Cat Planet

Further to the previous story: http://www.catplanet.co.uk/Newsflash/Celebrity-to-judge-Overall-Household-Pet-at-Supreme-2010.html

27/09/10 - A Household Pet exhibitor contacted the Show Manager of the Supreme to clarify the below press release and was told that Dawn Porter will merely be picking her favourite cat from the line up and that the award means nothing in terms of the Supreme Show. This appears to be in contradiction to the below press release.

The Household Pet Judges will still judge the section winners in a ring and not on the stage.

Cat Planet has asked for clarification and was directed to the Supreme Website where it was stated:

"To clarify this procedure:

There will be three overall BIS winners: Supreme Non-Pedigree Exhibit, Supreme Pedigree Pet Exhibit and Supreme Household Pet Kitten.

This judging will take place in a ring and be judged by the Supreme HP Panel as per the schedule.

The Supreme Non Pedigree, Supreme Household Pet Kitten and Supreme Pedigree Pet will then be taken to the main stage to be judged against each other by TV personality Dawn Porter to select her Supreme Household Pet Exhibit.  – This win will not count towards any title.

Dawn will present the prizes to the 3 winning owners."

Publicity Officer Lisa Aggett has posted this on an email group thanking those 'who were able to find this information, understand and digest it' 

Cat Planet has also learned today from various internet sources that the entry is up on last year with 1049 pedigree exhibits and 73 Household Pets entered, that is 2 Household Pets and 50 Pedigree exhibts up on last year.

No More Comments will be accepted on this story, thank you to everyone who has contributed so far.

Comments

Add New Search

Anonymous   |2010-10-06 12:53:30 I have kept out of this up to now, being a (now long distance) friend of Carol & Pat's but not being an exhibitor. However, I have just seen a posting on another forum that I just cannot let go by without comment. I am shocked and appalled that a show manager at any level, let alone that of Supreme, can be so rude and nasty (and downright unprofessional) to "a small minority" which anyone with half a brain can see applies to only one poster on the forum. I know, reading between the lines, that Carol is very hurt by this and Pat is very upset. I have known Carol long enough to know that she has always, does, and probably always will support and do anything for the Household Pets at shows. Not just for herself, but in the interests of fairness and correctness for all. The show that she, Pat and their small band run specifically for household pets proves this, they all go that extra mile, no matter what else is happening in their lives at the time, to make it as good as possible for the "moggy people. They are in amongst the exhibitors at shows so know what they want and try their damndest to provide it - something the Supreme show manager could learn a lot from! So when they complain now it is for those same exhibitors that they do it. So to be singled out, (perhaps not by name, but please, do not insult my intelligence by saying that Ms Leighton's comment could be aimed at anybody else, READ the posts then tell me who else it could be!) and then insinuated that they should not bother entering again is downright insulting. Maybe Ms Leighton should take into account that the main cat in question is, although in joint names, actually Pat's special cat, the cat who sat constantly by her side when she was recovering from major cancer surgery, the same cat who rarely now ever leaves her side as Pat is severely ill most of the time and is also now virtually blind. This cat is taken to shows and , yes, does well, just imagine the boost that gives Pat, despite the fact that she is now in too poor health to attend the shows in person, but imagine, living most of your waking hours in a pain filled, dark world, where there is little relief, the joy your cat doing well can bring, even if you can only be told about it and feel rather than see the prizes and rosettes. THEN tell her she should not be entering her cat so someone else can have a chance! How cruel would that be and how much lower could anyone stoop. As it is, it will probably not be happening for all that much longer anyway as the cat is no spring chicken and surely has only a limited time left showing. So for god's sake let the poor woman get what little comfort she can from it until then! I know I will get a rollicking from my friends about this as they do not really like it being said just what a hard time they have behind the scenes but I am not prepared any more to just sit back and watch dear friends be insulted like this and if I risk a telling off then I will. It is time some people knew the harsh truth. Perhaps the Supreme show manager should remember that the exhibitors are "customers" PAYING for a "service". Ms Leighton has obviously never heard of the saying "The customer is always right". It would behove her to do so. Reply | Quote 3   1

Skydancer   |2010-10-06 17:05:20 I can't applaud you enough for saying that, Carol & Pat's friend. I've also seen the post in question and cannot believe that a show manager would have the nerve to write that and post it in a public domain. It's just not on and way out of order. The comment is a serious cause for complaint and nothing more than a public apology from Ms Leighton will do. A show manager should at least, on the surface and in public, appear to be impartial. Her personal and private view should not come into it at all - one just bites one's tongue and gets on with the job of running the show. One does not splash one's personal view all over the internet for everyone to see - it's such bad form. As for saying that it is a minority who are upset, I think that if the show manager would join us in the real world, she would realise that it is in fact a majority that are unhappy about the situation. Besides, for a show cat, to be the best, you've got to beat the best. If the best HPs didn't turn up at the Supreme, then what's the point of competing at all? Reply | Quote 2   1

Carol Walker   |2010-10-06 20:09:20 I really am lost for words (well, that's a first, I hear you all say, LOL). I hadn't seen this as I have been so busy the last few days with work and the show that I haven't checked stuff as much as I normally do, but someone very kindly brought it to my attention. I wish I knew who you are, obviously a very close friend, or else you would not know some of the details you so very "kindly" publish, and yes, I WILL tell you off for that, I don't like to broadcast such details publicly, but, having said that, I very much appreciate your support and am touched that we have such a friend. I do not, however, feel that I should comment further, I have vowed to stay off the subject now and I will do. I just wanted to thank you for being so kind. Maybe you will let me know which friend you are, but I suspect not, or else you would have put your name to this in the first place. I do have my suspicions though :-) Reply | Quote 1   0

Skydancer  - re:   |2010-10-02 20:37:39 Karen Freeman wrote: To clarify my comments re Proper hp judges,most of the comments are about Dawn Porter not being a judge, so does this mean that the hp judges have been through the stewarding scheme? and do hp judges have to go through a bac as the pedigree judges have to, I dont think so maybe this should be the case, not forgetting that there is no offical standard of points for hps I doubt that HP judges of many years' seniority and experience would find any crumb of comfort in your comment - in fact, I'm sure they would find it rather denigrating. Besides, how can anyone grabbed at random know *anything* about judging Household Pets? There may be no official standard of points - although TICA does have official guidelines - but there are certain things that judges look for that only comes with experience and handling LOTS of cats all the way across the spectrum. And in any case, quite a few HP judges have either completed the stewarding scheme or are currently working their way through it. Either that or they've been judging HP for years and know what they're on about. Since you *are* a HP exhibitor, surely you would know that? Reply | Quote 4   3

Karen Freeman   |2010-10-02 12:59:29 To clarify my comments re Proper hp judges,most of the comments are about Dawn Porter not being a judge, so does this mean that the hp judges have been through the stewarding scheme? and do hp judges have to go through a bac as the pedigree judges have to, I dont think so maybe this should be the case, not forgetting that there is no offical standard of points for hps Reply | Quote 0   7

sheltie  - re:   |2010-10-01 18:10:52 Karen Freeman wrote: Think that is quite a rude remark to make about the SUPREME committee in view of the fact they have run this show with great success for many years.Maybe some people from the HP section would just like to hand pick judges of their choice?[/quote] Karen Freeman wrote: Think that is quite a rude remark to make about the SUPREME committee in view of the fact they have run this show with great success for many years.Maybe some people from the HP section would just like to hand pick judges of their choice? [quote=Karen Freeman]Think that is quite a rude remark to make about the SUPREME committee in view of the fact they have run this show with great success for many years.Maybe some people from the HP section would just like to hand pick judges of their choice? I fail to understand why (considering it doesnt affect you) you would have this attitude ,unless of course there was a vested interest?? I have supported The Supreme for 15 yrs and just once ,people have "dared" to voice their opinions ,I don't condone rudeness or bullying ,but believe that as an exhibitor of many years standing ,my opinion should be listened to ,without attracting comments such as "do you want to hand pick your judges"!! .Your opinion is that it is a good idea ,ours is, that it is not !! Reply | Quote 8   3

Sarah Walker  - re:   |2010-10-01 12:33:23 Karen Freeman wrote: It is a pity that there is now no rule preventing exhibitors advertising the fact they entering their cats at forthcoming shows.Some of the comments referring to Dawn Porter are downright rude bordering on bullying the gccf to back down on what in MY opinion a good idea,and when all said and done the 3 lucky cats to reach the point of overall best in show will have already been judged by your "PROPER"! judges.gccf have made this decision wouldn't it surely be better to support the gccf and not bicker about a decision which has already been made I can't see anyone being rude more expressing their dissatisfaction with a decision which alters the format of the best in show judging (now in rings not on stage etc) after the closing date of the show so exhibitors have not been able to make an informed decision about whether or not to enter. Exhibitors are entitled to their opinions just as you are entitled to express your opinion that the change is a good idea. Reply | Quote 9   2

Anonymous   |2010-09-29 19:37:38 It appears that an error of judgement has been made by the sumpreme committee with regards to the HPP section. The committee need to reconsider their position over this matter when you consider that Whiskas removed sponsorship for basically the same reason. Somebody needs to wake up and smell the coffee Reply | Quote 8   3

Karen Freeman   |2010-09-30 13:28:08 Think that is quite a rude remark to make about the SUPREME committee in view of the fact they have run this show with great success for many years.Maybe some people from the HP section would just like to hand pick judges of their choice? Reply | Quote 4   9

Carol Walker   |2010-09-30 15:57:41 No, the HP section do NOT want to "hand pick" judges, I have no idea why you seem to think they do. All they want is "proper" HP judges who, as far as possible, have judged at least once before, preferably more often, to make sure they know what they are doing. Unlike the popular misconception, a good HP showcat is not just "pretty" or "cute", it has to have all the other attributes of purrsonality, temperament, condition and grooming as well. Then, the top one has to have that little bit extra sparkle, showmanship, presence, call it what you will, but just that extra "zing" that sets it apart as being the best of the best on the day. What the HP section do not want is a minor celebrity "qualified" to judge on those criteria at the most important GCCF show in their show year, solely, it would appear, because she has a single pedigree cat! No one is asking for, or expecting, special treatment, just what was set down in the schedule (which was the "contract", if you like), that we agreed to when we entered our cats. It is not us breaking that "contract, merely asking that it be adhered to on both sides. Surely that is not too much to ask? Reply | Quote 8   5

Karen Freeman   |2010-09-30 17:12:54 It is a pity that there is now no rule preventing exhibitors advertising the fact they entering their cats at forthcoming shows.Some of the comments referring to Dawn Porter are downright rude bordering on bullying the gccf to back down on what in MY opinion a good idea,and when all said and done the 3 lucky cats to reach the point of overall best in show will have already been judged by your "PROPER"! judges.gccf have made this decision wouldn't it surely be better to support the gccf and not bicker about a decision which has already been made Reply | Quote 6   2

sheltie  - re:   |2010-09-29 20:53:32 Karen Freeman wrote: If the majority of the previous comments are representative of the attitude and behavior of the hp exhibitors entered to this years supreme show then I am glad I have not entered. There is nothing wrong with the attitude or behaviour in the HP section ,and I for one take offence at your generalised comment .What the folks are saying on here is they are not happy with something,and they are entitled to their views ,obviously your beliefs are different ,but as you say ,you have not entered ,so it doesnt affect you,so why insult a section !!! Reply | Quote 8   5

Reynard   |2010-09-29 20:23:41 Agreed! well-said, Sheltie. There's absolutely nothing wrong in airing one's views on the matter in a polite and corteous manner. Reply | Quote 3   3

Sue McParlin   |2010-09-28 18:11:48 A sensible compromise Carol, one I know which has a lot of support with in both Pedigree and HP Reply | Quote 8   3

Reynard   |2010-09-28 12:21:11 Whether the show manager likes or dislikes household pets should not have a bearing on how the show itself is run. A show manager is there to run a show in the best interests of all, preferably without stepping on *anyone's* toes. Many shows depend on the HP section to help balance their books, and in this, the Supreme is no different. Upsetting the exhibitors isn't the way to do this. The bottom line is that the situation with the celebrity "judge" was not mentioned in the schedule and that the show committee have made a serious misjudgement over what the Household Pet section wants. Getting "bums on seats" in terms of the visiting public is a completely different kettle of fish... Reply | Quote 9   7

unknown   |2010-09-28 07:46:44 As far as I know the show manager doesn't like household pets. Reply | Quote 2   9

Carol Walker  - A possible solution to this silliness   |2010-09-28 07:45:03 OK. Bottom line is this:- a simple but serious misjudgement on the part of the Supreme Publicity Officer of what the HP section wants and is all about has, in one fell swoop, alienated the vast majority of HP exhibitors who always look upon the Supreme as the highlight of their year. This in turn has brought a considerable amount of support from the pedigree section too and the whole thing has now grown to the point where a good number of next year's entries are seriously at risk of being lost. Whether or not you believe the rumours that the Supreme Show manager dislikes the HPs and would like rid is immaterial, no show manager worth their salt, and especially not one working so hard to turn around the fortunes of a show losing vast amounts of money - and, moreover, one who has already had some success in that respect - would want to risk losing any entries at all if they could help it. I also appreciate that any celebrity, "A" or "Z" list, will have their following (whether or not "us oldies" have ever heard of her) and, therefore, may be able to generate some extra visitors and, therefore, gate money so having a celebrity in itself is not a bad thing. What that celebrity does, however, is an entirely different matter. Before it is too late why don't the Supreme Committee go back to what is written in the schedule and what the exhibitors are more than happy with - "There will be three overall BIS winners: the SUPREME NON-PEDIGREE EXHIBIT, the SUPREME PEDIGREE-PET EXHIBIT and the SUPREME HOUSEHOLD PET KITTEN" And, also what I myself have been given in writing will happen - "Group judging (on BOG/BO will be done in the ring as per the pedigree section. The best SH/LH NP (Non-Pedigree) and ditto PP (Pedigree Pet) will go up on stage for Supreme BIS in each." Then let Ms Porter award the prizes by all means, let her do the same for the pedigree section and, if she MUST have a personal favourite cat then give her a "Dawn Porter loves/chose me" rosette to give to ANY cat of her choice, non pedigree, pet pedigree or pedigree. If she is as much a cat lover as is indicated by her being asked to "judge" then surely she will be in her element having over 1100 cats and kittens to choose from, plus this would give her a chance to mingle with her fans, which would be a far more enticing proposition to attract visitors than merely the chance to see her on stage from afar for a few minutes, which, of course, they will get as well. This way everyone is happy, the status quo is restored vis a vis the HP exhibitors, neither they, nor their judges, continue to feel demeaned and devalued and the Supreme has the added atrraction of a celebrity mingling, choosing her favourite cats and awarding prizes. No one loses and, hopefully, bridges are built to breach the ever widening divide appearing bewteen many exhibitors and the Supreme, surely it has to be worth a try? Reply | Quote 12   7

Reynard   |2010-09-27 20:38:14 All of us HP exhibitors are spitting tacks at this. We've been taken for a ride and we don't like it one little bit... Reply | Quote 6   9

Philippa   |2010-09-28 07:45:00 Not all of us HP and PP exhibitors are are spitting tacks. Please do not generalise. Reply | Quote 9   5

Linda   |2010-09-27 20:06:58 I've always watched at the main stage, the HP Supreme exhibit winning...it's part of the run up to the Pedigree Supreme winner being announced..the situation with the HP's being relagated to the rings is disgusting! They pay as much as the rest of us and deserve to be treated as equals. If it wasn't for the 'humble moggy', many of the breeds that we have today wouldn't be here. Why have the powers that be forgotten where their roots lay? I feel that there is something very,very fishy going on here and I cannot put my finger on it. Not only the thing with Dawn judging, but now we find it won't count to any title, but pushing the HP's to the outside edges seems to be a bit much. Or am I being a bit paranoid here? If I were exhibiting a HP at the Supreme I would be livid at this. Reply | Quote 10   2

Marianne Brett     |2010-09-27 16:21:30 The HP exhibitors pay the EXACT same entry fee as the pedigree exhibitors. Why should the pets be treated as second class citizens with the BIS judging not even taking place on stage? There is usually a huge crowd watching the BIS non ped judging (you only have to watch last year's YouTube footage to verify this) and I cannot for my life see this being possible with it taking place in a ring. If we are going to be treated like this, with Z list "celebrities" handling the cats, why are we paying the same entry fee? Reply | Quote 10   1

Carol Walker   |2010-09-27 15:24:57 Well that is better than it was I suppose, although one is left wondering why on earth they couldn't have put that in the press release in the first place, it would have avoided all the fuss and ill-feeling that it has now generated. Although there still seems to be confusion, one source says that she will merely be presenting prizes and picking her favourite cat, the other still maintains that it will be the Supreme Household Pet she is picking, though this will not mean anything??? In that case, how can it have the title of Supreme Household Pet?????, Crazy and still most unsatisfactory. Whilst the HP section is, obviously, very gratfeul for this , it is also very sad that it is now to be denied its limited few moments of glory on stage as originally (and I have proof of this) it was to be that the Best SH and LH Non-Ped, Pet-Ped and Kitten were to be ring judged with the Best SH and LH in each of the 3 categories then going up on stage to be judged by the panel for Overall Best Non-Ped, Pet-Ped and Kitten. The section has now, it would appear, forfeited their right to this in return for the "glory" of being presented with their prize on stage by a "celebrity" who will then pick the one she likes the best. There was always a good crowsd around the stage for the BIS HP judging in the past, as, let's face it, to the majority of ordinary cat lovers and owners, these are the ones most like their little cat at home, and to remove this to a ring still leaves the section devalued, which makes one wonder if that was not, in fact, the original intention! This outcome is a compromise, nothing more, nothing less. I see the HP section is only up 2 cats, let's just hope for the Supreme Committee's sake that they get a lot more pedigree entries next year as I think they will be missing an awful lot of HPs after this! Reply | Quote 8   5

Karen Freeman   |2010-09-28 09:14:52 If the majority of the previous comments are representative of the attitude and behavior of the hp exhibitors entered to this years supreme show then I am glad I have not entered. Reply | Quote 9   10

Tortietart   |2010-10-06 21:51:14 The attitude and behaviour of the pedigree exhibitors is never in question then? I don't see anything wrong with what has been written by HP exhibitors above, at least it's civil and polite. I exhibit in both sections and it's a matter of principle - if you're so keen on this happening to HPs then let's have a celebrity judge choosing the top pedigree as well. Reply | Quote 1   0

Write comment
Name:
Email:	do not notifynotify
Website:
Title:
UBBCode:	-color-aquablackbluefuchsiagraygreenlimemaroonnavyolivepurpleredsilvertealwhiteyellow -size-tinysmallmediumlargehuge
	Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.26

3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."