This is the first time I've really read the information about the Grand Championship. It looks like it shouldn't be difficult for any dog or bitch that is already being campaigned as a special, and is winning. It also provides extra incentive for BOS and others that have decided to compete at that level, whereas there was nothing for them before.

I'm sure that initially, it may not run as smoothly in the ring. Hopefully, the ring stewards will be aware and will remind the judges of these new awards. Sometimes when Awards of Merit are available, judges now forget and the entrants are called back into the ring, or they're just not given out.

I think the Grand Championships will be viewed dependent on the viewpoint of the observer. For some they will be good, interesting and extra incentive for competition. Obviously, it's an extra title that still doesn't change the quality of the animal. And clearly, many of those that competed before its implementation would easily earn this title.

Jay

Could you explain the # of GC points that w/b awarded? Is it same as # of pts awarded for WD/WB? Or would you add in CH defeated to determine pts? For instance, if the show is 1 dog shy of a major but there are 3 CH in BOB, would dog winning Breed be awarded 3 GC pts (provided judge gave GC pts)?

still leaves a question in my mind..



* Non-Regular class winners that are not Champions of Record are not eligible to be awarded Grand Championship points and any points awarded would have these points disallowed administratively by the AKC. The Select awards have no relationship or correlation to Club Awards of Merit and judges should continue to review premium list or discuss with the club the criteria in making these awards.

What is a Select Dog and Select Bitch? Is this like second place to BOB and BOS--If a dog is given an Award of Merit would he/she automatically be the Select Dog/Bitch? Are AOM still going to be given?

Miriam Olesen
http://www.omegabulldogs.shutterfly.com/

Hi Fred,

It sounds to me like we both believe that not only is this Grand Champion status meant to bring more revenue to clubs and the AKC, but also to somehow separate or classify one Champion of Record from another. I think I agree with you that it would likely have been better to make the criteria for becoming a Champion more difficult. But that would likely not have increased entries and brought in more income.

Also, I feel that it is too much of a blanket statement that just because a dog wins at a specialty under a breeder-judge equates a deserving Champion, should it continue to earn all its requirements. One could argue (and it's an age old argument) the very same issues for and against specialties versus all-breed shows. Yes, we in Bulldogs pride ourselves in the fact that the vast majority of our specialties are judged by breeders and I am just as proud to win at a specialty under a breeder as anyone in the breed. But I guess I have seen questionable judging at both specialties and all-breeds alike and I have seen good judging at both specialties and all-breeds as well.

The system isn't perfect and it will probably never be, but the good news, is that we can all still look at the individual dogs and make our own minds up about their true quality, whether Champion, Grand Champion, unfinished and specialty winner. At least, that's the assumption.

Jay

special, then that dog should be considered for GC points. It isn't as if that dog could complete their Ch and GC title concurrently, it still takes many more points to get the GC title. And if that dog was finished, it would be up to the owners if they wanted to campaign that dog on to the GC title.

~Heather

...that if a class dog wins the breed, selects can still be awarded GC points, even though they were beat by the class dog.

I am hopeful that judges won't arbitrarily give GC select awards out (they do not have to award GC points, even to the BOB or BOS).

Hopefully a very high bar will be raised.



e

n/m

I don't post here often but I guess I'm looking at this from a different point of view than most.

Many people have been against it because they say the AKC are just trying to get more money from our pockets. Actually I don't think that the AKC stands to make much from it, some yes, but not a fortune, the real intent is to help the clubs from suffering falling entries, and in turn it will be the clubs and possibly the superintendants that will benefit the most financially.

The Grand champion title will go ahead from 12th May, but personally I don't like the concept as it seems to me that it will make the dogs that only hold the title of champion, the second class citizens of the dog world. For this reason I'm sure tht most including myself will compete for the title of Grand Campion.

Personally I think the AKC could of achieved the same goal (more entries for the show giving clubs) by a different means. I would have much preferred to leave the word "Grand" out of the equation and made it more difficult to achieve champion status. They could do this by many different ways, they could increase the number of points needed to become a champion, or increased the number of majors needed, or increased the number need to create a major, or as I would prefer a combination of all those. This in turn would make the title of champion really mean something.

I can hear some people saying that it is hard enough to find majors, and others saying that it is already too difficult to become a champion, and that there are many dogs that are "singled out" and can't get their majors, well that's really my point, how meaningfull is the title if those dogs cannot win at a specialty show where most often it IS a major, if they cannot win at a specialty show under a specialty judge, do they really deserve the title of champion. I know that some people live in area's that have very few specialties but even with the stricter criteria a good dog will always get there.

We were discussing this just a few weeks ago at a specialty show and several judges there also thought that it wasn't difficult to achieve champion status.

I don't expect all to agree, but it should create some discussion.

Fred Haynes

After speaking with breeders and exhibitors on both sides of this debate. I feel compelled to offer my two cents. A dog might obtain this additional title in less time than it took to obtain the current title of champion. My point is it that once a dog earns this additional title what is next? Awards of Merit can be accumulated they will have no end. The number of Award of Merits a dog earns will not have any baring on the title of champion. It will never be confused with the title of champion, it will never diminish or make it difficult to explain the difference to newbies or the uninformed. An owner will have the option to continue to campaign his or her dog until such time it decides not to continue. Why mess with a system that has stood the test of time. Why even give the illusion that a Grand Champion is worth more than a dog that achieves the Championship title Those who have the finances and desire to continue to campaign their dog will be able to do so. It will never diminish or confuse anyone that a dog that stops at Champion status is not as worthy as anyone who decides to make a substantial investment in their dog as a Special.

Mike and the bullies

Mike and the bullies

Hopefully the title will be won by deserving dogs and judges won't feel pressure to name one of the dogs shown that day the Gr. Ch. points.

Great points and thanks for clarifying, Fred. I don't disagree with you. Sometimes, I just think it's important to elaborate on things and present different viewpoints so possibly the bigger picture can be taken into focus.

No one would love to finish a dog in 3 specialties under breeders more than me. But I would still know exactly what I had at the end of the lead. And I would realize what's important and not so important to those judges.

Another age old suggestion is maybe removing altogether the Best of Winners award. That could certainly make it more difficult in certain instances to earn a Championship. And no, this is not to question the ability of judges to distinguish which of their winners is more deserving of the said award - not at all. But this is another subject, perhaps for another time.

Thanks,
Jay

Hi Jay,

There is no doubt that the AKC created the grand Champion concept to generate more entries for the clubs, they have openly stated that, the point I was making was for once I beleive that to be true, the only revinue that the AKC themselves will receive is the exta 50 cents, for the recording fee, If I'm wrong in that assumption, I'm sure someone will correct me.

I do beleive that making it harder to finish a dog to a championship will create more entries, if it is more difficult to finish a dog then the campaign becomes longer, which equates to more entries we all have to make to achieve the title. However after giving it more thought that may not achieve as many extra entries per show as the Grand Champion concept is hopeful of.

Yes, it was a blanket statement, and of course you are correct in your reply, there is good and bad in both arena's. I was really making two points with that statement, one was purely based on numbers, and the whole dog game in the USA IS based on numbers, generally the specialty show and the specialty judge do demand higher numbers, (again a blanket statement)the usual exception to that is in the area's where there are only a few specialties, but the AKC beleives that if you your points come from higher numbers the better the dog is, they must beleive that or why else would they allocate a higher number of points, a dog that finishes from three shows with three five point majors under three different judges must be better than the dog that picks up single points, gets singled out and then has to enter show after show waiting for those three point major's to come their way. Yes that dog has as you say completed all it's requirements and still deserves the title of champion, but some dogs are just more deserving than others.

My second point was that it is the standard that I set for the dogs I campiagn, working on the theory that if this dog is not good enough to finish at specialty shows (based on #s) then this dog is not good enough to keep in the yard, much easier and cheaper in the long run to let that dog go and it also serves to keep my yard tidy!

I do agree with you that there are good and bad judges in both camps, I also agree that there is no perfect system when it comes to judges being approved. A few years ago there was an article in one of the dog magazines entitled "Thank God For Bad Judges" It's a true statement, without the bad judges many of today's champions would not be champions, and many of today's exhibitors would get fed up of losing and leave the fancy, and If that were the case, perhaps even less shows would make majors.

Whichever way we look at this, we are in America and must compete under the AKC rules, so, if in their wisdom the AKC thinks we need a Grand Champion, then so be it.

One thing the AKC may not have taken into consideration is if we now have to enter more shows to achieve this title, it may mean that it will be a longer period for us as exhibitors to go on to the next dog to campaign, which in turn may mean longer periods between us breeding for the next hopeful, and if that's the case the AKC may just have bitten themselves in the a$$ by suffering loss of registration revenue.

Fred Haynes

the way I am understanding it is the judge alone can determine if GC points are to be awarded. He might only let his BOB winner get them, or none of the specials at all.

It is absolutely not an automatic award.


From what other judges are discussing, I am gathering that many of them plan to be very stingy with these points. I hope that all judges are the same way and only award points if they are truly deserved.

e

I do not support the Grand Champion concept.
AKC should spend more time and money educating and governing Judges. There are very few of us that either have the money or are willing to part with it for more than gaining a championship. Specialing a dog is very costly and is usually out of the financial range of the middle class. What is wrong with using Awards of Merit at all breed shows in addition to those at the Westminster and National Specialties if another form of recoginition is needed or wanted. And anyone that knows true breed type knows that a title does not improve the quality of sperm or eggs.

Mike and the bullies

Let's say there is an entry of 15 specials, 13 are dogs, only 2 specials bitches in the ring. The judge picks BOB, BOS (from one of the 2 bitches) and BOW. The dog is best of winners. The bitches aren't the quality that the judge considers worthy of Grand Championship. Then the judge would end up with only one dog that gets the grand champion points?
Dara