|
In my last article I discussed a
disturbing problem that I’ve observed growing in the Junior
Showmanship ring over the years. In quite a number of cases
Juniors have been asked or expected to handle their given breed
incorrectly. With examples and some speculation as to the
purpose for some of these circumstances having been talked
about, let us now ponder what can be done in such a situation.
Let me first begin by saying that in
the AKC Rules and Guidelines for Junior Showmanship Judging it
clearly states (in Sections 4, 5, and 6) that “As a judge of
Juniors at an all breed event it is essential to be familiar
with the appropriate presentation for every breed.”, and that
“The actual routine of judging is to be consistent with the
procedures utilized when judging conformation…..It is the
responsibility of the judge to be aware of the appropriate
presentation for all breeds, which is to include knowledge of
which breeds are normally examined on a table.” With this being
said, the rules conclude by saying that “The judge should
examine and evaluate the class of Juniors in four basic areas:
proper breed presentation, skill in the individual dog’s
presentation, knowledge of ring procedures, and appearance and
conduct….A judge should not confuse the ability of a Junior to
take directions with the Junior’s ability to handle his dog.”
However as wonderful as all of this may
seem, the problem lies in the courses of action available for
handlers when they feel they are “getting the short end of the
stick”. The truth is, there is little official action that can
be taken other than reporting the incident to the AKC Field
Representative present, after the fact, and allowing them to
deal with it (which will likely result in them simply observing
that judge in the future). Not to mention that many people would
be apt to view this as going and tattling on the judge because
they didn’t receive the results they had hoped for. Is there a
better way of handling such things? Possibly, but without
babysitting the rings, it would be difficult to enforce
anything. So this being the case, what are the other available
options?
In essence, it simply comes down to the
Junior Handler making a decision based upon what his/her goals
are. If one’s goal is simply to please the judge with the
purpose of winning, they can ignore the strangeness of the
situation and simply follow the judges’ demands. As a rule,
judges are the ringmasters, so yielding to their requests will
certainly never count against a handler. It’s when someone
decides to do something against the grain that judges become
irritated and generally penalize that person accordingly. In
addition, it is also possible that the judge wishes for a
particular maneuver to be executed so that they may make a
decision based upon a Junior’s ability to guide the dog they are
handling. |
|
Now it is important to remember that if one is not sure
about the instructions given to them, they can ask the judge
to clarify in the chance that they perhaps misunderstood.
However, once the clarifying statement has been made, there
is no deciding to make the “innocent” mistake of doing
something else. This becomes a point of no return, and going
against what a judge wishes to be done is blatantly
disrespectful.
But, if the handler happens to be working a young dog that
is not yet ring wise, or if they themselves do not wish to
do something that is incorrect for their breed, then they
would possibly choose to do things as they ought to,
feigning ignorance of the judge’s request and pleading
naiveté. Now in most circumstances, this means sacrificing a
chance at winning. As previously stated, judges generally
become irritated with an individual who ignores their
instructions. But sometimes it’s worth it. That’s for the
individual to decide.
Personally, I’ve done both. While in Junior
Showmanship, I often found myself working with young,
clueless puppies that needed all the correct practice that
they could get. Not to mention that my sense of pride in my
ability to do what was customary in the conformation rings
probably kept me from some ribbons on more than one
occasion. But there were times when I was chasing a win or
two for whatever reason that I would go for an approach that
made my rather ordinary handling seem “stylish”, and
generally my efforts were reinforced. Was I frustrated with
having to make an executive decision on how to present my
dog based more upon the judge than the dog itself?
Endlessly. But such is the way of things, and unfortunately
they don’t seem to be getting better.
In the end, I see this issue becoming less problematic if
there was a way for the AKC to integrate more breed
knowledge into the judging requirements for Junior
Showmanship. Regrettably, it would probably result in more
“breed” judges running the Junior Showmanship rings, which
would lead to more judges who would be inclined to judge the
merits of the dog (even subconsciously) rather than the
skills of the handlers. Perhaps if there was a minimum of
experience in a certain number of breeds from every group,
it would at least contribute as a benefiting factor. I am
hard-pressed for ideas when it comes to this particular
matter, but I am certainly open to suggestions.
- Brigette |
