Dog shows are meant to celebrate excellence in our breeds and educate breeders on how their dogs measure up. Yet a surprising silence has fallen over the conformation ring: the once-common practice of judges providing written critiques of their placements is rapidly vanishing in the United States. This decline of judging critiques in U.S. dog shows is nowhere more evident than at breed specialty shows for Labrador Retrievers – including marquee events like the U.S. National Specialty and the famed Potomac Labrador Retriever Specialty. Exhibitors and breeders are asking: Where have all the judging critiques gone? And more importantly, what is this silence doing to trust in our sport?
In this thought-provoking overview, we’ll explore the rise and fall of judging critiques in the U.S., compare our situation to the robust critique traditions in Europe, and examine how the loss of feedback and transparency correlates with declining entries and growing distrust. We’ll also lay out a bold recommendation: bring back written (or recorded) critiques for the top four placements in each class at major specialty shows. By reinstating critiques, we can rebuild accountability, refocus on the breed standard, and renew exhibitors’ faith in the judging process.
A Historical Tradition Fades Away
Not so long ago, it was normal for judges at U.S. specialty shows to provide critiques of their class placements. Specialty clubs often invited breeder-judges (including international judges) who embraced the tradition of writing a short evaluation of the winners. This kind of feedback was invaluable. Exhibitors could go home not just with a ribbon, but with a better understanding of their dog’s strengths and faults.
However, over the past 5–10 years, judging critiques have virtually disappeared at U.S. shows. Few AKC conformation events today offer any formal critique to exhibitors. Even the Labrador Retriever Club of the Potomac – touted as “the largest single-breed specialty in the world” – no longer reliably publishes critiques for its classes, despite having done so in the past. The decline has been gradual but clear. Enthusiasts recall when the Potomac show routinely posted judges’ write-ups for each class (as recently as the mid-2010s), but today exhibitors are typically left in the dark about why one dog prevailed over another.
Eroding Trust: Favoritism and the Void of Accountability
Ask any seasoned exhibitor about today’s dog show climate, and you’ll hear common concerns: politics, favoritism and a lack of transparency. When judges provide no public rationale for their decisions, exhibitors can only speculate about why certain dogs won – and speculation tends toward the cynical. Many breeders now believe that who is handling a dog or who bred a dog can sway the outcome more than the dog itself. Without critiques tethering decisions to the breed standard, the door opens to suspicion that personal relationships are at play.
Long-time breeders are speaking out. Even some judges acknowledge the problem. As one AKC judge observed, the lack of communication in the ring breeds frustration and suspicions of “foul play.” He noted that if judges could let exhibitors know why a dog didn’t win, “we would not have such a high level of frustration in exhibitors and cries of foul play in judging.” [1]
Declining Entries: Have People Lost Faith in the System?
The decline of critiques parallels a worrying decline in show entries. According to AKC records, the 2023 Potomac show drew 534 Labrador entries (468 actually present), barely half of the entries seen a decade earlier. In 2008, Potomac had 896 Labs competing. The LRC National Specialty typically draws around 300 dogs or fewer.
Labradors aren’t alone. AKC show entries declined for eight straight years in the 2010s [2]. Surveys of dog fanciers suggest that “politics and cliques” are major turn-offs. In one analysis, exhibitors cited how disheartening it is to enter shows dominated by professional handlers and to feel “you can pick who will win before anyone even walks in the ring.” [3]
Across the Pond: Europe’s Commitment to Critiques
In many countries, every dog shown receives a critique. In the UK, judges at Championship shows must write a critique for at least the first two placements in each class [4]. On the European continent under FCI rules, judges write a critique and grade each dog before awarding placements. Exhibitors leave with a written report of the judge’s assessment.
Benefits of Judging Critiques
✨ Educational Value – Breeders gain direct insights to guide breeding decisions.
🔦 Transparency & Trust – Exhibitors understand why decisions were made.
🌟 Accountability & Judge Improvement – Judges must adhere to the standard with confidence.
📃 Validation of Quality – Documented assessments bolster breeding credentials.
Immediate Impacts of Reinstating Critiques
🤝 Reconnect Judges & Breeders – Open dialogue renews collaboration and respect.
⚡ Restore Accountability & Curb Favoritism – Decisions must stand on merit.
🐾 Refocus on the Breed Standard – Evaluations remain centered on the dog, not politics.
🖋️ Educate Exhibitors – Constructive feedback helps everyone improve.
📅 Documented Feedback for Every Major Win – Elevate the value of specialty wins.
The Path Forward
🔗 Make It Club Policy – Outline critique expectations in the premium list.
📄 Select Judges Who Embrace Critiques – Prioritize those with experience and enthusiasm.
🎧 Provide a Scribe or Recorder – Enable real-time documentation.
🔢 Keep Critiques Short & Structured – Consistent, concise insights.
⏱️ Allow Extra Time – Build flexibility into the show schedule.
📡 Publish & Share Widely – Maximize reach through web, email and print.
📢 Encourage Positive Engagement – Frame critiques as learning tools.
🏛️ Collaborate with AKC – Advocate for long-term support of critiques.
Conclusion
At Overlook Mountain Labradors, we urge our fellow breeders, clubs, and judges to embrace this push for transparency. Let’s break the silence and let the judges’ voices be heard – for the good of our dogs and the sport we love.
References
[1] Canine Chronicle. “The Art of the Critique – A Bold New Endeavor,” 2021.
[2] Breeding Better Dogs. Battaglia, C. “Four Factors Portend the Future,” 2018.
[3] PetMojo. Ramsey, H. “Why Are Dog Show Entries Declining?” 2024.
[4] Our Dogs UK. Kennel Club Critique Compliance Report, 2015.
Leave a Reply