Judges on the Mic

[JSchroeder]

I do think it's funny that market show steers still have that bad rep for movement issues when the show ring is the only place a 1300 lb steer packed with muscle and fat is actually expected to move. 

 

[qbcattle]

My argument was not that they did not need to be MARKET ready, it is simply that at the end of the day Ur MARKET READY cripple is going to lose or cost u money where my sound market ready calf will make me money.

 

[JSchroeder]

I think you're making a slightly different point.  There's a different between dropping a terminal steer for being a cripple and ignoring a calf because he doesn't move like a cat at 1,300 pounds pumped with fill.

There's no shortage of judges today that will drop a steer in a terminal show because he doesn't cover his tracks.  He can move just fine otherwise, he just doesn't move like you'd like a cow out in the pasture to move.  A person can understand why a judge does that and still admit that there's no logical reason that missing his tracks by 2 inches makes him in any way a lesser terminal market animal than an identical steer that does fill his hoof marks.

I don't fight it any more, I just laugh at the fact that a heavy emphasis on soundness and movement are now one of the biggest differences in show steers vs what is necessary in a real life finished market steer. 

That divergences of priorities of the show ring is only emphasized the day after the show when those same market steers that "absolutely have to be able to move" are then tied up to the fence where they can't move so kids can compete in livestock judging contests.

 

[dixieland cattle co]

I tend to find it goes the opposite way to much myself.  Yes I believe we have to recognize structural issues, but its a market show.  In a market show we are supposed to be judging the animals as if they are going to hang on the rail that day, in that situation product and market readiness(finish) are the most important traits to look for.  In fact I just had a committe member for a fairly large county fair call me to get me to submit my information and price to judge their show next yr.  One of their concerns with past judges is that they tend to value stucture and style over product to much.  Their issue is that their carcass contest is always completely backwards from the live show.  Understanding that we will never completely match live evaluation with the rail, there is concern when the 2 are so far apart.  In judging a market show we are supposed to be selecting the calf that we think is most likely to hang the best carcass on the rail.  When they evaluate on the rail they arent in the least concerned with how that calf walked or how stylish he was, I am not saying we should throw structure and style completely out of show ring, but when they arent a factor at all on the rail, then they shouldnt be very high on our priority list in the show ring.
Beyond that, using a finished steer that was fed for show or in the feedlot to determine possible structure issues in his mama and sisters is kinda like comparing apples to oranges, yes they are both fruit and both grow on trees, beyond that the environment and methods that get them to us are fairly different.  I would never expect a heifer the same frame size and age as the steers in my barn to carry near the body mass and weight that my steers are, when ideally I not only expect my steers to do that I would love for them to have more.  We affect that by castrating the steers and taking away hormones which affects metabolism and how they use feed, we also tend to push a lot hotter feed to steers.  We push steers to be 1300+ pounds, finished, and ready for market long before they mature skeletally.  All of that can have negative impacts on structural soundness.  While if heifers are fed properly to be replacement females we are going to support skeletal soundness and maturity above all else.  So saying that a steer that is post legged or tight strided or pops a little when he is 14-15 months old, over 1300 pounds and no where near to  skeletally mature is going to mean that his contemporary heifers will have the  same issues is not a very sound advice, b/c hopefully if those contemporary heifers are being raised as replacements then they havent been raised in nearly the same manner.

This post might be the most informative and common sense response to this age old debate, I have ever read. Well said.

 

[leanbeef]

I have to disagree with the notion that the winner of the live show has to win the carcass show in order to validate a judge's evaluation of the live cattle. If we just want to know which animal is the highest marbling or the highest yielding calf, there's no need to HAVE a live show! There are other factors--like soundness--that become part of the puzzle when we evaluate them live, so it stands to reason that the same calf doesn't win both shows every time. That's not to say the winner of the live show shouldn't hang a respectable carcass...he absolutely should! Because that SHOULD BE an important part of the puzzle as well. A live show is an opinion and it's subjective...it might even change if you lead the same cattle back to the same judge a few days later, and that's because the cattle change...they have some days that are better than other days, and it's a subjective evaluation based on the information and the opinions of that judge on that day. I agree with the comment that was made about an excuse not to breed a great one! Too many people want their good one to be considered great, and if we could all see them just for what they are, we'd make more progress toward making the next generation a little better. We can still appreciate and respect the what's good in each one without being too critical, but we also have to keep that ideal in mind if we want to keep moving em in that direction.

 

[twistedhshowstock]

I have to disagree with the notion that the winner of the live show has to win the carcass show in order to validate a judge's evaluation of the live cattle. If we just want to know which animal is the highest marbling or the highest yielding calf, there's no need to HAVE a live show! There are other factors--like soundness--that become part of the puzzle when we evaluate them live, so it stands to reason that the same calf doesn't win both shows every time. That's not to say the winner of the live show shouldn't hang a respectable carcass...he absolutely should! Because that SHOULD BE an important part of the puzzle as well. A live show is an opinion and it's subjective...it might even change if you lead the same cattle back to the same judge a few days later, and that's because the cattle change...they have some days that are better than other days, and it's a subjective evaluation based on the information and the opinions of that judge on that day. I agree with the comment that was made about an excuse not to breed a great one! Too many people want their good one to be considered great, and if we could all see them just for what they are, we'd make more progress toward making the next generation a little better. We can still appreciate and respect the what's good in each one without being too critical, but we also have to keep that ideal in mind if we want to keep moving em in that direction.

I dont believe the winner of the  live show has to be the winner of the carcass show, but when the results of the 2 contest are completely backwards from each other then yes I think we have an issue.  We are never going to be spot on with the live show and carcass contests, none of us have x ray vission to see marbling and other things we would need to evaluate the carcass completely.  But as it is a market show, and they should be evaluated on which is more likely to hang the best carcass that day, then yes I believe there is an issue when the live evaluation  is as far away from the carcass contests as it is often common for it to be in this time where be cat like athletic and real pretty on the profile seem to be more important in the market show ring than the product the animal will put on the table.

 

[Ms Ray]

I remember my first steer I had when I showed the judge placed him down and got on the mic and said this steer will be the best hanging steer at the fair, if I was going to buy one I would buy him.  He wasn't as fancy as the other ones and was bigger than they were going for at the time.

 

[GONEWEST]

I'm as much about soundness as anybody - I really agree with what rtmcc and qbcattle are saying.  Matter of fact I had a couple of paragraphs typed adding my two cents, but before I posted it, twisted's last reply came up.  I read it, and I agreed with it, and I cancelled that post and went to bed and tried to sleep, then the light finally flashed on in my head...  We've been to 6 shows in the past month, and looking back over a wide array of judging styles just at those shows, it finally clicked for me.  We have talked about the need to improve soundness so much, that some judges have become absolutely paranoid about using any animal they see even the tiniest thing in that they think might be construed as a soundness issue. With some, it has almost become a vendetta of sorts - they're out to rid the world (or at least their show ring, by golly) of all structral issues, big or small.  Much as we need soundness, we don't need that either.

Its not only FUNCTIONALLY SOUND that they have to be, it's gotten to the point that it's got to be aesthetically sound. The soundness has to LOOK good. A heavy muscled 1350 pound steer that misses his tracks by 2 inches is not less sound than a lighter muscled one that makes it. He just LOOKS better moving. Some of these thick cattle that "get their legs up under them" would have no more skeletal problems than a lighter muscled one that kept his legs out on the corners of his body if they both lived 25 more years. For me it's no different than the extremes in frame that were the 80's, or extremes in anything.

But back to the original question, I think if you keep the heifers that are mates to show steers for your cows, you deserve what ever you get, good or bad. Even commercial people who have a rotational cross breeding programs have a terminal cross that all animals go to market. Its one of the worst thought out comments a judge can make.

 

[woltemathangus]

The top placing steers will most likely be dark cutters because they have gone on and off feed to make weight, fill out, and such. The perfect cutting steer is the one that is fed straight through beginning at the time of being implanted. But noone has the perfect equation to start a show steer on a certain date that he will finish perfect because no 2 steers eat the same all the way through. If the carcass and live judging correlation ever levels out I don't know.

 

[Hoosier]

I usually avoid posting on topics like this because I know how controversial these discussions can be.  I can see both sides of the debate on soundness in the show ring vs. soundness in the feedlot/heifer mates/etc.  We feed cattle for a living and I'm gonna say that by the time our cattle get ready to make their last trip around the pen at our place and get on the truck, 75% or more of them are NOT perfectly sound, because they have been pushed hard to gain weight as quickly as possible and get them fat and get em outta here.  Last time I checked that was the name of the game.  Twisted hit the nail on the head that these fat cattle are not at their skeletal maturity and most of the time are not going to be sound because of that.  Good thick cattle that can grade at 15 or 16 months eating the lower quality feeds that you have to use in the feedlot are at a premium in the commercial deal.  We can't make money feeding large amounts of $8 corn, corn silage ain't cheap- even if you grow your own, and byproduct prices in our area have more than doubled in the last 6 months.

But to get back to the topic, I don't think market steers need to be perfect on the move to be the best one at the show.  Muscle and proper condition should be the determining factors in finding a champion.  Soundness should be a tiebreaker between calves that are extremely similar in those first two categories.  Now, do I think a crippled one should win if he is the stoutest and most market ready?  Not if there is another steer that is market ready and has adequate muscle and can move.  But I think it has gotten extreme in the last few years, leaving a good thick steer stand in class and using one that comes up way short in the total product department because he can cover his tracks better.  Prospect steers, now that is a whole different story.  600 - 800 pound prospects need to be sound or they will never have a chance to make it to 1300 and compete without all kinds of feed additives and what not to keep from falling apart.

And I guess while I'm at it I will add a new wrinkle to the debate.  I don't know if it's just me as a cattle feeder or if others notice the same thing, but the amount of rib some of these winning fat steers have is getting a little out of whack as well.  Steers are really beginning to look like heifers with a sheath, being so deep and big belllied that they look silly.  I realize that the shallow, flat ribbed ones are hard doing (believe me I've fed a few!).  I like em to have some shape, but my biggest gripe is the depth.  I was always taught that BELLY = WASTE in fat cattle.  Big bellied ones won't yield on the rail, and yield has become a very important factor in fat cattle, especially if you sell on the grid or the hook.

But I suppose I'll jump off my soapbox by saying that until a judge steps outside the box and starts using a different style of steers to win fat shows, the trend of soundness first and big middled ones winning will continue, and I will continue to look for that kind when I buy prospects, whether I agree or not.

 

[GONEWEST]

I like what Hoosier said about the belly and the yield and I THOUGHT that some judges had gotten away from some of that over the past couple years but the pictures I have seen from midwest fairs so far doesn't look like it.

 

[OH Breeder]

on topic sorta off topic.....

we had a feeder show and the judge knocked a calf down because he said the calf was "...too early maturing?"
Anyone care to take a stab at that one?


Hoosier....question
Big belly or deep ribbed? I am asking trying to understand your statement. Belly - waste but what about deep ribbed?

 

[knabe]

what about having a belly makes them not yield.

yield is based on carcass weight of carcass, fat thickness at 13th rib and kph.

do they have excess fat somewhere?

 

[Hoosier]

OHB - I'll take a stab at your early maturing question first.  To me, early maturing is short boned, headed, bodied, etc.  Those calves get there quick but never get to an optimum size, like finish at 1000 or 1050 instead of 1250 or 1300.  A lot of these little headed and short cannon boned ones won't grow size-wise and typically get fat sooner (steers) or run out of gas and are smaller framed mature females. 
Now, to clarify about my belly/deep ribbed statement.  When it comes to feedlot cattle, extra rib, belly, depth of rib, or whatever term you choose to use equals one thing -- extra guts.  And by extra guts I mean actual guts - stomach, intestines, basically all internal organs.  And while all these organs are used by the packer, whether sold as specialty "meats", for research, or any of the other variety of products they are used for, I, as a feeder, am not getting paid for how much the internal organs of an animal weighs if you sell on a value based system (grid or hanging weight).  I realize that selling fats on live weight that, yes, technically you get paid for everything, but packers would much rather handle red meat than organs.  They will pay a feeder more for cattle that consistently yield over 63% than to someone whose cattle yield less (63% is considered average yield on beef breed cattle, dairy breeds are lower).  I had a buyer tell me once that cattle are ready to kill when you have "fed the gut off 'em", meaning they have been fed high energy feed long enough to lose the hay/grass belly, because they no longer need it.  I realize that is completely opposite of females, but cows have to survive on roughage, and they have to eat a large volume to get their nutritional requirements. That is a big reason we feed straw instead of hay in the feedlot.  A little straw goes a long way in terms of keeping the rumen going in cattle that are being fed hard.  We have found that cattle will go to a bale of hay and eat a large volume, but will only eat a few bites of straw, reducing gut fill, and in turn eat more energy dense feed and get fat more efficiently.  Knabe, you are correct saying that yield is based on hot carcass weight, fat cover and kph fat.  And no, excess fat doesn't cause poor yield.  Actually it is the opposite.  Cattle with extra fat, at least to a degree, often yield higher than under conditioned cattle.  I guess i find this situation to be similar to wet grain (forgive the comparison, it's the first thing that popped into my head).  If a steer is like a kernel of corn, which is heavier, a kernel of 30% moisture corn, or 15% corn?  The 30%.  But all you get with that weight is 15% more water, no more actual corn.  Fat cattle work the same way.  If you have two identical steers in terms of carcass weight and fat cover, on weighing 1250 and the other weighing 1300, all you are gitting with that extra 50 pounds is more guts, not red meat, and as a result, lower yield.  I guess I will quit rambling now, sorry for the ANSCI 101 lesson, but I just wanted to explain my thought process as clearly as possible.

 

[OH Breeder]

OHB - I'll take a stab at your early maturing question first.  To me, early maturing is short boned, headed, bodied, etc.  Those calves get there quick but never get to an optimum size, like finish at 1000 or 1050 instead of 1250 or 1300.  A lot of these little headed and short cannon boned ones won't grow size-wise and typically get fat sooner (steers) or run out of gas and are smaller framed mature females. 
Now, to clarify about my belly/deep ribbed statement.  When it comes to feedlot cattle, extra rib, belly, depth of rib, or whatever term you choose to use equals one thing -- extra guts.  And by extra guts I mean actual guts - stomach, intestines, basically all internal organs.  And while all these organs are used by the packer, whether sold as specialty "meats", for research, or any of the other variety of products they are used for, I, as a feeder, am not getting paid for how much the internal organs of an animal weighs if you sell on a value based system (grid or hanging weight).  I realize that selling fats on live weight that, yes, technically you get paid for everything, but packers would much rather handle red meat than organs.  They will pay a feeder more for cattle that consistently yield over 63% than to someone whose cattle yield less (63% is considered average yield on beef breed cattle, dairy breeds are lower).  I had a buyer tell me once that cattle are ready to kill when you have "fed the gut off 'em", meaning they have been fed high energy feed long enough to lose the hay/grass belly, because they no longer need it.  I realize that is completely opposite of females, but cows have to survive on roughage, and they have to eat a large volume to get their nutritional requirements. That is a big reason we feed straw instead of hay in the feedlot.  A little straw goes a long way in terms of keeping the rumen going in cattle that are being fed hard.  We have found that cattle will go to a bale of hay and eat a large volume, but will only eat a few bites of straw, reducing gut fill, and in turn eat more energy dense feed and get fat more efficiently.  Knabe, you are correct saying that yield is based on hot carcass weight, fat cover and kph fat.  And no, excess fat doesn't cause poor yield.  Actually it is the opposite.  Cattle with extra fat, at least to a degree, often yield higher than under conditioned cattle.  I guess i find this situation to be similar to wet grain (forgive the comparison, it's the first thing that popped into my head).  If a steer is like a kernel of corn, which is heavier, a kernel of 30% moisture corn, or 15% corn?  The 30%.  But all you get with that weight is 15% more water, no more actual corn.  Fat cattle work the same way.  If you have two identical steers in terms of carcass weight and fat cover, on weighing 1250 and the other weighing 1300, all you are gitting with that extra 50 pounds is more guts, not red meat, and as a result, lower yield.  I guess I will quit rambling now, sorry for the ANSCI 101 lesson, but I just wanted to explain my thought process as clearly as possible.

THANK YOU!
Seriously, this is why I came to this site few years back. I have learned so much from people on here. What you have said makes total sense. Thanks for your input helped me a bunch.

 

[qbcattle]

THANK YOU!
Seriously, this is why I came to this site few years back. I have learned so much from people on here. What you have said makes total sense. Thanks for your input helped me a bunch.
[/quote]

I agree Jason may need to archive this entire thread. There is a lot of real good info, very informative debate, and different approaches that make alot of real world sense.

 

[twistedhshowstock]

I agree this has been one of the best true debates we have seen on here in a while.  Most of the time they turn into big ol arguments with name calling and degrading each other if everybody doesnt agree.  This time, even though there was difference of opinion, everyone remained civil and seemed to see the validity of everyones point of view.

 

[leanbeef]

I agree this has been one of the best true debates we have seen on here in a while.  Most of the time they turn into big ol arguments with name calling and degrading each other if everybody doesnt agree.  This time, even though there was difference of opinion, everyone remained civil and seemed to see the validity of everyones point of view.

That's what it's all about. As long as we can respect each other and try to understand another's point of view, we'll stand the chance of learning something, regardless of whether we think we still have something to learn or not!

 

[PLKR]

At state fair we had a judge for a breed show that said he would give up structure and soundness for mass and body. This was for a purebred show on the heifers and bulls. I found it very wrong to ok some structure flaws especially when the show had over 200 head and the heifer that won had no base width and couldn't walk. There were much better ones left standing.

Obie--I would be interested in knowing what show you are referring to...I won't ask you to mention the judge's name.
Hard to imagine a judge would make such a statement, especially given the current emphasis on soundness by many judges...

 

[PLKR]

At state fair we had a judge for a breed show that said he would give up structure and soundness for mass and body. This was for a purebred show on the heifers and bulls. I found it very wrong to ok some structure flaws especially when the show had over 200 head and the heifer that won had no base width and couldn't walk. There were much better ones left standing.

sent u a PM obie...can't wait for a reply!