Why people think that AKC Championed dogs are better than UKC Championed?

Question

So many people think that the AKC automatically means quality. If a dog has his/her AKC Ch. they assume that the dog must be quality simply because he/she earned the title.

Then you have the UKC that many people turn their noses down on. Many people think that any dog can earn a UKC Ch. and it has no meaning as far as quality of the dog goes.

Why do people think that an AKC Ch. is better than a UKC Ch.?

In the AKC most dogs are handled by professional handlers. Dogs that do not have exceptional conformation and cannot easily earn their UKC Ch. can be put with a well known AKC handler and earn their AKC Ch. Jimmy Moses (very well known AKC German Shepherd handler) could take almost any German Shepherd to earn his/her AKC Ch. It is common for dogs to be judged by their handlers and not their conformation in the AKC ring.

In the UKC dogs are not handled by professional handlers so they have to be judged on their conformation. Granted, people who have shown longer are obviously going to handle their dogs better than people who are just starting out. It is common for a UKC judge to ask a handler to redo a down and back so that they can see the dog move better if they did not think that the first time was good enough.

So.. why do people think that having an AKC Ch. is better than having a UKC Ch.? And what do you personally think?

Thanks in advance!

Answer 1

The rules in AKC are a little stricter and the competition is usually a little more. Also AKC shows, depending where you live are better attended thus having more dogs per class. On occassion one will see a dog put up in AKC simply becasue of who is on the other end of the leash, but this is not happening in the majority of cases. I owner handle and I am a novice handler. I also show a natural ear Dane. I've done very well with him and have placed over some very experienced handlers..even getting WD, BOS, BOB.



There is nothing wrong with UKC however it does usually take less time to get an UKC CH then it does AKC...AKC can't be gotten in a single weekend where UKC often times can be. I have no problem with UKC at all and have many Dane friends that show in both and have CH in both....also be aware that there are many judges that judge both AKC & UKC.



It seems that many people including the OP have a total misconception of both showing in AKC & UKC.

Answer 2

1) Why do people think that an AKC Ch. is better than a UKC Ch.?

Because at any AKC show (to win) you will have to beat a bunch more dogs than at a UKC show.



2) In the AKC most dogs are handled by professional handlers.



Untrue. It varies. 50-60% may be shown by handlers, at any given show, but if you watch very long, you will also see many non-professionals (owners or breeders) show their own dogs. My husband completely showed & finished our 1st Champion, and he had very little ring experience. In the long run, it can be cheaper to have a handler who often doesn't do anything else (for a living) but show dogs & can therefore finish the dog quickly, with their superior experience & confident manor.



3) Dogs that do not have exceptional conformation and cannot easily earn their UKC Ch. can be put with a well known AKC handler and earn their AKC Ch. Jimmy Moses (very well known AKC German Shepherd handler) could take almost any German Shepherd to earn his/her AKC Ch.



(This is your OPINION, but many handlers do NOT want to take a "piece of junk" into the ring, for any amount of money.) It doesn't enhance their reputation. Dogs who don't enjoy showing, or are fearful also can't be finished either, regardless of who's holding the lead. Dogs can be dismissed in AKC rings, or the ribbons with-held if the quality isn't here, or if the dog bites the judge, or attacks another dog, etc. Yes, I've seen ALL of the above at AKC shows.



4) It is common for dogs to be judged by their handlers and not their conformation in the AKC ring.



UNTRUE! (That sounds like souur grapes.) If everybody is a professional in the ring and it only matters who's at one end of the lead - (the dog isn't important at all) how does the judge decide which HANDLER to pick?



5) In the UKC, dogs are not handled by professional handlers so they have to be judged on their conformation. Granted,

Answer 3

I think people confuse the UKC with the CKC. (CONtinental not Canadian)



That said, some dogs that are accepted by the UKC are NOT accepted by the AKC, so they have to be shown//championed through the UKC.



The AKC is more well known, I think that's why some people look down on the UKC.

Answer 4

Well.. frankly... both of them are pretty worthless when it comes to CH titles on many breeds of dogs.



Show lined shepherds from EITHER registry are just a JOKE. None of them are REAL GSDs... I've yet to see a CH GSD that I would ever consider... so as far as why people prefer one over the other, I dunno... And as far as Jimmy Moses or any other GSD handler, if they're ALL crap, then it doesn't really matter which level of crap they are showing, right?



Although I will give UKC props, I've seen a FEW CH shepherds that aren't COMPLETELY horrible... a very small few, but hey, better then AKC







EDIT: For once, I completely and 100% agree with EVERYTHING King Les said

Answer 5

I show in both UKC and AKC and find both have their issues.

I do enjoy both and do not find 1 CH title to be better then the other.



I do like UKC for all the different work events they offer. They also just added lure coursing to their many events.

Answer 6

did you know that UKC will grant full registration to a limited AKC dog?



UKC is a little more lienient on granting registration to dogs than AKC is.. from my understanding, this is why UKC is generally frowned upon.



ADDED

Breeders use Limited Registration for a reason- the animal was meant to be spayed/neutered and used as a pet. UKC offers a "loophole" to the dishonest to get their dog registered elsewhere to be able to register any offspring their dog produces.



Its unfortunante they dont offer a limited registry (Im not talking about ILP- AKC also has a similar program)..

Answer 7

The UKC has less stringent requirements, which can be seen in the sheer number of clueless backyard breeders on craigslist trying to sell their "ukc registered" puppies with who knows what kind of genetic problems.



I personally don't ever plan to get into dog showing, so neither certification means anything to me. The only place I'd consider getting a dog from is a shelter or rescue.

Answer 8

I wish I could be as smooth and classy as Lester (King Les)....but I'm not patient enough to type that much.



As I've said many times before, the U.S. does not have a legitimate conformation organization to judge "Standards" for the German Shepherd Dog. To go romp in circles here is pointless. The dogs are sickening to look at. And every one of them is corrupt.



So, it doesn't make a difference which "Conformation" ring you earn your championship in. It's all BS until the Koermeister speaks.

Answer 9

Hey, thanks for asking this Question!



I still think UKC and IABCA/International championships are better than AKC cha,pionships earned on a bad dog with a well-known handler (David Williams, Jodie Keener, Brian Livingston ect...).



ADD: When "we" me and GSD asked this Q, we're talking about championships, not the registry...



Hey, don't TD me! I was talking to the asker on Facebook and this question came up. My Border Collie happens to be ranked #1 BC in UKC right now, but only has a 3 point major in AKC just coz I'm not a pro handler.

Answer 10

biased ive equated it to cult worship. thats why the registry is why they think the CH's are bad because they think the registry is easy. i do not agree.



now most people think its bad because of the incident with the APBT...however that was the fault of greedy STUPID breeders and they have tried to fix that even taking it to court.



despite what some think "the AKC is the only reputable registry" is a LIE their are older registries and clubs that have held to strict standards to keep their breeds alive.



it takes time to gain reputability one mistake and people hate you for life as you can see. and the dogs and owners that have worked hard for Ch suffer for it. stupid yes if the dog meets the standards and betters the breed no one should have problems with it.



we could call the AKC a BAD registry because of a couple reasons.



1. as much as i love the american akita it is a mixture of dozens of different dogs that happened during and around the war when american soldiers tried to save the breed when it returned home they didnt say it was a mutt they called it "Japanese Akita" the biggest lie i have ever heard, different body, shape, colors and temperaments and height and weight i even see a difference in the tail and head shapes ears and eyes. yes for the longest we have claimed this breed as the TRUE japanese Akita in the AKC. other countries have indeed acknowledged it as a breed however the name is "Greater Japanese Dog" because the rise of popularity for it in japan. hachiko was a greater japanese dog.



2. looked at some of the breeds that have gained popularity because the AKC airs their dog shows?

rare breeds suffer rise in popularity and bad breeding practices all because of that. as the australian shepherd club was heard to say "they ***** the Aussie". imagine what they say for the rotts and GSD's? over emphasized.



the rott had relatively few hip and other health problems before they were made popular , everyone wanted one and BYB's met the demand cheaply.



3. it is obviously easy to skirt around ANY clubs rules, does the AKC insist of canine paternirty tests for dogs? no you could easily buy from a woman with 2 akc dogs and one ConKC dog and find out later the akc dog WASNT the father. or heck the real father doesnt even have to be registered just has to meet something of the standard for a BYB who wants to make money.



ive seen people convinced that they had a purebred AKC rott, when apparently to keep the coloring the BYB bred her female to a doberman. (head shape was wrong and APPARENTLY they had a rare red rott whose head was shaped like a- you guessed it- DOBERMAN!) theirs an AKC purebred...YEAH RIGHT it was registered AKC however



4. what we could call ANY registry out for is their inability to monitor the behind the scenes during the show. over the last couple years we have seen anitfreeze in water, dogs released from pens by PETA, in my cousins case when he was helping a friend with her dog for the first time in the ring her opponents rubbed superglue into the dogs hair. that kind of thing needs to be monitored, dying dogs to hide certain markings .



anyone registry and club could be persecuted.



however in 4 years i have every intention of showing my next A. akita and dragging a friend along to make sure no one touches my dogs AT ALL. UKC most likely ive had bad experiences with AKC breeders and after seeing what happened to that dog and some others involving itching powder....not sure i want to be their

Answer 11

The idea of breeding is to maintain or improve a dogs health and quality. When you mix breeds it can cause genetic defects such as hip dysplasia, cataracts, and skin conditions. The UKC does not have a strong emphasis on responsible breeding. Classifying a mixed breed and declaring it purebred does not constitute reputable breeding.

Answer 12

An international champion is a CH in more than one country. The most common around here are Canadian/American champs.

Answer 13

The question is naive - more to the point is that Yanks should get their own-opinion-worshipping rebellious acts together and have JUST ONE Registry, ONE set of requirements for each kind of title, ONE set of qualifications for each type of training activity, etc. (And NO WAY should existing champions be removed from the competition for championship points!)



I have not the SLIGHTEST interest in what the ARBA, Con.KC, IKC, IRBA, UKC, Uncle Tom Cobley & All do & offer. That's for one very simple basic reason:

Those organisations count for NOTHING, their codes & "papers" etc are worthless - each has recognition from NO organisation except itself.



Try exporting a pooch to a breeder or show-competitor anywhere outside the USofA without first getting it an AKC Registration number and see how far you get! Try getting UKC-etc titles and qualifications gained by an AKC-regd pooch recognised by the KC of whichever country you are wanting to export to.



It's got nothing to do with "better" or "quality" - in the last 30+ years I don't normally recognise the AKC's "Champion GSDs" as actually even being GSDs, let alone QUALITY GSDs! A friend in SC with about 5 pet GSDs decided to have a look at a dog show about 5 years ago, so chose one of those big 3-day affairs - and was SHOCKED to see about a third of most classes piddling themselves in the ring as soon as the judge approached, and surprised to see that almost every GSD class was won by whatever a particular tall N=gro handled. At GSD shows in my own country I rarely see more than a couple of males that fit my strict "reading" of the International Standard of the GSD: ( http://www.fci.be/uploaded_files/166A1991_en.doc ), but at least I cannot recollect ever seeing one piddle with fright - not even in my all-breeds daze before 1976.



As for claims that pro-handlers don't handle in UKC rings - oh really? In such a corrupt, venal system as the USofA has developed? So the UKC regulates that every exhibit must be handled by its registered owner, does it? - and has secret marshals watching each class & recording who handles what?

Pro handlers are not allowed in my country - but certain handlers are kept VERY busy at shows. Some of our top breeders cannot gait a GSD because they have had, or still need, hip or knee replacements or heart bypasses. A few have a son/daughter or grandson they talk into handling for them, but most "persuade" one of the fit teens or 20s accompanying other breeders to handle for them.



There is ONE canine organisation that counts in the world - the FCI (see http://www.fci.be/nomenclature.aspx ). Sadly for Brits, Canucks & Yanks, THEIR official KCs are too arrogant to actually belong to the FCI (horrors - they MIGHT get democratically outvoted by the rest of the world!) Use that nomenclature link to see what the Standard used for your breed by the rest of world looks like, folks. If your breed wasn't developed in Britain, Canada or the USofA you are sure to be surprised at just how much "tougher" (LOTS of DQs!) and more precise it is than what you (& the judges you have been paying for) have been ignoring at home! If your breed fits into any definition of a "working breed", you might also be unpleasantly surprised to discover that in FCI nations your pooch CANNOT become a champion without first passing a courage-&-aptitude test!



[Gilb]: Grow up. Mongrels are not capable of competently performing the specialist tasks that actual; functional breeds were developed for (before show-is-all and pet-is-all people set about ruining those breeds....)

Les P, owner of GSD_Friendly: http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/GSD_Friendly

"In GSDs" as of 1967

Answer 14

I handle in both AKC and UKC.



I prefer AKC shows, though.

Answer 15

IDK...maybe something to do with the fact that I can register my left slipper or a hamster with the UKC.

Answer 16

I think people shouldn't care so much about owning a championship purebred dog and start caring about the millions of strays that need homes and are just as beautiful and awesome as any purebred dog in any country. :)