Hi all, I know there is a sticky regarding racing type old type and show type huskies which I have read, however I am still confused about the types and lines of Huskies.

The thing that I can't get my head around is the fact there is only one breed standard and yet there seem to be two distinct types of Husky - the show and the racing. Why is this? I realize that a lot of it comes down to heritage i.e seppala line etc but what is the point? Why would somebody specifically seek to breed or own one type over the other? To my way of thinking if there is one standard then should a show dog not be able to race and a racing dog not be able to show? Which is a "correct" husky?

I have never actually come across a racing line sibe in person and until I joined the site I had never even heard of the two distinctions in the breed before so it kind of fascinates me. There are only a handful of sibe breeders here in nz and now one who is importing racing stock for their kennels.

I really hope no one takes offense to my ignorance, I am not for or against one type over another I am just curious and since Orion came into my life I have become a little obsessed with all things sibe  

There is a "show" and a "working" split in any working breed of dog.  It's just how it is/always will be.  

There is a split because at one point the dogs were only used to work.  Then people wanted to show.  Our standard is written based on the working dogs.  When exhibiting the Siberian Husky became what people wanted to do - many had the original dual-purpose Siberian Husky.  They were the people who ran their dogs on team and then took them into the show ring.

As with everything their became a split - people who only wanted to race and people who only wanted to show (along with the people who did both).  Along with that - standards are subject to ones own interpretation of what it says - which is where "style" comes into play (you can have different "styles" of dogs within a breed but they should still possess correct breed "type" http://www.dogchannel.com/dogsinreview/success-show-dogs-type-style.aspx for a better explanation on type/style.).  Judging in the show ring becomes subjective to what people then prefer - so then there become ring "fads".  The standard is also subjective to what breeders prefer and how they interpret the standard.  Lots of variables!  Also doesn't account for those breeders that breed solely for the show ring - regardless of what the standard says (breeders who breed for what's winning - and they do exist)

This doesn't even begin to touch base on things like Seppala line Siberian Huskies (or Seppala Siberian Sleddog if you want to refer to them as their own breed) or the mess that is the discussion of those dogs.

I probably have more to add to this but I have to step away from the computer for a moment!  More likely there are others who have more to say than I do on the matter or who are better informed.

**this is me adding**

To touch very briefly onto Seppala line Siberian Huskies (or Seppala Siberian Sleddogs).  It is important to note here that the entire modern USA Siberian Husky (I know you're from NZ) is based on only a handful of imported dogs that were bred.  **Technically** all Siberian Huskies in the states are "Seppala" Siberian Huskies.  From what I've gathered/seen from the people involved in the (breed) Seppala Siberian Sleddog is that they believe their dogs are free from the "taint" that is showing dogs and that their dogs have been bred true and don't contain "show" dogs in their line. They're bred for their working drive and are still used to pull sleds and they maintain the closest ties to those original Siberians.  They feel their dogs are "unique" and should be recognized as a breed apart from the (normal) Siberian Husky.  This teeny little paragraph doesn't even make a mark in the surface that is the Seppala line or Seppala Siberian Sleddog.  

Off of that topic...

Quote :

Why would somebody specifically seek to breed or own one type over the other?

It's all preference.  If you want a dog to race you're going to want to find a working bred dog specifically chosen to excel at racing/working.  Not only does the dog have to have great conformation so that it doesn't breakdown but also great drive to work.  Now - that's not saying you couldn't go to a show breeder and pick out a dog/pup as a prospect to race/work.  You're options are much more limited.  It would be like a show person going to a working kennel to pick out a show dog - mostly because a working dog doesn't fit what is popular in the ring.  There are many show dogs who would not live up to a life of sled pulling for one reason or another.  

Quote :

To my way of thinking if there is one standard then should a show dog not be able to race and a racing dog not be able to show? Which is a "correct" husky?

In a perfect world you are correct.  Each and every dog would fit the standard and each would be able to go straight from running in harness on the trail to the show ring. Since our world is less than perfect - we have the split.  The term "correct" is subjective. Racing vs. Show in the Siberian world is a very old and very heated argument.  Each feels that they are correct and each feels that the other is the absolute extreme (extreme is not what you want).  Are there extremes? Yes.  There are extremes in every breed.  

There are many people out there who breed show dogs that feel that because their dogs earned their ribbons and rosettes and got their CH or their GCH - that their dogs absolutely are the epitome of the breed standard - their dog is "perfect" (no dog is perfect) - even though it most likely have never run in a harness, pulled a bike let alone a sled but because it won in the show ring it obviously must mean that dog adheres to the breed standard.

The opposite of that are people who work/race their dogs.  They feel that since their dogs are worked in harness and are doing what the breed was intended to do that their dogs are "perfect" and they don't need the politics of the show world to tell them that.

Niraya puts it excellently from a factual standpoint! It's a lot of opinions and fads when it comes to different show types too.

To ME the "correct" type for any breed is the type that can still preform the duties they were originally bred to do. I'm very big on this and when I do get a dog from a breeder, either a Am. pit bull terrier or another breed that I can work in Schutzhund, I want that dog to be physically capable of performing the tasks it should be able to. Like, I can't get a show GSD to do Schutzhund, that dog would fall apart so quickly, their backs and back legs are just cruel.

Personally I think this is a great question!  Yes there are differences between a strictly racing line Siberian and a strictly show line Siberian.  But, there can also be similarities across the gap- ultimately either dog should be able to be identified as a Siberian no matter which style they come from.

What I notice in the show world- many breeders tend to follow the current trend of what the judges are putting up- not as bad as other breeds for sure but it is there.  These dogs are often a lot heavier than they should be if they were in running condition.  Short legs are not uncommon in the show world either.  Where the real problems are in the length of loin, lacking croup, and inappropriate shoulder angles.  These traits stem from the 'flashy' side gait current judges are wanting to see.  This is an inappropriate and ineffective gait for a working trail dog- there are still a number of quality show dogs that are built correctly and are able to function in harness on the trails as well.  

Where I feel the differences lie in the racing lines, many racing Siberians aren't what you'll see when you look back into the archives of Leonhard Seppala and his teams of original Siberians-  If you read the standard you'll find the Siberian is intended to be a moderate dog capable of pulling a moderate load at moderate speeds.  Not a 'racing' speed dog.  I feel racing kennels are often the product of traits that the musher desires to keep their team competitive on the trails, not necessarily the 'ideal' interpretation of the standard either.  The one thing I notice about many racing kennels is their dogs lack the coat necessary to insulate them in the environment for which the breed was originally designed.

To further discuss I am going to use a friend of mine's racing line Siberian Cassi owned by Jill Wilson-


And my show line male Denali-


I feel that both of these dogs are easily identifiable as the Siberian Husky.  Cassi is a smaller bitch but very balanced.  Her shoulder angle appears steep in this photo but that is the angle of how the photo was taken.  Both dogs have a nice lay back of the shoulder, strong straight top lines, Cassi has more length of leg and longer stiffles but both dogs show strong straight rears.

This is one of my biggest problems with AKC conformation. I believe that a dog should be bred for the ability to perform their intended task. Conformation has a lot to do with ability to perform a duty, but its not everything. When you breed for only one thing, everything else goes out the window. Someone brought up the GSD already; there is no way those poor dogs can do anything athletic and will be broken long before they get old. Plus the breed has just become a giant neurotic, untrustworthy (from a vet tech perspective) mess- that's not what they should be! I believe that a dog should have to prove themselves in a working trial before being allowed to go into the conformation ring. Then the scores for both can be added together and the winner then selected from that.

My sibe is well bred on her sire's side (Inisfree), but is more working bred on her dam's side. Consequently, I have a dog that isn't doing as well in the show ring. She has a bigger head and ears as seems to be typical of the working sibes. She is also a bit big, has an upright shoulder, and is somewhat long in the back... That's just bad luck, though . She pulls like her life depends on it, though! And LOVES it!!

This is kind of a bad picture, but this is Murphy stacked. I need to get a picture at a better angle of her when she is actually groomed and stacked correctly! Murphy is 22in at the shoulder- JUST in standard!

Wow thank you all for taking the time to post the information here is fantastic I didn't realize that show vs racing was such an old debate although it makes sense that it would be since the breed has been in america a lot longer than the 36 years it has been in NZ. Funny how we are just starting to see the division here that has been present in america for so long. It will certainly be interesting to see how the Siberian's breed here develop over the next 30 years, particularly as working dogs in harness recreationally is becoming increasingly popular. I would hope that we do not see the extremes in sprint dogs or the like but who knows?

I find it kind of sad that the two types have been specifically altered through breeding by people, I realize that is how breeds come about in the first place but once there is a standard in place I would hope that any breeding alterations would simply be for health and temperament not for fashion but I suppose that is just me being naive!

If you were simply looking for a pet and had no clear intention of either showing or competitively racing would there be a clear advantage to one vs the other? Is there any prominent health advantages or differences in temperament between a strong racing line or a show line? I know that there are dogs in the show world which have been heavily breed (for better or worse) is this also the case with racing dogs?

I feel like I have a lot more to learn about the breed and the physical characteristics that make up a sibe. When I was researching the breed before we got Orion I mainly focused on the temperament and the traits of the breed I never looked into or considered the structure of a dog other than health testing. I was hoping that I would be able to run Orion in harness when he is older (Just scooting nothing serious) but I never realized being from a show line may hinder him in that aspect. How would I know if he will be compatible for harness work?

As far as a clear distinction of one vs another when considering a family pet I'd say in my opinion the clear advantage goes to the 'show' breeder as there tends to be far more health testing done in the show lines vs. the working lines at least here in the US. In most working lines you'd be lucky to get consistent CERF (eye) testing done. Most mushers feel that a dog with bad hips wouldn't perform in harness so no need to check (wrong!). Some racing breeders will literally wait and eradicate lines when the 'eyes turn milky or the hips fall apart'. Far more 'close' dare I say inbreeding done in racing lines than most show lines as well as when many find a 'formula' that works they work to keep it as long as they can. This can prove problematic in many cases. Though temperament either side often does produce nice temperaments that make happy companions (after all you want dogs that are easy to handle and get along with one another when working on a team), often the highly work driven dogs can be more of a demand in the exercise department and a little more 'go-go-go' that may not be as happy in a strictly home life companion type roll-

Ceara, any thoughts on the GSD comparison? What does Jackie have to say about the show dogs breaking down in work?

I dislike the GSD comparisons and I really dislike the fact that they are the very first breed that everyone mentions in things like this (What about the Neo Mastiffs? Poms? Basset Hounds? The tens and twenties of other breeds that share huge problems but just aren't as publicized because they don't all "look like they can't walk" etc). Jackie has lots to say on the matter. I haven't spoken to her directly about it in a couple years just because it's not a fun topic. (And for reference - Jackie is a person of moderation in her breed. She has a very moderate show line bitch that is actually posted somewhere on this forum for anyone who wants to see)

I had this whole entire big thing written out and then realized it just wasn't worth it to post. Are there problems with show [specific] bred dogs? Absolutely - but it is most definitely not just limited to the German Shepherd Dog breed. Do certain breeds have more/less problems then others? Yes.

I figured. I think that breed comes up because they have such a different looking gait and stack, but good breeders are good breeders no matter what the breed. I admit I thought that too the first time I saw a well bred shepherd, but just because its not what I'm used to doesn't mean it's wrong or they would break down if worked. Yay for education!

I didn't mean to offend or upset anyone by just bringing up the GSD issue as an example and not other breeds, so I'm really sorry if I did  I just figured it would be easier to explain and more people would understand it since they're such a popular breed.

Ceara, speaking of the Neo. Mastiff, do you know what that book was called that was written by a veterinarian about how they're beautiful master pieces even though being alive is excruciatingly painful for them? Like, she (I do remember that it was written by a woman!) spends an entire book basically justifying creating dogs, that are in pain after they're only a few months old because of they way their structured, because they're not just dogs, but artwork? It sounded ludicrous but I can't for the life of me remember what it was called or what her name was.

Don't worry about it! When you talk to a hardcore GSD person who is trying to change things for the better and when you talk about these issues you kind of see how it could be really annoying/bad/terrible when that is -all- you hear about is GSD's over every other breed - and it is true. They are the first breed that is mentioned when a discussion about what is "wrong" with purebred dogs comes up.

I don't remember the book but I do know which you are talking about (didn't read it but have heard discussions about it).

I think the GSD is the most common show/work issue most do see which is why it often comes up. Personally I would never buy a show line GSD especially from the USA. I know some get very offended at that but I do not think they are as put together and workable as they should be.

Another large gap is show/ work Border Collies and Aussies. You see these massive coats in far too many as well as their drive is just not there with most breeders. There are a few who really push to have performance and confirmation dogs but in the end a working bred herding dog will 1000x outshine a confirmation bred dog when it comes down to trials. It's very sad.. I feel a lot of function is lost or overlooked with show bred dogs.

My personal opinion anyway, i'm not heavily involved in showing so take that for what it's worth.

From my understanding trialing is nothing like the actual work a farm dog does (at least from an ACD point of view). It's why ACD's don't shine in trials but are so successful in their actual every day farm work.

I dunno. I can't really say I'm "involved" in showing since I don't show. lol I just kind of know tidbits here and there. As I think it's useful.

Blast, I'll have to go forum hopping to figure out which one I heard about it on!