Mike Gilbert put up John's champion, and I sent it to BYC as i know that Walt Leonard, the APA Standards President hangs out there and wanted his comment...I am resposting it here in full.
<quote>
Well since there is only one noteworthy black Ameraucana. The one that won Best of Show at the APA National meet. I have to say that there is no comparison between the two birds. This bird has no chest...which is supposed to be prominent. In addition the wing set is incorrect.....too low. The back is supposed to SLIGHTLY elevated at the shoulders. The APA Standard says nothing about it sloping to the rear. Someone needs to read the Standard and look at the Standard illustrations.</quote>
Brownie,
You can tell Walt Leonard maybe he should talk to the one who helped write the Standard to find out what it means. I also approved the Standard illustrations before they were published. They are not very good at all, but we were under a deadline at the time and the artist could not come up with anything better. The bird on the cover of the APA Yearbook is way too level, has way too high of a tail, and even has purple barring in the tailfeathers. It's ridiculous a panel of judges would pick a bird like that to be top large fowl of any show. This is why a lot of us are not much interested in showing any more, and especially under certain judges. I'll take John's bird any day of the week over the other one. You can quote me on that. John would be the first to say his bird is far from perfect - he sold it at the show. But the wings of both birds in the photos are in the exact same position. The other one's tail is way higher than John's, and the slope of the back on John's bird is just exactly the way the Standard was intended. Further, you can't judge a bird's chest based on one photograph. You would have to handle the bird, and observe it from the front as well as side views.
That is exactly why I would never enter an online poultry show. Pictures never show how a bird really looks. I thought John bird looked a lot better in person. The picture did not do it justice in my opinion. Funny how one judges opinion over another's can very. Proving that it's up to what you the judge prefers at any given show. I for one still have my opinions on what makes a nice Ameraucana and that's what I will continue to breed for 😃
Russ, that is good advice for anyone. Keep on breeding for what you believe to be right, regardless of any one judge's opinion. When you start seeing a trend over several years of time and a good number of shows, then it is time to pay closer attention.
Frankly, as a beginner, I found the whole thing rather dispiriting whether it is virtual or real.
Brownie
NePA
Quote from: Russ Blair on October 31, 2015, 07:29:11 PM
That is exactly why I would never enter an online poultry show. Pictures never show how a bird really looks. I thought John bird looked a lot better in person. The picture did not do it justice in my opinion. Funny how one judges opinion over another's can very. Proving that it's up to what you the judge prefers at any given show. I for one still have my opinions on what makes a nice Ameraucana and that's what I will continue to breed for 😃
Online poultry shows is just meant for fun. I've entered some birds on one. Its just for kicks, anyone who takes it seriously is clearly a novice. The one on Facebook has brought attention to the Ameraucana breed, to me thats a positive. Last show Ameraucanas was the 2nd most entered breed.
Quote from: Russ Blair on October 31, 2015, 07:29:11 PM
...Pictures never show how a bird really looks...😃
Some birds pose better than others and it has always been a battle trying to get
good photos of each winning bird at our National Meets. When the Poultry Press takes photos of winning birds they generally put them in a special box designed for that purpose.
I'm not knocking online judging of photos for those that are interested, but it does seem logical that birds that like to pose and exhibitors with better camera skills have an edge.
I have only seen a photo of so or the bird Leonard is referring to that won at the at APA National Meet last year. He looked very nice and think the judges were struck by his "exotic" look, due to recent crossbreeding of that line.
Mike wrote the Ameraucana Standard with some help. In the descriptions the words "medium" or "moderate" are used several times for males and again for females. I created the LF black Ameraucanas and even though I don't have any perfect ones...I don't know of any better.
The Champion AOSB cockerel that I had was sold to Neil & Donna, but I still have 3 of his brothers to breed from and they are similar to that winning bird. Here are a few photos of a couple I have. Some poses show more of a "prominent" breast, more and less slope of the back, different tail angles and whatever. Some things that can't be disputed are things like the length of the tails are not too long, they have correct eye color and great pea combs.
They look good to me John, none are perfect. Every Bird I have Bred or even seen at a show had some flaw. If they all hatched out perfect there wouldn't be much fun in it. I don't have nothing against the online shows as well. It's just something I do not have the patience for (chicken pictures that is). It's definitely easier with a Bird, one has been conditioning for show. Unless I am doing something wrong? But standing in there there best pose it crucial to getting the second look from the judge 😉
Once you get past what birds are the best in a show according to the Standard, other things do come into play as they are judged. Between two identical birds the better groomed one will stand out, just as the friendlier, calmer one will.
Personality matters. Our club member, Mary Lou Phelps, had a bantam wheaten hen, named "Sweetie" that was tame as any pet and won Champion Ameraucana Over-All at least twice. Mike had a bantam buff male that would jump out of his pen and onto Mike's hand when the door was opened. Walter Malcolm's bantam silver hen, Coral, is as close to him as a boy and his dog.
Because black is easier to get the color right with, it is the color that will usually win BB and go on to Champion Row.
So those that are most interested in winning try to put all the above into one neat package.
Ah, the old days! Mary Lou actually won BB three times at national meets on that little wheaten hen. Of course hens stay in condition much longer when they don't lay eggs any more.
John, that bottom black rooster has just too much bottom fluff for my taste. Makes his legs look way too short. He does have a beautiful back and tail - topline. I realize it is only a photo - maybe he was squatting a bit? Or maybe it's a bad camera angle? The others look real nice. The one on the left in the top photo has the proper main sickle feathers extending past the main tail.
Quote from: Mike Gilbert on November 01, 2015, 07:38:01 PM
Or maybe it's a bad camera angle?
I saw the same thing before posting that photo, but put it up anyway. He was about 3 feet lower than me and too close when I took the picture from outside the pen. Some other photos don't look as bad in that area, because the birds were further away.
John Blehm, The black cock you sent me had a lot better type than the bird I have from that other strain. I have seen many birds starting to get very long backs and loose the type of the example that is in the APA standard.
I agree with Walt that the chest is supposed to be prominent. It's something I've been working on and something I see missing in a lot of birds. You'll notice in my avatar what I would think is a "prominent" breast BUT it sure doesn't look like the illustrations in the SOP.
I still have a pic of the 2014 APA Champion and am attaching it for review/comparison to John's bird. I tried to get them side by side but couldn't do it. From these pics, I'm not sure what Walt is talking about wrt the breast. Note the head/neck position in both pics is forward. So that may be a cause for a lack of seeing the breast but if you look at the very bottom pic of my Wheaten, the head/neck is forward but breast still pretty well defined. So my guess is the APA Nat'l bird didn't have a "prominent" breast either. I'm also not sure what he's talking about wrt wing carriage. Both breast and wing carriage appear to be very similar in the pics. And I don't know how one can have "slightly elevated at the shoulders" and not have the back sloping toward the rear?? Finally, if you look at the backs in the 3 illustrations provided in the Standard, none of them are the same.
Personally, I thought the pic posted of John's bird showed him too high at the shoulders but Mike says it's "very correct". The pic of 2 Wheatens are birds I culled but show the backs I've been working towards. And obviously head position affects the sight picture of the back as shown in the second Wheaten pic of the same 2 birds. "Slightly elevated" to me is just above the horizontal.
And btw, on a side note, speaking of going by the SOP Illustrations, Mike can you please verify that the pic of the BW male shows incorrect coloring in the wing bay? Doesn't really matter to me because if I can get the bows to be more orangish and the bays a little lighter, I'll be pretty satisfied with the overall color but I know a new SOP is coming out so it would be worthwhile I think to point out the blue shouldn't be there at the end of the Primaries.
As for the online virtual show I won't be submitting any pics again for awhile. I don't mind coming in 2nd, 4th, or 10th for that matter when the birds placed higher are better or even debatably better but the way they placed the W & BW in September left me baffled for the most part. Look at the Wheaten cockerel that took 2nd too see what I mean.
Lots of good points in your post Royce. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be looking at with regard to the Blue Wheaten wing bay. Could you put up an enlarged photo of what you want evaluated? With regard to the two blacks. You are correct, the wing carriage in both are the same, and they are both correct - which is to say carried above the hock joint. There is room for some variation in that description. The point about the back being elevated at the shoulders is well taken. I guess "slightly" means different things to different readers. I do think John's bird is standing a little too high in that photo, not much, but remember, I saw him in the flesh. The photo was taken in haste the morning after the show as Neil was leaving, so I didn't have time to wait for that perfect pose. On the other hand, the other bird is too low in front. Put water on that bird's back and it would run toward the front, not toward the tail. How is that elevated at the shoulders? I have seen quite a few photos of the APA winner, and they all look about the same. John and I have discussed the fact that he looks to be part Sumatra. Tom Kernan bred him, is noted for his terrific Sumatras, and we feel there is a cross somewhere in the bird's ancestry. My best guess is that he is about one quarter Sumatra. Of course we could be wrong, but that bird is a different style than what Ameraucanas have been bred to be in the past. The short legs contribute heavily to my opinion. He is a beautiful bird to be sure, and in top condition and in great feather. But he lacks in certain points of type to be an ideal Ameraucana. Neither bird has the two main sickle feathers extending beyond the main tail as shown in the Standard.
Quote from: Tailfeathers on November 03, 2015, 05:08:28 AM
I agree with Walt that the chest is supposed to be prominent....Note the head/neck position in both pics is forward. So that may be a cause for a lack of seeing the breast...
Yes. Most photos don't show a bird's normal stance and I'm sure that is why portraits were used instead of photos in Standards (usually). When one of my cockerels was facing downhill his back looked more level...even sloping the other way. Even in the show coops judges often try to get birds to pose correctly to better judge them, but most aren't used to being in those small coops and surroundings.
Great replies from you both! Good point Mike about seeing the bird in person and misunderstood and thought you were talking about the pic. Sorry about that. I also like that there is some room for variation when it comes to the SOP as that allows each breeder a little room perhaps to distinguish their birds from others. Right now I've been shooting for slightly above horizontal and mostly consistency. That's why I like the pic of those two together such as they are. Even though they are both culls they are pretty close to being identical. I'll have to try and get a pic or two with my current two cockbirds while their head is up. I think that will show just a little bit more elevation - but not much. I have a picture in my head of what I think they should look like and I'm getting real close. If I remember right, the Wheaten male in the September Virtual Show is just the Type I'm shooting for. It's the 2nd Place bird that leaves me SMH.
I may be able to scan the SOP Illustration of the BW and then blow it up and attach it here but it's pretty easy to see in the book. If you look at the BW male pictured, the bottom 1/3 of the Primaries are blue with orange coloration making up the top 2/3 of the Primaries. From what I've read and been going by in the written portion of the SOP the Primaries and Secondaries should be lined on the outside with "bay color" and not orange thus giving the whole bay one continuous bay color.
Let's not even talk about the placements of the Silver Ams in the Virtual show this last time! I'm also not a sore loser, especially IF the winning bird is better. All the results did for me was make me wonder what SOP the judge was using... I might try again, have an amazing Black from John ;-) but my own Silvers are not old enough yet. Let's say... It was interesting. But I love to take lots of pictures!
Hey lady! That silver pullet that won the BV is a nice silver 😠 .....😄😄 ...I know the one you are talking about though, and I'll say that except for the color, that was a nice looking young bird, but certainly was not the runner up to John's pullet that I entered 😏
Quote from: Tailfeathers on November 03, 2015, 09:55:08 PM
I may be able to scan the SOP Illustration of the BW and then blow it up and attach it here but it's pretty easy to see in the book. If you look at the BW male pictured, the bottom 1/3 of the Primaries are blue with orange coloration making up the top 2/3 of the Primaries. From what I've read and been going by in the written portion of the SOP the Primaries and Secondaries should be lined on the outside with "bay color" and not orange thus giving the whole bay one continuous bay color.
I could be wrong, but in my mind there is not a lot of difference between bay and orange. In bantams we used to get some males with black or almost black wing bays in the folded position. That was supposed to be impossible for male wheaten coloration, but we got it. Anyway, as long as the wing bay is not black I would not worry a whole lot about the exact shade of bay/orange. There are too many other things to get right that would have priority.
Mike, when I think of "Bay" I think of two things. The horse color and the Buckeye color. Looking at the SOP the Eye Color for the Buckeye (same as for the BW & W Ameraucana) is supposed to be a "Reddish Bay" and the Plumage Color is supposed to be a "Mahogany Bay".
I think the color shown in our emblem is pretty close. Maybe a bit more orange than what I'm shooting for but very close. That said, I totally agree with you that there are a whole lotta other things more important to be focusing on right now. I just wanted to point out that the SOP Illustration is not correct as it shows the Primaries being Blue in the bottom 1/3. That's not what the written portion says and besides I think it'd be next to impossible to get that.
The SOP portraits are not very good in a number of respects. We were working under a deadline, and the artist had tried several times before coming up with what we have. I hope they are replaced someday, hopefully with actual photos.