Class 1 White Face Market Lambs - Side View

Class 1 White Face Market Lambs Rear Views

Class 1 White Face Market Lambs Side and Rear Views

Official Placing = 1-4-2-3

Cuts = 4-3-7


1-4-2-3 is my placing on this class of white faced market lambs.  I found the class to break into a easy top and bottom with a close middle pair.  Ideally my class winner could have been neater through the base of his shoulder, nonetheless, it's still 1 over 4 in my initial pair as 1 was the most complete, nicest balanced lamb in the class.  1 was easily the freshest, squared topped, fullest hipped lamb that had an obvious advantage in thickness through the center of his leg.  1 was also a nicer balanced lamb that was leveler topped, squarer rumped and tighter hided.  Additionally he had more curvature to his rib and was a stouter, heavier boned lamb that when taken to the rail should hang a carcass that would open with a larger eye and a higher scoring leg.  I realize that the Montadale appearing wether was a bigger framed, taller fronted lamb that set higher in his neck-shoulder junction.  However, this doesn't offset the fact that he was heavy conditioned and flat through his leg.


In reference to my intermediate pair it's still 4 over 2 as 4 more closely followed the pattern of my class winner in his muscularity.  He was a wider based, meatier lamb that was especially squarer through his rack and wider through his loin.  The slick legged lamb was also stronger topped and more nearly level to his dock.  Furthermore he was a growthier, higher performing lamb that when taken to the rail should hang a carcass with more total pounds of high priced, consumer preferred cuts.  I appreciate that 2 was a leaner, trimmer designed lamb that stood on more circumference of bone.  However, I criticized him and left him third as he was weak topped and steep-rumped.


Nonetheless, I still easily placed 2 over 3 in my concluding pair as the horned lamb was simply more overpowering.  He especially had more mass of muscle draped down his top and let down into a thicker leg with more inside shape.  He was also a bloomier, fresher lamb that was nicer balanced on the profile being straighter in his line.  Additionally 2 was a deeper bodied, easier feeding lamb.  These obvious advantages should allow him to rail a more packer acceptable carcass with a higher yield of retail product.  I realize that 3 was the leanest lamb in the class.  However this serves to his disadvantages as he is the steepest-rumped, narrowest made, most underfinished lamb that when taken tot he rail would hang the least market-ready, lowest yielding carcass in this class today.

Back to...