I've been studying the standard like crazy lately, and I wanted to see how my Sienna compared to the illustrated standard. Well that was problematic as she is still a growing puppy, so I decided to try to compare a Ch. lab that has been winning big events this year to see how they match up. Here's what I came up with.
This is not an exact science as I don't know heights of the dogs, etc. I did this purely for fun and information purposes in my quest for knowledge concerning my beloved labby's.
Red is the standard, white is the show lab
In this picture, the red is the standard, gray is the show lab (same dog as above)
So? Comments, what do you think?
I prefer the look of the dog in the red
Is the dog you chose Nick by any chance
To err is human:To forgive, canine."
I'm interested in the responses to this.
Dani, Rider & Rookie
SHR Watson's Safari Rider, JH, WC, CL1-R, RA, CGC, TDI
SHR Endeavor Put Me In Coach, RN, WC, CGC
Member Since 6/2003
I much prefer the red dog, but any lab is a good lab!
Whomever the dog is that the outline was drawn from in gray is not my idea of a great Labrador. He has no front and a curled tail and a short muzzle. I prefer most of the red - better front, tail, and balance. I don't prefer either head - red has too little backskull whereas gray has a short muzzle.
This spurred a debate on another forum where show dogs are getting bashed for being too small and short legged and even bad temperaments are being thrown around like that is the norm for show dogs. Shame. Someone even showed up from the hunting/retriever section who just loves to bash show dogs and jumped on them not for being too short, etc as the thread was debating but saying <yet again sigh> that a JH is not title enough to be called a hunting retriever. Whatever. It really irritates me to know end that only a handful of people have known that Clint (my black boy) is a Labrador in the 9 + years of owning him. The general public has no idea what a correct Labrador should look like because there are so many inferior individuals being bred by puppy mills/backyard breeders. Grrrrrr. I got into the thread mainly because the people saying that they are too short, too fat, etc are basing their opinions on their one and only dog who in one person's case came from a rescue. It's fine that we all see our dogs as "ideal" and "perfect" no matter what the look like but I feel they shouldn't bash other people's dog if they are not their cup of tea going as far as saying that show dogs do not look like Labradors are supposed to look like!
I have to agree with you, Sharon, about both of the outlines above. Neither is MY idea of a great labrador, but, I'm not a judge, nor pretend to be.
Most people have never seen a show labrador or a field labrador for that matter. When I say field labrador, I mean specificly breed for the field trials with a pedigree to prove it. Most see the 'pet' bred lab, which can look a lot different from the two. Not that any of the three are 'bad' labradors!
A person can put any dogs outline on that 'standard' and make up what they want.... Some people forget that a lab shown in Alaska may look different than a lab shown in Arkansas. There is a variety in any 'type' of labrador, period. Whether it be show, field, or pet. Just as there is a variety in Goldens, German Shepherds, Aussies, etc, etc. I like my kind of labrador and you will like yours, whether each is 'right' or not, well we can open another can of worms on that one!!!
And the Dostaff Girls:
Abby, Anna, Ava, Brandy, Cali, Holly, and Ruby (and Dixie, too)
The red outline is straight out of the illustrated standard, so isn't that what a lab is supposed to look like? I'm really confused. People on here keep saying that know one knows what a proper lab should look like because of BYB. I agree about the BYB, but how can you say there are things you don't like about the red outline when that is the standard? So, what should a lab look like. I thought the standard is what people are supposed to strive to have their labs look like? And just so everyone knows the other outline is Westminster BOB.
There was only one person bashing show labs on the other thread. Everyone else was respectfully stating opinions that just happen to differ from yours. I know I was one person whose opinion about what labs are looking like in the show ring is different, but I'm certainly not basing my opinion on one lab I've met. I've been studying the standard (probably read it 100+ times by now), and from looking at hundreds of labs at shows, events, and also studying labs in pictures, etc. I really didn't mean to offend you in anyway, or imply that your labs aren't lab like. I think your dogs are beautiful. My only objective here is to try to figure out what a lab is supposed to look like, and why the labs that are currently winning big in confo are winning, as I really want to do well in the show ring with my baby!!
Let me just say.........Big winning doesn't always equal correct.
That drawing is the artist's interpretation of the standard. Figure out what you like. Afterall, if the dog shows ended tommorrow, you would still have to like what you see out in your backyard.
What Peggy said. Neither is my ideal.
♣ Laura ♣