Moonshine Stud
Quality home-bred rabbits bred true to type
Judging
On opening the Fur & Feather these days it is becoming common practice to see very little and sometimes NOTHING at all submitted by the judges on what they thought about the exhibits shown under them on the show day. We as breeders and exhibitors go to shows to have an expert eye cast over our stock and if we are lucky enough to win, we really would like to know what that expert eye thought. More and more judges are keeping their comments to a bare minimum or not writing anything at all and this does not help the breeder/exhibitor when he is looking for an outside opinion on his stock. The qualified and time served stockman will know what his own stock is like and how it compares to the standard, but to the newer breeder/exhibitors this is not always the case and the opinions of the judge would really have helped guide this persons breeding program and set his stud hopefully on the right track to breeding his next winner. I have tried to look at this from both angles…… could it be that F&F just don’t have enough space to print all the critiques and therefore edit them or do the judges know this will happen and ‘edit’ them before sending them off? Or is it because judges are just not able to write a fully detailed critique that gives the reader a full picture of where their rabbits gain and lose points?
Too many times we see ‘Wins coat’, ‘Good front’, ‘Fails ears’, Lacks type’….. What does this terminology mean?? I am not so bothered about the good attributes commented on in the critique but am quite concerned when we see comments informing us there is something wrong with the rabbit, yet not giving us and explanation as to ‘WHAT EXACTLY?’ Many of today’s judging critiques leave the reader very confused. For the purpose of this article I shall use to demonstrate my point, the Miniature Lop (as it is my main breed) and its standard.
When writing a detailed critique you should start at the front of the animal. This is the first thing you see when judging the rabbit and it makes sense to start here. Now then! ‘Fails Head’…. What does this mean? The head has many different properties. Does the judge mean it is not so well off for width of skull, depth between the eyes or has a bad profile – or top skull? With that comment we are left not knowing what part of the skull he was failing it on, or indeed failing it on all properties. By adding only one word such as ‘width’ we immediately can see where the judge has looked at to come up with his conclusion. One word may not seem much, but it makes a huge difference when someone is trying to interpret a critique. ‘Fails ears’…. Yet again we are left not knowing why it failed ears. Was it because they were held incorrectly (the normal reason for this comment) or was there another reason it failed? Ears are to be broad and thick, well furred and rounded at the ends and carried close to the cheeks to form a horse-shoe like outline when viewed from the front. With this in mind, lets look at that observation again. ‘Fails ears’ As a beginner in this breed and having read the standard I would now be thinking my rabbit had very badly shaped, furred and carried ears…. With the introduction into the critique of just one adjective such as ‘carriage’ or ‘shape’ the reader can see where the judge has failed this rabbit and the breeder/exhibitor knows where to place more emphasis on at home in the breeding pen.
Moving on to the body of the rabbit or the ‘Type’. Here there are many properties to be looked over. On first assessing the animal the judge should be looking for the shape of the rabbit, how balanced is its body to its head? Is it of correct body length and width? Does it have the correct length of leg at the front and the right amount of bone thickness to ‘balance’ everything out? All of these points are important parts of the animal and are accounted for in the standard. Why then do we see extreme comments such as ‘Wins body’ or ‘Lacks shoulder’? Both these comments to an experienced fancier will mean something on their own, but to someone who is relatively new to this game, they mean nothing, especially the ‘lacks shoulder’ comment. Why does this animal lack shoulder? More often than not the reason behind a rabbit lacking shoulder is because it is too long in the front leg or lacks width and strength of bone….all of which, had they been written, would have given the exhibitor a good idea of the failings of the animal, and a goal to set himself to improve in the shed at home. You need to understand how certain faults have an effect on other attributes of the rabbits construction and how so many times one good point or failing comes hand in hand with something else on the animal being good or bad.
So onto the coat….as I am using the Miniature Lop as my example breed for this article we shall keep with continuity and asses this ‘imaginary’ rabbits coat. We have 20 points covering the rabbits body, which is 1/5 of the overall points allocated to this breed With such a big emphasis placed on coat, why do we see so many comments like ‘wins coat’ or ‘fair jacket’? The coat has a clear outline in the standard as to what it should be. Dense and of good length, roll back with an abundance of guard hairs. There are four properties alone mentioned here and yet all seem to be replaced when judging with the words ‘good, fails, fair…..COAT’ Did it lack density (thickness), texture (the guard hairs) or did it win on length of coat? Was it because the coat lacked movement (dead) and did not roll correctly? These one word comments really are not good enough when we are assessing 20% of the rabbit in one go.
The final attributes to asses are colour, the distribution of that colour whether it be a solid exhibit or a patterned exhibit and the condition the animal has been shown in. Now condition is only allocated 5 points but covers an awful lot in my book. Firmness of muscling over the body, health of the animal AND the presentation of the exhibit (how clean it is). Colour and pattern are given a further 15 points, of which these should be distributed between evenness of colour on top, base colour or under colour and the distribution of markings on patterned exhibits. Depth of colour needs assessing too. How does this colour conform to the breed from which it is taken or how good does this colour appear against the written colour standard? We all will have our own interpretation of what a ‘good’ example of colour is, likewise of what a good ‘balanced’ rabbit looks like against its written standard. So why do we as judges have trouble in expressing what we mean? ‘Fails colour!’ WHY? WHERE? Does the judge mean depth of colour, evenness over body… is the rabbit just a little rusty or needing a moult to regain its already good colour? We as exhibitors need to know, especially if this hobby is new to us and we need to gain knowledge of how to breed and turn out a good exhibit.
Once or twice in this article I have used the word ‘balance’ and I feel that this is the most important view when judging a rabbit. It must be balanced…. If it isn’t, then there is something out of place. If there’s something out of place this would indicate that it is incorrect and has major faults. A trained and experienced eye should be able to see this and a more inexperienced eye will miss it. Or will they? They may be able to see the balance is not there, but are asking themselves the question ‘Why does my rabbit appear unbalanced?’ A correct and detailed critique should give the discerning breeder/exhibitor the knowledge and information they require. Too many judges are out to win popularity contests when judging and don’t want to write the bad points about and animal, only its good ones. Nine times out of ten we know the good points as we are blinded by them, it’s the bad points we need showing and we should have them explained to us by the judge in his critique. You may not think it but the judging trends over the years have been a major reason for the change in some breeds and in some cases the change in their standards too. The Dwarf Lop when originally imported into this country in the late 60’s and early 70’s was a 4lb rabbit. Today’s breed is almost unrecognisable from that of the days of its introduction to this country as it is now a 5lb4oz rabbit. This is because the judges set a ‘trend’ of putting up the bigger exhibits (however incorrect) because THEY thought they looked better…. The judging of the day influenced what was being bred and hence 35 years later we have a rabbit which has increased in size by over 1lb4oz…..over 25% its original standard! So judges, please have a thought for the exhibitor who’s rabbits you are judging. We don’t know what your thinking! Only when you write your critique will we find out and in most cases, we as exhibitors are still left WONDERING………..
Phil Batey
Other Tips
