I would not want to see an inferior specimen go up, neither would I want to see an artificially altered specimen go up, as that would set precedents. Doesn't appear to be black and white, guess that is why it is called judging:)
I agree with Dave on this one. All the judges have to do is overlook the better, but altered dogs, for wins a couple of times stating clearly to the handler that their dog didn't win because it was altered and very quickly altering would come to a cease. Then the good dogs could win again. But in reality, I feel funny even mentioning such a thing! *Good* is so subjective. The *good* dog that wins today is quite often the dog that doesn't win tomorrow and it has nothing to do with it being altered or not. What one breeder thinks is *good* is often the same dog that another breeder thinks is *not good*. So how much difference would it even make--in the long run--to overlook altered dogs even if they appear *better* to our own eyes and give the wins to the unaltered dogs. Often there is not that huge a difference between what we call good and not good--sometimes there is, but not all that often. Sometimes I think we get a little too focused on the tiny details and forget the big picture. Laura Lang ========================================================= "Magic Commands": to stop receiving mail for awhile, click here and send the email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20NOMAIL to start it up gain click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20MAIL E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance. Search the Archives... http://apple.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ckcs-l.html All e-mail sent through CKCS-L is Copyright 2002 by its original author.
