Talk:Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show/Archive 1

Archive 1

Trivia

I noticed the trivia included a part where it mentioned that people who watch WWE/RAW are in fact "low income, lower class, lowlives". I think that the part of the lowlives is quite an unnesscary stab. just my thoughts —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.20.220.60 (talk) 03:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

"I noticed the trivia included a part where it mentioned that people who watch WWE/RAW are in fact "low income, lower class, lowlives". I think that the part of the lowlives is quite an unnesscary stab. just my thoughts." Hmm, what was this about?

Also, the emcee of the Westminster is quite well-known and his voice is quite recognizable. I don't have his name off hand but he's public addressing the archery events at the Beijing Olympics.123.248.101.159 (talk) 09:40, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Not a Mistake

It is not the wrong dog Breed. That is a Komondor. Puli's are a much smaller breed only about 16 inches. The Komondor is 27 -32 inches. Unless the person is incredible short, based on the fact the dog height is above the knee on the person. That is not a Puli.

Additionally, the description of the photo states that it is a Komondor, in particular Ch. Gillian's Quintessential Quincy, which doing a little research from the photos on the Westminster's online Breed Judging Photos [1] , you can see it is the same dog. While it is true that Komondor puppies, do not fully cord as a puppy, Ch. Gillian's Quintessential Quincy, would have been 7 years of age at the time of this photo, therefore capable of cording. Also the 2007 Best in breed, Puli (which is in the Herding Group not the Working Group), was a black Puli not a white Puli. [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.205.5.163 (talk) 14:38, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes it is a mistake to create the wrong idea about the Komondor dog breed in an encyclopaedia

I have owned both dog breeds. That picture is Puli and the description of the photo stating that it is a Komondor, is wrong. You can NOT see that is the same dog. The 2007 Best in breed, Puli may also be just as wrong.

This is a Komondor. http://www.komondorklub.hu/komondortar/sztar2005/KKKAtyafi.jpg http://www.cinofilionline.it/images/Komondor.jpg and a puppy http://vovve.net/i/Galleri/0/20.jpg http://m.blog.hu/ba/balihazikomondor/image/Dezsa/Komondor%20D%c3%a9zsa01.JPG

an other young dog

http://m.blog.hu/ba/balihazikomondor/image/miskolccacib2008/komondor/Miskolc%20CACIB%20komondor%20011.JPG http://m.blog.hu/ba/balihazikomondor/image/fruzsi%20es%20arnold/Komondor_FrusziesArnold50.JPG

and an other puppy,

http://stripduke.web-log.nl/photos/uncategorized/maximum_threat.jpg +

• Komondor pictures (Hungarian)

If that dog in the picture is a Komndor than that dog should be disqualified imediatly because of its small size and the picture should be deleted because it gives the wrong idea about the Komondor dog breed in an encyclopaedia, which is a rather big mistake.

Warrington (talk) 15:43, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

And this is a White Puli http://w3.enternet.hu/cserisub/feher.htm

Not a Mistake

If you look at the other dogs in the photo - there is a stand for the Neopolitan Mastiff and the Portuguese Water Dog, both in the Working Dog Class! The Puli is in the Herding Class! So, this is obviously a Komondor - classified as a Working Dog for the AKC.

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.244.81.133 (talk) 15:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC) 

Just go ahead and take a look at the pictures above and see for yourself the correct proportions of a standard adult Komondor, head-body-legs and cords.

Warrington (talk) 16:28, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't really care about the above photos. The caption should read 'Komondor' because it is a photo of the Working Dog Class competition (Neopolitan Mastiff, Portuguese Water Dog, etc). It may be a bad example of a Komondor, but that is another matter. 21:37 . . (+287) . . 128.244.81.133

It is 'Komondor' in the picture. But I~do care about that it is a bad example of a Komondor. So bad that one can hardly recognize the breed, that is pretty bad. Warrington (talk) 21:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

The differences in the photos listed above seems mostly differences on the way the Komondor was corded around the face, and the width of the cords, (where cords are present). Also the dog is currently in motion so the cords at least around the face look different than if stationary.

The dog in that photo, Ch Gillian's Quintessential Quincy, whose photo is linked above but here it is again http://www.westminsterkennelclub.org/2007/photos/breed/WP97060403.html. He is also listed as the 2005 KCA Specialty on the Komondor Club of America Website http://clubs.akc.org/kca/theshow.htm . So I would say he is not a bad example of a Komondor.

All these photo arguments aside, the photo is obviously taken during the Working Group, based on the other dogs represented in the photo (i.e. the Yellow box that says litan ff, which is Neapolitan Mastiff) . Thus eliminating the Puli as an option.

Take a look here at picture nr 4 http://www.kutya.hu/0003/17.htm and see the Komondor size compared to that man. That dog is a Komondor.

The Westminster dog would never be able to do this...

I do not doubt that the picture is from the show. And it is not the differences on the way the Komondor was corded, it is a difference in dog size, it is all about size. Yes, the dog is currently in motion, but the proportion head-legs is still the same, moving or standing still. The width of the cords is fairly constant, about max 1 cm. And both Puli and Komondor are working dogs, Puli occasionally works as a polis dog in Hungary, so it is not necessarily eliminating the Puli as an option. Either way, this dog is way too smal for a Komondor. It is definitely not a typical Komondor (miniature Komondor?? also miniature Komondor do not exist).

The smallest Komondor IS MINIMUM 27 inches (69cm) And no other dogs have cords like this, I can not imagine that it is a corded Poodle http://www.standardpoodlesusa.com/corded-poodle.html. (also everything is possible)

Warrington (talk) 17:48, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I think part of the problem is that there appears to be a difference in the size judgements of the dog in that photo. I look at that photo and compare it to the man. The withers look higher than his kneecap, making him easily over 20 inches in height, therefore making too large for a Puli. (I'm attempting to be conservative in my estimate there, I'm 5'6 and my knee cap is at the base is 24 inches high). I have a feeling that the dog in that photo is larger than it appears there. In the breed judging photo linked above it looks as though the dog whithers are at about the handler's mid thigh, making it most likely closer to 30 inches +. And I am not arguing the minimum height of a Kom, though if a Kom was under 27 inches it not like it no longer a Kom, it just probably not going to be showing at this level. Additionally I believe when they judge the breed, size is one of the requirements, that it must fit within X range given the breed standard. I really doubt at this level of competition they would've chosen the best in breed Komondor who would be outside this requirement.

Also though the Puli can be considered a Working Dog. The Westminster Classifies the breed in the Herding Group. I am also fairly positive the only corded dog in the working group is the Komondor. That the Poodle is in a separate group (non sporting i believe) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.170.20.99 (talk) 18:30, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, you are right, I can see CH Gillians's Quintessential Quincy. So that dog is really a Komondor. But I am also right about one thing, that dog really has terrible proportions, short legs, big head and long body, the same with an oyjer dog listed as a Komondor, CH Meadowview Flaming Star. The head-leg proportion is almost one to one, a big mistake for a Komondor. Those are Basset hound proportions. A Komondor should have a square body, not like Quicy. I still say that Quincy is a very very bad example for the Komondor breed. If a Kom is under 27 inches it not like it no longer a Kom, no but is a bad Kom, which does not fit the Komondor breed standards.

A dog show judges by standards, by the way. One should try to show a typical Komondor in a encyclopaedia image, because everybody will go after what they see here and will belive that this is the way Komondor should look like.

I look at that photo and compare legs and head proportions, and I don’t doubt that they chosen a Komondor who is outside the breed standard requirement. I do not know why, but they did, if they chosen this one. Maybe there were other requirements like agility, behaviour or whatever.

I go after Hungarian standards, Komondor is a Hungarian dog breed. If you compare these dogs http://clubs.akc.org/kca/theshow.htm with the Hungarian Komondor dog breed winners you will see the difference. (see best in show Hungarian Komondor picture in last years, here:

http://www.komondorklub.hu/sztar.htm Chech the head-leg body-leg and head-body proportions everywhere. Warrington (talk) 19:11, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

While it is your opinion that the dog is small/bad example of a Komondor according to the Hungarian Breed Standard, this is a page for the Westminster Kennel Club Show, which uses the AKC Breed standard (which based solely on looks, not things like agility) which being Best in Breed, CH Gillians's Quintessential Quincy, must have met. Additionally, maligning an accomplished show dog that you have not actually seen in person only in a few photos is foolish, mean spirited, and a quite an insult to both the dog, its owners, and the breeders. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.121.204.57 (talk) 08:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

And your oppinion is that mistakes does not happen. Happen all the time. Warrington (talk) 09:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

In America, the AKC follows a breed standard for Komondorok, which differs from other countries (possibly yours?). Your opinion of the size of the winning dog from a photo is irrelevant to this article and should not be included. Westminster is considered to be the second most prestigious dog show in the world and the dog in question has won best of breed in many different shows (not only Westminster), so it is extremely unlikely that the dog does not meet the American breed standard. One mistake is possible, of course, but mistakes at every show he has attended? Regardless, the dog did win, and your amateur opinion based solely on a photo is not Wikipedia material. Please keep this page professional. —Preceding Lynovella (talk • contribs) 09:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Check breed standard for Hungarian dog breed, the original country, where the breed is from. And Komondorok is the plural for Hungarian, not English.

Warrington (talk) 09:17, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

As stated before, this is a page for the Westminster Kennel Club Show that utilizes American Kennel Club breed standards, therefore judgments based on Hungarian breed standards are not applicable for this particular Wikipedia article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.121.204.57 (talk) 09:25, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Check than American Kennel Club breed standards. They say the same thing. I breed this dog.

Size, Proportion, Substance: Dogs 27½ inches and up at the withers; bitches 25½ inches and up at the withers. Dogs are approximately 100 pounds and up, bitches, approximately 80 pounds and up at maturity, with plenty of bone and substance. Height below the minimum is a fault. Warrington (talk) 09:45, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

And there is no way from a photo without knowing the exact proportions of another object in the photo can you say what the height of the dog is. More likely as not since this is a successful show dog (as evident in its champion status and having been invited to Westminster and won best in breed) , it meets the minimum 27.5 minimum height for a male, and the rest of AKC breed standards. My point is that with no proof to the contrary (since your judgments based on one or two photos does not count as proof), arguing that this dog is a poor example of a Komondor or a mistake, is pointless and highly insulting. Just imagine that this was one of the dogs you bred and had successfully shown at the top level of dog shows in the united states, and someone else were to judge that dog as inferior just from a few photos, think about that before you respond again on this particular dogs quality.

It has nothing to do with the shows success. There is an other 'object ' in the picture, namely the man. Now it is possible that the man is a giant and the dog is a very very small female, or it is an optical illusion, or a bad picture, either way, an encyclopaedia has to be very careful about using pictures, because they are often taken as a reference. That is why it is necessary with a note in the picture that the dog is a small dog by it’s breed standards.

Warrington (talk) 16:15, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

That's just it you don't have any proof except your judgment that this dog is small by breed standard based on a photo. And since this is a page on the Westminster Kennel Club show, and that photo was taken at Westminster, it is a perfectly fine photo to use as an example of a dog shown at Westminster. I would also argue that it is important to keep personal opinions without factual backup out of the article. And the point of mentioning it's success in shows is that since not meeting the minimum height is a fault, if the dog did not meet the height, it would not be as successful as the dog has been.

Please read the breed standard again, and don’t waste my time. Have you ever seen some Komondors in real life? If you would, you would know what this is all about.

Warrington (talk) 16:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Facts on Ch. Gillian's Quintessential Quincy

I have contacted the breeder of my Komondor, who is an officer in the Komondor Club of America, and she gave me some information that will be useful in this discussion.

First of all, she has been around Quincy many times and is good friends with his owner/breeder. Quincy is the sire of one of her dogs and the grandsire of another. Quincy is approximately 29 inches tall and weighs 120 lbs. The handler shown in the photo, was also known to her and is approximately 6'3" tall.

As for the photos you linked, the young dog is actually Quincy's son and in the Hungarian photos you linked the middle picture is a woman with Ari's Iva. Ari's Iva's mother is Ari's Aleeta, a half litter mate of Quincy.

Also, comparing the American Komondor to the Hungarian Komondor is not valid either. In Hungary, the dogs are bred for size alone, while in America, they are bred for health, temperament and lastly size. So it is not surprising that many Hungarian dogs would be larger than many American dogs. Most dogs imported these days from Hungary do not pass the health clearances and temperament tests that legitimate American breeders use before breeding dogs.

Finally, we did look at the FCI Hungarian breed standards and they list the same minimum height as the AKC. As for body proportions, the 2000 FCI standard states that the dog should be slightly longer than their height at the whithers (so not square) link. --Lynovella (talk) 19:11, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I own CH Gillian's Quintessential Quincy

As the owner of Ch Gillian's Quintessential Quincy, I have read the posts in this section with much interest. It is amazing how people who have never seen my dog nor put a hand on him could make such colossally incorrect statements. I do hope you don't judge the people in your life with the same standards by which you have judged my dog.

Quincy is 29 1/2 inches tall at the withers. He is 31 inches long, and his head is approximately 12 inches long. His cords were well over 3 feet long, but now measure 26 inches because after he retired from the show ring, I cut them to make him more comfortable. His weight is 125 pounds. Quincy's handler, Ernesto Lara, of Bowmansville, Pennsylvania is well over six feet tall. One of the pictures you have used to describe a "correct" komondor is CH Meadow View Maximum Threat who is Quincy's son, and yes, he is indeed a correct komondor.

During Quincy's show career, he earned 130 group placements, including 30 Group Ones. He won the National Specialty in 2005 and is a Best in Show dog. Quincy was best of breed at the Westminster Kennel Club show in 2005, 2006, and 2007. Besides his accomplishments in the U.S., he is a Canadian, Mexican, Americas, World and International Champion. He placed third in the group at the World Show in Mexico City at 7 years of age. At his final show, at 7 1/2 years old, he placed third in the group and won the Veteran Working Group.

As I write this, Quincy lies at my feet. If you have any doubts as to the veracity of my post, please, please come and see for yourself. He is here, at his home, ready to be inspected.

Sincere thanks to the person who posted the information immediately above this post. It was kind of you to set the record straight.

Janet Cupolo, Farmingdale, New YorkGoldie102 (talk) 01:31, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Prizes not really mentioned

What do current handlers/owners/whatever of the dogs win aside from the prestige and touring afterwards with the media. Is there no prize money at all? This should be addressed in the article. Cowicide (talk) 03:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Missing lead section

I don't pretend to be knowledgeable enough about the subject to write a competent lead section, so I used the tag. (I am also presently incapable of gathering the requisite information myself for personal reasons I choose not to disclose.) If someone who does feel competent enough to do so would kindly write a lead section in compliance with WP:LEAD, it would be greatly appreciated. Lockesdonkey (talk) 05:23, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Was just passing through this article because this has been on TV and I was surprised that it had no lead. A check of the page history reveals an edit that deleted the lead (as well as other tags) entirely without any explanation. –RedSoxFan274 _{(talk~contribs)} 08:52, 17 February 2015 (UTC)