Photos by Kim Booth
I had not attended this Kentuckiana Cluster for a while but what with the large entries of dogs entered in Louisville, I thought it a good idea to return. These are four days of all-breeds shows, with specialties, I think, on Wednesday, as well as the dreaded (for me) nighttime specialties after the all-breeds.
I understand there is a move afoot to expand the all-breeds to five days, which requires special Board approval. Well, unless the clean-up situation improves tremendously, forget that idea. By Saturday and Sunday the smell in the grooming areas—to say nothing of the main show arena—was anything but pleasant. And I suppose with the mammoth 4,000 or so dogs in attendance, one might expect some sort of problem but certainly not to the extent that it existed. Nonetheless, the Kentucky Fair and Exposition Center can and has held larger entries, and from a convenience factor, most people find these sets of shows comfortable and workable. I don't know when grooming spaces began to be sold here too, and while some like the concept, I never can quite get used to it. Aside from the outside food areas,  which are always fun to go to, there are two or three new restaurants (for me, anyways) I went to that were very pleasant surprises. Ruth Chris has opened a steak house, there is Le Relais in the converted old Louisville airport terminal, which was top-notch too. How I never got there before, I do not know, whilst there is a new farmhouse-type place called L&N that was excellent also.
Oh yes, there were dog shows too! Coming off of two solid weeks of foreign dog showgoing, it's always good to get home. The overall quality of our dogs in America is certainly to my eye the best in the world! And I may add that I think the overall judging quality of our judges is also the best there is.
The first night, the Pug of UNC's Caroline Koch was awarded Best; the next night was the California Bloodhound; Saturday, David's Peke, and Sunday, the Red Engie shown by Laura King were the winners. An interesting and diverse group of dogs, all worthwhile in their own right. Interestingly, the groups were as strong as could be overall as well. It's always funny how people who attend dog shows regularly seem to conclude at the end of the show how strong the BIS line-ups are, notwithstanding how the quality in the classes may not be up to snuff on some days. I'm not saying that was the case here, as I thought the classes I watched were really strong here too, perhaps because of all the specialties and supported shows. And the reason I think our line-ups for Best are as good as they are is due to the quality of not only the dogs in America but because, basically, our group judges are above average too. In many countries—the U.K., for sure—some of their breed judges get so hung up on breed politics, they end up not always putting up the strongest dogs in their classes. That rarely happens at home (although in Kentucky one day, it certainly was the case in a particular breed), but that's the exception and not the rule. At our shows the cream always seem to rise to the top, and this Cluster was no exception.
 Take the Lead held a party on Friday which I understand was most successful, both socially and, more importantly, financially. I choose not to attend, although certainly DOG NEWS as a magazine contributed an unsolicited two-page spread, and I made a personal contribution as well. Additionally, the week before, an advert was run gratis in DOG NEWS announcing the event. Obviously we remain and continue to be strong supporters of Take the Lead, which is the most worthwhile of organizations.
I understand that some Board Members may be preparing to apply for more breeds under their comparatively new policy. In fact, so far only one has done so, which of course was Pat Scully for Rallye. This notwithstanding her vote against the change in policy. Why she went counter to her own vote perplexes me at best, and the others who may be thinking about it voted for the change, so at least to their own selves they are being true. I still think that the change in policy is not a good one so long as the Board has any say in the approval processes, but if they did want to change the policy they should have excluded sitting Board Members from taking advantage of the change. But that's me, not them.
 I understand there may have been some confusion about what I wrote in last week's Editorial with regard to the differences between attitudes in the U.K. and America. Those of you who contacted the Chairman of the Board in England claiming I was criticizing the U.K. system, certainly missed the point. Fortunately the entire Editorial was read by Mr. Irving, who I am told totally understood what I was saying. What's the expression—attempting to stir the pot?—or is that being too nice about it! •
|
