Dog Shows 1980-Today: How Things Have Changed

Abstract

Dog shows have changed in many ways over the last forty years. This article summarizes the factors that have driven these changes, the statistical reality of purebred dog registrations, cultural changes that have altered patterns of dog ownership, and how the AKC has altered the competitive landscape to remain viable in this changing environment. To understand how these factors function together, I use system modeling to explain how these forces have acted together, altering the landscape and driving dog shows further from their intended purpose: the exhibition of breeding stock and the preservation of our breeds.

To anyone who has been engaged in the sport of Conformation dog shows for more than two decades, it is readily apparent that the culture of dog shows has changed. In this article, I look at the historical factors that have changed our culture, including shifts in the larger culture, outside factors driving those changes, and how they have altered the sport. When studying changes in a culture over time, and dog shows are a unique culture, you can conduct a longitudinal study that compares how elements of the culture have changed. We are limited here in that we only have anecdotal history and few relevant statistics. I realized very quickly that the place to begin a cultural comparison was to compare the best relevant data points:

AKC registration numbers, number of breeds in the registry, number of shows per year, entries per show, number of unique dogs competing, etc. Before the advent of AI, a study of this type, which is basically referred to as a “meta-analysis,” would be a time-consuming affair, requiring data collection and numbers crunching with a statistical tool (R or SPSS). With AI, all I had to do was design a battery of questions, so I could tease out the data comparisons I needed for this discussion. Check it out: I used AI and no dogs were impregnated; I made no cute ads for dogs; nor did I clean up any pictures to post on social media! I did homework.

1980: A Starting Point

As a starting point for this discussion, I chose 1980, the year that I first stepped into the ring with a dog I owned. I was sixteen-years old, my parents were breeding Standard Poodles, and I was the curious kid who couldn’t get enough knowledge about everything dog shows. I spent my formative years under the grooming tent, with people whom I idolize to this day. Since most of my readers were not there or even born, I must share that the “tone” of discussions regarding dogs was completely different. At times, discussions were raw and pointed; most exhibitors and judges were breeders who were working hard to improve and preserve their breed. I miss the days of open discourse! In a post on Facebook, Karen Fitzpatrick, a successful breeder of Border Terriers, states that she once asked Anne Rodgers Clark what she didn’t like about her dog after not getting the ribbon she’d expected. Mrs. Clark retorted, “Did you read your Standard?” and continued by explaining that her dog was too long. Karen recalls this as a teachable moment, not as criticism, and she has numerous Best in Show ribbons to confirm that she made good use of the judge’s critique. Mrs. Clark was not a Border Terrier breeder, she primarily bred Poodles, but she brought a great deal of knowledge into the ring about the breeds she judged. I believe that few judges today carry this level of confidence into the ring regarding the breeds in their assignment.

The Numbers

For those of us who have been involved for more than a few decades, it is obvious that there have been numerous changes: declining show entries, low class-dog counts, more professional handlers, fewer dedicated breeders, NOHS, AKC recognition ballooning from 130 breeds to over 200 breeds, and diminished judging quality. (Kind of hard to find judges given the requirements of the new reality.)

In 1980, there were 130 AKC registered breeds and 844 all-breed shows, with roughly 857,000 dogs competing (~429k unique dogs). In 1980, total AKC registrations numbered roughly 1.1 million and it is estimated that there were 400,000 litters whelped. On average, there were two dog shows per week that took place on Saturday and Sunday; the average entry per show was roughly 1100/ weekend, 550 per show.

By 2022, the AKC registry had expanded to roughly 200 breeds, and the number of all-breed dog shows jumped to 1647 with the expansion to a Thursday through Sunday format. There were over 1.4 million entries in shows, a sixty percent increase, and a decrease in unique dogs entered to 349,000 (~20 percent fewer unique dogs). The entries at the average show dropped 53 percent. In 2022, the AKC registered 716,500 dogs in total, of which more than 108,000 were French Bulldogs alone. So, with 35 percent more breeds able to be registered with the AKC, registrations dropped by 35 percent. Despite total entries growing 63 percent over 42 years, the actual number of individual dogs being shown declined by roughly 18 percent from about 429,000 unique dogs to about 350,000. A summary analysis of this data would be that dog show culture is imploding into itself and struggling for survival.

To fully understand the statistical reality, we need to seek out causal explanations as to why things have changed. In 1980, the numbers were driven by a committed breeder community that bred dogs to supply the public with purebred, registered dogs that were desired by most American families. Growing up, my parents had German Shepherd Dogs, my grandparents had a Shepherd and a Weimaraner, and my other grandmother had a Miniature Schnauzer. My best friend had an Irish Setter. I honestly can’t think of one person I knew who had a mutt. Purebred dogs were an American ideal; everyone wanted Rin Tn Tin or Lassie. As we have all witnessed, values and ideals change over time, and much of this has to do with external pressures that are often ignored.

Animal rights organizations pursued a deliberate long-term strategy of conflating responsible hobby breeders with commercial puppy mills in the public’s mind. The result was that by the 2000s, the word “breeder” had acquired a stigma in mainstream culture that it simply did not carry in 1980. A person who bred a litter of German Shepherds in 1975 was a respected community figure. That same person in 2005 was vilified by people who believed the adopt don’t shop narrative. “Adopt Don’t Shop” started as a campaign against buying puppies from pet stores, but it quickly morphed into a movement arguing that no one should get their dog from a breeder, no matter how responsible the breeder, creating a false dichotomy between shelters and breeders. A massive share of the market for purpose-bred dogs did not disappear—it migrated to unregistered “designer” crossbreeds. The Labradoodle, Goldendoodle, Cavapoo, and their variants captured exactly the demographic that in 1980 would have bought a registered Labrador or Golden Retriever: young families wanting an attractive, friendly, relatively low-maintenance companion dog (with the false promise of hybrid vigor and hypoallergenic coats). These buyers have paid premium prices ($2,000–$7,000) to breeders whose dogs were not AKC registered, used no health testing, produced no pedigrees, and generated zero AKC registrations. The market for purebred dogs didn’t contract, it was captured by a parallel, unregulated economy that grew exponentially while AKC numbers fell. The doodle boom represented a major shift in preferences, with designer crosses first appearing about two decades ago and then accelerating into a mainstream trend. Due to these factors, the value of purchasing a registered purebred dog collapsed, forcing the AKC to find ways to expand their business model to remain a viable entity.

In 1980, the AKC was an elegant non-profit business model: a purebred dog registry with a dog show side-hustle. At its peak in 1992, 1.5 million dogs were registered annually. Registering over one million dogs a year produced the overwhelming bulk of the AKC’s income. This business model was sustainable with no real marketing budget, since they had enough breeders producing enough dogs and a monopoly on registrations. As the bottom fell out of the registration business, the AKC had to diversify their business model to sustain its profitability. By 2023, the AKC had expanded their registry by 65 percent. As a means to maximize its registration revenue, they added a portfolio of event service fees, sold sponsorship deals for dog shows and sporting events, like the AKC National Championship as well as other shows and events that are televised, digital and web advertising on akc.org, and sponsorships with Purina and other partners. Without getting too deep into a financial analysis of their historical business model, their revenue adjusted for inflation has only shown a modest increase while their expense load has increased exponentially.

Note, I am not blaming AKC for the changes in dog shows. I am sharing how changes in dog culture have forced changes that have invariably reshaped the landscape of the Conformation dog show world. Going back to the numbers, in 1980, dog shows were a weekend sport with a total of 844 all-breed dog shows per year. By 2022, dog shows had expanded to a four-day-a-week format, bringing the number of all-breed shows to 1642. Even though there are 65 percent more breeds competing, the number of unique dogs competing has gone down by ~25 percent. In an attempt to keep dog shows sustainable, the AKC added the Grand Champion point system, National Owner-Handled Series, and AKC Rankings to the mix.

Cause and Effect

If you are newer to Conformation dog shows, what you are seeing is the status quo, and it might appear that the changes in format represent the sport growing and moving into the future. But the reality is that what you are witnessing is a system that is fighting for survival due to inordinate amounts of stress. What we are witnessing is referred to as system decay. The primary driver of system decay is “entropy” or a reduction in energy that maintains system balance. We can see simple examples of entropy all around us: a car running out of fuel or the aging process where the body no longer has the energy to repair itself as we get older. Natural systems progress from an ordered state to chaos. The changes in culture and the reduction in the number of AKC-registered dogs being bred and shown may have driven dog show culture into a state of entropy, but systems often do not die quietly; they create alternative “feedback loops” in an attempt to keep themselves sustainable.

Three Truths About Systems

Systems ensure their own perpetuation.
Systems may produce outcomes that nobody wants.
Systems can be nested within systems.

If we look back at the historical collapse in AKC registrations, we could describe it as a reduction of in-flows that would require structural changes to sustain the energy within the system. With fewer dogs registered, fewer unique dogs competing, and more breeds, the AKC attempted to foster sustainability by creating NOHS, GCH Point System, and AKC Rankings. These are examples of systems that are nested within another system. While these new entities may aid with sustainability, they may work against “utility,” altering the terminal reward or the original purpose of competing in dog shows, which is credentialing dogs that are part of your breeding program and exhibiting them so that others can use your breeding stock.

The Grand Champion system offers an exhibitor the possibility of almost never-ending rewards. Exhibitors can show one dog endlessly in an attempt to reach the highest level of achievement: Platinum. This type of strategy bolsters dog show entries as a rationale for many to show their special week in and week out for many years. Grand Champion titles become the terminal reward or “endgame” for many. Unfortunately, in the big picture, it skews the entry numbers, creating an illusion of more unique dogs. But it shifts the weight out of the classes, where we should see a parade of new class dogs into the specials ring. This may also prevent some people from breeding or purchasing new class animals to bring into the show ring, further reducing registration numbers. When the only title you could get was a Championship, there was little point to campaigning the same dog year in and year out. Most people would move forward, breed a litter, try to improve on what they have, and bring out class dogs to compete for a title. The important competition that grew the competitive playing field was in the classes, not in the specials ring. You might keep bait in your pocket for your dog, but the Grand Champion points might be the bait that keeps you running the same dog endlessly.

The NOHS system has transformed dog show culture in many ways, bolstering the participation of many non-breeders and negatively stratifying the competitive playing field into Varsity (pros) and JV (owner handlers) divisions. Many people will argue that professionals are rewarded at a higher level because they prepare and present a dog better, considering the fact that there are many breeders and exhibitors who can match them one for one. If we believe that the handler always has the better dog, we are jaded into believing that only the people who can (or chose to) spend large amounts of capital to hire handlers have better animals. I will tell you emphatically that this is not true. However, when you create a stratified system, human psychology takes over and some judges will pay more attention to the handlers who are getting paid to present a dog than the owner or breeder who is competing against them in the Group or even in the Breed ring. Often, I feel like judges will reward the handler, who might have a lesser dog, and give the Owner-Handled ribbon to the non-professional, figuring they get to go play in Owner-Handled Group. One of my close friends, who is a very successful European handler, refers to NOHS as “fun with owners.” It is a ribbon, but it’s not the same! I can do an entire article on the biases that our current system creates, but the full scope is far too expansive to present here.

Lastly is the AKC ranking system, the coveted ranking that we have accepted as our most important recognition in dog show culture. Breed rankings, Group rankings, All-Around rankings, the one thing that it ensures is that you will have your dog entered in shows week in and week out to stay in the race. I have joked that some of the top specials must have personal jets, because they seem to show up wherever their favorite judges are on the panel. I can tell you that this maddening travel schedule is a new phenomenon. Back in the day, handlers would usually go to the same shows year in and year out, since they weren’t chasing their judges for Breed and Group points. If you are flying coast to coast to chase a judge so that you can climb to the number one spot in your Breed, Group, or overall, are you showing us that you don’t believe that you can have equal success just staying local, and showing to the panel that comes up in your area? I guess we know the answer; politics and relationships are an unfortunate part of this game, but I thought it was supposed to be about the dog.

Conclusion

Writing this article was very difficult on many levels. I could have easily written a scientific paper, featuring charts, hypotheses, flow charts, statistical computations, graphs, etc. Unfortunately, our lives on screens have reduced the average person’s attention level to roughly thirty seconds, so that article would be difficult for many people to read and absorb. I am writing this out of a level of love and passion for the sport, and the love and respect for my mentors who took the time to teach me the finite aspects of showing dogs. When I started showing dogs, it was made clear to me that it was about the dog and the quality of your presentation. Sadly, in this day and age, you would have a hard time convincing me that it is still about the dog. The environment has decayed, and if we ever hope to correct it, we have to be better citizens of dog show culture who seek to gain and share knowledge so that we can all reap the benefit of a cleaner, more level playing field.

I’ve written this article inspired by many of my friends, long-term successful breeders, multi-Group judges, and professional handlers who share my feelings about the things I’ve discussed here. It takes a village. We all need to do better if we are ever to correct the system decay that is evident in dog shows today.

If you are interested in discussions of this type, please join the Dog Show Psychology Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/dogshowpsychology.