Early AutumnShowdown

An IABBR Virtual Show is a structured dog show in which eligible Alapaha Blue-Blood Bulldogs are presented to an appointed judge through a prescribed set of conformation photographs and movement videos.

Dogs are entered into the appropriate age and sex classes. Each approved entry is presented to the judge through a private professional judging workspace.

The judge reviews each dog individually, compares dogs within the class, records criterion observations, assigns scores where required and determines the final placements.

The worldwide Alapaha population is geographically dispersed.

Many owners do not live within practical travelling distance of an IABBR show or another event offering dedicated Alapaha classes. International travel, transport costs, accommodation, work commitments, health, disability and the welfare implications of transporting a dog over long distances can make physical participation impossible.

Virtual shows allow these owners to participate in an organised breed competition without pretending that a remote assessment is identical to a physical examination.

No.

The IABBR remains committed to physical dog shows and is actively planning multiple in-person events for 2027, aiming to hold at least three.

We are also exploring opportunities for Alapaha classes at established dog-show events in the United States and the United Kingdom.

Virtual shows are an additional part of our show programme. They are not a substitute for gathering dogs, breeders, owners and judges together in person.

Physical shows remain extremely important, but they cannot serve every member.

The IABBR represents an international breed community. Restricting meaningful competition to owners who can travel to a particular region would exclude a substantial part of that community.

Our aim is to provide both:

• Properly organised physical events
• Accessible virtual events for owners who cannot reasonably attend them

The formats serve different circumstances and can exist alongside one another.

Yes. It is a genuine virtual competition conducted under published rules.

Dogs are entered into defined classes, assessed against the Alapaha Blue-Blood Bulldog breed standard and placed by an appointed human judge.

Entry does not guarantee a placement, qualification, award, title, high score or favourable critique.

The word “virtual” describes the format. It does not mean that every dog receives an award or that the result is predetermined.

No, and the IABBR will never pretend otherwise.

A physical judge can handle the dog, inspect it directly, control its movement and observe its response to a live show environment.

A virtual judge can study a prescribed set of conformation photographs, replay movement videos, focus on individual media views and compare dogs alongside one another. However, the judge cannot physically touch the dog or independently reproduce every part of an in-person examination.

Our virtual events therefore operate as a distinct show format with their own evidence requirements, safeguards and judging procedures.

---

Each dog is presented through six required conformation photographs and two required movement videos.

The required media consists of:

• Front head view
• Side head profile
• Mouth and bite view
• Front body and conformation view
• Side stacked conformation view
• Rear conformation view
• Side gait and movement video
• Down-and-back movement video

These requirements give every judge the same core views of every dog.

Exhibitors cannot replace the prescribed views with unrelated portraits, promotional photographs or selectively chosen media that does not meet the judging requirements.

Each item shows the judge a different part of the dog.

A small number of attractive photographs would not provide enough information for a meaningful assessment and could make it easier to conceal important characteristics.

The complete set allows the judge to examine the head, mouth, front, side, rear, overall outline and movement from more than one perspective.

The purpose is not to create more work for exhibitors. It is to give every dog a sufficiently complete and consistent presentation.

No.

An ordinary modern smartphone should be capable of producing acceptable photographs and videos when the recording guidance is followed.

The media must be clear, correctly framed and suitable for judging. It does not need to be artistically produced.

The judge is assessing the dog, not the cost of the camera, the attractiveness of the background or the exhibitor’s editing ability.

A clear presentation helps a judge see a dog properly, just as good preparation and handling matter at a physical show.

However, the IABBR reduces this advantage by prescribing the required views, camera positions and movement patterns. Professional portraits cannot replace the required evidence.

A polished presentation cannot change the dog’s underlying structure, proportions or movement across a complete and consistent media set.

Exhibitors must follow the published media guidance.

This includes requirements relating to:

• Full visibility of the dog
• Camera orientation
• Suitable camera distance
• Full-body framing
• Natural and even lighting
• A clear, uncluttered background
• A firm, level and non-slip surface
• The prescribed movement route
• Continuous and unaltered video
• Clear visibility of the dog’s feet and outline
• No obstruction of important anatomical areas

Media that prevents a fair assessment may be returned for replacement or rejected.

Exhibitors are allowed to prepare and present their dogs properly, just as dogs are trained, conditioned, groomed and handled for physical shows.

However, the required submission is not limited to a single flattering photograph. Every exhibitor must provide the complete set of prescribed views and movements.

The media must consistently show the same dog and must comply with the event rules relating to age, authenticity, editing and recording conditions.

---

Subject to the quality of the submitted media, the judge can assess visible characteristics including:

• Overall breed type
• Balance and proportions
• General outline
• Head shape and visible head characteristics
• Muzzle proportions
• Visible bite presentation
• Neck and shoulder presentation
• Topline
• Body proportions
• Front and rear structure
• Feet and pastern presentation
• Visible angulation
• Apparent substance and condition
• Side movement
• Coming and going movement
• Visible masculine or feminine breed character
• Overall structural presentation

The judge can enlarge photographs, replay movement videos and compare corresponding views across selected dogs.

Certain characteristics require physical handling, measurement or direct examination.

Depending on the circumstances, these may include:

• Exact height
• Exact weight
• Coat texture
• Muscle condition beneath the coat
• A complete dental examination
• Characteristics that are not visible in the required media
• Certain injuries, scars, surgeries or alterations
• Anatomical characteristics requiring direct physical confirmation

The IABBR will never claim that a remote judge has physically verified something that was not physically examined.

Judges are instructed to assess only what can reasonably be seen or verified.

They must never assume that an unseen characteristic is correct. They must also avoid inventing a fault solely because something cannot be seen.

If a required characteristic or media view is unclear, the entry may be held, returned for replacement evidence or dealt with under the rules of the event.

A clear mouth and bite photograph is required.

The image must show the required area clearly and without manipulation. If the bite cannot be assessed properly, replacement evidence may be requested.

The judge may assess what is visible in the submitted image. This must not be described as equivalent to a complete hands-on dental examination.

Each dog must be shown in two prescribed movement videos:

• A side gait video
• A down-and-back video

The videos allow the judge to examine side movement and movement coming towards and travelling away from the camera.

The judge can pause, replay, slow and closely inspect the movement. The judge cannot, however, independently direct the handler or request an immediate additional circuit in the same way as at a physical show.

If a movement video does not permit a fair assessment, it may be rejected or returned for replacement.

Only behaviour visible in the submitted media can be considered.

A virtual show cannot reproduce the pressures of a physical event, including unfamiliar dogs, crowds, noise, travel, handling by a stranger or unexpected distractions.

A virtual-show result must not be represented as proof that a dog has passed a comprehensive temperament assessment unless a separate, properly governed temperament evaluation has taken place.

---

Where a required characteristic cannot be conclusively verified through the submitted media, the exhibitor must provide a formal declaration as part of the entry.

Depending on the dog and class, the exhibitor may be required to confirm statements such as:

• I confirm that this dog is intact and has not been spayed or neutered.
• I confirm that this male has two normally descended testicles.
• I confirm that the media submitted shows the registered dog named in this entry.
• I confirm that the photographs and videos are current and comply with the permitted recording period.
• I confirm that the dog has not been surgically or digitally altered to conceal a fault or disqualifying characteristic.
• I confirm that I have disclosed any information required under the event rules.
• I understand that false or misleading declarations may result in the revocation of points, awards and titles.

These declarations form a binding condition of entry.

The declaration establishes personal responsibility and gives the IABBR a clear basis for enforcement if misrepresentation is later discovered.

The IABBR may also request additional evidence where a declaration is questioned or where something within the submitted media requires verification.

A declaration does not prevent investigation. It ensures that the exhibitor cannot later claim that they did not understand what they were confirming.

The IABBR takes deliberate misrepresentation extremely seriously.

Where an investigation establishes that an exhibitor knowingly misrepresented a dog, submitted false evidence or made a dishonest declaration:

• The entry may be disqualified.
• Class placements may be withdrawn.
• Points may be revoked.
• Awards and titles obtained through the false entry may be revoked.
• Progression or qualification resulting from the entry may be cancelled.
• Related results may be corrected.
• Further disciplinary action may be taken.
• The enforcement outcome may be published on the IABBR website.

These consequences may apply even when the misrepresentation is discovered after the result or title has been published.

No.

An innocent recording problem, unclear photograph or failed upload is not the same as deliberate dishonesty.

Any allegation of deliberate misrepresentation must be reviewed against the available evidence. The exhibitor must be given an opportunity to provide the requested explanation or verification before a final finding is made.

Strong enforcement must be accompanied by a fair and documented process.

---

No.

Every score, placement, qualification, award and title remains the decision of an appointed human judge.

Artificial intelligence will never be used to:

• Decide whether a dog has correct breed type
• Assign conformation scores
• Determine the quality of a dog
• Select a class winner
• Rank dogs
• Decide progression
• Award points
• Grant titles
• Replace the judge’s professional opinion

This is an absolute boundary within IABBR Virtual Shows.

Artificial intelligence and computer vision may assist in three defined areas:

1. Media-authenticity and manipulation screening
2. Speech-to-text transcription of the judge’s criterion comments
3. Pose-estimation tools that assist the judge when reviewing posture, stacking and movement media

These tools support administration and human review. They do not make judging decisions.

Submitted media may be examined through a multilayered screening process intended to identify:

• AI-generated images
• Digitally reconstructed images
• Body reshaping
• Removed or added physical features
• Composite images
• Inconsistent identity
• Suspicious editing
• Manipulated video
• Other indications that the media may not represent the dog honestly

A technical flag is not, by itself, a finding of fraud. Flagged media is referred for human administrative review.

The exhibitor may be asked to provide original files, additional evidence or a newly recorded verification video. An entry that cannot be satisfactorily verified may be rejected or referred for disciplinary review.

Automated detection can produce false positives.

Compression, mobile-phone processing, lighting, background blur and other technical factors can sometimes make legitimate media appear suspicious.

For this reason, no exhibitor should be found guilty of misconduct solely because an automated system produced a warning. The warning identifies a need for closer human review.

The final decision must be based on the full evidence.

Judges may speak their observations rather than typing every criterion comment manually.

Speech-to-text technology converts the judge’s spoken words into written text. It does not decide what the judge should say and does not independently assess the dog.

The judge remains responsible for reviewing, correcting and approving the final written comments.

Pose estimation is a form of computer-vision technology that can identify and track specific anatomical reference points visible in an image or video.

For dogs, these reference points may include areas such as:

• Joints
• Paws
• Ears
• Shoulder area
• Hip area
• Hocks
• Head position
• Spine reference points
• Tail base

The technology can assist the judge when examining posture, stacking alignment and movement sequences.

No.

Pose estimation does not decide whether a dog is of correct breed type, whether its structure meets the breed standard or whether it should win.

It is a visual review aid. It can help a human judge follow visible reference points or examine movement consistently, but the judge determines what those observations mean.

The system must not convert pose-estimation data into automatic conformation scores, rankings or placements.

No.

Fraud-screening tools may hold media for administrative verification, but no artificial-intelligence system can replace or overrule the judge’s professional assessment of breed quality.

Technology supports the process. Human beings remain accountable for eligibility decisions, fraud findings, scores, placements and awards.

---

Editing that changes the appearance of the dog or conceals relevant evidence is prohibited.

Prohibited manipulation includes:

• Reshaping the body
• Changing proportions
• Altering the topline
• Changing the head, muzzle or jaw
• Altering the bite or dentition
• Changing markings or colour
• Removing scars, injuries or physical features
• Adding or reconstructing physical features
• Combining parts of different images
• Replacing parts of the dog with AI-generated content
• Concealing faults
• Manipulating the background or perspective in a misleading way

The purpose of the media is to provide evidence, not to create an enhanced representation of the dog.

Movement videos must be continuous and unaltered.

The following are prohibited:

• Cuts
• Splicing
• Removed frames
• Altered playback speed
• Transitions
• Artificial movement correction
• Manipulation that changes the dog’s apparent gait
• Combining footage from different attempts
• Combining footage of different dogs

The judge may use playback controls inside the judging workspace. The exhibitor must not alter the natural movement shown in the submitted file.

The complete media set must consistently show the registered dog entered into the show.

Administrators may compare:

• Coat colour and markings
• Head characteristics
• Body proportions
• Scars and identifying features
• Photographs against movement videos
• Registration information
• Original file information
• Any additional verification evidence

Material inconsistencies may result in the entry being held or rejected.

Each event will define the permitted recording period.

The exhibitor must declare that the submitted media was recorded within that period and accurately represents the dog at the relevant age and stage of development.

If the age or authenticity of the media is questioned, a fresh verification video may be required.

A verification video is a newly recorded, continuous video requested when additional identity, condition or authenticity evidence is needed.

The exhibitor may be instructed to show:

• The complete dog from both sides
• The head and identifying markings
• The mouth or another relevant area
• A unique code supplied by the IABBR
• The current date or entry reference
• A continuous transition from identity views into movement

The exact request will depend on the issue being investigated.

An entry that cannot be satisfactorily verified will not proceed as though no concern exists.

Depending on the circumstances and event rules, the entry may be:

• Held pending further evidence
• Returned for replacement media
• Rejected before judging
• Withdrawn
• Disqualified
• Referred for disciplinary action
• Subject to result, point, award or title revocation

---

Each show is judged by an authorised judge appointed or approved by the IABBR.

The judge must have the necessary breed knowledge and must understand the specific responsibilities and limitations involved in judging from remote media.

Yes.

Virtual judging requires judges to understand:

• The limitations of photographic evidence
• Camera angle and lens distortion
• The difference between visible evidence and physical verification
• Consistent application of the breed standard
• Appropriate use of video replay
• The treatment of incomplete or unclear evidence
• The use and limitations of pose-estimation tools
• Conflicts of interest
• The requirement never to assume an unseen characteristic is correct
• The requirement to retain independent human judgement

The judging workspace allows the judge to:

• Review the full class
• Focus on one dog at a time
• Move through every required photograph and video
• Select dogs for closer consideration
• Compare corresponding views
• Replay movement videos
• Record criterion observations
• Review provisional scores and placements
• Complete and lock the class

The purpose is to give the judge a disciplined, consistent process rather than a loose collection of uploaded files.

Yes.

The workspace records judging progress and shows which dogs have been reviewed, which remain, which have been shortlisted and which have been provisionally placed.

The class cannot be treated as properly completed until the required judging and placement process has been followed.

Judges should receive only the information required to identify and assess the dog.

Private exhibitor contact information is not relevant to the conformation decision. However, complete anonymity cannot always be guaranteed because registered names, kennel prefixes, markings or individual dogs may already be known within the breed community.

Judges must disclose relevant conflicts of interest. Material conflicts must be handled under the IABBR’s judging rules.

No.

Administrators manage entry eligibility, media approval, verification, technical issues and publication. They do not replace the judge’s assessment of the dogs.

Any authorised correction, disqualification, revocation or reopening of a result must follow a documented process and leave an appropriate record.

---

Yes. A virtual result must be clearly identified as having been earned through an IABBR Virtual Show.

The IABBR will not misrepresent a virtual result as though it were obtained through an in-person physical examination.

Clear record keeping protects the meaning and credibility of both virtual and traditional show results.

No.

Entry provides the opportunity to compete. It does not guarantee:

• Approval of an ineligible entry
• Acceptance of unsuitable media
• A placement
• Points
• An award
• A qualification
• A title
• A high score
• A favourable critique

The judge remains free to assess the dogs according to the breed standard and applicable event rules.

The judge reviews the eligible class, records the required assessment and creates the final placements.

The system checks that placement positions are valid and that the same dog has not been assigned more than one position.

The judge then confirms and locks the class.

A completed result cannot be changed casually or merely because someone disagrees with the judge.

A correction, withdrawal or revocation may be necessary if there is verified evidence of:

• Ineligibility
• Incorrect identity
• Fraudulent media
• A false exhibitor declaration
• An undisclosed material conflict
• A serious administrative error
• A material failure to follow the published rules

Any such action must be authorised and recorded.

The passage of time does not protect a fraudulent result.

If deliberate misrepresentation is established after publication, the IABBR may revoke:

• The class placement
• Points
• Qualifications
• Awards
• Titles
• Progression resulting from the entry
• Any later achievement dependent upon the invalid result

The result record will be corrected, and the enforcement outcome may be published on the IABBR website.

---

A concern must be submitted through the official IABBR process and supported by relevant evidence.

Concerns may relate to matters such as:

• Eligibility
• Dog identity
• Media authenticity
• A false declaration
• Prohibited editing
• An undisclosed conflict
• A serious procedural failure

Unsupported allegations, personal disputes and social-media speculation are not substitutes for evidence.

A difference of opinion is not, by itself, evidence that the judging process was improper.

Conformation judging necessarily involves professional judgement. Another person may honestly have placed the dogs differently.

An appeal or formal review should concern eligibility, fraud, conflict, rule enforcement or a material procedural failure. It should not be used to replace the appointed judge’s honest opinion with somebody else’s preference.

Yes.

Before a final finding of deliberate misrepresentation is made, the exhibitor should be informed of the substance of the concern and given an opportunity to provide an explanation or the requested verification evidence.

This does not weaken enforcement. It helps ensure that strong sanctions are applied accurately and fairly.

---

No.

The registration and media process should be manageable using an ordinary computer, tablet or smartphone.

The IABBR will provide clear instructions and examples so exhibitors can understand:

• Which photographs are required
• How each photograph should be framed
• How movement videos should be recorded
• Which surfaces are suitable
• What editing is prohibited
• How files are uploaded
• How to confirm that an entry is complete

A file is not treated as successfully submitted merely because it was selected on the exhibitor’s device.

A complete entry requires all six photographs and both videos to be successfully uploaded and connected to the correct dog and class.

Members should begin their entries well before the deadline, particularly when uploading large videos through a slower internet connection.

A genuine technical failure should be distinguished from an incomplete entry, ineligibility or deliberate non-compliance.

Any technical-failure provision or deadline resolution period will be governed by the published event rules.

Members remain responsible for beginning the process early enough to identify and report problems before entries close.

---

Sensitive registration and ownership evidence should not form part of the public show result.

Such records are used for legitimate purposes including eligibility checks, entry administration, identity verification and approved investigations.

Judges should not receive private exhibitor information that is unnecessary for judging.

The exhibitor retains ownership of their original media.

By entering, the exhibitor grants the IABBR the permissions described in the event terms. These may include storing the media, presenting it to authorised judges, conducting authenticity checks and publishing approved show results.

Any broader promotional use should be clearly explained in the applicable terms or obtained through separate permission.

---

IABBR Virtual Shows are governed by the following commitments:

1. Judging remains a human responsibility.
2. Artificial intelligence never determines breed quality, scores, placements or titles.
3. Virtual shows complement rather than replace physical shows.
4. The IABBR remains committed to expanding in-person showing opportunities.
5. Every eligible dog is presented through the same required media views.
6. Judges assess only what can reasonably be seen or verified.
7. Characteristics that cannot be physically verified require honest exhibitor declarations or additional evidence.
8. Suspected manipulation is investigated through layered screening, human review and verification.
9. False declarations and deliberate misrepresentation carry serious consequences.
10. Strong enforcement must be supported by evidence and a fair process.
11. Virtual results are clearly identified as virtual results.
12. The limitations of remote judging are acknowledged openly.

The credibility of virtual showing does not come from pretending that a screen can reproduce every part of a physical examination.

It comes from clear rules, consistent evidence, qualified judges, honest exhibitors, accountable enforcement and an organisation prepared to protect the integrity of its results.