From The Publisher
Click here to read the complete article
By Tom Grabe
During my time as an exhibitor, then a professional handler, I had the good fortune of showing under some judges that I consider to be the finest dog experts of their time. Many of you remember Lang Skarda, Anne Rogers Clark, Mel Downing, Don Jones and Maxine Beam. There was Derek Rayne, Carlos deBango and Richard Guevera. I’ll never forget Herman Felton and Dorothy MacDonald. These people along with many others defined the term ‘dog man’ or ‘dog woman’. They were breeders, handlers and everything else that involved dogs. Dogs were their life and it was reflected in their mannerisms and the way they approached the sport as judges.
There was a certain seriousness to their demeanor. There was also a reverence for the sport that was obvious when you spoke to them about dogs. An exchange with any of these people made you aware of the depth of their expertise. I had nothing but respect and the deepest admiration for them. I wanted to be like them. I read about these people, and I talked to anyone who knew them. I wanted to know how they became the iconic figure I saw in the ring.
Needless to say, a win under any of these people carried more weight than one under another more ordinary judge. A critical comment was a teaching moment. I remember when Mrs.?Clark chastised me for showing a dog she admired in less than optimal condition. She didn’t care that we were in a race, she was disappointed I showed him to her out of coat… really out of coat! She had rewarded him before but not on this day; then she explained to me in no uncertain terms that I should never, ever show her a dog, especially one she liked, in poor condition. It was a lesson learned and taught by one of the best.
There was a reason these great judges were respected and admired. They had done it all. Many were handlers, most were breeders, and every one of them knew dogs. They couldn’t be fooled by an outstanding grooming job or great presentation. They weren’t intimidated by the owner or handler of a dog. They knew dogs, and that confidence was apparent every time they walked in the ring. They were decisive and they could explain the reason they picked one dog over another.
Since I don’t show dogs now, I wonder sometimes if some of today’s more popular judges have the same level of experience as the group?I mentioned. I know some do, but I am not sure about others. I see some people judging groups and Best in Show at some of the most important shows in the country and I wonder about their background in dogs. Were they breeders? Did they show dogs? Did they study at the knee of a great dog person? I don’t know their background.?The fact that I never knew about them when I was a handler doesn’t mean they aren’t accomplished.?However, it does make me wonder how they rose to fame. There are times when I wonder if these people are hired based on what they did outside of the ring rather than inside it; and that is what concerns me.
Who knows, maybe I’ll look back on these judges 20 years from now with the same fondness I have for those mentioned at the beginning of this editorial. I hope that’s the case. However, I will be disappointed if I look back a couple of decades from now and see people who were hired to judge at the highest levels of our sport because of the shows they ran, the positions they held, or the social circles they maintained.
Editor’s Note: The photographic essay on pages 298 and 300 of the February issue was incorrectly credited to Michelle Steigmeyer. Karen Evasuik was the photographer of this essay and credit should have been given to her. We apologize for this error.
Short URL: http://caninechronicle.com/?p=72537
Posted by ralbee
on Mar 12 2015. Filed under Current Articles, Editorial.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Comments are closed
