Article IV
To: All Stafford enthusiasts.
Subject: Last Year's (1997) Crufts (Long - bring your lunch!).
It was suggested to me that some of you might like to see the Crufts Report
that I wrote last year. For those of you with the historical turn of
mind, read on.
Just returned from an unforgettable seven days in England, terminating at
Crufts on Thursday, March 6, then flying to Odessa, TX, all day Friday,
driving home to Cloudcroft NM on Saturday, and writing this in the wee
small hours of Sunday morning due to jet lag - or leprechauns.
Warning #1 : If you're looking for show
results or a recap of the big winners and/or owners. you'll not find
them here. My interest lies in the process rather than the results.
Warning #2 : Everything herein consists
not of facts but of impressions from this year's Crufts as compared
with those from 1965 and 1966 Crufts, overlooking everything in between.
Memory is a tricky thing, and the eye is fallible.
Warning #3 : Differences exist between
an American dog show and English dog show. I would describe Westminster
as a dog SHOW and Crufts as
a DOG show.
Warning #4 : Although 205 Staffords
were entered, one has to keep in mind that while they could probably be
considered typical of the best Staffords currently being shown in the
UK, they should not be considered typical of the British bloodstock because
there (as in other countries) the vast majority of dogs are never ever
shown - for a variety of reasons.
General impressions:
#1 - Overall, the Staffords I saw formed a decidedly positive composite. I
had half expected to see a number of outsized and/or overdone exhibits.
This failed to be the case as only a few seemed to exceed a
guesstimated 16 inches. I also half expected to see a number of obese
Staffords, and this presentiment was realized at least in part. I further
half expected to see a number of exhibits that were not in iron-hard
condition, and this expectation was met in full as none of the dogs I
actually handled (perhaps twenty) came even close to that description
whereas at 1966 Crufts probably 80% did. This is a correctable state of
affairs, however, and certainly accounts for much of the disparity
between photos taken of Staffords back then and photos taken now. (Most American
fanciers derive a visual perception of British Staffords via photographs taken
of winners.) It also explains why many Staffords of 16 inches and less
would have failed the 38/34-pound limit, had they been weighed. I
had also half expected to see a number of exhibits carrying
"bulldog bone" rather than "terrier bone" but encountered
not a one fitting into that category.
#2 - Breed type has become much more uniform, making the job of evaluating
classes more difficult. A great deal of Breed uniformity in type has
been attained, exactly what many Stafford enthusiasts were strongly
advocating in the Sixties. From the short-range viewpoint this can be
considered a positive development. From the long-range viewpoint, this
can be interpreted negatively in that the Breed has lost a degree of its genetic
diversity. (Can anyone find a genuine outcross?)
#3 - I was delighted to see a larger percentage of women handling Staffords
in the ring although men still outnumber them. Also I was delighted to
see a large number of working-class men, especially, young
working-class men, owning and handling Staffords and doing a good job
of it at that. The Stafford has always been a working-class man's dog,
and it was a delight to see that this aspect of the Breed hasn't changed much
in England. As far as I could tell, professional handlers were
conspicuous by their absence from the Stafford ring so that
owners/breeders continue to maintain control.
#4 - The Crufts stats are staggering! Birmingham Exhibition Center is
enormous. Staffords appeared in Hall 1, Rings 2 and 3, but getting
there seemed like a cross between Australian Rules Football and the Iditerod. The show runs four days to
accommodate the 19000+ exhibits
(and exhibitors). I never did see the head-count of spectators, but it
seemed as though Friday, Terrier and Hound Day, hosted the entire University
of Nebraska football stadium crowd. Stafford dogs were judged in a huge ring by
G. Westwood and Stafford bitches in the adjoining ring by G. Walton. Many
classes boasted more than 20 exhibits so that the crowd (very friendly,
quite knowledgeable) stood three and four and five deep around each
large ring. It was difficult, nearly impossible, to navigate due to the
crush. Everyone seemed to be having a grand, carefree time as evidenced
by the fact that exhibitors fearlessly left their belongings (and their
dogs) unattended while they kibitzed.
Specific impressions:
#1 - Breed type has changed somewhat in the head and skull, probably due to
the genetic influence several outstanding winners over the last couple
of decades. On average, the skull has broadened a bit and the muzzle
has become slightly shorter (in a few cases, possibly a less than the
"standard" 1:2 ratio), so that the entire head when viewed
from above forms a "V." But the most visible change is that
the muzzle when viewed in profile now tilts upward several degrees more
than it used to. In addition, the eyes have become more prominent. As a
consequence, the dog now has an expression that differs marginally from
his ancestors'. While not at all negative in its cumulative effect,
this phenomenon should also be viewed as a red warning flag: if the skull continues
to broaden, whelping problems will inevitably follow; and if the muzzle continues
to shorten - well, you fill that one in with your own phrase.
#2 - In the show ring, exhibitors seem to have discontinued the use of the
two-inch Stafford collar-on-a-collar in favor of an inch-wide
single-layer black collar decorated with brass pieces. No choke chains
or wimpy nylon straps, thank goodness. (One of my many pet prejudices.)
#3 - The trend in coat color has changed. I saw a much higher percentage of
unmarked black brindles and much lower percentage of tiger or mahogany
brindles, perhaps only three or four; a smaller percentage of reds. Of
the reds in attendance, there was a much higher percentage of red smuts
but a much smaller percentage of fawns. Saw two blues, something of a
novelty, and one exhibit that seemed to be blue-gray - but it may have been
the lighting which made that effect. I was somewhat surprised at the number of
all-whites (head patches and tail patches not counted) and the number
of pieds but truly astonished at the number of skewbalds (also called
red pieds) which used to be a rarity.
#4 - Stafford aggressiveness in the ring is somewhat diminished, most of it
seeming to consist of the "get off my back" variety instead
of dedicated "I'll have your guts for garters" sort, and the
owner-handlers took it in stride. However, Stafford "yappiness" has
increased. At 1966 Crufts one hardly ever heard any barking, but at 1997
Crufts one clearly understood that one was amongst yapping terriers.
Chalk this up as another prejudice if you will, but I prefer Staffords
to be silent as snakes.
#5 - Each gender was divided into nine "competitive" classes
(Special Puppy, Special Junior, Special Yearling, Undergraduate,
Graduate, Post Graduate, Mid Limit, Limit, and Open) and one
"non-competitive" class (Special Veteran). Open Dog had an entry of
33 dogs, 10 of which were already Champions in their own right. Open
bitch had 25 entries, nine of which were Champions in their own right. Three CC's are needed for an exhibit
to become a Champion of Record, so
for a non-champion Stafford to receive the CC at Crufts he/she had to
win out over all existing champions in his/her class (ten or nine, respectively),
no easy task. (The results are available via http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~nickwheat/staffy.html,
if you just have to know.)
#6 - For the most part, I looked at the Staffords themselves rather than
classes but made an exception for the Limit class, the one just before
the Open class. My theory has always been that if a Stafford is a good
enough show dog to place first, second, or third in the Limit class at
a Championship show, he/she will easily make into an American Champion.
The Limit dog class had 23 entries and the Limit bitch class 25 entries, so the
judges had their work cut out for them. As a spectator, I would guesstimate
that about fifteen of the dogs and thirteen of the bitches could be
made into American champions in a couple of weekends by anyone who knew
what he/she was doing. As for the next five or six exhibits, it would
depend on circumstances but perseverance would probably get the job
done. If you think I am trying to say that the overall quality was extremely
high, you've got the message.
#7 - Almost all benched dogs were confined in wire crates (probably to
protect them from the crowds rather than visa versa), a radical
departure from previous practice when they were kept in the crate by a
short strap attached to the collar. The modern practice makes it
difficult to see the dogs as they are mostly lying down while behind bars, looking
miserable or yapping miserably, but it does allow the owners to leave them unattended.
This may or may not be the reason I observed a much higher percentage of Staffords
in the ring who could only be described as unhappy campers, exhibits with
tails between their legs, heads down, ears laid back, eyes rolling.
#8 - I had half expected to see a number of dogs with "iffy"
movement, and there were a few, but only a few. Rear movement on the
whole has improved (some needed to display more drive from the
hindquarters) while front movement is marginally better. These comments,
of course, apply only to the happy campers.
#9 - As I knelt by the ring hoping to get photographs, I was attacked by
five for six Staffords who attempted to smother me with kisses. From
what I was able to determine under such limited circumstances, the
genuine Stafford temperament is alive and well in the U.K.
#10 - I gleefully noticed the total absence of winning ribbons attached to
bench stalls. American showpeople seem to believe: "If you've got
it, flaunt it." The English attitude (which I prefer) seems to be:
"If you've really got it, you don't need to flaunt it." Different
horses for different courses. I genuinely regret not getting to meet the Nick
Wheat's, the Mervyn Thomas's, and the David Ormes's due to my having to depart
for England before the rendezvous spot and hour had been set, and, once
there, having no way of finding it out. On the other hand, this
unfortunate circumstances simply gives me an additional reason to visit
Merrie England one more time.
Tidbits:
From what I could see, the qualify of white and color Bull Terriers has
regressed somewhat since the days of the late Raymond Oppenheimer, but
the quality of the Miniature Bull Terriers has improved considerably.
Border Terriers seem stronger there than here. I was delighted to see
that the Finnspitz numbers and quality are vastly improved.
No American Staffanatic should miss the Crufts experience!
Steve Stone
And then, a few days latter, an
addendum:
Perhaps an addendum to my previous post on Crufts might not come amiss at
this point. I did not post the following previously because I wanted to
make sure my thoughts were in order before doing so and that I would
choose my words carefully.
All the caveats of my previous post still apply.
I need to say something about the phenotype - the overall appearance - of
the bitches I saw at Crufts this year. The bitches were much more even
in size and type than before. Gone were the slender damsels, vanished
were the macho gals, departed were the Plain Janes. Had they all been
of one color, say, black brindle, the casual spectator like myself would
have been hard pressed to tell one from another, which wasn't at all the case
in earlier days.
From a show perspective, this has got to be considered a major plus.
I had half expected to see a number of outsized bitches, a few undersized
bitches, and too many overdone or doggy bitches. Happily, this was not
the case although - like the dogs - none that I actually handled were
in iron-hard condition.
This again has to be considered a major plus.
That said, what I did see caused me to pause and consider - and consider
and consider and consider. (Which is why I waited to make this post.)
What I saw - overall - was a group of bitches that constituted a somewhat
feminized version of the dogs in the other ring. Not particularly
smaller on average, but a bit more slender, a bit less bulky, and bit
less masculine. BUT not particularly feminine, perhaps lacking that
definitive gender stamp that once existed
I have difficulty convincing myself that this development is a good thing.
Steve Stone
To: Carolyn & Terry Stewart <stouthrt@lodinet.com>
Subject: 1997 Crufts Photos
Carolyn and Terry:
Am attaching nine scanned photos at 1997 Crufts. I took many more, but my
ASA 400 film was too slow for successful non-flash photos. As you see,
mostly I photographed the bitches, not only because the light was
better on that side of the hall but because I believe that bitches are
the future of the Breed.
For the record, I was so busy observing that I didn't concentrate properly
on taking good candid shots. I don't much care for posed winners photos
and made no attempt to take any.
The photos:
1. A nice fawn dog standing on the sidelines, not terribly happily. Fawn
are much rarer now than formerly.
2. A bitch class, possibly Open Bitch. The three bitches at the left
(placing first, second, and third) are whites or pieds, rare or at
least unusual in the Sixties. Interestingly, in one of the previously
classes (Mid Limit or Limit) the top three were all unmarked black-brindles.
3.Same class, different view.
4. Same class, different view.
5. The head of a nice red dog in the ring. This accidental shot shows the
slight upward tilt of the muzzle that I mentioned in a previous post.
6. A good-looking black-brindle dog, one of the finalists in (I believe)
the Limit Dog class. Strongly reminiscent of (Ch.) Rapparee Renegade as
a youngster in the 1966 Crufts Limit Dog class.
7. My favorite of all the photos: showing a white Stafford and his
Border Terrier buddy getting away from it all. Who's taking care of
whom?
8. Can you say, "Relaxed owner-handler," children? The
accidentally-by-photography beheaded person on the other end of the
leash connected to this white (pied) entry (finalist?) in the Open Dog
class displays a rather typically English nonchalant panache in the
ring, confident in his perfect perfect control over his Stafford who seems
quietly ready for all comers.
9. Head shot from above of another nice red dog which (if memory serves)
had won two Reserve CC's prior to Crufts. The V-shape of the head and
muzzle shows nicely in this photo.
