# The darkening apricot, nose color, and breeding questions



## BorderKelpie

This is just my opinion and I could be waaaay off, but she is beautiful, has a great temperment and personality and you are planning on all the required/requested health testing. 

I personally think she could be an asset to her breed on just her temperment alone, but add to that her spectacular coloring (IMO) and as you say, her poodliness (had to scroll up to sheck on spelling lol) - I'd say go for it!

I just wish I lived closer and had more room. I'd put a deposit down now for a pup out of her.  A girl can only dream, you know.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

outwest said:


> I have some questions as I start to ponder breeding my girl in a couple years or spaying her. The breeder is supportive of allowing breeding to the right sire if her testing is good. If you don't feel like listening to my yammering, skip to the bottom for my questions please.
> Thank you!
> 
> Darkening coat:
> I was taken aback when my little odd colored cream standard began to darker instead of lighten to an off white. She is now a year old with no end in sight to the darkening. I mentioned before that every time she is trimmed she appears a little oranger, a little clearer. It was suggested that was because of sunfading on the outside of her hair, which is quite possible. But, honestly, I am not crazy. This girl is getting darker and oranger. Since I hadn't heard of a poodle getting darker, I thought I would try to research it some and came across this:
> 
> "Apricots are usually deep in color when whelped and lighten gradually until the age of two yrs., when they gradually deepen again. _[not the case with mine]_They usually end up the same color basically as the first layering and depending upon how coarse and how long the coat is, the jacket may be many times deeper. However, _*there are lines of apricots which progressively deepen throughout their lives. This type will be a dull orangish or a very deep tan, in color as young puppies.*_ _[This is what mine looked like]_ Both types must have the same color all over. At puppy that is light orange at six wks., with a white face and feet ( and has started to patch at the skin ) will mature into a white with orange guard hairs. If it is a bright or light apricot at that age, it will be a deep cream with orange guard hairs at maturity. If you cut this color down, it appears cream, _[mine looks quite orange when cut down]_ but when in long show coat it looks a good color. So the longer the hair the deeper the color."
> 
> When I got my puppy, she was an odd, off color, kind of a dullish deep gray/tan. Her tummy skin was bluish (don't know how else to describe it). No one had chosen her yet. My theory was because of the strange color. I didn't care because she was so full of personality. Here was her color as a newborn (she is the darker one straight down):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we called her our little paper bag:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She is no longer tan. She is light apricot. I can hardly call her cream, although she is registered cream. Sorry for the crummy picture, but I just took it tonight in a hurry. It is so hard to get an accurate picture of her color, but this is pretty close. To be honest, her ears seem to be getting reddish!? Usually the camera washes her out and she looks whitish (like in my signature) but she isn't:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nose:
> In addition to the changing color and darkening of her coat, in the last couple weeks her nose is not holding onto the pitch black that it was. It is turning a very dark hershey chocolate color (you can see it in the picture). It still looks pretty on her and is not the brown poodle color of nose. I hope it doesn't go pink! Yikes. Her eye rims remain black, her lips are black (no fading there) and her eyes are very dark (almost black, hard to see the pupils).
> 
> Her pedigree is 80% black. There is one brown in there several generations back as well as one cream and a full line of apricots (but they are three generations back). WAY back is one silver. Other than that, all black.
> 
> Here are my questions:
> 
> 1) Nose questions:
> Is the pigment they are born with the pigment they are considered to have? Did the one brown in her background cause the black to begin to go? Is it common for apricots to lose their black noses? Would a black nose that faded on a light apricot dog be considered a fault to the degree that she shouldn't be bred? Or, is that something which could be mediated by choosing the right sire for her?
> 
> 2) I think her color is pretty because it shimmers and glows, like a sunset almost. Is there a way to encourage the color and ensure the black points stay strong? Like, by breeding to another apricot with black points that stayed black? Or, breeding to a black with some apricot background? Someone also said a silver, but wouldn't a silver be introducing a fading gene? I don't think she carries a fading gene since she has not faded and had nonfading parents.
> 
> These questions are premature, obviously.
> 
> Also, she is a UKC grand champion at 10 months of age and did it with very little effort, but was never shown in AKC partly because she is a small standard (about 22 inches) and partly because I wasn't prepared to do that when I bought her. I only decided to show her when she started getting prettier as she grew. I tried it for fun at 6 months old and she won. I thought she could be bred to a fullsized male (she isn't too small for that).
> 
> Why I am thinking of breeding her?
> She has an interesting, diverse pedigree, lots of sparkly poodliness and has an awesome personality. Her conformation has plusses and minuses like them all. I either want to breed her and keep one of her puppies for my own or spay her and buy another puppy. There is no reason for me to deal with an unspayed dog if I am not planning on breeding her.
> 
> Thank you for your thoughts! I also thought it might be interesting to others when thinking about color breeding and keeping the points dark.


I think, and have always thought that Bonnie is a stunning little girl! She most certainly is big enough to be bred to a full sized male. If I were to breed her, I would try to find a glorious apricot or red with coal black, holding pigment, or breed her to a black. She could be going through winter nose, which is pretty typical in apricots, creams, reds and some whites. Are her dishes glass or stainless? How do you store her food? It should never be stored in a plastic bin, and food and water should never be served in plastic dishes. This can lighten pigment. You can also ask your vet about adding vitamin D or kelp to her diet to help retain pigment if it is winter nose. Brown pigment is acceptable in apricots and reds, though not preferred. It seems to be a flaw that is easily remedied. Our Holly's nose faded terribly and the colour never came back. Her daughter's also faded, though not as much and a little later. Her grandchildren, the result of breeding to a male with coal black pigment and dark skin at seven years old, all have pitch black points that I am certain is not going to fade...all the result of one generation bred to a dog whose pigment was a consideration.

Our puppies darken a lot from birth...usually to about 15 months old. Then at two they begin to fade somewhat, everyone to varying degrees, some a lot, some hardly at all. 

I think Bonnie could produce some stellar pups if bred to the right male. Good luck with everything!!


----------



## outwest

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> Are her dishes glass or stainless? How do you store her food? It should never be stored in a plastic bin, and food and water should never be served in plastic dishes. This can lighten pigment. You can also ask your vet about adding vitamin D or kelp to her diet to help retain pigment if it is winter nose.


Her food bowl is stainless steel, her water bowl is ceramic, but her food is stored in a plastic antproof container (we have ants here that find their way into everything that isn't protected). Do you think it would be better to store it in it's own bag? 

I thought of winter nose, but I live where it is sunny most of the time. I feel her nose is not holding her blackness because it isn't, not because of a lack of sun. I could certainly add some vitamin D to her food and stop using the plastic food container, but my whippets food is in the same type of container and his nose is black. I have been throwing an Omega 3 capsule in her food for dinner, but I haven't seen any difference. 

Mainly, I was wondering if her nose would be a killer in whether to breed her or not. Also, her smaller size means she wouldn't likely produce any huge dogs, but I think there are other people producing large standards for those who wish them. There are people interested in average sized ones. 

I firmly believe no poodle should be bred if not an asset to the breed. I think she could be an asset even if she didn't prove herself in AKC. She is muscular and agile, she is smart and has a pretty face. Her ears have very little hair inside them and her eyes do not drip or goober up ever. She has a beautiful even bite, a good chin and robust health at this point (she has never had an ear infection or as much as one itchy spot on her). Her coolio coloring seems a bonus to me. A couple of the standard puppies being born to the breeder now I would practically die to have. I was thinking of getting a gorgeous black recently and lost out because I hestitated. grrrr. Then I was looking at a brown, but realized a brown was not right for my situation. Then I thought I could have one myself through Bonnie. The breeder retains co-ownership and is encouraging and supportive, so that is terrific. She would need a longer legged guy for more height. 

It would be fun to try one in AKC after so many years of the line being away from it. I don't see why I couldn't do that with one of her puppies. 

The wait to breed her would also be better because then my whippet would be older, too. Bringing another puppy into the house now when Bonnie is still young would be harder. 

Thank you for listening to my thoughts. It is so nice to have this forum to talk about these things on. Everyone around me thinks I am a little bit crazy to think of breeding puppies. It has been a long time since I had puppies (over 20 years now). I don't see why I couldn't try to have one litter with her! There are no guarantees, I know from experience, but still it is exciting for me to think about.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

The Whippet's nose will not change colour because they do not have the pigment issues. I would buy a galvanized steel garbage can with a lid to store the food.


----------



## outwest

That's a good idea, Arreau. That should keep the ants out, too.


----------



## PoodlePowerBC

outwest said:


> Also, her smaller size means she wouldn't likely produce any huge dogs, but I think there are other people producing large standards for those who wish them. There are people interested in average sized ones.


I like Bonnie's color! And we are looking for a smaller standard for our 2nd Spoo ... so there are "people" out there


----------



## BorderKelpie

May I butt in with some thoughts that were shared with me years ago (that, in hindsight, I wish I followed)?

Do you really want a male pup to raise? Reason I ask, years ago when I was first stating out, I purchased a male and a female to breed eventually. By the time they were mature, tested, shown, etc - they both showed similar confirmation faults. If I bred them, I would not have been improving the breed, just making more of what I already had. Disappointing, to say the least. 

The other thing I've learned. Keep your best bitch, breed her to the best dog you can find, then, keep her best daughter. There are always nice males around. You can breed to a spectacular male cheaper than you can raise, train and campaign one. With AI available now, you're not limited much at all anymore. The world has really opened up now. With a small number of really nice girls, you can make quite a name for yourself in breeding. Always leave options open for co-owning your pups as well. 

Just some weird, random thoughts. Truely, I wish I had followed my own advise years ago, but, at least I am finally learning. 

I wish you and Bonnie all the best in your new endeavor!!


----------



## outwest

Excellent points, borderkelpie. 

I don't have any desire to be 'a breeder'. I could spay her, which I have thought endlessly about, practically killing myself with indecision. Bonnie's breeder is interested in having me complete testing and is encouraging. This particular pairing of Bonnie's parents was well thought out. The resulting puppies were very nice. Even though she specializes in black, she thinks Bonnie is beautiful, even if 'the wrong color'.  

So, the purpose of breeding Bonnie is that I think she is nice, the breeder is encouraging me not to spay at this point and I want another poodle. I could easily buy another puppy, that is true. Having puppies is a lot of work, but oh- so fun. It would be challenging and never a guarantee, but I can dream about breeding my own puppy and showing him or her eventually. I don't think there is anything wrong with doing that. I don't care about money or fame, honestly. Call me naive, but I love this dogs personality and spunk. I believe puppies from her could be an asset to the breed for her diverse background and that she is at the tail end of a huge shakeup in the breeding lines. The final products (like the fullsize puppies the breeder held on to from the last litter) seem even better than Bonnie. Bonnie has the same genetic background as those absolutely gorgeous ones from the breeders last litter. I kick myself for hesitating on the beautiful black boy some lucky person now has, but it made me realize I really could breed Bonnie if I wanted to. 

There are some short videos of the two puppies the breeder held onto at 6 months of age on her facebook page. I look at them and think Bonnie could have babies that looked like them! THAT thought is exciting to me.  I know there is no guarantee of a show quality puppy from Bonnie. I am not that naive. Still, she should produce wonderful, smart dogs with happy, loving and sweet, sparkly personalities like she has that could excel in things like agility if not conformation.


----------



## NOLA Standards

Outwest,

The color is such a mystery. I don't think any of us can give you a solid, scientific answer. One day that will happen and Yippee for that day!

As Arreau said, many reds and apricots darken well through puppy and adolescent days. I've shown a pretty apricot pup that is now a light red (orange red, but red). I've seen deep red pups be creme by the time they are a year old.

It is entirely possible your girl is darkening. Lombardi has darkened, though he will never be red. Out of the same litter I have a light red boy, picture attached, who was as apricot as the others at birth. There is a light red girl as well.

(Can I just soap box here for a minute. Color breeders, don't pick your puppy at birth because of the color of its coat! We can have indications, but we can not know the conformation of a pup until around 8 weeks. It is not consistent nor are we being truthfull to say we breed to improve/understand conformation/our dogs are conformationally sound and follow that with picking a puppy at 2 - 3 weeks old. The darkest puppies in my Carter X Ruby litter were NOT the best puppies of the litter. I picked the best pup - and expect that pup - because it is out of color - to produce quality color. Because it has the best conformation, regardless of color, the pick puppy (conformationally) is the puppy that should continue the line. IF we are breeding to improve....)

As for pigment...B's pigment is better than Annie's. Though no one could fault Annie's pigment. B's nose looks wet it is so black. I think as long as you have black, not liver, you have quality to work with.

If you are thinking color breeding, and we desperately need quality in the color - look at her overall picture. (I'll confess to being prejudice against UKC Conformation. I've seen too many hot messes have UKC CH titles. BUT, at least the owners are working with their animals - which is much better than many do!)

Does your girl have type? How would you describe it?
How is her carriage?
Evaluate her front assembly - shoulder, neck, chest, rib spring, arm, post sternum.
Evaluate her rear assembly - croup, tail set, stiffle, hock, 
Is she balanced?
Is she long/square/cobby - how? (So many say - my dog is SQUARE! It's awesome! And square is good - but that doesn't mean a longer bodied dog won't have better movement, a longer neck, still be balanced and have longer elegant lines).
How is her head?
Her eye?
Her feet?
Her pasturns?
How does she move?
Does she carry her tail?
I'm assuming, because you are considering breeding her that her temperment is pleasing. 

Those things are all more important than her color or her nose not being as dark as it once was 

If the answers to the above questions are positive - Lombardi would like to meet her!

Tabatha
NOLA Standards

PS Would you PM me her pedigree?


----------



## NOLA Standards

Vinny - from the Carter x Ruby litter is a light red color at almost a year.

His picture is attached.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

BorderKelpie said:


> May I butt in with some thoughts that were shared with me years ago (that, in hindsight, I wish I followed)?
> 
> Do you really want a male pup to raise? Reason I ask, years ago when I was first stating out, I purchased a male and a female to breed eventually. By the time they were mature, tested, shown, etc - they both showed similar confirmation faults. If I bred them, I would not have been improving the breed, just making more of what I already had. Disappointing, to say the least.
> 
> The other thing I've learned. Keep your best bitch, breed her to the best dog you can find, then, keep her best daughter. There are always nice males around. You can breed to a spectacular male cheaper than you can raise, train and campaign one. With AI available now, you're not limited much at all anymore. The world has really opened up now. With a small number of really nice girls, you can make quite a name for yourself in breeding. Always leave options open for co-owning your pups as well.
> 
> Just some weird, random thoughts. Truely, I wish I had followed my own advise years ago, but, at least I am finally learning.
> 
> I wish you and Bonnie all the best in your new endeavor!!


I love having a dog! IF he is bred in the future, I hope to keep a nice bitch from one of his litters. I also hope to find a nice black puppy bitch unrelated to him (maybe an older puppy bitch just as I did with him - so I can have a better idea of faults and virtues) who compliments his faults.


----------



## outwest

He is a very nice color! 

There are some hot messes in UKC, I agree. I also think there are AKC champions that are lacking in many areas. Still, you are correct. UKC is NOT AKC.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

ALL AKC champions are lacking in some areas. There is no perfect dog. But a dog has to be of a certain quality to be finished in AKC. JMO.


----------



## Rayah-QualitySPs

_


outwest said:



I have some questions as I start to ponder breeding my girl in a couple years or spaying her. The breeder is supportive of allowing breeding to the right sire if her testing is good. 

She is no longer tan. She is light apricot. I can hardly call her cream, although she is registered cream. 

Her pedigree is 80% black. There is one brown in there several generations back as well as one cream and a full line of apricots (but they are three generations back). WAY back is one silver. Other than that, all black.

Here are my questions:

1) Nose questions:
Is the pigment they are born with the pigment they are considered to have? No. Pigment can change with the seasons. Puppies are often/sometimes born with very little pigment in thier noses and footpads. IMO black/brown dogs usually have pigment when born more often than lighter colours.
Did the one brown in her background cause the black to begin to go? NoIs it common for apricots to lose their black noses? Yes but this is more common because so many apricot breeders - *of course not the ones on this list*- are breeding just for coat colour instead of pigment, temperament and health testing.Would a black nose that faded on a light apricot dog be considered a fault to the degree that she shouldn't be bred? If the nose loses all or most of the pigment I would not breed it unless the parents, grandparents had good pigment.Or, is that something which could be mediated by choosing the right sire for her? see last answer

2) I think her color is pretty because it shimmers and glows, like a sunset almost. Is there a way to encourage the color and ensure the black points stay strong? Yes do some research. Follow the siblings, parents and grandparents. What is their pigment like?Like, by breeding to another apricot with black points that stayed black? Maybe Or, breeding to a black with some apricot background? Someone also said a silver, but wouldn't a silver be introducing a fading gene? I don't think she carries a fading gene since she has not faded and had nonfading parents. There is not a non-fading line standard poodles. Most standards do not show fading until around one year of age. I breed brown and sometimes they do not fade until after 2 years of age.

Why I am thinking of breeding her?
She has an interesting, diverse pedigree, lots of sparkly poodliness and has an awesome personality.How have you decided she has a diverse pedigree? Her conformation has plusses and minuses like them all. I either want to breed her and keep one of her puppies for my own or spay her and buy another puppy. There is no reason for me to deal with an unspayed dog if I am not planning on breeding her. Please make sure you understand breeding is not always pleasant. Sometimes bitches die. Sometimes breedings do not catch. Sometimes puppies die. You should prepare for the fact that you may lose your bitch due to the birthing process or complications that can happen a few weeks after birth like gangrenous mastitis. Buying a new puppy will always be cheaper.

When breeding you should always breed the best you can afford.

You did not say anything about health testing but are the mom and dad fully health tested? What about the grandparents?

Thank you for your thoughts! I also thought it might be interesting to others when thinking about color breeding and keeping the points dark.

Click to expand...

Good luck with whatever you decide to do._


----------



## Sookster

outwest said:


> Her food bowl is stainless steel, her water bowl is ceramic, but her food is stored in a plastic antproof container (we have ants here that find their way into everything that isn't protected). Do you think it would be better to store it in it's own bag?


I have not found an affordable metal or glass bin to store food in. I do what I think is actually better: I store food in it's own bag inside an air-tight, waterproof, antproof, human food-grade plastic bin (Vittles Vault). 

Storing it in the bag keeps it from absorbing any bad things in the plastic, keeps the plastic from absorbing fats and oils (causing food to go rancid more quickly), and prevents having to _pour_ the kibble out of the bag, which aerates it and [I have read] can cause it to go stale more quickly because all of the kibbles are exposed to large quantities of oxygen during the pouring process. I think this would also prevent the pigment loss. 

And I too would just _DIE_ to have a Bonnie puppy! I just love her. Too bad you are all the way on the other side of the country from me. BUT if you do breed her and decide you want to put some of the pups into service work, you know who to contact


----------



## outwest

Rayah, Yes, the parents, grandparents and gg grandparents and many of the ggg grandparetns were fully tested. Bonnie will be fully tested. She is from CHIC parents who did all tests, not just the minimum. I say diverse because she is. COI 3.66, which I know doesn't mean much to many, with lines from eastern europe, belgium, canada and the us with unknown dogs and others in there. It is not your usual breeding dog pedigree.

There are people on here who would not buy a puppy from Bonnie's background...ever...and they have told me so in pm's. They don't have to. 

I say, go and look at the videos of the puppies from the breeder on her facebook that were recently posted. Then tell me they aren't nice dogs. You can scroll down to see them- one black, one brown 
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Tiara-Standard-Poodles/115740081831144


----------



## outwest

Thank you for everyone's thoughts. 
It is helpful in making the decison.
The breeder has asked me to do a preliminary hip, so I will.


----------



## 3dogs

I will chime in only on the size issue. Personally I like the Smaller Spoo. I think there is a definate niche for QUALITY small Spoos. I don't care if they don't "win" in the AKC. I care about the temperment, how they work, are they smart, high energy or low, do they work (agility, rally, obedience, hunt) heath testing, quality raising of pups in the home where all the action takes place. These are important to me & to many people out there we don't want a Spoo over 22". Mine is that size & he is a great size out of Rescue. Would I love a smaller 20" one, yes, in a heartbeat. Would I take a larger Spoo NO WAY!. So, before you think that "Small" is bad, poor, undesirable etc... I would look at small stud Spoo & not chop them off the block.


----------



## BorderKelpie

I wish my daughter were older and ready for a dog. She wants to do SAR once out of college and I would LOVE for her first SAR dog to be one of Bonnie's pups. I think her size is perfect for that sort of work. (and, of course, if she opts for a different SAR dog, I could go ahead and use the Bonnie pup for tracking - see, really I'd be getting the puppy for my daughter, really. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!)


----------



## outwest

3dogs said:


> I will chime in only on the size issue. Personally I like the Smaller Spoo. I think there is a definate niche for QUALITY small Spoos. I don't care if they don't "win" in the AKC. I care about the temperment, checkhow they workcheck, are they smartcheck, high energy or lowsparkly, do they work (agility, rally, obedience, hunt)check, she has many working poodles in her lines heath testingcheck, quality raising of pups in the home where all the action takes placeI would plan that for sure. These are important to me & to many people out there we don't want a Spoo over 22". Mine is that size & he is a great size out of Rescue. Would I love a smaller 20" one, yes, in a heartbeat. Would I take a larger Spoo NO WAY!. So, before you think that "Small" is bad, poor, undesirable etc... I would look at small stud Spoo & not chop them off the block.


Thanks for your thoughts. 

The issues I see are her tail curl, although nicely set, and her shoulders far forward, although not as bad as many. A short backed guy would be nice. I like her head. She is extremely agile and athletic. He wouldn't need to be super muscular.

It would be SO much easier just to buy a puppy. Goodness knows there are some wonderful ones out there for a patient person. I don't mean to seem so darned wishy washy. It is only that my poodle is a little different than AKC winning poodles. Is there value in her 'type' to poodles in general? I think there is, but is it right to breed those that are a little different than AKC winning ones? That is a very tough question.


----------



## outwest

vet read hip preliminary yesterday as EXCELLENT. He said they were beautiful hips! LOL.  Mailed off to OFA. He did warn they could easily read it GOOD since they are quite conservative, but either way we move forward with the other testing.


----------



## DivinityPoodles

Congratulations on the hip testing!

You are right about it being easier and cheaper to buy a new dog as opposed to breeding your own. No question there. Having done both, and having appreciated both ways of obtaining fantastic dogs... it comes down to how 'good' is your female. 

I personally think she is absolutely GORGEOUS!! But that is from pictures. 

Does she or do her lines 'work'? Hunt, agility, therapy etc?? I am asking just for my own info


----------



## outwest

They work for me. I know, not an answer. She has agility poodles as cousins and ancestors galore. They are not sedate poodles, but not hyper- super smart dogs and I think pretty. She was appropriately cautious as a little puppy, but with socialization she is confident and sweet, too. Some of her litter mates were quite full of themselves as pups. I chose the sweet, sparkly one.


----------



## zyrcona

Probably other people will disagree, but I would say any poodle who is healthy (as proven by proper health tests) and correct with a good temperament and an owner prepared to put in research and effort is worth breeding. The gene pool is shrinking and this is only being made worse by people excessively breeding particular individuals -- namely show-winning dogs -- to the neglect of the rest of it. Already I know breeders who are having to go abroad to keep the COI down, because there's just not a suitable unrelated stud they can find in the country. Yes, it's a good idea to breed for type by choosing a mate who complements your dog and makes up for its faults, but it's also very important to preserve the genetic diversity we have and not cause prolonged bottlenecking, as this will ultimately result in a sickly and genetically diseased population.

Note: I would say tail curl and snow nose (which is what I understand this is) are really minor faults. Nobody has bothered with tails for pretty much the lifetime of the breed, because historically they were chopped off, and the variety of tails that occur simply reflects this. Neither of these faults adversely affect the dog's health or activity. A fault that would rule out breeding in my opinion would be an incorrect bite, too narrow chest, etc. -- anything that impedes the dog's comfort or its ability as a working or companion animal. Choose a black, red, or holding apricot stud with a dark nose and a straighter tail and good shoulders.


----------



## outwest

Zyrcone, I totally agree. What I see she needs is a male with as straight a tail as possible, with shoulders set back a little further and a good black nose. I would also like a longer leg proportionally, but not too leggy because her athleticism is something I would like to retain. One of her cousins was in the seaworld shows, for example. 

She has an excellent tail set, so his wouldn't need to be perfect as long as it was a little straighter. She has the muscle, the chest depth and the width with excellent muscle in the rear, so he wouldn't have to be a bruiser of a poodle. I like the amount of angulation in her rear. I would not want a dog with too much angulation. Some have mentioned she needed more, but the amount she has is great for athleticism. She practically flies when she jumps with such ease - airborn is to be expected. More than this and I don't think she would be nearly as agile or walk on her rear legs or pop up and stand like a meercat - SO cute- I have no idea how she does it. 









I know to look for health and testing and nice personality. I need someone who isn't going to flip about a mini in her background. Someone who would understand her 'type'. Bonnie is a little pixy. She is an active, intelligent, loving and athletic girl. My sweet, sweet whippet is a great dog. Bonnie is like another person in the house wearing fur pajamas. 

I think personality, sweetness, health, intelligence and sparkliness are the most important. It would be nice to try for great conformation, but honestly it is secondary compared to these other things. 

Even so, is there anything else I should be looking for conformationally that is important that she lacks?


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

outwest said:


> Thanks for your thoughts.
> 
> The issues I see are her tail curl, although nicely set, and her shoulders far forward, although not as bad as many. A short backed guy would be nice. I like her head. She is extremely agile and athletic. He wouldn't need to be super muscular.
> 
> It would be SO much easier just to buy a puppy. Goodness knows there are some wonderful ones out there for a patient person. I don't mean to seem so darned wishy washy. It is only that my poodle is a little different than AKC winning poodles. Is there value in her 'type' to poodles in general? I think there is, but is it right to breed those that are a little different than AKC winning ones? That is a very tough question.


It would indeed be way easier to purchase a puppy from elsewhere, but it is the most incredible rush to get to choose a puppy from a litter that has been with you from their moment of birth. You have had eight weeks to pick apart their conformation, to see every little quirk and nuance in their character, to pick the puppy who absolutely, for EVERY reason, best suits you and the purpose you have for it. I do not encourage many people to breed, because most do not have a dog I feel is worthy of being bred, and people are so naive sometimes. They have no idea of the back stabbing and ugliness that is part of dog breeding. But you have a bit of a support network and the blessing of your breeder, your girl is lovely, comes from health tested parents, has a low COI...So many things that so many dogs being bred today do not have. Ask Trillium what it was like going through the process of us picking Cayenne out of our last litter. She talks to me often about how glorious it was to have those little babies in her home for eight weeks...watching, watching, watching, looking for the best puppy to add to our breeding program for so many reasons, and to her family, looking for the very best fit.


----------



## zyrcona

I think she has a very nice bottom. It looks correct and as though it permits normal movement, and that's what's most important. Most of the angulation on a dog in a clip such as a Scandinavian or Modern comes from how the hair is shaped, so I would say what she has is fine. Her tail set is correct and I personally wouldn't worry if the tail is gay. The standard in my country is 'as straight as possible' but TBH I like gay tails and they don't seem to be overly penalised.



outwest said:


> Even so, is there anything else I should be looking for conformationally that is important that she lacks?


I can try. Can you get four photos of her:

One from the side, in 'show posture'.
One from the front, head up, standing straight.
One from directly above her, standing straight.
One directly behind, tail up.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Here rear looks better here. You had photos of her where her stifle appeared stick straight. Stack her up properly with the tip of her toes placed straight down from her pin bone and then we can see her angulation better. The standard calls for the pelvis to be at a 30 degree and then definite of bend of stifle. Similarly, you want equal angulation in the front with the shoulder layback and the upper arm angle. This allows proper, balanced movement and is a balanced dog. I may have missed it if you already discussed it, but where are her shoulders located? Are they too far forward like many poodles? Or are they set back at the withers as they should be? It's OK if they are forward as most are...but keep this in mind and aim to breed up to a dog with great front placement. 

I'm with you, Outwest. I like a nicely anguished rear but I too don't like overdone. I wasn't trying to say that Bonnie didn't have enough angulation, it's so hard to tell with limited photos not necessarily properly stacked, but it did appear she *could* be a tad straight on the stifle. Recently you've shown pictures that look like she does have a correct rear. I think she has lots of positives.


----------



## outwest

I will try to get better pics this weekend, Zyrcona. A leggier guy with a shorter back? Here are a couple that might help:
front (need to get front on view): 
















side (sort of- I'm at the wrong angle - looks a little cobby in this pic): 








a little butt (good profile of head?): 









Arreau, I know about the nasty things people say. Backstabbing and ugliness are a complete waste of my time. I feel sorry for people who feel they need to do that to make themselves feel superior. I have no idea why people find it necessary, but I refuse to buy into that ridiculous crap. They are pets, for goodness sakes, PETS!
CM, Most photos are of her playing around or moving. 

I guess I need to formally pose her. When I showed her UKC she naturally stacked far better than I could place her. When I tried to control her too much she didn't look as good. I let her do her own thing using a loose leash when she trotted, too. Usually she held her head up. Tiger is awesome looking. Bonnie doesn't compare to him in type, but I like her, too. 

Thanks for your honest thoughts everyone. I will try to get some more formal pics this weekend. btw: people think she is a little cobby because of the mini, but that is not true at ALL. Her body type is from her moms side, with no mini in it. Her sire, who had the mini back there, was far leggier and shorter bodied than her mom was.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

Outwest, do not ever doubt what you have there. Remember several months back when you posted photos of Bonnie in her puppy coat, before you ever showed her in UKC and were being encouraged by many breeders on here, telling you what a lovely package she was? I will never forget those photos of her at the sliding glass door, showing off her beautiful little self. She is not perfect. No dog is. But she is certainly quality enough to be bred, particularly if he testing is good.


----------



## zyrcona

outwest said:


> Arreau, I know about the nasty things people say. Backstabbing and ugliness are a complete waste of my time.


I thought this was more in showing? Someone who breeds casually (but responsibly) to maintain their own line won't be in direct competition with other breeders. It's bad customers that are the problem lol, and worrying about the homes your dogs will go to.

I certainly am not interested in showing, mainly because of some of the vile gossips I've heard breeders saying about other breeders in show situations!

Anyway, Bonnie looks like a pretty and happy girl. Hopefully when you get some square-on pictures of the type I mentioned, people will be able to give a better assessment. I would agree from your pictures that her legs are on the short side, which would make sense when you say there is mini in her background, as this often manifests like this. The only other thing I notice is that her front feet turn out in one of the photos. This could be indicative of her shoulders being set too far forward or her chest being narrow (my bitch has exactly these faults) but it's not possible to see from the angle of the photograph if Bonnie does too. If so, look for a stud with a broad chest and straight feet.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> Thanks for your honest thoughts everyone. I will try to get some more formal pics this weekend. btw: people think she is a little cobby because of the mini, but that is not true at ALL. Her body type is from her moms side, with no mini in it. Her sire, who had the mini back there, was far leggier and shorter bodied than her mom was.


I think that Bonnie DOES have type. She is a pretty little bitch. I love her size and her topline looks very good. She looks to have pretty good length of neck, too. She's got a pretty little face, too. I love her muscle tone. Cobby is not necessarily a bad thing. I know many, many breeders whom desire cobby. You are correct, Bonnie is an entirely different "type" from Tiger. This does not mean that his type is better than hers, or that her type is better that his. I think that both types are important to have so long as both are poodley. Breeding too much of the same thing is not in anyone's best interest...

If you breed her, you do want to find a leggy dog. How is she in the loin? Does she have a nice short loin? "Short in the back" involves much more than length to height ratio (as you know). If she has a nice long ribcage with SHORT, muscular loin (long, skinny loins are my pet peave lol) then my amateur opinion is that breeding her to a leggy guy also with short loin could have some dramatic improvements, since she's already got the nice structure, just is lacking in leg.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

zyrcona said:


> I thought this was more in showing? Someone who breeds casually (but responsibly) to maintain their own line won't be in direct competition with other breeders. It's bad customers that are the problem lol, and worrying about the homes your dogs will go to.
> 
> I certainly am not interested in showing, mainly because of some of the vile gossips I've heard breeders saying about other breeders in show situations!
> 
> Anyway, Bonnie looks like a pretty and happy girl. Hopefully when you get some square-on pictures of the type I mentioned, people will be able to give a better assessment. I would agree from your pictures that her legs are on the short side, which would make sense when you say there is mini in her background, as this often manifests like this. The only other thing I notice is that her front feet turn out in one of the photos. This could be indicative of her shoulders being set too far forward or her chest being narrow (my bitch has exactly these faults) but it's not possible to see from the angle of the photograph if Bonnie does too. If so, look for a stud with a broad chest and straight feet.


OMG no!!! Breeders are bashed constantly by other breeders. No other breeder can know what someone has in mind for their future, or what their goals are, but they seem to feel they have the right to judge and pick everything apart. I have been blessed that in the past several months that I have been approached by a number of breeders who want to work with me. But holy smokes...it is a dog eat dog world out there!!! And it is not for the faint of heart!


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

I think Bonnie has really good breadth of chest. Not a ton of forward chest but certainly wide enough. Here is what a well known and respected breeder in the US told me: You are not breeding to A dog. You are breeding to a pedigree. Our two litter sisters lack chest, but their Mother has a chest to die for, in every aspect. So, those girls will likely produce better than they have, based on their ancestry. And one of them has already.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> I think Bonnie has really good breadth of chest. Not a ton of forward chest but certainly wide enough. Here is what a well known and respected breeder in the US told me: You are not breeding to A dog. You are breeding to a pedigree. Our two litter sisters lack chest, but their Mother has a chest to die for, in every aspect. So, those girls will likely produce better than they have, based on their ancestry. And one of them has already.


I definitely think there is some truth to that, and take what I say with a grain of salt because I am not a breeder, but I would have a hard time making breeding decisions based on a characteristic that is behind a dog in his pedigree but that that dog does not possess. On the contrary to what you have said, I have also heard the saying, even a dog like London has littermates who are only pet quality. 

I'd have a hard time breeding to a narrow chested dog hoping to improve chests, even if some dogs in the pedigree behind that dog have good chests. Now, I will say that I would be _similarly cautious_ breeding to a dog with a good front who comes from a pedigree full of poor fronts, or whom has many littermates with poor fronts. I do think that you are right, the entire pedigree does come into play, but I personally would look for a dog that has the characteristic I am looking for PLUS has that characteristic in most of the dogs in its pedigree. I would personally NOT breed to a dog who is lacking in what I want and expect this to be improved, even if some dogs in the pedigree have that characteristic.

In other words, I wouldn't suggest that Outwest breed Bonnie to a dog with short legs who has a sire or dam with long legs, expecting that that sire will help Outwest produce longer legs. I'd instead find a dog with long legs, who also has a sire and dam with long legs, and who has been known to _produce_ long legs. So yes, this does completely prove your point, that you are breeding to an entire pedigree and just because a dog has a desirable characteristic does not necessarily mean he will produce that characteristic, and this might depend heavily on what is behind him. But as I explained, I do have a bit of a different take on this philosophy. 

Again, this is just my opinion and I don't require that anyone share my opinion.


----------



## zyrcona

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> OMG no!!! Breeders are bashed constantly by other breeders. No other breeder can know what someone has in mind for their future, or what their goals are, but they seem to feel they have the right to judge and pick everything apart. I have been blessed that in the past several months that I have been approached by a number of breeders who want to work with me. But holy smokes...it is a dog eat dog world out there!!! And it is not for the faint of heart!


lol, I've not noticed it among the breeders I know, although it might be a transatlantic difference. The only time a small-time breeder who doesn't show really is forced to deal in person with other breeders seems to be when using a stud. Some stud owners can be snobby about not letting their dogs be used with certain bitches, non-solid bitches for example, but that's the worst I've heard. It seems to be hard to be someone who keeps to themselves when your dog is in the show ring and people learn to recognise you, though.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

zyrcona said:


> lol, I've not noticed it among the breeders I know, although it might be a transatlantic difference. The only time a small-time breeder who doesn't show really is forced to deal in person with other breeders seems to be when using a stud. Some stud owners can be snobby about not letting their dogs be used with certain bitches, non-solid bitches for example, but that's the worst I've heard. It seems to be hard to be someone who keeps to themselves when your dog is in the show ring and people learn to recognise you, though.


I believe there is some good that comes from having your dog in the show ring, scrutinized. It's not easy to hear your dog being criticized and certainly requires the development of a tough skin. But for me, having my boy in the show ring, I did learn to know my dog on a deeper level, his faults, strengths, everything. Though it was hard, I felt it was important to hear what others had to say about my dog, even when negative. When you hear someone scrutinizing your dog, it's not uncommon that there is some truth to it, and when you are considering breeding, making an impact on the breed as a whole, I think it's difficult to justify hiding beneath the covers.


----------



## zyrcona

CharismaticMillie said:


> I believe there is some good that comes from having your dog in the show ring, scrutinized. It's not easy to hear your dog being criticized and certainly requires the development of a tough skin. But for me, having my boy in the show ring, I did learn to know my dog on a deeper level, his faults, strengths, everything. Though it was hard, I felt it was important to hear what others had to say about my dog, even when negative. When you hear someone scrutinizing your dog, it's not uncommon that there is some truth to it, and when you are considering breeding, making an impact on the breed as a whole, I think it's difficult to justify hiding beneath the covers.


'Scrutinised' would be what I'd describe was happening here to Outwest's dog. People are commenting on the faults the dog has. So far, I think it is respectful, educational, and reasonable. I agree that it is important to get impartial critical observations of your dog if you intend to breed it.

This is not in the same league as what I have heard from some people to be said about dogs at shows -- that a dog is 'ugly', or insinuations that a breeder lied on the pedigree registration and bred a dog to another breed to improve the colour etc. The dog is what's important, not the person who owns or bred it. If you prefer to remain largely anonymous, a show isn't an environment conducive to that. As a person whose work has allowed me to labour under a plethora of assumed identities and who prefers my work to speak for itself and remain detached from its creator, showing holds no appeal to me. On the other hand, if it were possible to enter a dog anonymously into a show and have it judged and receive feedback on it, I'd be game for that. And no, I wouldn't want my name known if it won.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

CharismaticMillie said:


> I believe there is some good that comes from having your dog in the show ring, scrutinized. It's not easy to hear your dog being criticized and certainly requires the development of a tough skin. But for me, having my boy in the show ring, I did learn to know my dog on a deeper level, his faults, strengths, everything. Though it was hard, I felt it was important to hear what others had to say about my dog, even when negative. When you hear someone scrutinizing your dog, it's not uncommon that there is some truth to it, and when you are considering breeding, making an impact on the breed as a whole, I think it's difficult to justify hiding beneath the covers.


I think there is some truth to this, but unless someone is deeply involved in another breeder's program, or entirely aware of the pedigrees behind the dogs involved, they do not have the right to be judgmental or degrading, particularly if the breeder is being responsible by doing testing, only breeding dogs with low COI, etc.


----------



## Keithsomething

Out west email Terry Farley of Farleysd poodles he will be able to point you in the perfect direction and give you some of the BEST advice when it comes to colour seeing as he pretty much pioneered the colour and has done WONDERS for it (almost EVERY red CH. Has Terry and johns dogs behind them  and find a dog in Europe that is red that doesn't have his line in it  )

I say breed Bonnie and see what she produces


----------



## CharismaticMillie

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> I think there is some truth to this, but unless someone is deeply involved in another breeder's program, or entirely aware of the pedigrees behind the dogs involved, they do not have the right to be judgmental or degrading, particularly if the breeder is being responsible by doing testing, only breeding dogs with low COI, etc.


I'll give anyone the right to be judgemental, we are human after all and this is a normal thing, but I think it's best to keep those judgements to yourself or express them in the way of constructive criticism. I think all of would be lying if we said we didn't judge other.

I do think that it's wrong to be degrading.


----------



## outwest

I do not mind if someone finds fault with Bonnie. I know what she is, where she came from, what I wanted and what I got. It is what I was looking for and have been very happy. I throw her out there to the wolves (you guys, so to speak) because I don't have any reason to present her as anything other than what she is. 

I am not a breeder and have no desire to become one. I don't have to breed her. It is purely selfish. I want to because I think having Bonnie puppies would be awesome. It has nothing to do with money. In fact, I am sure it will cost me far more to have a litter and find good homes than to buy a puppy from somewhere else. I do NOT want to breed her if her testing is bad, either. Puppies are a lot of work, but seeing what she produced would be SUCH fun! 

I have enlisted my husband to help get some photos in the next couple days. My goal would be to find a nice sire to compliment her with no dogs in common for 10 generations. I would want a tested dog and a black or apricot dog. I think no dogs in common would be easy. Tested dogs harder. Dogs that didn't mind her background harder still.  If I do my research, I don't see HOW I could be hurting poodles!


----------



## DivinityPoodles

When do you plan to breed her? I know after testing but are you looking to breed her at 2, or older? What tests will you be doing?

I am just wondering as I am interested in possibly breeding sometime in the very distant future and am trying to get a feel for what other people are doing. 

Also, what is everyone's considered opinion on low COI? I had 1 breeder tell me only below 1 and someone else say less than 10. We won't talk about the breeder who asked 'What's COI?' :afraid:


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

There is a really good read regarding COI here: Canine Diversity Homepage

We shoot for less than 7%. COI is a very controversial issue, but I have been able, thanks to PHR, to look up dogs I grew up with. The ones with high COI's lived to be nine or ten. The ones with low COI's lived to be between thirteen and fifteen. Coincidence? I think not.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> I am not a breeder and have no desire to become one. I don't have to breed her. It is purely selfish. I want to because I think having Bonnie puppies would be awesome. It has nothing to do with money. In fact, I am sure it will cost me far more to have a litter and find good homes than to buy a puppy from somewhere else. I do NOT want to breed her if her testing is bad, either. Puppies are a lot of work, but seeing what she produced would be SUCH fun!


You will be a breeder if you breed Bonnie. If your reasons to breed are purely selfish, do you think the right decision is to breed? Something I would definitely think about. There are a lot of puppies that need homes because someone thought breeding their dog 'would be awesome.' Just something I would think about.


----------



## peppersb

Thanks to Outwest and many others for a very interesting thread. 

One issue that has not been discussed: Is the relationship that Bonnie (or any poodle mother) would develop with one of her offspring different than the relationship that would be developed between Bonnie and an unrelated puppy? I am assuming that Outwest wants a second spoo that would be a good life long companion for Bonnie. Would one of Bonnie's puppies be a better companion for Bonnie when both dogs are adults, or would an unrelated puppy be a better bet? Does the mother-offspring relationship make a difference in the kind of relationship that two dogs will have in the long run? And does timing matter, i.e., getting a puppy now while Bonnie is only a year old vs. waiting until Bonnie can have her own puppies? I'd be curious to know what some of the breeders think about this.


----------



## Keithsomething

I actually have to agree with CM on this...breeding is a MONUMENTAL task, as my mentor has told me you have to look at it like a lesson plan (for those teachers out the  ) you have a standard to follow and meet in your plan, and an end goal in mind (the reason FOR the lesson)

I know with Heaven I have plans already for my puppy/ies I plan on keeping out of her to whom I would hope to breed them too and what I hope to achieve in my "program" from breeding them.

I would never give myself the beeder monicure at this point...I'm really just a spectator taking a stab at something I think might produce the kind of dog I'm looking for...and if that doesn't happen spay/neuter em all and purchase the dog of my dreams ^_^


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

peppersb said:


> Thanks to Outwest and many others for a very interesting thread.
> 
> One issue that has not been discussed: Is the relationship that Bonnie (or any poodle mother) would develop with one of her offspring different than the relationship that would be developed between Bonnie and an unrelated puppy? I am assuming that Outwest wants a second spoo that would be a good life long companion for Bonnie. Would one of Bonnie's puppies be a better companion for Bonnie when both dogs are adults, or would an unrelated puppy be a better bet? Does the mother-offspring relationship make a difference in the kind of relationship that two dogs will have in the long run? And does timing matter, i.e., getting a puppy now while Bonnie is only a year old vs. waiting until Bonnie can have her own puppies? I'd be curious to know what some of the breeders think about this.


Yes, it does make a difference. Because Betty-Jo has known her daughter from the moment she entered the world, they have bonded so tightly, poor Jenny doesn't know where she fits in with them now. Whether or not they realize they are Mother/Daughter, I have no idea. But there is definitely a bond there that can not be denied. They have established a hierarchy that they respect and understand and it is entirely different than the relationship when you bring an eight week old puppy into the fold. Sometimes when you bring in a puppy, your other dogs do not ever like it, or barely tolerate it, or get along famously, or just subside in the same environment. But with a Mother/child, the bond is there from the beginning. This is just my opinion and what I have observed with my own dogs.


----------



## Fluffyspoos

I also agree with CM. What would you be doing to better the breed that other breeders aren't already achieving with dogs with more than just a ukc title? I've had people tell me that I should be a breeder, but I asked myself; why? I can't find a good enough answer, there are plenty of people out there breeding dogs, and plenty more dying in shelters.


----------



## zyrcona

Luvmyspoos said:


> Also, what is everyone's considered opinion on low COI? I had 1 breeder tell me only below 1 and someone else say less than 10. We won't talk about the breeder who asked 'What's COI?' :afraid:


Opinion from a person with a scientific background:

The Canine Diversity page ArreauStandardPoodle posted is a good guide. Research strongly suggests that close inbreeding and a large degree of homozygosity results in something called 'inbreeding depression' that causes individuals to have poorer health, reduced lifespan, and in general less vitality compared to less inbred ones. In addition to this, any genetic disease carried by the dogs used is far more likely to manifest. The 7% figure quoted is the magic cutoff number, where below this figure the effects of inbreeding depression become measurably negligible. The lower the COI, the better, but anything below this 7% figure is acceptable. It's also important when calculating a COI to know how many generations it is calculated over. A 12-generation COI is better than a 10 or 5-generation one because it takes more ancestors into consideration, and should be used where possible.

A cousin, assuming no further crossover, is 6.25. Therefore, I personally would consider no mating closer than a first cousin to be acceptable. Half-aunt or uncle and great grandparent are equivalent to cousin. Although it is very important to also take into account if there are high incidences of genetic diseases that can't be tested for (SA, Addison's, etc) in the pedigree. A dog with such a background should only ever be mated with an unrelated dog with as little of this disease in its pedigree as possible.

You can also use poodlepedigree to enter test breedings and calculate COIs.

On the bitches bonding with puppies question, most bitches I know lose interest in their puppies after they are weaned. My dog formed a closer bond with her father than with her mother, and he actually seems to recognise her when I take her back there to see them.

All decisions to breed from anything (including oneself) are selfish. Usually people want to develop their own line, preserve and improve upon what they have, etc. Whether it's ethical or not depends on how you approach it.


----------



## outwest

Keithsomething said:


> I would never give myself the beeder monicure at this point...I'm really just a spectator taking a stab at something I think might produce the kind of dog I'm looking for...and if that doesn't happen spay/neuter em all and purchase the dog of my dreams ^_^


Keith, I feel exactly as you do. 

Fluffyspoos - What are you saying? That having parents with 'real' conformation titles makes a puppy more worthy? I trusted my eye. My puppy was nicer than the one from two AKC champion dogs I was looking at.  

What would Bonnie bring? That is what I am asking questions for!

I know she is the smartest dog I have ever had. I know she is athletic and vigorous. I like her head. I know she is sweet and huggy. She is a great color and has a nice coat so far (I hope when she finishes coat change her tail is full and fluffy). She has proper points for her color. She has a terrific bite. She has low inbreeding (COI 3.66 10 generation, 4.39 12 generation) with a diverse pedigree. I know her breeder likes her, is supportive and helpful. I know she is healthy and hope her testing proves that. Her eyes don’t drip. Her ears don’t get infections. She has the stomach of a tank and no allergies. The breeder asked me to submit her DNA to that immune study because her relatives have come out great in it. I know she is from generations of CHIC dogs. I know she is poodly and prancy and silly. I like her size. I know she makes a good watch dog. Most of all she is our intuitive friend. 

Does she need perfect conformation and an AKC title, too? Will that make her worthy? Is breeding puppies only allowed for ones who have put out the time, money and effort to show AKC conformation? Surely you jest. I would like Bonnie to have a nice sire if she was bred and agree a conformation title would be a bonus. 

What I know about myself is I have bred dogs in the past and am aware of what that entails. I have shown AKC (albeit with a short haired breed) and know what that that entails. I can afford to do right by puppies and my dog. I wouldn’t want to do anything harmful to poodles. I think it would be very cool to take one of my breeders dogs AKC again (maybe a Bonnie puppy?). 

Asking why breed her at all is a good question. Is wanting to take a Bonnie puppy AKC selfish? Yes, it is, it certainly is. I also know she could easily have only pet quality puppies, but what fabulous pets they would be.

The best things about Bonnie have nothing to do with the curve of her stifle or the straightness of her tail or the placement of her shoulders. I will try to get the pics and a short video up tonight if anyone is interested.


----------



## Fluffyspoos

I'm saying what makes Bonnie puppies different than the thousands being produced already?


----------



## outwest

Does she needs to be different in some glorious way? Or, are you saying I shouldn't do it because other people are doing it and it isn't necessary? 

I do not mind these questions as long as everyone remains civil.


----------



## zyrcona

Fluffyspoos said:


> I'm saying what makes Bonnie puppies different than the thousands being produced already?


To turn that question on its head, what makes the thousands any worse, any less deserving of existence or a good home than the puppies of show-winning dogs? A show might be lots of things including but not limited to a good social experience for some and an entertaining way of evaluating a dog's conformation, but a show does not assess a dog's suitability to be a dog and to be someone's companion, which is what in reality it was born to do. It is also not necessarily an assessment of good health, considering that dogs do not need health tests to be entered and deformed/ill dogs have won Crufts.

Different people look for different things in a dog. I would not choose a dog because its parents won shows. I would choose a dog based on health, COI, agility, and my own assessment of its conformation. If a dog has won a show and I don't personally like how it looks, I probably would prefer not to look at it every day if there's an alternative. Champions in its ancestry might be a bonus, but at the end of the day, I don't particularly care what a judge thinks of my dog and its ilk. The judge is not going to be working with the dog, driving around with it all day, or having it sleep on his/her bed all night.

There is no such thing as a bad dog. Irresponsible breeders and bad owners make shelter fodder. Responsible breeders' dogs don't end up in shelters, because if a breeder can't sell their puppies to good homes or they get returned, the breeder takes responsibility for them, even if it means they have to end their breeding programme and spay & neuter all their dogs to make room.


----------



## peppersb

Fluffyspoos said:


> I'm saying what makes Bonnie puppies different than the thousands being produced already?


In addition to the many things that have already been mentioned that make Bonnie puppies better than the thousands being produced (coolio color, great temperament, good health, gorgeous looks, etc.), I would like to mention two that I think are important.

1. Size. I love it that Bonnie is small. When I was looking for a new spoo, I looked everywhere for a small one. Believe me, there are not "thousands" of well bred small spoos out there. Outwest, I think you are in an ideal position to play a role in developing a line of small spoos. Bonnie's breeder already has an interest in this, right? I do hope that you will choose a small sire if you decide to proceed with the breeding. This may not lead you to an AKC championship, so those who equate "improvement of the breed" with AKC championships would doubtless disagree. What you do is up to you, of course. But I'd love to see Bonnie produce some nice small spoos!

2. Bonnie is a happy dog in a happy home. I am sure that not everyone thinks that this is important. But I think that many of the "thousands" are produced by breeders who breed their bitches too many times and/or keep dogs in kennels and/or overcrowded homes. Between puppy mills at one extreme and breeders like Arreau (and many members of this forum) at the other extreme, there is every shade of gray in between. I for one would like to buy a puppy from a breeding program where the momma dog is a pet living in a happy home. The fact that Outwest does not have financial pressures to ovebreed and that she does not have more dogs than she can manage all sounds good to me. That's the way it ought to be for all momma dogs!

From everything I have heard, I think breeding Bonnie is a great idea!


----------



## Fluffyspoos

outwest said:


> I am not a breeder and have no desire to become one. I don't have to breed her. It is purely selfish. I want to because I think having Bonnie puppies would be awesome. It has nothing to do with money. In fact, I am sure it will cost me far more to have a litter and find good homes than to buy a puppy from somewhere else. I do NOT want to breed her if her testing is bad, either. Puppies are a lot of work, but seeing what she produced would be SUCH fun!


This is your reason for breeding. I do not think this is a valid reason to breed a dog. I will not continue on this subject, but I don't support your reasons.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

I do support your reasons. She is lovely and her puppies could add positive things to the gene pool. There are many hideous dogs out there being bred. Many dogs with zero health testing in their backgrounds. Many with no testing themselves. Bonnie is none of these things. Just for the record, I have offered to let Outwest use Quincy. They are so similar in type it is ridiculous! He is on the small side. He is from black and apricot parents. He is a champion. And he will be fully tested. My opinion is that a breeding between these two dogs could create something VERY exciting!!! I have notified Bonnie's breeder, so she can look at his pedigree and photos with a trained eye to see if she feels it would be a good match.

I have to say that the idea of these two is so intriguing that I would possibly consider a puppy back as opposed to a stud fee.

Quincy, being black, would also strengthen the pigment on the puppies.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

Quincy:


----------



## BorderKelpie

Quincy is STUNNING!

I would love to see what they can produce. 
Now I really want a Bonnie puppy.............


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

Well no decision has been made, but my offer stands. It excited me too!


----------



## BorderKelpie

I think, just in case, I am going to start to play the lottery. 
I can so very see one of those pups doing tracking or SAR and looking quite dashing doing it. 

(lol - I'm trying to picture a pup from those two in a Scandinavian lion clip. What a glorious dog that would be.)

I am hoping I'm being an enabler.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Do you really think that Quincy and Bonnie would be a good match? Personally, I'm not so certain. If I recall correctly, Quincy is quite small, correct? This would be fine for any bitches produced in the litter, but you're going to have a hard time finishing dogs in AKC that are 21, 22 inches tall. I would personally want to breed Bonnie to a taller dog. Additionally, if I recall correctly, Quincy was slightly lacking in bend of stifle as Bonnie appears to be in some photos. I'd be concerned that puppies would be too straight in the stifle. I very well could be proven wrong. What qualities of Quincy would improve Bonnie? I think both Quincy and Bonnie are nice dogs, but I'm just not certain I'd pair them together.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

Well, Quincy is 22" and he finished his championship. And some of the males he competed against were typical, large, North American bred males. He appears to have a slightly straight stifle, but obviously the judges did not find it a problem. I think Quincy being black with apricot behind him is a HUGE asset! Strengthen pigment and likely produce some apricot puppies. For his size he has a respectable chest, breadth and forechest. Not remarkable, but he does have chest. His temperament is out of this world, as is Bonnie's, so puppies might be born needing to be caught with a butterfly net. He has a good tailset. I think it would be exciting to breed two dogs together who are so similar, having a pretty good idea what their offspring should look like. Petite, refined females do very well in the ring. Did Outwest say she wanted to keep/show a male? I might have missed that.


----------



## outwest

I think Quincy is stunning, too, and I am honored that Arreau thinks Bonnie is okay.  I think his personality is exactly right. He has the longer front legs to counteract hers. It appears his front legs are straight and set back more than hers are. He has a shorter back. He has a gorgeous face and super hair. He has no dog in common with Bonnie at all. His tail is full length and doesn't curl over. He has an apricot mama and a black daddy. He will be fully tested as would Bonnie. I think his personality is to die for. They would produce puppies around 21-24 inches tall I would think? -Active, sprightly pups. She had bigger littermates and smaller ones. He is 22 inches, correct? She is a hair under or exactly 22 depending on where you are measuring at.  You would have to understand those puppies would have a pinch of mini (almost washed out at that point).

What would the COI be on those pups? 

I have been trying to cut down the darned video, but it is hard to know what to cut out. I will get it up here in a couple hours. 

What could Bonnie add to him that he doesn't already have?


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> I think Quincy is stunning, too, and I am honored that Arreau thinks Bonnie is okay.  I think his personality is exactly right. He has the longer front legs to counteract hers. It appears his front legs are straight and set back more than hers are. He has a shorter back. He has a gorgeous face and super hair. He has no dog in common with Bonnie at all. His tail is full length and doesn't curl over. He has an apricot mama and a black daddy. He will be fully tested as would Bonnie. I think his personality is to die for. They would produce puppies around 21-24 inches tall I would think? -Active, sprightly pups. She had bigger littermates and smaller ones. He is 22 inches, correct? She is a hair under or exactly 22 depending on where you are measuring at.  You would have to understand those puppies would have a pinch of mini (almost washed out at that point).
> 
> What would the COI be on those pups?
> 
> I have been trying to cut down the darned video, but it is hard to know what to cut out. I will get it up here in a couple hours.
> 
> What could Bonnie add to him that he doesn't already have?


Why would you think that Bonnie and Quincy would produce puppies larger than they are? From what I have heard, the largest puppy will typically be no larger than the largest parent and the smallest puppy no smaller than the smallest parent. What leads you to say that Quincy and Bonnie have no dog in common at all? This is not true for any two paired standard poodles. _Does_ Quincy have a shorter back? _Is_ his front set back to the proper position? I think you should look around at some studs that have fronts that are truly set back in the proper position. It will look funny to you we are so unaccustomed to seeing a proper front. It would be back at the withers and prominent forechest would protrude. I wouldn't know without having my hands on him or without a description from someone else know knows him well. You mention his upper arm length is longer than Bonnie's, that would be a plus. Finally, are you certain his tail is straight? In the photos it appears to be carried over his back. I am not at all trying to knock Quincy, by the way, but you do need to be honest about what you hope to achieve...


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

You know what? I did not ask for people to assess Quincy. As per YOUR suggestion CM, he HAS been assessed by judges, and they found him to be correct. He earned his championship with three majors and two singles, so obviously was found to be sound enough to earn their approval.

BTW...Quincy's tail is extremely straight compared to almost every other natural tail I have been. There is an ever so slight arch.

I think the biggest thing Bonnie brings to the plate is her colour. Their temperaments together would create some incredibly good natured offspring. I'm telling you my opinion, and from the time Bonnie was a youngster, I felt these two could make something special together. The nice thing about breeding two similar dogs is you can be fairly sure what the pups will be like. 

Would you like me to run a test breeding to figure out COI? It would take one to two weeks to get the result.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> You know what? I did not ask for people to assess Quincy. As per YOUR suggestion CM, he HAS been assessed by judges, and they found him to be correct. He earned his championship with three majors and two singles, so obviously was found to be sound enough to earn their approval.
> 
> BTW...Quincy's tail is extremely straight compared to almost every other natural tail I have been. There is an ever so slight arch.
> 
> I think the biggest thing Bonnie brings to the plate is her colour. Their temperaments together would create some incredibly good natured offspring. I'm telling you my opinion, and from the time Bonnie was a youngster, I felt these two could make something special together. The nice thing about breeding two similar dogs is you can be fairly sure what the pups will be like.
> 
> Would you like me to run a test breeding to figure out COI? It would take one to two weeks to get the result.


Quincy is a nice dog. Having the champion title does not mean that your dog is without faults. Both yours and mine and every other champion out there has faults. When you are suggesting openly on a forum that Quincy be bred to Bonnie, it's inevitable that people are going to begin to question and discuss the compatibility of the two. In this case, both dogs are small and both appear to be lacking bend of stifle. Personally, I don't see the match. I don't think that either dog would be improving in this breeding.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

By the way Outwest, Quincy has never had an ear infection or any other ailment, and he will be two on the 9th. And something several breeders were especially impressed with were his teeth. Apparently, just as lack of chest in a lot of Standards is becoming the norm, so too are dogs in the ring with genetically missing teeth. Quincy has all of his teeth.

Oh, and CM...there is no such thing as a perfect dog, and I am well aware of that.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> By the way Outwest, Quincy has never had an ear infection or any other ailment, and he will be two on the 9th. And something several breeders were especially impressed with were his teeth. Apparently, just as lack of chest in a lot of Standards is becoming the norm, so too are dogs in the ring with genetically missing teeth. Quincy has all of his teeth.
> 
> Oh, and CM...there is no such thing as a perfect dog, and I am well aware of that.


Other than having a full set of teeth...what strengths of Quincy's would improve upon Bonnie? Structural...let's abandon color and COI for now.


----------



## outwest

Quincy has a 10g COI under 1% (impressive Quincy). I looked and can't find any similarities except for AM CH Haus Brau Executive Of Acadia TP and he is far back there. Bonnie's full aunt is 23.5 inches. The males in her litter were larger than Bonnie. The only issue with a 22 inch male is in AKC showing. 

Besides good looks, Quincy is pure poodle personality. That is one way Bonnie won in UKC fairly easily. You can have a perfect physical specimen, but if the other one makes you smile, then the other one makes you smile.  

There is a niche for a smaller spoo. It is all talk at this point, pure speculation and talk. 

This discussion is good to make people think about what is important to them. What dogs should or could be bred and what would that breeding produce. It is all academic at this point, but really gets one thinking about what is and is not important.


----------



## Fluffyspoos

Both Vegas and Vienna have all their teeth. Maybe I should have bred them.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

outwest said:


> Zyrcone, I totally agree. What I see she needs is a male with as straight a tail as possible, with shoulders set back a little further and a good black nose. I would also like a longer leg proportionally, but not too leggy because her athleticism is something I would like to retain. One of her cousins was in the seaworld shows, for example.
> 
> She has an excellent tail set, so his wouldn't need to be perfect as long as it was a little straighter. She has the muscle, the chest depth and the width with excellent muscle in the rear, so he wouldn't have to be a bruiser of a poodle. I like the amount of angulation in her rear. I would not want a dog with too much angulation. Some have mentioned she needed more, but the amount she has is great for athleticism. She practically flies when she jumps with such ease - airborn is to be expected. More than this and I don't think she would be nearly as agile or walk on her rear legs or pop up and stand like a meercat - SO cute- I have no idea how she does it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know to look for health and testing and nice personality. I need someone who isn't going to flip about a mini in her background. Someone who would understand her 'type'. Bonnie is a little pixy. She is an active, intelligent, loving and athletic girl. My sweet, sweet whippet is a great dog. Bonnie is like another person in the house wearing fur pajamas.
> 
> I think personality, sweetness, health, intelligence and sparkliness are the most important. It would be nice to try for great conformation, but honestly it is secondary compared to these other things.
> 
> Even so, is there anything else I should be looking for conformationally that is important that she lacks?



I do not think Bonnie is straight stifled.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> I do not think Bonnie is straight stifled.


Her rear legs are not properly placed in this photo to assess her bend of stifle. Millie is a bit straight in the stifle but also appears to have more bend when I place her back legs the way Bonnie's are placed in that photo. We'd have to see a properly stacked photo from the right angle to really judge her bend of stifle. It's not a huge fault of Bonnie's and I do prefer a moderate dog, but I personally would not breed her to another dog that appears to also have very little bend of stifle.


----------



## Keithsomething

I have to agree with CM, you need to look at this VERY critically!

Look at your dog and SEE those faults that have to be fixed in her puppies, choose 2 of them (because I can guarantee that she has more than 2) and if the male doesn't match those faults with IMPROVEMENTS or hasn't produced dogs with those improvements find another one...

With my girl, I KNOW what her faults her and I know what I have chosen to correct in my breedings of her...if that doesn't work out I won't keep any of the puppies because I NEED a show/breeding potential from her otherwise the dog doesn't meet my needs. So I have to find boys that HAVE and have produced the neck I'm looking for, and have the front assembly that my girl is lacking...if they don't meet that criteria I move on to another stud


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

Quincy does have all of his teeth which is an asset. His quality of coat is phenomenal. His pigment will help offset the fading of Bonnie's pigment. They both have good tail sets, good top lines, nice heads, he has great ear leathers...how are Bonnie's? There are entire pedigrees to consider when breeding, not just the two dogs you breed. And both of these dogs have some beautiful dogs behind them...varied and beautiful.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> Quincy does have all of his teeth which is an asset. His quality of coat is phenomenal. His pigment will help offset the fading of Bonnie's pigment. They both have good tail sets, good top lines, nice heads, he has great ear leathers...how are Bonnie's? There are entire pedigrees to consider when breeding, not just the two dogs you breed. And both of these dogs have some beautiful dogs behind them...varied and beautiful.



But which of Bonnie's _faults_ will Quincy fix or _improve_? 

How is Quincy's shoulder layback? How his his upper arm angle? How is his muscle tone? How is his loin? Is it short or long? Where is his front set on? How much breadth and depth of chest does he have? How much forechest does he have? I recall discussing with Outwest in a thread that Bonnie's front is too far forward and she lacks forechest. Does Quincy have the forechest to fix this? Is his front set much further back than hers? How is his neck angle?

Is Bonnie missing teeth? Does she need Quincy to produce puppies with full sets of teeth? Many studs have a full set of teeth. Unless Bonnie is missing teeth, I wouldn't consider the Quincy's full set of teeth to be one of his assets that will be used to improve Bonnie. Isn't that the point, afterall? To breed UP?


----------



## Fluffyspoos

Because it's always a good idea to take the first stud offered.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

You are a hoot Fluffyspoos! Just a hoot! This is exactly as Outwest said...academic at this point. Bonnie's breeder might not even like the notion of these two dogs bred together, and if she doesn't, then I would not think it is a good idea. She knows more about her line than I do. so is likely the best person to figure out if this is an adventageous idea. But, if she does, knowing her line as she does, then I am in.


----------



## Fluffyspoos

Well good! I find myself quite hilarious as well. :]


----------



## zyrcona

outwest said:


> The only issue with a 22 inch male is in AKC showing.


There is nothing in the breed standard or in conventional medical opinion that says there is anything wrong with a 22-inch male. If a 22-inch male cannot win a show purely because of this, I would say there is something wrong with the show philosophy and not the dog.


----------



## outwest

I had second thoughts about posting anymore here. I don't feel like having my dog torn to shreds, but if you have constructive thoughts I would welcome them. As I said, breeding is not a for sure thing and all academic at this point. She is in a Miami, so there is no hiding a thing. What you see is what you get. 










Here is the video. It washes her out, but you will see why we call her bouncy, trouncy, flouncy and why I say she is athletic and strong for a girl. My husband put a car on the grass for a moment so we could take the video -embarrassing! Oh, you can also see her umbrella tail. I think it is super cute, but I know it is not correct. 

I used Windows Live Movie and it was super easy. I even added some slo-mo so I could check her timing. Her timing looks good, but her back goes up and down I noticed in the slo-mo. Of course, she was wagging her tail because everything is fun to her, maybe that had something to do with it. When she stands still her back is flat. Why the difference or is that normal? Is it because she is long in the loin?


----------



## KalaMama

Hi Outwest, have you seen the illustrated breed standard? It is very helpful and easy to compare your dog to. Bonnie is not a bad looking dog and looks very sweet. She could definitely use more forechest and does not have a rear shelf. I would not match her with Quincy if for no other reason than you need a very prominent chest in a stud. Her movement, if you notice her front feet break at the ankle instead of extending out. If you are not wanting to be a breeder in the long run then my vote would be to purchase another puppy. Often you just don't get what you want out of a breeding so why not just get another pup if you are not in it to continue improving each generation. just my thoughts


----------



## zyrcona

outwest said:


> I had second thoughts about posting anymore here. I don't feel like having my dog torn to shreds, but if you have constructive thoughts I would welcome them.[/url]


Thanks for sharing the video. I think she looks like a nice compact, sturdy, moderate bitch. I do not get the impression that there is anything wrong at all with her back legs. The only faults I would suggest are that her front is not quite right, I suspect due to a combination of minor things: Her chest may be slightly narrow (although it's hard to tell without being able to feel her myself) and her front legs look a little too far forward and short. But these are nothing I would consider to be of huge detriment as it's apparent from the video that she is agile.

Regards breeding with Quincy: If I recall right, he is ArreauStandardPoodle's Scandinavian import and a nice dog. I have only seen pictures of him in hairy clips so I can't see exactly what his chest is like, but (without meaning any offence to ArreauStandardPoodle or her dog, as I'm aware she didn't ask for an assessment of him) I suspect he may have the opposite problem to Bonnie in that his front legs are the correct length and his back legs are a little short, causing them to be straighter when standing like this. I don't think this breeding would be problematic, and you would have a good chance of being able to select a puppy with well-proportioned legs that shouldn't be 'weird' elsewhere and that will improve upon what you have for your next breeding decision.

My tuppenceworth: Whatever you do with your life, someone somewhere is going to disapprove of it. I have seen people be slagged off for various reasons, including breeding guinea pigs, writing books, publishing books, selling books to small independent publishers instead of big bucks major commercial ones, starting their own businesses, buying a puppy from a breeder instead of getting one from a shelter, being a member of the Conservative Party, having parents who live on a farm, having parents who are poor, having parents who are rich, and all manner of other things. You only get one chance at life. If you do not do with your life the things you most want to do, you, you will only live to regret it. I get the impression you are taking this seriously and doing your research and taking into account evaluations from other people, which is not something to be sniffed at.

Also, if people only ever bred dogs who won shows and were conformationally perfect, it would come to a point where nobody would be able to find a mate for their dog that would produce a low COI, half the people who wanted a puppy would have to accept one that was enormous or otherwise not suited to their requirements in some way, and every dog would be deformed and ill from inbreeding depression.


----------



## peppersb

Zycona: I hit the little Thanks button for your most recent post. But really, I want to say
*THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU *
for your "whatever you do with your life paragraph" and
*THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU *
again for your reminder of the importance of preserving the genetic diversity of the breed.


----------



## peppersb

A question for those who know more about this than I do: I am surprised that so much of this discussion has focused on conformation and so little on health. Of course, it has been mentioned that Bonnie and any stud will be tested. And Bonnie's low COI has been mentioned (thanks to Zycona for a very helpful explanation of the science behind why this is important in producing healthy dogs). But what about researching the pedigrees for health problems? Especially Addisons or epilepsy (are there others?) for which there is no test. My understanding (correct me if I am wrong) is that you basically can't find a poodle with no Addisons in their pedigree. How much Addison's is too much? So regarding health, a responsible breeder should (a) do the basic testing (b) breed only dogs with COIs of less than 6.5 (or whatever number you think is right) and (c) research the pedigrees for health issues. I am hoping that some of you can help put some meat on the bones for (c). Is it generally accepted that responsible breeders research their pedigrees for health issues? What would you be looking for? What is acceptable and what is not acceptable?


----------



## PoodlePowerBC

I think Bonnie is lovely ... thanks for the video. I love looking at her pics!!! She looks like a great pet and kudos to you for all the hard work in UKC! I've been following, and really haven't felt that I could contribute with any real knowledge, but I have to say I don't agree with this



zyrcona said:


> Also, if people only ever bred dogs who won shows and were conformationally perfect, it would come to a point where nobody would be able to find a mate for their dog that would produce a low COI, half the people who wanted a puppy would have to accept one that was enormous or otherwise not suited to their requirements in some way, and every dog would be deformed and ill from inbreeding depression.


I have been researching. We are wanting to add a poodle to our family. One of my concerns is Mini or Standard due to size. Both Standards I've had to date were over 65 lbs, so I was afraid I would have to go mini to get a 45 to 50 lb dog. NOT true. There are a lot of breeders out there that have been breeding for years that breed smaller standards! So to say we "would have to accept one that was enormous or otherwise not suited" is not true, at least not in Canada or America! And as far as I've seen, inbreeding is not really an issue, again at least with the breeders I've been interested that I've been able to check on PHR. Personally, I really don't care about perfect conformation as much as health and temperament, but that doesn't mean conformation isn't important to the breed.
I am going to look for a responsible breeder, one that breeds for the "good of the breed" but I believe it's also up to me to do due diligence as well ... I was burned with my first Spoo, not going to happen again. That's just my opinion


----------



## zyrcona

peppersb said:


> Zycona: I hit the little Thanks button for your most recent post.


Thank you.  On the subject of researching diseases in a pedigree, I have some examples I can use to illustrate this, but I do not care to post them publicly in order not to single out particular breeders or dogs, as I do not think this is polite or diplomatic. I do not mind explaining more in confidence if anyone wants to PM me about it, or if anyone would like to link their own dog's pedigree here for constructive feedback. In general, you are unlikely to find a 12-generation pedigree free of all disease. There is always a small risk with untestable diseases, even when great care is taken. What you want to do to minimise it is avoid diseases such as Addison's, SA, and epilepsy in the 5-generation pedigree, and you particularly want to avoid combining dogs with the same disease in both their recent pedigrees.

Other people's opinions may differ, but the priority I would put on choosing dogs to breed together would be *health testing, diseases in pedigree, COI (of the resulting puppies, not so much the parents), THEN structure and THEN colour*.



PoodlePowerBC said:


> NOT true. There are a lot of breeders out there that have been breeding for years that breed smaller standards!


Yes, but the comment I wrote was an _if_, meaning if people only bred show-quality dogs with the intention of producing dogs to win shows, and 'enormous' was an example because some people earlier on suggested that a 22-inch dog was too small to win a show. Fortunately, not all responsible breeders breed just to win shows.


----------



## Keithsomething

It is MY opinion that you should first find a dog you like conformationally THEN research it's pedigree for health issues... Also it's been my experience that people that place a lot of value in COIs have no idea what they're talking about I can point out whole lines of long lived dogs with COIs at or ABOVE 20% so take those with a grain of salt...

Conformation does not need to lack for health and anyone that says that née to reevaluate wha they're doing...go to a reputable breeder and you'll be fine


----------



## zyrcona

Keithsomething said:


> Also it's been my experience that people that place a lot of value in COIs have no idea what they're talking about I can point out whole lines of long lived dogs with COIs at or ABOVE 20% so take those with a grain of salt...


You can think that if you want, but inbreeding depression has been well researched and documented in many species, including dogs and poodles specifically. There will always be exceptions, and I wouldn't worry unduly about it if you already have a dog with a high COI whom you don't intend to breed, but inbreeding will reduce the vitality of a population in the long term and, if it's used universally, it will result in genes being permanently removed from the population with heterosis and precious variety being lost for good. Heterosis Inbreeding Inbreeding depression - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And no, conformation doesn't need to mean bad health, but I still believe health is far more important than conformation.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> I had second thoughts about posting anymore here. I don't feel like having my dog torn to shreds, but if you have constructive thoughts I would welcome them. As I said, breeding is not a for sure thing and all academic at this point. She is in a Miami, so there is no hiding a thing. What you see is what you get.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is the video. It washes her out, but you will see why we call her bouncy, trouncy, flouncy and why I say she is athletic and strong for a girl. My husband put a car on the grass for a moment so we could take the video -embarrassing! Oh, you can also see her umbrella tail. I think it is super cute, but I know it is not correct.
> 
> I used Windows Live Movie and it was super easy. I even added some slo-mo so I could check her timing. Her timing looks good, but her back goes up and down I noticed in the slo-mo. Of course, she was wagging her tail because everything is fun to her, maybe that had something to do with it. When she stands still her back is flat. Why the difference or is that normal? Is it because she is long in the loin?
> 
> Feb 2012 Bonnie - YouTube


She is a balanced little mover, which is a good thing. Oddly, her back looks like it could be roached. In photos you've posted before she appeared to have a nice flat topline but it doesn't appear as flat here. I wonder if her rear is higher than her front?

As for her stifle. I never said I thought there was anything "wrong" with her rear but I do think she has minimal bend of stifle. This is fine as moderate is still correct, but like I said, I wouldn't breed her to another dog with minimal bend of stifle. 

Someone mentioned that she lacks a shelf. A shelf is caused largely by a shallow pelvis, which is beautiful in the show ring and also allows for the rear legs to extend far out with tremendous drive. Many performance poodle people believe that such a shallow pelvis inhibits a lot of natural movement that would happen in performance sports. The standard doesn't call for a shelf but it does call for a pelvis to be slanted at 30 degrees. I'm not very good at assessing pelvis angle, but I'd guess her pelvis angle is correct or maybe slightly steep. This doesn't surprise me as she comes from performance lines, right? As for why she isn't getting much reach in front, it's could be because she has as steep shoulder. Have you assessed her layback? 

Finally, someone mentioned she might be narrow in front. I actually don't think she looks too narrow because her front feet do seem to point forward and she has decent of chest in between her front legs. I do think her front is too far forward and this is why she lacks forechest. I do not think that Quincy would fix this problem. Like I said, when you see a dog with a truly correct front you will say WOW! I can PM you a dog I know with a front you won't believe...

I'm new at all of this conformation assessment, so this was my best go. 

ETA: Re: all of these discussions being about conformation rather than health. I think at this point since her discussions are purely academic it makes sense to be discussing what conformationally matches Bonnie as there is no sense in breeding a healthy dog that will double up on her faults. The key is to find a healthy pedigree that has a promising chance to fix at least one or two of her faults. Researching health etc. is more difficult than looking at a picture of a dog and trying to assess his/her conformation so I know I'd be seeking help from my breeder and even handler to assess those pedigrees.


----------



## Keithsomething

CharismaticMillie said:


> ETA: Re: all of these discussions being about conformation rather than health. I think at this point since her discussions are purely academic it makes sense to be discussing what conformationally matches Bonnie as there is no sense in breeding a healthy dog that will double up on her faults. *The key is to find a healthy pedigree that has a promising chance to fix at least one or two of her faults.* Researching health etc. is more difficult than looking at a picture of a dog and trying to assess his/her conformation so I know I'd be seeking help from my breeder and even handler to assess those pedigrees.


I think you hit something right there CM that is PARAMOUNT to breeding! I have been told time and time again to find just 2 or 3 faults I'd like to correct in a breeding, because over reaching and attempting to fix ALL the conformational faults can end up with a dog that has even MORE faults than the beginning foundation!
Choose the 2 things that you feel your dog desperately needs improved upon and find an animal that both HAS what you're looking for and has produced that in it's offspring. When I'm looking at dogs I want to find ones that are as close to what I'm looking for conformationally, but have also produced get that meet that same criteria (again...I'm not a breeder, and I won't be for some time but I definitely know the dogs I do and don't want to breed to at this point)


----------



## Jility

*The Breeding Checklist*

Somebody sent me a link to this thread. It is very interesting to read the different opinions here.
Having come from an AKC show background (I bred some top winning Great Danes and Basset Hounds many years ago), but am now heavily involved in agility (we have six standard Poodles, a BC and a mix we show or have shown in agility), I have a little different take on breeding dogs.
The first and foremost thing when it comes to breeding dogs is good health! NOBODY wants a sick dog! No matter how beautiful a dog is, poor health or frustrating health issues will cause misery for the dog as well as the owner. There are no tests for most health issues. I believe in health testing, but you must go far deeper when deciding whether or not to breed a dog!
For instance:
My first standard Poodle was sired by a top winning AKC Champion. He took top honors at the Poodle Club of America Specialty Show more than once! My dog's dam was an AKC Group winning Champion as well. Both sire and dam were tested for everything that has a test. My dog has epilepsy (no genetic testing for that), SEVERE IBD (no genetic testing for that), Bloated and torsioned (no genetic testing for that and she has bloated EIGHT more times since being tacked the first time she bloated!), horrific bite (No genetic testing for that - her lower canine teeth grew through the roof of her mouth), Born with an undersized liver and adrenal glands (no genetic testing for that), is completely intolerant of ANY animal protein whatsoever (no genetic testing for that and now suffers from some unexplained neuropathy and can barely walk (no genetic testing for that). She has littermates with Addison's disease (no genetic testing for that), Hip Dysplasia (no genetic testing for that) and a myriad of other nontestable genetic diseases. 
Our next SP came from completely tested parents and with a low COI, yet she was diagnosed with Legg-Perthes disease (no genetic testing for that), chronic pancreatitis (no genetic testing for that and her uncle recently died from the disease) and SEVERE allergies (no genetic testing for that either). I would not wish any of these diseases on dogs or owners.
YOU MUST KNOW THE BACKGROUND OF YOUR DOG! You must have a breeder who is forthcoming with information and lists the information of health issues on the Poodle Health Registry website! ALL breeders will have health issues at some point in their breeding program! That is a given. It is what the breeder does with the information that defines them as a good breeder or not.
All that said, if you feel confident about the health and background health of your dog, then put a checkmark in the yes to breed column next to health.
The next thing you must explore is temperament.
Poodles were originally bred to work. They were hunters, retrievers, herding dogs, guard dogs, some pulled a cart and all around good family pets. They have to be athletic AND biddable. They should never be shy, fearful or aggressive. I made a HUGE mistake about two years ago. I bred my MACH 2 Agility Champion SP to a top hunting dog. My dog was a rescue that came from top AKC Champions. Her former owner was brutal to her and I blamed my dog's shyness and reserve on her upbringing. BIG MISTAKE! If you met my bitch, you would never know there was anything wrong with her temperament. She would appear outgoing and confident. I found her issues when training her but, as I wrote, I blamed it on her upbringing (I did not get her until she was three). I got some extremely fearful puppies with very difficult temperaments in my litter. I know it is coming from my bitch and not the stud dog. Her barely shy temperament was magnified in the puppies, one in particular that is borderline functional(I kept the worst one because I didn't want to stick her with anyone else). I have been able to train my puppy to a high level but I am a very experienced dog trainer. Somebody else would really struggle with her. I NEVER should have bred my bitch!
So, if you can say your bitch does all the things a standard Poodle should do like: LOVES to swim, is a GREAT swimmer, retrieves like a fool, is biddable and outgoing no matter what, put a big YES checkmark in the temperament box!
If I can say yes to the above two things, THEN I look at structure.
I love your bitch's pelvis! I HATE a flat pelvis with a shelf! It is useless for a good working dog. A flat pelvis will cause a dog to have NO drive from the rear. It will appear to have drive, but the hind legs can't get underneath the dog to really drive. They just fling out behind the dog and look flashy. 
I would like to see a straighter tail and a longer croup on your bitch. The longer the croup (area from the root of the tail to the ilium bones) the more room for muscle and strength to really drive that rear. When the ischium bones are embedded lower in the muscles, there is more drive from behind. A more slanted pelvis allows the dog to turn well and power forward. The length of the pelvis is extremely important! The longer the pelvis, the more drive from behind. It is what gives breadth to the thigh. It is possible to have a well sloped pelvis that is too short!
The femur and the tibia should be of equal length. Your bitch has moderate rear angulation. I LOVE that! Most SPs have MUCH TOO MUCH angulation behind! This bleeds power and turning ability from the dog. I much prefer moderation in dogs but, alas, the show ring has sucked moderation right out of most breeds. Some are too angulated (think SP and GSD) and some too straight (Shar Pei, Chow and Akita)
Standard Poodles were only meant to be over 15" tall! Anything more than that is just the extremes of the show ring! I bred my 21 3/4" bitch and got two bitches that are 25 1/2" tall! YIKES! That is MUCH too tall, but I also got two under 22" tall. Go figure. Breeding is a crap shoot. I much prefer the smaller SPs that are closer to the original SP.
When you draw a line up the front leg, it should never intersect the neck or head! It should be well behind that. That is my biggest complaint about your bitch. There are no perfect dogs! Her entire front is too far forward and her upper arm is extremely straight. When/if you breed her, look for a dog with a better front.
As for length of body, the SP standard is absurd. Anyone can measure square! It is WHY the dog is square that counts! You can get a dog shorter by breeding straight shoulders and short pelvises, yet they can have very long loins (I own one like that!). You must look to see WHERE and WHY the dog is short bodied! I prefer, short back, long body. If you think about that, it will make sense. I show lots of photos of that in my book (Recipe to Win).
So, if you love her structure, swimming ability and athleticism, put a check in the yes box for structure!
As for type:
I have to laugh at this word. When was the last time you saw a standard Poodle and had to ask what it was (assuming it wasn't shaved down)? It only needs to be easily recognizable as a standard Poodle! Type, as defined by show people, means ridiculously high head and tail carriage, too much rear angulation and a recognizable handler at the end of the leash!
I could go on and on forever, but I won't bore you anymore. 
So that is my opinion (for what it is worth).


----------



## outwest

Thanks for the opinion so far! 

So, IF I chose to breed her (still an if), I would look for a dog with a proper chest and shoulder placement with longer front legs proportionally. All I can think of is that I never looked at her moving in slo motion before or that she is completely cut down and every little bobble in her conformation is glaringly apparent. It wasn't noticeable before (hair hides a ton of flaws, especially when a groomer cuts the hair short by the tail and longer around the rough).  

Conformation has always been secondary to me, but a person does want a dog that somewhat fits the standard of what a poodle should be, but retains the working ability a standard should have. I wouldn't breed a poodle with multiple glaring flaws that were detrimental to the breed. I don't think she qualifies for multiple glaring physical flaws, but I do see flaws, yes. She has a beautiful head to me, for example, and a thick curly coat for a light colored poodle. I like her rear end, even if it doesn't seem as angular as it should from a showdog point. She is able to push off, twist and turn on a dime. I can't see her being able to do with a longer rear end. She has muscle and tone, which a lot of standards lack. 

Bonnie does have an impeccable character which makes her a wonderful pet. She is not shy, but bold and happy. Her awareness and curiosity of everything around her is unusual to me. Her intelligence, vigor, amazing human perception and perpetual joy are what I think is special about her. She fetches like a fiend and I can't keep her out of any water she encounters, so those are poodly. 

Jility was kind enough not to mention it, so I will. Mimi, her amazing Mach 5 agility standard poodle, is Bonnies cousin. Mimi had/has health issues. It is Mimi's character and drive that is similar to Bonnies, but I would certainly not wish Mimi's health issues on anyone. Bonnie has no health problems and there haven't been any health issues for several generations (Mimi is about 8?). Still, Mimi and Bonnie share relatives back in the pedigree, so that is something to think about! 

I could still choose to spay her and buy another puppy.


----------



## zyrcona

Jility said:


> Somebody sent me a link to this thread. It is very interesting to read the different opinions here.


Great post. I own a poodle whom I use as a working dog, and would like another one (not from my current one, who is spayed because her chest is too narrow and her front legs are too far forward). I will keep in mind your detailed anatomical comments next time I look at some! The importance of temperament goes without saying.


----------



## Jility

If there have been no health issues in Bonnie's immediate family or others that are closely related , I wouldn't worry about it.


outwest said:


> Thanks for the opinion so far!
> 
> So, IF I chose to breed her (still an if), I would look for a dog with a proper chest and shoulder placement with longer front legs proportionally. All I can think of is that I never looked at her moving in slo motion before or that she is completely cut down and every little bobble in her conformation is glaringly apparent. It wasn't noticeable before (hair hides a ton of flaws, especially when a groomer cuts the hair short by the tail and longer around the rough).
> 
> Conformation has always been secondary to me, but a person does want a dog that somewhat fits the standard of what a poodle should be, but retains the working ability a standard should have. I wouldn't breed a poodle with multiple glaring flaws that were detrimental to the breed. I don't think she qualifies for multiple glaring physical flaws, but I do see flaws, yes. She has a beautiful head to me, for example, and a thick curly coat for a light colored poodle. I like her rear end, even if it doesn't seem as angular as it should from a showdog point. She is able to push off, twist and turn on a dime. I can't see her being able to do with a longer rear end. She has muscle and tone, which a lot of standards lack.
> 
> Bonnie does have an impeccable character which makes her a wonderful pet. She is not shy, but bold and happy. Her awareness and curiosity of everything around her is unusual to me. Her intelligence, vigor, amazing human perception and perpetual joy are what I think is special about her. She fetches like a fiend and I can't keep her out of any water she encounters, so those are poodly.
> 
> Jility was kind enough not to mention it, so I will. Mimi, her amazing Mach 5 agility standard poodle, is Bonnies cousin. Mimi had/has health issues. It is Mimi's character and drive that is similar to Bonnies, but I would certainly not wish Mimi's health issues on anyone. Bonnie has no health problems and there haven't been any health issues for several generations (Mimi is about 8?). Still, Mimi and Bonnie share relatives back in the pedigree, so that is something to think about!
> 
> I could still choose to spay her and buy another puppy.


----------



## outwest

Jility said:


> If there have been no health issues in Bonnie's immediate family or others that are closely related , I wouldn't worry about it.


Yes, it is my feeling that the bobble in the line was a one time bobble. The vet read her preliminary OFA hip as excellent, but we are waiting for the official OFA determination before moving forward with further testing. I am sorry that Mimi had issues. She is an amazing poodle and so very talented. I think Bonnie could have poodles with similar strengths since she possesses many of the characteristics Mimi does, but without (knock on wood) health problems.

I, too, had a standard with health issues. To me, Health is #1. Temperament #2. Conformation #3. #1 is great so far. #2? I couldn't be happier. #3 is what I am interested in improving.


----------



## KalaMama

Using examples of AKC champions with tons of health issues is just generalizing. The same could be said for lots on non conformation champions. I think breeding a healthy poodle is a given. I agree they should also be able to do what they are bred for but that does not mean you can't have a dog that meets standard and is able to work.


----------



## Jility

Of course you can have a dog that meets the standard and can work! I never said that was not possible. I will tell you that I have not seen any current AKC top winning SPs that actually meet the standard or are built to work! 
I think the interpretation of the standard is incorrect. I won't go into details here, but most dogs shown in the breed ring have been ruined by fashion and fad. I have seen it over the past 50 years!



KalaMama said:


> Using examples of AKC champions with tons of health issues is just generalizing. The same could be said for lots on non conformation champions. I think breeding a healthy poodle is a given. I agree they should also be able to do what they are bred for but that does not mean you can't have a dog that meets standard and is able to work.


----------



## outwest

KalaMama said:


> Using examples of AKC champions with tons of health issues is just generalizing. The same could be said for lots on non conformation champions. I think breeding a healthy poodle is a given. I agree they should also be able to do what they are bred for but that does not mean you can't have a dog that meets standard and is able to work.


That should be the goal for everyone. Sadly, it is not. 

In an aside:
Have any of you noticed the shoulders on the PoodleForum icon of the red poodle at the top left of the screen?  I think I shall be examining poodle shoulders in great detail for a while. LOL


----------



## outwest

Jility said:


> Of course you can have a dog that meets the standard and can work! I never said that was not possible. I will tell you that I have not seen any current AKC top winning SPs that actually meet the standard or are built to work!
> I think the interpretation of the standard is incorrect. I won't go into details here, but most dogs shown in the breed ring have been ruined by fashion and fad. I have seen it over the past 50 years!


I do agree with you here, too. I have seen lots of show poodles who didn't seem nearly robust enough to really work. My girl may have iffy shoulders, but she IS robust and muscular without being coarse. I love that about her.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

There was once a whole heated discussion devoted to that icon...


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> I do agree with you here, too. I have seen lots of show poodles who didn't seem nearly robust enough to really work. My girl may have iffy shoulders, but she IS robust and muscular without being coarse. I love that about her.


Why do you say she has iffy shoulders?


----------



## outwest

I thought the general concensus is she had iffy, set too far forward shoulders!? Am I missing something? Ack, it is so complicated, this conformation stuff! Or, when we talk shoulders are we talking the layback of them? That seems quite good to me, although move the whole assembly back and inch. Maybe I am missing something here.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> I thought the general concensus is she had iffy, set too far forward shoulders!? Am I missing something? Ack, it is so complicated, this conformation stuff! Or, when we talk shoulders are we talking the layback of them? That seems quite good to me, although move the whole assembly back and inch. Maybe I am missing something here.


Iffy is a little harsh for her I think.  They are set too far forward, but most poodles are. This is why you want to look for a handsome man with a great front. Iffy makes me think of crappy shoulders that are going to give out ha ha. 

When we talk shoulders it can be either shoulder layback angle and/or shoulder placement (where they are set on).


----------



## Jility

The largest problems with her front are the placement and the upper arm. Her shoulder angle could be better but is better than many. Her upper arm is straight as a stick, however.


----------



## Jility

one thi
ng I should have written was that pointing out the health issues in two of my SPs, was not meant to say all show dogs are unhealthy. I used it as an example to point out that health testing alone is not the end all and be all for good health. You MUST know what is behind your dog!


----------



## outwest

Jility said:


> The largest problems with her front are the placement and the upper arm. Her shoulder angle could be better but is better than many. Her upper arm is straight as a stick, however.


Got it. Thank you.  This seems to be her main weakness from what I gather. There are so many things I do like about her. Upper arm angle is important, I agree, but minor (to ME, maybe not others) in comparison to the rest of the package. 

Does anyone have a picture on a real poodle (not a drawing like in the standard) of a great front assembly that is NOT covered by a continental? Cut and paste out the face and other identifying things and show me what a great front end looks like, please? Then I will know what to look for.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> Got it. Thank you.  This seems to be her main weakness from what I gather. There are so many things I do like about her. Upper arm angle is important, I agree, but minor (to ME, maybe not others) in comparison to the rest of the package.
> 
> Does anyone have a picture on a real poodle (not a drawing like in the standard) of a great front assembly that is NOT covered by a continental? Cut and paste out the face and other identifying things and show me what a great front end looks like, please? Then I will know what to look for.


I do...I sent you a pm earlier today telling you this and asked for your email/gave you my email address so I could send you the photo as I cannot do so via PM. I haven't heard back from you, though.

Also, I don't know if you've read this but your breeder as an extremely informative compilation of information on shoulder assembly. http://www.tiarapoodles.com/pr_articles/frontend.html 

This is very information as well - from Helen's website. http://www.speednet.com.au/~helenc/dogs/Collie Illustrations anatomy.html

None of these are photos of real life dogs, though.


----------



## outwest

I sent you an email. Let me know if you got it, CM. Check your junk email folder.

Yes, that is all I have seen- DRAWINGS of a correct front end. Why is that? Do so few poodles have a correct front end that it is easier to draw it than show it in the flesh? That must mean it is a very difficult thing to get put together correctly. 

I speculate that is because of the history of hiding the front end and tweeking the grooming to create illusions. All the more reason, in my opinion, to allow a shorter cut in AKC showing. Too much flies under the wire under all that hair. Whatever people say, seeing it in movement - not feeling it under fluff while they stand still - is the way to tell if it is right or not.

edit: I have read the shoulder article. I reviewed it again. I just want to see a real dog with it.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> I sent you an email. Let me know if you got it, CM. Check your junk email folder.
> 
> Yes, that is all I have seen- DRAWINGS of a correct front end. Why is that? Do so few poodles have a correct front end that it is easier to draw it than show it in the flesh? That must mean it is a very difficult thing to get put together correctly.
> 
> I speculate that is because of the history of hiding the front end and tweeking the grooming to create illusions. All the more reason, in my opinion, to allow a shorter cut in AKC showing. Too much flies under the wire under all that hair. Whatever people say, seeing- not feeling it under fluff - is the way to tell if it is right or not.


Yep. That's why you see a lot of nice looking rear ends and not so many nice fronts. The fronts are covered in hair. Thankfully, I think at least some breeders have recognized this problem and have begun to try and breed better fronts. Too many dogs have overangulated rears with nothing on front to balance the dog. I want so badly to find a nice bitch to show with a correctly angulated front. Tiger has a good front with amazing shoulders but of course not all aspects of his front are perfect. I'd love to see what he could produce with a bitch with an outstanding front. I really love fronts. Ha ha.


----------



## Rayah-QualitySPs

Jility said:


> The Breeding Checklist
> ________________________________________
> The first and foremost thing when it comes to breeding dogs is good health! NOBODY wants a sick dog! No matter how beautiful a dog is, poor health or frustrating health issues will cause misery for the dog as well as the owner. There are no tests for most health issues. I believe in health testing, but you must go far deeper when deciding whether or not to breed a dog!
> 
> Dear Jility;
> 
> I agree that every poodle breeder must go “far deeper” before breeding poodles. The siblings and relations behind both poodles must be investigated for temperament and health issues.
> 
> Low COI is just one tool. It should be used but all breeders should also calculate the influence of Wycliffe on the pedigree. This is where the genetic bottleneck occurred. A breeder will usually have to go back more than 10 or 12 generations to calculate this number. There are some very knowledgeable people in poodles; one is Kathryn Foran, who is willing to help breeders calculate these numbers. Again these numbers are just an additional tool for breeders to use in addition to health testing and pedigree research.
> 
> Where I disagree with you is that health should be the number one priority. The *temperament* of the poodle should be the *number one priority*. If you do not have a poodle that can be part of the family no one, including the poodle, will be happy. A healthy poodle that fear bites, is shy or is aggressive is much more of a dilemma than a poodle that has bite problems or thyroid disease. In my honest opinion health should be the second priority when looking to breed poodles.
> 
> Temperament does not necessarily mean the ability to swim or retrieve but the ability to be taught to swim, retrieve or hunt. Poodles are supposed to be smart and willing to please people. You can call this characteristic whatever you want, including biddable, but this is, IMO, definitely the essence of a poodle. Look at Emily Cain’s Poodle History Project http://www.poodlehistory.org/ and you will see poodles were circus performers, herders, army dogs, smuggler dogs. The smuggler poodles were taught to “dislike men in uniforms”. A smart dog indeed but if unable to be trained they would be useless. The Poodle History Project shows many more poodle jobs than I have listed and proves that Versatility was the hallmark of the historical poodle.
> 
> You are correct that there are no tests for *some* health issues, such as bloat, epilepsy or allergies but all health issues are *not* genetic. In my opinion, bloat is genetic but at this time there is no proof either way, just opinions. Sebaceous Adenitis was thought to be a simple recessive genetic disease and has now been proven not to be a simple recessive but polygenetic.
> 
> How many autoimmune diseases, (IBD, allergies, Addisons, thyroid disease), are affected by the dogs environment? Some of these environmental issues including dog food ingredients that contain hormones, antibiotics, anti-inflammatory drugs and melamine. What effect does over-vaccination have on the immune system? These theories are another tool that should be studied by all breeders; all breeders should make decisions about what health issues are non-negotiable *before* they breed a litter based on scientific fact not feelings. When a health issue crops up I agree that breeders should share that information. First and foremost with all puppy buyers that could be affected. I do not agree that there is only *one correct way* to share health information. I know that the Canadian Poodle Club’s Health Registry 2000-2004 has information that is not verified/proven by veterinarian paperwork. How did this happen? I am not sure but what I do know is people are human and mistakes can be made.
> 
> I am in no way advocating breeding any health issues. Poodles need to be healthy and health tested before being bred. I agree with Jility that health is much more than just health testing.
> 
> 
> As for length of body, the SP standard is absurd. Anyone can measure square! It is WHY the dog is square that counts!
> 
> Some sort of written breed standard of characteristics is required to improve or call any breed distinct. I think that over many years the breed standard, or benchmark, has proven itself by producing poodles that continue to look like poodles - not like a generic wolf type dog. I agree that interpretation of the standard leaves much to be desired - especially in the show ring. What is important tho is that 50 years from now humans will still be able to have a benchmark for what makes a poodle different from a greyhound or akita.
> If you look at the illustrated poodle standard Illustrated Breed Standard
> Page 4 you will see a skeleton that shows *why* the poodle is square. The bones are clearly labelled to demonstrate the length of pelvis compared to the femur and length of back. The illustrated standard goes on to state “the loin is short, broad and muscular” Page 14. The angulation of the hindquarters balances that of the forequarters”. The poodle standard is a blueprint that reputable breeders should have vast knowledge of before attempting to breed. Breeders must using this blueprint as a tool when making breeding decisions.


Breeding poodles should not be profit oriented but research oriented to improve the breed!


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Rayah, thank you for that elaborate, well thought out post. I very much enjoyed reading what you wrote and agree with what you have said.


----------



## outwest

I enjoyed it, too. Much food for thought. 

I still feel temperament is above conformation. For the record, I do like Quincy for his lovely personality. He is the blackest of black from an apricot mama. He makes me smile the way Bonnie makes me smile. Yes, poodles should look this way or that way, yes, we should breed to the physical standard as much as possible, yes, they should be able to be trained to do this and do that, but you can't train personality. You can breed for a personality type, though. I know in essence it is possible to get the holy grail: health, personality and looks, but it is mighty hard. What do you choose? 

I would like to thank everyone for the (mostly) civil discussion here. I have taken down the video of Bonnie now. If anyone wants to see it for any reason, let me know. People have strong opinions about breeding or not breeding. I appreciate that you took my honest questions and offered constructive thoughts. 

I showed Bonnie in a Miami and still no one bashed my little pixy.  Thank you.


----------



## faerie

if your bonnie is half the personality that quincy is, then you are lucky. that boy's joy of life is just wonderful. (i have a huge poodle crush on him and have for a long time.) 
i don't know shizzle about conformation, being a pet owner, but i do know about personality. I've met poodles who are just good dogs, but they aren't the great dogs. 
the great poodles in my opinion are the ones who are bounce through life exuding joy.
and being well put together is a perk.


----------



## wickednag

This from a pet owner who would never breed. I would never put my dog at risk, I do not show and never will. I have a great example of the breed according to my vet who also has a standard. I would never put Hazel at risk by having her bred. There are very many reputable breeders breeding very nice dogs. I really don't think the poodle world needs me or my Hazel, no matter how wonderful her temperament, her color or her confirmation, to add to the mix. Just my thoughts...Also just read one or two posts on this


----------



## PoodlePowerBC

Does this mean I am asking for too much ... I want Health and Temperament  But I'll gladly take a poodle out of the litter that lacks conformation, as you can see by my dear Russell  BTW, I have my name on a list for a smaller Black female, as long as health testing comes out OK. Bitch is to be bred sometime this summer, and she is an absolute sweety  I still have to meet the stud, but Fingers crossed!!!!


----------



## Rayah-QualitySPs

PoodlePowerBC said:


> Does this mean I am asking for too much ... I want Health and Temperament  But I'll gladly take a poodle out of the litter that lacks conformation, as you can see by my dear Russell  BTW, I have my name on a list for a smaller Black female, as long as health testing comes out OK. Bitch is to be bred sometime this summer, and she is an absolute sweety  I still have to meet the stud, but Fingers crossed!!!!


There is no need in this day and age not to have *temperament, health and conformation* in your puppy. Poor conformation poodles should not be bred by reputable breeders. 

Buy your puppy from a reputable breeder! 

Please visit the Versatility in Poodles website at Versatility In Poodles This non-profit website provides valuable information on how not to be a victim of an unethical breeder, how to evaluate a breeder, questions to ask a breeder plus much more.

Good luck with your future purchase.


----------



## outwest

I have read through that Versatility in Poodles site. There is some terrific information in it.


----------



## PoodlePowerBC

Rayah-QualitySPs said:


> There is no need in this day and age not to have *temperament, health and conformation* in your puppy. Poor conformation poodles should not be bred by reputable breeders.
> 
> Buy your puppy from a reputable breeder!


I am ONLY looking at breeders that Health test, show, do agility, therapy, etc. But correct me if I'm mistaken, not all puppies from every litter have perfect conformation????? If they do, why do breeders hold back certain puppies for themselves for breeding stock or show, then release them at 5 or 6 months because they aren't "right". I was led to understand it is usually because of conformation ... therefore a potential show dog becomes pet stock, leading to my statement "I'll gladly take a poodle out of the litter that lacks conformation"


----------



## CharismaticMillie

PoodlePowerBC said:


> I am ONLY looking at breeders that Health test, show, do agility, therapy, etc. But correct me if I'm mistaken, not all puppies from every litter have perfect conformation????? If they do, why do breeders hold back certain puppies for themselves for breeding stock or show, then release them at 5 or 6 months because they aren't "right". I was led to understand it is usually because of conformation ... therefore a potential show dog becomes pet stock, leading to my statement "I'll gladly take a poodle out of the litter that lacks conformation"


Re-read what she said: 

"Poor conformation poodles should not be *bred* by reputable breeders." 

Poor conformation and pet quality are not necessarily synonymous. Poor conformation is always pet quality, but pet quality is not always poor conformation.
I think there will be pet quality puppies likely even when you breed two good example of the breed. When you have a reputable breeder who is likely showing and breeding only the best examples of the breed, there's a good chance that even the pet puppies will have better conformation than pet puppies that resulted from breeding two poor examples of the breed. For example, I know several breeders who have sold most of the litter as "pets", yet all of these "pets" were judged to be finishable in the AKC show ring...

Also, keep in mind that the "pet quality" that come out of a very nice litter will have better conformation than "pet quality" that come out of a litter where the breeder bred two poor representations of the breed. It seems that the more reputable breeders are quick to designate pet quality to very good specimens of the breed that they themselves don't need in their program or that don't have the specific conformational aspects they are seeking for their program.


----------



## PoodlePowerBC

CharismaticMillie said:


> Re-read what she said:
> 
> 
> I think there will be pet quality puppies likely even when you breed two good example of the breed.


My point exactly


----------



## outwest

Long yammering conclusion to this whole idea of breeding Bonnie:

I have spent so much time looking at poodle conformation, analyzing my girl, looking at preformance poodle types and conformation show winning poodles. 

No matter how much I look at the poodles winning in the shows today, I so much prefer the look of the preformance poodles. The ultra flashy dogs are pretty to look at, to be sure, but I have a hard time seeing them doing much more than prance around. Remember, I have a whippet. I am interested in healthy physical dogs who can run and balance. To me, a dog in motion is a beautiful thing. 

As regards shoulder placement: Doesn't having shoulders somewhat forward allow the front legs to leap and jump further? If you can picture a dog jumping, those shoulders and legs hinge forward, reaching. As regards the break at the ankle: She flies over the coffee table and leaps tall buildings. LOL. Could she do that even BETTER if she didn't have her humerus so straight? Maybe she could. If her front legs didn't break at the ankle, but moved as one unit, flinging the front leg forward, it looks sparkly, but is it an efficient movement for speed and turning ability? 

Rear legs: Wouldn't having those rear legs able to pull under the dog allow a stronger push off and ultimately faster run? My little girl flies so fast for a poodle. Show poodles rear legs seem SO far in back of their bodies. Can they run fast?? Aren't dogs that appear to have a straight stifle looking that way because the show ring has asked that the dogs legs be placed BACK, not where they naturally land, UNDER their bodies?

In the picture of Bonnies rear legs, that is where she naturally puts them. CM mentioned she wasn't placed correctly in this particular picture, but she wasn't placed at all. That is why I posted that picture. In the picture where I am holding her tail up she is not placed, either. This is how she stands and her back is not roached. 


















Here is the one in my signature= her back is broad and flat, her shoulders and thighs carry muscle (her feet are normally pointed straight, this photo is an odd angle)









and this one again (she is standing there unplaced by me, staring at my daughter):









She has a different look from the winning show poodles. I was VERY brave to put her pictures here, where breeding of show conformation is much more desirable to many than breeding for preformance bodies. 

I have also seen pics of the show dogs with super long rear legs who are not placed by a human behind them. Those pictures are very hard to find because people don't post those pictures of their show dogs. They DO have a roach when standing calmly. I wouldn't want to raise hackles posting a dog that wasn't mine, but if you search the internet diligently, you can find them. The uber long rear legs that look so elegant when placed behind don't look efficient for movement to me. 

I would like Bonnie to have a longer front legs, I agree totally that her upper arm is too straight, but I love her more moderate angles and breadth of body and muscle. Her ease of movement is SO great.


________________________
I have come to the conclusion that I prefer the more moderate, more athletic and preformance type poodles. They look so different! Most preformance poodles are not NEARLY the size of the show standards, usually in the 21-23 inch range- right where Bonnie is!! 

Compact, athletic, muscular, springy and smaller than the average standard poodle with slightly shorter legs. That is what I have. That is a preformance body type. I have grown to appreciate the things she is able to do physically over the things my show line poodle could do. I will say I LOVED the long legs of my last girl. I would like Bonnie to have a bit longer legs than she does, but not too much longer. There is a reason Bonnie was shown UKC and not AKC. The judges appreciated her type there and she won easily.  

I believe there is value to the poodle breed in the preformance poodles. My girl is not perfect conformationally for either type of poodle, seeming to have some of each type. Which way do I decide to go if I decide to breed her? Go for the preformance bodies? Or, go for the conformation bodies? As jility pointed out, they are two different dogs. Reading the poodle standard dozens of times only confuses the issue because so much of it is left to gather what you will from it. 

I wonder what would happen if my more compact, preformance bodied girl was bred to a more show type of body? Would the pups be a mishmash of styles? Could I get those longer, elegant legs and retain the mental and physical intelligence of my girl?

Maybe Bonnie is a mishmash of the two styles already? LOL 

What to do, what to do...


----------



## Rayah-QualitySPs

outwest said:


> No matter how much I look at the poodles winning in the shows today, I so much prefer the look of the preformance poodles.
> 
> She has different look from the winning show poodles. I was VERY brave to put her pictures here, where breeding of show conformation is much more desirable to many than breeding for preformance bodies.
> 
> I have come to the conclusion that I prefer the more moderate, more athletic and preformance type poodles. They look so different! Most preformance poodles are not NEARLY the size of the show standards, usually in the 21-23 inch range- right where Bonnie is!!
> 
> Compact, athletic, muscular, springy and smaller than the average standard poodle with slightly shorter legs. That is what I have. That is a preformance body type.
> 
> I believe there is value to the poodle breed in the preformance poodles. My girl is not perfect conformationally for either type of poodle, seeming to have some of each type.
> 
> I wonder what would happen if my more compact, preformance bodied girl was bred to a more show type of body? Would the pups be a mishmash of styles? Could I get those longer, elegant legs and retain the mental and physical intelligence of my girl?
> 
> What to do, what to do...


Dear Outwest;

Let me start by saying Bonnie is a beautiful girl and you should be proud to own her! I do not see how she is so different than the poodles that win in the ring - other than her colour. (As a colour breeder it is harder to show anything but black and white. Even then there are some judges that just like white or just like black.) No show poodle has perfect conformation - no poodle anywhere has perfect conformation. Reputable breeders strive towards this perfect ideal but are aware that producing a poodle that is exactly like the standard - i.e perfect- is impossible. 

The over angulated poodles in the show ring are *not correct* according to the breed standard. 

Yes, many over angulated poodles do well in the ring but that does not make them correct - that makes them *popular.* This is turn perpetuates more over angulated poodles. Can you see the vicious circle? The pendulum will eventually swing back towards the middle.

A well bred correct poodle can and does win in the ring, (moderate rear and front), but judges can only judge what is put in front of them. If 80% of the poodle show dogs are over angulated than more often than not an overangulated dog will win. If 80% of the dogs are over 24 inches then more times than not a poodle over 24 inches will win. Over the years I have seen many 21 to 23 inch poodles obtain championships here in Canada. 

Poodles are not divided into show and performance lines like some breeds are divided between hunting and show line. I hope that poodles never become so. Look at the AKC stats for poodles and see how many are born every year. Then look at the show stats and see how many are shown every year. The show dog is in the minority! 

If you bred your girl to a taller flashier dog with an over angulated rear who knows what she would produce, but if you know about the body types of both parents and their sibling and the grandparents and their siblings you will have more of an idea about what Bonnie could produce. 

You do not just breed what you see but also what is behind them. The tall flashier dog may go back to shorter, more moderate stock. Your Bonnie may have the genetic capability to produce very large over angulated poodles even when bred to a dog very similar to her. Knowledge is power.

Whatever you decide there is no need to rush. If you think you want to breed her with health testing and go forward from there.


----------



## Rayah-QualitySPs

PoodlePowerBC said:


> I am ONLY looking at breeders that Health test, show, do agility, therapy, etc. But correct me if I'm mistaken, not all puppies from every litter have perfect conformation????? "


There is no such thing as *perfect conformation*, just good and/or poor. The idea of a perfect poodle is something reputable breeders strive for knowing that the ideal is always out of reach. It is a bar to attempt to reach. If any breeder actually thinks they have a perfect conformation poodle please pass me some of what ever they are drinking! VBG


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Re shoulder angles and performance - if you read some of what Jility has written about her agility dogs, you will understand how a straight upper arm limits the ability to tuck the arms when jumping. On Tiara's website an Jility's website you can read a bit more about proper conformation as it relates to working and movement.

The poodle breed standard does not say that a poodle should have short legs. Also, If you read some books on canine structure you'll understand why having a properly placed front assembly is important. I recommend K9 Structure and Terminology.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

As far as your statement that show dogs stand with their back legs further out resulting in stifles appearing straight...well this isn't true. Show dogs sometimes stand with their back legs too far out but this could be due to a) overangulation or b) incorrect placement of a properly angulated dog. A properly angulated dog will not have a straight stifle when properly placed in a stack. Look at the illustrated breed standard. Remember, the breed standard shows the dog properly placed in a stack... The same way dogs are places for examination in the show ring...

You cannot properly assess the structure of a dog when they are not placed properly in a stack.

The poodle breed standard illustrates and faults underangulation just as it does overangulation.

(sorry for the multiple responses - on my iPhone.)


----------



## outwest

CharismaticMillie said:


> Re shoulder angles and performance - if you read some of what Jility has written about her agility dogs, you will understand how a straight upper arm limits the ability to tuck the arms when jumping. On Tiara's website an Jility's website you can read a bit more about proper conformation as it relates to working and movement.
> 
> The poodle breed standard does not say that a poodle should have short legs. Also, If you read some books on canine structure you'll understand why having a properly placed front assembly is important. I recommend K9 Structure and Terminology.


I agree Bonnie would need a guy with a terrific front end. I do not care for poodles with short legs, either. Bonnie needs more leg in the front. 

You have mentioned choosing 2-3 things to improve. Temperment-wise, to me Bonnie is about as perfect as a poodle comes. I like her color, face, neck, rear, body, muscle and smarts. Healthwise, I think she has that. 

The 3 things to try and improve will probably be: a great front end, somewhat longer front legs and a straight tail. A few inches taller in height would be nice, too (but now we are at 4 things!). 

I have plenty of time and Bonnie is still developing, too. What I think now may easily change in a year. She seems to have stopped getting taller, but is filling out and becoming more sure of her physical body. Her face is maturing, her hair is thickening and becoming very dense. I am still waiting for that tail fluff to hold shape! I hope it does.


----------



## Apres Argent

*Not Poodle but great explanation of Shoulder angles*

THE CANINE SHOULDER, IRISH WOLFHOUND, GREYHOUND, BORZOI EXAMPLES, by Sue McClure


----------



## outwest

cha cha cha  pleased as punch:
Report came pretty quickly-

OFA: excellent 
"superior joint conformation as compared with other individuals of the same breed and age"

 On with the show.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

WOOTY WOOT WOOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is awesome! Congratulations!

You know...I think you need to search all of the old posts, where you were being told by BREEDERS how lovely Bonnie is, that you should show her because she would do well, and pointed out every wonderful thing about her. Re-affirm in your mind what a pretty little girl you have!


----------



## Brittany May

I just wanna say that if I wanted a Standard & lived in your country, I would totally love a Bonnie pup. She is the prettiest Standard I've seen!


----------



## outwest

Oh, you are both SOOOOO sweet! At least strangers don't comment on her size anymore, they comment on her color. Although....I hooked up my computer to the big TV and was watching the whole Westminster poodle class on their website (okay, is that weird?) and noticed TWO little girl spoos that couldn't have been any bigger than Bonnie. I started pointing at the computer screen, "Look! A little standard! Look!" 

Arreau, I love her to pieces and feel blessed to have gotten her. Just give her another inch of leg!! I tell myself her body type is why she flies onto the bed from a distance just for the joy of doing it or jumps to the side from a complete stand still. Maybe it is those awesome hips propelling her . 

I was surprised how anxious I was when I opened that envelope. I let out a WHOOP myself when I read it. I so want her to test well. I think she will- both her parents did- but you never know...


----------



## zyrcona

Rayah-QualitySPs said:


> The over angulated poodles in the show ring are *not correct* according to the breed standard.


This.

If you look at historical images of the breed, you will see they do not look the same as modern poodles. What's correct in the show ring is constantly evolving with the times and with fashion. Some dog breeds have become unhealthy due to breeders striving to produce an exaggerated look for the show ring. If you google some images of Siamese cats, you will find the modern example of the breed is not much like the mogs you might remember from thirty years ago. The modern Siamese cat is certainly very dramatic to look at, but it probably isn't particularly catlike and not to everyone's tastes to have as a pet in the house or as vermin control.

Many aspects of the show ring are useless or downright inconvenient in other areas. A long coat in a novelty clip is meant to look dramatic and exaggerated in the ring, but is a big hindrance as to what you can do with the dog otherwise. Tail docking, which recently came up in another thread, might make a dog win more easily in countries where it's permitted, but doesn't benefit the dog in any other area of its life.

Showing is not the be all and end all or a gold standard as to whether an animal should or shouldn't be bred. Showing is just one thing some people may choose to do and enjoy as something to do with their dogs. There are many other things people can do with their dogs.


----------



## ladybird

I like the athletic looking poodles too, I'm not sure about mine though, but I have pictures and video if anyone wants to judge!

Nimbus is an apricot too, now 7 months old so I guess his body could still change a little until he's full grown, right?


Here's a picture of him after a bath, 6 months old











Updated picture of him 7 months old











and video of his movement. I've always wondered if he would be any good at agility... does the power come from his back legs as it should?


----------



## mom24doggies

He's a very pretty boy.  From the pics, he looks like a very nice, balanced dog. He seems to be fairly square, have a good level top line, decent length of neck, his shoulder appears to be nicely laid back and he appears to have a decent amount of forechest. I can't tell much about his rear, since he isn't stacked quite right there. He seems to have all the proper angles though. Would it be possible for you to get a pic of him with his back feet set just behind his butt bone? If you draw a straight line down from that point, his feet should be set just behind that line, his are in front of it. Back to Nimbus now.  he has lovely feet, nice straight legs with nice width between them, and to my eye his movement looks good. The main issues I see with him are: he is down faced, and his tail set appears a bit low, not to mention the tail itself is very gay. All in all, you have yourself a very pretty poodle.  You should be proud to call him yours!

Hopefully people who are better at this will chime in.  I'm still in the stage where I really have to feel the dog in order to critique him.


----------



## ladybird

mom24doggies said:


> The main issues I see with him are: he is down faced, and his tail set appears a bit low, not to mention the tail itself is very gay.


I just want to point out that the 'down face' is an illusion on that picture because of the light hair further up blending with the background - his nose is actually straight! I agree that his tail is slightly low-set and the fact it's quite curly (gay-tailed)

Here is another attempt at stacking. You can see here his nose is straight!











I always thought he's also a little bit short in the back (his last rib is quite far back)


----------



## mom24doggies

ladybird said:


> I just want to point out that the 'down face' is an illusion on that picture because of the light hair further up blending with the background - his nose is actually straight! I agree that his tail is slightly low-set and the fact it's quite curly (gay-tailed)
> 
> Here is another attempt at stacking. You can see here his nose is straight!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I always thought he's also a little bit short in the back (his last rib is quite far back)


 I see, there isn't a hump in his nose like in the other picture. But he's still down-faced; If you draw a line through the top of his ear and through his eye, his nose angles down...it should be level with that line. Does that make sense? Although again, it COULD be the angle of the picture... 

OK, better stack.  The feet still need to come back a little, but that's ok...I _think_ I can say with confidence that his rear angles are correct. 

His upper arm also looks a bit short....with all the fluff it's hard to tell though.


----------



## ladybird

mom24doggies said:


> I see, there isn't a hump in his nose like in the other picture. But he's still down-faced; If you draw a line through the top of his ear and through his eye, his nose angles down...it should be level with that line. Does that make sense? Although again, it COULD be the angle of the picture...
> 
> His upper arm also looks a bit short....with all the fluff it's hard to tell though.



Oh I see, does that mean his ears are set too high or his actual face points down too much? I always thought it was because his ears were high. Here's another picture which might help











I also think his upper arm is a little short. His elbow is right at his chest, if you can imagine without the fur!


----------



## mom24doggies

ladybird said:


> Oh I see, does that mean his ears are set too high or his actual face points down too much? I always thought it was because his ears were high. Here's another picture which might help
> !


 IMO, his face still points down, even if you leave his ear out of the line and just draw a line through his eye; if he were holding his head up more, I think it would be less pronounced. The ear should be level with his eye, though. It's hard to tell if his earset is correct or not with all his hair. 

ETA: here's a pic of my boy with a line drawn from his ear through his eye. See how it's completely level, all the way through?


----------



## ladybird

How's this? shows his ear/eye/nose line. p.s. I thought my last stacking photo was correct because his pasterns are vertical? if I place his hind feet too far back, his pasterns start to angle out instead of being vertical to the floor


----------



## zyrcona

ladybird said:


> I like the athletic looking poodles too, I'm not sure about mine though, but I have pictures and video if anyone wants to judge!
> 
> Nimbus is an apricot too, now 7 months old so I guess his body could still change a little until he's full grown, right?[/url]


He's a lovely chunky boy! His tail is slightly low set and his head is slightly coarse (which is often the case with dogs) but I would say he otherwise looks like a nice moderate dog, although he does have more hair than the last one and this makes his body harder to judge. You could also groom him to give him a slightly more dramatic shape -- with more of an arch through his sternum/stomach and more of a front by cutting the fronts of his forelegs in a bit closer and shaping his chest.

I think his ear set might be too high in your headshot.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

ladybird said:


> I like the athletic looking poodles too, I'm not sure about mine though, but I have pictures and video if anyone wants to judge!
> 
> Nimbus is an apricot too, now 7 months old so I guess his body could still change a little until he's full grown, right?
> 
> 
> Here's a picture of him after a bath, 6 months old
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Updated picture of him 7 months old
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and video of his movement. I've always wondered if he would be any good at agility... does the power come from his back legs as it should?
> 
> Nimbus Movement (Standard Poodle 7 months old) - YouTube


When correctly stacked, you can draw a straight line down from the pin bone and it will touch or be only slightly in front of the toe of the back feet.

Nimbus has GREAT feet! His foreface looks short and coarse/heavy to me. I'd like to see it longer and more refined. His overall body seems a bit less refined than I would like to see, as well. A bit "doggy". His tail is set low and carried over his back. Looks to have good length of neck. In some of photos his upper arm looks straight, but in another he looks to have some angulation. His shoulder might be a little steep. His topline is very nice in the photos where he has hair, but looks like maybe a slight roach in the wet photo. He looks square. I do think his upper arm might be a little short. Looks like he's got a nice short, strong loin.

ETA: His rear angles look correct. Re: his movement: we cannot assess his movement without him being properly gaited.

Lovely boy. He is your pet, enjoy him! <3


----------



## CharismaticMillie

ladybird said:


> How's this? shows his ear/eye/nose line. p.s. I thought my last stacking photo was correct because his pasterns are vertical? if I place his hind feet too far back, his pasterns start to angle out instead of being vertical to the floor


Do you mean his hocks? Or do you mean his pasterns (front legs?). If you mean pasterns, it's because he is posting. Reset the front legs after doing the back legs - make sure they are far enough under the body and that you are not overstretching the rear legs. Try and get him to lean into his stack.

If you meant hocks,, remember a proper stack is when a straight line can be drawn down and either touch the toe of the rear foot or the toe of the rear foot will be just slightly behind that line. The hocks should be straight in that position in a correctly angulated dog.


----------



## mom24doggies

ladybird said:


> How's this? shows his ear/eye/nose line. p.s. I thought my last stacking photo was correct because his pasterns are vertical? if I place his hind feet too far back, his pasterns start to angle out instead of being vertical to the floor


. Ok, that shows he's definitely not down faced, it was the way he was holding his head.  Thanks for the photos!


----------



## CharismaticMillie

OH. And re: down in the face. I've found that many people are quick to label a dog "down in the face." IMO, just about any dog could be labeled down in the face depending on the angle of the photo. Again, IMO, a true "down in the face" dog will have a foreface reminiscent of a daschund. Yes, I've seen them look like hound heads. To the point where you wonder if they were a mix! THIS is what I truly consider "_down in the face_." I don't see this in your dog.


----------



## ladybird

zyrcona said:


> his head is slightly coarse (which is often the case with dogs)


just wondering how you can tell his head is 'coarse' (what features in particular are you looking at?) and how it should look?



CharismaticMillie said:


> His foreface looks short and coarse/heavy to me. I'd like to see it longer and more refined. His overall body seems a bit less refined than I would like to see, as well. A bit "doggy".


He is 7 months old, perhaps his shape is still slightly 'puppy'?



CharismaticMillie said:


> Re: his movement: we cannot assess his movement without him being properly gaited.


what did I do wrong? how is he not properly gaited?



CharismaticMillie said:


> Lovely boy. He is your pet, enjoy him! <3


Oh I do indeed! He has the most lovely temperament in the world! I did consider getting into showing (I'd be starting from scratch there) although not having a car means I can't travel to any of them 



CharismaticMillie said:


> If you meant hocks,, remember a proper stack is when a straight line can be drawn down and either touch the toe of the rear foot or the toe of the rear foot will be just slightly behind that line. The hocks should be straight in that position in a correctly angulated dog.


I think I managed a little better here?


----------



## zyrcona

ladybird said:


> just wondering how you can tell his head is 'coarse' (what features in particular are you looking at?) and how it should look?


I mean it is not 'fine boned'. If you look at the 'Poodle Illustrated Standard' some other people have recommended in recent threads, his face leans slightly towards the 'too broad and heavy' image. I don't think it's anything major, and a lot of boys are a bit coarse. If he is only 7 months old he is probably going to be quite a big-boned lad anyway. But that's just part of his charm.  If he was a stud dog, he might complement a bitch with a high tail set who was a bit too much on the fine side.


----------



## outwest

I interpreted his head to the fact he was from England. The distance from his nose to eyes appears shorter than the distance from his eyes to back of head. It seems many of the poodles from the UK have this characteristic. I am not talking about the show poodles, but many of the poodles seem to have the look of Nimbus' head. They also seem heavier boned in the pictures. I think it is a regional thing. He has a lot of skin under his jaw, which may makes it appear heavier, too. I don't see him being downfaced, only shorter faced than I am used to. 

He is still only 7 months old, though. He has a LOT of maturing to do. 
PS His feet ARE incredible- perfect feet really.

Also- putting your dog out there to have strangers pick him apart is pretty brave! I know!


----------



## zyrcona

outwest said:


> It seems many of the poodles from the UK have this characteristic.


Yes, lots of thickset dogs here. My own bitch is a weedy little thing from mostly English and a bit of Australian on her mother's side, and German and American ancestors on her father's. It's another example of how a particular breed's appearance varies with location and time.

There's an American imported stud I know of who is absolutely huge and to me looks gangly and messy in the pictures I've seen. One of his parents is from a full-sibling breeding by a notorious American high volume breeder; I cringe internally when I look at his pedigree. A breeder I know has used this dog a few times and some of the puppies have loose skin on their faces and don't look that great, but one of the puppies she got from him and a small British bitch she is hoping to show, and it's really quite a nice-looking dog. I'm genuinely surprised she got this dog from such an ungainly sire.


----------



## ladybird

outwest said:


> I interpreted his head to the fact he was from England. The distance from his nose to eyes appears shorter than the distance from his eyes to back of head. It seems many of the poodles from the UK have this characteristic. I am not talking about the show poodles, but many of the poodles seem to have the look of Nimbus' head. They also seem heavier boned in the pictures. I think it is a regional thing. He has a lot of skin under his jaw, which may makes it appear heavier, too. I don't see him being downfaced, only shorter faced than I am used to.
> 
> He is still only 7 months old, though. He has a LOT of maturing to do.
> PS His feet ARE incredible- perfect feet really.
> 
> Also- putting your dog out there to have strangers pick him apart is pretty brave! I know!


His head - I've looked at his head (with hair flattened) to check the distances and it looks like his eyes are about in the middle between his nose and the back of his head. Maybe it's his clip that makes it look less?

I'm glad his feet are good though, I've seen flat-footed poodles before!

I'm quite critical of him myself because I was considering letting him up for stud when he's older, but only if he had pretty good conformation/breed type. His temperament is amazing - really I think he's an asset to the breed. Especially if you like the more athletic looking type! I'm curious to see how he matures!


----------



## CharismaticMillie

His head *does* appear coarse and his foreface does appear shorter than I'd like to see. The coarseness would be less obvious if he had a loger foreface OR it could be the opposite. His coarseness causes him to appear to have a short muzzle. His haircut cannot be causing that illusion. If you look at pictures I've posted of my girl Millie you can see she has a shorter muzzle than I'd like, too. I'll post some photos when I get home. Both my boys Tiger and Henry have very long forefaces with lots of chiseling and without a heavy look or a heavy backskull. This look is considered "refined.". Refined actually means proper bone for size dog.


----------



## outwest

Someone once commented Bonnie's head was 'too refined', but I like her head :act-up:. 

As far as ears being too high on you guy? That is impossible to tell from a picture. Ears go up and down depending on what they are looking at or their mood. In this one Bonnie has spied a cat and is alert, so her ears go up. In my signature is a picture of her face where she was relaxed and you can see her ears are in the right place (if you can see that tiny little pic in the top right). Your guys ears look fine to me, but too hard to judge from a picture.









Where I live, the main issue I see in most poodle heads is a lack of lower jaw and a pointy nose.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

I think Bonnie has a very nice bitchy head! Not at all too refined IMO.


----------



## outwest

CharismaticMillie said:


> I think Bonnie has a very nice bitchy head! Not at all too refined IMO.


I agree. I love her head. On a dog it would be too fine, but she is a girl. In a class a month or so ago another woman with a large female standard poodle again mentioned Bonnie's 'fine' face. I looked at her dogs heavy, bullish muzzle and nodded... uh...yah. 

Here's a close up of the one with the ear placement. Because of all the fluff on the ears, you still can't tell unless you feel in there:


----------



## minipoodlelover

Where I live the main issues I see in poodles are too-short muzzles and legs. I love the look of a more refined muzzle with chiseling, that is the proper length. I also love the square body shape. This is coming from a person who knows very little about poodle conformation - but even I can spot these things.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Okay, heads.

Here are some photos of Tiger. Ranging from 5 months until now. While a puppy may have a smaller head if they are not finished growing, IMO coarseness would still be evident because it's in part relative to the size of the dog.

ETA: I made a boo boo. The last photo is at about 9 months. All the rest are chronological.


----------



## outwest

Great picture, CM. His nose is big in relation to his muzzle like many males are (so cute). His muzzle is particularly long the way show dogs are right now, but he has a better bottom chin and jaw than many, so it looks nice. It is slim, yet not scrawny. Pretty head! 

Here is Bonnie's sires head. His nose is tight and angular (different than Tigers) and his muzzle is not as long in relation to the skull. I love his little chin and his great chiseling, which makes a difference in expression to me:









Here is her dams head, who doesn't have enough chiseling in my opinion, but has extra length plus she has a good bottom jaw for a girl. The head styles seemed to compliment each other. What one lacked, the other one had:









Bonnie got a mixture of the two. As a little pup her muzzle was slightly dished, which her breeder said will keep it straight as an adult and not downfaced. She has some chiseling, less than her sire, and a straight tight nose, like her sire, with more length like her Mom. I like how her teeth are straight like her Dad rather than more rounded like her mom.

10 weeks (a bit dished):









3 months (still slightly dished)









5 months (looking longer and straighter):









12 months:
I would like her to have a little more chiseling, but she does have some and I think her length fits her very well:
















(crummy picture, sorry)


It is so fun to look at the different styles of poodle heads! They vary SO much! Tiger's head is decidedly the current fashion and quite good looking, but I love the style of Bonnie's sire's head, even if not in fashion at the moment.


----------



## outwest

Back to Nimbus- you can see how your boys cute head is a different style than these two dogs heads and their heads are different from each other. I think all the heads have things attractive about them and they all look like poodle heads! Here is a video of a standard poodle from 1967. You can see his head is more like Nimbus' head. 

The US does a lot of screwing around with shapes! LOL
(love this video and the haircut)

CRUFT'S DOG SHOW - British Path


----------



## CharismaticMillie

The big difference between Tiger's head and Bonnie's sire's head is width of skull and length of foreface. Tiger has a narrower backskull and longer foreface. 

I agree, Bonnie's sire has a very attractive head!

Tiger is certainly not lacking in chiseling (is quite extreme, actually) nor is Bonnie's sire.

As far as Tiger's actual sniffer-nose - I know! It's huge, lol! I call it a honker. That's really the only thing I'd change about his head. I like tighter noses better.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

You have to remember, though, that there is a standard and it does fault a head that is too coarse, heavy and short. It also faults a snipey head with no underjaw, a head without chiseling and a foreface that is too narrow with a broader skull. 

An ideal head is long, narrow, chiseled, refined (not too heavy, backskull not too broad and foreface not too narrow for width of backskull) and has underjaw. Eyes are tight, oval and dark.

It's less about 'fashionable' and more about correct.


----------



## outwest

CharismaticMillie said:


> The big difference between Tiger's head and Bonnie's sire's head is width of skull and length of foreface. Tiger has a narrower backskull and longer foreface.


Yes, you hit it. I like both styles, but they are different. SOOO much to consider when choosing a sire! Dang. How on earth does anyone ever choose!!!!

Did you look at that short Crufts video from 1967? Bibelot Tall Dark And Handsome LOL He apparently sired some hideous number of puppies, actually. 
Pedigree: AM/ENG/CAN CH Bibelot's Tall Dark And Handsome CD

check out how many offspring he had and this is only a tiny portion of them! YIKES
Offspring of AM/ENG/CAN CH Bibelot's Tall Dark And Handsome CD


----------



## ladybird

so.... how does one properly 'gait' the poodle to assess movement?


----------



## zyrcona

outwest said:


> Did you look at that short Crufts video from 1967? Bibelot Tall Dark And Handsome LOL He apparently sired some hideous number of puppies, actually.


lol, that's pants. And there's the Wycliffe dogs Yaddaluvpoodles was talking about, in that pedigree, xD.

The breed standard in my country says that the distance from the nose to the stop and the stop to the occiput should be equal. Therefore a particularly dolichiocephalic dog with a long nose would be correct, as would a coarser dog with a more thickset head. Neither of them should be snipey of have excessive loose skin. I think the emphasis should be more on the balance of the dog rather than its overall build. I actually prefer the chunky Scottish dog to the white American dog of the ones people have posted on here, but that's not to say I think there is anything wrong with either. It's good that slightly different ones do exist, because then people can aim for the middle ground in their breedings by using something more towards the other end of the scale to improve more extreme features in their dogs.

I think Bonnie's face is spot on. 









(I guess were he born today, he would be Bibelot Short Dark and Squat)


----------



## outwest

(had to look it up)
DOLICHOCEPHALIC : having a relatively long head with cephalic index of less than 75, 
Meaning long headed, wherein the cranial length is greater than the cranial width. Long, rectangular cranium.

By the definition of the length from nose to eyes equaling eyes to back of head, Bonnie IS spot on.  

But, as you say, perhaps Nimbis is ALSO spot on and perhaps Tiger is ALSO spot on, although they are at the two extremes. Tiger being super elongated with a narrow skull reminding one of a borzoi style like many of the AKC show dogs are now. Or, Nimbus being short and broader skulled, but still meeting this definition. Then there is Bonnie, more toward the middle in both regards. 

All THREE of these dogs could easily meet the standard very well. As you can see the poodle standard leaves a lot of room for interpretation. 

Which style shall win? Right now Tigers style is the preferred in the show ring, but I believe all three styles have a place and should have a place.


----------



## zyrcona

outwest said:


> Which style shall win? LOL Maybe all three styles have a place and should have a place.


Which one do you want lying on your feet?

It's not all about winning.  Winning also depends on the judge's opinion, and quite possibly the country where the show is being held and the trend there.


----------



## outwest

zyrcona said:


> (i guess were he born today, he would be bibelot short dark and squat)


roflmao.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

Actually, Tramp was not a small of squat dog. This haircut is what makes him look this way. This boy was from my era, and he was divine up close and personal. He was sent to England, where there was a six month quarantine, and his handler there, Marilyn Willis of Springett Poodles, would go in every day to play with him and work on his coat. He came out of quarantine, got Reserve Best In Show at Crufts, and became England's Dog Of The Year. He was truly amazing! Don't let the photos or the haircut fool you!


----------



## liljaker

I have some great Poodle books and one, in particular, goes waaay back and shows all the show clips.......it is interesting how they change the entire look of the poodle.


----------



## zyrcona

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> Actually, Tramp was not a small of squat dog. This haircut is what makes him look this way. This boy was from my era, and he was divine up close and personal. He was sent to England, where there was a six month quarantine, and his handler there, Marilyn Willis of Springett Poodles, would go in every day to play with him and work on his coat. He came out of quarantine, got Reserve Best In Show at Crufts, and became England's Dog Of The Year. He was truly amazing! Don't let the photos or the haircut fool you!


Oh, I do think he looks a nice dog. In fact, he looks exactly my type of dog. But in that picture, his head definitely looks coarser to me than how the modern American imports I've seen do. The popularity of the Scandinavian clip (which is the show clip in Crufts these days) is also probably more flattering on slightly cobbier dogs than the Saddle clip, which might go some way to explaining how the tastes seem to have changed across the Atlantic.

(The stinky quarantine law was also lifted at the start of this year and the import procedure made a lot more straightforward)


----------



## ladybird

zyrcona said:


> I actually prefer the chunky Scottish dog to the white American dog of the ones people have posted on here


This dog is a Canen line poodle (an actual Scottish line, Nimbus I got from someone in England) who a friend of mine owns. Perhaps more of them have this kind of head in the UK











This is another UK poodle, not Canen line though (female), also owned by my friend











Her other poodle is apricot (edit: looks cream but is in fact apricot, I've seen her in real life, she's darker than this, the photo doesn't show it well), also female. She looks like she has a finer head than her other two


----------



## outwest

Yes, those are the English heads on the dogs I have seen. Quite different from the ones winning here. There is more substance to the dogs, like they could actually carry a duck. I like somewhere in between the two styles. I prefer moderate dogs: more elegant and lighter on their feet with slimmer muzzles and heads than your English ones, but less exaggerated than some of the American ones.

edit: Now, that third dog, the 'apricot' (looks cream colored, not apricot) has a lovely head - exactly the type I like. Not too much, not too little. a bit of chiseling and good length with a narrower skull - a beautiful head and eye- my favorite shape. I would like to see more angles at her nose rather than so rounded, but I'd take her in a moment. LOL


----------



## zyrcona

The lady who owned Canen died earlier this year. RIP.


----------



## zyrcona

Here is a stud dog of British origin in German trim. He is a very cobby dog (and unfortunately he does seem to have excess skin on his jowl and throat) but I would say he looks otherwise correct. I think his broad, deep chest and straight back are particularly nice.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> (had to look it up)
> DOLICHOCEPHALIC : having a relatively long head with cephalic index of less than 75,
> Meaning long headed, wherein the cranial length is greater than the cranial width. Long, rectangular cranium.
> 
> By the definition of the length from nose to eyes equaling eyes to back of head, Bonnie IS spot on.
> 
> But, as you say, perhaps Nimbis is ALSO spot on and perhaps Tiger is ALSO spot on, although they are at the two extremes. Tiger being super elongated with a narrow skull reminding one of a borzoi style like many of the AKC show dogs are now. Or, Nimbus being short and broader skulled, but still meeting this definition. Then there is Bonnie, more toward the middle in both regards.
> 
> All THREE of these dogs could easily meet the standard very well. As you can see the poodle standard leaves a lot of room for interpretation.
> 
> Which style shall win? Right now Tigers style is the preferred in the show ring, but I believe all three styles have a place and should have a place.


BORZOI, huh? Yikes.

A poodle head should never look like a Borzoi head. 

Tiger's head IS considered to be an exemplary _correct_ head (according to the standard).

I agree, we all have *preferences." But our preferences are not always what is correct.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

zyrcona said:


> Here is a stud dog of British origin in German trim. He is a very cobby dog (and unfortunately he does seem to have excess skin on his jowl and throat) but I would say he looks otherwise correct. I think his broad, deep chest and straight back are particularly nice.


You really can't tell anything about this dog in this position. He does seem to have a nice front and a nice topline. Though, a nice front can be sculpted quite easily in a German trim. He's got great chin! A heavy head and a bit of a Roman nose from this angle. A bit to heavy boned for my taste but I'd have to see a stacked photo to compare him to the standard.


----------



## zyrcona

I believe this dog is from the same breeder. It's the closest I can seem to find at the moment to the show stance, although I don't think this one's chest looks as nice as the other one's. One thing that I find annoying about the showing practice of displaying and photographing dogs in profile is that it gives no idea of the dog's breadth of chest. The apricot bitch in Ladybird's picture is an example of this -- the chest looks far too narrow when viewed from the front. With the popularity of these fancy narrow faces (which anatomically don't go with breadth elsewhere) and given that dogs' fronts are covered by long hair in conformation shows, this seems to be something that gets neglected and is difficult to find now. I don't think the first dog I posted has been scissored/shaped in the chest area. The coat looks shorn close around the neck and seems to follow the natural contours, and the shape of the dog's scapula/humerus joint on his right side is apparent from the tilt of the neck.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

zyrcona said:


> I believe this dog is from the same breeder. It's the closest I can seem to find at the moment to the show stance, although I don't think this one's chest looks as nice as the other one's. One thing that I find annoying about the showing practice of displaying and photographing dogs in profile is that it gives no idea of the dog's breadth of chest. The apricot bitch in Ladybird's picture is an example of this -- the chest looks far too narrow when viewed from the front. *With the popularity of these fancy narrow faces (which anatomically don't go with breadth elsewhere) and given that dogs' fronts are covered by long hair in conformation shows, this seems to be something that gets neglected and is difficult to find now*.


You're looking at one in this thread! My boy's front (breadth, depth, shoulder and upper arm angles) _and_ his head are two of his strongest (most correct) assets. And I don't mean that they are what *I prefer*, but that they are considered to be actually very correct. 

I actually find the grooming on the brown dog you posted to be quite distracting. I'd much rather see him shaved down!

You're right, when you stack a dog you cannot see the breadth of the chest from the side. But in a show the judge does put their hands on the dog. And when a dog is shaved down and in a stacked photo (IDEAL!!), you can really see what's going on.


----------



## Keithsomething

lol I've been to alot of shows and I've never seen a borzoi like head on a poodle XD
lab like...yes and I HATE that!!

For me the head is where it's at!
I want my heads to look like the illustrated breed standard, Mr Sammet hit the nail on the head when he drew those ;D, I've seen them in person and it's what I expect a head to look like!! (and Tigers is pretty darn close to that!!)

and about "Tramp" producing so many litters...that doesn't bother me...he has left an impact on the poodle world for the good if you ask me! He produced lovely puppies that could move and were gorgeous and those puppies produced well as well!! "Popular Stud Syndrome"...p-sha is what I say!! We breed to dogs we like because they can fix an issue with OUR dogs I have never heard someone that bred to London say "Welll we bred to him because he's London..." NO they see what he has produced, what he is producing, and what he is...the END people need to stop reading into it!!

One of the studs high on my list has only been used selectively...does that make him more appealing? I've seen his puppies and I'm in love with them, but I feel there might be more of a risk breeding to a dog that has been used to a limited extent than there would be going with a dog used more and to a different selection of bitches (I still love the dog though  )


----------



## Keithsomething

From what I've been shown to do...that chest on that dog isn't anything to write home about.

People shouldn't ever judge a dog by photos! Unless you have your hands on the dog you can't possibly know whats going on with it structurally!! except movement that can't be hidden by a groom ^_^


----------



## petitpie

White Poodle in a Punt - Image

The British poodles reminded me of this George Stubbs painting, and they look closer to the style of huntng for which the poodle was originally bred.


----------



## zyrcona

Keithsomething said:


> People shouldn't ever judge a dog by photos! Unless you have your hands on the dog you can't possibly know whats going on


When the porn industry invents a way of transmitting information over the Internet in a tactile, three dimensional way, I'm sure fora where dog conformation is discussed will catch on. Until then, people can't really use anything else as a point of discussion asides from an image.


----------



## zyrcona

petitpie said:


> White Poodle in a Punt - Image
> 
> The British poodles reminded me of this George Stubbs painting, and they look closer to the style of huntng for which the poodle was originally bred.


lol, I don't think that would win anything anywhere or be much to anyone's tastes these days. But a good example of how standards change over time.


----------



## petitpie

This is a better picture and good explanation:

Saturday Art: <em>White Poodle In A Punt</em> by George Stubbs | MyFDL


----------



## outwest

His chest and back are particularly nice. His chest is something a lot of poodles are missing. Notice how his leg and over all height compares to the American ones. He is much smaller [do you know his height? Bonnie seems to have grown a hair more in the last couple mos.- 22 in. dead on now]. Both styles should have tight skin under the jaw and neck. 

Several people have tried to tell me that European (yah, that is a broad term) and American poodles look the same, but they don't. My dog resembles her dams European side more that her sires American side including the gay tail from her dam :ahhhhh:, except she didn't get her dams chest (darn). Her coloring is also from her dams side and I wonder if color and conformation may be linked somehow because she was the only apricot in the litter (registered cream because breeder assumed she was cream). 

I like the mix of styles, but that is one reason I chose my dog in the first place. She would look different in an AKC ring. I think it would be really fun to eventually take one of her pups and try AKC. :alien2:


----------



## CharismaticMillie

There is a _standard_. Sure there are different styles and you can like what you like. But that does not mean that it is correct or that it meets the standard.

My dog has a...GASP..._European_ sire! Half of my boy's pedigree is..._European!_ And the point is...?

The majority of his looks are from his..._European sire!_ Guess where he got his head from? Not his American dam, but his European sire! (Remember Zyrcona referring to Tiger's head as a fancy American head?) 

From what I understand, the standard is relatively the same in Europe and in the US. Certain aspects of the standard may be focused on and exaggerated and/or perfected in certain countries over others.

http://www.afghanskmynde.dk/jouet_mark.html


----------



## outwest

Please don't pull any hair out.  

A borzoi has the quintessential dolichocephalic head, which is why I used that example. Poodles heads should not be like that (!), but an awful lot of them are getting narrower skulls and super long noses. You can not deny that.

Tiger is lovely. He IS the type of poodle winning in the AKC ring and he IS a beautiful dog! No one, not me or anyone else, is saying he isn't. He is a type. For you to feel he is the only correct type that meets the standard is wrong, in my opinion. There are many people who do not show AKC for this exact reason. They do not like this type and that is okay, too. People interpret the poodle standard in different ways. The way you have interpreted it, he meets it wonderfully. The way someone else would interpret it, maybe he wouldn't. 

In many of your posts you seem to think the standard only has one interpretation, but I bet to differ. It is not a black and white affair. It has been left with some leeway for people to interpret how they will. It is important to keep the standard as written decades ago so that everyone can strive towards it, but I believe that many current show dogs are exaggerated, interpreting the standard as "the more the better" when sometimes enough is enough.


----------



## petitpie

I may have misinterpreted what yaddaluvpoodles was saying, but I think we are the same blip on the radar screen as those landed gentry who bred "poodles" in England in 1780. At least, standard poodles made it another 250 years.


----------



## zyrcona

outwest said:


> He is much smaller [do you know his height?


I'm not sure how tall he is, but I would agree with you that he is probably smaller than American dogs, generally speaking. lol, if you wanted to use a British stud dog on Bonnie, it would be a lot easier to do it these days. I suspect the main reason the British lines look slightly different from foreign lines is because it is an island here, and the rabies laws made it inconvenient in the past for a lot of dogs to move back and forth. She is looking nice and compact in your recent pictures and appears to be developing a nice muscly bum (or possibly just hair lol) but her front still does not look quite right to me.



CharismaticMillie said:


> (Remember Zyrcona referring to Tiger's head as a fancy American head?)


I did not say this. I have deliberately avoided making comment on anyone's dog who has not requested feedback. The only time I did mention your dog was when I said I personally preferred the stockier dog someone else posted.


----------



## outwest

There is room for all of us in the poodle world. 

This has been such an interesting discussion. I would hate for it to get snippy.  
sigh. 

In the end, conformation is one part of a poodle package. There is so much more...


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> Please don't pull any hair out.
> 
> A borzoi has the quintessential dolichocephalic head, which is why I used that example. Poodles heads should not be like (!), but an awful lot of them are getting narrower skulls and super long noses. You can not deny that.
> 
> Tiger is lovely. He IS the type of poodle winning in the AKC ring and he IS a beautiful dog! No one, not me or anyone else, is saying he isn't. He is a type. For you to feel he is the only correct type that meets the standard is wrong, in my opinion. There are many people who do not show AKC for this exact reason. They do not like this type and that is okay, too. People interpret the poodle standard in different ways. The way you have interpreted it, he meets it wonderfully. The way someone else would interpret it, maybe he wouldn't.
> 
> In many of your posts you seem to think the standard only has one interpretation, but I bet to differ. It is not a black and white affair. It has been left with some leeway for people to interpret how they will. It is important to keep the standard as written decades ago so that everyone can strive towards it, but I believe that many current show dogs are exaggerated, interpreting the standard as "the more the better" when sometimes enough is enough.
> 
> There is room for all of us in the poodle world.


The standard is not meant to be a subjective guideline. A judge is not taught that they are to judge dogs based on the type they prefer. (This does sometimes happen, and that is unfortunate and one of the great known faults of conformation showing). They are taught to judge the dog based on what the standard describes as being correct. 

Yes, there are different types. But a heavy head is *specifically* faulted in the standard as is an overly narrow, snipey head. You simply cannot rationalize this by saying it's a "different type" but still correct. 

I'm not saying that a heavy head is a deal breaking fault. In fact, a head doesn't move the dog and I'd gladly take a structurally amazing dog with a heavier head than what the standard identifies as "preferred."

I'm also not saying that there isn't room for dogs of different types or varying levels of correctness. But to be blind to the standard, believing only what one wants to believe is, IMO, concerning when someone is considering breeding. I am well aware of my dog's faults and where he fails to meet the standard. I am not rationalizing this by saying that he is a "different type". Instead, I am acknowledging that he has faults and that I would choose a bitch who does not have those same faults. But what i I liked those faults? Preferred them, actually? Well heck, I could just say he's a different type but still correct according to your rationale! 

People who choose not to show in AKC because they don't like that "type" are people who have chosen to disagree with the standard. You can breed an entirely correct poodle and show the dog in AKC. Am I saying that my dog is perfectly correct? Not at all! He has faults as does every other dog out there. But his *head* is *almost* a textbook example of what the breed standard describes as correct for the breed.


----------



## outwest

CharismaticMillie said:


> Abica's Afghans with Attitude


Beautiful dogs!!

From the site:
POODLES - HISTORY
Kirsten got her first poodle in 1983. One thing lead to another and during a stay in the States Kirsten met Kathleen Arnold, Prestige Poodles in California, whom she has been co-breding and co-owning standards during her stay in the US.

:tape:

just so you know:
I do not want to breed some gargoil of a poodle. Everyone should breed towards the standard conformationally, but there is a hell of a lot more to consider than just that. It's a tricky business.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> From the site:
> POODLES - HISTORY
> Kirsten got her first poodle in 1983. One thing lead to another and during a stay in the States Kirsten met Kathleen Arnold, Prestige Poodles in California, whom she has been co-breding and co-owning standards during her stay in the US .
> 
> me again:
> these are American style poodles being bred abroad.


Good point.

But "Kristen" has nothing to do with the breeding of Mark (my boys' sire.) That website simply displayed some of his photos, for whatever reason. 

Mark is very much a Scandinavian style poodle from a well known and established Scandinavian line.

http://www.123hjemmeside.dk/Jouet_Poodles/911072
http://www.jouet.dk/


----------



## Keithsomething

the Jouet dogs are a VERY well established European kennel...I wouldn't be surprised if you had a few of their dogs behind Bonnie Outwest ;D (and may I add that they're some of my FAVOURITE Euro dogs) BUT of course they come back to American bred dogs...all the good ones dog ;D hahaha

and I completely agree with Lizzie, the standard is COMPLETELY up for a breeders interpretation...but not a judges, they have a standard they're given and they have to judge accordingly! Coarse heads are NOT what the standard calls for, snipey heads are NOT what the standard calls for...the END


----------



## outwest

CharismaticMillie said:


> Good point.
> 
> But "Kristen" has nothing to do with the breeding of Mark (my boys' sire.) That website simply displayed some of his photos, for whatever reason.
> 
> Mark is very much a Scandinavian style poodle from a well known and established Scandinavian line.
> 
> Males - www.123hjemmeside.dk/Jouet_Poodles
> Jouet poodles[/QUOTE
> 
> 
> Aaahh...NOW you're talking:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I LOVE those poodles. Gorgeous! They meet the standard the way I see it. This is the type/style/look, whatever you want to call it, that I prefer. Honestly great looking, beautiful heads, with some substance of body, more moderation than I see around here and a good moderate size, too.
> Thanks for the link.
> 
> Coarse heads are not to standard - agreed. See, we don't disagree as much as I thought we did. LOL I think it is a matter of degree. That European site has some of the best looking poodles I have seen in quite a while.
> 
> EDIT:
> Surfing around admiring those poodles and lo and behold, you are absolutely right, Keith. There are some Tiara poodles in there! Great find. Also, some of the European ones Bonnie does have. Fascinating. Maybe the reason I like the look of them is because they remind me of my best buddy. LOL


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> Aaahh...NOW you're talking. I LOVE those poodles. Gorgeous! They meet the standard the way I see it. This is the type/style/look, whatever you want to call it, that I prefer. Honestly great looking, beautiful heads, with some substance of body, more moderation than I see around here and a good moderate size, too.
> Thanks for the link.
> 
> Coarse heads are not to standard - agreed. See, we don't disagree as much as I thought we did. LOL I think it is a matter of degree. That European site has some of the best looking poodles I have seen in quite a while.


They are wonderful dogs. But I find it very interesting what you are saying because they do have some quite extreme dogs.  These dogs win in Europe and in America and IMO aren't drastically different from what you see here. The majority of the heads are incredibly similar to Tiger's.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> Aaahh...NOW you're talking:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I LOVE those poodles. Gorgeous! They meet the standard the way I see it. This is the type/style/look, whatever you want to call it, that I prefer. Honestly great looking, beautiful heads, with some substance of body, more moderation than I see around here and a good moderate size, too.
> Thanks for the link.
> 
> Coarse heads are not to standard - agreed. See, we don't disagree as much as I thought we did. LOL I think it is a matter of degree. That European site has some of the best looking poodles I have seen in quite a while.


You crack me up, Outwest!

That is Tiger's sire you have pictured. He is a GORGEOUS dog. He *is* an _extreme_ dog. I am surprised you are attracted to him as you have previously said you prefer more moderate dogs. 

His head is the same as Tiger's with Tiger having a bit of a tighter eye. The narrow head and refinement is the same.

Refer back to this post and see above dog (which you like) has the same narrow head you earlier said you don't prefer. http://www.poodleforum.com/222070-post186.html


----------



## Keithsomething

I also want to point out that Mark is a Gr.Ch. here in the states...and a tp here as well!!
So whenever I see people saying that these "european" style dogs don't do well in the ring are just flat wrong, when a dog conforms to the written standard it does well no matter WHERE its from! Mark (and his litter mate Jacob up in Canada) are both outstanding dogs, but that has nothing to do with their country of origin it has to do with the fact that these are exquisitely well bred dogs that come from breeders that KNOW what they're doing

We want to talk about Europe...I can think of only a handful of breeders I'd consider buying from in Europe because of the style of dogs they breed just aren't up to snuff to win here in the states (literally the hardest place in the world to CH. a dog...in AKC that is ;D)


----------



## outwest

CharismaticMillie said:


> You crack me up, Outwest!
> 
> That is Tiger's sire you have pictured. He is a GORGEOUS dog. He *is* an _extreme_ dog. I am surprised you are attracted to him as you have previously said you prefer more moderate dogs.
> 
> His head is the same as Tiger's with Tiger having a bit of a tighter eye. The narrow head and refinement is the same.


HE is not extreme at all in this picture and I never said Tiger was extreme. Tiger is more along the lines of American winning poodles, must come from his dam than his sire. I could easily post a picture of extreme dogs (there are plenty!), but it wouldn't be mine to post.  I felt I could post that black boy because I like him. He IS more moderately sized and he DOES have a great head. You can't tell me that he is just like the American style poodles I see here in SoCal or the ones on the first site you mentioned, because he is much more moderate. If that is Tigers sire, I see why you think he may be a nice stud for people to consider using. Tiger seems a lot bigger than he is. That dog can't be over 23 inches tall. Tigers sires head is quite slim in the head shot and it doesn't look so slim in the profile.

Keith, I am so glad he could win in the US. Maybe it isn't that the judges are choosing the extreme dogs all the time. Maybe it is that they aren't presented with anything else.

edit: CM, I never said i didn't like Tigers head. I am thinking, in particular, of a line of dogs that is winning here in SoCal where the muzzle is far longer than the skull depth and very skinny. I don't like that.

It all goes to show you that you have to see a dog in person to really know what they look like and we probably like what we are used to seeing.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> HE is not extreme at all in this picture and I never said Tiger was extreme. I could easily post a picture of an extreme dog (there are plenty!), but it wouldn't be mine to post.  I felt I could post that black boy because I like him. He IS more moderately sized and he DOES have a great head. If that is Tigers sire, I see why you think he may be a nice stud for people to consider using.


The boy you posted above _is_ absolutely an extreme dog. He is about Tiger's size (25.5 inches tall), so yes, moderate in size. Tiger measures a hair over 25 inches tall and is no doubt no taller than his sire (per his sire's owner). While you never said that Tiger is extreme, I have mentioned time and time again that he is not a moderate dog in build. Nor is his sire. Both have a large amount of rear angulation and refinement/overall fancy exaggerated type which IMO is evident in the photo. Again, very odd that you find him to be your type when he is the same type as Tiger, has similar angulation, refinement and a nearly identical head.  

Tiger's dam is MUCH more moderate and is MUCH smaller than the boy I posted above that you like. Clearly you have been misled somehow by photos. 
I've had his conformation detailed and described to me very specifically seeing as his owner sold me Tiger.  And I've had my hands all over his dam (who actually IS a moderate bitch that you would surely like.)

The very fact that you have been misled to believe a various false notions shows me how photos can be quite misleading.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> Tiger seems a lot bigger than he is. That dog can't be over 23 inches tall. Tigers sires head is quite slim in the head shot and it doesn't look so slim in the profile.


You are incorrect. He is well over 23 inches tall. He is ~ 25.5 inches tall.

You are also incorrect in saying that he is not an extreme dog.

I'm honestly not trying to be snippy, but I *am* getting tired of repeatedly saying the same things over and over again only for them to be negated. I have had extensive discussions about this dog WITH his owner, as you can imagine, since he sired my dog.


----------



## outwest

Tiger's dam is MUCH more moderate and is MUCH smaller than the boy I posted above that you like. Clearly you have been misled somehow by photos. 
I've had his conformation detailed and described to me very specifically seeing as his owner sold me Tiger.  And I've had my hands all over his dam (who actually IS a moderate bitch that you would surely like.)

The very fact that you have been misled to believe a various false notions shows me how photos can be quite misleading.[/QUOTE]

__________

You're kidding me!!?? Obviously pictures lie big time. To me, the dog looks much smaller than Tiger in the picture, although 25 is a nice size. He also looks moderate to me, without extreme angulation or overly long head. I still like *this picture of a dog*. I don't read it as 'extreme' although you say he is (I believe you, I believe you ). I guess a picture really isn't worth a thousand words. 

Maybe everyone will have to start posting videos ONLY. :act-up: Or, not read ANYthing into a photo.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

He *is* extreme, but certainly is not the most extreme dog out there. I am sure that he would look perfectly moderate compared to the majority of the dogs out there at PCA so are so far exaggerated past the standard... But so will Tiger look moderate.  Anyway, I think the above boy is a GORGEOUS dog. I would not _fault_ him for being extreme. That said, he is _far_ more angulated in the rear than Bonnie is and many of the other dogs whose angulation you have said you prefer. His angulation is much closer to that of the dog I emailed you a photo of with the correct front and short back. You specifically said that you found that amount of angulation to be too extreme yet this dog has the same amount and you find it to be moderate.


----------



## outwest

CharismaticMillie said:


> He *is* extreme, but certainly is not the most extreme dog out there. I am sure that he would look perfectly moderate compared to the majority of the dogs out there at PCA. But so will Tiger look moderate.  Anyway, I think the above boy is a GORGEOUS dog. I would not _fault_ him for being extreme. That said, he is _far_ more angulated in the rear than Bonnie is and many of the other dogs whose angulation you have said you prefer.


No, CM. Bonnie needs more leg. I have said that over and over, too.  I think her rear end is fine looking, but could use another inch. Her front could use two. I don't like the look where the rear legs are far behind them. They appear off balance. In THAT PICTURE, the black dogs legs don't look like that. A line drawn straight down their rear end should just touch the front of the leg. That is the amount of angulation I like. Most of the winning dogs her have far more than that. 

Honestly, I believe I will go watch TV. :act-up:


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Did you look at the photos on this website (that I first posted). Remember - disclaimer: this website is NOT the breeder of this dog, I just found a collection of photos there.

Abica's Afghans with Attitude

Look through all of these photos. Can you see how he has tons of lovely rear angulation? This is the same dog (which I assume you know.)

Look at the bend of stifle. Draw a mental line down from the pin bone, through the stifle, to the ground. The back foot is quite far past that line and is not overstretched. This is not a moderate dog. This IS a gorgeous dog with beautiful angulation.


----------



## outwest

CharismaticMillie said:


> Did you look at the photos on this website (that I first posted). Remember - disclaimer: this website is NOT the breeder of this dog, I just found a collection of photos there.
> 
> Abica's Afghans with Attitude
> 
> Look through all of these photos. Can you see how he has tons of lovely rear angulation? This is the same dog (which I assume you know.)
> 
> Look at the bend of stifle. Draw a mental line down from the pin bone, through the stifle, to the ground. The back foot is quite far past that line and is not overstretched. This is not a moderate dog. This IS a gorgeous dog with beautiful angulation.


Oooohhhhh...that is the SAME dog!? No, I didn't realize that at all!! Holy crap. He has an abundance angulation!

:rofl:

You popped my bubble. I am not going to choose any dog by photographs. I will need video.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> No, CM. Bonnie needs more leg. I have said that over and over, too.  I think her rear end is fine looking, but could use another inch. Her front could use two. I don't like the look where the rear legs are far behind them. They appear off balance. In THAT PICTURE, the black dogs legs don't look like that. A line drawn straight down their rear end should just touch the front of the leg. That is the amount of angulation I like. Most of the winning dogs her have far more than that.
> 
> Honestly, I believe I will go watch TV. :act-up:


Rear legs being far out has to do with angulation. The more bend of stifle, the more the leg will either need to be placed further back or will appear to be placed further back.

Also, you do have to remember that in that photo that you like, it is NOT a direct profile. There is some distortion due to the angle and you must mentally take that into account. That means that there is a tad bit more bend of stifle that is camouflaged by the angle.


----------



## outwest

Yes, the angle. I understand now why you are always saying a dog MUST be stacked properly with a photo spot on from the side. BIG differences! I always thought it was a little picky, but now I bow my hat to you on that.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> No, CM. Bonnie needs more leg. I have said that over and over, too.  I think her rear end is fine looking, but could use another inch.


I know. And I know you prefer her amount of angulation. My point was that I was very surprised you suddenly preferred a dog with significantly more angulation than her.


----------



## outwest

I didn't know he was that angulated. It is a bit much to me when looking at the other photos.  I also can see how big he is in the other pictures, which is a nice size. In the first one, he appears FAR smaller.

I know, everyone needs to photograph their dogs with a soda can next to them. LOL


----------



## outwest

Two days later: 

edit/delete - nevermind. I'm wasting my breath.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

*Something to think about*

See my comments below...


CharismaticMillie said:


> People who choose not to show in AKC because they don't like that "type" are people who have chosen to disagree with the standard. You can breed an entirely correct poodle and show the dog in AKC. Am I saying that my dog is perfectly correct? Not at all! He has faults as does every other dog out there. But his *head* is *almost* a textbook example of what the breed standard describes as correct for the breed.


This may actually belong in a new thread. I encourage people to think really hard about what they do.. why they do it. Not to be "sheeple" and move mindlessly along with the rest of the flock. I'm loving this discussion.
Ok, here goes..

There are many reasons to show/not to show in AKC. Much of the breed standard is subjective and it depends on the era the type of poodle that is promoted to winning without changing the standard, yet the standard hasn't changed and the types are still correct.

There are people who feel that AKC type judging is harmful to the breed. (Big concept... GASP.. uhoh.. I'm gonna get burned at the stake again! cuz.. I'm one of them). Ok, I fully support the AKC in almost all areas, but not in judging. Here's why. When judging for one winner, one dog who fits the current concept of the breed standard more than any other, the winner is the "best". Now ever breeder and every owner out there always wants the "best" poodle. We all do. Human nature. Given the choice between best and less than best, we are going to take the best. So.. next critical question... What happens to the poodles who are less than the best? My answer is.. they very slowly.. disappear and go away.. and so do their genetics. What I'm leading up to here is that selecting only for the best leads to loss of genetics for the breed and.. promotes genetic bottlenecks such as the Wycliffe bottleneck. Stop and look at how in demand London is right now, how many breedings, people who desperately want one of his offspring because he is currently the best poodle dude out there. 

So is there a better alternative? Absolutely (IMO). The IABCA in the USA and as well as some of the European dog shows use a method called "card" judging. With card judging, each dog is compared to the breed standard, each trait of the dog is critiqued. The overall evaluation shows both the good points and the bad points of each dog. There is emphasis on this: (key point) *There is no one ideal poodle, every poodle has it good points and it's bad points.* By developing and reinforcing that awareness, breeders are more likely to make choices based on the individual traits of each poodle rather than breeding to the poodle which has been determined to be the "best" even though that "best" poodle really is not the best choice for their breeding. Ok.. disclaimer.. having said all of that... if you research the pedigrees in the European countries, you're not going to find more than a handful who don't have Wycliffe and the poodles from the USA in them..why? Because they were the "best" and everyone wanted them.... 

Anyway, probably belongs in a different thread.. but I thought I would throw that out there just to get people to think about this as, again, IMO.. the AKC style of judging is damaging to the overall well being and longevity of the breed.


----------



## outwest

yaddalove, You said what I alllmmooosst said, but didn't feel like coming up against a good boys club of people who show and win with their dogs in AKC and believe (and I mean they REALLY believe with all their hearts) that their concept of the ideal poodle is correct and everyone else should strive for THAT. Some of them, not all, encourage that concept in newbies by sticking with themselves, taking people into their fold, refusing to see beyond the ring, patting each other on the backs and snipping behind others backs about 'that other breeder'. It's almost like brainwashing. I can not and do not believe the current winning poodles are the only poodle or the best poodle for the breed. I never will. 

I do want to improve conformation in any pups I might breed, but I will not breed to only conformation, ever. Conformation is down the list after health and temperament. If I find a dog with good health and a terrific temperament, THEN I will look at conformation. As my breeder said, it isn't as easy as it seems to find all three. 

I do like the AKC. I don't find fault in principal. We have to have an overall parent club. I think they are trying to do the correct thing, too. I do believe we need dog shows to help people understand the different breeds. Showing dogs is fun, also. I want a beautiful dog. Don't we all? 

I am worried that the standard poodle is beginning to split into two distinct camps because of the distain of one group of poodle breeders for the other and the blindness to see any good in 'the other side'. Why, tell me why, can't the two types of breeders come together? WHY will it be hard for me to find an AKC Champion sire for Bonnie if I decide to do that? "An approved bitch". Ah, would she be 'approved'? After all, Bonnie is a Tiara poodle.  

That poodle with the stocky build/shorter face and the highly stylish/leggy dogs are too far apart. To me, neither ONE meets the standard all that well. I am sorry if that offends any of you, I don't mean it to. I want people to see the whole picture, the whole genetics, the whole brain and spirit of a dog and not whether he can hold a topknot without wiggles and hairspray. Why CAN'T I try to bridge the gap with my poodle from 'the other side'. She is alREADY a mishmash of the two styles. 

Flame away.  I am a tough cookie and the trap set for me earlier was very well done. LOL


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

This is something that has been on my mind for a long time now. We are all going to get flamed now, so I may as well get this off my chest.

I feel, FERVENTLY, that a dog should not be allowed to finish it's championship, until it is the age of two and has been tested for all of the breed specific issues and has been cleared for all of these.

After watching Pedigree Dogs Exposed, and seeing the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel, my lightbulb went off. This dog won the Specialty show, in spite of having been tested for and failing the test for the ailment this breed is prone to where their skull is too small for their brain. At the point of this prestigious win, this dog had sired approximately 40 litters. At this point, after getting to watch some of his offspring seizing and screaming in pain, it got me thinking that there must be a different way of doing things. Maybe something that could would be better for the breeds as a whole. Because most breeders do OFA hip testing, and you cannot get a final using this method until a dog is two years old, two seems to be the magic number. It does not seem right to me that a dog can win to the point where things seem to become a fever pitch- people wanting to breed to it, people wanting to own one of it's offspring, and it could have become a champion at ten or eleven months old, and might not do so well when it's testing has been completed. Does this make sense?


----------



## Keithsomething

I have to kindly disagree

The things (and I say things...because those dogs should never have been born let alone finished in ANY venue!!) finished in IABCA are just awful...

I was seriously thinking about dabbling in UKC, but I had enough long time breeders of repute ask...Why?

Well to be quite honest...there isn't a good reason why, I want to show dogs in AKC so why waste my money and show UKC? If I need ring experience or my dog needs ring experience they have AKC sanctioned matches for that...then theres also handling classes...so why pay $20 for an entry fee when I can pay $6 for a handling class and usually in this area at least enter a FREE match?

I get why UKC is a valid place for partis...but for solid dogs there is no reason to show exclusively in that venue!


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> This is something that has been on my mind for a long time now. We are all going to get flamed now, so I may as well get this off my chest.
> Well, maybe we could have a few marshmallows with our bon fire.. and it will all be good.VBG Crossing my fingers.. that I'm not about to become a marshmallow.
> 
> I feel, FERVENTLY, that a dog should not be allowed to finish it's championship, until it is the age of two and has been tested for all of the breed specific issues and has been cleared for all of these.
> 
> " Because most breeders do OFA hip testing, and you cannot get a final using this method until a dog is two years old, two seems to be the magic number".
> 
> This comment probably belongs in a hip thread.. but here goes.. something else for all to consider. We know that eyes and skin health can change throughout the life time of a dog... but what about joint health. How many old poodles are there out there with hip issues who tested with Good or Excellent hips as youngsters. Unless there is an injury, we simply don't re-xray as poodles get older. So how confident are we.. that even though a poodle had OFA "good" hips at 2 years old, that poodle isn't displastic at age 8, or 9 or whatever. Because xrays are not a genetic test, huge room for variables, errors and changes. Most none genetic tests have some subjectivity to them. One of the foremost agility poodles here in the USA who had OFA passing hips (not fair, I don't remember what they were).. is now dysplastic. I'm not advocating for annual hip xrays. What I am encouraging is just that people take a really good look at the hip health in a pedigree, make contact with as many owners of ancestors to their poodles (if they are breeding those poodles) and contact them occasionally for updates.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It does not seem right to me that a dog can win to the point where things seem to become a fever pitch- people wanting to breed to it, people wanting to own one of it's offspring, and it could have become a champion at ten or eleven months old, and might not do so well when it's testing has been completed. Does this make sense?


absolutely


----------



## Keithsomething

I want to add that I LIKE the idea of IABCA and FCI where they give you written critiques...but I've been standing ring side and those 2 minutes per dog for a class of 15, and then another class of 12, and then a class of 6...if the judge had to write a critique for all those dogs I'd pull my hair our along with the show committees for letting it take too long!!!


----------



## zyrcona

Yaddaluvpoodles said:


> When judging for one winner, one dog who fits the current concept of the breed standard more than any other, the winner is the "best".


It’s not even that the dog that wins is the ‘best’. The dog that wins is just a dog that someone has decided is best based on cosmetic features alone. I don’t think there is anything wrong in principle with competitive showing, but I do think it is taken far too seriously for what in reality is a beauty pageant for pets. I know of a breeder who apparently hates non-solid colours and won’t allow their stud dogs to be used on them. This same breeder’s website suggests no testing has been done on said studs beyond hips and eyes. How is this proportionate or sensible?

The breed standard is a written document. Here is the breed standard for the Kennel Club. It uses a lot of subjective descriptions that can be interpreted with various degrees of extremity. A dog’s head being ‘long and fine’ could mean different things depending on whether you are thinking of a bulldog or a Borzoi for comparison. Also note the weasel clause ‘as straight as possible’ for a tail, which could well mean as straight as that dog could personally hold its tail if you wanted to interpret it that way. If the breed standard is supposed to define accurately what a breed should look like to the degree modern show dogs look alike, its writers have made a lousy job at it when you compare it to a highly specific document that a solicitor can knock up in half an hour. The illustrated poodle standard I see as being more based on proportions and angles, and the dogs illustrated in there do look cobbier to me than most of the American dogs I’ve seen. This publication is also by the American Kennel Club (it says so on the front page) and thus by no means should necessarily be assumed to be an international reference.



outwest said:


> I am worried that the standard poodle is beginning to split into two distinct camps because of the distain of one group of poodle breeders for the other and the blindness to see any good in 'the other side'.


This may not be a bad thing if it does happen. We already have 'working type' GSDs and Labradors.

Kennel club registries are important and useful. At the very minimum, they prevent people from stealing and breeding dogs for profit. They also importantly provide a method of being able to trace ancestry over multiple generations and allow people to do genetics research.

I have a dog. It is a poodle, and because of this it is recognisable as a poodle, it does not smell, and it has a coat that does not shed. I also have a disease that causes me chronic pain. Sometimes the pain is very severe; other days are almost normal. My dog gives me courage and helps me. She helps round up chickens so I don't have to walk so far. One time I passed out because I was in so much pain, and my dog lay beside me with her head on my chest until I recovered. I do not need a dog bred to win a show. I do not give a monkey's b*llocks what a judge might think about my dog. I need a dog to suit my purposes, and so I and other people with similar requirements need breeders to continue to produce this sort of dog.

I do not have a problem with people breeding and using dogs to compete in shows. It is interesting to study the structure of dogs and see how they are different and how they might be combined to improve upon what exists already, but in my view this is not the main thing a dog is for. In the end it will make no difference to the dog or its owner’s life that a judge has decided the dog’s ancestors look pretty. It _will _make a difference if the dog has a low COI and is free of health problems, though.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

Keithsomething said:


> I have to kindly disagree
> 
> The things (and I say things...because those dogs should never have been born let alone finished in ANY venue!!) finished in IABCA are just awful...We need to learn from the fact that they did, that there is a demand for them and that they are still being bred because of that demand.. and we need to make sure that nothing like that ever happens with our poodles! I look at all of these things as lessons. I have heard grumblings from some people that standard poodles shouldn't be bred because of bloat... breeders need to be aware and use extreme caution..
> 
> I was seriously thinking about dabbling in UKC, but I had enough long time breeders of repute ask...Why?It's a priority issue. Many long time AKC breeders feel a bit off balance, or a bit threatened by something outside of their "realm". AKC promotes show poodles, in theory, UKC supports working poodles.. that can be a threatening thing.
> 
> Well to be quite honest...there isn't a good reason why, I want to show dogs in AKC so why waste my money and show UKC?Agreed. It depends on where your priorities are.. and each person needs to follow their own priorities.. I'm not big on the AKC stuff and that has come out in this thread (sigh).. but life is simply too short for people not to do and follow what is important to them. Now the IMO part <VBG> So long as it is not highly detrimental to the breed and not raining on someone elses parade. We poodle people (self included) tend to be highly judgemental and fore the most part.. if we don't do something in a certain manner, we tend to be in tolerant and disrespectful of others who do. If I need ring experience or my dog needs ring experience they have AKC sanctioned matches for that...then theres also handling classes...so why pay $20 for an entry fee when I can pay $6 for a handling class and usually in this area at least enter a FREE match? Again, I agree 100%.. and not just for people who are truly showing. Fun Matches can be a great place to.. have fun, to meet other owners and to learn a whole lot more about poodles.. as well as preparing for the ring.
> 
> I get why UKC is a valid place for partis...but for solid dogs there is no reason to show exclusively in that venue!Back when I strongly supported AKC shows.. I would have agreed 100%. Now I have to disagree. There is a hard edge to the competitiveness at many (not all) AKC shows. Again, IMO.. when pro handlers are needing to be used.. well then it seems to me that the dogs aren't being judged on their individual attributes but that some of the handlers skills are coming into play as well.
> 
> There are many folks who will dabble with UKC and IABCA shows simply because there is a lot less of the snob factor running amuck.
> 
> While I'm not a fan of AKC shows.. again.. the bottom line is the more diverse we are, the more tolerant and encouraging we are of others, the more our poodles will benefit with added diversity. If AKC is where your heart lies.. then by all means, that is exactly what you should
> do and love every minute of it!
> 
> I'm not sure that what I'm attempting to say is coming out right. I am not trying to give permission.. I certainly wouldn't attempt to do that, nor have any rights to do that. I'm simply saying.. we should follow our hearts, do what we love and try to support and encourage others even though their paths may lie in other directions.


-----


----------



## zyrcona

Keithsomething said:


> The things (and I say things...because those dogs should never have been born let alone finished in ANY venue!!)


I am sorry, but if you mean this remark to mean what I think it to mean, I find this sentiment disgusting. Are you saying that a dog should not have been born because it is not pretty enough to win a conformation contest, despite what other merits it may have and what is has brought to someone's life? This reeks of eugenics.


----------



## Rowan

zyrcona said:


> I am sorry, but if you mean this remark to mean what I think it to mean, I find this sentiment disgusting. Are you saying that a dog should not have been born because it is not pretty enough to win a conformation contest, despite what other merits it may have and what is has brought to someone's life? This reeks of eugenics.


Thank you. I was going to say more but I agree with Zyrcona on this one and such comments actually make me physically ill. It's not unlike a previous comment by a forum member that certain poodles seen at dog parks are so ugly she couldn't understand why anyone would want to own them. WTFO? 

*CharismaticMillie*: I don't have anything of value to add regarding the topic of this thread, but I wanted to say that I think Tiger is absolutely _gorgeous_. No dog is perfect, but he's as perfect as he can be.


----------



## Keithsomething

lol Zrycona...do I sense a JH fan amongst us ;D

No I didn't mean the dog should be euthanized, I meant that these dogs were finished in a "show" so now they're being bred unscrupulously because they're "finished" that dog should have been SPAYED and left as someones beloved pet! Perhaps I should regrow my Elphies uterus and expand the gene pool with her because she was a female?

(BTW since you mentioned it...eugenics isn't to far off from what I believe about people...I feel HUMANS should have complete health screenings prior to breeding so I suppose I'm a nazi now HAHAHAHAHA :aetsch: )


----------



## Rowan

> Posted by *Keithsomething*:
> (BTW since you mentioned it...eugenics isn't to far off from what I believe about people...I feel HUMANS should have complete health screenings prior to breeding so I suppose I'm a nazi now HAHAHAHAHA )


You're not remotely funny, Keith. Your comments are repulsive. Please stop and think before you type and consider everyone you're insulting with your comments.


----------



## Keithsomething

Rowan I'm insulting someone who compared me to Hitler (who was supposedly a eugenicist) if I insult someone else I'm sorry for that...but her comment was just as uncalled for


----------



## zyrcona

Keithsomething said:


> No I didn't mean the dog should be euthanized, I meant that these dogs were finished in a "show" so now they're being bred unscrupulously because they're "finished"


Ah OK. No idea what JH is. Nazism was based on selection for aesthetic features, so wanting health screening for breeding humans is not strictly Nazism.

Edit: I did not compare you to Hitler; that would have incited Godwin's Law; I compared an opinion you appeared to profess to eugenics. You also have no idea what sex I am, so I'm not sure why you assumed I'm 'her'.


----------



## Rowan

> eu·gen·ics   [yoo-jen-iks] Show IPA
> noun ( used with a singular verb )
> the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).


Eugenics | Define Eugenics at Dictionary.com

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics


> Eugenics is the "applied science or the bio-social movement which advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a population", usually referring to the manipulation of human populations.[2][3] The origins of the concept of eugenics began with certain interpretations of Mendelian inheritance, and the theories of August Weismann.[4] Historically, many of the practitioners of eugenics viewed eugenics as a science, not necessarily restricted to human populations; this embraced the views of Darwinism and Social Darwinism.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

Ok, Folks...

This has been a most impressive thread, lots of sharing of what could be really inflammatory opinions and ideas, lots of listening and discussion, hopefully lots of thinking about what was posted.

It's tough to discuss things that we get so impassioned about. I want to thank everyone here for not roasting me as I have promoted so really outrageous thoughts (hmmm.. maybe everyone just decided I was a wack job and wasn't worth the time of replying). 

But let's do keep it gentle.. that way, we can continue learning!

And again.. THANK YOU, each and everyone of you.. for allowing me to share my comments without attacking.

Darla


----------



## Rowan

Keithsomething said:


> Rowan *I'm insulting someone *who compared me to Hitler (who was supposedly a eugenicist) if I insult someone else I'm sorry for that...but her comment was just as uncalled for


*Boldface mine*

Keith:
First, there truly is no reason to insult anyone. I understand knee jerk reactions because I'm quick to rage mode myself. But *Zyrcona *didn't compare you to Hitler. She mentioned "eugenics" which isn't necessarily related to Nazism (please see my reference post above or Google it). Your comment about human breeding was inappropriate. Completely inappropriate. 

Second, there are simply better ways to make your point.


----------



## Keithsomething

Apologize for assuming your gender Zrycona...I've never had anyone get upset about that on the internet...

Yadda sorry for skipping over your post, 

I actually agree with you...I do feel if there are working dogs they should have a venue to display that...but I don't agree that that venue should be a conformation ring, clearly as some have stated conformation rings "ruin" dogs and if you want to show off your dogs working abilites AKC offers events to do just that

Rowan you're right...the reason I thought it was a hitler reference was because of PDE...which if I remember correctly has been offered as the holy grail on this forum several times in which the produce DID compare dog breeding/eugenics to hitler...but about the human breeding...I do agree with that if my dogs need to be health tested the people I purchase my child from will be as well...


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

It takes me forever to get a message to post.. usually have to log in with every single message, slows me down.

@ Keithsomething, I love performance events.. whichever registry is promoting them.

But I really think that AKC tends to focus so much on a certain type/look, that sometimes the judges overlook poodles who may be even more structurally sound and have more to contribute to the gene pool. That doesn't matter.. it's not going to change, AKC is very much about type. Again, that's an okay thing.. but for people who are interested in a different type, it's nice to know that there are other venues where their poodles can be equally as appreciated. Neither is wrong, what seems to be wrong.. as time passes and the impact it has on the breed.. is when everyone does the same thing, breeds for the same thing. It is important that each of us learn to respect and love our poodles, not just for the things that they have which are similar, but also for their differences. Those phenotypic differences.. may be supported by some genotypic diversity that these poodles need for survival. So, support, encourage, try not to condemn each other.. if we really HATE something someone else is doing.. let's try to inquire why and learn from them. It may still be something that we disagree with. rather than lighting the fire.


So.. how do we get this thread back on track?


----------



## zyrcona

Keithsomething said:


> ...but about the human breeding...I do agree with that if my dogs need to be health tested the people I purchase my child from will be as well...


Well, there _are _far too many humans on this planet. If people are saying dogs are overbred, humans take overbreeding to a whole new level. It's a taboo and I think it perhaps should be discussed. With human rights come human responsibilities, and perhaps someone who has twelve children and no income is not being responsible.


----------



## Rowan

Keithsomething said:


> Apologize for assuming your gender Zrycona...I've never had anyone get upset about that on the internet...
> 
> Yadda sorry for skipping over your post,
> 
> I actually agree with you...I do feel if there are working dogs they should have a venue to display that...but I don't agree that that venue should be a conformation ring, clearly as some have stated conformation rings "ruin" dogs and if you want to show off your dogs working abilites AKC offers events to do just that
> 
> Rowan you're right...*the reason I thought it was a hitler reference was because of PDE...which if I remember correctly has been offered as the holy grail on this forum several times in which the produce DID compare dog breeding/eugenics to hitler*...*but about the human breeding...I do agree with that if my dogs need to be health tested the people I purchase my child from will be as well...*


Never mind. Rowan out!

*yaddaluvpoodles*: no worries. It's back on track because I'm done here. My apologies.


----------



## zyrcona

Rowan said:


> Second boldface. I must be thick because I'm not following your train of thought at all. _"The people you purchase your child from...."_ I'm sorry, but are you actually referring to human trafficking now?


I recall from something on another thread (although I may have made a confusion with another forum member) that Keithsomething is a gay man and would thus be talking about paying someone to work as a surrogate to produce a child for him in this case.


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

Hmmm... I think I'm going to take a break, go pet my poodles.. Hopefully will come back and we can resume this thread. I have enjoyed it immensely and I think others have too. We poodle people are just too passionate.

Ok... so Outwest is looking for an AKC CH. sire to breed to Bonnie... 
Can we help? How can we help?

Suggestions?


----------



## Keithsomething

lol not human trafficking Rowan XD
As a gay male, I can't exactly reproduce on my own ;D so when I hire a surrogate she will be of the healthiest "stock" (and if I don't pass MY health testing then I won't be used in the conception)...perfectly legal and perfectly responsible ...you have to pay a surrogate...so I will effectively be "buying" a child...and it isn't cheap XD

and I absolutely agree Zrycona thats what I'm referring too...but I'm called a bitter queen when I say something like that ;D

Yadda yes back on topic hahaha XD
I would never say I hate someones dogs...I believe every dog has a right to live, but I do NOT think every dog has the right to be bred...

I love watching performance events, and I completely agree I want my dogs to be as genetically diverse and healthy as possible but ALSO look like a poodle
there are plenty of dogs that are able to do the things they were bred for but also keep that poodley type I love :]


----------



## petitpie

So, without the drama, 

Too many poodles are there without health testing,

And, yet, too few for diversity and longevity.

Are these the problems being discussed?


----------



## Yaddaluvpoodles

At this point, I know of several individual breeders who are trying to keep notes on longevity, but there is no one single place where we can track it. According to Ian Dunbar (my all time fav veterinarian), ongoing longevity is the number one indicator of health of a breed.

As far as health testing, results can be listed with OFA.. for some people, the extra cost of submission to OFA is a deterent to listing those results. For CERF and SA results which are clear.. this can be important info that is not tracked.

All test results can be posted to PHR free of charge EXCEPT normal CERF and SA results. The reason for this is.. staffing at PHR is incredibly small and there simply isn't the manpower to go in and re enter those results as they turn up. If a poodle is listed on PHR with a normal CERF or SA.. and someone uses that information when making breeding plans.. the poodle may have actually expressed SA and the info not been updated with PHR, or have cataracts since the last CERF. So to keep things as safe and accurate as possible the people at PHR have chosen not to list normal CERF and SA results.

More I could say.. I'll leave it for someone else.. I'm really tired and my poodles are calling me.


----------



## outwest

Yaddaluvpoodles said:


> .. if we really HATE something someone else is doing.. let's try to inquire why and learn from them. It may still be something that we disagree with.
> 
> 
> So.. how do we get this thread back on track?


I wish people weren't so bullheaded. You could find there is more agreement than you think there is. I would love to show in AKC again. I would never consider using hairspray, dye or a handler, though, so what would the dogs chances be? Not high, me thinks. I'd have to be tough to do it. I may be willing to crawl across that line, but am frustrated by what I find there. 

Keith, I wish UKC was more competitive, too. My dog did win against AKC winning dogs there whereas I am positive she couldn't have in AKC in Southern California. Someone needs to cross that line. I wonder if I am tough enough. My dog is almost there conformationally, not quite but almost. If I could move a little more into the AKC style camp with her puppies while retaining the things I prefer, maybe I could be one of those people.  

What was the track of this thread? 
Oh, yah...black noses and apricot fur...:act-up:


----------



## outwest

Yaddaluvpoodles said:


> Ok... so Outwest is looking for an AKC CH. sire to breed to Bonnie...
> Can we help? How can we help?
> 
> Suggestions?


ONLY if Bonnie tests beautifully and retains her nice looks and retains her temperament in a year or more and ONLY if the sire tests beautifully and has a nice personality, too. LOL
:alien2:

I much prefer the discussion that has commenced since my initial doggie questions. Don't bother with The Bonster anymore. 

The other issues are OH so much more important than my dog! Keiths dog, CMs dog those English dogs and all the other flopsum and jepsum dogs are at stake. Maybe someone should make a new thread to continue the discussion.


----------



## Keithsomething

I want to recommend the Delta poodles here in Ohio Outwest
look at Denver

THAT is a dog who will ALWAYS be on my possible stud list! Typey, produces typey, but he is also able to move from the BIS ring to the performance ring what a great well rounded dog 

Denvers Page


----------



## zyrcona

outwest said:


> I wish people weren't so bullheaded. You could find there is more agreement than you think there is.


So far, I don't think anyone, or anyone's dog, has been criticised personally in this thread (apart from Outwest, who asked to be criticised, and has taken it very graciously). But some people seem to be interpreting comments personally or at least reacting to them that way and perhaps making assumptions about other forum members, and some people seem to be writing stuff down and perhaps not pausing to consider whether it's conveying the exact message they intended. Keithsomething's comment about dogs that should not have been born was not clear in the way he intended it, and it appeared to me (and apparently to Rowan too) that he was expressing a very offensive opinion, when actually from his second post, it appears he intended something closer to the opposite. Please all remember that if someone challenges your opinions, that is not tantamount to attacking you as a person. The first is a normal healthy part of discussion. The second has no place in any civilised discussion.


----------



## outwest

I did not read Keiths comments that way initially. I read them to mean that the puppies being bred from the less that stellar healthy dog should not have been bred. If we take that comment further, there are top winning poodles right now that should never be bred, either. 

The judges in the AKC show rings are to judge on looks/conformation/personality ONLY. They have NO WAY of knowing the testing and health of all those dogs lines. It is up to the breeders to keep track of that and breed for health and diversity. Luckily, more breeders are breeding this way, so I feel hopeful.


----------



## outwest

Keithsomething said:


> I want to recommend the Delta poodles here in Ohio Outwest
> look at Denver
> 
> THAT is a dog who will ALWAYS be on my possible stud list! Typey, produces typey, but he is also able to move from the BIS ring to the performance ring what a great well rounded dog
> 
> Denvers Page


Nice chest on the boy, Keith.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

zyrcona said:


> Ah OK. No idea what JH is. Nazism was based on selection for aesthetic features, so wanting health screening for breeding humans is not strictly Nazism.
> 
> Edit: I did not compare you to Hitler; that would have incited Godwin's Law; I compared an opinion you appeared to profess to eugenics. You also have no idea what sex I am, so I'm not sure why you assumed I'm 'her'.


So are you a he then? Can we know once and for all? Then we won't get it wrong anymore! .


----------



## outwest

Humans are funny. They need to put people in little pockets, me included, to get a fixation in mind. I like on line forums where you are forcibly removed from preconceived notions of what a person is or is not based on appearance. It isn't necessary to know, really, but we all do it. We can only assume that Zyrcona is somewhere on the spectrum of human between Tinkerbell and Conan the barbarian, no matter what hides in the pants. I'm good with that.


----------



## DivinityPoodles

LOL... have to laugh at the imagery between Tink & Conan....:dancing2:


Keith... I have specifically chosen not to show AKC or CKC simply because of the hair. We work our dog and I personally do not have the time or patience to deal with a show coat. I would jump at the chance to show in a shorter clip and believe whole heartedly that it is the best way to show poodles so as to be able to see the dog not just the hair, thus I am trying to determine if we will show UKC as there is maybe 1 show a year that is actually close enough for me to get to from where I live. 
Having said that, I don't know if I would want to get involved with all the politics that go along with showing but that's a whole other kettle of fish.


----------



## zyrcona

lol. Something I like about online discussion groups is that one doesn’t have to wear a gender in public, so with respect I prefer to decline. In my old line of work I was variously known as ‘the Doc’ or by my surname, which maintained an interesting ambiguity for people who hadn’t met me in person, and of the things I do now to earn money, many of them allow me to operate anonymously or under various pseudonyms, which are assumed to be both genders.

What I was trying to illustrate with that point is that when someone starts thinking with their temper on a public forum, usually the first thing they do is assign characteristics to the person who posted what caused them to lose their temper that they can’t possibly know for sure. Let’s keep to discussing opinions, instead of people.

Besides, my dog doesn’t care what sex I am.


----------



## zyrcona

Keithsomething said:


> I want to recommend the Delta poodles here in Ohio Outwest
> look at Denver
> 
> THAT is a dog who will ALWAYS be on my possible stud list! Typey, produces typey, but he is also able to move from the BIS ring to the performance ring what a great well rounded dog
> 
> Denvers Page


I like the look of this dog. He looks balanced, but he looks fun to be with too.  There are some witty names in his pedigree. One of the more amusing things about breeding dogs I guess must be coming up with funny names to register your dogs with.


----------



## Keithsomething

I guess its just a matter of what politics you want...for ME I've never been witness to any politic, the dogs that should win do no matter who is on the end of the leads...do people get upset if their dogs don't win...duh its a competition I'd get mad if I lost too...but for people to say its out and out politics is just a (this isn't meant as an insult...=\) cowardly thing so as to not justify showing in the NATIONAL club

Theres cheating everywhere, do you think dogs aren't dual registered in UKC so as to have someone "handle" it in the ring and get it top dog status? Happens all the time!

And about hair...why? I think the fact that poodles can grow that amount of hair is AWESOME!! Do you think you can't hide faults in an inch of hair? lol my showing mentor has told me he'd LOVE if AKC would allow the sporting clip because then all of his dogs would have great shelfs and beautiful tailsets ;D
Also don't forget that you can show in a tight CC...you just better have the dog CLOSEST to the standard possible or you'll be easily over looked :]

standard poodles win more BIS's and Group 1's than any other breed in the country...why is that... because of all the hair? OR is it because the standard poodle is the epitome of what a dog being shown in conformation should be! Well trained, well groomed, well loved, super intelligent, and enjoys the ring...just some of my thoughts on the matter ^_^ AKC all the way


----------



## zyrcona

Keithsomething said:


> I guess its just a matter of what politics you want...


Competition politics to me would be people taking stuff too seriously and getting into cliques. I used to do archery and ended up entering various competitions and getting up to the county tournament level, and I found it much less enjoyable. I went to archery to have a laugh with friends and to swear and tell jokes etc. as well as shooting, but at the tournament level you shoot with people who are serious about their sport and don't talk or make jokes. Then the recurve people start sneering at the compound people for being feeble and needing 'Zimmer bows' and the compound people denounce the recurve people for being elitist and hidebound, and someone calls your bow cheap rubbish and your arrows recycled knitting needles, and says your technique is wrong, and you will never get anywhere if you carry on like this.

I do like the long coats like the Scandinavian, and it is nice that people show off a feature of the breed and grow them so long. I just cannot see that much hair working on a dog who spends time in brush and long grass and sitting in a filthy tractor cab full of mouse turds.


----------



## faerie

i still say get rid of the long hair and pro handlers and shave 'em down and don't hide anything. :aetsch:

so what's the deal w/ how poodles looked when the breed standard was set down in writing and now. 

which is truer to the breed standard????? the ones in the ring now or then? 

and what about german shepherds when the breed standard was set down and now? which is truer to the breed standard? the ones in the ring now or then?


----------



## Keithsomething

I don't think there is or ever will be a dog that matches the breed standard perfectly...lets face it the thing can be flawed in some aspects (feet placement...I was told recently that dogs after moving beautifully tend to stop and self stack with a tinge of easty westy feet going on...according to our standard "feet should turn neither in nor out" well... to some judges that just doesn't work if you want a beautiful mover...Judges know how standards...they don't just place people up because they're handlers I've yet to see that happen!)

What I'm saying is its ALL up to interpretation...BUT the dogs winning NOW are winning because they match up to the breed standard as close as possible 

(And the same goes for German Shepards...they match up to the standard, I won't give my opinion on the dogs because I don't like the breed personally, and I don't show/own any of them)

I forgot to mention the older style dogs compared to now...I think people need to always be looking for what they can improve on in their lines and thats why I feel some of the kennels from the 60's and 70's aren't doing nearly as well NOW as they were THEN because they refuse to see the faults in their dogs...they have been breeding the same look in their lines for decades and in their opinion its what poodles should look like (they're MORE than welcome to have that opinion...but for me Id rather see the standards of NOW in then the photos of the dogs from then...)


----------



## NOLA Standards

Much seems to be made of the show coat "hiding" structure in the ring, and I am disagreeing enough to chime in.

A show coat doesn't hide anything to anyone with an eye. Shoulder layback is still evident, movement always tells. 

I would agree a dog can be groomed to highlight strengths and minimize weaknesses, but to hide faults is asking a lot of hair. Especially since the animal is asked to move, around and down and back, stack and stand with the judge moving their hands over and around the animal. 

If a chest were "scissored on" when the animal stands, the front legs will tell. If a judge somehow missed that, when their hands sunk into the hair to find the chest, they'd know then.

Now, say the care required for a show coat is nuts and I'll agree :amen: But it is something I enjoy, a time spent with my dog that he enjoys as well. (Lombardi adores being groomed. Annie I was learning on and neither of us enjoyed the coat care like we should/could have.) 

One of the most memorable classes I have ever watched was at PCA - Joyce C's black multi field titled male won it in his hunting clip. (Maybe Hunting Class or Hunter Clip?) She had to constantly keep moving on the down and back and on the around and even when she took him over for his win - as when she would stop he was trained to sit! 

Tabatha
NOLA Standards


----------



## 3dogs

I think it is awesome that he won in a Hunting clip- didn't know that was acceptable but I did know the HCC was acceptable & think that is what should be shown & not the overly stuffed, poof balls gaiting around the ring. I asked one of my grooming competitors that shows Mini Poodles why she didn't scissor her Poodle down, it's not like she doesn't have the skill. Her response was that if any Poodle looks very much different than the rest the poodle will be overlooked & not judged. I found that very sad. I guess there are very few judges that will judge the dog soley on the dog but too many put the emphasis on how much coat can be coiffed.

ON another note- the black male Standard that was posted on here a few pages back. I found that poodle stunning from what I could see. Now it was stated that this male was an Extreme Type. Can somebody post what would be Moderate Type, Old Fashion Type, & more Extreme Type than this male. I really didn't find him extreme but correct. I have seen more angulated, stacked back rear almost GSD looking Poodles out there & I don't like that look at all. NOLA can you post a picture of Joyce C's male in his Hunting Clip. I would love to see his structure & see if it really is that much different than what is currently gaiting in the conformation ring.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

This is a moderate bitch.


----------



## outwest

Tiger's dam?


----------



## CharismaticMillie

outwest said:


> Tiger's dam?


No, this is not Tiger's dam. This is GCH Kaylen's In A Perfect World.


----------



## 3dogs

What makes this a Moderate Bitch? What qualities am I looking at when it comes to Moderate vs. Extreme?


----------



## CharismaticMillie

She has a much more moderate amount of rear angulation. Anytime a dog is on the verge of "too much" of anything, they are extreme. This doesn't only apply to angulation but a lot of extreme dogs do have extreme angulation. And IMO extreme dogs do have something to offer, just as moderate dogs. But the point is to not continue to breed more and more extreme dogs. An extreme dog can contribute greatly, but just needs to be bred to a more moderate dog.

For example, my dog is pretty extreme and fancy. He has as much angulation as I'd want without being too much. I'd prefer to breed him to a moderate bitch who is not straight in the stifle but who is certainly not excessively angulated.


----------



## Rayah-QualitySPs

CharismaticMillie said:


> This is a moderate bitch.


Dear CM;
These *type* (3/4 pictures not straight on),of pictures make it very hard to see the angles of the poodle body. It might be that you know the dog and your knowledge allows you to perceive what I, without that background knowledge of the dog, can not see.
A moderate dog, in my opinion, is a poodle who is neither over-angulated or underangulated front and rear and who is balanced front and back, as per *the breed standard*.
One of the easiest ways to tell about rear angulation is to lift the foot up towards the pin bone. If the point of the hock lines up evenly with the pin bone end the dog is not over or under angulated. If the point of the hock sticks out past the end of the pin bone the dog is over angulated.
This over and under angulation has nothing to do with balance or if the dog is balanced front and rear.
In my opinion *many* poodles shown in the poodle ring now a days are *overangulated in the rear with front shoulder far to forward* on the poodles body. Then those forward shoulders are also *fairly straight*.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Hello Rayah!

I do know this bitch. Sorry, but while I am aware that a 3/4 angle is not as helpful as straight on (in fact, if I recall correctly I have said
this *time and time again*, I do not have a straight on photo of this bitch. I thought a 3/4 angle photo would be more helpful than no photo.

The differences between this moderate bitch at a 3/4 angle and the extreme dog I posted earlier, again at a 3/4 angle, are IMO easy to see and easily compared as they are at the same angle.


----------



## outwest

Rayah-QualitySPs said:


> One of the easiest ways to tell about rear angulation is to lift the foot up towards the pin bone. If the point of the hock lines up evenly with the pin bone end the dog is not over or under angulated.
> 
> 
> 
> Rayah, how could your test be correct? I just did that with Bonnie and it lines up so perfectly there'd be no space with a ruler set up there. Bonnie is considered to not have enough angulation by people, ie: they would like to see her rear legs set further back with more knee bend like the dogs posted before. For the record, I like her rear legs as I think it contributes along with pelvis angle to strong jumping, driving and turning, but it isn't enough according to many.
> 
> I snapped a couple pictures. What am I missing here? Bonnie needs more rear angle, right? That was something I was thinking of looking at in a possible sire.
Click to expand...


----------



## Keithsomething

Outwest you'd be able to get a better idea of her angulation if she were in a continental...With Heaven I thought she had an all right backend with all her hair covering it, but after her behind was shaved down I think she has a pretty good back end (I'd still fix quite a few things about it XD)

Even though she had MAYBE 2-3in of hair on her back legs it just didn't offer a very good picture of what she had going on underneath it

(I know the continental isn't something that everyone wants to do with their dogs...but I love that it gives a pretty clear picture of the dogs rear!)


----------



## outwest

Here is her rear with only one eight of an inch of hair two months ago, peach fuzz really. You are right, you get a much better look.
I don't plan to have her this naked again (quick fix for hideous groom).


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Thats an interesting test but both my heavily angulated dog and my less angulated, slightly straight stifled pet girl both pass the test.


----------



## outwest

It has to be a combination of many elements all coming together. Perhaps Rayah's quick test shows pelvic angle as much as leg length and angles.


----------



## KalaMama

I thought you brought the leg straight back not up(not with leg tucked under the body).


----------



## outwest

Back? Can you explain that better? What angle would the knee be?


----------



## KalaMama

Well, the way Rayah describes it I must be incorrect, but i thought you lifted the foot back (like if you are behind the dog and pull the leg straight back and up so the leg is as fully stretched as possible. I have not done it but had it done to my puppies but I guess I was taking notes and not watching exactly how it was being done


----------



## outwest

Thanks. Maybe Rayah will clarify.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Doing the test the way Rayah described it, both of these rear ends passed! Tiger's got tons of angulation. He is not overdone but Ip consider him to be *as much* angulation as you can have without going overdone. 

Millie's stifle is much straighter and, IMO, is possibly a little underangulated. 

I attached photos just to see the difference in their angulation.


----------



## outwest

I am glad I am not too dorky taking photos of dogs rear ends.  

According to the pictures in the Illustrated Poodle Standard (page 19) a straight line down the rear- the toes are 'slightly behind the point of the rump' (top illustration). Many dogs are over angulated (middle right picture).

http://www.poodleclubofamerica.org/illstand.htm


----------



## 3dogs

I didn't mean to start a controversy. I really love to see the pictures because it helps me. Please keep posting pictures becuase I really enjoy seeing the differences.


----------



## outwest

3dogs said:


> I didn't mean to start a controversy. I really love to see the pictures because it helps me. Please keep posting pictures becuase I really enjoy seeing the differences.


I did not think you started any controversy. I thought we were yacking. :act-up:

Pictures help me, too, but the more I see them, the more I don't trust them. Take the dog I thought very nice and turn him four inches to the right and it looked like a totally different beast. Video is important, but seeing a dog in person is best. 

Most people don't want to hassle posting video and we can't see these dogs in person, so we are left with pictures. Digital pictures are quick and easy, but often make a dog look better or worse than they actually are. I can't even get my dogs color to show up right in them. Video is better because you can see the whole dog from all angles as they move.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

"Hindquarters
The angulation of the hindquarters balances that of the forequarters.

(a) Hind legs straight and parallel when viewed from the rear. Muscular with width in the region of the stifles which are well bent; femur and tibia are about equal in length; hock to heel short and perpendicular to the ground. When standing,* the rear toes are only slightly behind the point of the rump*. "

They do not have to be touching the rear toes. My interpretation is that is correct if the imaginary line touches the tip of the toes or if there is a small degree of space between the toes and the imaginary line but not a large or significant space.


----------



## outwest

CharismaticMillie said:


> " My interpretation is that is correct if the imaginary line touches the tip of the toes or if there is a small degree of space between the toes and the imaginary line but not a large or significant space.


I agree with this, CM. That is how I read it.


----------



## Fond of Poodles

I think you're right about pictures making it difficult to determine the correct structure. For example in that last post where you posted pictures (one where her leg was raised, and one of with her feet on the floor), the 2nd one looks to me like Bonnie has correct rear angulation. She looks straight in the picture, but her hock is not perpendicular to the ground. I think if you were to stack her correctly, she'd look exactly like the correct dog in the diagram that you posted.

There are some smaller poodles winning in the ring right now, here in Canada we have Tina (AM GCH CAN GCH Alaman's It's All About Me), and of course there is Am Gr Ch and Can Gr Ch Vetset Kate Winsit. Both are a little smaller than the average bitch.

Bonnie is a pretty little bitch, I love her colouring, like champagne!


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

Fond of Poodles said:


> I think you're right about pictures making it difficult to determine the correct structure. For example in that last post where you posted pictures (one where her leg was raised, and one of with her feet on the floor), the 2nd one looks to me like Bonnie has correct rear angulation. She looks straight in the picture, but her hock is not perpendicular to the ground. I think if you were to stack her correctly, she'd look exactly like the correct dog in the diagram that you posted.
> 
> There are some smaller poodles winning in the ring right now, here in Canada we have Tina (AM GCH CAN GCH Alaman's It's All About Me), and of course there is Am Gr Ch and Can Gr Ch Vetset Kate Winsit. Both are a little smaller than the average bitch.
> 
> Bonnie is a pretty little bitch, I love her colouring, like champagne!


Isn't she lovely? I do not get all of the negativity toward her. I think she is lovely too.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> Isn't she lovely? I do not get all of the negativity toward her. I think she is lovely too.


I think Outwest is the only one I've heard say anything negative about Bonnie!


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

charismaticmillie said:


> i think outwest is the only one i've heard say anything negative about bonnie!


really....


----------



## Rayah-QualitySPs

outwest said:


> Rayah-QualitySPs said:
> 
> 
> 
> One of the easiest ways to tell about rear angulation is to lift the foot up towards the pin bone. If the point of the hock lines up evenly with the pin bone end the dog is not over or under angulated.
> 
> 
> 
> Rayah, how could your test be correct? I just did that with Bonnie and it lines up so perfectly there'd be no space with a ruler set up there. Bonnie is considered to not have enough angulation by people, ie: they would like to see her rear legs set further back with more knee bend like the dogs posted before. For the record, I like her rear legs as I think it contributes along with pelvis angle to strong jumping, driving and turning, but it isn't enough according to many.
> 
> I snapped a couple pictures. What am I missing here? Bonnie needs more rear angle, right? That was something I was thinking of looking at in a possible sire.
> 
> 
> 
> Dear Outwest;
> In my opinion if Bonnie's point of hock and pin bone match up than her rear angulation is more than likely correct. I am by no means perfect. The lifting of the hock up to the pin bone was what I was taught at a club meeting by a person who now judges.
> Pictures and hair can be very deceiving.
> Many people are *judging* poodles *angulation* by what is *winning in the ring*. If all you ever see is overangulated poodles than often people think a correct, moderate dog looks wrong.
> I suggest people who want to really see their poodles bones take some masking tape or painters tape and place the tape on the leg bones, pelvis and shoulders. Take pictures or use a mirror to see the dog while you are stacking them correctly. Many poodle pictures show dogs leaning too far forward - posting.
> Kennel blindness is still alive and well. VBG
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Rayah-QualitySPs

CharismaticMillie said:


> "Hindquarters
> 
> When standing,* the rear toes are only slightly behind the point of the rump*. "
> 
> They do not have to be touching the rear toes. My interpretation is that is correct if the imaginary line touches the tip of the toes or if there is a small degree of space between the toes and the imaginary line but not a large or significant space.


This is the reason why we all have our own opinions and judges put up a different dog each show. 

Often our opinions change over the years as we develop more experience with seeing dogs. Just how much space between this imaginary line is allowed? What does large or significant mean? No need to answer -this is a retorical question because the answer is based on opinions. I am not calling anyones interpretation wrong just different than mine. 

I am happy we can discuss angulation on this forum without people taking my opinions as criticisms. Thanks CM and Outwest for this discussion.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

Rayah-QualitySPs said:


> outwest said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rayah-QualitySPs said:
> 
> 
> 
> One of the easiest ways to tell about rear angulation is to lift the foot up towards the pin bone. If the point of the hock lines up evenly with the pin bone end the dog is not over or under angulated.
> 
> Dear Outwest;
> In my opinion if Bonnie's point of hock and pin bone match up than her rear angulation is more than likely correct. I am by no means perfect. The lifting of the hock up to the pin bone was what I was taught at a club meeting by a person who now judges.
> Pictures and hair can be very deceiving.
> Many people are *judging* poodles *angulation* by what is *winning in the ring*. If all you ever see is overangulated poodles than often people think a correct, moderate dog looks wrong.
> I suggest people who want to really see their poodles bones take some masking tape or painters tape and place the tape on the leg bones, pelvis and shoulders. Take pictures or use a mirror to see the dog while you are stacking them correctly. Many poodle pictures show dogs leaning too far forward - posting.
> Kennel blindness is still alive and well. VBG
> 
> 
> 
> When we took Cayenne to be assessed, three breeders, two whom are professional handlers and one who is a judge, all used the method you mentioned Rayah, as part of the assessment of her rear angulation.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## outwest

Nobody should post pictures of the dog they love and say "have at it" without a steel countenance and an open mind. I needed some opinions on specific issues I saw and wanted to know if anyone else saw anything I didn't. On line forums are not the best place to assess these things, obviously, but where else can you find so many poodle aficionados?! 

My conclusions are:
She is a solid 22 inches at the shoulder (she grew another half inch the last couple months) and 37 pounds. She has no fat on her, so that shoud tell you she has muscle because i would expect a 22 inch female to be slightly lighter than that. 

She is muscular, agile, comfortable/solid in her body, a terrific torso, broad flat back, nice tuckup, compact yet not cobby, head straight up and proud, long neck, nice gait, front legs too short, but nice and straight, a straight humerus (maybe her worst fault), good feet, chest wide and deep enough, square, good thick coat, good tail set with an icky curl in her tail, a beautiful classic style face, great chin, great bite, ears in the right place (when relaxed), black points with a nose that could be blacker now that she is older, bluish skin and lovely light apricot/champagne/dark cream whatever you want to call it coloring. 

She has correct rear angulation, although just barely enough according to the standard. In real life I checked her rear carefully. A line down her rear would land about a half an inch in front of her toes with them stacked correctly. More poodles have almost too much, so her rear looks different, but when I compare her rear leg to the picture in the illustrated standard it looks right. The shaved leg picture did show her stifle much better. It bends, it really bends!  I wish I had a pic that was straight from the side when she was bald. "the leg":









If you look at her in video, you see her much better. She is ridiculously cute, sparkly, uber smart and sassy. She opens doors, runs like the wind, jumps through hoops (literally), talks, smiles all the time, is sweet, responsive, hugs and has a tail that never stops wagging. Life is one big happy party for her. THIS is why I think she completed her UKC Grand Champion so neatly, not her decent conformation. She exudes poodle. This dog has never had an ear infection, her eyes don't drip, she has the intestinal tract of a bull and never had a rash. I know she is young, but it bodes well for her future health. Nothing conformationally incorrect will make up for any of that.

I do appreciate the input on her body parts, though, both good and not so good. I have seen the next generation of this line and know Bonnie could have even better pups if the breeder and I choose the right sire. I did a hip prelim. to check her before I went forward. She was prelim. excellent, so onward I go. Right now I am mulling over the idea of perpetuating her small standard size or going for a bigger dog. There are so many positive things about this size yet I love the slightly bigger dogs, too. 

Thank you to everyone who posted and gave their opinions and to all those who read and had opinions, but chose to keep them to themselves. I have no qualms about her. I know exactly what I have and I am damn lucky to have her. 

Now, I'd like another one. :angel2:


----------



## CharismaticMillie

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> really....


Really. I know I've even sent Outwest PMs telling her how I think Bonne is a very nice bitch with a lot to offer. Many people on the forum have continually told her that her bitch would do well in the AKC ring and that her size is NOT too small (I know I've said this over and over again as have others) for AKC success. 

Have we pointed out her faults? Sure. Every poodle has faults and since Outwest is considering breeding - pondering outloud on this forum - these faults were important and part of a healthy discussion of what type of dog she should be bred to.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Rayah-QualitySPs said:


> This is the reason why we all have our own opinions and judges put up a different dog each show.
> 
> Often our opinions change over the years as we develop more experience with seeing dogs. Just how much space between this imaginary line is allowed? What does large or significant mean? No need to answer -this is a retorical question because the answer is based on opinions. I am not calling anyones interpretation wrong just different than mine.
> 
> I am happy we can discuss angulation on this forum without people taking my opinions as criticisms. Thanks CM and Outwest for this discussion.


Well I could be totally literal and say that the imaginary line can go so far back as to the point where it matches the illustration that says overangulated. I don't know that it's taken quite so literally in actuality though.

I honestly am curious about your opinion on both my less angulated and mire angulated dogs passing the test. Can both dogs be correct? Perhaps being on both extremes of correct?


----------



## outwest

I did want people to point out her faults. I don't want to be blind to them. CM did give me her opinions just as I asked her to. Her opinion varies a little from what I think, but that is the value of collecting opinions. Nothing is black and white here. The only way any of us, me included, will grow is to see the whole picture. 

I see breeding a dog as a big undertaking. I would not want to do it if my dog didn't have something to contribute. She is far more moderate than many dogs being shown today, but that doesn't mean she couldn't contribute something positive to poodles. Perhaps her physical moderation is what is needed in some lines. Perhaps her odd pedigree. Perhaps her personality or intelligence is needed in another line. There are all kinds of things she could offer. She could get something valuable in return that she needs, too. 

Anyway, it has been a terrifically interesting thread to me. It isn't all about my dog, you know. It is about all kinds of things beyond one dog.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Rayah, I thought posting was when the front legs were placed forward and the dog was leaning *back?* (often happens if back legs are placed too far behind the dog?). This is how everyone I know at shows and conformation class uses the term.


----------



## Fond of Poodles

The video is listed as private, :-( - not that I'm looking to critique. It sounds like you've gotten ample input and know your dog inside and out, .

It's exciting to plan and dream of your first litter, I'm looking forward to hearing about your journey, and just a tiny bit jealous too, ;-).


----------



## outwest

Fond of Poodles said:


> The video is listed as private, :-( - not that I'm looking to critique. It sounds like you've gotten ample input and know your dog inside and out, .
> 
> It's exciting to plan and dream of your first litter, I'm looking forward to hearing about your journey, and just a tiny bit jealous too, ;-).


 Yah, I like the dog. 
I did make the videos private after showing them. Not to worry, I am sure there will be more at some point. 

Your avatar shows your wonderful black girl (?). I would like a black dog next. One poodle is not quite enough. I look forward to meeting your new puppy here, too!


----------



## outwest

Rayah-QualitySPs said:


> outwest said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rayah-QualitySPs said:
> 
> 
> 
> I suggest people who want to really see their poodles bones take some masking tape or painters tape and place the tape on the leg bones, pelvis and shoulders. Take pictures or use a mirror to see the dog while you are stacking them correctly. Many poodle pictures show dogs leaning too far forward - posting.
> Kennel blindness is still alive and well. VBG
> 
> 
> 
> Or, they could shave them bald like I did a few months ago. No, don't do it. It is shocking to see a peach fuzz poodle, but she already has a good amount of hair. It grows fast!
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## ladybird

Rayah-QualitySPs said:


> One of the easiest ways to tell about rear angulation is to lift the foot up towards the pin bone. If the point of the hock lines up evenly with the pin bone end the dog is not over or under angulated.


Oh dear. I tried this with Nimbus, and his hock sticks out behind the pin bone a bit. What does this indicate?


----------



## BorderKelpie

Will the masking tape work even on a hairy beast? I really want to try this. (I'll post the pictures here and you all can slam my babies (gently, please. I adore them). lol

Gee, I could do this with all my dogs, I could keep you all busy for a while.


----------



## outwest

BorderKelpie said:


> Will the masking tape work even on a hairy beast? I really want to try this. (I'll post the pictures here and you all can slam my babies (gently, please. I adore them). lol
> 
> Gee, I could do this with all my dogs, I could keep you all busy for a while.


You could also get some of the medical wrapping tape that doesn't have adhesive, but sticks to itself, and can be reused over and over. That wouldn't hurt the dog at all. Drugstores carry it:
COBAN Wrap Medical Bandage Tape by 3M BUY ON SALE 1581, 1581, 1581, 1581B, 1581B, 1582, 1582, 1582B, 1582B, 1583, 1583, 1583A, 1583B, 1583B, 1583N, 1583R, 1583R, 1583S, 1583S, 1583W, 1583W, 1584, 1584, 1584S, 1584S, 1586, 1586, 1586S, 1586S, 2081, 20

BorderKelpie, it's okay showing your dogs. They're gorgeous, nothing to worry about at all!


----------



## outwest

ladybird said:


> Oh dear. I tried this with Nimbus, and his hock sticks out behind the pin bone a bit. What does this indicate?


I suspect many poodles do this. All it indicates is that he is slightly overangulated- so are many these days.


----------



## ladybird

outwest said:


> I suspect many poodles do this. All it indicates is that he is slightly overangulated- so are many these days.


overangulated meaning what exactly? what angle are the hips at, and what should they actually be at?


----------



## CharismaticMillie

ladybird said:


> overangulated meaning what exactly? what angle are the hips at, and what should they actually be at?


Angulation refers to how the bones of the hindquarters (pelvis, Femur, tibia, etc) and forequarters (shoulder blade and upper arm) connect to create visual angles.

ETA: So underangulation in the hindquarters could be a steep pelvis, and a straight stifle (steep connection of femur and tibia)/lack of visual angle in hindquarters.

Overangulation refers to too much angulation or the connection of the bones is too shallow/too much visual bend and angle. This could be a pelvis too shallow or too much bend of stifle. A longer tibia than femur can lead to excess angulation.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Now I am going to be extremely brave. 

Here are two imperfectly stacked WET photos of my boy. I payed close attention and put my hands all over him before snapping the photo so I could fairly accurately indicate certain points on his body with photoshop. I have drawn some lines to show his rear angulation. As you can see, I did not place his rear legs far enough back. Also, the perspective of the photos is at an odd angle and it looks like his hocks are not perpendicular to the ground (they are - the hair creates an illusion.) Finally, in one of the photos you can tell his back legs face forward. In the other it looks a bit like they are turned out and placed too far apart (they're not - I kept looking at him in real life, retaking the photo, comparing, but it kept turning out that way.)

Anyway, point is, this gives you a fairly good idea of how clearly there can be a difference in the amount of bend of stifle and still meet the standard. His breeder and handler always refer to him as having _tons_ of angulation but not overdone. He is a fairly extreme dog in that I would not want ANY more angulation on him. I would not want to breed him to a heavily angulated bitch, either. He'd be best bred to a moderate (but not straight) bitch. I like fancy, but I don't like overdone. His breeder told me that my boy will actually look moderate compared to much of what I will see at PCA.

His rear is pretty, but it's actually not why I wanted him specifically and I wouldn't say it's his strong point, in fact, certain aspects of his rear have been the main cause of any faults he has movement-wise. His hocks could be stronger (and ARE infinitely stronger than when he was a puppy), and this is often the result of large amounts of angulation. Additionally, he has a nice short back, but so short that for a while it posed a movement problem. Of his assets, his front is the reason why I wanted him as my first dog to start out with. Plenty of dogs have nice rears, but a good front is hard to find and a bad front is hard to breed away from.
---
Changing topics for a second. One thing that Bonnie has is a ton of muscle tone. She's a petite *bitch* and not ultra refined so she has good muscle tone at a very young age. Also, the way her bracelets are on her rear legs does a disservice to her angulation. I think we would see it much more if her legs were a) shaved down completely and a properly stacked photo was taken or b) a wet stacked photo was taken.


----------



## Keithsomething

...super off topic, but Tigers pigment makes me drool!!!


----------



## outwest

I agree, Keith. He has wonderful pigment.

When you do that his rear angulation looks good. I like that he seems to be standing naturally and his back remains flat. Lots of poodles hide not so flat backs by having their legs pulled back. His legs look particularly long, which is why there seems to be such a difference in look. Mine could use more leg, but she met this little test well. Maybe Tiger could use a hair less leg, which is what his breeder was referring to rather than the angulation? It is hard to argue with a dog that won his AKC championship as quickly as Tiger did and is working on his Grand. 

It isn't necessary to compare two dogs other than in an academic sense. Although Bonnie meets many things in the standard, she is more of an agility/athletic type. Yes, the girl has substance. Her thighs, shoulders, back and waist in particular are powerful. She pops four feet up on the top of the barbeque in one light footed leap. She is prancy and incredibly cute and light on her feet when she moves, but I wouldn't necessarily call her elegant. You need more leg for that regal appearance.

Elegance is also part of the standard. 
Bonnie is adorable and cute. 
Tiger is elegant.

By the way, can I have that straight tail?


----------



## BorderKelpie

outwest, you made my whole night, Bonnie's person saying my poodles are gorgeous. I think I love you.  I may be able to handle another loooong weekend night shift at work now. 

I tried the hock thig with Bug while I was grinding his nails today, his hock doesn't meet exactly to his hip bone, it's ever so slightly short of it - so underangled, right?


----------



## mom24doggies

I tried this on Trev, his hock came up even with his pin bone, yet I feel he's a bit straight. So (and I'm just spitballing here) maybe this test also has something to do with tibia\femur length? Trev has really long legs, so...maybe?


----------



## Rayah-QualitySPs

*correction. thanks CM*



CharismaticMillie said:


> Rayah, I thought posting was when the front legs were placed forward and the dog was leaning *back?* (often happens if back legs are placed too far behind the dog?). This is how everyone I know at shows and conformation class uses the term.


Yes CM you are correct. My wording is wrong but I did mean the front feet are to forward. Thanks for the correction.


----------



## Lily

Hey outwest, I m just too tired right now to read this 31 page thread! Haha.... I would just like to share something. My friend had a litter of purebred poodle pups (super red bred with red) 3 yrs ago and I witnessed how her red pups darkened to super red adults and her light red (almost apricot) pups grew up to be darker red adults. In fact, breeders and poodle owners here are always telling me how their reds have darkened as they mature (usually the maximum shade of red the pup can darken to can be predicted by the shade of that particular pup's ears). I am no expert but this has really got me thinking - maybe poodles from different countries have vastly different lineage, and that's why colour breeding is so complicated and there are so many different theories out there. I am working in the medical line so i can tell you that science is evolving everyday and sometimes it's hard to keep up with it... So be a little lenient with your vets (I read a few posts about ppl questioning their vet's viewpoints, haha)... A 'new' discovery today might be irrelevant and even obsolete in a few years time, examples like these are not uncommon in the medical field. This is also partly why medical professionals do not quote fresh theories until they are widely accepted by experts in that field. So always take what you read with a pinch of salt and critically review it objectively. IMHO its better to seek advice from experienced breeders near you or from your own country, because experience do count. So does epidemiology. Just my two cents. BTW I have learnt A LOT by reading the threads in PF, this is such a fabulous forum 

P.S. In my country inbreeding is highly discouraged (though I m certain some backyard breeders are doing it anyway) due to health reasons (poor health of inbred pups)... I'm mentioning this cause I read about inbreeding in another thread, sorry if it's not related to this one...


----------



## Lily

Just a crazy thought from all that I have been reading in PF : if humans were ever to be another species' pet ( like the sci-fi movie 'Planet of the apes' ), only supermodels would be picked for breeding... And my bloodline would most probably be extinct due to 'poor conformation'. I'm sure glad we humans are the highest being on planet earth ( at least for now ). Hahaha...


----------



## outwest

Lily said:


> Just a crazy thought from all that I have been reading in PF : if humans were ever to be another species' pet ( like the sci-fi movie 'Planet of the apes' ), only supermodels would be picked for breeding... And my bloodline would most probably be extinct due to 'poor conformation'. I'm sure glad we humans are the highest being on planet earth ( at least for now ). Hahaha...


That's exactly what Hitler wanted to do and he sucked a whole nation into it. It isn't beyond the realm of possibility that some crazy would try to do it again. 

on the poodle front: at near 15 months old my poodle seems to have darkened to the color her ears were as a little pup. Sometimes she appears quite dark orange and sometimes not so much. She has settled on (at least I THINK she has settled) light apricot. 

The breeder has new puppies with Bonnie's dam (with the apricot line). It is a different sire than Bonnie's. There are three 'creams', three browns and three blacks, just like Bonnie's litter. I am looking forward to seeing if any of the creams have the hue that Bonnie did.


----------



## BorderKelpie

Oh, I need to win the lottery, I want a Bonnie-like puppy!


----------



## zyrcona

Lily said:


> only supermodels would be picked for breeding...


Or maybe not...

Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.


----------



## NOLA Standards

Zyrcona,

We know the same people!!!!!!!!



:act-up:




Tabatha
NOLA Standards


----------

