B
biothanasis
Guest
They are all very nice!
Help Support Slippertalk Orchid Forum:
toddybear
Awarded Stud
Well done!
emydura
Well-Known Member
That awarded plant is a bit strange to say the least. Below is a link the awarded clone in question. The photo clearly is not a Norito Hasegawa. Almost looks like a micranthum. But the description sounds like Norito Hasegawa - yellow everywhere. SO what is going on? It seems more than just an incorrect photo. Darren's plant is clearly not a Norito Hasegawa.
http://www.orchidsaustralia.com.au/award_display.asp?award=3150
David
http://www.orchidsaustralia.com.au/award_display.asp?award=3150
David
emydura
Well-Known Member
I saw that ebay link
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=190591016989
That is extremely poor and dishonest Darren. You posted that after you have been told here that it wasn't a Norito Hasegawa. Some poor sucker is going to think he is getting an awarded Norito Hasegawa. Won't they be dissappointed when they eventually find out. You have done this sort of thing before. I bit my tongue the first time. This goes to the heart of your integrity. There will be many people who will look at that photo and clearly see that it is not what you are trying to sell. They will question your ethics and honesty and decide not to touch your plants. I know I have.
David
quietaustralian
Well-Known Member
That award photo is strange. I was comparing NH awards about 12 months ago and noticed that pic. I couple of months ago I mentioned it to the registrar of judging but I believe the person responsible for managing the AOC website was away at the time and I guess the message wasn't passed on.
Darren's plant is supposed to be a division or the awarded plant but It doesn't look like the incorrect award photo anyway.
Mick
emydura
Well-Known Member
It would appear that the actual plant judged was indeed a Norito Hasegawa. God knows how there are photos of two other clones masquarading as a Norito Hasegawa.
David
quietaustralian
Well-Known Member
Norito Hasegawa HCC/AOC - obviously not awarded on this flowering but it's a huge flower and I can see why it would have gotten an award on a previous flowering, next time it will be better.
Darren,
I gave you the benefit of the doubt about this issue as I thought you'd have the honesty to let people (bidders) know that there was some doubt
about the identification of the plant you auctioned on eBay. I now tend to agree with David's last comment.
Members of this forum often give a heads up about dodgy sellers on eBay. Do you fit that description?
You posted a pic of the plant on this forum, people commented that it was unlikely to be a NH, you indicated that you doubted the id
and then listed it on eBay as a NH. When asked a direct question about the id of the plant through eBay's system, you were less than forthcoming about
any doubt in id.
Everyone makes mistakes with the identification of plants, judges, registrars, growers and breeders but there is a difference when the mistake becomes deceit.
I would have thought an AOC judge would have more integrity in their dealings.
.
Darren,
I gave you the benefit of the doubt about this issue as I thought you'd have the honesty to let people (bidders) know that there was some doubt
about the identification of the plant you auctioned on eBay. I now tend to agree with David's last comment.
Members of this forum often give a heads up about dodgy sellers on eBay. Do you fit that description?
You posted a pic of the plant on this forum, people commented that it was unlikely to be a NH, you indicated that you doubted the id
and then listed it on eBay as a NH. When asked a direct question about the id of the plant through eBay's system, you were less than forthcoming about
any doubt in id.
Everyone makes mistakes with the identification of plants, judges, registrars, growers and breeders but there is a difference when the mistake becomes deceit.
I would have thought an AOC judge would have more integrity in their dealings.
.
B
Bolero
Guest
Well today I have learned I should come back and check all the responses to my posts. It appears my integrity and credibility is being questioned, perhaps by people who should look at themselves before posting slanderous and venemous comments such as the ones above.
Anyway, as I am now going to leave the forum (I have asked the admins to delete my profile if they can) I should state a few facts.
The flower is very yellow, yellow is everywhere and the yellow is very strong in every segment. The washed out colour probably comes from the fact the sun was to the side of the flower and shining through it. It blooms very yellow in person and I apologise if that wasn't clear to you, I should have taken the photo at a different angle.
If you look at the photo of the original flower which was awarded the markings in the segments are very similar and are greyed orange to greyed red in colour as stated in the description and the markings.
So we have a very yellow flower with the same marking colours as described in the original award.
After I posted my doubts after hearing some others here doubt the flower, I took it along for judging. At which point it won a ribbon at the club show and was confirmed by all judges to be Norito Hasegawa and a similar flower to the one that was originally awarded, albeit not as good a shape due to the dorsal reflexing slightly. A number of people with many decades experience confirmed that it is in fact Norito Hasegawa and it wouldn't have got a ribbon if it wasn't.
So I decided to sell a division of the plant, I need some space and have another piece of it left. So quietaustralian saw fit to contact the buyer on Ebay after it sold (must have checked my feedback) and let him know that not only was the plant not what I sold it as but it hasn't been awarded either.
Considering the plant was originally sold and bred by Nicky Zurcher many years ago and awarded by one of the best judges in the country I would have thought it would be beyond doubt. But I haven't had the genetics tested either. So looking at things now, after I had the panel examine the plant I should have come back and responded but I don't always come back and check my posts after the first few days and didn't think it mattered whether i came back to confirm the plant or not. Until now.
At the end of the day I could tell you I am highly ethical, I have served in the military, I work full time for the Federal Government and I have even facilitated lectures on ethics but then again none of you have to believe me and all of you will form your own opinions anyway.
To call me deceitful when talking about me like this, anonymously in a forum where you know there are no real repurcussions for you is pretty disgusting. I don't care if no one buys my plants, they are what I believe them to be. I wouldn't sell them if I didn't believe them to be correct at the time I put them on.
And remember quietaustralian, just because you believe you are right, it doesn't make me wrong. Unless you see the plant in person it's often hard to judge what you see from a photo online.
Now you can all argue the merits but I won't be weighing into this discussion any further and I hope the admins delete my profile from this site. As much fun as it's been with most of you I can't stay here when this cloud hangs over my character.
Very disappointed.
Anyway, as I am now going to leave the forum (I have asked the admins to delete my profile if they can) I should state a few facts.
The flower is very yellow, yellow is everywhere and the yellow is very strong in every segment. The washed out colour probably comes from the fact the sun was to the side of the flower and shining through it. It blooms very yellow in person and I apologise if that wasn't clear to you, I should have taken the photo at a different angle.
If you look at the photo of the original flower which was awarded the markings in the segments are very similar and are greyed orange to greyed red in colour as stated in the description and the markings.
So we have a very yellow flower with the same marking colours as described in the original award.
After I posted my doubts after hearing some others here doubt the flower, I took it along for judging. At which point it won a ribbon at the club show and was confirmed by all judges to be Norito Hasegawa and a similar flower to the one that was originally awarded, albeit not as good a shape due to the dorsal reflexing slightly. A number of people with many decades experience confirmed that it is in fact Norito Hasegawa and it wouldn't have got a ribbon if it wasn't.
So I decided to sell a division of the plant, I need some space and have another piece of it left. So quietaustralian saw fit to contact the buyer on Ebay after it sold (must have checked my feedback) and let him know that not only was the plant not what I sold it as but it hasn't been awarded either.
Considering the plant was originally sold and bred by Nicky Zurcher many years ago and awarded by one of the best judges in the country I would have thought it would be beyond doubt. But I haven't had the genetics tested either. So looking at things now, after I had the panel examine the plant I should have come back and responded but I don't always come back and check my posts after the first few days and didn't think it mattered whether i came back to confirm the plant or not. Until now.
At the end of the day I could tell you I am highly ethical, I have served in the military, I work full time for the Federal Government and I have even facilitated lectures on ethics but then again none of you have to believe me and all of you will form your own opinions anyway.
To call me deceitful when talking about me like this, anonymously in a forum where you know there are no real repurcussions for you is pretty disgusting. I don't care if no one buys my plants, they are what I believe them to be. I wouldn't sell them if I didn't believe them to be correct at the time I put them on.
And remember quietaustralian, just because you believe you are right, it doesn't make me wrong. Unless you see the plant in person it's often hard to judge what you see from a photo online.
Now you can all argue the merits but I won't be weighing into this discussion any further and I hope the admins delete my profile from this site. As much fun as it's been with most of you I can't stay here when this cloud hangs over my character.
Very disappointed.
NYEric
Well-Known Member
Not questioning your ethics. i believe both parvis are Fumi's Delight. Good luck, Eric.
John M
Orchid Addict
It is shocking that Bolero is defending the pictured flower as being Norito Hasegawa. That flower is absolutely NOT Norito Hasegawa. Perhaps a Norito Hasegawa was what was originally judged; but then in that case, someone has since mixed up the tags. We don't need to consider the delicate nuances caused by being backlit, or the photo being taken at the wrong angle; or even the fact that we are looking at a photo and not the real thing in person.
It is clear to see:
The pouch is the wrong shape for Norito Hasegawa. It does show strong micranthum influence, however.
The veining and background colour in the petals extends completely out to the tips and completely from top to bottom, as is typical for micranthum. Paph. malipoense, even highly coloured clones, are never so completely covered in veining right out to the tips and from top to bottom. The veining always fades on the margins.
The most glaring and obvious problem is the staminode. If you google Norito Hasegawa and look at the images, virtually every single flower shown has strong remnants of the dark chocolate colour on the lower half of the staminode. This is a clear indication of malipoense being a parent. The lack of this colour (as is the case in the pictured flower), indicates that malipoense is NOT a parent. This flower has virtually none of that. Not only is the staminode of this flower the wrong colour, it is also the wrong shape. If malipoense was a parent, the staminode would be much more square, not round. It also has the wrong colour pattern to be Norito Hasegawa. It does however, have the correct colour, the correct shape and the correct colour pattern to fit perfectly with the expected staminode of Fumi's Delight.
Bolero; of course, you say you won't be back; but, if you do read this, I'd like you to know that I will miss you. I've really enjoyed your posts and photos.
However, you finish your last post with "very disappointed". Well, YES! I sure am! I would never have expected someone as experienced and (I thought), well regarded as you, to even consider defending such an obvious mislabelling, not to mention profiting from the sale of the plant in question while it continues to masquerade as something that it clearly is not. I do not believe that you do not know better.
It is clear to see:
The pouch is the wrong shape for Norito Hasegawa. It does show strong micranthum influence, however.
The veining and background colour in the petals extends completely out to the tips and completely from top to bottom, as is typical for micranthum. Paph. malipoense, even highly coloured clones, are never so completely covered in veining right out to the tips and from top to bottom. The veining always fades on the margins.
The most glaring and obvious problem is the staminode. If you google Norito Hasegawa and look at the images, virtually every single flower shown has strong remnants of the dark chocolate colour on the lower half of the staminode. This is a clear indication of malipoense being a parent. The lack of this colour (as is the case in the pictured flower), indicates that malipoense is NOT a parent. This flower has virtually none of that. Not only is the staminode of this flower the wrong colour, it is also the wrong shape. If malipoense was a parent, the staminode would be much more square, not round. It also has the wrong colour pattern to be Norito Hasegawa. It does however, have the correct colour, the correct shape and the correct colour pattern to fit perfectly with the expected staminode of Fumi's Delight.
Bolero; of course, you say you won't be back; but, if you do read this, I'd like you to know that I will miss you. I've really enjoyed your posts and photos.
However, you finish your last post with "very disappointed". Well, YES! I sure am! I would never have expected someone as experienced and (I thought), well regarded as you, to even consider defending such an obvious mislabelling, not to mention profiting from the sale of the plant in question while it continues to masquerade as something that it clearly is not. I do not believe that you do not know better.
kentuckiense
Debaser
This.
Use your eyes, Bolero! I don't care what any of those judges say, that's NOT a Norito Hasegawa. Hell, you could have Norito Hasegawa himself tell me that's a Norito Hasegawa and I'd still call him wrong. The obstinate refusal to admit the glaringly obvious mislabeling is honestly perplexing.
The judges are incorrect and you're incorrect. Bottom line.
SlipperKing
Madd Virologist
Good rid-din's I say! I don't know how many times I've posted a flower with the wrong identity and had to back track with a humble apologize. NO BIG DEAL! Say sorry and the case is over. Then quickly run to the greehouse and change the tag!
quietaustralian
Well-Known Member
@John M
Your description of Norito Hasegawa is very similar to the second bloom in this recent thread. http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22604
Mick
Your description of Norito Hasegawa is very similar to the second bloom in this recent thread. http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22604
Mick
John M
Orchid Addict
Wow! Thank you for pointing that out. The mislabelling of the plant under discussion in this thread can't be more clear now. How can anyone say that these two flowers are the same thing? It's mind boggling. Especially, how can one person who owns both flowers insist that they are the same hybrid? A classic case of sticking one's head in the sand and refusing to acknowledge the glaringly obvious.....but why? The money made by selling a division of this mislabelled plant is not equal to even a fraction of the value of one's personal reputation. It's important to make the distinction between knowledge and confidence.....and out of control ego. The latter can ruin a person. This whole situation is unbelievable. A person spends a lifetime building their reputation....and to so quickly destroy it with a few keystrokes is perplexing. Bull s**t is still bull s**t, no matter how it is served. .....And when one makes a mistake, it's far better to humbly change the menue, rather than pile on even more and insist that it's really a chocolate sundae. "Very disappointing" indeed!
M
Marc
Guest
I've avoided commenting on the issue in this topic because I more or less missed it and hybrids arent my primary interest.
The link posted by quietaustralian made me open my eyes and makes me wonder why bolero is getting so emotional. When I first saw the picture on the first page of this topic I though oh it's just another micranthum hybrid that I don't care about. The influence of micranthum is even to my beginners eye very obvious.
How someone can see a hybrid of malipoense x armeniacum in that flower is beyond my imagination.......
Still it's a shame to see a fellow forum user leave because of this.
The link posted by quietaustralian made me open my eyes and makes me wonder why bolero is getting so emotional. When I first saw the picture on the first page of this topic I though oh it's just another micranthum hybrid that I don't care about. The influence of micranthum is even to my beginners eye very obvious.
How someone can see a hybrid of malipoense x armeniacum in that flower is beyond my imagination.......
Still it's a shame to see a fellow forum user leave because of this.
John M
Orchid Addict
I agree Marc. I liked Bolero and his threads and I truly will miss him. He's a fantastic Masdevallia grower and I REALLY enjoyed being inspired by the photos of his well grown, well bloomed plants....and I'd like to see more. I just wish he'd simply admitted an obvious mistake instead of insisting on treating us all like blind fools.
Roy
Well-Known Member
Bolero has made a mistake, big or little doesn't matter, that is for him to live with. The biggest problem is that one of the posters to this thread has entered into the discussion "outside" of his forum. This member involved should have a good hard look at themselves. It leads one to believe they couldn't be trusted nor be called a good honest person in any way. This type of action is not something, I believe anyone could condone. This member is a person I have lost respect for and would not in anyway offer assistance to even if they were drowning. Its not their place to enter into private issues.
emydura
Well-Known Member
Looking at the award details I was struggling to work out if it was just the awards photo was wrong as there was so much yellow in the description. It almost sounded like a Norito Hasegawa and I could barely detect any yellow in either Darren’s photo or the awards photo. But if you look at the length and width of the labellum, this demonstrates to me that the judges have incorrectly awarded the wrong plant rather than labels being mixed up. I checked a few awarded Norito Hasegawa’s and in all cases the labellum was as wide as it was long or even wider. The Fumi's Delight's had a much longer labellum than it was wide as in the award measurements of this plant.
Award no: 3150
Plant: Paph. Norito Hasegawa 'Highclere'
Owner: Garrett G.
Award: HCC/AOC 2003 (VIC)
Points 79
Date: 05/09/2003
Description: Petals yellow-orange 21C, striped greyed red 181B. Dorsal sepal yellow 6C, striped greyed orange 181B. Ventral sepal yellow 6C. Labellum yellow 8D. One flower on 260mm stem. Maribyrnong OC Spring Show
Parentage: (Paph. armeniacum x malipoense)
Flower length: 94
Flower width: 81
Petals: 5244W
Dorsal sepal: 44L36W
Ventral sepals: 41L26W
Labellum: 70L52W
Darren’s defence of his fellow AOC judges is honourable if a little misplaced. I would always trust the opinions of the experienced growers on this forum over that of an AOC judge who doesn’t specialise in Paphs and sees them only occasionally at shows etc. People on this forum live and breathe Paphiopediulums. There isn’t a more obsessive group of growers than those who love slipper orchids. They can detect a misidentified plant a mile away without a moment’s thought. I think most judges I have spoken to would struggle to pick up a plant that was incorrectly labelled. As an example, I entered the two plants below in our show. On both times the plants were all but disqualified as the senior judge said they were incorrectly entered in the species section. He said the first one was a wardii hybrid. We are talking about senior judges with more than 20 years experience. All the junior judges just accepted his opinion without question. If they can’t identify some of the most commonly grown species then they are no hope of differentiating the hybrids. I’m not so much bagging judges but making the point that their word should not be treated as gospel.
The biggest issue here is the selling on of incorrectly labelled plants. By continuing to sell a plant as something it isn’t just compounds the original mistake. The next owner may get themselves into the same problem as Darren. It is disappointing to see Darren go. His Paph collection was just starting to mature and we were seeing more of his plants in flower. His Parvi’s in particular were excellent. The tragedy is, despite being mislabelled, this was a damn nice plant. The judges may have got the id wrong but they were still impressed enough to award it so it was obviously above average.
David
Award no: 3150
Plant: Paph. Norito Hasegawa 'Highclere'
Owner: Garrett G.
Award: HCC/AOC 2003 (VIC)
Points 79
Date: 05/09/2003
Description: Petals yellow-orange 21C, striped greyed red 181B. Dorsal sepal yellow 6C, striped greyed orange 181B. Ventral sepal yellow 6C. Labellum yellow 8D. One flower on 260mm stem. Maribyrnong OC Spring Show
Parentage: (Paph. armeniacum x malipoense)
Flower length: 94
Flower width: 81
Petals: 5244W
Dorsal sepal: 44L36W
Ventral sepals: 41L26W
Labellum: 70L52W
Darren’s defence of his fellow AOC judges is honourable if a little misplaced. I would always trust the opinions of the experienced growers on this forum over that of an AOC judge who doesn’t specialise in Paphs and sees them only occasionally at shows etc. People on this forum live and breathe Paphiopediulums. There isn’t a more obsessive group of growers than those who love slipper orchids. They can detect a misidentified plant a mile away without a moment’s thought. I think most judges I have spoken to would struggle to pick up a plant that was incorrectly labelled. As an example, I entered the two plants below in our show. On both times the plants were all but disqualified as the senior judge said they were incorrectly entered in the species section. He said the first one was a wardii hybrid. We are talking about senior judges with more than 20 years experience. All the junior judges just accepted his opinion without question. If they can’t identify some of the most commonly grown species then they are no hope of differentiating the hybrids. I’m not so much bagging judges but making the point that their word should not be treated as gospel.
The biggest issue here is the selling on of incorrectly labelled plants. By continuing to sell a plant as something it isn’t just compounds the original mistake. The next owner may get themselves into the same problem as Darren. It is disappointing to see Darren go. His Paph collection was just starting to mature and we were seeing more of his plants in flower. His Parvi’s in particular were excellent. The tragedy is, despite being mislabelled, this was a damn nice plant. The judges may have got the id wrong but they were still impressed enough to award it so it was obviously above average.
David
Roy
Well-Known Member
David, I looked at the AOC pic and believe it to be wrong also. There was a few probs with the posting of award pics for some time as the responsible person was ill & the job was taken on by someone not aware of differences in pics to names or just stuffed them up. I don't believe Darren got the plant he bought, not excusing what eventuated. If the members of the forum call this a hanging offence, so be it, as has been mentioned, the loss of Darrens pics of his Paphs, Catts & Masdevallias is a loss to us all.
Similar threads
