MChis, very interesting post! I'm so glad to see this mentioned here. It's something I have thought about too. It's funny what we see as the "standard" now is not what I have researched the breed to be from the beginning. I have looked into chi's history and seen many old pics of Chis going way back and they all have deer heads and so forth, they're larger in size (although still small) etc. I have found articles stating these changes in the breed and so forth. The breed really has changed and just because someone thought different features were more aesthetically appealing, I find it a bit funny as well. Not meaning to stir up controversy or debate either, but very interesting post, I'm glad to see this mentioned.

__________________

"Until one has loved an animal, a part of one's soul remains unawakened." ~ Anatole France

Back in the 50's, here's an example of what was winning...

http://www.hurdschihuahuas.com/Hurds_Herd/1950s.html

The toplines don't look as level, muzzles were longer, heads less apple shaped, bodies longer on the dogs, few long coats. Would these dogs still finish if they were shown today? I'd guess it would be a bit tougher for them! I also think people would frown on breeding them in that case, ranking them as "pets" rather than breed quality.

Today, here's what's winning:

http://www.hurdschihuahuas.com/Hurds_Herd/2000s.html

Typier heads, rounded and domed more. More level top lines. Many more LC dogs. Dogs appear to be somewhat smaller than those from 50 years prior when referenced to the people at least from what I can tell =)

I realize that's just one guy's dogs/show history, but its a good example of what's changed.

This is all just my opinion, not meaning to step on any toes...its just things I've noticed.

__________________

Thank you Jan & Chico!!

From those links it appears that the Chi was still basically the same look. Maybe just a tad longer muzzle on some, but nothing that stands out. Some not as level on the topline, but again, nothing major. The only thing I notice is that the current pics, some look bigger than 6 lbs.

I have no clue if there is any truth to this, but from what I was told they do not weigh the dogs in show. They just go by “looks.” If one “appears” to be bigger than 6 lbs., they can weigh them at their preference.

__________________

I've heard that they don't weigh either unless they want to...the differences aren't major but IMO they are there, and in just 50 years. It's also just one guy's kennel, I haven't found any other breeders that show history like that. Would definitely be interesting to see. I think more pronounced stops are appreciated today than they were before...

__________________

Thank you Jan & Chico!!

That's interesting! I would have expected they weighed them. You know, I swear some of the ones at the last show looked bigger than 6 pounds to me too. They probably weren't though, but they sure looked it.

__________________

"Until one has loved an animal, a part of one's soul remains unawakened." ~ Anatole France

We have seen some pics here on the board from years ago that showed Chi's that looked very dear headed, and quite big compared to the standard today. They weren't show Chi's, but means that look was there many many years ago. I don't know enough about breeding or showing to really comment on much other than what I see. I do have a friend that has been showing Chi's for years. And her family prior to her. I've asked her many many questions, but didn't focus much on the breeding and showing part since that isn't my interest. But it was very interesting to hear some of her stories.

Nope, not from what I hear. The ones you saw probably were bigger. I just can't see how a Chi that is clearly larger than what we know to be 6 lbs. being 6 lbs. I have heard this and that about shape, muscle, yada, yada. I know shape has some to do with it, but I would lay money on the scale showing some of them heavier than 6 lbs. Go look at some of the Westminster pics. Geeez, some of those Chi's are bigger than standard!

I think as far as the look goes, they don't have to be "perfect" to win. I have seen some Champions that do not look any more to standard than my pets.

__________________

There's gonna be something off in every dog, even finished Champions. The perfect dog has yet to be bred. It should be the goal of every breeding...improvement upon what the parents are. Different breeders have different sticking points. Some will tolerate a not so great topline but not a terrier front. Some are OK with a low tail set if the rear angulation is dead on. A longer body is permissable in a bitch but not a dog but if the dog is otherwise wonderful, they may be shown anyway. Etc. Etc. That's no different now than it was in the 50's. Our bodies are more compact but still slightly off square. If you have a dog with a longer body, it's be default gonna have longer legs...but they shouldn't be leggy. The overall dog should be in proportion, with no one thing sticking out more noticably than another. I think our heads have evolved into a rounder more pleasing look. Ears have gotten smaller and I'm trying hard to get larger ears back into my breeding program. I think we went through a time that extremely short muzzles were in favor but that lead to bite issues so we've move back to a more moderate length. I would love to see the ideal muzzle length be about 1/2 the width of the head to allow for better dentition. I'm working on it, but it's slow going. I think we'll see more muzzle from now on but, pray God, it's never gonna be long and snipey. We certainly don't want a Manchester Terrier head. One definately must have a good stop and preferrably some width between the eye set.

That said, there are dogs out there that definately look like pets who have finished or are well on their way. It's the judge's interpretation of the Standard, and what's in the ring on a given day. It's sad to say that sometimes they have to pick the best of a bad group. It's few and far between that a Judge will withhold points for lack of merit. I've seen it happen, but not often. Judge's are paid by entry fees and if the entries don't come, they don't get hired. Not everyone is as joyful about maintaining the integrity of the breed as some of us are and entries would fall for judges that did this...or called for the scales. Scales are available at every show but they are only used if an exhibitor calls for them on a competitor or a judge feels that a dog may be over the limit. Again, it doesn't happen often. Honestly, the times I've seen it, the dog's weighed in, with the exception of one, and it was 6 pounds 1 ounce. Many dogs can fool you visually about weight. I don't like to push the limit for just this reason. I prefer a good 5 pounds myself. However, generally, if a judge suspects the dog is over they just don't put the dog up versus calling for the scales and putting the entire judging program behind schedule. The Superintendent's are pretty anal about how much time is allotted per dog.

I think, over all, our breed has maintained. We've got way more long coats now than smooths, simply because long coats were better than the smooths for so long. To this day, it's hard to find a well put together smooth coat. We are working very hard to bring them back up to the same degree of structure soundness what we have in longs but it's been a hard process. That and the fact that long coats tend to take over due to the interbreeding we've done. I'm not sure that we have many pure smooth coat lines anymore so most smooths carry the long gene. I know I breed for smooths and end up with longs all the time...from two smooth parents. Frustrating. Anyway, consistency is the key and while we have refined the Chihuahua, I'd say that in general they have the same appearence as they did in the beginning. Unlike some breeds.

__________________

I have thought about breeding, then I got my head on striaght! lol