JUDGING UNDER FCI RULES
First, an introduction to explain on what basis I can write this article.
First and foremost, I am a dedicated Corgi breeder on a very small scale,
but I also have been a long time member of the Norwegian Kennel Club
board of directors and on the Judges' Training Committee. In addition to
judging Corgis, which I have judged on three continents and in most
countries in The
first thing non-FCI judges worry about when invited to judge in FCI
countries seems to be the grading of the dogs. The second is writing
critiques. But one thing you don¹t have to worry about is your Judge's
Book. All paper work is taken care of by the ring steward and all you
have to do is give it a check and sign it at the end. Basic ring
procedures are
also the same. Grading
As in all countries, you get the full class in the ring and are able to
get an overview. Then each dog has to be gone thoroughly over, given a
written critique and graded. When all in the class are graded, they come
back for placement, as in other countries. In some countries all, in
others only those with sufficient grading. This may vary from country to
country, but rest assured, your ring steward will keep you up to date on
this. The same goes for choosing best male and best female, - rules may
vary, but your ring steward is responsible for keeping the right dogs in
the ring and inform you from which class they come. The highest grade is EXCELLENT. This means the dog is close to the ideal
of the standard of the breed, in excellent condition, well tempered and
well presented. Minor imperfections can be ignored, but a male must be
masculine, a bitch feminine. VERY GOOD is awarded to dogs who are typical for their breed,
well-balanced and in good condition. A few minor faults may be tolerated,
but none that affect the soundness of the dog. GOOD is to be awarded to dogs who have the main features of the breed,
but show faults that detract from type or soundness. SUFFICIENT means you can recognize which breed it is, but the dog has
serious faults that detract from type and/or soundness. Dogs who are severely untypical, or are aggressive, must be DISQUALIFIED.
The same goes for males who do not have two apparently normal testicles
fully descended into the scrotum. FCI policy is to adopt the breed
standard of the country of origin. That means for Cardigan Welsh Corgis
that they are judged according to the standard accepted by the British
Kennel Club. The British standard has no disqualifying clauses. However, one has been
added to all the FCI breed standards: «Dogs displaying sign of
aggression or physical defects affecting the dog's health/soundness must
be disqualified». FCI goes on to explain that this also goes for flawed
bites, coats and colours other than asked for in the standard, plus
albinism. This means that overshot or undershot mouths in our breed
should lead to disqualification, and also a fluffy
coat, even though the standard doesn't clearly say so, as well as
dogs with the colours that go with brown noses. Bear in mind that dogs
with a really unsound anatomy also should be disqualified under this
clause, but not dogs that are temporarily lame. Dogs that are difficult or impossible to assess, due to not being trained
to move on the leash or not used to being handled by others so that the
judge can go over it, but not aggressive, (which should lead to
disqualification), or if the judge suspects the dog has been tampered
with or operated on to conform to the standard, should be given CANNOT
BE JUDGED For the complete wording of the definitions, check FCI's web site http://www.fci.be In Scandinavian countries we do not use the terms given above, but award
1st, 2nd and 3rd prizes, which roughly conform with Very Good, Good, and
Sufficient, and then all those with a 1st come back in to be placed and
the judge decides how many are of such quality that they could be
awarded a «Certificate Quality». A 1st with Certificate Quality equals
Excellent in other countries. This just to confuse overseas¹ judges,
but don't worry, the ring steward will know the ropes. Critiques
The second worry seems to be having to write critiques. You will have a
secretary in the ring, writing as you dictate. The secretary should
write exactly what you say. This means that the show committee has to
find someone that can write fluently in the language used in the
critiques and not one who translates directly as he/she writes. It is
wise to check the text, at least in the beginning, and also to bring a
list of the words you will use most often, so that you don't have to
stop and spell them out. This helps you keep the necessary speed. What also helps, is to stick to a pattern. Thus you make sure that you
have covered all aspects and that all dogs get equal attention. We
recommend you build up your critique like this: You start with size, colour and sex plus your overall impression,- «
Brindle male, up to size, of Excellent type/Very good type/Good
type/Sufficient type». Normally, excellent type would indicate a grading of Excellent, but then
later on in your critique you may describe faults that must detract from
the grading, even though the type still is excellent. So one must not
necessarily follow the other, but often does. Then, for instance, you start in one end, with the head and all the
features you find necessary to comment on, continuing with neck, front
construction, chest and ribcage, topline, tail set and carriage, hind
construction, movement from all sides, coat and temperament. Below
follow two examples. Both critiques are based on actual dogs. «Brindle male of excellent size, substance and type. Masculine head with
well placed, nicely rounded ears of correct size, dark eyes, correct
stop. Correct bite. Would like a stronger lower jaw. Excellent length of
neck coming from well laid back shoulders, with excellent forechest,
front angulation and length of upper arm. Very good bone going down into
correctly rounded feet. Well sprung ribs, but rib cage could be somewhat
longer and loin somewhat shorter. Still, a strong and level topline
ending in a well set tail carried correctly both standing and moving.
Moves with excellent reach and drive, correct coming, could be more
parallel going. Dense, short coat. Excellent temperament.» Now, what grading should he have, do you think, from reading this
critique? Will the owner recognize his/her dog with both faults and
virtues? Here is another one, the other end of the
scale: «Small, but masculine sable dog of sufficient type. Very good head with
correct proportions, dark eyes, but expression is disturbed by small and
high set ears. Correct bite. Would like better lay-back of shoulder and
better angulation in the front, giving him a forechest. Good bone and
feet, but appears leggy and has too much wrap-around. Short, cobby body
in Can you also picture this sable male? And if so, what grading does he
merit? Remember to use adjectives of correct value to describe the different
parts of the dog;- an excellent lay back of shoulder and front
angulation is better than a very good, and very much better than a good.
It is too easy to slip into listing the different body parts, adding
just nice or good, giving a bland critique that doesn¹t really say very
much to the reader. Also, remember that in the FCI countries, exhibitors
are used to having the faults mentioned, not only the virtues. Also,
here, it is possible to consider how to say it;- «would like a better
turn of stifle» sounds less harsh than «lacking in hind angulation»,
although in some cases there is no way of wrapping things up nicely, for
instance «would like to see better reach and drive» implies that the
dog has the construction to do so, but not the inclination. If that is
not so, one simply has to say that the movements are short and stilted.
The important thing is; when the owner reads the critique, he or she
should be able to understand the grading. Another important thing to remember, both when writing critiques and
grading the dogs;- is not to get too hung up in details, in spite of the
critiquing system, but to see the whole dog. AND to look for virtues
where they are to be found, and to ignore minor imperfections. «To
their virtues ever kind, to their faults a little blind». If every
little fault should lead to subtraction from the grades, some dogs, like
the poor little sable male above, could end up in minus! AND we could
end up with winners who perhaps had few faults, but also few outstanding
virtues. Personally, if a dog gives me goose bumps and closer inspection
reveals a fault, I turn a blind eye and risk getting a reputation for
one who «doesn't see» things. Anne
Indergaard, Annwn Welsh Corgis, Trondheim, Norway
|