27/08/2025
Permission to repost body but not comments. Thank you.
This is a major drawback of the AKC style of comparison judging.
‐-----‐------------------‐---------------------------------
This was sent to me to post for them via an AKC judge as a discussion topic they would like exhibitors thoughts on.
Jacqueline - there has been a great deal of discussion regarding magazine ads and how they affect judging. Friends who know I have published a number of articles asked me to write about it. The article does not point out any judge in particular and I think the public's concerns are valid. It could also be a chance for judges to comment and give their side. Trouble is I am still actively judging and don't wish to screw myself because you do not allow anonymous posting. I am putting it here for your perusal and am asking for your recommendation where it can go for level headed discussion Thank you: Magazine Judges. Let’s talk about magazine judges. These are the judges that, almost without fail, can be relied upon to put up the most well advertised dog of a breed when they judge in any given area of the country. Any exhibitor that has consistently shown in conformation for years knows that the most advertised dog is often not the best dog in the ring, but you can bet it is owned by one (or more) owners that have a fair amount of disposable income. Judges not confident in their breed knowledge see ads featuring a string of pictured judges with the dog and form the opinion it must be an exemplary example of the breed. They are almost afraid NOT to put it up.
A friend happened to share a breakfast table at a hotel with a couple judges when the question came up whether or not judges looked at the magazine ads. The answer was a definite “yes.” In fact one judge suggested that if someone felt they were not winning as much as they deserved, they should “up” the advertising. Also factor in that there can be
artistic doctoring going on with many of those ads. Is the dog pictured actually what it looks like in real life?
The mega bucks that keeps a dog in the top ten or twenty in the country is unlikely to be spent on an extremely poor example of a breed. But many a person has dropped out of the show ring, not because they don’t have a competitive dog, but because they feel they just cannot get past the financial backing of the heavily advertised competitor. They are often still working, decided this sport would provide good weekend outings, and decided the money they are able to spend would go for entries, travel and lodging, and not splashy ads. Should the very deserving, but lightly advertised dog that gets to fewer dog shows not win due to being less known? Judges must have the courage of their convictions to do the right thing.
So look in the mirror judges. Is the dog you put up that day truly the one that had the best breed type, could move soundly and correctly, and deserved the win for reasons other than you recognized the faces surrounding it? Or did you decide to reward the poor front and so-so movement because it stood like a statue and was with a big name? Do you feel some people deserve more wins because they put more money into the sport? A judge’s job is supposed to be judging breeding stock that hopefully will go on improve each breed.
