Sorry i forget... here is the part 4 article dedicated to "solid tree" branch classification i propose.
http://www.fanatik-discus.fr/2016/11...-couleur-unie/
Yann
Hello!
Thank you again Rick for this very interesting exchanges
Well, it wouldn't be the first time I lost a bet. I was a bit shocked to learn you proposed TWO class's for the heckle cross. More on that later.
I present 2 exemples of "solid prominent central bar" in the part 4 of the articles series. (Now online)
Personally, I think it would be a good idea. Maybe something like "prominent center bar". But it's just not enough to create the class, you have to define the class. For instance, in this new class, is the thicker the center bar is, the better? Will a fish be awarded more points if it has a thicker center bar than it's competitors? If the fish also has an enlarged 6th bar, is this a deduction? These are things that need to be defined before you create such a class.
i agree, i will have a reflection on this subject. Just need to find an appelation. So... for the rest, it is here the point that separate the classification and the standard. Classification is made to find a place for each stable phenotype and standard is made to clearly define in detail each branch of the tree.
Your questions here should have answers in the standard, not in the classification. (I explain my point of view later in the series)
This is were you start to lose me. Maybe in Europe you get a lot more of these dominate 5th bar fish entered in competition. Too date we get very few. Here, even giving them one class would be a stretch, let alone two. Besides, a solid fish should not have bars.
Yes we have few... but i know breeders working on it in asia for sure but also now in Europe... So those fish will appear maybe more often.
But question for me is not there, because i think we have to find a place to each stable phenotype, no matter the market demand it or not.
This to promote every "variety lover". Imagine someone loving "pigeon butterfly" phenotype... why this person shouldn't benefit of clear and fair judgement due to lack of variety definition? (Because today, this is not always concidered "normal" that this phenotype have stripes on head area) To definite a standard of a variety, first we have to find a place of this variety in the tree classification.
1) Fine line
2) Thick line
3) Spotted
4) Solid
5) Wild
6) Open Non-pigeon blood (you heckel cross's would fit well in this category)
7) Open Pigeon blood
8) Albino
9) Bred by hobbyist. A class within all the other class's for the hobbyist breeder
There i'm not really agree... (sorry ) But for me... with this classification, "open pigeon blood" should simply (discus!!!) be call "pigeon blood".
This class is for me here one of the most specific category of this show. and not "open"; Because pigeon is pigeon....
As exemple, here the fine line gather (i talk here variety) blue snakeskin, red snakeskin, golden snakeskin
Thick line gather all form of turquoise, coarsed, striped, vertical, pearl
Solid gather blue, red, orange, brown etc...
and so on...
So this "open pigeon blood" couldn't be concidered as a real "open" category. for me, it is simply a pigeon blood category. If not, fine line cat could also be "open fine line" cat etc...
Your "solid" is maybe the most "open" category because it gather many types of phenotypes.
This is why i like the 2 open category: open pattern and open solid that both gather few represented phenotype (Like our "prominent central bar" phenotype)
Be sure, I do not criticize the US show. Just is my point of view.
Yann
My website Fanatik-discus
Sorry i forget... here is the part 4 article dedicated to "solid tree" branch classification i propose.
http://www.fanatik-discus.fr/2016/11...-couleur-unie/
Yann
My website Fanatik-discus
The object was to divide the class in a simply and easy way that gave a clear cut direction of where the fish in question should be placed. And in doing so divided the class evenly. While we only have done it once, I think it was a success. I guess I am a little confused, as you don't like the idea of having an open class with some distinctions, yet your ok with a solid class with fish with bars?There i'm not really agree... (sorry ) But for me... with this classification, "open pigeon blood" should simply (discus!!!) be call "pigeon blood".
This class is for me here one of the most specific category of this show. and not "open"; Because pigeon is pigeon....
Ex-President-North American Discus Association-NADA
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
This is a very nice fish.
Ex-President-North American Discus Association-NADA
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I moved this to the NADA forum as it seems like an excellent opportunity for NADA to discuss discus competition guidelines with the international community. Who knows, maybe some collaborations will come out of it.
Al
Last edited by brewmaster15; 11-04-2016 at 07:38 PM.
AquaticSuppliers.comFoods your Discus will Love!!!
>>>>>I am a science guy.. show me the science minus the BS
Al Sabetta
Simplydiscus LLC Owner
Aquaticsuppliers.com
I take Pics.. click here for my Flickr images
Hello!
First of all, i wanted to tell you i'm sorry for late reply...
I was working all week end...
Maybe it is due to my not so good english Rick... I'm sorry and hope i understand you well.
I'm ok with "open" categories, and i believe we should need 2 of them: "open pattern" and "open solid".
Organisators should propose a "X" number of catégories as we talked before and add those 2 open catégory.
Regarding to the tree classification, (And future standard i will propose) every fish could be judge in the best way. I hardly believe we should not put in competition this 2 kind of fish (pattern vs solid) in a same and unique category.
In a single "open category" you opposite pattern and solid and i really think it is not so fair... I also think the same for albino category... if you have enough albino in a show to separate them into 2 categories... i think we should separate them in "albino pattern" and "albino solid".
All i discuss here is depending on subscriptions organizers received... with a tree classification, everybody could understand where his fish could be place depending to enteries.
Clear rules = less protestations
I will send the following of my articles, you will feel better my ideas.
Hello!
It is a pleasure... i'm infact honored...
Situation may be different in Europe and USA... but we have same passion!
I would be happy to be stay in connection with you, we exchange interesting point of views, especially with Rick
I'm on facebook, and if you have an account, feel free to connect me, it is sometimes easier to "talk"...
Hope you feel my respect and friendship in my not native english language...
I follow when i'm able to the NADA and other american discus subjects.
Yann
My website Fanatik-discus
Here you can find the final parts of my articles:
Part 5 Notations system; propositions http://www.fanatik-discus.fr/2016/11...on-des-discus/
Part 6 Discus standard.. still plenty of work ahead us! http://www.fanatik-discus.fr/2016/11...rd-des-discus/
Part 7 (and final...) My conclusions and propositions for discus show regulation http://www.fanatik-discus.fr/2016/11...urs-de-discus/
In France during the last France Discus Show 2016 of Arvert city; some propositions i did in relation with the organisation where adopted. So we where able to test some things. We exchange a lot and try to find best solutions to evolve.
Next edition in 2018, i think they will test more things...
Let me know if you want to exchange about those articles.
Yann
My website Fanatik-discus