How to make people happy as a show breeder:
- Go to every show you can but DO NOT WIN!
- Only be happy when other people win...but tone it way down if the rabbit is one you bred.
- If you should win, express how bad you feel for winning, scratch that rabbit from the remaining shows so you cannot win the next ones, and then immediately sell your winning rabbit to someone else.
Okay, that is over-the-top crazy. But, is it? Because I have heard other breeders over the years say to people directly or in a conversation about them:
- When are you going to retire "Winning Rabbit"?
- Rabbits should be retired after they become Grand Champions.
- "Winning Rabbit" should be at home making babies, not at shows.
- It seems unfair that you brought "Winning Rabbit."
- Hasn't "Winning Rabbit" won enough already?
- How many more legs does "Winning Rabbit" need after all?
Here is how each sounds on the flip side—especially if you were to ask a judge:
Stop showing your "Winning Rabbit" so mine can win.
(I apologize for the rawness of this but...yeah, it really sounds just like that!)
(I apologize for the rawness of this but...yeah, it really sounds just like that!)
There are some who purposely leave their grand champions at home rather than show them for various reasons, but the one that seems to be held as the noblest is so that other people might win with rabbits that would more likely lose if they brought theirs. That is fine if they so choose, but then it is not quite enough as they also at times make their "noblest" practices known as a way of shaming breeders who are winning. I have a friend who calls this "weakening the strong to strengthen the weak."
I know that some people like to say "Team Fox" and may tend to see showing Silver Fox rabbits as a team sport, so why would anyone want to weaken the strong to strengthen the weak? Football fans do not want to see the losing teams in the Super Bowl. No one would say that a certain team has won too many times so they should not be allowed to play! Fans do not want a winning team pulled from playing in the Super Bowl, just because the same team won it previously. And fans would not want a particular player barred from playing in the Super Bowl because he was on another team that won it previously. Well, some might but what would be their reasons? We have competitions to determine who is the best, at least for that time because there is always someone who will eventually be better.
If you do not like football as an analogy, use anything else that fits. I have competed in art in the past and I never wished the winner had not entered to show their art. I saw the winners' works and appreciated them and thought I might like to try that style, technique, medium, colors, or whatever that made it extra special to improve my own art if I liked it as much as the judge did. I might even have wanted to take lessons from a winning artist.
The thing I looked for when I was going into showing was the best rabbits from the best breeders. Whenever someone won Best in Show or Reserve in Show, I saw that as a win for the breed as well as the breeder. When I showed against some of the breeders that had rabbits with multiple legs and my own rabbits, whether bought or bred, held their own in the top five placements against theirs in some larger shows, I was not disappointed—I was elated! I know of one judge who had a rabbit win 20+ Best in Shows—the rabbit was a gorgeous show-stopper that was hard to beat, so what is wrong with that? And I still feel surprised when any of my rabbits win because it is always: that judge, that rabbit, that day. There are no guarantees. Every "best rabbit" has bad fur days. There are so many variables on any given show day that no one knows which rabbit will win—psst, that is why everyone keeps going to shows!
I once talked about this shaming of the winners with some breeders who had been long in the hobby and they would just say: "Breed better rabbits." Realize that it is rare for any breeder to just fall into having high-quality rabbits, top breeders had to work at it and keep working at it too. And it is not like once a breeder is at that level that it is easy to stay there. Genetics throw lots of wild cards even from the best rabbits, there are setbacks that can happen, and there are others who are improving their stock as well.
So, if you find yourself in a conversation where one breeder is saying the quiet part out loud to another or about another, think about what that person will be saying when he or she decides you are winning too much. Also, I find it interesting that while criticizing a breeder for winning too much, why would those same people buy rabbits from breeders who "win too much"? The answer is kind of obvious, isn't it?
I know that some people like to say "Team Fox" and may tend to see showing Silver Fox rabbits as a team sport, so why would anyone want to weaken the strong to strengthen the weak? Football fans do not want to see the losing teams in the Super Bowl. No one would say that a certain team has won too many times so they should not be allowed to play! Fans do not want a winning team pulled from playing in the Super Bowl, just because the same team won it previously. And fans would not want a particular player barred from playing in the Super Bowl because he was on another team that won it previously. Well, some might but what would be their reasons? We have competitions to determine who is the best, at least for that time because there is always someone who will eventually be better.
If you do not like football as an analogy, use anything else that fits. I have competed in art in the past and I never wished the winner had not entered to show their art. I saw the winners' works and appreciated them and thought I might like to try that style, technique, medium, colors, or whatever that made it extra special to improve my own art if I liked it as much as the judge did. I might even have wanted to take lessons from a winning artist.
The thing I looked for when I was going into showing was the best rabbits from the best breeders. Whenever someone won Best in Show or Reserve in Show, I saw that as a win for the breed as well as the breeder. When I showed against some of the breeders that had rabbits with multiple legs and my own rabbits, whether bought or bred, held their own in the top five placements against theirs in some larger shows, I was not disappointed—I was elated! I know of one judge who had a rabbit win 20+ Best in Shows—the rabbit was a gorgeous show-stopper that was hard to beat, so what is wrong with that? And I still feel surprised when any of my rabbits win because it is always: that judge, that rabbit, that day. There are no guarantees. Every "best rabbit" has bad fur days. There are so many variables on any given show day that no one knows which rabbit will win—psst, that is why everyone keeps going to shows!
I once talked about this shaming of the winners with some breeders who had been long in the hobby and they would just say: "Breed better rabbits." Realize that it is rare for any breeder to just fall into having high-quality rabbits, top breeders had to work at it and keep working at it too. And it is not like once a breeder is at that level that it is easy to stay there. Genetics throw lots of wild cards even from the best rabbits, there are setbacks that can happen, and there are others who are improving their stock as well.
So, if you find yourself in a conversation where one breeder is saying the quiet part out loud to another or about another, think about what that person will be saying when he or she decides you are winning too much. Also, I find it interesting that while criticizing a breeder for winning too much, why would those same people buy rabbits from breeders who "win too much"? The answer is kind of obvious, isn't it?