RE: SPEC-X
- Subject: RE: SPEC-X
- From: E* H* <e*@mymts.net>
- Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 11:24:53 -0600
|
Chuck, can you send us a couple of pictures, please. To: iris-species@yahoogroups.com From: dkramb@badbear.com Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 11:53:37 -0500 Subject: Re: [iris-species] SPEC-X
nope. i'm not a judge. i'm just a gardener. i've never understood (nor cared enough to learn) the rules of classifying bearded irises. so such dilemmas just seem silly to me. (if it is 1 inch too short or if the flower is too large, or whatever)
and if indeed the rules are so strict that they hinder development of wonderful seedlings like the one you described, then i have even less interest in those rules than before! sorry... it's far from an intelligent or helpful answer. but all i can do is reiterate my viewpoint that as a gardener, to me, i would not be able to see a big difference between your hybrid and another SDB or IB. and so i struggle to accept it as a SPEC-X. i suppose that's what happens when non-show people like me are utilizing show terminology. so i guess i've learned a lesson from today's conversation. that if i don't care enough to learn about bearded classifications, then maybe i shouldn't be so opinionated about the SPEC-X category either (even though it's totally my favorite). i humbly apologize. :-) Dennis in Cincinnati On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Chuck Chapman <i*@aim.com> wrote:
|
- Follow-Ups:
- RE: SPEC-X rebloomer
- From: C* C* &*
- RE: SPEC-X rebloomer
- References:
- Re: SPEC-X
- From: D* K* &*
- Re: SPEC-X
- From: C* C* &*
- Re: SPEC-X
- From: D* K* &*
- Re: SPEC-X
- Prev by Date: RE: Re: SPEC-X
- Next by Date: RE: SPEC-X rebloomer
- Previous by thread: Re: SPEC-X
- Next by thread: RE: SPEC-X rebloomer