Paph Macabre 'Mother Mary'

[gonewild]

Lance, has anyone ever told you you are a bit of a pain in the ars?
Not that I am saying that...I'm really interested in that MK of yours so I'll behave.

I can be bribed. Easily.

It took many years of trial and error to get to the point I can be an effective pain. Be happy I have self control.

 

[Roy]

This thread seems to have lost its way, but its fun. Any judge worth their salt should be able to look at a flower and know whether it is awardable or not and what award it should get within 5 minutes. If Heathers scale of points is correct, with a 10 point margin between HCC & AM, AM to FCC then there is enough scope to award all flowers that are deserving. We have the scale of HCC...75 to 80 points, AM....80.1 to 85, FCC...85.1 to 100.
The biggest problem we found is that we kept looking for the next orchid we awarded of the same Hybrid or species or Hybrid in general, to be that bit better until we pushed the award requirements to a level that was almost unreachable. As it is now with a relaxation of this criteria, some of the orchids awarded HCC's 3 years ago, under todays standards should have received FCC's.
As a judge, you have to remember the last award granted for the genus, example, Paph Macarbe and armed with the stats available for that plant compare it to the one you are now viewing. If the previous one gained a HCC with 78 points and the one your viewing totals 75 to 77 it should get the award still, full stop. Maybe the one your viewing stats up better than the previous, ok, up your plant to 78.1/2/3/ whatever, award it. Frankly, many Judges express views on things they know nothing about but to make out they do.

 

[WolfDog1 (C. Williams)]

I too have learned a lot by sitting in on judging. I think it's very interesting. I've never experienced the 'parallel' discussion, but I would guess that I will. The process can be very contentious. It's even more interesting when the judges disagree than when they agree. I find these discussions notable because of the way that judging and criteria can shift over time.
I envision a time when rounder and flatter may not be the 'standard' by which Paphs are judged; and at time I don't think that standard applies even today.

 

[Roy]

The rounder and flatter standard should still apply to the Paphs its supposed to fit, ie complex hybrid Paphs. You cannot use that standard for Maudiae type or Suk petal types etc.
The problem is that many judges "only grow or like" the 'suk' petal, species, novelty type hybrids or Maudiaes. They have lost all knowledge on how to judge the round, flat complex type, or just don't care. The reverse can also apply. Whatever the orchid being judged, the Judge MUST be familiar with, at a minimum, the basic requirements of that 'style' of orchid (ie paph ) should hold, to be worthy of consideration for an award. If they don't, then there is no way that orchid will be assessed fairly or correctly. Its like comparing lemons with watermelons. BTW, this type of judging is common.