Netters,
Here’s a strawman for you to critique:
Generations Class: Cultivar, with or without siblings, along with members of its family tree. If deemed appropriate by judges, class to be sub-divided by number of generations included in the entries. Blooms to be judged on ADS Historics Scale. Overall winner is judged to be the entry having best balance between breadth of generations (50%) and quality of blooms (50%). Winner receives ADS Daffodil Generations Ribbon. Entries may include blooms of cultivars (registered, unregistered, or seedlings) or species.
Bob
Netters,
I have no intention of sponsoring this class – or proposing it to the ADS Board. I was just playing with all the various comments I read and trying to put them into a single statement for critique.
Bob
Note: forwarded message attached.
Donna,
What you say is not quite right.
In ADS Shows, if you place a bloom in a class in the Historics section, it is not eligible for awards outside that section (eg, Best in Show). All blooms in the Historics section are to be judged using the Historics Scale of Points.
But these ADS show rules don’t preclude judging blooms in certain classes outside the Historics section using the Historics scale. Probably it hasn’t been done, but I don’t know of a rule against doing it. It would seem that the Generations Class could be placed outside of the Historics section, allowing exceptionally good blooms to compete for best-in-show. Indeed, the Generations class wouldn’t fit in Historics section because it would have blooms registered later than 1940.
Judging the same bloom twice using two different scales is confusing. Yet that is what judges do with species in the Miniatures classes. Within their single-stem and three-stem classes for Division 13, they are judged using the Species Scale. But when in collections or when selected to compete for Best Miniature, they are judged using the regular ADS Scale of Points.
I don’t know of a case where different blooms in the same class are to be judged on different scales.
Bob
At 03:44 PM 8/20/2008, Donna Dietsch wrote: