On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 08:19:58 GMT, torgo
wrote:

, I'm not sure if this guidance is always the best. It might depend
on the rose. I know one thing - if I had cut the first flush of the
Bel Amis, I would have definitely been cheated out of about 20 blooms,
and I'm not sure if there would have been much benefit. Having said
that, I'll have to evaluate how vigorous the plants are going to be in
the spring. I have no absolute way to judge them against a control
group, but I think it will be pretty apparent if their root structure
suffered because of excessive blooming the first year depriving the
plant of energy to the roots.

Just my .02.

My experience has been that it does indeed depend on the rose - not
the variety but the individual plant. If you're lucky and get one
with a halfway decent root system, let it bloom away. But if you get
one with the roots hacked to nothing, then a full first bloom flush
can easily be the death of the plant.

Yeah, I sort of missed your comment about basing your advice on plants
with poor root systems.

Sorry to hear about the Diors.

The thing is, I always read the advice that every rose should be
deadheaded "at birth", even potted roses. Maybe I misunderstood the
advice, but I've decided to only take blooms if there's a first single
bloom. I did that with Portland from Glendorra and I'm glad I did. Of
course, that plant came as a very small twiglet with a root system
about the size of a walnut (it was a "banded" rose). So, I guess I
followed your advice after all...