In the following, the FCI-standard of 1996 (the latest standard) is used as a reference. It is not reproduced in full here, because it's not necessary for the understanding of my comments, but if you want the entire standard, you're kindly recommended to use the websites of the various Special-clubs for this purpose. The intention here is to highlight elements in the standard, to which it is useful or necessary to pay attention when viewing or judging a specimen of the breed (because there may be present problems or a tendency towards problems). Hopefully, this can help potential puppy-buyers in the (necessary) evaluation of the puppy's parents/grandparents, and if even some breeders and judges get something to think about, I think we've achieved something. The selection of the elements discussed is based on the author's observation over years of a large number of dogs, mainly in the show-ring environment, where the norm of today's Ridgeback is supposed to be shown, and where the norm of tomorrow's Ridgeback to a large extent is defined. So this is not a complete evaluation vs. the standard - that could be a future project.
Further, it would make no difference to the comments here, if you used the U.S. standard as the reference. The differences in the standards do not constitute different types of dogs or major deviations in details, and do thereby not provide any legitimate reason to develop different variations of the breed.

Regardless if you consider one or the other of the available standards, you will notice, that it does not serve its intended purpose without further interpretation, because a big part of the characteristics are not described in a completely clear and 100% unmistakable way. This problem it shares with standards for other breeds, which is only of little comfort. Inevitably, this is also part of the reason for many of the differences in perception of what is right and what is wrong.

The further foundation of the entire discussion here is naturally,  that the Ridgeback is a functional dog. It is developed mainly for big-game hunting-,  and for guarding-purposes,  and this has an important impact on the demands on physical and mental capabilities of the dog. I'm not going through the historical background here, but you have to have this in your back-head when judging about the points, we're going through.

When reading the following comments you'll have to bear in mind, that these are only focusing on areas, where there are (or is a risk of) problems. Overall,  this may therefore seem somewhat negative, and you might get the impression,  that the breed is about to get in deep trouble, which is not the case - however,  neglecting everything in the following would cause that situation. Another important aspect is,  that no single specimen of the breed carries all the problems mentioned (at least, I've never seen such a dog), which leads me to highlight, that equally important to analyzing and describing all faults/ weak points vs. the standard on the individual in judging it (regardless if you do it yourself or a judge does it) is to analyze and describe the positive characteristics of the dog,  its assets - you need the full picture! Sometimes,  this is a bit neglected!

And now to the topics:

General appearance

An often discussed problem is the main proportions of the body. Generally accepted is, that the Ridgeback has to be rectangular in profile, meaning that the measure from the point of forechest to the back of the upper thigh is slightly larger than the height at withers (some cm.'s more). There seem to be no systematic or problematic deviation from this in the dogs, you see today. What you have to be aware of is that some literature suggests a proportion of  5:4 ! Do not take this literally,  and do not breed for it. You won't find it in many of today's Ridgebacks. A  Ridgeback with these proportions will appear very "longbodied", and the risk of a weak topline is increased. The most important aspect, however, is another functional one: The long body will impair the ability to make fast turns, sidesteps and pivoting (which is essential to original function), reason being, that large mass (front/rear-end) at a larger distance from the centre of gravity will increase inertia,  thereby slowing down turning movements. To avoid any misinterpretation: A quadratic outline, or an even shorter body, is just as problematic, with the usual effect of crabbing/overreaching at the trot.

The ridge

It seems, that there is a number of short ridges around. Not so short, that they should be rated as unacceptable referring to the standard,  or be deemed so by the judges in the showrings, but on the other hand shorter than the optimal length (= reaching to the point of hip). Something, that has to be taken into consideration, especially in the breeding.

Temperament

Now we come to something not so easy: The breed-standard's description of the temperament is short: "Dignified, intelligent, aloof with strangers but showing no aggression or shyness", and this naturally and immediately raises more questions, than it answers, because each of the descriptive words is loaded with possible interpretations. Numerous attempts to translate these few words into daily behaviour of the Ridgeback in a lot of different situations have been made,  and I'm not going to duplicate these. Only one focus-point here: There seem to be a risk of developing the breed into something too "mild", "gentle", "friendly" and "extrovert",  thereby gradually reducing or loosing some unique traits of the breed,  and thereby also some of the functional capability originally intended. (Comparisons are sometimes done with other breeds to illustrate the point - I'll refrain from that to avoid any unnecessary negative reactions.) More than one factor contribute to this:

• Demands from the society: With increasing focus on dogs' behaviour in the society,
  in the last years even complemented with the fighting-dog problems and discussions,
  there could be a certain motivation to breed for dogs with a tolerance for everything.
   

• "Standardization" caused by mental tests: The increasing use of mental tests in the
  Kennel Clubs and the Special Breed Clubs around,  more and more recommended or
  even required as a precondition for breeding-approval,  can lead to a more
   stereotyped  judgement of the character, pulling it towards more conformity
   to other breeds (influenced by the makers of the "ideal" test-profiles as well
   as the test-executors and -judges, basing their values on a more general approach).
  
   

• "Show-ring-conformance": In many (most) cases the dog, who accepts all kinds
  of handling, all kinds of examination and treatment by the judge, and all kinds of
  disturbances/challenges from other dogs around will be rewarded with the
  statement "nice" or "excellent" temperament and will have an advantage,
   anything else being equal, to the dog not so kind or flexible.
   For obvious reasons it is understandable, that the judges want friendly dogs
   in the showring. The big question is,  if an adult Ridgeback wagging the tail
   in front of the judge, maybe even licking his/hers hand and/or head,  shows
  breed-typical behaviour ("dignified", "...aloof with strangers...")?  There's again
   a risk of gliding towards more conformity to other breeds, if breeders try
   to create dogs especially suited for "showbusiness". As an alternative,
   training can do a lot, and training can also moderate the natural (breed-typical)
   reservedness into something acceptable in the ring, so that the dog
  at least stands perfectly still when examined and otherwise.
  So: It's not necessary to modify the original temperament, not even for the
   showring, and to breed out the aloofness and breed in an
   "over-friendliness" would be a serious fault. Or,  to put it more directly :
  To try and modify the Ridgeback to a " beginner's dog" would destroy
   the unique traits of this breed.

Head

Apart from the  functional requirements to the head, which to some extent is the background for the description in the standard, there is no doubt that the head as a total (the shape, the individual components and the expression) has a very high influence on the overall impression and recognition of the Ridgeback, maybe even more than the ridge - if you see a Ridgeback at a distance or at an angle, so you're unable to see it's ridge, you will most certainly recognize it immediately, if it looks at you. If a ridgeless Ridgeback looks at you, you'll know, it's a Ridgeback (if the head is right). If the head deviates too much, you no longer have a typical Ridgeback. This is a sharp dog (in the sense "bright", "intelligent", "thinking", a.s.o.) with some mind and will of it's own, and the head and expression must reflect that (and, again, serve the functional requirements). The head must be clear-cut, not soft or rounded in the lines, not weak, and not coarse. The expression, when the dog is observing something, should be intelligent, inquisite, firm, (again: Sharp), not nice/sweet/cute or dull. As several other things, this expression is not always so easy to bring forward in the showring, so never judge a Ridgeback only by what you see there. Without going through all details, you should especially watch out for the following:

The skull: Should be flat, both seen from the side and from the front/rear. Many are more or less rounded, in one or both directions, also contributing to a wrong (soft/mild) expression. It is a problem, look for it. Too much cleavage in the skull is sometimes seen, and is a fault.

The muzzle: Maybe the biggest problem in the heads, we see today: The muzzle must be long, deep and powerful (functional requirement), but many of today's Ridgebacks have too short muzzles (the most frequent problem), and many have too weak lower jaws (going in the "snipey" direction). This applies to both males and females, and for the males a short muzzle often connects with a head more in the "mastiff"-direction. Also pay attention to the lips, sometimes being so long/hanging, that they mask a weak lower jaw - they should fit close. A good muzzle is hard to come across, so be aware of it.

Parallelity between skull and bridge of muzzle is not requested in the standard, but,with good reason, mentioned in the elaborations - deviations, not so rarely seen, distort the clean cut of the head and the expression. Unfortunately, this and the rounded skull seem not to be much penalized in the showring,  so you have to watch for it yourself.

Eyes: Watch the shape - they must be round, nothing else. Almond-shape is not uncommon, but a fault. And as to the important look in the eyes, the standard says it all: "Bright and sparkling with intelligent expression..."  (also refer to the above about the head as a whole).

Teeth/bite: Not a problem in general, but frequently seen faults are lack of premolars (one or more). This is a functional fault and should be avoided in the breeding. Unfortunately, judgements in the showring is no guarantee, since the accuracy on this point varies a lot from judge to judge, plus of course that it's not always easy to get a good look at the teeth. The impact is, that a certain part of teeth-faults passes through breeding,  so you'll have to be your own judge in each case. To make it more difficult,  if you're going to select a puppy, you can not even be sure, that the bite-condition at 2-3 months of age will be the final - it can go from normal to faulty, or vice-versa. So at least be sure about the parents,  and,  if possible,  about the nearest familiy.

Neck

Avoid the straight necks - the neck should be arched, the topline curved in a convex shape (functional requirement, for strength). Throatiness (loose skin at he underside of the neck) is not rarely seen, but,  it being a functional fault, should not be accepted.

Forequarters

The first thing to look for is the angulation in the front - not so uncommon is a steep front, meaning that the angle between upper arm and shoulder blade is too open (often described as "insufficient layback of shoulder (blade)").
It is actually a severe functional fault, causing reduced reach of the foreleg and thereby unbalanced movement,  if the hindpart at the same dog has correct angulations. Not trying to establish an "academic" discussion here about which angles are correct, and how you determine it, let's just conclude, that the effect of this fault alone is easily seen in the gait (trot) as one or more of: "Short" or "stilted" movement, overreaching, padding, pounding, Hackney-gait.
Often the steep front comes with lack of forechest, which is easily seen when viewing the standing dog from the side - the brisket should continue it's curve forward and up between the forelegs, so that the forechest protrudes slightly between the forelegs. This should be as a curve,  not as a single point only (pro-sternum),  also called "chicken-breast". The hollow-chest is also an easily discovered fault.

Body

Essential is, that the Ridgeback must be strong and powerful, without being too massive in body, and enduring without loosing swiftness - not always an easy compromise to achieve. There is a slight tendency towards massiveness, so look not only for the size, but also for the shape: The ribcage must be oval, not drum-shaped. This is very decisive for the dog's movements in the front. There's also a slight tendency towards insufficient depth of brisket (which should go to the mid-point of the height from withers to ground, normally corresponding to the point of the elbow), the effect being reduction of the lung-capacity,  and thereby endurance - and even worse so, if combined with lack of forechest. Other systematic problems around the body is not seen - backlines not being level is occasionally seen, in such case sometimes as a part of an overall dropping topline, but it could not be considered a general problem. The perfectly arched loin and croup is not so often seen, but the deviations do not amount to a general problem.

Hindquarters

From these parts the dog gets most of its moving ability and power, so naturally the construction here is vital. Frequently occurring is the (too) straight stifle, reducing the reach and drive of the hindleg, easily detected in the more stilted or tripping trot. Occasionally is seen the over-angulated dog,  showing long steps and fantastic drive from the rear, very impressive in the showring, but with other functional disadvantages, and therefore not correct. Not so often paid attention to is the lay-down of the hocks, also important in obtaining angulation in the leg, and length of muscles - several dogs are not adequate here.

Feet

The standard is reasonably understandable here: "Compact, well arched toes, round, tough, elastic pads, protected by hair between toes and pads". Having the dog's original function in mind, it is very obvious, that the feet can not be allowed to be a weak point, so specifications must be obeyed. In relation to this there is one problem, frequently seen (but not evenly distributed): Splayed and/or flat feet, especially the front-feet. This does normally not give any practical problems in everyday life in industrialized societies, but under rough, natural conditions it does,  and is therefore not permissible.

Tail

One not quite uncommon problem is the kinked tail, caused by a hereditary development of a deformity in one or more of the vertebrae. It can be anything from a very visible 90 degrees bend at any point of the tail, to an almost invisible irregularity at the tail. It is not always detected at the puppy stage or later in the showring, or elsewhere, so you have to make sure for yourself. Do not trust your eyes only, you have to feel the tail over its entire length. A curled tail, also a fault, is sometimes seen. The tailset and the slope of the croup are two sides of the same coin - a steep croup will give too low tailset, and a flat croup too high tailset. The functional impact of both extremes is that the forward reach and the rearward extension of the hindlegs will not be the same. In the case of the steep croup there's a risk of overreach/crabbing, and in the case of the flat croup you'll probably see short-stepping and insufficient drive. It's easily recognized at the natural, relaxed trot, whereas showring conditions sometimes makes it a bit more difficult to detect. Also at the trot look for the gay tail (tail pointing upwards at the root,  tail carried over the back), which is not rarely seen, but seldom penalized in the ring - the ideal croup/tailset and tail carriage is shown by the tail's first part pointing close to horizontal, and the rest forming a soft curve, when the dog is trotting natural and relaxed at it's own pace (again: Which is not easily obtained in the showring). When the dog is standing still, the topline should show a continuance of the soft curve of the loin into a slightly curved croup, ending in the tail at a point slightly lower than the level of the back. Some experts give more exact measures of degrees and cm.'s for angulation and length of croup, which will not be attempted here.
The basic advice is: At first look at the dog's movements, all major faults are revealed by that. If any problems are seen, then go to the more detailed analysis, to find specific reasons.

Gait/Movement

In the FCI-standard 5 words are used to describe this essential characteristic, one of the most important characteristics of the Ridgeback: "Straight forward, free and active".
Although this statement already says a lot, naturally it also opens for - and makes necessary - a lot of interpretations, and - consequently - discussions and different opinions on the subject.
One of the factors contributing to making the evaluation of the dog's movement difficult is - that the dog moves. This is not meant as a bad joke - what it means is, that for certain things you have to translate what you see to what is really happening, and especially in the showring, with very limited time and the dog probably not moving at its best, this can be very demanding, and uncertain.
 Let's take just one example, an important ingredient of the movement: At the dog's natural trot (at it's own chosen moderate speed and without stress), it should singletrack, meaning that the footprints should appear on or very close to the imaginary longitudinal centre-line of the body during the movement. When you look at the dog coming or going, this is very difficult, if not impossible, to directly see due to the swift inwards movement - what you see if the trot is correct is the forelegs symmetrically converging towards the centerline at a slight angle from vertical when passing each other, and this at approximately a paw's distance, and the same applies to the hindlegs. Hindlegs with hocks + pasterns moving exactly parallel/vertical are not correct (not a common fault, but just taken as an example).
One frequent problem in the movement, seen at the trot, is too short action, in front or rear or both, causing the unwanted stilted and often unbalanced gait. Other problems to look for is too much vertical movement (severe problem due to waste of energy) and a backline which is not level.
 But once again: Do not rely only on the movements in the showring - the circumstances, and/or less than optimal handling can cause very strange gaits. The correct trot - a fluent, balanced, effortless movement, really bringing the dog forward without any excessive signs, is easily recognized, once you've seen it. There's of course a lot more to be said about movements, being so fundamental for the Ridgeback, however, by the abovementioned limitations, I've only focused on a few relevant problem areas of today.

Coat

There's a reason for the breed-standard's demand of the "short and dense" coat, namely it's ability to protect the dog, which you can observe in your everyday life, if you have Ridgebacks with different types of coats. In general it is not a big problem, but watch out for the "soft" or even "long-haired" types, these are severe faults.

Colour

Here we have a topic for lots of discussion, although not heavily weighted in the breed-standard (which is a pity, since this has a lot of impact on the overall appearance of the dog). At first, about the base - colour: The standard says "light wheaten to red wheaten". So: What is the colour of wheat? That depends on a lot of things, and when discussions get really "sophisticated", things like time of the day, sun/not sun, type of wheat, a.s.o. is mentioned, and not helping anything. Overall, the interpretations of the breed-standard ranges from something like beach-sand, almost white, to "Irish-Setter-red" or "Mahogany".  The fact is, that if you take the majority of today's Ridgebacks and put them in the middle of a wheat-field, they will clearly deviate in colour, in most cases being darker, and some will even appear plain brown - a problem today seems to be the colours moving in the dark direction, too light colours are very rarely seen. There are several creative arguments around for these dark variants, and I'm not going into this discussion here, but only recommend you to look for the right colour, which is not "Irish-Setter-red" (because then the standard could have used this designation) or  "Mahogany" (because the standard would then have said "Mahogany").
The amount of white hair/white areas is no general problem, just be observant to it. The amount of black pigmentation have to be observed, especially when distributed all over the coat - this is clearly unwanted and can be difficult to breed out.

Size

The size of the dog is crucial to it's function. The aim is to obtain both the strength,the endurance, the speed and the agility required, which is a compromise fulfilled by keeping the dog within the standard. Unfortunately there's a tendency towards the extremes, both in the direction of the "Greyhound"-type and in the direction of the "Mastiff"-type or "Great Dane"-type. The prevailing "fashions" or "trends" can be somewhat geographically oriented, but in Europe it seems nowadays that we are going too much in the direction of the too tall, and especially too heavy types. Without going into a lengthy theoretical discussion of the implications of this, I just recommend you to watch Ridgebacks playing with each other, or at the lure-course, and you'll quickly notice the effect on agility if the dog is too large. And which dog would survive on the hunting-scene? Also, when using your dogs for hunting, having a heavy type and a normal type: Which one will last through the day with the least amount of problems? Keep them within the standard, both in height and in weight, there's a reason for this!

This concludes my comments on todays Ridgebacks vs. selected elements of the the breed-standard - as mentioned in the introduction I have focused on some parts where I see problems/potential problems, and to which I think potential buyers (and of course breeders) should pay special attention. There may be elements not covered here, which you think is just as important, and should be mentioned. Maybe you think, that some of the above is not relevant or superfluous, and maybe you just disagree with my view on something.

In every case I welcome your feedback, if you'd just bother to send me a few words on my e-mail:

holmgaard@zumelis.dk

Thank you for your attention.