Newest Kangals, age 5 months, with wife ( one without leash on)
Often in the show and pet industry there are certain colors, sizes, head, and patterns that are defined as acceptable for a dog to be "of a breed". These often are physical indicators actually emerging over the past 200 years at most. In the world of livestock guardian dogs the history goes back centuries but the "standard" evolved not in appearance but in performance. If a herder had 1,000 sheep or goats to graze over vast areas that herder was not interested in what the guardian dog looked like, but more interested in how the dog would perform in protecting the livestock. This was the basis of LGDs and how they evolved.
However in the present world we live in the human need continues to be able to define a dog with specificity. I personally do not subscribe nor believe there are "appearances" within a range that affects whether the dog is a Kangal or not. It's the behavior of protection, instinct, ability to have the Kangal accept and protect the family in behavior that I subscribe to. However some need physical features and this is for those who prefer those definitions. There also exists a higher propensity of shared DNA and the DNA sequencing helps identify physical characteristics within inheritied DNA structure.
Here is a standard for Kangals.