Hawkins System

Discover the comprehensive history of the Hawkins System Collie Rankings. This archive provides the official yearly results for both Rough and Smooth Collies from 1963 to 2024. Explore the top-ranked dogs and legendary bloodlines that have defined the breed across decades of elite competition. A must-read resource for dedicated fanciers and collie historians alike.

Explore the complete historical records of the Hawkins System winners for both Rough and Smooth Collies from 1963 to 2024. This comprehensive list tracks the honored champions throughout the decades, providing a definitive reference for breeders and enthusiasts alike. Discover the legacy of excellence and see which distinguished Collies have earned this prestigious recognition.

Since 1963, the Hawkins System has been the definitive method for ranking the top Collies within the Collie Club of America. Developed by Bob Hawkins to prioritize breed-specific virtues over mere show frequency, this objective system identifies the finest specimens by rewarding wins under respected judges in the most significant, competitive dog show environments.

Discover the origins of the Hawkins System in this insightful interview with founder Bob Hawkins. Originally published in the Collie Club of America Bulletin, Bob shares his journey in the breed and the historical process behind creating an objective ranking model that has influenced Collie excellence for nearly sixty years of competition history.

Discover the history of the Hawkins System for ranking Collies in this exclusive interview with administrator Les Hutchins. Originally developed by Bob Hawkins to provide an objective way to evaluate show records, the system remains a cornerstone for the Collie Club of America. Learn more about how the system works and its unique value.

After a three-year research project on the Hawkins System, questions emerged regarding a 2004 CCA Bulletin article often cited by critics. Both Bob Hawkins and Les Hutchins confirmed they did not endorse or write the statements attributed to them in the piece. Consequently, the article was deemed erroneous and excluded from the final research findings.