Re: Re: SPEC-X

---

In terms of awards, that is the award system per say, there isn't a bias towards TB or bearded. In actuallity proably less (smaller percentage) of the introduced bearded plant get awards as versu barless plants.

But when it comes to selection of best of show, or to voting for Dykes, there is a bias towards  big showy TB.

I have many a time seen  best of show go to a TB that would point out at 80 or so  while an SDB or species that would point out at 90+  be passed by, or not even be considered.  Just look at show reports, and see how many times TB get Best of show.

When it comes to Dykes medal, and we look at history of winners, can you honestly say  that  there have been so few other types worthy of  garden merit quality to warrant Dykes medal? They have won way more  Dykes , in terms of percentage of winners, then percentage of introduced plants.

Personally I like the idea of a layer of judges that  limit those voting  for top awards to be able to judge fairly. That is for a top in a category, need to have seen, or tried at least two cultivars eligible for the award.

For Dykes, to have seen or grown at least three different categories of plant types up for award.   If all you grow  or can evaluate are TB,  then you would choose your vote only from the TB plants eligible.


Further,  for Dykes,  would like to see winners have votes from  all regions, for example, be in top five  in all regions or at lest in top five for 20 out of 23 regions.

As to SPEC-X.  I can appreciate your argument for  Dolce, but still am not convinced.  Each year  I get  seedlings of merit, that just don't fit cleanly into a class. Most hybridizers do. Occasionally they are just too good to not introduce, so  they get introduced, hopefully with a cravat , such as flowers too big for class. For me an example is Forever Violet, introduced as a MDB , when in actuality it is a small SDB. It is a gorgeous flower, and reblooms vigorously , including  Manitoba Canada (zone 2 or close to ag zone 2 USA rating)  But flowers too big for class, but too good a garden plant to not introduce.

In Flight (1992) is  small flowered  TB by it's registered  data. Its sibling Departure was registered as IB, parents of each was a tet MTB. So small flowered TB are not  anything that new.

So   basically , all these iris not fitting cleanly into a category  could very well have their own class, but SPEC-X shouldn't be that class.  A Misfits Class (tongue in cheek here) would fit their need for awards

So although Dolce doesnât fit neatly into TB, it has at least one 11 year predecessor, and a number of other small flowered  TBs to compare with.  Further,  small flowers on a TB is not a species characteristic, in that a lot of TB X TB crossed produce small flowered TB. So species involved as great grandparent shouldn't by itself be a qualifier.

I have a couple of small flowered TB  from cross of SDB X TB. As SDB X TB are from separate species lines. So could they be considered a SPEC-X?    Could a pumilla seedling X TB be considered a SPEC-X?   I have some of those as well. They fit SDB class, but as not good enough to win awards there, so could I enter them  in SPEC-X class?

The consensus here seems to be that something like Dolce doesn't fit.  If plants like this were  not included, you basically would (at this point in discussion)  have a definition of class to include bearded and beardless  plants, where  they suitably  show species characteristics, that most people would accept, with perhaps a few odd hold outs.

Chuck Chapman