VA sizes in cm - Page 1

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by bobby999 on 12 March 2008 - 18:03

Hi everyone, just wondering what are the actual sizes of open VA males and females thanks bobby

by kmaot on 12 March 2008 - 18:03

this should be interesting.


Videx

by Videx on 12 March 2008 - 19:03

You can be absolutely certain that most VA males are over 65 cms. and most VA females are over 60 cms.

most years if not every year,  there have been VA males and even Siegers that are much close to 70 cms than 65 cms.

Most years if not every year VA females are also nearer 65 than 60 cms.

We need the WUSV meeting in September, following the 2008 Sieger Show, to pass the following motions;  WUSV Clubs around the World should  adopt these motions and send them to the SV for inclusion on the WUSV AGENDA.

1) raise the breed standard  height to withers by 1cm - with immediate effect.

2) raise the allowance above the breed standard height to 2cms for Korklasse 2 grading - with immediate effect

3) Amend the Korung rules to allow an appeal or challeng to a Kormasters decision on the height to withers of any dog as written in its Korung, A fee of 100 Euros to accompany any appeal or challenge, payable to the SV. In the event that an appeal is successful, the 100 Euros is refunded. TO BE INTRODUCED IN 4 OR 5 YEARS.

 


by Speaknow on 15 March 2008 - 07:03

Now, why was my post following removed – it obeys all the Rules as far as I can tell! Your suggestions seem strangely at odds with Standard’s ideal of a medium-sized working dog, one fit for a variety of tasks; particularly since raising height, all things being equal, automatically equates to more weight, with extra demands placed on joints/ligaments etc, and an inherently greater vulnerability to impact damage. And if limits were raised now how easy to do so again in another five or ten years - isn’t it far better to enforce current dimensions more rigorously? “Most years if not every year, there have been VA males and even Siegers that are much close to 70 cms than 65 cms.” If this is the case why stop at adding one measly centimeter: let’s go the whole hog and have the maximum for males at 70 cm straight off! On the other hand, what if we instead expressly stipulated that a male at say 62¿ cm, again all other things being equal, ought to be given preference over one at 65.

Videx

by Videx on 15 March 2008 - 12:03

My suggestion is NOT at odds with the reality of the Sieger Show for the past umpteen years.

If "CONNECTED" an owner can get away with 68+ and get VA grade, and even Sieger.

Similarly for females, 63+ and get VA grade, and even Siegerin.

the following RULE would change that:

3) Amend the Korung rules to allow an appeal or challeng to a Kormasters decision on the height to withers of any dog as written in its Korung, A fee of 100 Euros to accompany any appeal or challenge, payable to the SV. In the event that an appeal is successful, the 100 Euros is refunded. TO BE INTRODUCED IN 4 OR 5 YEARS. and if a Kormeister is found to regularly or routinely flout the accurate measuring of height to wither, then he is appropriately diciplined by the SV.

The above RULE is vital in order to effectively & fairly control our breed standard height to withers, and to significantly reduce "NO CONNECTION = NO CHANCE" which is prevalent in Germany, and which causes huge disillusionment leading to many leaving the breed, and not renewing their SV membership.

I cannot suggest changes for ALL aspects of our breed, to satisfy EVERYONE, but identifying KEY issues and tackling them make PROGRESS.

Working Dogs can maintain their optimum size for their function, but lets NOT pretend that Show/conformation Dogs are the same or look the same.

 

 


by Speaknow on 16 March 2008 - 08:03

Videx states: “My suggestion is NOT at odds with the reality of the Sieger Show for the past umpteen years. If "CONNECTED" an owner can get away with 68+ and get VA grade, and even Sieger.” I’m sure there’s some truth in what you say, but where’s the hard evidence? Can you positively identify one VA at a 68+ height? The problem of oversized dogs is also one strenuously acknowledged now for years; and with German breeders in particular striving to reduce height even as we speak, even to the extent of offloading otherwise excellent larger animals. Must we now actively work to in part reverse this healthy trend by taking the retrograde step of raising the limit? You urge a one centimeter increase but as I understand it, a dog is already allowed to be over size within that figure; meaning in practical terms, should it be adopted, a limit of 67 centimeters. “Amend the Korung rules to allow an appeal or challeng to a Kormasters decision on the height to withers of any dog as written in its Korung, A fee of 100 Euros to accompany any appeal or challenge, payable to the SV. In the event that an appeal is successful, the 100 Euros is refunded. TO BE INTRODUCED IN 4 OR 5 YEARS. and if a Kormeister is found to regularly or routinely flout the accurate measuring of height to wither, then he is appropriately diciplined by the SV. The above RULE is vital in order to effectively & fairly control our breed standard height to withers, and to significantly reduce "NO CONNECTION = NO CHANCE" which is prevalent in Germany, and which causes huge disillusionment leading to many leaving the breed, and not renewing their SV membership.” On various counts I think your recommendation would result in an administrative nightmare! Not only is the employ of surveyors delegated to regional jurisdictions, but related comprehensively detailed decision-making process is by wont also of a highly subjective nature (as for initial studbook entry). I’m thinking here of dog’s general temperament and behavior fitness, gun sureness included, dental correctness, and compliance more broadly, including anatomically, to a very unspecific Standard to begin with. And then, pursuing your suggested mode to logical conclusion, why restrict the right of challenge solely to the height issue? Taking into account financial effects, I doubt there’d ever be an end to it! One way or the other, as similarly rife for many other arenas’ administrative procedures, one’s given by practical necessity scant choice but to rely on one individual’s integrity and expert judgement. Then, selling pups or stud services at a good price etc entails SV membership and obliging relevant rules but, otherwise, is strictly a matter of personal choice. I think cited SV “disillusionment” stems from myriad factional and other discontents, and as mostly unrelated to any height issue.

VonIsengard

by VonIsengard on 16 March 2008 - 13:03

Speaknow, the thread is about height so Videx addressed that, I seriously doubt those few points is all that will be discussed in the meeting.

I am curious about the raising of the height standard as well, and personally would be disappointed to see an increase in the standard size come to pass.

However, someone has to put a stop to "creative measuring" and I applaud anyone who tries. Speaknow, I agree with what you said about there being other "discontents" aside from incorrect height, but they have to start somewhere, do they not?


by Schaeferhund on 17 March 2008 - 07:03

Speaknow   Very well put.


ATARTHS

by ATARTHS on 17 March 2008 - 07:03

I agree with Videx suggestions. Simply because in a ring it is the bigger dog that catches the eye of ANY judge. Secondly it is too late now to enforce the correct height standard. And I say too late because a lot of oversized dogs have already won top placements and on the other hand are now vulnerable to judging discretion.I.e. a Vorzuglich rated dog that has Kkl 1 for life and signed by the vice president of the S.V. has been kicked out the arena because the judge(top S.V. judje,also judged in 2007 siegershow) thought she was too tall. All these because the opposition treated the judge with due "respect" the night before the show. So yes Videx is absolutely correct. If champion Ice had his Korung signed for life by the president of the S.V. he could be very well be likely to be thrown out by some other judge trying to enforce the correct height rule. And my question is: Do we give them judges mor weapons to do their dirty tricks? If they have a measure in their hands everytime they go judging is like they have the absolute authority to do as they please, and they would be throwing all Kkl certificates in the bin.


by Speaknow on 17 March 2008 - 09:03

Hi KC, Greatly appreciated reading some of your other very worthwhile posts today. But please don’t misunderstand, I think the issue of oversize is a crucial one and grateful that Videx saw fit to raise it. (Thus my irritation at seeing my first response deleted.) And of course he’s not far off the mark where recent years’ oversized VA’s are concerned. Still, this issue has received prominence for some years, as also highlighted by successive SV Presidents, and he’s thus not exactly the first to mention it. In fact, whenever I need to select a stud now the first question, and it must be the same for many others, relates to its size. Know exactly what you mean by “creative measuring”, and also how some folk are rather expert at setting up a dog just so in order to bring down its real height. How you’d go about enforcing more rigid protocol here is something else again though! Of course raising official height as suggested by Videx still wouldn’t do away with this ‘subjective’ measuring. After re-visiting survey procedural detail – particularly as to how different aspects/steps are meant to dovetail with one another (with final entry into annual official record) – I simply can’t see the option of challenge as being all that practicable, or as even that desirable for that matter Part of the reason for the size problem, as I see it anyway, is that present show-dog is almost wholly derived from Quando, Cello, Palme and Odin combinations – with the first three all oversize. Continued linebreeding into this same genetic mix (almost always with animals similarly derived) can only prolongs or exacerbates the problem. It gets rather off track but elsewhere you said: “What about all the "creative measuring" done during breed surveys and "bought titles"? Are those dogs worthy because they have that blue piece of paper? Are they more worthy than an outstanding police dog who has no title?” I couldn’t agree more. You also say: “However, crossing show/work lines in those breeds seems to produce a much more consistently balanced dog, yet in the GSD, many of those crosses go haywire. I'd love someone with a good understanding of genetics start a thread on why.” Seeing this problem preoccupies me as well, I wish I knew the answer, KC. Then, Mutz for instance, initially went well with Quanto, but its male line didn’t blend well with the subsequent show-lines. If I had to guess I’d say that the four above-mentioned dogs and a couple of others (all very narrowly inter-related to begin with of course) not only generated uniformity in style but, as you’d expect, also in genetic make-up. Try to mix that now to a working-line dog whose genetics hails separate from well prior to Quanto and, I suppose, you’d expect a significant degree of unpredictability regarding offspring’s style/model. You’re certainly right when you say that the large dog impress judges the most, ATARTHS. Can’t agree with your remainder though – doesn’t it simply redress the situation to how it ought to have been in the first place? Level the playing field, so to speak, equally for all the exhibitors – especially since the oversized dog owner would have known all along that his animal in fact didn’t comply to the Standard.





 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top