for examination was to top and tail him, place the front feet well under him below the withers with the rear feet just behind the back of the dog so that a line drawn down for the buttocks to the feet would pass just in front of the toes. Then the head was held forward of the body and the tail was held straight out and behind the dog with, at most, a slightly upward curve. Little baiting was involved, the dogs’ backline was level as called for in the standard. Nearly constant baiting, done so that the head is held high with an exaggerated arch—too often with the neck over the withers, creating the look of a straight front lacking proper angulation—was never done. This changed in the later 1970s when a pro- fessional handler showing an outstand- ing bitch, but one with a rather plain head and low-set ears, started standing or kneeling in front of her and baiting her almost constantly so that her ears were erect and framing her head nearly always, improving the look. She started to do some serious winning, includ- ing a National Specialty BOS and BOB and multiple Groups. As a result, many exhibitors starting mimicking this bait- ing, thinking it would make their dogs win as well—even if the dog already had a very correct head and expression. Soon, everyone was doing it whether it improved the dog or not. The practice continues today. I know this story is true, for it was my bitch. It is always interesting to compare photos of top winning dogs of the same breed whose wins are years or even decades apart. For example, Ch. Saga- more Toccoa, a big winning Cocker Spaniel in the 70s, won the Sporting Group at Westminster in 1973. When compared to GCh. Casablanca’s Thrill- ing Seduction, the 2011 winner at the
same show, there are differences in presentation and the way the dogs are trimmed. Take nothing away from either dog. Both are outstanding exam- ples of their breed. However, over time, some of the words of the Breed Stan- dard are ignored. The Standard says: “The ears, chest, abdomen and legs are well feathered, but not so excessively as to hide the Cocker Spaniel’s true lines and movement, or affect his appear- ance and function as a moderately coat- ed sporting dog. Excessive coat…shall be severely penalized. Trimming to enhance the dog’s true lines should be done to appear as natural as possible.” The accepted trim for a Cocker Spaniel today results in a dog with much more coat than in the past. To be fair, it should be noted that in the minds of exhibitors the definition of “excessive coat” has changed over time. The allowed additional coat of today developed over many years. I remember Toccoa was criticized by some as hav- ing excessive coat. Beckham carries no more coat than nearly all of the other Cockers being shown. Still, the changes over time are interesting to note. Coat preparation has certainly changed in the last 40 years. Look at the Golden photos. Drawing on my experi- ence in Golden Retrievers, when I start- ed showing 1971, standard ring prepa- ration consisted of some trimming of the feet, ears and tail and, perhaps a minimal bit of coat removal when there was an excess in some areas of the body and a bath the day before the show. The dog was dried while wrapped in a towel to hold the coat flat against the body so that it would appear straight and wrap the body when dry. At shows, a bit of final minor trimming might be done and a light spray of a coat conditioner like Full Bloom might be brushed into
the coat. Powder was occasionally used on wet or dirty leg and tail feathering, but carefully brushed out before going into the ring. That was it. Total groom- ing time at the shows was anywhere from ten to twenty minutes. Today, the dog is kept standing on the table for at least an hour and often more while it is wet down and then dried with a strong blow drier that fluffs up the coat so that it stands away from the body. Various grooming prod- ucts are applied to hold the coat in its fluffed up position and to sculpt in a smooth outline to create the look of an arched neck and excellently angulated front assembly with a level backline— whether or not this reflects the actual structure of the dog. As with all breeds, the idea is to fool the judge’s eye into thinking the dog has it all. The wise judge uses his hands to confirm that what appears to be there is actually in place. Look at the two Goldens in the photos. Quite some evolution! The Golden is certainly not the only Retriever or Sporting Dog to receive this treatment. Not only are nearly all the coated breeds in the Group carefully sculpted, even the short-coated Labra- dor Retriever’s tails are routinely fluffed to create the correct “otter tail” that is desired, whether it is actually there or not. Changes in grooming presenta- tion are true in nearly every hairy Gun dog, the Brittany being, in general, one exception. The German Wired Pointer and the Wirehaired Pointing Griffon have seen some changes as well. I recall one breed comparison judges’ seminar where a professional handler took an untrimmed Griffon and groomed it so that it became an acceptable German Wirehaired Pointer. No, the two breeds are not that similar, but grooming can make them appear to be.
Ch. Chuckanut Par t y Favor O Noel, Westminster group winner in 2006. This dog shows more substance and more coat much more careful ly presented, in keeping wi th the cur rent method of presentat ion for the breed. He is l ighter in color than the 1967 winner and his over-al l presentat ion is in keeping wi th the more modern way of showing the breed.
Ch. Cragmont’s Hi-Lo, the Sporting Group winner at Westminster in 1967 (and the first Golden to earn that honor). There is a clear difference between this dog and the more modern example pictured here. Hi-Lo, an influential sire, carries much less coat and is much darker in color than the modern dog. He appears to be a less substantial dog, but its difficult to know if the difference is actual bone or just coat and presentation.
200 • S how S ight M agazine , M ay 2018
Powered by FlippingBook