[ SHOWGSD-L ] Undeserving dogs

From: "Helen Franklin" <helen@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 16:36:01 -0700
If I or anyone else were to answer these questions of Jane's, it would cause 
an uproar heard round the world.  With all of us, sometimes we win when we 
shouldn't and sometimes lose when we shouldn't.  If one of our dogs is 
perceived as "ugly"  and "faulty", that does not mean that our whole kennel 
is ugly and faulty, or our breeding program lacking.  It means one of our 
dogs is ugly.  If our ugly dog wins, the judge either likes ugly dogs or is 
crooked.  The fault lies with the judge if that case not the owner.  All of 
us have produced good ones and not so good ones...tis life.  Naming names 
would be hurtful and pointless.  What is done is done.  But whatever is 
done....it is our responsibility to "never forget."
Helen
Jane writes:

Jane Kerner <jkerner@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:jkerner@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:   I am an 
exhibitor.......not a judge.
  I have no judging license to "level the playing field".
  Let me try and understand what is being alleged here?
  I am just wondering?
  ........are any successes and/or losses that I, or anyone, may have had 
through the years the result of "crooked" judging?
  And, if you believe that my (or someone else's) dogs have won because of 
"crooked" judges and that they did not win on their own merit because of 
their quality...........what must you think of any of the breeding programs 
of any one who has achieved a modicum of success in the breed ring?
  You don't think their dogs deserve the successes achieved? You think the 
dogs were not worthy?
  If the judging is "crooked", then the dogs who are winning are not 
deserving. No?
  Perhaps we should start giving name to the "undeserving dogs"..........it 
would help to identify these "dishonest" judges.
  If someone would start naming "undeserving" dogs who have been successful 
in the breed ring, then we will be able to give names to the judges who are 
"crooked". No?
  I have always valued the Red Book and the information it offers. It is a 
breeder's hand book and a wealth of information for those who will read. The 
results are tabulated more than one way.
  Are the dogs in the Red Book included in the tabulations because "crooked" 
judges have given them titles they don't deserve?
  Could someone name a deserving dog who should have finish his Championship 
and didn't because of "crooks" in the center of the ring?
  This sword which has been unsheathed cuts both ways.
  Jane Kerner








============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2006.  All material remains the property of the original 
author and of GSD Communication, Inc. NO REPRODUCTIONS or FORWARDS of any kind 
are permitted without prior permission of the original author  AND of the 
Showgsd-l Management. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 

ALL PERSONS ARE ON NOTICE THAT THE FORWARDING, REPRODUCTION OR USE IN ANY 
MANNER OF ANY MATERIAL WHICH APPEARS ON SHOWGSD-L WITHOUT THE EXPRESS 
PERMISSION OF ALL PARTIES TO THE POST AND THE LIST MANAGEMENT IS EXPRESSLY 
FORBIDDEN, AND IS A VIOLATION OF LAW. VIOLATORS OF THIS PROHIBITION WILL BE 
PROSECUTED. 

For assistance, please contact the List Management at admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx

VISIT OUR WEBSITE - URL temporarily deleted due to AOL issues
============================================================================
[ SHOWGSD-L ] Undeserving dogs

Other related posts:
