BTW of the two YouTubes above, I actually think "Rambo" is actually closer to breed standard, as long as he is still immature in that photo. He does look younger...I think in two more years he looks to be perfect breed standard. The first one seems just a bit too boxy in the face and a bit overweight in the body.
I think of this akita as a perfect breed look:
This one seems too long-legged:
This one is pretty, but I think slightly long in the muzzle:
Of course, again, age makes a HUGE difference in this breed....an 18 month old akita can hardly be compared to, say, a 6 year old one.
micro is short for microphthalmia. It is a genetic disorder--recessive genes, both parents must carry it. It causes one eye to be smaller in mild cases, but is pretty bad because in worse cases, puppies can be born blind or without eyes altogether. If a dog has it, then not only should the parents not be rebred, but neither should any dogs from that litter, or at least that's what I've read about this, because it can be devastating. But some people think it's ok to breed--just not repeat the breeding.
I don't believe dogs with micro should be shown, because the purpose of showing is to prove that these are dogs that are worth of being breeding stock, and a dog with micro should not be bred. But I've seen dogs with it in the ring. Once you know what it is, it's easy to see even the mild cases. (My Akita has it, so I feel pretty strongly about this. His vision is ok now, we think, but he is at risk of other vision problems in the future, and we do have to pay a lot of attention to his eyes, since the smaller eye doesn't fit well, and needs to be flushed out more often, etc.)
i sometimes can't tell if AA have longer torso's or shorter legs than JAs.
I know that they're longer than a JA, and maybe not significantly much, buuuuttt is it because of their longer torso or is it because they have shorter legs??? Or does it go back to the super varied tastes that deviate from the standard? Is the AA actually even supposed to look longer than a JA? See, thats my problem. Because the breed has become popular, there are too many BYB's and sub-par breeders who contribute to this variety, straying too far from the standard. Its great that the AA is popular, but it comes with its own evils.
Well, good question. I thought I'd pull some stuff out of the breed standard (AKC) for AA to see, though it doesn't really answer the question of length, but it does look at proportions and size a bit.
AA:
Body--Longer than high, as to 10 is to 9 in males; 11 to 9 in bitches. Measurement from the point of the sternum to the point of buttocks. Chest wide and deep; reaching down to the elbow, the depth of the body at the elbow equals half the height of the dog at the withers. Ribs well sprung, brisket well developed. Level back with firmly-muscled loin and moderate tuck-up. Skin pliant but not loose. Serious Faults--Light bone, rangy body.
Size: Males 26 to 28 inches at the withers; bitches 24 to 26 inches. Disqualification--dogs under 25 inches; bitches under 23 inches.
JA From JACA breed standard page (love the diagrams, btw!):
Chest and Body Well developed deep chest, with full rib cage and a well drawn up tuck up in abdomen. Back is strong and level with a broad and muscular loin. Males are square 10 to 10. Females may be slightly longer in proportion than males.
Size Males, preferred is 24 ½ and over. Females, preferred is 22 ½ and over.
Interesting....I thought I remember at some point someone said there is no upper size limits, and I didn't think that was right for AAs. And there is an upper and lower size range for AAs, but not for JAs!
And this is interesting. I also found this, the FCI standard for JA, which is slightly different than the JACA:
IMPORTANT PROPORTIONS : The ratio of height at withers to length of body ( from the point of the shoulders to the point of the buttock) is 10 : 11, but the body is slightly longer in bitches than in dogs.
SIZE :
Height at the withers: Dogs : 67 cm, + or – 3 cm. Bitches: 61cm, +or – 3 cm
Anyway, I don't know that this answers jellyfish's question, but it was interesting to look at the different standards.
Well, there is a height too tall for JA. Something around 29 or 28. People care more about a dog being too short than too tall, however. I knew the JA males were square. I think a lot of the weight for an AA comes from being longer. Yea they are slightly taller, but a JA is going to be short in the torso. I remember I never really noticed until I took toki to dog parks when he wad a puppy. He was super square and short lengthwise compared to all the mutts running around. Then I look at an AA and theyre so long. Its strange to me.
Yeah, I was surprised actually at how close the standards were, because AAs seem so much bigger and bulkier. But in fact, the difference isn't huge. And I've only seen a few young JAs so it's hard to really compare.
But while AAs aren't exactly square, they shouldn't be too long either. (note the 10/9 above, or 11/9 in bitches). I note this in comparison to the Kai, who seems so long in comparison to our Shibas and AA.
So I guess, really, a good example of either breed should not be that different in size/proportions...
And every time I'm at a dog show, my husband says these AAs aren't that big, and often we're looking at the puppy class, so we're seeing dogs that are just past 6 months old. Our AA grew a lot after 6 months, and gained height even after 1 year.
Comments
I think of this akita as a perfect breed look:
This one seems too long-legged:
This one is pretty, but I think slightly long in the muzzle:
Of course, again, age makes a HUGE difference in this breed....an 18 month old akita can hardly be compared to, say, a 6 year old one.
I don't believe dogs with micro should be shown, because the purpose of showing is to prove that these are dogs that are worth of being breeding stock, and a dog with micro should not be bred. But I've seen dogs with it in the ring. Once you know what it is, it's easy to see even the mild cases. (My Akita has it, so I feel pretty strongly about this. His vision is ok now, we think, but he is at risk of other vision problems in the future, and we do have to pay a lot of attention to his eyes, since the smaller eye doesn't fit well, and needs to be flushed out more often, etc.)
I know that they're longer than a JA, and maybe not significantly much, buuuuttt is it because of their longer torso or is it because they have shorter legs??? Or does it go back to the super varied tastes that deviate from the standard? Is the AA actually even supposed to look longer than a JA? See, thats my problem. Because the breed has become popular, there are too many BYB's and sub-par breeders who contribute to this variety, straying too far from the standard. Its great that the AA is popular, but it comes with its own evils.
AA:
Body--Longer than high, as to 10 is to 9 in males; 11 to 9 in bitches. Measurement from the point of the sternum to the point of buttocks. Chest wide and deep; reaching down to the elbow, the depth of the body at the elbow equals half the height of the dog at the withers. Ribs well sprung, brisket well developed. Level back with firmly-muscled loin and moderate tuck-up. Skin pliant but not loose. Serious Faults--Light bone, rangy body.
Size: Males 26 to 28 inches at the withers; bitches 24 to 26 inches. Disqualification--dogs under 25 inches; bitches under 23 inches.
JA From JACA breed standard page (love the diagrams, btw!):
Chest and Body
Well developed deep chest, with full rib cage and a well drawn up tuck up in abdomen. Back is strong and level with a broad and muscular loin. Males are square 10 to 10. Females may be slightly longer in proportion than males.
Size
Males, preferred is 24 ½ and over. Females, preferred is 22 ½ and over.
Interesting....I thought I remember at some point someone said there is no upper size limits, and I didn't think that was right for AAs. And there is an upper and lower size range for AAs, but not for JAs!
And this is interesting. I also found this, the FCI standard for JA, which is slightly different than the JACA:
IMPORTANT PROPORTIONS : The ratio of height at withers to length of body ( from the point of the shoulders to the point of the buttock) is 10 : 11, but the body is slightly longer in bitches than in dogs.
SIZE :
Height at the withers: Dogs : 67 cm, + or – 3 cm. Bitches: 61cm, +or – 3 cm
Anyway, I don't know that this answers jellyfish's question, but it was interesting to look at the different standards.
But while AAs aren't exactly square, they shouldn't be too long either. (note the 10/9 above, or 11/9 in bitches). I note this in comparison to the Kai, who seems so long in comparison to our Shibas and AA.
So I guess, really, a good example of either breed should not be that different in size/proportions...
And every time I'm at a dog show, my husband says these AAs aren't that big, and often we're looking at the puppy class, so we're seeing dogs that are just past 6 months old. Our AA grew a lot after 6 months, and gained height even after 1 year.