OK, here goes.  Where does one go to get into a technical discussion on the "GSP Breed Standard"?  Also, who, by consensise is considered to be the Breed Standard Exegete?

My question goes to who has the difinitive interpretation of the breed standard.  Is it AKC or GSPCA?  Not only that, but who with in the respective organization is concidered the expert on the interpretation of the words within the standard?

OK, here goes.  Where does one go to get into a technical discussion on the "GSP Breed Standard"?  Also, who, by consensus is considered to be the Breed Standard Exegete?  The discussion is not so much to cause a change to the standard but rather get a further understanding of the words that already exist.  Any discussion as to the meaning of the words which has no exegete involved only leads to a multitude of opinions.  I am reluctant to pose the actual questions until I can find the Breed Standard Exegete. 

I agree that owners vary differently in likes and dislikes.  Also because of the versatility of the GSP there are a multitude of venues which they participate in.  And yes even when discussing the standard with its terms of faulted or penalized or disqualified for various components that comprise the GSP you can end up with opinions as to weather the sum of all the parts results in correct or incorrect.  I would also assert that when in the ring a Judge is not giving a critical interpretation of a text but rather forming an opinion as to the total sum of all the parts (as described in the standard) for each individual in the ring and then choosing the best one present and judged that day as the winner.  I would say each judge gives more or less credence to the different parts of the standard as a function of their likes or dislikes.  However I can also see Trey’s point of view that the judge in the ring and making a judgment is in essence acting as and exegete because of the ultimate authority on the final decision which cannot be challenged.  What if two different judges come out different holes?  What is black?  What is brown?  If a dog is disqualified what does that mean?  

To me it is a given that no two judges are alike.  When entering an event you are asking for their opinion and that is what you get, their opinion.  As to Black or Brown, I would argue that you cannot use the term to define the term.  I do not disagree with the statement that a black dog has a black nose and a brown dog has a brown nose.  However, I got there not from reading the standard but by reading articles on genetics.  The reason I was looking for an exegete was to understand the subtlety of why the term “Brown” is used in the standard when describing the eye and the nose.  Yet when describing the coat the term “Liver” is used.  I understand those things within the standard that result in disqualification.  What I am asking is having been disqualified what does it mean?  If you are telling me that it simply means you are not eligible to be in the show ring, I would then ask what business does it have in the standard since the standard is a description of what a German Shorthaired Pointer is.

If I were elected Queen of the Universe one night, you'd all wake up to find GSPs being defined first by what they do and how well they do it, and ONLY then racked and stacked by their various visible merits. And those visible merits would be based on FUNCTION FIRST.

And all children would be loved and wanted, and the Jerry Springer people would actually turn their brain on, and wars would be replaced with calm adult discussion and reason, and chocolate would be non fattening. But... until then....