Judging Breyer Collectibility: Basic Required Knowledge

Recent discussions on Facebook about judging (triggered by great disparity in NAN results, a subject for another day) have once again brought up the topic of judging certification and what criteria we should be using to judge various divisions at shows. While these conversations do produce useful discussion, they have a tendency to stall out because a certain segment of the hobby demands to know who has the right to assess their knowledge (or lack thereof).

I find this incredibly dismaying because it suggests to me that those who make these complaints are likely not confident in their abilities as a judge and that they are unwilling to acknowledge it or to seek greater education to remedy it. This attitude is sadly what killed off Project '88, the hobby's best attempt at a program to provide basic judging certification. This attitude is frustrating as well because education is absolutely key in this hobby---there is always something new to learn. Our knowledge of equine color genetics has improved radically in the last 15 years for example, fashions and trends are forever changing in the real horse show world, and new, previously unknown models or documentation surface periodically via eBay, estate sales, etc. But I digress.

To move the FB discussion along, Lesli Kathman devised a sample judging test for breed halter with basic knowledge questions about anatomy, bio-mechanics, and color that any reasonably knowledgeable judge should be able to answer. I decided to follow suit and composed a sample test for Breyer collectibility because that is the subject I know best.

Note that this is NOT intended to be a comprehensive test of Breyer minutiae; instead, these questions are meant to demonstrate that a judge has a solid grasp on Breyer history and a good understanding of collectibility judging criteria, both essential qualities in a good Breyer collectibility judge. In my opinion, as a long-time collectibility shower and judge, these are questions that any competent Breyer collectibility judge should be able to answer easily.

I will follow this up with a series of posts answering the questions for any who are interested, and link the answers below. (I've already covered a few of the topics, so I will go ahead and link to those blog posts.) Be warned that some of these are trick questions!

1) Create a Breyer history time line including the following information (please provide the year or years as close as possible): First Breyer horse issued, Reeves takeover, chalky era, decorator era, blue ribbon sticker era, first Just About Horses issued, first BreyerFest, woodgrain era, general introduction of round Breyer stamp, general introduction of USA stamp
http://modelhorsecollectibility.blogspot.com/2015/09/collectibility-test-breyer-history.html

2) Name four companies Breyer copied models from in the 1950's and/or 1960's.
http://modelhorsecollectibility.blogspot.com/2015/10/collectibility-test-companies-breyer.html

3) Explain what a chalky is and why they exist.
http://modelhorsecollectibility.blogspot.com/2015/02/what-is-chalky.html

4) List Breyer packaging types in chronological order from earliest to latest (ending with the 1980's brown picture boxes). Provide date ranges to the best of your knowledge.
https://modelhorsecollectibility.blogspot.com/2016/06/collectibility-test-good-things-come-in.html

5) Explain the history of the PAM, FAM, and In-Between Mare.
http://modelhorsecollectibility.blogspot.com/2013/04/pams-fams-and-in-between-mares.html

6) Name the five rarest woodgrains.

7) Describe which of the following you factor into collectibility judging and why: condition, age, rarity, desirability, breed standard, documentation, presentation, conformation, color

8) Explain how you would place a class containing small runs (under 30 made or known) and OOAKs. Cite examples as desired.

9) Correctly identify the Breyer Western Horse from the 5 models pictured below. Bonus points if you can correctly identify the manufacturers of the other Western Horse Shaped objects. This turned into a massive research project and four blog posts. They are all linked here:
http://modelhorsecollectibility.blogspot.com/2020/11/western-horse-shaped-objects-wrap-up.html

10) Explain the difference between an official Breyer flockie and a custom flockie.
https://modelhorsecollectibility.blogspot.com/2016/04/collectibility-test-of-flockies-vs-cm.html

Stay tuned!

What is collectibility and why should we care?

Collectibility as a stand-alone division is a fairly new concept in the hobby. When I first started live showing in 1991, halter classes were only split into OF and RRH (aka customs). Resins were almost unknown, and everything OF was fair game in the OF classes---Breyers, Hartlands, Hagen-Renakers, Beswicks, etc. Most people showed only Breyers, with Hartlands and especially chinas being a rarity. Judging for OFs was a mix of breed standards and rarity, and which was weighted more depended entirely on the judge. For example, I used to win regularly with the Monrovia HRs my grandmother gave me because they were both well-conformed as well as rare (relatively speaking at that time, anyway). Furthermore, it was not unusual to see a horse like a Hartland Regal Saddlebred or a Florentine 5-Gaiter win a gaited class despite anatomical abnormalities or an unrealistic color because they were the rarest models on the table. Halter judging was hugely subjective to say the least.


(The Regal Hartland ASB puts the fun in funky, but she's not quite what most Saddlebred fanciers would consider well-conformed.)

It was not until the late 1990s that judging OFs based on the ABCs (anatomy, biomechanics/breed standard, and conformation) as well as collectibility began to fall out of favor. Customs, resins, and chinas were judged by the ABCs, so following suit in OF plastic halter was a logical continuation of the trend. At NAN in 1998 and 1999, a few token collectibility classes were added to the OF Plastic division to deal with decorators and woodgrains. But it was not until 2001 that OF plastic collectibility was recognized as a necessary division in its own right with OF china collectibility following the next year in 2002. Since then, both divisions have grown exponentially, and most live shows these days offer halter and collectibility divisions split out between Breyers, Stones, and chinas (and occasionally Hartlands, too).

So that said, how is collectibility judged in the hobby and what makes a model collectible?

Some might argue that collectibility can be equated with the biggest price tag or the highest perceived value, and while that is sometimes the case, it just as often isn’t true. I personally usually equate collectibility with rarity. That is my primary criterion when judging. I also factor in age, desirability, and to a lesser degree, condition.

Rarity is pretty much self-explanatory. Models made in limited numbers are hard to find, old or new. The more limited, the better usually. However, because one-of-a-kind models are surprisingly easy to acquire these days, a OOAK model is not necessarily better or more rare (in terms of perception) than a model of which 2 or 3 or even 10 examples are known.

Age is important because while some models were not necessarily made in small numbers, they may have been made 40 or 50 years ago and few have survived to make it into collectors' hands. Newer rare models can often be acquired with a little patience and a willingness to pay the going rate. Older rare models are often much harder to acquire because few are known, and those that are known are often in "black hole" collections. Old and rare usually trumps new and rare.

Desirability can definitely play a role in collectibility as well. Certain molds and models have more cachet than others, like vintage decorators, for example. Some models even obtain a sort of legendary status because of their rarity and interesting history, such as the wedgewood Longhorn or the $13,500 test run palomino Alborozo.

Condition is my last and least important consideration for several reasons. First, most showers these days know to bring only their best models, and those with noticeable scratches or dings usually remain at home, so condition is rarely an issue. Secondly, the chances of condition being the tie-breaker in collectibility are pretty slim. There are almost always more important factors that will sort the entries out (i.e. the three criteria discussed above). And thirdly, many models that show in collectibility are old, some more than 50 years old, and I am more than willing to forgive a few minor condition issues if the piece is clearly superior to what else is on the table. The same can be applicable to newer rare models. Ear tip rubs or hoof rubs are of little importance in the grand scheme of things.

So all that having been said, the point of the collectibility division is to celebrate those unique models that do not fit into the usual breed classes but that are still highly desirable to many collectors. Things like decorators, woodgrains, lamps, clocks, night lights, horse and rider sets, test runs, and OOAKs are typical collectibility entries as well as models with original ephemera such as boxes, hang tags, and stickers.

Becoming a good judge of collectibility requires immersion in the subject and a fascination with the history and minutiae of the companies and models involved. Thankfully, model horse hobbyists have written a number of excellent reference books on the various makes available. I'll make my recommended reading list the subject of my next post.