# Judging Discussion



## Gcroz (Apr 20, 2012)

Not sure how many of you will want to go on record discussing judging issues, but I thought I'd try and start a conversation. Based on the Recent _Orchids_, and some of the FCC plants pictured there, I thought the topic was ripe. Here are my issues with AOS judging (based on Boylston so experiences may vary):

1. I think parallel awards should be given if the plant deserves the award (Boylston will not give parallel flower awards)!

2. Judges do need to consider there is a pecuniary interest in plants that are awarded.

3. Rather than starting with the plant being crap and working up, judges should start at the plant being 100 pts. and work down!

4. (Not at Boylston) there is an appearance that certain companies and individuals easily get awards, while more worthy plants from lesser known people to not.

Yes, this may come across as "sour grapes" but it is very hard to judge award quality plants when one center screens out a plant and another awards a lesser quality plant, for example the same hybrid.

Curious as to others opinions, ideas, and reflections. Please keep it civil!


----------



## Rick (Apr 20, 2012)

Gcroz said:


> Not sure how many of you will want to go on record discussing judging issues, but I thought I'd try and start a conversation. Based on the Recent _Orchids_, and some of the FCC plants pictured there, I thought the topic was ripe. Here are my issues with AOS judging (based on Boylston so experiences may vary):
> 
> 1. I think parallel awards should be given if the plant deserves the award (Boylston will not give parallel flower awards)!
> 
> ...



For having been on a role for a half a year now:

1) I'm mixed on the idea of parallel awards. It could lead to so many awards that ultimately awards are diluted to worthless. On the other hand many plants were awarded so long ago they've locked out any contemporary competitive interest. So maybe the judging review can be pared back to the last 10 years worth or so other meaningful time period to reduce the ancient awards history pressure.

2) I'm not convinced that judges should consider the commercial aspects of an awarded plant.

3) This is a constant debate amongst the judges themselves. They all have different personalities that shine through in their judging styles. But yes I think there is a bit of a push to look at plants more optimistically. Part of this may be due to the shaky financial position of the AOS and need to get the membership at large to increase participation.

4) I don't go to the judging center enough to see a strong trend in this. In some ways its basic odds. The more plants a person brings in the more likely a plant will pay off. Also the more frequently a person attends a judging, the more you can tell what they are looking for. And pre-screening the plants in the old AQ records helps too. But in my region I don't see the awards dominated by a handful of major commercial players.


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 20, 2012)

Rick said:


> 4) I don't go to the judging center enough to see a strong trend in this. In some ways its basic odds. The more plants a person brings in the more likely a plant will pay off. Also the more frequently a person attends a judging, the more you can tell what they are looking for. And pre-screening the plants in the old AQ records helps too. But in my region I don't see the awards dominated by a handful of major commercial players.



Thanks for your input. Here is the problem, I, and many others, do screen based on AQ, but with many old awards and a general lack of consistency, in my opinion, it's hard to decide. A plant in one center that gets denied an award may get an AM in another. Plus, couple that with a recognizable name and I thin there is a presumption of quality. Judges are supposed to be neutral, but they know who presented the plant!


----------



## littlefrog (Apr 20, 2012)

Sometimes we know who brought in the plant, it doesn't take too many decades to figure out who grows what. Although I've been fooled plenty of times. I take pride in not letting my guess about ownership effect me in any way. In fact, I could easily judge my own plants impartially, I think. The bigger players get more awards because they bring in more plants...

I am neutral on parallel (I call them lateral) awards. Sometimes I'm for it, sometimes against. It depends a bit on what I'm judging. If it is the 300th Paph. St. Swithin in the system, I'm going to be pretty hard to convince. Something with just a few awards, I'll be easier to convince. I think we need to get a good representation of the variety of any given species or hybrid into the award literature, and don't mind focusing on what makes that particular plant different or appealing.

I tend to judge as deductions from 100 rather than additions towards 100... Actually I think I might not even do that... I tend to look at a plant and after doing the research I know where it will score (in my opinion, of course). If I think the plant is an HCC for color, my color scores are going to reflect ~75% of the points for color. My final score will thus always reflect my initial estimate of the score. Sometimes I surprise myself in the pointing, coming out a few points higher or lower than I had estimated. I look pretty closely to see where those extra (or fewer) points came from, it is often a mistake.

I don't think I have ever given any consideration to the financial impacts of an award, positive or negative. Never crosses my mind. I don't think I'm just saying that, it just really doesn't ever hit my conscious thought. Of course now I'm thinking about it, and it will make tomorrow's judging interesting...

Rob


----------



## cnycharles (Apr 21, 2012)

I have seen awards at our shows mixed between some of the vendors, and excellent individuals. Often bloomfield orchids gets awards but they have most of the really nice paphs, and can screen their plants, so it makes sense


----------



## Roth (Apr 21, 2012)

in short, the RHS awards stand valid for some decades. Most am or fcc from the 50s are still the same or nearly so today... The AOS definitely not.

One more point given the price to pay once people get award would be virus testing too. I have seen quite a lot of virused awarded plants over the years.

Last, scoring a plant to know if it is worth an award is pointless. You see the plant, estimate the award and done. With the point scoring, it is clear that some plants get undeserved awards.

Things like that fcc mem rex van delden are simply a joke, and lower the value of all awards. At a point the TIOS in Tainan wondered if aos judging was worth it, but nonetheless some exhibitors refused their plants to be judged...


----------



## Finrod (Apr 21, 2012)

Roth said:


> Last, scoring a plant to know if it is worth an award is pointless. You see the plant, estimate the award and done. With the point scoring, it is clear that some plants get undeserved awards.



Good point. The way I see it any judge half decent judge should know in his or her own mind if a plant is worth an award. After the appropriate research if unfamiliar with the plant of course. 

On the other side of the coin. Too often have I seen plants I have considered worthy of a mid to high Am relegated to Hcc status or worse still nothing. 

One of the perils of starting at 100 and deducting. Although I have to say I see it happening less these days.

However we still have judges in our system wouldn't know a good flower even if it bit them on the backside.  This is just from personal experience over the years.


----------



## cnycharles (Apr 21, 2012)

we have pretty good judges that come to the shows in our area. that said, like finrod points out, just because a person has gone through training to become a judge and spends the time, it doesn't mean that they are going to be any good at telling the worth of one plant over another. some people have 'the eye' so that they can look and know award quality; others don't have the eye and need a point chart. it is interesting to watch at our shows when one of the judges has an interest in a group of species and is trying to point out particular positive points about a certain plant, and the others that may not have any experience just don't get it and may be uninterested in listening. it really does pay to have judges who know a particular group to judge that group, as long as they are 'death sentence' judges who feel that since they 'know' a certain group, don't over do it and be very over-critical of the plants they judge (so that nothing gets an award)

I wonder if somehow the lead judges in a center where something gets an inordinately high award, are ones who aren't familiar with the group that is being judged, so don't realize that it isn't as good as they think. all judges are volunteers, which is important to remember, and though sometimes there are funky plants that get awarded, we all have bad days  . It's just odd that a whole judging crew would have a bad day all at the same time, unless at a big show the judges are split up into little crews and something is happening like where there may only be two judges awarding a particular group, they aren't familiar and may be in a hurry to get things done


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 21, 2012)

Thank you for your responses. 

I agree that the big players contribute more plants and thus get more awards. However, on several occasions, I have seen plants get awarded that were of inferior quality, owned by big players, to plants of the same type owned by "little guys" that were not awarded. Thus my statement that there is a presumption of quality from the big players. Unfortunately that plays back to the issue of parallel awards and make it that much harder, or impossible, for those "little guys."

Obviously, the system is not perfect. However, to play devil's advocate, wouldn't it be better to award plants that are worthy of the award no matter how many have been awarded in the past? After all, it's flower judging, not grex judging. Just sayin'...


----------



## NYEric (Apr 21, 2012)

The AOS judging system is Perfect. You are quite welcome to quote this at my student judge interview.


----------



## tim (Apr 21, 2012)

if you are concerned about judging, and you are interested in orchids, why don't you forget those excuses and become a judge. I did, I'm in Boylston, and I would welcome with open arms another person interested in bettering the system and dealing with some of the supposed and actual problems at work within it.

For example, did you know there was a heated debate about judging that Chiu Hua Dancer at the CAIOS show? Did you know that there is a significant about of discussion about things from other centers that should or should not have been awarded? Maybe Thanh supplied paperwork with his awarded plant? It's impossible to know the entire story of lots of this stuff without actually being a judge. I like to think that as a judge I can help fix some of the problems...and maybe that's naive, but it is more proactive than complaining for me. I find myself agreeing with most of Rob's points, and I think many (but not all) judges are in the same boat.


----------



## Rick (Apr 21, 2012)

Roth said:


> Last, scoring a plant to know if it is worth an award is pointless. You see the plant, estimate the award and done. With the point scoring, it is clear that some plants get undeserved awards.



That's how the dog show people do it. One judge no scoring. Total mess, smacks of politics and favors.

I really like the multiple judge scoring method to bring some semblance of impartiality, discussion/debate, and compromise into the decision. If there are a lot of judges at a center it's a good idea to change up the teams so that the smaller groups don't get into the same rut/view of the plants (no "group think"), and reduces the friends and allies stampede.

I've watched some group dynamics and noticed that there is always one judge who really loves the plant and promotes heavily in the discussion, and one who really doesn't like the plant. And the other 3 or so are neutral. By the time the research, counts, measures, views, and associated chatter is done, the score is generally based on how well the "promoter" has sold the rest on the qualities of the plant.

This may be one of the reasons why lateral awards just don't happen much, since boredom for very common or popular plants just doesn't create enough enthusiasm for any one judge to expend enough energy for effective promotion among the team.


----------



## littlefrog (Apr 21, 2012)

We judged a Chiu Hua Dancer today, actually. We had a bit of a discussion about whether it was 'legal' or not. Turns out it is. Not sure when that decision was made. We didn't award this particular one because of some flower issues. Nice cross though.



tim said:


> if you are concerned about judging, and you are interested in orchids, why don't you forget those excuses and become a judge. I did, I'm in Boylston, and I would welcome with open arms another person interested in bettering the system and dealing with some of the supposed and actual problems at work within it.
> 
> For example, did you know there was a heated debate about judging that Chiu Hua Dancer at the CAIOS show? Did you know that there is a significant about of discussion about things from other centers that should or should not have been awarded? Maybe Thanh supplied paperwork with his awarded plant? It's impossible to know the entire story of lots of this stuff without actually being a judge. I like to think that as a judge I can help fix some of the problems...and maybe that's naive, but it is more proactive than complaining for me. I find myself agreeing with most of Rob's points, and I think many (but not all) judges are in the same boat.


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 22, 2012)

tim said:


> if you are concerned about judging, and you are interested in orchids, why don't you forget those excuses and become a judge. I did, I'm in Boylston, and I would welcome with open arms another person interested in bettering the system and dealing with some of the supposed and actual problems at work within it.
> 
> For example, did you know there was a heated debate about judging that Chiu Hua Dancer at the CAIOS show? Did you know that there is a significant about of discussion about things from other centers that should or should not have been awarded? Maybe Thanh supplied paperwork with his awarded plant? It's impossible to know the entire story of lots of this stuff without actually being a judge. I like to think that as a judge I can help fix some of the problems...and maybe that's naive, but it is more proactive than complaining for me. I find myself agreeing with most of Rob's points, and I think many (but not all) judges are in the same boat.



I certainly agree that Thanh may have produced paperwork for the plant. My point was that I, and others would like to know, and perhaps that should be stated with the award. I had the same hybrid awarded and had the award nullified (http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16628&highlight=chiu+dancer). If the situation has changed, I'd like to know! If it hasn't changed, I'd like to know why one plant is eligible and others are not.

While some may see it as complaining, others may see it as discussion. I NEVER stated that judges did not earn their privileges, but as a member of the AOS, I am allowed to have my opinion. I was also commenting on information supplied to me by the AOS and other growers and noted that perhaps the situation had changed (see 4/21/2012 6:44 AM post "Perhaps the status of Chiu Hua Dancer has changed? Anyone know?"). If you'd like to see the email supplied to me from the AOS regarding the eligibility of my plant for award, I'd be happy to supply it to you and the readers here!(_email dated June 29, 2010_).

As for the impossibility of knowing "the entire story of lots of this stuff without actually being a judge" that is an issue which I think deserves its own discussion. I believe that you do not mean that there are secret decisions and discussions which judges are entitled to know the contents of and which non-judges are to remain in darkness.

Finally, Tim, my decision to not enter the judges "training" program came due to personal considerations of my life at the moment. That does not mean that I'm not allowed to discuss, "complain," or contemplate openly my opinions of the judging process. As noted elsewhere on this board, judges are not perfect, but they are also not exempt from the scrutiny of the orchid community. Perhaps there will come a day when I decide to enter the judging program. Until that time, I will gladly observe and comment on the system as I see it. I also welcome any judges to comment on my opinions and enter into discussions about those opinions.


----------



## tim (Apr 22, 2012)

I never said you were complaining and I certainly never said you weren't "allowed" to say whatever you want about the system. I would simply contend that the easiest way to change an organization you think has problems, but also intrinsic value, is from within it. I'm sure all the judges would tell you that the training process is long and time-consuming, but allows us to provide a service to something we all think is worthwhile.

For example, perhaps to deal with your valid assertion that discussions be privy to members I might ask that centers have secretaries and minutes of the discussions of each of the plants to be published online or on the AOS blog or something. That might be great!

I think posting that email would be very interesting. It appears as though it is only within the last year that Chiu Hua Dancers have been awarded...trying to keep current with what can and cannot be awarded is an ongoing process for us.


----------



## Rick (Apr 22, 2012)

Rick said:


> I've watched some group dynamics and noticed that there is always one judge who really loves the plant and promotes heavily in the discussion, and one who really doesn't like the plant. And the other 3 or so are neutral. By the time the research, counts, measures, views, and associated chatter is done, the score is generally based on how well the "promoter" has sold the rest on the qualities of the plant.



I should add that during the coarse of research/debate, the promoter is often tempered in outlook too. The final score is an average of individual scores (straight math), but the range is narrowed and focused by the judging debate.


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 22, 2012)

Tim, per your request, here is the relevant text from the email I received from Bob Winkley.

_"It has been brought to my attention by Ron McHatton, Chief Operating Officer at the AOS, that Paphiopedilum gigantifolium (and its hybrids) is ineligible for AOS judging. Ron is also in charge of Education, Nomenclature, Research and Regional Outreach. Per his note to me on June 29, 2010:

'According to the US Fish & Wildlife, these (note: referring to Paph gigantifolium) are not legally in cultivation anywhere - yes I know they are for sale here ... but there is a disconnect between USDA which clears plants and F&W which enforces CITES. Since no plants of gigantifolium can trace their history to legally obtained material none of their offspring can either. This then makes it impossible to clear them based on the CITES exemption for hybrids of paphiopedilum. Also, the JC voted (approved by the trustees) that we are no longer able to judge any of the post-ban species and their hybrids anywhere in the world unless it's the country of origin and they are collected legally or they have been released into the US by a rescue center.'"_

As you can see, my confusion over the legality of the plant, and awards, is grounded in this email (see also Orchids Mag thread in the Tell Me About It forum). Now, like I've addressed, this situation may have changed in the intervening 2 years. 

This email also highlights the question as to whether AOS needs to be an "enforcement agency" for the USDA and USFWS. I contend that the issue of legality should not be considered when judging since I do not believe enforcement of laws is something AOS should be a part of. Personally, I think AOS judging should be able to award any orchid. But, I will add that I do see the other side of this as well!


----------



## tim (Apr 22, 2012)

Thanks for providing that and sorry for your experience. I think the issue at work here is, just as you said, that when your plant was awarded, gigantifolium was not legal, and now it's been imported legally and it and its hybrids are legal. 

Can you provide another example of an organization which implicitly accepts illegal products as a part of daily business? 

I don't think it's an issue of enforcement - it's not like the AOS is going to take away an exhibited plant because it's illegal.

I think it would be wonderful if the AOS or other advocates for the orchid industry would do some lobbying on our behalf to grow these widely available, artificially propagated, "illegal" species. Hopefully as Holger (or others) brings more and more of them to the states it will become a non-issue. To the best of my knowledge there are no paph species which have not been legally introduced to the US at this point (perhaps excepting some little-known natural hybrid-ish or similar things).


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 22, 2012)

tim said:


> Thanks for providing that and sorry for your experience. I think the issue at work here is, just as you said, that when your plant was awarded, gigantifolium was not legal, and now it's been imported legally and it and its hybrids are legal.
> 
> Can you provide another example of an organization which implicitly accepts illegal products as a part of daily business?
> 
> ...



Tim, what then is the requirement to produce paperwork with plants. Is there still a presumption that the plant is illegal and AOS will require proper proof?

Also, what you imply regarding "accepting illegal products as part of it's daily business" does not necessarily apply to the judging example. Since the plants are not possessed, the "owner" still controls and keeps possession during judging, then the issue of "accepting" contraband doesn't apply. 

If you'd really like to know some organizations around the world that do accept stolen goods, try going to museums in which antiquities are displayed. There have been many cases of stolen antiquities being found in the actual possession of museums.

Enforcement is perhaps the wrong word. I'll have to think about how to explain that portion of my argument more clearly.


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 22, 2012)

tim said:


> To the best of my knowledge there are no paph species which have not been legally introduced to the US at this point (perhaps excepting some little-known natural hybrid-ish or similar things).



For my own curiosity, has Paph. canhii been imported legally? I think it is a neat flower and I'd definitely like to get one if they are legal.


----------



## tim (Apr 22, 2012)

good example - to the best of my knowledge canhii is not legal presently.

the requirement to produce paperwork with plants appears to disappear by gestalt - eventually it is "accepted" that enough plants are legally (?) in the trade to allow this restriction to be released. I would say that, as a judge, I would like to see papers for hangianum, vejvarutianum and coccineum and their hybrids before awarding them. As I'm sitting here, I know that there are lots of legal helenae, gigantifolium, vietnamense...maybe others I can't think of. So there's really not too much on the list...and the list shrinks all the time.

I said "implicitly" for a reason - by awarding "illegal" species, there is an accepting of having these illegal things as acceptable.

As far as museums are concerned, in those cases where materials have been found to have been acquired illegally, ongoing lawsuits to return them are commonplace, as far as I know. I would love to hear examples to the contrary, and again other examples of organizations accepting illegal items.

If you are interested in all this, why don't you come to the northeast business meeting judging session on the 13th - it's in southern Connecticut near you - I can forward the info on to you if you want. The reason I mention this is that the chairpeople of the region, because they attend JC meetings, would be able to thoroughly clarify some of these issues.


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 23, 2012)

tim said:


> good example - to the best of my knowledge canhii is not legal presently.
> 
> the requirement to produce paperwork with plants appears to disappear by gestalt - eventually it is "accepted" that enough plants are legally (?) in the trade to allow this restriction to be released. I would say that, as a judge, I would like to see papers for hangianum, vejvarutianum and coccineum and their hybrids before awarding them. As I'm sitting here, I know that there are lots of legal helenae, gigantifolium, vietnamense...maybe others I can't think of. So there's really not too much on the list...and the list shrinks all the time.
> 
> ...



Yes, I'd love to have the information regarding the session in Southern CT.

While off topic, one good example of a museum keeping improperly taken artifact is the British Museum having the Elgin Marbles. This has been an ongoing issue between Greece and the UK, and as with other artifacts stems from colonial era conflicts. Also, with enforcing "stolen history" laws, it takes an active step to push for the return. Many museums have extensive collections never seen by the public. If a country, or person, does not exert the claim perhaps sue to lack of knowledge of the items existence, then the items would stay in the museums, but the legal status of those items doesn't change.

One last example of illegal goods being accepted, and sold, are all the marijuana "dispensaries" in CA. While legal under state law, they are illegal under Federal law. Like with orchids, it would boil down to what most people would think are laws worth enforcing and laws which seem frivolous, orchids I believe fall in the latter category.

But lets argue semantics since it is interesting and brings back my old Law School days! Judging a flower, or a plant, does not implicitly accept the plant as legal. It is merely an acknowledgement that the plant of award quality exists and makes no claims as to legality. It is similar to the plants that have been described, and the description published, the plant is known to exist- but that says nothing about the plant being legal for trade. If the AOS took possession of the plant for any length of time, that would then open the AOS to liability, but since possession of the plant remains with the owner/exhibiter that doesn't apply.

Think of it this way: 

If a thief walks into a pawn shop to fence stolen goods and the shop owner looks at them and determines they are/may be stolen.

1. If the shop owner merely identifies for the thief what they are, ie a diamond ring, a Picasso, etc. and gives them back refusing to purchase them, he has not taken possession. He has merely identified the items for what they are (some states place a burden on the owner to report but that is a different situation).

2. If that owner accepts them and takes active possession, or even constructive possession, knowing them to be what they are, then he may be criminally liable. Liability may even extend if he accepts them and immediately calls police to notify them of the stolen goods.


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 23, 2012)

I should also add, as with museums, there exists a lot of "nod,nod/ wink, wink" in the orchid community. A good example, and I'm currently reading the tale, is with kovachii in "Scent of Scandal". Good book if you haven't read it yet and I would definitely recommend it!


----------



## NYEric (Apr 23, 2012)

Gcroz said:


> For my own curiosity, has Paph. canhii been imported legally? I think it is a neat flower and I'd definitely like to get one if they are legal.


Imported, yes. legally, not so much. :evil:


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 23, 2012)

NYEric said:


> Imported, yes. legally, not so much. :evil:



No doubt!:evil:


----------



## mormodes (Apr 23, 2012)

Gcroz said:


> I should also add, as with museums, there exists a lot of "nod,nod/ wink, wink" in the orchid community. A good example, and I'm currently reading the tale, is with kovachii in "Scent of Scandal". Good book if you haven't read it yet and I would definitely recommend it!



I've been thinking the Pk affair really put the kibosh on developing what is a very beautiful orchid. Here in the US there are only a handful of clones (or DNA) to work with. We see Pk and its hybrids rarely at shows. There are 2 AOS awards AFAIK on Pk, one of which is from Peru, right? I had intended on looking at the record for Phrag besseae. How long did it take for its first AOS award? (An FCC IIRC) How long after its discovery for the first hybrids to hit the market? I bet not a decade. You may say that it took a while to learn how to raise Pk, but I'll bet the vendors here will say 'no' to that. I think Decker wrote an article in 'Orchids' 2-3 years after his access to the plant saying he had its culture dialed in. So where are they all? Where are all the pretty Pks and progeny? We hearalded the arrival of besseae whereas kovachii has landed with a [thud]. Almost like no one wants to touch it with a 10-ft pole. Because of the paperwork/documentation involved? Why bother with such a troublesome plant when there are easier one's to make a living from? 

I have more questions than answers and all comments here are my own opinions. As always I'm probably wrong.


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 23, 2012)

mormodes said:


> I've been thinking the Pk affair really put the kibosh on developing what is a very beautiful orchid. Here in the US there are only a handful of clones (or DNA) to work with. We see Pk and its hybrids rarely at shows. There are 2 AOS awards AFAIK on Pk, one of which is from Peru, right? I had intended on looking at the record for Phrag besseae. How long did it take for its first AOS award? (An FCC IIRC) How long after its discovery for the first hybrids to hit the market? I bet not a decade. You may say that it took a while to learn how to raise Pk, but I'll bet the vendors here will say 'no' to that. I think Decker wrote an article in 'Orchids' 2-3 years after his access to the plant saying he had its culture dialed in. So where are they all? Where are all the pretty Pks and progeny? We hearalded the arrival of besseae whereas kovachii has landed with a [thud]. Almost like no one wants to touch it with a 10-ft pole. Because of the paperwork/documentation involved? Why bother with such a troublesome plant when there are easier one's to make a living from?
> 
> I have more questions than answers and all comments here are my own opinions. As always I'm probably wrong.



Interesting point! Tim, you were at the NHOS show this past February, was there any discussion regarding judging of the PK and the PK hybrids that were in displays? I can't comment on what Mormodes says, because I just don't know. But there seems to be a small number of awards for PK and its hybrids. But then again, perceptions can be wrong!

Funny thing is, there have been some exceptional PK photos posted on this site by Dr. Orchid. Have those plants been judged?


----------



## littlefrog (Apr 23, 2012)

Heh... I don't think kovachii has landed with a thud. When I was working up a talk for the local center, it seemed like half of the recent awards to phragmipedium over the last couple years were to kovachii hybrids. I'd have to dig up that talk to get you actual numbers, but it is impressive. Not the species itself, but its progeny. And I believe Orchids Ltd. had at least one kovachii awarded recently.


I myself received one of the very first awards to a kovachii hybrid. And I know it was legal... One plant out of the batch grew like lightning unleashed and went from tiny to bloom in something like 8 months. And I've gotten a subsequent award to a different cross (x schlimii).


----------



## NYEric (Apr 23, 2012)

I've seen a lot of Pk hybrids at Glen's place and H.P's. The first bunch, that were crossed in Peru, had limited besseae hybrids to be crossed with. Now that we're getting blooming sized Pk and gen 2 hybrids I think we'll see them take off.


----------



## Gcroz (Apr 23, 2012)

NYEric said:


> I've seen a lot of Pk hybrids at Glen's place and H.P's. The first bunch, that were crossed in Peru, had limited besseae hybrids to be crossed with. Now that we're getting blooming sized Pk and gen 2 hybrids I think we'll see them take off.



Cheers to that. Glen told me part of the problem was the lack of hybrids in Peru to choose from, hence the combinations that were made. But, I do feel that Suzanne Decker and Fritz Schomburg are some of the nicest hybrids I've seen!


----------



## mormodes (Apr 23, 2012)

OK I stand corrected. In the same time frame - the 1st 10 years - besseae had far fewer AOS awards and hybrids. I guess 2 things are happening 1) its too soon for these to grow up and 2) they seem to be geographically locallized. That is to say they ain't in California, LOL!! Also the hybrids are getting the AOS awards. Not the species. Another interesting factoid. In the USA. I'm not talking about the rest of the world. I have 6-7 of these (1 Pk itself and the rest various hybrids) and with my poor skills they are taking their own sweet time to grow. None of which were purchased from California vendors. Rather weird considering the size of the state and its economy. In real life I've probably seen 3-4 of these hybrids in shows. I've never seen a real Pk flower.


----------



## li'l frog (Apr 24, 2012)

Orchids, Ltd had two Phrag kovachii (peruvianum) awarded earlier this year, one in Minn -- 'Moyobamba' and AM, ns 18.8, and one in Madison, 'Purple Cow' AM, ns 18.0. Thought Dr. Orchid may have posted pics of these.

Hybrids so far, except Fritz Schomburg and Haley Decker, are not quite as expected. They are generally below the geometric mean for size, and the color and shape of kovachii are not showing through. Yet. Some of them are quite nice, and have been awarded.


----------



## mormodes (Apr 24, 2012)

li'l frog said:


> Orchids, Ltd had two Phrag kovachii (peruvianum) awarded earlier this year, one in Minn -- 'Moyobamba' and AM, ns 18.8, and one in Madison, 'Purple Cow' AM, ns 18.0. Thought Dr. Orchid may have posted pics of these.
> 
> Hybrids so far, except Fritz Schomburg and Haley Decker, are not quite as expected. They are generally below the geometric mean for size, and the color and shape of kovachii are not showing through. Yet. Some of them are quite nice, and have been awarded.



Thanks Rob. I always thought the kovachii parent heightened or intensified the color of the opposite parent - hence a pinker pink, etc. Of course I'm only going by what photos I've seen online. Yes? No?


----------



## slippertalker (Apr 24, 2012)

From my experience kovachii strongly increases flower size and usually adds petals that waffle as they age. The color is more of a reflection of the other parent unless species like schlimii are involved. The hybrids are quite strong growers and have impressive inflorescences, so kovachii does positively add vigor. The back crosses to kovachii from the primary crosses should be quite good.


----------



## Gcroz (May 31, 2012)

Ok, to move this thread in another direction, since the previous topics seem to be discussed out, let me pose a question or three:

1. Since we have Orchid Wiz and AQ, we have availability to photos of plants and awarded plants to be able to compare to our own, should we desire to seek an award. Due two the subjective nature of judging, many times making a comparison to awarded plants from centers other than the one we frequent, misleads as to the quality of our plant. Hypothetically, if our plant was denied an award, yet appeared to be superior to an awarded plant from another center, there could be a feeling of confusion. How can we as "customers" of centers become better judges of our plants with the resources available?

2. How can judges at these centers explain how to select our plants for judging based on AOS criteria and with the available resources in order to maximize their time and awards to "customers?"

3. How can the resources available be improved to aid everyone involved in the judging process?

Where I'm coming from: I personally have my own process for selecting plants to bring to judging, which includes a review of AQ and Orchid Wiz photos. However, in many cases my selections have failed to make the grade. I admit to occasional feelings of frustration when my plant "appears" to be superior to another awarded plant, but that frustration really derives from not feeling I have any concrete way of evaluating the potential plant. This feeling of frustration is aggravated by having an admitted pecuniary interest in my plants getting awards. 

Let it also be said, that I do understand that judging is subjective and there may be no easy answer. I'd like to learn as much as possible about how to select plants for entry into the judging process. 

Let's discuss


----------



## NYEric (May 31, 2012)

My humble recommendation would be to pre-screen your plants regarding bloom count and size and plant condition. If it is similar or superior bring it to judging. "You have to be in it to win it!"


----------



## Gcroz (May 31, 2012)

NYEric said:


> My humble recommendation would be to pre-screen your plants regarding bloom count and size and plant condition. If it is similar or superior bring it to judging. "You have to be in it to win it!"



Thanks Eric,

I do these things as part of my "process." I guess I should have clarified, that I'm particularly interested in learning more about flower quality suggestions. As it stands now, I do attend judging as often as I can, but recently have not had any flowers worthy (in my mind) of judging. Maybe I'm too selective, but with work and a 4 hour round trip drive, I feel I need to be sure of the flower. And you're right, "you can't win if you don't play," but knowing as much about the process and criteria helps your chances a lot, at least in my experience.

On a lighter note... is it just me or do flowers seem to be perfect in between judging sessions and then on the day they are set to "perform", there always seems to be an issue?


----------



## slippertalker (May 31, 2012)

My answer is to base your decision on whether to bring the plant in or not on the existing record, especially the more recent awards. If you think it is good, just bring it in........If it is awarded or not, have the judges give you feedback on the merits or demerits of the plant so you can figure what the basis of their decision is. Also, ask to be included as an observer in the judging teams (as long as it isn't your plant).

My experience is that judges like to see a lot of plants, period. The more plant material they see, the more accurate their judgements.


----------



## Gcroz (May 31, 2012)

slippertalker said:


> My answer is to base your decision on whether to bring the plant in or not on the existing record, especially the more recent awards. If you think it is good, just bring it in........If it is awarded or not, have the judges give you feedback on the merits or demerits of the plant so you can figure what the basis of their decision is. Also, ask to be included as an observer in the judging teams (as long as it isn't your plant).
> 
> My experience is that judges like to see a lot of plants, period. The more plant material they see, the more accurate their judgements.



Thanks. More interesting than sitting in the audience. Sounds like fun too!


----------



## Rick (May 31, 2012)

Gcroz said:


> Thanks. More interesting than sitting in the audience. Sounds like fun too!



Yes, it's important to keep it fun. Most of us got into this hobby for the pleasure of growing cool/pretty flowers and it's too easy to take it personally if your "judged" flower is deemed not award-able. Award or not, you still have the flower, and it looks the same regardless of the outcome of a judging.

But if you are going to go for the awards, its important to develop a report with the judges and get that feedback on what they're looking for beyond the old records. Most of the "rejections" I've experienced is that the flower is just too much like all the previous awarded plants. It just didn't stand out from the crowd.

For a more specific question, does your judging center look at plants under natural sunlight, high quality artificial light, or just standard room lighting?

The center/judges I frequent makes a big point of taking plants outside to see what they look like in good sunlight. So in some cases, the plant could be at the mercy of cloudy or cold weather for the judges to get that "good look".


----------



## PaphGuy (Jun 30, 2012)

I was surprised to find discussion. I thought AOS judges are not supposed to talk about AOS stuff. Anyway, it is fun to discuss this matter. 

I was in the AOS judging system for about 12 years, not too long. But I noticed that to be a good judge, it is a combination of innate ability and also training. There were quite a few people whom I believe should not be elevated to be a fully accredited judges. Every center is different, none has the same criteria. The knowledge and quality of the judges are also different considerably. For example, when I just joined my second center, I witness a a prob judge who was on the verge of getting elevated to fully accredited who was not able to discern between miniature cattleyas and Dendrobium cuberthsonii. It was very discouraging! He became a fully accredited judge anyway, and over the years, his performance was a joke to say the least.
However, some of the students in the same region were amazing, better than most accredited judges anywhere in the US. 

I am not a commercial grower, therefore, I do not see the reason of getting an award from AOS. I know which ones of my plants that are of award quality. I can be very objective. When I judged, I always used this rule: If I am going to spend, say, $500, will I pay for this particular plant? What is the chance of this plant of getting an AM? I do not follow AOS scoring chart. Who cares. If I thought the plant was of AM quality, I just gave 80 something...depending whether it was a low AM or high AM. I did not spend a lot of time like most judges try to be exact...It was a waste of time!


----------



## PaphGuy (Jun 30, 2012)

Rick said:


> For a more specific question, does your judging center look at plants under natural sunlight, high quality artificial light, or just standard room lighting?
> 
> The center/judges I frequent makes a big point of taking plants outside to see what they look like in good sunlight. So in some cases, the plant could be at the mercy of cloudy or cold weather for the judges to get that "good look".



Most people do take outside or look under incandescent light. For me, it is the last thing that I will do. I will look the shape, etc, color is the last consideration. It is the same like when you judge women. How beautiful the color of the make up will not improve their look if they are actually ugly.


----------



## NYEric (Jun 30, 2012)




----------

