First Place:  2

Entry number: 513

Exhibitor: football freak

State: TX

Sheep name/number: Dime

Breed: Hampshire X

We choose to prefer the added show ring appearance attributed to 2 over the added muscular development exhibited by 3. To better explain this, 2 displays a more stunning view from the profile, he is driven more upward through the floor of his chest, ties neater at the top of his shoulder and what truly sets him to the top of this class is he is the strongest and levelest down his top and out through the base of his hip.

Second Place:  3

Entry number: 627

Exhibitor: farmtown8kid

State: MN

Sheep name/number: 10643

Breed: Suffolk X

On the other hand some may admire 3 for his advantage in muscular development. When viewed from behind we quickly notice more budge and true dimension to his lower leg, he too exhibits more width from stifle  to stifle and more depth to his twist. But this aside, the fact he is steeper in his hip and hocks in on his hind legs, limits him to a close second.

Even so 3 clearly dominates 4 in our intermediate pair, he presents himself as wider based, deeper sided lamb that is more parallel in his lines and posses a more desired turn to his rib.

Third Place:  4

Entry number: 674
Exhibitor: babyewe
State: CO
Sheep name/number: Dee

We do recognize the long fleeced wether as a better balanced more correctly designed lamb who, in terms of profiling appeal better matches our class winner, but his lack of width of skeleton from the floor up and structural integrity makes him unfit to be deemed a top pair contender.

Nevertheless, its 4 over 1 in our closing decision as he is not only better balanced but to add to this he presents himself with a more muscular look. He is wider and thicker down his top and fuller through his lower leg.   If handled we would expect him to present a firmer, broader, more upstanding rack shape.

Fourth Place:  1

Entry number: 298

1 is surely sounder footed as he sets down on stouter, more powerful bone and exhibits a squarer, truer set from his hocks to the ground, but beyond this, there is not much more to distance himself from the bottom. He is the poorest in his visual presentation from a standpoint of correctness of balance and when assessed for productivity we quickly notice his is the lightest in his muscular development being peaked in his top shape and flat when viewed from behind.

Therefore we placed this class 2, 3, 4, 1 with cuts of 3, 5, 2.