Hi Gene,

This is not a case of who is right. Judging is all about metrics. A metric
is defined and plants are than compared to this metric and rated. There is
no reason to think different organizations will select the same metric.
Along those same lines, when I am considering plants to put in my
greenhouses I use a metric based on profit potential.

A few years back I had a two spike phal pulled from a show display, after
measurements and judge discussions it was passed on. After judging, the
head judge pulled me aside to discuss the plant. She told me the plant had
everything for an award except the flower size was a bit small. She
recommended that next year I cut off the second spike as soon as it started
to show with the hope that the plant would put the extra energy into the
remaining spike and maybe the flower size would cut mustard.

When selling plants, I get more money for a two spike plant than a one
spiker. Even at a higher price, the two spiker with its marginally smaller
flowers will sell first. With my metric for plants, the recommendation of
cutting off the second spike seemed silly, but when rating a plant by the
AOS metric it made perfect sense.

Around here we have a game. When AQ arrives we go to the color picture
section and based solely on the picture and the award granted, we pick
plants we think belong to judges. We are very good at it. I like to think
this is not a sign that the judging system is corrupt or broken, but instead
just shows that the judges are in tune to their metric and understand what
will be awarded by their metric.

When considering plants for your collection, in addition to the AOS judging
metrics I think the consumer's metric should also rate traits such as plant
vigor, bloom last time, number of bloomings a year, number of spikes
produced, time till first bloom for seedlings, conditions required and
personal preferences of flower colors, shapes and patterns.


Pat