Page 47 - ShowSight Presents The Bullmastiff
P. 47
JUDGING THE BULLMASTIFF
Anyone who has spent any amount of time observ- ing the Bullmastiff will undoubtedly remark upon the inconsistency of type in the breed. This is not only evident when comparing dogs from one area of the country to another, but is also a fairly common occurrence at regional specialties and local weekend shows. This disparity is not due to the lack of attention or due diligence of Bullmastiff breeders, but rather, can be attributed to a fairly liberal breed standard as well the dif- ficulty of breeding “true” in a breed with a genetic makeup that includes the extremes of the nineteenth-century Bulldog and the Mastiff. Yet as Adele Pfenninger writes in the Bullmastiff Handbook, “Interpretation of the standard by each breeder accounts for the differences in each strain, but ultimately and ideally, all [Bullmastiffs] should look more alike than they look different.” Thus while judges unfamiliar with the breed may find variation in type to be somewhat dis- concerting, a recognition and understand- ing of the quintessential characteristics of Bullmastiff breed type will lead to sound, appropriate and intelligent assessments when judging the Bullmastiff.
It’s Hip to be Square
A cursory reading of the Bullmastiff standard reveals a number of terms or con- cepts repeated time and time again. The continued reference to a particular attri- bute is indicative of its importance to breed type. The most frequently mentioned con- cept in the Bullmastiff standard has to do with proportion. The standard alternatively refers to the Bullmastiff as “symmetrical,” “nearly square,” “compact,” “short” backed and “well balanced.” This suggests that an essential Bullmastiff characteristic is a nearly square appearance. This may come as
a shock to those who have spent any time with the breed as it is quite probable that the majority of Bullmastiffs encountered have been more rectangular than square. How- ever, it is important to keep in mind that it is not only size, but also proportion, that distinguish the Bullmastiff from the larger and longer mastiff. In profile and from all angles, the Bullmastiff should appear square. Thus when considering the Bull- mastiff, an important point to remember is that long is always wrong.
The overabundance of long-backed dogs in the ring is not due an inherent misun- derstanding of the standard on the part of Bullmastiff breeders, but rather, to the diffi- culty of breeding a short-backed dog that is balanced. Breeders compensate for a lack of balance front and rear by producing a long- coupled dog. Excessive length of body can mask a multitude of structural faults that affect how a dog covers the ground. Remem- ber that a Bullmastiff does not require a long back to move well; rather, it is balance - mod- erate rear angulation and complementary shoulder layback—that makes a good-mov- ing Bullmastiff. A square Bullmastiff that is structurally correct will move smoothly with power and drive making maximum use of its moderate angulation, just as the standard recommends.
The concept of squareness also applies when considering the Bullmastiff head. In the Bullmastiff ring, you will undoubt- edly find a variety of head types as the liberal Bullmastiff standard allows for a range of interpretation. However, it is important to remember that each indi- vidual element that comes together in the Bullmastiff headpiece should contribute to its square appearance. This not only applies to traits such as the broad, deep muzzle and the large skull with well-developed cheeks, which Bullmastiff breeders often refer to as a “cube on a cube,” but also to such char-
By Chris Lezotte
HappyLegs Bullmastiffs
acteristics as ear set, shape and size, the width of the underjaw and eye shape and placement. Rather than think of each of these attributes separately, base your assess- ment on the degree to which they contrib- ute to the nearly square appearance of the Bullmastiff head.
Only the Strong Survive
Another concept that appears with some regularity in the Bullmastiff standard is substance. The Bullmastiff is described as “powerfully built” and “showing great strength.” Its neck is “very muscular” and almost equal in circumference to the skull; its chest is referred to as “wide and deep,” with ribs well sprung and well set down between the forelegs; the loin is “wide and muscular;” the hindquarters “broad and muscular;” the forelegs are “well-boned;” the shoulders are defined as “muscular but not loaded.” And as the standard reads, oth- er things being equal, the “more substantial dog” is favored. These points of empha- sis provide a fairly vivid image of how the Bullmastiff should appear: strong, thick, sturdy, muscular, substantial and powerful. The determined focus on muscle and sub- stance convincingly removes any doubt as to the incorrectness of dogs that are weedy, rangy, tubey, or fine-boned. It also suggests that it is not enough for the Bullmastiff to be solid, but that substance should be an indication of muscle and bone rather than sheer mass attained by too many trips to the food bowl. Because the Bullmastiff has a short coat, there is rarely a need to run one’s hands over the dog to ascertain whether or not it is well-muscled; it should be visible for all to see. It is interesting to note that, other than a reference to weight range, there is no differentiation between dogs and bitches in the Bullmastiff stan- dard in reference to substance. Thus a bitch is a scaled down version of the dog;
