Paph roth "Scott Ware" FCC/AOS

[NYEric]

Look at my Roth 'Dragon', it destroys every measument and it has better color. It still has flaws but it crushes this Roth. And it has 5 flowers. I had it in my orchid display. It wasn't even pulled. Because I'm not in with the orchid people or not liked lol.

Yes, they don't like you! oke: Now you know why you should have friends bring the plants to judging.

 

[paworsport]

The petals are also longer it has 31.5 ns

I don't think a Roth can make it into the very nice range for me unless it has minimum 2cm petals. The best TON roths all satisfy this as well.

I think 30, 6.5, 2. This is a good general guideline for Roth size. There are lots of other things but for size this is a starter for me. If it has amazing color or form can it still be good if all these aren't met, sure? If petals are down swept then ns not so important.

The other things include synsepal. Color coming up to proximal petal. Pouch color richness. ...... Lots of things

You are right for synsepalum neglected part in the roth breeding program
All is question of balance between all part of the roth flower

 

[Fabrice]

All is question of balance between all part of the roth flower

Yes agree! And in the last roth generation I saw here from OZ, many blooms have not a good balance in my eyes, mostly because of too broad petals and/or which fall.

 

[Ray]

Hmmmmm.... this thread reminds me of folks arguing the better of walnut or mahogany for the shift knob in their Mercedes.

 

[Ozpaph]

walnut...............

 

[Justin]

clearly mahogany is superior

 

[tnyr5]

*reads thread*
*rolls eyes & groans*
*walks away*

 

[paphioland]

Yes agree! And in the last roth generation I saw here from OZ, many blooms have not a good balance in my eyes, mostly because of too broad petals and/or which fall.

I disagree about the new OZ Roth generation.

Most roths that bloom in any cross have poor quality flowers, including balance. If you are going to have a 6.5 to 7 cm dorsal you need 2.3-2.5 petals. The average quality of the OZ roths is astounding. Leaps above the previous average. You are seeing many of the good to great grade ones on here not the amazing ones.

Some of them are a little short on ns but so is every other cross. The great ones though are breaking 30-32. Also this is the first real year of significant blooms. In other crosses including TON and Rex X mm you needed to bloom lots of roths to get the balanced ones you are talking about. How many Mm X Val were bloomed to get that elite group. Lots. I would agree that ns might tend to be a slight weakness of a group that has so many strength. Dorsal size petal thickness color shape. TON roths tend to have a weakness of thin petals.

When I get some time I'll post some of the best OZ roths I saw this year.

 

[theorchidzone]

Here are some that originated from our breeding.

http://www.csnjc.org/April2016/paphrothschildianum.html
http://www.csnjc.org/Sacto2016/paphrothschildianumAM.html
http://www.csnjc.org/Sacto2016/paphrothschildianumfcc.html

My April FB album shows a bunch more. Most are sold
https://www.facebook.com/theorchidzone/posts/1129470427103681

 

[paphioland]

 

[Justin]

Damn.

 

[Ozpaph]

My personal choice isnt the super fat petals. I think they make the flower too chunky and they dont seem to sit flat. They roll back especially at the top edge (looking at the posted photos). Love the big fat dorsals and a smaller, balanced synsepal.
We all have our 'ideal' roth in mind.

 

[emydura]

My personal choice isnt the super fat petals. I think they make the flower too chunky and they dont seem to sit flat. They roll back especially at the top edge (looking at the posted photos). .

That's for future breeding to fix. One step at a time.

 

[paphioland]

My personal choice isnt the super fat petals. I think they make the flower too chunky and they dont seem to sit flat. They roll back especially at the top edge (looking at the posted photos). Love the big fat dorsals and a smaller, balanced synsepal.
We all have our 'ideal' roth in mind.

Reflexing and loss of color as the petal leaves the flower is a problem in most roths. Even skinny petaled ones. Petals could always be thicker. The rest of the flower also needs to be bigger as well. I don't like small or pinched synsepals. Like I said if a Roth doesn't have 2 cm petals it is not top shelf.

 

[Fabrice]

On the FB link, I like only: S2, S3 (the only "Very big boy" what is well balanced) and S12. The other are not in my taste and some are even monsters for me! (S6, S10, S11...)

@paphioland: I think we already talked about that.
When I read you, I always feel that our vision (pawosport, Ozpaph, me, etc...) is difficult for you to understand.

What is sure, the single thought is not my cup of tea in life. And of course, it's true too about roths "quality" flower.
And what is sure too, I don't need to mesure each part of the flower to appréciate many roths bloom what are not in the "2cms petals top shelf"! :ninja:

Fortunately, there are other ways to select roths, for my greatest pleasure.

As they say, it takes all kinds to make a world.

 

[Justin]

I love all style roths--particularly the old clones like CE and Borneo etc. There is something magical about the classic roth look that no other orchid has. In fact my avatar is Sam's Best x Rex which have that old school look.

But for modern breeding I can't imagine a better roth than the 2 posted from OZ Ken posted at the bottom of the last page. size, color, form--it is all about as perfect as can be. the next generation from this is going to be insane.