# Paph. Krull's Worthy Web 'Aldarra', FCC/AOS



## Scott Ware (Sep 25, 2010)

This is a hybrid we have already been shown by at least two other growers here, Bob's plant 
and another wonderful cultivar in this thread: Fren's plant

I have seen several others in bloom and there hasn't been one yet that I wouldn't want on my bench. They are all very nice.

First, the parents:






*Paph. charlesworthii 'Hooded', AM/AOS* has one of the most well-developed dorsals with pure solid color of any _Paph. charlesworthii_ ever. It also has the widest petals, I believe, of any cultivar ever awarded.

*Paph. Hsinying Web 'Jim Krull', AM/AOS* is _Paph._ (Pulsar x Cyberspace). 
It is an extremely vigorous mottled leaf hybrid consisting mostly of _Paph. callosum_ and _Paph. lawrenceanum_ genes that have been massaged over and over again for multiple generations with minor intermittent contributions from other mottled leaf species, including _Paph. curtisii_, along the way. This particular cultivar has a very full, elegant form and magnificent color.

Hybridizers have experimented with _Paph. charlesworthii_ as a parent for many years, experiencing mixed results in some cases, and once in awhile coming up with some absolutely outstanding crosses. Some that come to mind would be _Paph._ Rosy Peacock (Ruby Leopard x _charlesworthii_), _Paph._ Western Sky (Yerba Buena x _charlesworthii_), and _Paph._ Krull's Worthy Web (Hsinying Web x _charlesworthii_) pictured below:






I acquired this plant from Krull-Smith in Miami at the 19th World Orchid Conference in January, 2008. At the time it was a 6" single-growth seedling in a 2.25" pot. There were very few available and I was lucky to get even one. Since then, it has been growing it under lights with my seedling trays. (I'm not sure why - it just ended up there. There is no special reason I had it under lights other than that is where it landed when I needed top bench space for something else.) It bloomed last year, but it seemed like leaving it under the lights had a negative effect on the flowers as they were smallish and poorly formed. This year as soon as the buds began to emerge, I moved it up to a surface bench where it received natural light as the inflorescences grew and matured. With the flowers over a month old, we took the plant to our AOS regional judging in Seattle last week, where the AOS judges offered high praise for the way the _Paph. charlesworthii_ parent worked its magic with this cross and in this particular plant. 

One comment on the Award Form was as follows: "Commended for deep, intense color, glossy finish and exceptionally flat dorsal."

As a side note - I would encourage everyone to identify the location and judging dates for your AOS regional judging centers, and mark those dates way in advance on your calendar. You never know when you'll have something in bloom at just the right time to take and present for evaluation by some folks who really know what they're looking at. I promise you'll learn something and you'll meet friendly, knowledgeable people.


----------



## Candace (Sep 25, 2010)

Wonderful plant, Of course mine tend to be judging shy and make sure they show their glory right before or AFTER a judging date. Booo....


----------



## Scott Ware (Sep 25, 2010)

Candace - no kidding! That's how it has been for me 99% of the time over the last 25 years. You either have to drive hundreds of miles to another judging center or just hope for better timing next year. In the case of this plant - the flowers looked this good for the PREVIOUS month's judging. I just didn't think to take it in before I realized I had missed the date.


----------



## paphioboy (Sep 25, 2010)

WOW WOW WOW WOW...!!!! What an incredible plant... :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: I'm sure there are no dogs from this cross..


----------



## Pete (Sep 25, 2010)

awesome plant scott. absolutely gotta love that dorsal and the color. that charlesworthii is just ridiculous. as for judging i have long said that we would have more than twice the awards than we do now if it wasnt for the timing factor. realistically most people who want to exhibit something have to have it open and in perfect condition on only *one of 12* nites out of the entire year. my favorite is having something decline two days before judging or pop open the day after judging..


----------



## ehanes7612 (Sep 25, 2010)

i couldve sworn i heard one of the judges kept saying the dorsal was too big (on the Krull's Worthy Web)...


----------



## Scott Ware (Sep 25, 2010)

ehanes7612 said:


> i couldve sworn i heard one of the judges kept saying the dorsal was too big (on the Krull's Worthy Web)...



I remember that now, Ed, that's what you told me - but I didn't hear it. I dunno, but I really wonder if they might not have been joking. It's a _Paph. charlesworthii_ hybrid. Hard to imagine a dorsal "too big."


----------



## JeanLux (Sep 25, 2010)

2 great parents (esp. charlesw.), and an excellent plant you have grown in 2 years :drool: from that 1 growth seedling!!!! Congratulations Scott!!!! Jean


----------



## Shiva (Sep 25, 2010)

Awesome!


----------



## fibre (Sep 25, 2010)

WOW!!! love it


----------



## ehanes7612 (Sep 25, 2010)

Scott Ware said:


> I remember that now, Ed, that's what you told me - but I didn't hear it. I dunno, but I really wonder if they might not have been joking. It's a _Paph. charlesworthii_ hybrid. Hard to imagine a dorsal "too big."



i just thought it was funny.....its def a worthy flower and nicely grown, makes me want to grow charlesworthii


----------



## SlipperKing (Sep 25, 2010)

Congrats! Beautiful plant.


----------



## hardy (Sep 25, 2010)

That's so very nice. Congratulations!


----------



## NYEric (Sep 25, 2010)

Usually not my type but that's fantastic!


----------



## paphioland (Sep 25, 2010)

Hooded is one of the best charlesworthii around along with darkside


----------



## callosum (Sep 25, 2010)

*superb*

superb paph


----------



## luvsorchids (Sep 25, 2010)

I was hoping you would share photos. This is an amazing plant :clap: :drool: :clap:. I took notice from across the room, so definitely has the WOW factor.

Susan


----------



## slippertalker (Sep 25, 2010)

Thank you Scott for bringing this lovely plant into judging. It is probably the best Paph charlesworthii hybrid I have ever seen and was very worthy of the award. The very full and FLAT dorsal was the highlight of the flower, but all of the parts blended well for an marvelous result. These flowers were open for a month and still retained the flatness.......


----------



## slippertalker (Sep 25, 2010)

ehanes7612 said:


> i couldve sworn i heard one of the judges kept saying the dorsal was too big (on the Krull's Worthy Web)...



LOL, you shouldn't take everything they say as the literal truth unless you know them fairly well. This comment was probably said as a compliment rather than a negative comment.


----------



## John Boy (Sep 25, 2010)

I normally don't really care too much for charlesworthii and it's hybirds. But this one: is sensational.


----------



## Yoyo_Jo (Sep 25, 2010)

Congrats Scott, it's wonderful!! :clap:


----------



## SlipperFan (Sep 25, 2010)

It's gorgeous -- very worthy, indeed. Congratulations!


----------



## e-spice (Sep 25, 2010)

Spectacular! Great growing Scott!

e-spice


----------



## ehanes7612 (Sep 26, 2010)

slippertalker said:


> LOL, you shouldn't take everything they say as the literal truth unless you know them fairly well. This comment was probably said as a compliment rather than a negative comment.



I actually took it as a critical evaluation, he seemed pretty serious and that's what his opinion was ...i never saw it as a negative comment and i didnt imply it was a negative comment....of course i always hold the reservation that i misheard him


----------



## paphreek (Sep 26, 2010)

Congratulations on a well deserved award!



Scott Ware said:


> Candace - no kidding! That's how it has been for me 99% of the time over the last 25 years. You either have to drive hundreds of miles to another judging center or ......



Anyone in Minnesota has to drive hundreds of miles to get to ANY judging center!


----------



## John M (Sep 26, 2010)

That is spectacular, Scott! Woohoo! Congratulations! :clap::clap::clap: You really brought out the best of this plant with your culture. You must feel very satisfied with your efforts!


----------



## John M (Sep 26, 2010)

> Originally Posted by ehanes7612
> i couldve sworn i heard one of the judges kept saying the dorsal was too big (on the Krull's Worthy Web)...





slippertalker said:


> LOL, you shouldn't take everything they say as the literal truth unless you know them fairly well. This comment was probably said as a compliment rather than a negative comment.



It wouldn't be the first time a judge (so-called expert), failed to grasp the concept of breeding for certain traits. Example: If you want a big pouch, add micranthum; if you want a big dorsal, add charlesworthii; if you want lots of spots, add sukhakulii, etc. Don't forget that this plant; http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13050&highlight=naugle lost out on an FCC by 1/10th of a point because a judge figured a primary micranthum hybrid shouldn't have such a big pouch! Duh! He refused to adjust his low score to come into line with the other judges much higher scores. This kept the average score down; thus, preventing the FCC award!


----------



## slippertalker (Sep 26, 2010)

Of course the judge knew the breeding influence of Paph charlesworthii, otherwise he wouldn't have given it an FCC.......his comments were like calling a Phrag Jason Fischer too red, stating the obvious in a joking manner.


----------



## John M (Sep 26, 2010)

slippertalker said:


> Of course the judge knew the breeding influence of Paph charlesworthii, otherwise he wouldn't have given it an FCC.......his comments were like calling a Phrag Jason Fischer too red, stating the obvious in a joking manner.



So, what was the score given by the judge that uttered the comment in question? Do you know that his score was an FCC? Of course, I realise that the comment could've been a joke. I thought that was a given bit of fact that everyone was keeping in mind as they read the thread because it had already been discussed. However, my point was that it was not necessarily guaranteed to be a joke. There are judges out there with poor knowledge; or who have "issues" with certain exhibitors; or just with the very concept of awarding FCC's. There are people (in general), as well as judges that like Paphs and those that don't. Some don't like big, flat, round dorsals; some do. 

As someone who won about 50 awards (before I quit exhibiting) and who lost out on just as many by just a fraction of a point, I have first hand experience of when a judge low-balled a score just because they didn't like a certain trait, regardless of whether or not that trait is legitimate and is recognised by the AOS judging system as desirable. I also received awards on plants that I felt should not have been pointed. I brought them because they were helping to secure something else in the box! I should also say that before I attended each judging, as well as having tons of knowledge and personal experience myself, I also researched my plants in the AQ. As a result of my own knowledge and information from the AQ, I had an excellent idea of how good my plants were and their relative chances of being pointed and the award that they might get.

I am aware of a number of people who became judges because they disagreed with the standards used and what was currently being awarded. So, they decided to not just complain; but, to join the system and have some influence over it by participating in the process. That's a good thing.....unless they go rogue and just do their own thing, once they have the accredation. In such cases, they seem to forget that it is not THEIR judging system, operating on their rules. There are standards to follow, even if they disagree with them. If they want to facilitate change, then, they should make a formal proposal and go through the process of pushing the AOS to accept their ideas of what is ideal to become part of the standards that all judges should use to make their award determinations. That is the only way to maintain awards quality and fairness for all throughout the system.

However, once they become judges, they simply begin applying their own personal likes and dislikes to the way that they judge....forgetting that there is a universal standard that all the AOS judges, including themselves, should be adhering to, untill such time as that standard is formally changed.

Not trying to be difficult here; but, I do disagree with your Jason Fischer analogy. Red Phrags are popular; but, not everyone likes them. Even some pretty strong negative comments have been made against red besseae-like hybrids, here on ST. There certainly must be judges that have a hard time getting excited over another red Phrag. Unless those judges are saints, it's hard to expect them to point a red Phrag the same way a red Phrag loving judge would. They should both produce the same score, based on the accepted AOS standards; but, in real life, personal bias comes into play in these situations. 

There's no reason to expect that at least some personal bias could not come into play in the case of Paph with a huge, round dorsal sepal. Therefore, it *IS* possible for the comment to have been a joke...*AND* it is possible that it was a serious comment. We don't know yet which it was and whether or not it affected the score given to the plant. If the judge's score was comparable or higher to the scores of the other judges, then, you are correct...and that's a good thing. If it was the lowest score, then, it was a serious, negative critisism which was ignorant and inappropriate, considering the parentage of this plant.


----------



## Candace (Sep 26, 2010)

When I made my first comment, I neglected to read that you got an FCC, Scott. Congrats and wooohoooo!


----------



## suss16 (Sep 26, 2010)

Damn, (can I say that?) - I guess I will find out. I would clear out a bench of my Phals to have that growing in my greenhouse. Congrats! Great growing! And yeah, you want a top notch seedling and are willing to pay a few bucks, visit the KS booth.


----------



## ehanes7612 (Sep 26, 2010)

It may have been a joke but he kept saying it over and over again and no one was laughing....they were listening to him but they seemed pensive because he kept saying it...then they continued to talk about it for a few minutes, then they voted....it just seemed like part of the process...i was glad to actually see their process....and the strong human element to judging


----------



## KyushuCalanthe (Sep 26, 2010)

I love the cross, but honestly that charlesworthii parent is just fantastic - a dream flower. Back to the hybrid, wow on all fronts - the color, form, and that dorsal is just out of this world!


----------



## rdlsreno (Sep 26, 2010)

I saw that in WOC Scott but I ignored it.:sob: Yours is awesome! Congratulation!

Ramon


----------



## smartie2000 (Sep 27, 2010)

congrats! that is exceptional, and thanks for the pictures. That charlesworthii parent is also spectacular too


----------



## Ray (Sep 27, 2010)

Fantastic, Scott. Congratulations!


----------



## labskaus (Sep 27, 2010)

These vinicolor-Maudiae-type by charlesworthii crosses seem be a bit of a fashion lately. I've seen a couple of these, especially from Taiwan.

Your's is spectactular and exceptionally good. Good growing too, congrats!


----------



## Ernie (Sep 27, 2010)

Nice!!! Love it. I buy this type of breeding whenever I see it (missed this batch!). 

Yeah, vinis by chuckworth is a good line! How about chuckworth sandowiae (album) X an album Maudiae type to get this in green, white, and yellow? Might take multiple generations, but I'd expect great things.


----------



## slippertalker (Sep 27, 2010)

John M said:


> So, what was the score given by the judge that uttered the comment in question? Do you know that his score was an FCC? Of course, I realise that the comment could've been a joke. I thought that was a given bit of fact that everyone was keeping in mind as they read the thread because it had already been discussed. However, my point was that it was not necessarily guaranteed to be a joke. There are judges out there with poor knowledge; or who have "issues" with certain exhibitors; or just with the very concept of awarding FCC's. There are people (in general), as well as judges that like Paphs and those that don't. Some don't like big, flat, round dorsals; some do.
> 
> As someone who won about 50 awards (before I quit exhibiting) and who lost out on just as many by just a fraction of a point, I have first hand experience of when a judge low-balled a score just because they didn't like a certain trait, regardless of whether or not that trait is legitimate and is recognised by the AOS judging system as desirable. I also received awards on plants that I felt should not have been pointed. I brought them because they were helping to secure something else in the box! I should also say that before I attended each judging, as well as having tons of knowledge and personal experience myself, I also researched my plants in the AQ. As a result of my own knowledge and information from the AQ, I had an excellent idea of how good my plants were and their relative chances of being pointed and the award that they might get.
> 
> ...



To answer your question, I believe the judge in question gave the plant an 88 which was certainly fair. Also, this particular judge tends to have strong opinions about many things and isn't shy about expressing them. The others on his team would take his comments in that context. The plant received an 89.5 which rounds up to a 90. Remember that the scores have to be within a 6 point range....

The judging score sheet is pretty well defined, but the ability to apply the standards is the art of judging. Many plants don't fit perfectly into the system but are quite deserving of awards.


----------



## berrywoodson (Sep 27, 2010)

Awesome flower Scott. Congradulations on the FCC.


----------



## John M (Sep 27, 2010)

Thanks for the reply, Bill.



slippertalker said:


> To answer your question, I believe the judge in question gave the plant an 88 which was certainly fair. *Agreed.*Also, this particular judge tends to have strong opinions about many things and isn't shy about expressing them. *Fair enough. After all, if everyone was as quiet as a churchmouse, nobody would learn anything.*The others on his team would take his comments in that context. *Well okay; but, we're not really discussing how he might have affected the other judges. We're discussing how he (may have), applied his own, personal biases to his scoring. Although, if his comments were serious and one or more of the other judges realised that, their scores may have ended up lower than if he'd not made the derogatory comments in the first place.*The plant received an 89.5 which rounds up to a 90. Remember that the scores have to be within a 6 point range.... *It would be VERY intersting to know what each of the other scores were and how they compared to this judge's score; but, that information is only useful in the context of us knowing whether or not the judge was joking or making a serious comment about the dorsal size.*
> 
> The judging score sheet is pretty well defined, but the ability to apply the standards is the art of judging. Many plants don't fit perfectly into the system but are quite deserving of awards. *Agreed....I understand that it's an imperfect process; but, the thing that I'm hanging onto is the possibility of a judge knocking a charlesworthii primary hybrid for having a dorsal that is too big. To me, that is completely indefensible because the whole point of using charlesworthii as a parent is to exagerate the size of the dorsal....while still retaining it's integrity (shape, flatness, etc.). An oversized, floppy dorsal that can't hold up under it's own weight would of course not be worthy of any award. This plant is a spectacular example of the breeder having successfully achieved his goal....and it's that kind of achievement that the judging system is supposed to reward, is it not? After all, since the judging system does grant awards to deformed (albeit attractive or at least, interesting), peloric flowers, how can anyone say that an extra large, round, full dorsal on a charlesworthii hybrid is a detriment? IMO, if the judge's comment was serious, he needs more training.*


----------



## Brian Monk (Oct 3, 2010)

Fantastic plant, Scott. Deserving of the award. Probably deserving of a cultural award in the future, as it seems to be incredibly vigorous.

An aside : Do these charlesworthii x Maudiae types breed on? I would imagine that no hybrids have been registered even if they are fertile, but would anyone here know if they have been used successfully as parents??


----------



## Kevin (Oct 3, 2010)

I don't normally like these types either, but this one is nice! Great job!



paphreek said:


> Anyone in Minnesota has to drive hundreds of miles to get to ANY judging center!



Even further in Canada!!  :sob:


----------

