|
During my time in
Junior Showmanship, I had many strange requests asked of me as a
handler. Sometimes judges wish to test the juniors’ knowledge,
and sometimes they wish to see how well they can take direction.
There are many reasons judges do the things they do, sometimes
for explainable reasons, and sometimes for reasons not
understood by anyone but themselves. However, there have been a
few requests that I have either experienced or witnessed that I
believe to be faulty on the part of the judges.
At a recent show,
I watched a judge instruct one junior with a table breed to
stack up her dog for examination in front of the table. The
judge then proceeded to squat down to examine the dog on the
ground, and continued with the individual gaiting pattern as
usual. Disregarding what the results of that day were, I don’t
agree with the instructions given to that junior.
Never in a
conformation ring would a judge request that a handler stack
their small (table) dog on the ground for examination. A judge
would not be able to thoroughly and properly go over the dog, as
they would on a table. So why would a judge have a junior
practice their individual examination improperly for the breed
of dog they are handling?
This is not the
first time I’ve witnessed a judge encourage handling
inappropriate for a breed. I’ve seen a judge reprimand one
junior for freestacking their Shetland Sheepdog on the table, a
breed which is traditionally handled as such. On another
occasion a judge told a junior that they placed their Bedlington
Terrier’s front legs too close together when stacking, despite
the fact that the breed has a narrower front structure than
most, requiring their legs to be placed closer together. Yet
another suggested that a junior would have placed better in the
class if they had straightened the front on his Welsh Corgi-
obviously not knowing that the ideal front on a Welsh Corgi is
that of “a slight turnout of approximately 30 degrees”.
|
|
One of the key
elements of Junior Showmanship is being able to follow the
instructions of the judge. Still, Junior Showmanship should also
replicate the experiences in the breed rings, as the ultimate
purpose of junior handling is to prepare these boys and girls to
handle in “the big kids’ rings”.
When judges try
too hard to test the astuteness of these kids, they lose sight
of the big picture. No longer does the ring procedure reflect
what would be asked of them in a normal conformation ring.
Instead it becomes its own three ring circus with the young
handlers performing every trick asked of them. The concentration
is taken away from handling their respective breeds as they
ought to be handled.
In addition, judges themselves need to be educated enough to be
able to recognize proper handling of the various breeds they may
encounter in their rings. In this way, they may be productive in
producing future handlers in our sport that do things as they
ought to instead of what is commonly
accepted as “stereotype handling.”
I suppose the
question should be asked: “What is more important in Junior
Showmanship, a junior’s ability to follow every direction given
to him/her (no matter how silly), or a junior who is able to
correctly show his or her dog to the dog’s best advantage?”
Obviously, both
are important, as even handlers in the breed rings are sometimes
given unconventional instructions. It’s important for Juniors to
follow instructions, but it’s also important that they know
their respective breed(s). Judges not only need to give
reasonable instructions, but they also need to be well versed on
the various breeds and any breed- specific handling that occurs
in conformation rings. When judges fail to keep these things in
mind, then it’s the Juniors who suffer.
- Brigette |
