Judging Phrag. kovachii - How will it be done?

[silence882]

Out of curiosity, does anyone know if any standards have been officially or unofficially set for judging Phrag. kovachii (by the AOS or any other group)?

Since its flower has such a limited lifespan and its characteristics change throughout, how will consistent judging of the blooms be achieved?

--Stephen

 

[Rick]

I don't no of any awards it.

The first one to go to judging should end up with a CHM to set standards, and then the race is on.

I don't think the flower age/variability issues are that much different as for any other phrag. You just got to be there at the right time. Other species such as Stanopheas have it worse than Phrags.

My prediction is that the first awarded flower will be at a judging center rather than a show.

 

[li'l frog]

One was awarded a year or so ago at a show in South America, a CHM, just to get it on the books. The one that was in bloom at the show in Madison, Wi, was deemed unjudged because it was still not fully opened.

 

[slippertalker]

Yes, the first one was given a CHM in Peru and was one of 3 or so plants exhibited. The plants that weren't entirely ripe had much better form, and they get more ruffled and reflexed as they age. How consistent with the judging be? Great question, probably not very until people are more familiar with the flowers.

The flower is judged by AOS as it appears on the day of judging, not before or after. It will be interesting to see how divergent the opinions will be regarding judging this plant over the next few years when they become more common. As far as a standard, they will be judged as any other Phrag.

 

[Ron-NY]

Here is a pic of the flower that was awarded

http://www.phragmipediumkovachii.com/Photogallery/gallery/PK-Grimanesa-Manrique.htm

 

[Rick]

Here is a pic of the flower that was awarded

http://www.phragmipediumkovachii.com/Photogallery/gallery/PK-Grimanesa-Manrique.htm

The CHM score is 94 points. I think that sets a pretty high bar for the HCC and AM quality plants out there.

 

[Ron-NY]

Personally, I don't think it sets the bar at all. The award was for cultural merit. It is not an award for the flower like an HCC, AM or FCC would be.

 

[Rick]

"CHM
Awarded to a well-grown and well-flowered species or natural hybrid with characteristics that contribute to the horticultural aspects of orchidology, such as aesthetic appeal. This award is granted provisionally and filed with the judging center Chair pending taxonomic verification supplied by the exhibitor".....from the AOS web site.

Ron, I think you are thinking about the CCM and CCE awards which are the cultural awards.

The CHM is often considered the first phase of a quality award (for species) by assessing its "aesthetic appeal" among other things. Depending on how well it was grown could also help set the bar for the CCM, but when I listen to judges reviewing a flower of a species that has little to no award history, the first thing they look at is the CHM score and description. The size shape and color of the flower(s) are recorded in the award description. So any future quality awards will measure up to the CHM description as a minimum.

 

[SlipperKing]

CHM = Certificate of Horticultural Merit, nothing more and nothing less. Is it worth growing (culturing)? Yes it is, then lets give it a certificate. I don't know about " first phase of a quality award" but it's primary purpose is to have a baseline inprint and picture for furture entries. Especially for judges unfamiliar with the species in question. I've also seen it given to familiar species (some hybrids) with unusual mutations.

 

[slippertalker]

The score of 94 on a CHM is representative of the desirability of this species in horticulture. It is not a quality award and shouldn't be interpreted as such. I believe that the fact that this plant was awarded a CHM rather than a quality award has a connection to the early FCC's awarded to Paph armeniacum and micranthum. After those high quality awards were granted, it was determined that they weren't the best representatives of the species but actually nice clones of a new and exciting species. A bit of caution needs to be used with such spectacular new finds until the range of quality is discovered.

The CHM is not a cultural award although obviously a well grown and bloomed plant tends to perform better than a weak plant. I do agree with the idea that a CHM or CBR does give a baseline for future awards, and in fact it is commonly used as such.

 

[NYEric]

Why Stephen, do you have one to judge!?!? :evil:

 

[Rick]

Why Stephen, do you have one to judge!?!? :evil:

Indeed!! Well it's going to need to be at least as good as the CHM!:wink: