Official Placing: 1, 3, 2, 4
Cuts: 2, 5, 1
I see
this class as a rather close class in the top and bottom pairs without a
single individual standing out too me. |
First Place: 1
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8a8b1/8a8b10d47ef5b36371da4c29dce9bd5333739c24" alt=""
Entry number:
330
Exhibitor:
CindyFreed
State: CA
Sheep
name/number: Lauren
Breed:
Suffolk/Hampshire |
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/458a1/458a1c3937decc9417157eb167b90cda991f4e5a" alt="" |
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ca78b/ca78b205453063d3c26be323d823451fe794a419" alt=""
With that said, I'm starting the class with 1. I believe 1
is the most complete ewe lamb in the class as viewed from
the side and rear. I would like to see a little less depth
of front and this would add balance, however, she has level
top and bottom lines, is correct at the points, does have a
long rack, loin, and hip and is adequately flat and wide in
these areas. I would like to pick her up at the loin edge
and raise the dock. She is adequate in depth of twist and
is good through the stifle.
|
Second Place: 3
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/28238/2823893c31918ad050b77f245e5e6be2d1a267f3" alt=""
Entry number:
403
Exhibitor:
Karin4005
State: CA
Sheep
name/number: Chanie
Breed:
Crossbred
Website:
www.fishclublambs.com |
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4f3f3/4f3f37b1a3b6114f4c9571e6418abc24c4777ffa" alt="" |
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/48684/48684b89a426b321e50ff13cb4d1d024db6f770c" alt=""
You have to look past the rough shear job and over-stretched
pose of number 3 to see this ewe lambs merits. She probably
has the most length of any ewe in the class. She does have
the length of neck I like to see and she is clean at the
points. She has most width of chest floor of any ewe
in the class. She does break at the hip/loinL juncture,
however, this is due to being overly stretched out. I would
like to raise the dock set and this would level the hip.
She is lacking in depth of twist and I would like to see
more evidence of muscle through the stifle.
|
Third Place: 2
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eaa45/eaa4579454b2f0914a74581b2714055328ebe1bd" alt=""
Entry number:
384
|
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2b249/2b249a34e7bc82fbb60602768355212c3307f397" alt="" |
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4ad56/4ad5600bda2c0e2bc0e428d5294c383fb9cb817a" alt=""
I see 2 and 4 in the bottom pair. Both are too short and
lacking in style and feminity for me. I do give a slight
edge to 2 over 4.
She does not profile, has a short neck, rolls over the rack
and loin, slopes at the hip and is too round in the muscle
for my taste, but, I believe she is not quite as weak in
those areas as 4.
|
Fourth Place: 4
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1eb1a/1eb1a38d269d27741718478eaee8c0b9153092e4" alt=""
Entry number:
404 |
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eea9d/eea9dcf1aaa6730d08a2ca1a4ce133692cb92e34" alt="" |
4 is too narrow over the rack and loin, roaches in the back,
slopes off the dock, is too shallow in the twist, and lacks
muscle through the stifle.
I see the class placing 1, 3, 2, 4 with cuts of 2, 5, 1.
|
|