Unless classified as a mini-flora, 3 1/4 inches is grossly oversized for a mini and I would think would be penalized for that flaw even if properly named.

Hollysprings - All I can tell you is that Dennis Bridges has them in his garden the same size. The judges told me in the minatures oversized blooms are cause for being disqualified. The 3 -1/4 inches was measured with the petals laying flat - the maximum width you could possibly attain.

Hollysprings - One other thing I forgot to mention. In talking to Dennis Bridges he told me he decided to call a miniature not because of the bloom size; but, because of the small leaves. I now know of three people that have grown a bloom this big. Dennis Bridges also being one of them. I honestly don't know the rules for judging miniatures. I have heard different stories. If the rose is not typical and indeed has an overly large bloom I guess I could see taking points off. Thats not what they did. They disqualified it.

There were a few Doris Morgan's that were in the Tulsa Nat. and they weren't DQ'ed or penalized. There was also one in the Los Angeles rose show that wasn't penalized. I don't remember seeing it there but Suzanne LadyinRed entered it. I don't know what size it was.

One of the Exhibitors at my show this past weekend entered a Doris Morgan... he said he takes off the first and second row of petals often to avoid being D'Qed. This is the guy who took the sweepstakes trophy as he won about 15 classes in the show.

If I took the first and second rows of petals off my Doris Morgan, there wouldn't be anything left to the bloom! It doesn't have many petals to begin with and they open SUPER fast.

My Doris Morgan was in my Hi-Lo entry at the Los Angeles Rose Show and it won.

It was a normal sized miniature rose, as are the 20 or so blooms currently on the plants in my garden. I have never seen an oversized one. I do, however, live in Southern California, and not North Carolina.

If a judge doesn't know the identity of the bloom, he should be very careful about DQing it unless he is certain it isn't the name on the tag. The rules allow a judge to DQ a rose for wrong name without knowing the true name, but that judge should be very sure first. However, a mini with a bloom over 3" in size should be subject to penalization since it is not "typical of the variety". If the leaves were still normal size, it could also be penalized for Balance and Proportion. Most judges would just penalize it enough to keep it from winning a blue ribbon and let it go at that in cases like the one you describe.

Phil - I could handle it if it was penalized for being too big. I don't think that is the problem. As I understand it, it was DQ's because they said it wasn't a Doris Morgan.

I measured all my Doris Morgans last night and found 10 of them that ranged in size from 2 1/2 inches to 3 1/4 inches.

Is there no leeway from the judges if a particular rose gets bigger under certain conditions. The hybridizer "Dennis Bridges" says that his own Doris Morgans were reacting the same way as mine and he says that it is the weather that is causing.

Either way if I ever show this rose again I will certainly remove the outer petals. I was unaware of the rules regarding size.

As Rachel says, if you remove any petals from Doris, you're not going to have much left to work with. It has very good form and substance with few petals. If it was really big (sounds like it was), it should only have been penalized as not typical of the variety. Last spring I had some big Doris Morgans but never approached the size of yours.

The judges should be aware of the possibility that certain cultivars can get quite large and should not DQ it because they don't recognize it. If there is a chance the entry really is the rose named on the tag, they should not DQ it. However, I would think it would be penalized significantly if it was so much bigger than the norm.
We should also remember here that the only class that is required to be "typical of the variety" in size is that of the minatures. All the rest tend to put a premium on larger size (including minifloras after the ARS Board meeting in Tulsa last Friday).

I know your outcome was pretty disappointing, but judges are all individuals and sometimes they make individual decisions that don't square with the rules and guidelines. It isn't right, but it is a human failing.

Phil - You've got my curiosity up now. If the show is set up to have minifloras separate, can you enter a miniature rose in it? From what everybody is saying, there is no way I will ever be able to show my Doris Morgan as a miniature.

The hybridizer determines the class of a modern rose when they register it. A rose's garden performance can sometimes have little to do with what class they are registered in, and unless the hybridizer changes their mind and has it reclassified, it stays how it was registered. So, no a mini cannot be shown in a miniflora class unless the schedule combines the two into one class. Perhaps Dennis Bridges is rethinking the registration of this one? But, probably not, given the reports from other areas of the country that describe it as mini sized.

Not every rose is going to be Trophy Table material. If you want to win a Mini Queen, it's best to grow many of the bankable roses that consistantly win. Check out Bob Martin's page for more information on which roses those are. You'll note that Doris Morgan isn't on the list. Since many exhibitors get "preview" plants of roses from hybridizers, it's also good to subscribe to Horizon Roses as well as the Rose Exhibitor's Forum. For a novice exhibitor, the book Showing Good Roses on the Roseshow site is invaluable, as are the Guidelines For Judging Roses, available from the ARS.

Showing roses is fun, so don't let your disappointment at this show sour you on it. Do a little research in the off season, and I'll bet you take home a bundle of blues next year.

Here is a link that might be useful: Top Minis

Not to defend the judgeâÂÂs decision, but you would expect that at least one of the judges would be familiar with a rose that in 2002 received an âÂÂAOEâ award. Than again it is a bit much to expect judges to grow or know all miniature roses they judge. They depend on the American Rose Society to help keep them informed on the latest rose data available.

In this particular instance, âÂÂDoris Morganâ appeared in the Aug. 2002 Rose magazine Rose Registration column, listing its bloom size as large (1 in.) 17/25 petals. If this is the latest information available on the rose, how can you actually fault judges when they come across a miniature rose 3 üâ in dia. and an official ARS publication state it should be only (1âÂÂ) in dia.?

On the miniature Rose List published on the Garden Web (GW) âÂÂExhibition and Judging ForumâÂÂ, lists bloom sizes as per hybridizers information. Growing seven âÂÂDoris Morganâ realized the size indicated in the Rose magazine was incorrect, compromised and listed it as medium (1 ýâÂÂ- 2 þâÂÂ) open. In reality it should have been rated as large 2 þ+âÂÂ, which I would have, but an actual size was also indicated. Here is a situation where a beautiful rose with excellent form, would be the ideal candidate classified as Mini-flora, where bigger is considered better.

It was suggested in a post on the new GW âÂÂExhibition and Judging Forumâ on 4-27-04 regarding the new Judging Manual. That since the new guidelines (P 50) one-bloom-per-stem miniature, state if a blooms size is typical of the variety (10) points can be awarded. If the bloom is smaller or larger than typical it is penalized. Why not just utilize the actual bloom sizes hybridizers list on IRAR official registration form, as criteria in determining the size of a miniature rose bloom?

Being that the ARS National Chairman of Horticultural Judges does not monitor the GW âÂÂExhibition and Judging Forumâ was mailed in May 2004, a 16-page document on my views on the âÂÂGuidelines On Judging RosesâÂÂ. This was but one, of the many questions I asked him to please respond to.

Ron S.

Typical bloom size where a hybridizer lives is not necessarily the typical bloom size somewhere else for the same rose. Desert vs. Coastal for instance.

Rgshwerdt - I did not know the rules on how they judged miniatures. Had I known I never would have entered this speciman. It was huge and it was beautiful. I had two of them. They both came from vigorous new basal growths. This is certainly ignorance on my part.

The only thing I was miffed about was that they said it wasn't Doris Morgan.

Hundreds of roses are introduced every year. It is impossible for a judge to know all roses. To know a rose you have to grow it. Judges are not the supreme authorities on roses. However, some do think so. I simply cannot stand these judges. I am a horticultural rose judge who at times do not see eye to eye with other judges. Unfortunately, in a Rose show the judge's word is the final word in awarding a trophy or a ribbon. However, usually there is more than one judge to judge each class. Some judges can be so authoritative that others in the group silently nod their heads. It is like an umpire or a line person giving bad calls to tennis players. They should have the humilty to accept their mistakes and give credit to the exhibitor. Do not get discouraged, take a stand and tell them that they have made a mistake. I have never seen a judge measuring the size of a bloom. According to ARS judging guidelines one should not penalize a bloom simply beacuse it is too large.

tmlakshmi
Thank you for your comments; but, I believe I have entered my last miniature rose show. The problems I have were a lot worse than I said above. I was ostracized from another forum because of judges ganging up on me. The judges stuck together on this one.

They were sure wrong on this one. They just wouldn't admit it.

Let me know the name of the judge. I do have some clout in the ARS. let me see what I can do about it.

The judges are not supposed to look at the name of the exhibitors while judging. How can rose lovers be so mean to you? How can judges gang up on you and osterize you for standing up and your Rose society do nothing about it?

I am sorry to hear about you unfortunate experience

tmlakshmi
I can't remember the one judges name. When I recall it I will let you know. There were three judges involved. One judge apologized to me right after the show and said they had made a big mistake. She then tried to convince one of the other two judges that he was wrong. He would have no part in it. In fact, he told me I should never show this rose again. I never met the third judge; but, he is the one that tried to discredit me the most. Its an enigma to me. I just don't know why he carried it as far as he did. All he ever had to do was apologize.
In defense of some of the other judges on the other forum, I think they were simply trying to get me to shut up and not damage the reputation of roses in general. I think they would have done better by having this judge not only reprimanded for his bad behavior; but, make him apologize.