Cymbidium awards

[Bill Zimmerman]

I was searching the AQ+ yesterday and reviewed the history of Cymbidium awards. The vast majority of the awards were HCC's, mainly 75-78 points, very few AM's and of course only a couple of FCC's.

This is much different than the typical spread for other major genera which have larger proportions of AM's.

These plants have been around for decades and continue to be bred. Do you think this is a reflection of judging bias or lack of knowledge, or few superior plants?

As a judge, I find this a bit unusual and would like to hear some comments.

[learning2letgo]

I would like to think it stems from a judging bias coupled with lack of knowledge.

[Bill Zimmerman]

I don't understand why you would like to expect such lack of expertise on the part of judges. This question was more of a rhetorical one, leading to a discussion of the merits of cymbidium hybridizing rather than a critique of judging.

One could ask similar questions regarding the lack of quality awards in dendrochilums or a dearth of FCC's in the oncidium alliance. Whether there are answers or not is up to conjecture. These questions aren't necessarily a problem with judging per se but a lack of quality or homogenous populations.

I certainly am not arguing for a diminished level of standards...........

[Graphicgreg]

Oh Bill, this is easy. It's because they are not Paphs.

[learning2letgo]

My humblest apologies, Bill... I clearly misunderstood the intended objective of the thread.

[Bill Zimmerman]

Originally Posted by Graphicgreg

Oh Bill, this is easy. It's because they are not Paphs.

or Phrags or Phals.....or Vandas or Cattleyas.......LOL.

[djanvrin]

OK, I'll admit that I mostly judge in the mid South where only the bravest of cymbidiums dare to grow, however...

Most of what I see at shows is the same old, already awarded clones. These are mostly plants that were bred for the corsage market when it existed. It is difficult to move them off the society auction table....

When new material shows up, it falls into one of two categories: more of the same with no improvement in dorsal or lip; or really interesting new hybrids - that fit very poorly with the existing AOS judging criteria.

Though I am a judge, the cym. section I prefer to grow is the Jensoa (the so-called Chinese cymbidiums - though they appear to be nearly pan-Asian). They're small, the forward-thrusting petals are practically un-judgeable, and the lips are often curled like salami on a tray of antipasto. An inability to meet judging criteria is not a good reason not to grow and enjoy them.

I have seen teams judge these under the general criteria - where they typically receive an HCC or occasional AM.

The CSA, of course, uses a completely different rule book.

David Janvrin

[Effiffdum]

It gives a distinct feeling that they are all popularity awards. As such, perhaps we should only have the "most popular member award".