please don't tell me you have a St. John's water dog | The Retriever, Dog, & Wildlife Blog








- "Richard Wolters found the last two St. John's water dogs in Newfoundland. The breed was extinct by the early 1980's."

Some might be interested in the source post for this set of silhouettes - http://retrieverman.net/2012/07/23/the-changing-labrador-retriever/










CC


----------

