|
RHS vs AOS Awards
I have a Paphiopedilum F. C. Puddle 'Bodnant' FCC/RHS (Actaeus x Astarte)
division about to come into bloom. I noticed it was awarded an FCC from the RHS but I don't seem to find any AOS awards for this or any F. C. Puddle. Why is this? Are the RHS awards easier to get than an AOS award? Or was this awarded a long long time ago? Good growing, Gene |
If you looked in Wildcatt for previous AOS awards remember that Wildcatt
doesn't include any of the awards from the Register of Awards (the RA). So there's a whole mess o' previous awards that aren't listed. FC Puddle has 3 AOS awards including one on 'Bodnant' - an AM of 80 points granted in New York in November 1958. As to RHS vs AOS ease of awards... wel they kinda sorta are different animals. The judging system - IIRC - in England is based on acclaimation. The judges all agree that the flower is of a certain quality and grant the award. I can't recall if the Judges score the flower, toss out the high and low and average the remaining scores or not. The AOS has a point scoring system. Only one judge is needed for a team to judge a flower. Then a team judges the flower, the scores must all be within 6 points of each other, the scores are averaged and results in the pointed award. I always thought it was a bit harder to get a RHS award. For one thing they don't have the HCC so a flower must be of a certain calibre in order to even be considered for judging. Plus the judges themselves are a class amongst themselves. One becomes an RHS judge by acclaimation, too, when the other RHS judges decide you know enough to judge. Imagine the AOS system without the HCC award. There's be nothing to print...*G* K Barrett "Gene Schurg" wrote in message nk.net... I have a Paphiopedilum F. C. Puddle 'Bodnant' FCC/RHS (Actaeus x Astarte) division about to come into bloom. I noticed it was awarded an FCC from the RHS but I don't seem to find any AOS awards for this or any F. C. Puddle. Why is this? Are the RHS awards easier to get than an AOS award? Or was this awarded a long long time ago? Good growing, Gene |
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 01:36:36 GMT, "J Fortuna"
wrote: P.S.: Another thought: "K Barrett" wrote in message news:9npqd.110410$5K2.16436@attbi_s03... If you looked in Wildcatt for previous AOS awards remember that Wildcatt doesn't include any of the awards from the Register of Awards (the RA). So there's a whole mess o' previous awards that aren't listed. Both Kath and Joanna have points. I am going to try for another couple. Ever been the second to say something is beautiful? Most people don't want to reinforce another's position. So most judges will pass on a plant that has a high award or a reasonably high award. They will think they are not going to score the plant higher, so it is a waste of time to score it. Sometimes it is a case of "that is such an old cross we should be looking for something new and better." Few stop to ask if there is new and if it is better. All that said... Joanna's point that RHS and AOS judging is different. RHS judging never looks at the flower (even in ribbon judging) until the plant has pasted muster. If the plant is not in good shape the flower can not be at it's best. I recently ribbon judged with an RHS judge on our judging team. It was very interesting. Kath said it took one judge to nominate something for scoring. It also often takes one nay sayer to stop a judging. If one of the senior judges says something very negative about a breeding line, plant age, or style, often the process will stall. It is after all an educated opinion of the condition of the flower and/or plant on a specific day at a specific time in the bloom cycle of the plant. SuE http://orchids.legolas.org/gallery/albums.php |
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 |
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. Well, size is only ten points... For phals, floriferousness is also ten points... So they should cancel out. Some points are more equal than others, it seems. 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. At least around here, most of the plants taken to a judging are owned by judges... Can't award something we don't see. I know that I don't take a plant to judging unless I think it is likely to get an award. I've been burned that way several times - we have awarded plants of the same cross that I have in my collection, my flowers are better but not at judging... I hate that. Actually since my standards are so high I don't take many plants to judging... Rob -- Rob's Rules: http://www.msu.edu/~halgren 1) There is always room for one more orchid 2) There is always room for two more orchids 2a. See rule 1 3) When one has insufficient credit to purchase more orchids, obtain more credit LittlefrogFarm is open - e-mail me for a list ) |
Susan,
I'm not sure I understand your point. If a plant gets an FCC/RHS then AOS judges will pass on scoring it? If this is what you are saying then is an FCC/RHS as "valuable" as an FCC/AOS? Somehow it doesn't seem that way. Gene "Susan Erickson" wrote in message ... On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 01:36:36 GMT, "J Fortuna" wrote: P.S.: Another thought: "K Barrett" wrote in message news:9npqd.110410$5K2.16436@attbi_s03... If you looked in Wildcatt for previous AOS awards remember that Wildcatt doesn't include any of the awards from the Register of Awards (the RA). So there's a whole mess o' previous awards that aren't listed. Both Kath and Joanna have points. I am going to try for another couple. Ever been the second to say something is beautiful? Most people don't want to reinforce another's position. So most judges will pass on a plant that has a high award or a reasonably high award. They will think they are not going to score the plant higher, so it is a waste of time to score it. Sometimes it is a case of "that is such an old cross we should be looking for something new and better." Few stop to ask if there is new and if it is better. All that said... Joanna's point that RHS and AOS judging is different. RHS judging never looks at the flower (even in ribbon judging) until the plant has pasted muster. If the plant is not in good shape the flower can not be at it's best. I recently ribbon judged with an RHS judge on our judging team. It was very interesting. Kath said it took one judge to nominate something for scoring. It also often takes one nay sayer to stop a judging. If one of the senior judges says something very negative about a breeding line, plant age, or style, often the process will stall. It is after all an educated opinion of the condition of the flower and/or plant on a specific day at a specific time in the bloom cycle of the plant. SuE http://orchids.legolas.org/gallery/albums.php |
I don't know how often the AOS and other organizaitons award and FCC
to the same clone but it is not unheard of. A quick search of my picture reference database found pictures for 11 different plants given FCC's by both the AOS and RHS. That doesn't include plants which received FCC's from both organizations, but were not labeled with both in the book or catalogue at the time of publication of the picture. The plants I found we Angulocaste Tudor 'Bill Rinaman' Brassolaeliacattleya. Norman's Bay 'Low' Cymbidium Bourgondian 'Chateau' or 'Chateaux' Doritaenopsis Red Coral 'Fuschia' Laelia tenebrosa 'Walton Grange' Paphiopedilum Winston Churchill 'Redoubtable' Phragmipedium Memoria Dick Clements 'Jersey' Sophrolaeliocattleya. Falcon 'Alexanderi' Sophrolaeliocattleya. Falcon 'Westonbirt' Vuylstekeara Cambria 'Plush' Vuylstekeara Edna 'Stamperland' On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 01:53:32 GMT, "Gene Schurg" wrote: Susan, I'm not sure I understand your point. If a plant gets an FCC/RHS then AOS judges will pass on scoring it? If this is what you are saying then is an FCC/RHS as "valuable" as an FCC/AOS? Somehow it doesn't seem that way. Gene "Susan Erickson" wrote in message .. . On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 01:36:36 GMT, "J Fortuna" wrote: P.S.: Another thought: "K Barrett" wrote in message news:9npqd.110410$5K2.16436@attbi_s03... If you looked in Wildcatt for previous AOS awards remember that Wildcatt doesn't include any of the awards from the Register of Awards (the RA). So there's a whole mess o' previous awards that aren't listed. Both Kath and Joanna have points. I am going to try for another couple. Ever been the second to say something is beautiful? Most people don't want to reinforce another's position. So most judges will pass on a plant that has a high award or a reasonably high award. They will think they are not going to score the plant higher, so it is a waste of time to score it. Sometimes it is a case of "that is such an old cross we should be looking for something new and better." Few stop to ask if there is new and if it is better. All that said... Joanna's point that RHS and AOS judging is different. RHS judging never looks at the flower (even in ribbon judging) until the plant has pasted muster. If the plant is not in good shape the flower can not be at it's best. I recently ribbon judged with an RHS judge on our judging team. It was very interesting. Kath said it took one judge to nominate something for scoring. It also often takes one nay sayer to stop a judging. If one of the senior judges says something very negative about a breeding line, plant age, or style, often the process will stall. It is after all an educated opinion of the condition of the flower and/or plant on a specific day at a specific time in the bloom cycle of the plant. SuE http://orchids.legolas.org/gallery/albums.php |
Bob,
First of all...great site you have. I use it often to check names of plants and where to go to find a picture. My point of this thread is that I would expect that a plant awarded an FCC from the RHS (or other group) should also score very high by other organizations. At least that is what I thought until this discussion. I find it interesting that a search of your files only yielded a short list of plants with FCCs from both organizations. It appears that a plant with an FCC from AOS may not get equal consideration by the RHS and vice versa. Not that any of this really matters in the big scheme of things....just interesting observation. Good Growing, Gene "Bob Betts" wrote in message ... I don't know how often the AOS and other organizaitons award and FCC to the same clone but it is not unheard of. A quick search of my picture reference database found pictures for 11 different plants given FCC's by both the AOS and RHS. That doesn't include plants which received FCC's from both organizations, but were not labeled with both in the book or catalogue at the time of publication of the picture. The plants I found we Angulocaste Tudor 'Bill Rinaman' Brassolaeliacattleya. Norman's Bay 'Low' Cymbidium Bourgondian 'Chateau' or 'Chateaux' Doritaenopsis Red Coral 'Fuschia' Laelia tenebrosa 'Walton Grange' Paphiopedilum Winston Churchill 'Redoubtable' Phragmipedium Memoria Dick Clements 'Jersey' Sophrolaeliocattleya. Falcon 'Alexanderi' Sophrolaeliocattleya. Falcon 'Westonbirt' Vuylstekeara Cambria 'Plush' Vuylstekeara Edna 'Stamperland' On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 01:53:32 GMT, "Gene Schurg" wrote: Susan, I'm not sure I understand your point. If a plant gets an FCC/RHS then AOS judges will pass on scoring it? If this is what you are saying then is an FCC/RHS as "valuable" as an FCC/AOS? Somehow it doesn't seem that way. Gene "Susan Erickson" wrote in message .. . On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 01:36:36 GMT, "J Fortuna" wrote: P.S.: Another thought: "K Barrett" wrote in message news:9npqd.110410$5K2.16436@attbi_s03... If you looked in Wildcatt for previous AOS awards remember that Wildcatt doesn't include any of the awards from the Register of Awards (the RA). So there's a whole mess o' previous awards that aren't listed. Both Kath and Joanna have points. I am going to try for another couple. Ever been the second to say something is beautiful? Most people don't want to reinforce another's position. So most judges will pass on a plant that has a high award or a reasonably high award. They will think they are not going to score the plant higher, so it is a waste of time to score it. Sometimes it is a case of "that is such an old cross we should be looking for something new and better." Few stop to ask if there is new and if it is better. All that said... Joanna's point that RHS and AOS judging is different. RHS judging never looks at the flower (even in ribbon judging) until the plant has pasted muster. If the plant is not in good shape the flower can not be at it's best. I recently ribbon judged with an RHS judge on our judging team. It was very interesting. Kath said it took one judge to nominate something for scoring. It also often takes one nay sayer to stop a judging. If one of the senior judges says something very negative about a breeding line, plant age, or style, often the process will stall. It is after all an educated opinion of the condition of the flower and/or plant on a specific day at a specific time in the bloom cycle of the plant. SuE http://orchids.legolas.org/gallery/albums.php |
Thanks for the complement. I am happy you (and hopefully others) find
it useful. The small project of indexing our own small collection of orchid books (about 170 at last count) to help my wife find a picture seems to have gotten out of hand over the last few years. I sometimes wonder whether I should keep doing it since it takes a lot of time. Comments like yours tell me it is worth continuing to do. As far as the few hits go, I am sure there are a lot of reasons - not the least of which is that FCC's are few and far between to begin with. Also, I have learned, from typing over 120,000 records, that even though pretty clear guidelines or rules exist for typing the name of a plant, they are often not followed, even by people and organizations that should know better. Plants that have been awarded sometimes appear in picture lables without the award designation, either because the book was printed before the plant was awarded or the author and publisher simply didn't put it in. Of the 120,212 records in the database, only 1,976 of them have the string FCC in them and of course that is not 1,976 different plants because pictures of some plants appear many times (e.g. Blc. Malworth 'Orchidglade' appears 29 times with the FCC designation but is in the database 35 times in total including once with no award designation at all. Also, when the plant is awarded by multiple organizations, the way it is shown in the label may vary. A common way seems to be FCC/AOS-RHS or FCC/RHS-AOS but I have also seen it printed as FCC/AOS, FCC/RHS and the variations go on from there. The lack of consistancy makes it difficult to find all the hits without doing multiple searches and without being clairvoyant enough to guess all the search strings to use. On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 03:54:27 GMT, "Gene Schurg" wrote: Bob, First of all...great site you have. I use it often to check names of plants and where to go to find a picture. My point of this thread is that I would expect that a plant awarded an FCC from the RHS (or other group) should also score very high by other organizations. At least that is what I thought until this discussion. I find it interesting that a search of your files only yielded a short list of plants with FCCs from both organizations. It appears that a plant with an FCC from AOS may not get equal consideration by the RHS and vice versa. Not that any of this really matters in the big scheme of things....just interesting observation. Good Growing, Gene "Bob Betts" wrote in message ... I don't know how often the AOS and other organizaitons award and FCC to the same clone but it is not unheard of. A quick search of my picture reference database found pictures for 11 different plants given FCC's by both the AOS and RHS. That doesn't include plants which received FCC's from both organizations, but were not labeled with both in the book or catalogue at the time of publication of the picture. The plants I found we Angulocaste Tudor 'Bill Rinaman' Brassolaeliacattleya. Norman's Bay 'Low' Cymbidium Bourgondian 'Chateau' or 'Chateaux' Doritaenopsis Red Coral 'Fuschia' Laelia tenebrosa 'Walton Grange' Paphiopedilum Winston Churchill 'Redoubtable' Phragmipedium Memoria Dick Clements 'Jersey' Sophrolaeliocattleya. Falcon 'Alexanderi' Sophrolaeliocattleya. Falcon 'Westonbirt' Vuylstekeara Cambria 'Plush' Vuylstekeara Edna 'Stamperland' On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 01:53:32 GMT, "Gene Schurg" wrote: Susan, I'm not sure I understand your point. If a plant gets an FCC/RHS then AOS judges will pass on scoring it? If this is what you are saying then is an FCC/RHS as "valuable" as an FCC/AOS? Somehow it doesn't seem that way. Gene "Susan Erickson" wrote in message .. . On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 01:36:36 GMT, "J Fortuna" wrote: P.S.: Another thought: "K Barrett" wrote in message news:9npqd.110410$5K2.16436@attbi_s03... If you looked in Wildcatt for previous AOS awards remember that Wildcatt doesn't include any of the awards from the Register of Awards (the RA). So there's a whole mess o' previous awards that aren't listed. Both Kath and Joanna have points. I am going to try for another couple. Ever been the second to say something is beautiful? Most people don't want to reinforce another's position. So most judges will pass on a plant that has a high award or a reasonably high award. They will think they are not going to score the plant higher, so it is a waste of time to score it. Sometimes it is a case of "that is such an old cross we should be looking for something new and better." Few stop to ask if there is new and if it is better. All that said... Joanna's point that RHS and AOS judging is different. RHS judging never looks at the flower (even in ribbon judging) until the plant has pasted muster. If the plant is not in good shape the flower can not be at it's best. I recently ribbon judged with an RHS judge on our judging team. It was very interesting. Kath said it took one judge to nominate something for scoring. It also often takes one nay sayer to stop a judging. If one of the senior judges says something very negative about a breeding line, plant age, or style, often the process will stall. It is after all an educated opinion of the condition of the flower and/or plant on a specific day at a specific time in the bloom cycle of the plant. SuE http://orchids.legolas.org/gallery/albums.php |
I don't think an award from a different organization would affect a plant's
chances of getting an AOS award. There are a couple very good reasons why most clones wouldn't have awards from both organizations: - AOS gives a lot more awards than any other organization. There are more judges, more judging centers, more judging sessions (probably 500-600 a year including shows?) with AOS. RHS doesn't give very many awards. - The plant would probably have to be exhibited in both the U.S. and U.K. to get AOS and RHS awards. (I'm not sure if RHS does any overseas shows, I know AOS judges who have gone to some shows in Asia and South America). Also, if a plant is given an award by one organization and then is shown to a different organization 10 or 20 (or more) years later, the plant may not measure up to the current standards any more. -danny |
Why wouldn't you want to give the same level AOS award to the plant? That
would put the plant in the AOS judging system, so that it could be used for future comparison when considering other awards for the species/grex. Are the RHS awards looked at by AOS judges when they are scoring a plant? I didn't think that was the case. If someone didn't put XX/RHS on the tag, would you even know it was an RHS awarded plant when you were looking at it on the judging table? If someone brings a plant to a monthly judging session, then your "It would cost them another $35 dollars" argument wouldn't apply at all. If an exhibitor in a show doesn't want to pay $35, they can simply mark their plant "Not for AOS Judging". I know many judges are reluctant to do something like upgrading an 80 point AM/AOS to an 85 point AM/AOS because they don't think there's any point, and I kinda agree with them there. Witholding an award from a plant because it has an award from a judging organization in another country doesn't make any sense at all. -danny "Rob Halgren" wrote in message ... Gene Schurg wrote: My point of this thread is that I would expect that a plant awarded an FCC from the RHS (or other group) should also score very high by other organizations. At least that is what I thought until this discussion. I find it interesting that a search of your files only yielded a short list of plants with FCCs from both organizations. It appears that a plant with an FCC from AOS may not get equal consideration by the RHS and vice versa. Hmmm. Ok, I'll give my personal opinion as a probationary AOS judge here. They can kick me out if I'm wrong... *grin* In my opinion, it is not worthwhile to give a plant the same quality award from the AOS and the RHS simultaneously. The purpose of the award system is to acknowledge superior plants for purposes of advancing the horticultural desirability of orchids. In other words, plants with awards are more desirable than plants without awards, and the award designation helps the public select better plants, and helps the breeder select better crosses. Probably most importantly, although it shouldn't be, it is a system for financially rewarding the grower of the awarded plant. What does all that mean? It means as a breeder and plantsman, I know that Paph. Winston Churchill 'Redoubtable' FCC/RHS is a damn fine specimen of paphly beauty. I don't even need to see the picture, and pictures lie anyway. I can purchase this plant and be assured that it is of high quality. I can breed with this plant and presume that the progeny will have a higher probability of being 'successful' than if I use the Winston Churchill "Joe Schmoe" clone that I picked up off the raffle table (although "Indomitable" is a more successful parent, if I recall correctly). Does it supercede my own aesthetic reasoning? It shouldn't. If my "Joe Schmoe" clone is nicer in some respect (color, shape, etc) than some FCC or AM plant, then it is my choice to use it, I just can't be assured that the plant buying public will be as apt to purchase my cross. Their loss, and mine, if I'm a commercial grower. Anyway, an FCC/RHS or an FCC/AOS is pretty much the same in my book. The plants would be equally valuable. I don't see much point in giving an AOS award to an RHS awarded plant. It just makes the exhibitor pay another 35 dollars. It is quite another thing to promote an AM/RHS to an FCC/AOS (or vice versa, I suppose). That is a higher ranked award, and makes the plant correspondingly more valuable. I am in favor of promoting awards when that is merited. We just did that on a Phrag a few weeks ago (78pt HCC/AOS promoted to something well over 80 points AM). Random ramblings on my last day of work... Rob -- Rob's Rules: http://www.msu.edu/~halgren 1) There is always room for one more orchid 2) There is always room for two more orchids 2a. See rule 1 3) When one has insufficient credit to purchase more orchids, obtain more credit LittlefrogFarm is open - e-mail me for a list ) |
Why wouldn't you want to give the same level AOS award to the plant? That
would put the plant in the AOS judging system, so that it could be used for future comparison when considering other awards for the species/grex. Are the RHS awards looked at by AOS judges when they are scoring a plant? I didn't think that was the case. If someone didn't put XX/RHS on the tag, would you even know it was an RHS awarded plant when you were looking at it on the judging table? If someone brings a plant to a monthly judging session, then your "It would cost them another $35 dollars" argument wouldn't apply at all. If an exhibitor in a show doesn't want to pay $35, they can simply mark their plant "Not for AOS Judging". I know many judges are reluctant to do something like upgrading an 80 point AM/AOS to an 85 point AM/AOS because they don't think there's any point, and I kinda agree with them there. Witholding an award from a plant because it has an award from a judging organization in another country doesn't make any sense at all. -danny "Rob Halgren" wrote in message ... Gene Schurg wrote: My point of this thread is that I would expect that a plant awarded an FCC from the RHS (or other group) should also score very high by other organizations. At least that is what I thought until this discussion. I find it interesting that a search of your files only yielded a short list of plants with FCCs from both organizations. It appears that a plant with an FCC from AOS may not get equal consideration by the RHS and vice versa. Hmmm. Ok, I'll give my personal opinion as a probationary AOS judge here. They can kick me out if I'm wrong... *grin* In my opinion, it is not worthwhile to give a plant the same quality award from the AOS and the RHS simultaneously. The purpose of the award system is to acknowledge superior plants for purposes of advancing the horticultural desirability of orchids. In other words, plants with awards are more desirable than plants without awards, and the award designation helps the public select better plants, and helps the breeder select better crosses. Probably most importantly, although it shouldn't be, it is a system for financially rewarding the grower of the awarded plant. What does all that mean? It means as a breeder and plantsman, I know that Paph. Winston Churchill 'Redoubtable' FCC/RHS is a damn fine specimen of paphly beauty. I don't even need to see the picture, and pictures lie anyway. I can purchase this plant and be assured that it is of high quality. I can breed with this plant and presume that the progeny will have a higher probability of being 'successful' than if I use the Winston Churchill "Joe Schmoe" clone that I picked up off the raffle table (although "Indomitable" is a more successful parent, if I recall correctly). Does it supercede my own aesthetic reasoning? It shouldn't. If my "Joe Schmoe" clone is nicer in some respect (color, shape, etc) than some FCC or AM plant, then it is my choice to use it, I just can't be assured that the plant buying public will be as apt to purchase my cross. Their loss, and mine, if I'm a commercial grower. Anyway, an FCC/RHS or an FCC/AOS is pretty much the same in my book. The plants would be equally valuable. I don't see much point in giving an AOS award to an RHS awarded plant. It just makes the exhibitor pay another 35 dollars. It is quite another thing to promote an AM/RHS to an FCC/AOS (or vice versa, I suppose). That is a higher ranked award, and makes the plant correspondingly more valuable. I am in favor of promoting awards when that is merited. We just did that on a Phrag a few weeks ago (78pt HCC/AOS promoted to something well over 80 points AM). Random ramblings on my last day of work... Rob -- Rob's Rules: http://www.msu.edu/~halgren 1) There is always room for one more orchid 2) There is always room for two more orchids 2a. See rule 1 3) When one has insufficient credit to purchase more orchids, obtain more credit LittlefrogFarm is open - e-mail me for a list ) |
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 02:08:29 GMT, "Gene Schurg"
wrote: Pat, I agree with you on the profit potential metrics. It would be great for you to have lots of FCC certificates but it's customer demand that pays the heating bill. I guess I've always been tuned to look for AOS awards as a measure of a plant that has good potential. When I see these other awards from other groups I don't really give them the credit they deserve and maybe I should. Gene "Pat Brennan" wrote in message ... 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 are really 3 judging points in an AOS judging. First the plant as picked from a table of entries to be looked at closely. Second the judges decide to score or pass on judging this blooming of the plant. Third they each receive a score card on which they write a numeric value for color, size, number of flowers, shape and form of the dorsal, of the petals, of the lip/pouch. The sum of all these individual points is averaged over the team and we have our numeric score. It is the first and second decision points that are often the most difficult to cross. This is where the eye has to be caught and the mind engaged favorably for the plant. Many judges are more influenced by the 'size' of the flower or the different color when they decide to score or not score a plant. When they do score the plants these items have a much smaller influence. As to Metrics - - Other than the RHS requiring a well grown plant under a well grown flower, just by their judging style; I know of none that suggests a lesser requirement for beautiful flowers from one group or another. I would just remember that as someone noted HCC's here sometimes are a dime a dozen. That the judging is one groups (usually 5-7 people) opinion on a specific day of a specific bloom spike. If YOU like it, if YOU think it is as perfect an example of its type, YOU should celebrate it and enjoy. SuE http://orchids.legolas.org/gallery/albums.php |
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 02:08:29 GMT, "Gene Schurg"
wrote: Pat, I agree with you on the profit potential metrics. It would be great for you to have lots of FCC certificates but it's customer demand that pays the heating bill. I guess I've always been tuned to look for AOS awards as a measure of a plant that has good potential. When I see these other awards from other groups I don't really give them the credit they deserve and maybe I should. Gene "Pat Brennan" wrote in message ... 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 are really 3 judging points in an AOS judging. First the plant as picked from a table of entries to be looked at closely. Second the judges decide to score or pass on judging this blooming of the plant. Third they each receive a score card on which they write a numeric value for color, size, number of flowers, shape and form of the dorsal, of the petals, of the lip/pouch. The sum of all these individual points is averaged over the team and we have our numeric score. It is the first and second decision points that are often the most difficult to cross. This is where the eye has to be caught and the mind engaged favorably for the plant. Many judges are more influenced by the 'size' of the flower or the different color when they decide to score or not score a plant. When they do score the plants these items have a much smaller influence. As to Metrics - - Other than the RHS requiring a well grown plant under a well grown flower, just by their judging style; I know of none that suggests a lesser requirement for beautiful flowers from one group or another. I would just remember that as someone noted HCC's here sometimes are a dime a dozen. That the judging is one groups (usually 5-7 people) opinion on a specific day of a specific bloom spike. If YOU like it, if YOU think it is as perfect an example of its type, YOU should celebrate it and enjoy. SuE http://orchids.legolas.org/gallery/albums.php |
Your first step may or may not happen. In the Atlanta center every plant
goes to a judging team for consideration. -danny There are really 3 judging points in an AOS judging. First the plant as picked from a table of entries to be looked at closely. Second the judges decide to score or pass on judging this blooming of the plant. Third they each receive a score card on which they write a numeric value for color, size, number of flowers, shape and form of the dorsal, of the petals, of the lip/pouch. The sum of all these individual points is averaged over the team and we have our numeric score. |
"danny" wrote in message
... Why wouldn't you want to give the same level AOS award to the plant? That would put the plant in the AOS judging system, so that it could be used for future comparison when considering other awards for the species/grex. For what its worth, danny, I agree with you. Are the RHS awards looked at by AOS judges when they are scoring a plant? No they are not because they are not AOS awards. Nor are HOS or CSA awards taken into account. I didn't think that was the case. If someone didn't put XX/RHS on the tag, would you even know it was an RHS awarded plant when you were looking at it on the judging table? No you would not know it was an RHS awarded plant if you saw it on the judging table. Because the RHS award aren't taken into account. If someone brings a plant to a monthly judging session, then your "It would cost them another $35 dollars" argument wouldn't apply at all. If an exhibitor in a show doesn't want to pay $35, they can simply mark their plant "Not for AOS Judging". I know many judges are reluctant to do something like upgrading an 80 point AM/AOS to an 85 point AM/AOS because they don't think there's any point, and I kinda agree with them there. Witholding an award from a plant because it has an award from a judging organization in another country doesn't make any sense at all. Again, for what its worth, I agree too. But I do see the value in awarding a higher AM. Again it gets the flower's quality into the system. K Barrett "Rob Halgren" wrote in message ... Gene Schurg wrote: My point of this thread is that I would expect that a plant awarded an FCC from the RHS (or other group) should also score very high by other organizations. At least that is what I thought until this discussion. I find it interesting that a search of your files only yielded a short list of plants with FCCs from both organizations. It appears that a plant with an FCC from AOS may not get equal consideration by the RHS and vice versa. Hmmm. Ok, I'll give my personal opinion as a probationary AOS judge here. They can kick me out if I'm wrong... *grin* In my opinion, it is not worthwhile to give a plant the same quality award from the AOS and the RHS simultaneously. The purpose of the award system is to acknowledge superior plants for purposes of advancing the horticultural desirability of orchids. In other words, plants with awards are more desirable than plants without awards, and the award designation helps the public select better plants, and helps the breeder select better crosses. Probably most importantly, although it shouldn't be, it is a system for financially rewarding the grower of the awarded plant. What does all that mean? It means as a breeder and plantsman, I know that Paph. Winston Churchill 'Redoubtable' FCC/RHS is a damn fine specimen of paphly beauty. I don't even need to see the picture, and pictures lie anyway. I can purchase this plant and be assured that it is of high quality. I can breed with this plant and presume that the progeny will have a higher probability of being 'successful' than if I use the Winston Churchill "Joe Schmoe" clone that I picked up off the raffle table (although "Indomitable" is a more successful parent, if I recall correctly). Does it supercede my own aesthetic reasoning? It shouldn't. If my "Joe Schmoe" clone is nicer in some respect (color, shape, etc) than some FCC or AM plant, then it is my choice to use it, I just can't be assured that the plant buying public will be as apt to purchase my cross. Their loss, and mine, if I'm a commercial grower. Anyway, an FCC/RHS or an FCC/AOS is pretty much the same in my book. The plants would be equally valuable. I don't see much point in giving an AOS award to an RHS awarded plant. It just makes the exhibitor pay another 35 dollars. It is quite another thing to promote an AM/RHS to an FCC/AOS (or vice versa, I suppose). That is a higher ranked award, and makes the plant correspondingly more valuable. I am in favor of promoting awards when that is merited. We just did that on a Phrag a few weeks ago (78pt HCC/AOS promoted to something well over 80 points AM). Random ramblings on my last day of work... Rob -- Rob's Rules: http://www.msu.edu/~halgren 1) There is always room for one more orchid 2) There is always room for two more orchids 2a. See rule 1 3) When one has insufficient credit to purchase more orchids, obtain more credit LittlefrogFarm is open - e-mail me for a list ) |
wendy7 wrote:
Right on Rob, I love your "Random ramblings" & "Rob's rules"! You say it's your last day of work, are you going on vacation or are you retiring? I wish I was retiring... Actually I'm quite outspoken. No, I've been offered a different position (still at MSU) at faculty rank, in a different department. It would be stupid not to take it. However, I'm treating myself to a month off in between. Although that will be more like a month of working like a slave around the house (and greenhouse) trying to catch up on 3 years worth of unfinished projects. Also what is the name of the Phrag that was given 80 points? What, I'm supposed to remember names? *grin* I remember what it looked like (pink). I remember the owner (Dot Potter Barnett). I remember that the previous award was last year (78pt HCC/AOS). I remember that we didn't realize it had a previous award (since it hadn't been published yet), and only discovered the HCC after we had given it... oh, 83 points, i think. I remember that the previous award was to one flower and one bud, this award had 9 flowers and multiple buds on a single inflorescence. And for those keeping score at home, it was growing in Ray's Prime Agra semihydroponic medium. Enough to convince me to try it, anyway. All that and I can't remember the name... Rob -- Rob's Rules: http://www.msu.edu/~halgren 1) There is always room for one more orchid 2) There is always room for two more orchids 2a. See rule 1 3) When one has insufficient credit to purchase more orchids, obtain more credit LittlefrogFarm is open - e-mail me for a list ) |
wendy7 wrote:
Right on Rob, I love your "Random ramblings" & "Rob's rules"! You say it's your last day of work, are you going on vacation or are you retiring? I wish I was retiring... Actually I'm quite outspoken. No, I've been offered a different position (still at MSU) at faculty rank, in a different department. It would be stupid not to take it. However, I'm treating myself to a month off in between. Although that will be more like a month of working like a slave around the house (and greenhouse) trying to catch up on 3 years worth of unfinished projects. Also what is the name of the Phrag that was given 80 points? What, I'm supposed to remember names? *grin* I remember what it looked like (pink). I remember the owner (Dot Potter Barnett). I remember that the previous award was last year (78pt HCC/AOS). I remember that we didn't realize it had a previous award (since it hadn't been published yet), and only discovered the HCC after we had given it... oh, 83 points, i think. I remember that the previous award was to one flower and one bud, this award had 9 flowers and multiple buds on a single inflorescence. And for those keeping score at home, it was growing in Ray's Prime Agra semihydroponic medium. Enough to convince me to try it, anyway. All that and I can't remember the name... Rob -- Rob's Rules: http://www.msu.edu/~halgren 1) There is always room for one more orchid 2) There is always room for two more orchids 2a. See rule 1 3) When one has insufficient credit to purchase more orchids, obtain more credit LittlefrogFarm is open - e-mail me for a list ) |
danny wrote:
Why wouldn't you want to give the same level AOS award to the plant? That would put the plant in the AOS judging system, so that it could be used for future comparison when considering other awards for the species/grex. Are the RHS awards looked at by AOS judges when they are scoring a plant? I didn't think that was the case. If someone didn't put XX/RHS on the tag, would you even know it was an RHS awarded plant when you were looking at it on the judging table? That is an excellent point, and well taken. And no, we don't look at the RHS awards (we should, and I was just thinking about writing a paper on that topic). However, I don't really believe in putting something into the AOS judging system just to put it on record. I know that many people do, there is an honest difference of opinion there. If somebody didn't put the RHS award on the tag, then it is likely to get an AOS award if it is sufficiently new. Older plants get judged by the current standards, it would be hard to give some of the old FCCs an HCC today. But even if the RHS award is on the tag, it can still get an AOS award, there is no rule against it. All that said, if somebody knows enough about the plant to put the RHS award on the tag, then they know that the plant is valuable. I don't know why an exhibitor would want to add an AOS award to the list. You wouldn't get any more money for selling it or its progeny, at least to the kind of people who would pay extra for that kind of thing. The awards are equally good. That is my opinion, of course, and others feel differently. And as a final point, I definitely think that the AOS should consider looking at RHS awards in the research phase of judging. The systems are similar enough that they can be rationally compared, and the more information the better, in my opinion. I base my score on a representation of the 'ideal flower' for a given type of breeding. Sure would be nice to know what is possible on the other side of the pond, for developing my image of what is possible. If someone brings a plant to a monthly judging session, then your "It would cost them another $35 dollars" argument wouldn't apply at all. If an exhibitor in a show doesn't want to pay $35, they can simply mark their plant "Not for AOS Judging". I know many judges are reluctant to do something like upgrading an 80 point AM/AOS to an 85 point AM/AOS because they don't think there's any point, and I kinda agree with them there. Witholding an award from a plant because it has an award from a judging organization in another country doesn't make any sense at all. I debated mentioning that in the last post... Yes, if a plant is brought specifically for AOS judging, then obviously the owner would like to pay for an award. We see about half our award plants at shows, and you would be surprised at how many people don't put "Not for AOS judging" on their tags. As for withholding an award, I don't think I said we would do that... A plant will be judged on its merits. If a plant has a previous AOS award to the same clone, we know what to compare it to. Is it better than the previous award? How does this improvement compare to the current state of the art? If a plant has an RHS award, we lack the literature to see what it looked like at the time it was awarded. That doesn't prevent us from comparing it to what we think is current. Nothing on the tag precludes a plant from an AOS quality award. Would I pull an awarded plant for judging out of an exhibit at a show? Probably not, unless I know that the bloom is superior to its previous award. It just isn't time efficient (or customary, for that matter) to pull every awarded plant and reevaluate it to see if it is better than the previous award. Nobody has time for that. But if a person brings it to AOS judging, we will look at it. In our region we look at everything that comes to the judging center, rather than nominating plants from the floor. It is certainly complicated... Rob -- Rob's Rules: http://www.msu.edu/~halgren 1) There is always room for one more orchid 2) There is always room for two more orchids 2a. See rule 1 3) When one has insufficient credit to purchase more orchids, obtain more credit LittlefrogFarm is open - e-mail me for a list ) |
Gene,
I do not know much about the CSA and HOS awards, sorry. I have seen some pretty weak BM & SM/WOC, but it could be they were just old awards. I have seen plants with awards from orchid societies in Asia and expect it is time to learn about these award systems. As has already been said, AOS and RHS awards measure different things. I think of RHS as sort of AOS award and AOS ribbon judging combined into one. It is a special plant that can carry both awards. As to which award raises the plant value more . . .I could get myself into so much trouble here. I have made my living selling blooming plants for over a decade now and I have found that an award does not really change a plants value. I know this is not true for all orchid businesses, especially those marketing non blooming plants. Before anyone calls me nuts, look at the flask and plug offerings from the major cloning labs, very few of the plants will be carrying awards and those which do have awards carry no premium; look at the orchids for sale in the box stores or other major outlets and try to find a price difference between awarded and nonawarded plants; or even go to an orchid show and try to find a relationship between price and award level of the blooming plants being offered. I disagree with those that say an AOS award is a good measure for selecting plants for ownership or breeding. The system does not consider factors essential for making those measures. Instead I view the judging system as the AOS means for tracking and documenting the current state of orchid flowers. In a recent survey of judges, 23% of the judges said they would not award a plant if an equal plant from the same cross had been awarded a year before. The second plant is just as good as the first with or without the award, AOS has documented the cross with the first award and it is time to move on. The state of orchid flowers moves fairly quickly. In many cases flower quality that was awarded five years ago would not even be considered today. An award without knowing the date of the award is pretty meaningless for assessing the flower quality. A cross is most likely to be at least 4 years old before a plant is mature enough to be awarded. If after the award it is sent to the lab, it is another two years before clone flasks start to be return. Compot, 2.5" pot, 4" pot - at least another 3 years before the clones are blooming, nine years after the cross was first made. Buying awarded clone might not always put the best quality flowers in your collection when seedlings a couple of generations ahead of the clones are also offered. In all of this please do not get me wrong. I am always honored and a bit humbled when granted an AOS award. I addition it is always very cool when a plant you are currently breeding with or have already sent out for cloning is pulled out of an exhibit and granted an award. Pat "Gene Schurg" wrote in message ink.net... Pat, I agree with you on the profit potential metrics. It would be great for you to have lots of FCC certificates but it's customer demand that pays the heating bill. You have to grow plants that people want to display in their homes. Us crazy collectors don't buy enough to pay the bills. Do you feel an FCC from the RHS is equal to an FCC from the AOS? Does one award increase the value of the cross more than the other? I see lots of awards for plants from different groups. Is there a ranking of RHS awards are worth more than CSA, CSA worth more than HOS, etc? I guess I've always been tuned to look for AOS awards as a measure of a plant that has good potential. When I see these other awards from other groups I don't really give them the credit they deserve and maybe I should. Gene |
Gene,
I do not know much about the CSA and HOS awards, sorry. I have seen some pretty weak BM & SM/WOC, but it could be they were just old awards. I have seen plants with awards from orchid societies in Asia and expect it is time to learn about these award systems. As has already been said, AOS and RHS awards measure different things. I think of RHS as sort of AOS award and AOS ribbon judging combined into one. It is a special plant that can carry both awards. As to which award raises the plant value more . . .I could get myself into so much trouble here. I have made my living selling blooming plants for over a decade now and I have found that an award does not really change a plants value. I know this is not true for all orchid businesses, especially those marketing non blooming plants. Before anyone calls me nuts, look at the flask and plug offerings from the major cloning labs, very few of the plants will be carrying awards and those which do have awards carry no premium; look at the orchids for sale in the box stores or other major outlets and try to find a price difference between awarded and nonawarded plants; or even go to an orchid show and try to find a relationship between price and award level of the blooming plants being offered. I disagree with those that say an AOS award is a good measure for selecting plants for ownership or breeding. The system does not consider factors essential for making those measures. Instead I view the judging system as the AOS means for tracking and documenting the current state of orchid flowers. In a recent survey of judges, 23% of the judges said they would not award a plant if an equal plant from the same cross had been awarded a year before. The second plant is just as good as the first with or without the award, AOS has documented the cross with the first award and it is time to move on. The state of orchid flowers moves fairly quickly. In many cases flower quality that was awarded five years ago would not even be considered today. An award without knowing the date of the award is pretty meaningless for assessing the flower quality. A cross is most likely to be at least 4 years old before a plant is mature enough to be awarded. If after the award it is sent to the lab, it is another two years before clone flasks start to be return. Compot, 2.5" pot, 4" pot - at least another 3 years before the clones are blooming, nine years after the cross was first made. Buying awarded clone might not always put the best quality flowers in your collection when seedlings a couple of generations ahead of the clones are also offered. In all of this please do not get me wrong. I am always honored and a bit humbled when granted an AOS award. I addition it is always very cool when a plant you are currently breeding with or have already sent out for cloning is pulled out of an exhibit and granted an award. Pat "Gene Schurg" wrote in message ink.net... Pat, I agree with you on the profit potential metrics. It would be great for you to have lots of FCC certificates but it's customer demand that pays the heating bill. You have to grow plants that people want to display in their homes. Us crazy collectors don't buy enough to pay the bills. Do you feel an FCC from the RHS is equal to an FCC from the AOS? Does one award increase the value of the cross more than the other? I see lots of awards for plants from different groups. Is there a ranking of RHS awards are worth more than CSA, CSA worth more than HOS, etc? I guess I've always been tuned to look for AOS awards as a measure of a plant that has good potential. When I see these other awards from other groups I don't really give them the credit they deserve and maybe I should. Gene |
Pat,
All good points. Nothing beats seeing a plant in bloom so you can judge for yourself if you like it. No one wants to grow a flower and not enjoy it. I hope all is well out in the valley. Gene "Pat Brennan" wrote in message ... Gene, I do not know much about the CSA and HOS awards, sorry. I have seen some pretty weak BM & SM/WOC, but it could be they were just old awards. I have seen plants with awards from orchid societies in Asia and expect it is time to learn about these award systems. As has already been said, AOS and RHS awards measure different things. I think of RHS as sort of AOS award and AOS ribbon judging combined into one. It is a special plant that can carry both awards. As to which award raises the plant value more . . .I could get myself into so much trouble here. I have made my living selling blooming plants for over a decade now and I have found that an award does not really change a plants value. I know this is not true for all orchid businesses, especially those marketing non blooming plants. Before anyone calls me nuts, look at the flask and plug offerings from the major cloning labs, very few of the plants will be carrying awards and those which do have awards carry no premium; look at the orchids for sale in the box stores or other major outlets and try to find a price difference between awarded and nonawarded plants; or even go to an orchid show and try to find a relationship between price and award level of the blooming plants being offered. I disagree with those that say an AOS award is a good measure for selecting plants for ownership or breeding. The system does not consider factors essential for making those measures. Instead I view the judging system as the AOS means for tracking and documenting the current state of orchid flowers. In a recent survey of judges, 23% of the judges said they would not award a plant if an equal plant from the same cross had been awarded a year before. The second plant is just as good as the first with or without the award, AOS has documented the cross with the first award and it is time to move on. The state of orchid flowers moves fairly quickly. In many cases flower quality that was awarded five years ago would not even be considered today. An award without knowing the date of the award is pretty meaningless for assessing the flower quality. A cross is most likely to be at least 4 years old before a plant is mature enough to be awarded. If after the award it is sent to the lab, it is another two years before clone flasks start to be return. Compot, 2.5" pot, 4" pot - at least another 3 years before the clones are blooming, nine years after the cross was first made. Buying awarded clone might not always put the best quality flowers in your collection when seedlings a couple of generations ahead of the clones are also offered. In all of this please do not get me wrong. I am always honored and a bit humbled when granted an AOS award. I addition it is always very cool when a plant you are currently breeding with or have already sent out for cloning is pulled out of an exhibit and granted an award. Pat "Gene Schurg" wrote in message ink.net... Pat, I agree with you on the profit potential metrics. It would be great for you to have lots of FCC certificates but it's customer demand that pays the heating bill. You have to grow plants that people want to display in their homes. Us crazy collectors don't buy enough to pay the bills. Do you feel an FCC from the RHS is equal to an FCC from the AOS? Does one award increase the value of the cross more than the other? I see lots of awards for plants from different groups. Is there a ranking of RHS awards are worth more than CSA, CSA worth more than HOS, etc? I guess I've always been tuned to look for AOS awards as a measure of a plant that has good potential. When I see these other awards from other groups I don't really give them the credit they deserve and maybe I should. Gene |
Pat,
All good points. Nothing beats seeing a plant in bloom so you can judge for yourself if you like it. No one wants to grow a flower and not enjoy it. I hope all is well out in the valley. Gene "Pat Brennan" wrote in message ... Gene, I do not know much about the CSA and HOS awards, sorry. I have seen some pretty weak BM & SM/WOC, but it could be they were just old awards. I have seen plants with awards from orchid societies in Asia and expect it is time to learn about these award systems. As has already been said, AOS and RHS awards measure different things. I think of RHS as sort of AOS award and AOS ribbon judging combined into one. It is a special plant that can carry both awards. As to which award raises the plant value more . . .I could get myself into so much trouble here. I have made my living selling blooming plants for over a decade now and I have found that an award does not really change a plants value. I know this is not true for all orchid businesses, especially those marketing non blooming plants. Before anyone calls me nuts, look at the flask and plug offerings from the major cloning labs, very few of the plants will be carrying awards and those which do have awards carry no premium; look at the orchids for sale in the box stores or other major outlets and try to find a price difference between awarded and nonawarded plants; or even go to an orchid show and try to find a relationship between price and award level of the blooming plants being offered. I disagree with those that say an AOS award is a good measure for selecting plants for ownership or breeding. The system does not consider factors essential for making those measures. Instead I view the judging system as the AOS means for tracking and documenting the current state of orchid flowers. In a recent survey of judges, 23% of the judges said they would not award a plant if an equal plant from the same cross had been awarded a year before. The second plant is just as good as the first with or without the award, AOS has documented the cross with the first award and it is time to move on. The state of orchid flowers moves fairly quickly. In many cases flower quality that was awarded five years ago would not even be considered today. An award without knowing the date of the award is pretty meaningless for assessing the flower quality. A cross is most likely to be at least 4 years old before a plant is mature enough to be awarded. If after the award it is sent to the lab, it is another two years before clone flasks start to be return. Compot, 2.5" pot, 4" pot - at least another 3 years before the clones are blooming, nine years after the cross was first made. Buying awarded clone might not always put the best quality flowers in your collection when seedlings a couple of generations ahead of the clones are also offered. In all of this please do not get me wrong. I am always honored and a bit humbled when granted an AOS award. I addition it is always very cool when a plant you are currently breeding with or have already sent out for cloning is pulled out of an exhibit and granted an award. Pat "Gene Schurg" wrote in message ink.net... Pat, I agree with you on the profit potential metrics. It would be great for you to have lots of FCC certificates but it's customer demand that pays the heating bill. You have to grow plants that people want to display in their homes. Us crazy collectors don't buy enough to pay the bills. Do you feel an FCC from the RHS is equal to an FCC from the AOS? Does one award increase the value of the cross more than the other? I see lots of awards for plants from different groups. Is there a ranking of RHS awards are worth more than CSA, CSA worth more than HOS, etc? I guess I've always been tuned to look for AOS awards as a measure of a plant that has good potential. When I see these other awards from other groups I don't really give them the credit they deserve and maybe I should. Gene |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:25 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter