# Paph. Harold Koopowitz 'Choc-Mint' FCC



## quietaustralian (Jan 13, 2014)

A very nice Paph. Harold Koopowitz. 
http://www.orchidsaustralia.com/award_display.asp?award=4719


----------



## paphioboy (Jan 13, 2014)

Isn't it too yellow to be a HK for you?


----------



## Erythrone (Jan 13, 2014)

Very nice one!


----------



## NYEric (Jan 13, 2014)

paphioboy said:


> Isn't it too yellow to be a HK for you?


I think so too. The blooms are Hellasexy but I would have questioned the parentage at judging.


----------



## Erythrone (Jan 13, 2014)

But it is written "all segments are yellow-green". Maybe it is much yellow on the pictures than in reality?

I also took a look at some pictures of HK in OW and many plants look as yellowish on my computer.


----------



## emydura (Jan 13, 2014)

It looks like a Harold Koopowitz to me and what an amazing clone. The shape is perfection. Fully deserved an FCC.

The Harold Koopowitz I got awarded came from John as well. So he is responsible for the only two awarded HK's in Australia.


----------



## SlipperKing (Jan 13, 2014)

Nice one. Say it is what it is the Aussies have a different point value for awards. A 86.2 would be an AM/AOS here in the states and wherever else AOS judges.


----------



## John M (Jan 13, 2014)

I love this gorgeous flower; but, I'm still not convinced it's labelled properly. That's just too yellow. Where the heck did that yellow come from? Neither parent has such strong yellow genes. Also, the chocolate drop on the lower half of the malipoense staminode is not showing. That characteristic of malipoense is quit dominant in it's primary hybrids. Plus, the staminode shows the "split down the middle" colour pattern of armeniacum. I wonder if this is Norito Hasegawa x rothschildianum. In fact, didn't we have a big discussion a few years ago about an awarded malipoense in Australia that was clearly a Norito Hasegawa? Perhaps because of one dishonest vendor, or a mistaken one, there are a lot of NH's lurking about in Australia labelled as pure malipoense? This awarded flower has definitely got roth in it, obviously....and to my eye, it is not a Paph. Dollgoldi. There's more to it than just armeniacum mixed with roth. It's got more "umph!" It's not as yellow as I would expect to see in a Dollgoldi. It's got more markings on the petals than you'd see on a pure Dollgoldi. I would love to see more photos of this gorgeous flower; but, until I do, I'm voting for NH x roth.

Edit; found the thread about the malipo that was not. http://http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17527&highlight=malipoense


----------



## emydura (Jan 13, 2014)

SlipperKing said:


> Nice one. Say it is what it is the Aussies have a different point value for awards. A 86.2 would be an AM/AOS here in the states and wherever else AOS judges.



It is all relative Rick. Despite the fact you only need 85 points to get an FCC in Australia, I would think you would get a higher proportion of FCC's in the US than here. You rarely see an FCC awarded in Australia. For example only one roth has ever got an FCC and that was a long time ago. None from the current breeding has yet to get one. True, we wouldn't be flowering tonnes of them, but you think there would still have been a few eligible clones.



John M said:


> I love this gorgeous flower; but, I'm still not convinced it's labelled properly. That's just too yellow. Where the heck did that yellow come from? Neither parent has such strong yellow genes. Also, the chocolate drop on the lower half of the malipoense staminode is not showing. That characteristic of malipoense is quit dominant in it's primary hybrids. Plus, the staminode shows the "split down the middle" colour pattern of armeniacum. I wonder if this is Norito Hasegawa x rothschildianum. In fact, didn't we have a big discussion a few years ago about an awarded malipoense in Australia that was clearly a Norito Hasegawa? Perhaps because of one dishonest vendor, or a mistaken one, there are a lot of NH's lurking about in Australia labelled as pure malipoense? This awarded flower has definitely got roth in it, obviously....and to my eye, it is not a Paph. Dollgoldi. There's more to it than just armeniacum mixed with roth. It's got more "umph!" It's not as yellow as I would expect to see in a Dollgoldi. It's got more markings on the petals than you'd see on a pure Dollgoldi. I would love to see more photos of this gorgeous flower; but, until I do, I'm voting for NH x roth.
> 
> [/URL]



You could be right John although I'm not seeing enough evidence to say that the label is wrong. Maybe it is my monitor but the flower is not that yellow to me. It is certainly not a deep yellow. I'm seeing more a creamy colour with a green tinge, especially that first photo. This is a lot like mine. I think it is a bit risky to identify this hybrid based on such subtle colour variations. You will get some natural differentiation between clones.


----------



## John M (Jan 13, 2014)

I wouldn't advise the owner change the label based solely on my opinion. I've only seen it on my monitor, in 2D and only in 2 photos. That's not enough to be certain enough to change the label. However, I also think that ignoring the question of it's lineage is a mistake. I googled HK and even with the variations seen, I didn't see anything like this flower. This one is still far too yellow (albeit, on my monitor) and the staminode markings don't look right for HK. However, they do look right for NH x roth and we know that there are good NH's in Australia that are labelled as pure malipoense. This is not proof of anything; but, it does warrant a vigorous discussion and close inspection of this awarded plant by a group of qualified growers. 

I've seen it happen here many times. Sometimes the judges seem to be so busy judging and operating inside a bubble to such a degree, that they end up not having anywhere near the same knowledge or expertise as the people who's plants they are judging. It's a ridiculous scenario; but, it happens. 

I think that it's possible that the judges have seen too many NH labelled as pure malipoense....to the extent that they may not *really* know what a pure malipoense looks like. So, NH's become accepted as being pure malipoense and those plants get used to make "malipoense" hybrids like this one....assuming I am right. 

The plant needs to be seriously investigated in person, by a number of very experienced growers; perferably not only growers from Australia, as the malipoense gene pool available in Australia may be widely contaminated with armeniacum genes, which would also therefore contaminate the knowledge base of the locals. The fact that the NH in the earlier thread in the link that I posted, was accepted as a pure malipoense and won Grand Champion of show, indicates that the local malipoense gene pool is contaminated to such a degree that few local growers have actually seen a real, pure malipoense, or at least, not many of them. As a result, that NH was thought to be pure malipoense and honoured as such.


----------



## emydura (Jan 14, 2014)

John M said:


> I wouldn't advise the owner change the label based solely on my opinion. I've only seen it on my monitor, in 2D and only in 2 photos. That's not enough to be certain enough to change the label. However, I also think that ignoring the question of it's lineage is a mistake. I googled HK and even with the variations seen, I didn't see anything like this flower. This one is still far too yellow (albeit, on my monitor) and the staminode markings don't look right for HK. However, they do look right for NH x roth and we know that there are good NH's in Australia that are labelled as pure malipoense. This is not proof of anything; but, it does warrant a vigorous discussion and close inspection of this awarded plant by a group of qualified growers.
> 
> I've seen it happen here many times. Sometimes the judges seem to be so busy judging and operating inside a bubble to such a degree, that they end up not having anywhere near the same knowledge or expertise as the people who's plants they are judging. It's a ridiculous scenario; but, it happens.
> 
> ...



The owner of this plant is a Paph breeder, the best Paph grower I have seen, extremely knowledgeable about Paphs and an experience orchid judge to boot. He is very honest too. I'd say he would be in a better position to identify this plant then the people who judged it.

That awarded maliopoense was ridiculous. Even blind Freddy could see that was a NH. Unforgivable really. I think that was a one-off though. I think the HK probably originated from overseas breeding in anycase - Taiwan or the US. If it was from John's own breeding he definitely could distinguish between a maliopoense and a NH. He grows a lot of Parvi hybrids.

None of that means that it is a HK. As you say it does look a bit different but then I would expect a FCC quality HK to stand out from the crowd. I'm not confident to say it is a HK but equally I'm not confident to say it is not. I think it would be pretty tough for the judges to be a 100% certain that it is mislabeled. I think it would have got an FCC no matter what it was entered as. That is one of the best shaped Parvi-roth hybrids I have seen.


----------



## emydura (Jan 14, 2014)

John M said:


> I
> I've seen it happen here many times. Sometimes the judges seem to be so busy judging and operating inside a bubble to such a degree, that they end up not having anywhere near the same knowledge or expertise as the people who's plants they are judging. It's a ridiculous scenario; but, it happens.
> .



I agree with you 100% on this although I think it is understandable. It is difficult to be across every genus of orchids. Everyone has their specialisations. Unless a judge is a passionate grower of Paphs then I would expect they are likely to have less expertise on them than most of us on this forum.


----------



## quietaustralian (Jan 14, 2014)

I'm pretty much in agreement with you David. When I noticed this award. I thought that seems a bit yellow but after seeing the award picture of your Harold Koopowitz and comparing it to your photos of the plant, it's difficult to know if the award pics are accurate. 

The difference in these two pictures is staggering.

David's pictures of Paph Harold Koopowitz 'Venous Red' HCC/AOC 
http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=28981

Award pic of same plant

http://www.orchidsaustralia.com/award_display.asp?award=4118


----------



## emydura (Jan 14, 2014)

quietaustralian said:


> I'm pretty much in agreement with you David. When I noticed this award. I thought that seems a bit yellow but after seeing the award picture of your Harold Koopowitz and comparing it to your photos of the plant, it'd difficult to know if the award pics are accurate.
> 
> The difference in these two pictures is staggering.
> 
> ...



Yes, they are pretty different. Explanations - different flowerings, awarded photo used a flash, mine is natural light, the flowers on mine were fresh, the flowers on the awarded photo were all but spent. I quite like the awarded photo though. It looks intensely dark. 

As you have shown, photos can be misleading.


----------



## Ozpaph (Jan 17, 2014)

I saw this plant - its gobbsmackingly beautiful. Its not yellow. The judging panel was VERY experienced. The best HK Ive ever seen. No doubt.


----------



## Ozpaph (Jan 17, 2014)

ps - its called "Choc Mint' for good reason.


----------



## Trithor (Jan 17, 2014)

Ozpaph said:


> ps - its called "Choc Mint' for good reason.



Kinda figures.
Although all the above comments are very appropriate from the point of view of what we can see in the posted picture, it is always worthwhile to realise that colour rendition in a posted picture is not always true to original. The reality is that the question has to be asked when looking at the picture is, 'where did the yellow come from?' But looking at the shape, ... that is pure top notch HK. Then, clonal name, that kinda seals the deal. If a previous award for a malipo was given to a hybrid, well, we can expect people to call into question everything that comes after relating to that species' hybrids.
For a long time I have been calling for advisory judges in awards and shows judging, because as has been pointed out in this thread and elsewhere, it is difficult for judges, even accredited judges, to be as experienced as people who specialise in a few genera only. In this I do not mean any disrespect, just being realistic. A judge who has to look at a multitude of genera can only be at a disadvantage to a specialist. We full well know, that even amongst our specialists, there are super-specialists in species, multis, primaries, complex, brachys, parvis and a whole bunch of divisions besides.

But again, perhaps that is just the clown in me speaking again?


----------



## John M (Jan 17, 2014)

Okay, okay. I hear all those who say this IS an HK. However, can someone explain to me why this flower shows aparent evidence (to me), of armeniacum being in the family tree as indicated by the staminode markings. Paph. HK has a different stami colour/marking design, than we're seeing with this awarded plant. Paph. armeniacum has a dividing line down the middle of the dark colour on the stami, malipoense does not. Yet, this hybrid does show a clear division of the stami colour. To me, that's a BIG hint that armeniacum is a grand parent. Comments anyone?


----------



## Dido (Jan 17, 2014)

I am not sure if you ever can find out for sure it is a Nh used or a pure malipo. 
But what ever it is really it is a really beauty.


----------



## emydura (Jan 19, 2014)

Stephen - was this plant awarded at a normal orchid gathering or in the Paphiopedilum group you guys belong to? That is, were the judges slipper orchid specialists or general orchid judges?

I think a bit too much is being made of that NH being awarded as a maliopoense. Those judges weren't even from the same state let alone the same group of judges that awarded this HK. Not all Australian judges are that incompetent.


----------



## jimspaphs (Jan 20, 2014)

*Yes it's HK*

I believe the award was given when the flowers had been out for a long time.
Also a flash photo can give some strange colours.
I photographed the plant a few years ago at a local Show.( also a flash photo)







Ozpaph said:


> ps - its called "Choc Mint' for good reason.


----------



## NYEric (Jan 20, 2014)

I would definitely say that last photo is HK; whereas in the first link the pouch looks pubescent and the blooms are very yellow. Thanks for the additional info.


----------



## John M (Jan 20, 2014)

It certainly does look more like HK in Jim's photo; although, we can't really see the staminode. Still, this photo puts more doubt in my mind about it not being labelled correctly. I would be interested in knowing if the judges were Paph. specialists or not. If they were and they had no issues with this being an HK, then, that along with this photo by Jim makes me feel that the first photos in this thread are more "off-colour" than I first thought they might be.


----------



## jimspaphs (Jan 20, 2014)

*another photo*

Australia is a very large area with only a small population.We haven't enough Judges to have a specialist panel. 
I dug out another photo that I took of the awarded plant when I visited the nursery well after it was awarded.
Hope this is some use.
If this is not a HK then what?
(PSI'm not a judge so don't ask me.)





John M said:


> It certainly does look more like HK in Jim's photo; although, we can't really see the staminode. Still, this photo puts more doubt in my mind about it not being labelled correctly. I would be interested in knowing if the judges were Paph. specialists or not. If they were and they had no issues with this being an HK, then, that along with this photo by Jim makes me feel that the first photos in this thread are more "off-colour" than I first thought they might be.


----------



## emydura (Jan 20, 2014)

You have a Paphiopedilum Society (TAPS?) in Brisbane don't you Jim? Would things ever get judged at that or does judging only occur at general orchid meetings?

That looks pure HK to me. In normal light it looks a lot different.


----------



## Ozpaph (Jan 20, 2014)

emydura said:


> You have a Paphiopedilum Society (TAPS?) in Brisbane don't you Jim? Would things ever get judged at that or does judging only occur at general orchid meetings?
> 
> That looks pure HK to me. In normal light it looks a lot different.



I confirmed with one of the judges that it was awarded at The Australia Paphiopedilum Society meeting. This is a specialist paph/phrag group(Jims a member, too) All the judges are very experienced growers/breeders/ nursery men of paphs. The grower is also a very experienced paph breeder and grower. I dont know if the flask/plant came from overseas where 'hanky-panky' is not unheard of but Im certain it was shown and judged as a HK with all believing it to be so.


----------



## Ryan (Jan 22, 2014)

Hello . I'm relatively new to this forum . But I have seen this very plant flowering twice ( as I pop in to John's nursery a couple of times a year) . And it's HK colours ( minty /pistachio green) . Looks so different /yellow in the AOS pics . It is a cracker too !!

Anyway that's my 2 cents worth 

Ryan


----------



## Ryan (Jan 22, 2014)

Oops ...... Make that AOC........


----------



## Ozpaph (Jan 22, 2014)

Hey Ryan, introduce yourself, please.


----------

