Why do some R. Digbyana have names? ex. 'Alpha'

[isurus79]

Originally Posted by Ray

Don't you have to have grown the plant for at least 6 months before taking it for judging?

I've seen people buy plants from vendors and win awards by immediately putting them in the show.

[estación seca]

Quality awards are to the plant, to recognize a potential improved parent of future offspring, and not to the grower. So it doesn't matter how long somebody has had it.

[NYCorchidman]

I don't see the point of having a plant for 6 months prior to judging rule because it seems impossible to know if the owner lied?

Anyway, back to award question, if you want to up the chance to get awards, then do some search and buy relatively newer crosses.

[Fairorchids]

Ray,

Many orchid societies have the 6 month rule for showing a plant at the monthly meeting. The AOS does not that I know of.

[smweaver]

Originally Posted by isurus79

I've seen people buy plants from vendors and win awards by immediately putting them in the show.

That's a little depressing. And rather shameless of the buyer.

Another less-than-kosher (in my opinion) trend I've noticed over the last few years is that many hobbyists are in the habit of naming every plant in their collection (or at least the ones they've bothered to display) with some self-referential designation that implies it's either a select clone or it's won an award.

Example (and I'm using my own name just to make a point): Rhycholaelia digbyana 'Weaver,' which really tells you nothing about the plant--but it implies (at least to me) that there is something noteworthy about the individual plant that makes it stand out from your garden variety digbyana.

If you buy half a dozen plants from, say, Andy's Orchids (or any other vendor), they suddenly don't become clonal varieties that you should have the privilege of slapping your name on as soon as you're done unpacking them from the box they arrived in.

[isurus79]

Originally Posted by smweaver

Another less-than-kosher (in my opinion) trend I've noticed over the last few years is that many hobbyists are in the habit of naming every plant in their collection (or at least the ones they've bothered to display) with some self-referential designation that implies it's either a select clone or it's won an award.

Example (and I'm using my own name just to make a point): Rhycholaelia digbyana 'Weaver,' which really tells you nothing about the plant--but it implies (at least to me) that there is something noteworthy about the individual plant that makes it stand out from your garden variety digbyana.

If you buy half a dozen plants from, say, Andy's Orchids (or any other vendor), they suddenly don't become clonal varieties that you should have the privilege of slapping your name on as soon as you're done unpacking them from the box they arrived in.

I agree! Most plants don't deserved to be named.