How small is "too" small?

[Carina43]

...for the standard? I mean in weight...most of us know what too big is, but how about too small.
Daphne weighs 68-70lbs, and Mercedes has wondered if her pup will be a "pocket Rottie." :) So for showing/breeding purposes, what would be considered an undersized Rottie?

[RottieGirl86]

is 75 - 110 lbs. My Athena just saw Vet last week and only weighs 67 lbs. I really thought she was more - she was last weighed in Jan. when she was fixed. The Vet said she looked good ovberall, so I'm not concerned.

I think she looks perfect - very high sheen to her coat, no bones/ribs showing, when you pet her, you cannot feel the skeleton, she's solid. But even at 15 months, she is still growing. Her chest and height have all increased over the past 4 months. Her Mom was around 100 lbs and lean. I hope to keep Athena around 75 - 80 lbs. max - less issues with heart and hips that way, when they get older.

Male weight is 85 - 130 lbs.

Just to brag, the assistant at the vets said Athena was beautiful :)

[RottiMomCT]

According to the AKC Standard: Dogs--24 inches to 27 inches. Bitches--22 inches to 25 inches, with preferred size being mid-range of each sex.

No mention of weight though. My Ben is 24 1/2 inches at the shoulder and weighs 82.5 pounds (just a little more winter weight to come off he'a always ranged between 80-83 pounds).

I think in terms of weight vs height...as ong as the dog isn't fat and the weight is good, nice tuck in the tummy and nice 'waist' when seen from above, who cares what the standard is (unless, of course, you're a breeder or showing!!!)...

[Skip]

Originally posted by RottieGirl86
......is 75 - 110 lbs. .....

Male weight is 85 - 130 lbs........

Where did you get your numbers from? I don't think the preferred range for males goes that high.

[Carina43]

Anne, that's why I asked - the AKC does not give weight ranges, like with most other breeds. I'm not sure why! I'm not experienced enough to know "proper" height-weight ratios, though I would think at 27" any dog over 130lbs would be fat. I know the preference is often said to be mid range...Dutch is right about 100lbs, Cooper about 95.

I actually like the look of small, compact Rottweilers...Daphne is somewhat leggy, though she's a lovely looking dog. There's a great looking little female at the training place I go to, she still has her tail :) and is very stocky and well conditioned. The owner says she's about 65lbs.

[frontierrots]

The preferred height is the middle of the standard. In the U.S. that is 23 1/2" for females and 25 1/2" for males. Weight wise these heights average 80-85lbs females and 100-105 males for Rottweilers withtypical bone and condition

The U.S standard minimum is 22" females and 24" males. These dogs typically weigh 70-75 lbs females and 80-85 lbs males

That said, in the US there is no weight guidelines but typically if the dogs of these heights are greatly less in weight yet at the proper weight for the individual, then they have too light of bone.

Dog's with heavier than average bone will weigh a bit more but still not be fat

[Judi W]

and remember, proportion is important.

Too small? Too small for what? For being a good pet? For being healthy? For training?

But yes, it is of course possible to be too small to be correct conformationally. Breed type can be lost by being too small just as by being much too large. The powerful look is part of breed type.

I have a friend with a tiny bitch and because she passed all her health certs, showed her quite extensively and wanted to breed her. She did nothing in the breed ring and my friend complained vigorously about that. She claimed the bitch was 22 inches. Well, maybe if she was measured waaay at the top of the whithers. Quite truthfully, she was lacking in breed type and one would have to stop and consider whether she was a purebred or not.

So, the answer is yes, there can be too small for correct to breed type, but remember the question of "too small for what?"

[legalbeagle]

Yes, there is too small and too light. I've seen it with my own eyes. Yesterday in fact at the CRC Specialty show.

A tiny bitch, 2 yrs old, with a very wavy longish coat, who was maybe 22" if you stretched the tape measure. Her coat alone should've DQ'd her, but the owner obviously felt this light girl should be shown. Needless to say, she was the worst looking bitch in the whole place. I honestly thought the dog was a poorly bred rescue and so did my companion for the day. This wavy, tiny dog didn't place that day.

I prefer a taller female with heavier body weight and bone. I've been seeing WAY too many overly small female Rotties at the barely there 22" mark. My beef is that they look like a miniature Rottie compared to some of the giant males shown in the same venue! Many of the males yesterday were small, but a slight majority by my count, were at 27" and top weight, probably 120 lbs. +/-.

When you see a tiny bitch with light bone being shown, it's sending out the wrong message, and probably pups who possess this tiny gene. I'd rather see slightly larger Rotties than overly small dogs.

My rescue bitch is 25", weighs 103 lbs. and is not fat or huge. She's the kind of dog who people look at and ask about all the time, in a positive way. I don't mean boneheads who don't know the breed, I mean those familiar with the breed.

I might also point out that many of these tiny bitches lack the quality head we should see in a Rottweiler. A female with a narrow skull, longer nose [all too common!] than the ideal ratio, and narrow front is not a dog who belongs in the ring or bred. But they're seen and sadly, bred.

Oh well.

Cathi M.

[chivas]

My Chivas was a solid 24 inches and weighed between 100-116. She had a wonderful blocky head with a nice short muzzle. My old rescued female was 23 inches and weighed around 100 but was fat, and had a narrow dobie looking jaw. This new girl I adopted has a perfect looking head but SMALL and she is 22 inches and about 80lbs. One thing I have noticed about all 3 girls, is that they greatly were different in body build. Now this male Im considering adopting is 25 inches and 105lbs yet seems alot larger then Chivas. I suppose body type has alot to do with it.

[Carina43]

Originally posted by Judi W
and remember, proportion is important.

Too small? Too small for what? For being a good pet? For being healthy? For training?

Oh, I meant for conformation showing is all, I know the importance of proportion!
I realise there's many crappy looking Rottweilers out there, none of mine would win any prizes in a "This is what the ideal Rottweiler should look like" contest.
Of course, they're almost ALL good pets. :)

[Simba]

In my neighborhood there are a few oversized Rotts. its funny. Simba is now 19 months old , 25" tall and right around 100lbs and still growing/ filling out. You wouldn't believe how many people comment on how he is too small!!! I think the movies and bad press have made people believe that Rottweilers are a huge mean looking dog.

[Sharon Marples]

My show bitches usually average 23 1/2 -24 1/2 inches and weigh in around 90 - 100 lbs. I prefer a larger bitch if my plans are to show her. 15 years ago smaller bitches would consistently win, but nowdays it's much harder to do so with a smaller bitch.

Of course, if the bitch is larger, you must also have breed type and correct structure to complete the picture. I think nowdays the judges are looking at a bigger bitch in the ring. If you are trying to show a bitch that is 75 lbs., it will be much harder to finish her than one that is 90 lbs (assuming of course, that they have the same breed type and fit the standard).

Along with size comes movement......that is another whole story and movement is what will win in many circumstances, irregardless of size.

Sharon Marples

[frontierrots]

I should clarify.

The weights I listed were for what I consider typical bone and condition. This is NOT "show weight". "Show weight" is generally 5-15 lbs above typical condition.

My dogs are never at show weight and as such are rarely competitive for points but we get reserves along with the judge commenting that "if I'd only add some weight (and usually they give me an amount to add) to my dogs, they would get the points." My answer is never, ever.

[Wrath]

What's wrong with showing a dog that's out of standard...maybe they just enjoy the show curcuit and don't really care if they win. Or maybe their show prospect went a little sour and they decided to take the opprotunity to practice their handling skills and spend some time with their dog. As long as they don't plan on breeding the dog I don't see any reason to be derisive toward them.

Purebreds that are smaller and/or lighter than standard might excel at agility, obedience, utility, freestyle, flyball, and many other competitive activities. They are probably are less painful to have tread all over your bare feet first thing in the morning. Smaller dogs are probably less prone to joint injury, eat less food, leave smaller piles. They're not as 'scary' for strangers so probably get more attention. They might fit more comfortably next to you on the couch and probably produce much less gas.

[Carina43]

Well, isn't showing a: the chance to show off and title breeding stock, and b: to enable people to show dogs that are (hopefully) exemplary examples of what the breed should look like?

I would think showing a dog in conformation just because you feel like it would waste the judges time and tick off folks with really nice dogs.

Like you say, there's a ton of other competitive activities one can get involved in with an out of standard dog. :)