Without question the most vital skill a breeder or a judge will learn is how to think correctly.  Because most breeders and therefore most judges are not coached and trained but learn their skills simply by experience, the outcome of those skills may not reach the highest level of effectiveness.  What I hope to accomplish in this chapter is to show the way to thinking in such a way that how you approach your breeding program and how you judge in the ring becomes crystal clear.  In either role, whether breeder or judge, the desired outcome is to identify those important dogs which can move the breed forward.  In the previous chapter I spoke briefly about the true purpose of dog shows being the instrument we use to select breeding stock with the greatest potential.  You must therefore learn how to pick the best possible breeding dogs, whether your role is judge or breeder.

Genetics has two effects, it determines how a dog’s physical and mental being are manifested and it determines what characteristics each dog can pass onto their offspring.  Simply by examining the dog’s appearance we can make a fairly educated judgment call about many of the genes which can be passed onto their progeny.  The genes that created the dog’s appearance are also potentially included in the genes of any sperm or egg (called gametes).  However, there are also genes that the dog harbors which are not apparent that can also be passed to their offspring so that judging the physical qualities of a dog is only partially correct regarding the characteristics a dog can reproduce.  Be that as it may, it is the best evidence we have available to making the judging of potential breeding stock possible.

Of course, there are sometimes characteristics which cannot be passed on because they are not coded in the genes. For instance, a condition during pregnancy may result in a characteristic to develop in such a way that it is not coded in the dog’s genes.  An astonishing example is the slight white markings such as a little white on the toes or a small spot on the chest.  Remarkably, many breed standards which are intolerant of white markings allow for a small white mark on the chest or toes.  I am unsure how breeders generations ago determined these were very minor infractions but science has proven them correct.  It has been recently discovered that such tiny white markings can be the result of the color failing to completely cover the embryo during gestational development.  Why?  It has been proven that if a bitch has a slight cold this can affect the development of the embryo which includes the successful migration of color on the body, and the chest and toes are the last areas which receive this color migration.   This is a perfect example of something which is not genetically determined.  It is also a strong case for ensuring that a bitch’s health is optimal during pregnancy.

So we understand the purpose of dog shows is to assess a dog’s ability to produce desirable qualities and we can accomplish this feat because the physical manifestation of that dog is a result of the genes they carry.  Simple enough.

As explained earlier, to gain an insightful understanding of a breed, one must study many of the best examples of the breed to help one’s brain understand what ideal characteristics of that breed really look like.  This is a mapping effect so that we carry within our brain a clear picture of breed excellence.  When this map is fully and completely developed we then have the ability to physically inspect any dog of that breed, compare it to the map we developed in our brain and determine the good things and the not so good things about that dog.  Since the perfect dog has never been developed it is possible to come across a dog who in fact has a characteristic which not only completely meets our mental map for that feature but exceeds it.  The ability to recognize an advance in breed type is a result of critical thinking.  Critical thinking is the ability to question; to not just take everything at face value but to look for ways things could be better and to recognize when that “something better” comes along.   

An example may be the eye shape of the dog.  Let us take for example a fictitious breed which requires a “round eye.”  It may be understood that an eye as round as possible is the ideal and yet even the eyes on the best specimens are not quite round.  They may be rather almond shaped.  Perhaps this is understood to be ‘round’ for that breed, relatively speaking.  So in your mind you have pictured the best eye you have ever seen and it is nearly but not quite round in shape.  Then imagine you are judging a dog and low and behold the eye of this dog is absolutely, perfectly round.  You have come across a breed specimen who not only has the best eye ever but also the ability to produce it.  You know the ability to produce the characteristic is there because it is being manifested by genes and genes are passed to progeny.  You do not know if it will be reproduced, you may not know what combinations of genes is required to reproduce it, but it does exist and so it is genetically possible for it to be reproduced.  A dog who exhibits a characteristic which is closer to perfection than practically any other dog of that breed is said to have great strength of virtue. 

Strength of virtue can be, and often is, relative to a point in time.  At the time the dog with the perfectly round eye is identified he or she may have the best eye for their time.  But let us also assume this breed asks that the eye also be large in size.  It might be that the dog with the perfect eye shape does not have the perfect eye size.  But because round shape is more difficult to achieve in this fictitious breed than eye size our round eyed wonder is celebrated.  This dog is carefully bred so that if not immediately then a generation or two afterward the round eye is being produced in the descendants.  Now let us assume one day we judge and low and behold, we come across a dog who not only has perfectly round eyes but also large eyes!  Now this dog has strength of virtue.  Now the process of carefully retaining this new development is attempted with careful breeding. 

What I have described to you is breed development.  It moved from a dog population having round-almond large eyes to perfectly round but smaller eyes to perfectly round large eyes.  It was accomplished very overtly.  It had to begin by someone recognizing the advancement toward the ideal.  It could only continue by utilizing this specimen in an intelligent breeding program.  Even more to the point, had the dog with the perfectly round eye not been used in a breeding program it is possible the perfectly round eye – a manifestation of the ideal – would never have been realized. 

The development of a breed can be either positive or negative or, in fact, neither but simply different.  As I stated earlier, one of the three duties of a national breed club is to preserve a breed.  That means to retain the specific characteristics which make that breed unique.  Slight changes which do not materially affect the core qualities of the breed may be made and this can be considered a stylistic change.  Stylistic changes which are in the “right direction” often are appealing to judges as they are noticeable enough to be considered positive developments.  For instance, if a breed standard calls for a “long neck” then a dog with a longer neck than his contemporaries may stand out for this characteristic.  If the longer neck is pleasing in appearance, if it does not negatively affect that dog’s ability to accomplish the task for which it was originally bred and if it is in balance with the overall picture, this is a positive development and it will be and should be rewarded by the judge in the ring. 

Some developments are questionable.  Some of the setters have been bred to have a distinctly sloping topline over and above what was originally “ideal.”  This in itself is not a negative development.  But in order to achieve this ‘rake’ the upper arm and shoulder blade are often less angled than they should be.  In addition, the rear is more angled than it should be.  Now negative structural developments have occurred which should be faulted.  However, as many judges have become used to the dramatic sloping topline they may not reward a specimen who has the much needed angulation because he does not have the dramatic slope!  Not only has this structural change affected the dog standing but now, because the angles are poorly engineered, the dog also moves incorrectly.  If you have studied, been coached and done your homework you will not be fooled into the “group think” and you will seek out those specimens who have the correct structure to remedy the problem.   You must be a critical thinker to do so!

Forward progress may not mean the appearance of an extreme virtue.  It may, in fact, simply be the combination of virtues within the same animal.  In bull terriers, for most of the twentieth century, head type was easily lost and very difficult to retain so that much weight was placed on dogs who had strength of virtue in the head.  Historically, in order to keep the head qualities which were easily lost, other features such as conformation and movement became secondary considerations.  Those specimens who had good conformation were often unused because they did not possess the difficult-to-breed head.  At some point head type became fixed enough that dogs who had better conformation could be rewarded because they also possessed the head quality.  This demonstrates breed development which has nothing to do with extreme virtues but rather the combination of virtues into one dog. 

As a thirteen year old I was most fortunate to come across an author who so shaped my thinking that I cannot imagine being a breeder or a judge without his teachings.  His name was Raymond Oppenheimer and he owned the world famous bull terrier kennel, Ormandy.  Together with his kennel manager, Eva Weatherill, who bred under the Souperlative prefix, they totally and completely dominated the breed on this planet.  They did far more than dominate it, however, they lead in its development so that there is not a well bred bull terrier alive anywhere who does not go back to their bloodlines.  One of my favorite quotes by this remarkable man is, “The lack of fault in no way signifies the presence of its corresponding virtue.”

What, prey tell, could this man have meant?   Isn’t it a fact that the way judges judge dogs is to look for the faults?  Isn’t our goal to breed for no faults, aren’t we trying to breed faultless dogs?

And now your mind should begin to bend.  Because what Raymond recognized so clearly and so unerringly is that no! we are not trying to breed faultless dogs and no! judges should not be looking for faults when they judge!

In fact, what a judge should be looking for is strong breed virtues.  And what the judge must do is look for the dog with the strongest and the most virtues!  That seems to make sense but let us explore what this really means.   This might indeed be an example of the the question, “Is the glass half full or is it half empty?”  One perspective appreciates what is present, the other is distressed at what is missing.  A complete thinker will do both, appreciate what is present while fully understanding what is missing. 

What this kind of thinking requires is that you do not discard a dog for what is wrong with it, but you include a dog for what is right with it.  It does not assume all dogs are perfect except for their faults.  It assumes no dogs are perfect unless they possess near perfect attributes.  Does the dog move adequately or remarkably?  Is the head acceptable or is it magnificent?  Easy enough to grasp, so why do I pretend this is so hard?

Remember that marvelous dog with the never-before seen round eye described earlier?  The same dog who if never used for breeding would probably deny the breed from ever possessing that virtue?  Now what if, in fact, that same dog also was a monorchid?  “Well, in that case, I would never use that dog.  He would be placed in a loving pet home and neutered.”  You did say that, didn’t you?  I did hear you, am I right?  You said that because, good heavens! if we used him we would have monorchids everywhere!  It would be the ruination of the breed!   But wait a minute, doesn’t your breed already have monorchids, in fact, aren’t those genes already present?  “Well, yes, but we certainly don’t want to produce more of those!”  What you have chosen to do is not to keep the dog because what was right with him but to discard him because what was wrong with him.  This is definitely half-empty-glass kind of thinking!  But wouldn’t everyone you ever met at a dog show agree with you?  Why, yes they most likely would.  And that is precisely why I am writing this.

In fact, in the early 1960’s the illustrious and almost unbeatable Ormandy kennel produced their next greatest achievement in a brilliant white bull terrier by the name of Ormandy Souperlative Bar Sinister.  His pedigree was magnificently linebred on the best specimens the breed had ever known and the results were culminated in this wonderful dog.  And not only was this a super dog he had a top notch brother as well.  There was only one little, tiny hitch.  Bar Sinister was a monorchid!

Imagine, if you will, a powerful and successful kennel with an unerring reputation of producing great winners.  Imagine having bred this litter and imagine having a really good litter brother of the monorchid wunderkind.  Who would, in their right mind, keep the monorchid and breed from him?  Why ask for trouble when a much safer bet would have been his normal brother?  Well, the answer to that question is to answer why the Ormandy/Souperlative kennel probably has never had an equal in the world of dogs.  Because they knew how to think!

Before we move along with the story perhaps now is a perfect time to pause and reflect on this kennel.  Their aim was to produce ever greater breed specimens.  In England, to gain a championship, a dog must win three challenge certificates.  These can be very difficult to win because dogs who are already champions also compete for them so a dog trying to become a champion must be good enough to beat any and all competing champions.  It is therefore the collection of these challenge certificates, or CCs as they are called, which makes a dog a distinguished winner.  Take into account that dog shows in England are often more than ten times the size of American shows and some breeds may have entries into the hundreds at any given championship show.  I might also mention that Raymond Oppenheimer was one of the THE Oppenheimers (as in the De Beers diamond cartel, the largest dealers of diamonds in the world) and so was one of the wealthiest dog fanciers in the world.  And what did Raymond do when one of his magnificent and important bull terriers gained its third CC?  It went home.  Even when such a dog would go Best in Show on the way to its title, it went home.  Because Raymond was not about trying to garner a list of wins, he was about improving the breed.  He wanted to focus on the next achievement, the next step on the ladder if you will.   An amazing and strange point of view to the sensibilities of the average dog fancier!

We can now return to our story.  After much research to determine that monorchidism wasn’t a severe health issue, Bar Sinister was used by the home kennel and available to anyone who had a suitable bitch who wanted to use him.  His brother was also available at stud and the most fascinating thing happened.   Some refused to use Bar Sinister but did chose to use his brother – a perspective, Raymond thought, rather strange since they were brothers and so likely genetically very close.  Nevertheless history reveals that within a few short years nearly every show-bred bull terrier had Bar Sinister in its pedigree.  He was a great dog and a phenomenal producer.  Had he been born in the kennel of someone who didn’t know how to think, he would have spent his years neutered and on someone’s couch and the breed would have been denied this opportunity to make great advances. 

Raymond, in his excellent works, McGuffin and Company and After Bar Sinister, relates in excellent detail how many of that breed’s greatest specimens – and therefore, producers – were gotten from outstanding parents one of whom often had a severe fault!  It was a lesson I learned and understood from my earliest participation in dogs.  It is a lesson that affected the development of several dog breeds.

My first foray into walking the talk, so to speak, occurred early in my breeding career of Cardigan Welsh Corgis.  From my teenage years I developed a very single-view of what the ideal Cardigan looked like to me, that of a little used English champion named Pantyblaidd Pip.  To me this dog stood out for his very unique proportions, a well fitted and attractive headpiece, a beautiful deep brisket, a sweeping bodyline, and an elegant and balanced silhouette.  I never like to tell people  “an eye” for a dog is something you are born with, but I first saw his photograph at age twelve and to me nothing could compare. 

Fast forward and I am now twenty and have purchased my foundation Cardigan bitch and she has a great deal of Pantyblaidd breeding, and goes right back to Pip several times.  Pip by then had a very well known but little used grandson in the United States called Ch. Brymore’s Taliesin and I loved this dog.  I encouraged the breeders of my bitch to take the opportunity to breed to Taliesin as much as possible.  In one instance they bred my bitch’s sister and in another, they bred their dam who was, in fact, already a Taliesin daughter.  As a side note I, too, bred my bitch to her grandsire but I only got one puppy who was killed by her dam as she was under sedation from a c-section!  I never cried so hard in my life and learned a very rough lesson about watching a bitch after a c-section.

In time, a resulting inbred litter by Taliesin was born and it contained a beautiful dog puppy.  As he grew, it became very clear the beautiful dog puppy had inherited several of the bad things about this bloodline, most noticeably, his movement was atrocious.  He still had quality and type but his front was wide and he had a terrible shifting movement in the rear.  I will say that although I was in my early twenties I had been going to dog shows, working for professional handlers and reading for ten years so I was not in any way naïve or blind to the situation thus presented.  Had I not had the passionate belief that this rare Pantyblaidd bloodline was truly the only suitable bloodline this dog would have made no difference.  In fact, I had expressed my interest in breeding my bitch to him – now inbreeding only more tightly! – and I was deluged with concern from everyone I knew in the breed.  Not exactly convinced I was making a smart move, I deferred and attempted to use another stud dog but my bitch didn’t cooperate.  I then attempted to use yet another stud dog and again ran into difficulty.  Finally, at the last possible moment, on her 14th day in season, I threw her in the car and drove her to her half brother!  From their best daughter I bred 9 champions from two litters, three of which were national specialty winners.  A fourth was a very important stud dog!

After this litter I decided, being located no where near good stud dogs, that I might as well try to buy a good dog.  Not recommended by anyone and remember I had been involved with show dogs for 13 years before I did this!  But I was fortunate to find a good dog and he ultimately became one of the greatest stud dogs in breed history.  He was also a very good show dog.  I will now take you to 1986, the national specialty weekend.  My stud dog, Ch Kennebec Ice Anchor, had won BB the day before and the day after the national specialty, his daughter had gone Best of Breed and Best in Sweepstakes at the national, his son Winners Dog and Best of Opposite Sex (over Ice Anchor himself), and another daughter Winners Bitch and Best of Winners.  And standing there at ringside a bitch was brought to me for a consultation on how she should be bred.  She was of good outline and nice type, but moved inadequately and had a long coat.  I had heard many people say they would never consider even breeding a dog with a long coat.  Her other advantage was she was from the litter of my foundation bitch’s sister by Taliesin!  Without hesitation I agreed to have her bred to Ice Anchor and agreed to do it for pick of litter.  The bitch from that breeding turned out to be a top producer, a multiple national specialty winner and the first Cardigan Welsh Corgi bitch in the world to win an all breed Best in Show.

Now I will turn to bull terriers for a moment.  This is a story of which I feel I played a very small part and yet an important part.  I purchased a beautiful and elegant brindle and white bitch from a renowned Canadian bull terrier kennel called Magor.  No one was or is more committed or more serious than the Smiths; in fact, Norma Smith began her education and coaching by moving to England and working at the renowned Ormandy/Souperlative kennel itself!  In due time, the Smiths repeated the breeding which produced my bitch, Bella, and they stopped by my house on one of their long travels with the litter in tow.  It was, as expected, a really pretty litter and I was especially struck by a red bitch puppy.  The litter was very young, I think about five weeks old at the time.  Nothing more was said until several months later when I inquired how those puppies were doing and Norma confessed the red bitch had gone horribly undershot in bite and she would be made available to a good pet home.  “Can I buy her?” I asked.  I had not seen her since she was a tiny baby, she had no chance of a show career and I owned her beautiful sister.   It felt so right. 

In due course, Bird’s time came to be bred and after several mishaps (which are my life story with bull terriers I’m afraid!) the Smiths whelped her first and only litter to survive.  In it were two beautiful bitches and two beautiful dogs.  The dogs went on to enviable specialty winning careers while one of the bitches made her American debut at the national specialty, and more importantly to bull terrier fanciers, Silverwood.  Silverwood is a unique competition opened only to champions, specialty winners or through special invitation.  It is the ultimate accolade in bull terriers, above winning any all breed Best in Show.  Bird’s daughter, Posh, swept in and out with Runner Up to Silverwood!  Posh’s lovely sister was never shown (although she should have been) but was bred and in her litter she produced two excellent bitch puppies.  Posh was also bred and in 2005 the Smiths had a glorious national weekend.  Also in her American debut, Posh’s daughter, Ch. Magor Margo of Misk, was awarded the Silverwood and also Best of Variety Colored and Best of Opposite Sex from the classes.  Margo’s litter sister was Reserve Winners Bitch at the national, and Posh’s son was Best in Sweepstakes and Winners Dog!

Need I say more to prove my point?  Okay, perhaps a little more.  A good friend of mine, Susa Epperson, was an early Lowchen breeder.  I contemplated breeding them once upon a time and almost obtained a bitch from her called Bitsy.  In fact I did not and so Bitsy stayed at DeSusa and became their most influential producer.  A few years later Susa brought to a dog show, in her motor home, two young daughters of Bitsy.  They were identical except for color, one was chocolate and the other red.  I loved them both despite the fact they both had tails that stuck straight up in the air!  Because I love the color chocolate, I could not help myself and bought the brown girl.  Soon after, Susa sold the red bitch puppy who was quickly spayed.  Over the years, Susa took my brown bitch, Coco, home with her and bred a litter.  Despite her other bitches and efforts, very soon almost all of Susa’s kennel population consisted of Coco descendants!  She became, like her dam, is one of the top producers in the breed.

What am I doing that apparently is providing this success?  It is very simple in its concept and so obviously correct that I have these and many other similar stories.  When evaluating a dog, I consider all virtues along with all faults.  I do not allow myself to be swayed by obvious faults, even when, and especially when, they would make the dog in question completely unsuccessful in the show ring.  What I know and learned in my teenage years, is that invariably coupled with outstanding virtues are outstanding faults.  I have learned to evaluate a dog wholly and completely and not allow any single “fault” to bias me in such a way that I would discard a top class animal because of a mere fault – even if it is not fashionable!

In order to provide an example of how my mind processes this information, let us, for the sake of example, assume a dog is made up of only seven parts.  Those parts are the shoulder blade, the upper arm, the upper thigh, the lower thigh, the tail, the topline, and the ears.  Now, let us imagine four dogs that we must judge.

Dog A has wonderful ears, a short shoulder, a short upper arm, a short upper thigh, a short lower thigh, a perfect topline, and a good tail.

Dog B has fair ears, a moderate shoulder, a short upper arm, a moderate upper thigh, a moderate lower thigh, a reasonable topline and a reasonable tail. 

Dog C has fair ears, a moderate shoulder, a short upper arm, reasonable topline, a very good upper thigh, a very good lower thigh and a reasonable tail. 

Dog D has excellent ears, a lovely shoulder, a correct upper arm, a good topline, a correct upper thigh, a correct lower thigh but a tail that curls over the back.

It doesn’t matter how you scramble these dogs in placements the one dog who I believe will invariably end up at the end of the line will be Dog D.  Why? First of all, to ascertain conformation, or ”make,” takes training and many will not be able to distinguish between an excellent shoulder and upper arm and an indifferent one.  Rear angle is far easier to see and so this is obvious to most.  But what each and every judge will see is that bad tail.  There will be no disagreement here – this is an eyesore!  I can hear disdainful, know-it-all breeders now, “I would never keep a dog with a tail like that!”  I can hear them because I’ve heard them all my life.  They are, unfortunately, very, very wrong.  (And yes, I can also hear the odd handler saying enthusiastically, “Hey, I can fix that tail!” – that is another chapter!)

So let us dispassionately relook at these dogs.  To breed an ideal breed specimen of this dog which has only seven characteristics let us see what we’ve got. 

Dog A has excellent ears which is a big plus, and no drawbacks in terms of topline and tail.  But the four bones are all wrong.  We have a count of 2 in terms of strength (head, tail), we have lack of fault (topline), and we have a count of 4 in terms of faults (shoulder, upper arm, upper thigh, lower thigh).  Some may say, the dog is “balanced.”  Indeed, wrong consistently on both ends!  We do have excellent ears here and this is worthwhile to note, for if we cannot find another with such a strong virtue this makes the dog a candidate for helping in breed improvement.

Dog B has no excellent virtues to offer.  We have lack of fault mostly though no corresponding virtue either, and 1 count of a fault (short upper arm).  This dog may win well under unknowledgeable judges – those who think lack of fault is the corresponding virue - but has nothing to offer toward breed improvement.

Dog C has a count of 2 strengths (upper thigh, lower thigh), four areas not faulty (ears, shoulder, upper arm, topline, tail), and 1 count of a fault (short upper arm).  The short upper arm is common and this dog has strength in the rear and nothing else which is faulty. 

Dog D has a count of 6 strengths (ears, shoulder, upper arm, topline, upper thigh, lower thigh) and 1 count of a fault (tail).  This dog has the greatest number of strong virtues and meets or excels in every department over every other dog in the class except in tail.

After this way of breaking things down, it is quite obvious the best dog, easily and by far, is Dog D.  This is the dog who has the greatest number of outstanding attributes, and hence, outstanding genetic characteristics, in which to pass on to future generations.  If ignoring this dog for what appears a silly shortcoming in view of the attributes, please expand the view to a real breed of dog who has hundreds of characteristics which must be evaluated and realize such a dog with an “obvious” fault will, in all likelihood, be removed from the breeding program.  A perfect example of bad thinking!

You may now be asking yourself, “OK, then why do dogs with obvious faults – even if they are truly insignificant to the whole picture – seem to lose in the show ring?”  It is simply because in this example I provided to you the evaluation of the characteristics.  In the real world, no one will say to you, “This is an outstanding characteristic,” you must know this because of your studies and coaching!

It is a very simple fact of life that the more knowledge you have of a subject the less you will be swayed by obvious shortcomings.  I like to think of the complete novice watching the judging from ringside and their view that the dog with the longest hair should win or the dog which seems to have a sparkling show personality.  These are obvious traits which help someone who has no understanding of details separate the dogs.  It is unfortunate we have judges who have not moved much beyond this point!  For someone of a level of experience, they will be looking at an aspect of movement and if the dog in general has the desired outline.  Are the proportions about right?  Does the dog move adequately or well?  The next level of expertise may have a good understanding of structure, they can identify a correct lay of shoulder, good return of upper arm, sound legs, correct ribbing, etc.  This person may overlook showmanship or a glamorous finish when they find a dog which has strong features of construction.  You then have someone who pulls it all together, they understand all the nuances of correct breed type.  They understand head proportions, angles, eye shape, ear set, substance, bone, foot shape, proportions throughout.  This person will focus strongly on each minute feature.  Then they will factor in construction.  Then they will factor in movement.  Then, when all the pieces are parts have been analyzed they will add in the glamour and pizzazz features.  No longer will how well the dog stands and baits play such an important role in their adjudication because they will not let a more outstanding dog who does not show as well stand down to a dog who likes to eat.  But to the novice, and there are a high percentage of dog breeders who never move from this stage, all the fine details will be lost to them.