|
The Original All Roller Talk Discussion Board Archive >
Birmingham roller = Performance?
Birmingham roller = Performance?
Page:
1
2
3
4
5
6
fhtfire
290 posts
Jan 13, 2006
10:01 PM
|
Cliff,
I think the fly should be a 20 bird and that is it. Scott said that he would fly against any color breeder for 5 grand. Everyone who knows Scott and has read his post over the years ...knows that the 20 bird fly is the fly to judge a kti of rollers.
you said something in your last post that this is U.S. and should fall under the NBRC rules. I myself do not see anything wrong with that...As for the 20 bird VS. the 11 bird fly...The NBRC is the mother organization and there are far more entrys for 20 brid fly then 11 bird fly and cliff the 20 bird fly is not just the left side and North West...it is National...it is the favorite.....most popular....and the true fly to measure the overall quality of a "Team" of rollers. The 11 bird fly is to look at individual rollers and not so much the "team". I do agree with you on using the NBRC rules...since it is a "U.S." fly.....second if it were me it is 20 bird or nothing. The 20 bird fly is by far the most popular. There were almost 400 20 bird kits entered vs. about 160 11 bird teams. Just my thoughts. anyway..you and Scott should talk on the phone get the stuff lined out and set a date and do it
rock and ROLL
Paul Fullerton
Last Edited by fhtfire on Jan 13, 2006 10:04 PM
|
Phantom1
93 posts
Jan 13, 2006
10:36 PM
|
Paul,
I like the idea of flying both the 20 bird and the 11 bird kits. It would create a level playing field for both individuals involved. Personally, of the 20+ bird kits I've observed, I can't tell CRAP of the overall quality of the birds, much less the kits. One or two or five make a break, in which two or three follow, etc. It's like watching a thunderhead trying to decide whether or not it's okay to let out a drop of rain. However, the smaller kits that I've observed, I've seen a more focused quality of performance. My two cents - the 20 bird kit fly is a blanket to hide the birds that aren't up to par - pure and simple. I'd love to see a 20 bird kit that can make a FULL BREAK and mean it. I could throw up a kit of 20 birds this year and hide the ones that play follow the leader. Heck, I PERFECTED that last year and I am moving away from it - Completely!
Eric
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
628 posts
Jan 14, 2006
5:17 AM
|
Cliff said: So my proposal is that we exchange pedigrees on all the kit birds, to prove mongrel heritage in my kit, and to prove "purebred" heritage in yours.
I think this is about as fair as you could come to proving sides. David
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
629 posts
Jan 14, 2006
6:05 AM
|
Scott.First.I ain't nobodys Huckleberry.Second.Yes I am a Color Breeder and yes I can put a kit of color rollers together.Remember last year you and Kenny kept telling me I had to put them in the air to prove they were any good.Just for the Record all 3 of us flew in the NBRC 11 bird Fall Fly.It looks like I was the one that is recorded as coming out the winner of the 3.I won my Region and placed 10th in the Finals.Neither you or Kenny can say that for 2005.A newbie who was poked at untill he finally entered Competition.A Newbie against 2 well known Competion Guru's.So the Credit has to go to the Rollers.
If Cliff can show Pedigrees showing they are of Color Crosses why can't you show where your rollers are the Pure thing? Sounds simple to me.But the wager is between you and Cliff.I proved what my rollers can do.And by the way Thanks for pushing my buttons and making me enter the Competition World.I got to meet a bunch of fellows I would never have met otherwise.And I really enjoy it.Not because of the Color or who has the best rollers but for the Fellowship in the Sport.Still your friend in the Hobby.David
P.S.You too Kenny.
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
630 posts
Jan 14, 2006
6:25 AM
|
Scott.You said: No Dave I will not go with pedigrees , it is way to open ended.
Why would you say it is to open ended? I don,t follow you on this.
Scott.I was only talking about the 11 bird fly.You were the one that always said the 11 bird fly was a kidee fly.It is not as easy as it sounds is it? LOL.As someone said the 20 bird fly is a Blanket and covers up a lot of confusion that goes on with the kit.I know. I am putting a kit together for the W/C this Spring and it is just a cluster bunch.No one can accurately judge a kit this size.The human eye just can,t take it all in at once.However I am still going to fly for the reasons I stated before.Can you imagine me getting to meet H. B. as the World Judge.It would make my Year.Just like getting to meet Mel Stalzer this past Fall.Worth it all. David
|
motherlodelofts
555 posts
Jan 14, 2006
6:49 AM
|
All right everyone , I deleted my posts and pull back my offer , This thing will do nothing but open up a wound and is already getting messy and pulling others in , I see nothing but a hurtful situation to people coming on , I'm going to swallow my pride and stop it here .
Cliff when you are ready and if you want let me know and me and you will fly, if you want to make it interesting that is fine.
Scott Campbell
|
motherlodelofts
556 posts
Jan 14, 2006
7:15 AM
|
"As someone said the 20 bird fly is a Blanket and covers up a lot of confusion that goes on with the kit.I know. I am putting a kit together for the W/C this Spring and it is just a cluster bunch.No one can accurately judge a kit this size.The human eye just can,t take it all in at once.However I am still going to fly for the reasons I stated before.Can you imagine me getting to meet H. B. as the World Judge.It would make my Year.Just like getting to meet Mel Stalzer this past Fall.Worth it all. David "
Dave whoever told you that was misleading you , a good team of birds doesn't look like confusion, such kits are hard for a judge to judge as a good judge has to try and sort the garbage out of it because they are simply poor kits with many poor qaulity birds.
The better the team the easier it is to judge and is much easier to score than a rocking 11 bird.
As your team matures into a team and if you are choosing the team mates correctly they will start looking like a team and not a cluster bunch , we were talking about birds coming out the wrong way a while back , such birds will only add confusion to the team and its team mates , besides a "good" judge won't score them any way.
Also pull out any birds rollng out the back of the kit even though the front of the kit hasn't broke , they are also screwing up the team and normaly have slight stability issues.
A team of birds is just that Dave , a team, when they break the roll needs to be hard , clean, straght and solid and go together, if they can't roll with qaulity don't put them in there , I will put a short bird in or a stiff that can hit the roll with qaulity over a poor qaulity bird ,in fact I would prefere a non rolling bird over a poor qaulity bird in the team , do NOT put them in your team !!!!.
If you put garbage in the team a good judge "will" peg it,
there isn't much you can hide from a good judge trust me.
Dave good teams are "built" and it starts with good solid hard rolling qaulity birds forming themself into a working machine.
It is them up to you then to tweak the team.
hope this helps
Scott
Last Edited by motherlodelofts on Jan 14, 2006 7:31 AM
|
Shaun
241 posts
Jan 14, 2006
9:23 AM
|
I think we all knew what Scott was getting at right from the beginning. Right through all the colour and cross-breeding debates, over a lengthy period, he's been at pains to point out that in all his travels throughout the US, both as spectator and judge, he's never seen a decent kit of rollers which, due to their colours, were clearly derived as a result of cross-breeding with other types of pigeon (whether this happened yesterday or decades ago). It seems that his challenge was simply that he would put his 'standard' coloured and non-crossed birds against a full kit of such 'non-standard' birds, with their 'odd' colours clearly in evidence for all to see.
Whilst most will, of course, appreciate that 'standard' colours will still eminate from pairs which also produce 'funny colours', surely I'm not the only one to find it peculiar that those who breed for 'colour with performance', have to fall back on standard colours to make up the numbers for this sort of challenge.
Scott's proposal seemed dead simple. It would have been obvious to all involved, whether particpating, judging or viewing, just from the colour of the birds in the 'non-standard' kit, what their origins would have been.
However, the minute it was put forward that 'standard' coloured birds should be accepted into the 'non-standard' kit, a whole jar of worms was opened up and the challenge descended into farce. I don't blame Scott at all for pulling out and to my mind his reputation is still intact.
Shaun
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
631 posts
Jan 14, 2006
9:33 AM
|
Shaun. You said:Scott's proposal seemed dead simple. It would have been obvious to all involved, whether particpating, judging or viewing, just from the colour of the birds in the 'non-standard' kit, what their origins would have been.
If they both had pedigreed proof of what they were flying everyone would have been able to tell.Even the ones that wouldn't have been able to see either kit fly.I would have liked to have seen both sides Pedigrees.LOL. David
|
Shaun
242 posts
Jan 14, 2006
10:12 AM
|
I take the point about pegigrees, David, but it seems to be more of a logistical challenge than the fly itself.
From a spectator's stance, wouldn't it be preferable to see a kit of hard coloured birds versus an opposing kit consisting of vivid colours?
If the bulk of the birds are standard colours, then the comparison between the two fanciers' approach to rollers would be far less evident. And isn't that the point? Scott wants to reassure those who are new to the sport that many haven't cross-bred for pretty colours. He wants to show that he has no qualms in his pigeons looking (to the uninitiated) like commies - that's because he's 100% performance driven. The colour guy, on the other hand, is trying to show that the roller can be much more striking when not restricted by standard colours. He will (probably) acknowledge that his family of rollers, at some point, was cross-bred with other types of pigeon, in order to obtain those 'non-standard' colours. However, he will maintain that the performance of his family of rollers has not suffered as a consequence. Indeed, he might say it has actually improved performance, when compared to that of the more traditional Birmingham Roller.
So, with this in mind, one would imagine that the guy who's taken the colour-breeding route, would wish to show the world just what can be achieved. Even the most unbiased observer would surely wish to see Scott's opponent putting on a 'Village People' spectacle for all to admire - beauty and the beast, as it were.
Shaun
|
birdman
111 posts
Jan 14, 2006
10:25 AM
|
Shaun, Did I miss something?
The way I read Cliff's post was that he would fly an 11 bird kit of 'colored' birds now and fly a kit of 'colored' birds in 2007. Not birds with color in their background, but actual birds of color in both kits.
Maybe there could be a compromise and each would agree to fly a 16 bird kit. Scott's would be 'pure' and Cliff's would show 'color'.
|
Gregg
2 posts
Jan 14, 2006
10:30 AM
|
Shaun,
Consider dominant vs recessive.
Consider blue checks vs blue bars.
Mate two blue checks that each carry bar. One in four will be blue bar phenotype. Two will be blue check carrying bar. One will be double blue check. Thus only one true blue bar out of four produced. These are statistical probabilities that prove themselves out over the long haul.
Substitute reduced for the bar in the above example. When dealing with recessive genes, this is the way it works. Now there will be a better ratio when you start to consider the dominant genes such as indigo and dominant opal. One dominant opal or indigo check in theory mated to a normal blue check will produce fifty percent of the dominant color gene.
To require the color loft to produce a solid "color" kit would be the same as requiring the normal color(?)loft to produce a kit of nothing but bars. Simple if his loft is built on bars, but if it has a large number of checks in it then he would face the same challenge as the color loft.
I don't want to sound like a smug jerk, but until you seriously study the genetics involved and understand same, you will not fully comprehend what I am saying. I understand that as it took me many years to digest it all.
But it has made for a much more informed pigeon breeder and yes, a better roller breeder.
I will not sit here and tell you that it is easier, it is not. It is another challenge to breed the color genes for performance. I for one really believe a lot of what the purist camp preaches, especially for the novices to this hobby. Too many are into the colors before they understand what the colors are when they should be trying to find out what the rollers are all about. If you are going to try to do both, then you had better get your nose to the grindstone and spin it furiously. You have five years ahead of you before you will even see the light at the end of the tunnel, and that is only if you are sharp enough to realize what you are up against and savy enough to put the required energies into the mental processes.
Gregg.
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
634 posts
Jan 14, 2006
10:34 AM
|
Shaun.It is useless to continue about what would have been had the Fly took place.The wager was withdrawn by Scott.But suppose the fly had taken place and the Color Rollers had won.What would it prove?That the Color Rollers could roll with the best Pure BR's.They already have.They all have the same gene for rolling. One is no better than the other.I remember what Pensom wrote one time.That the roll had been fixed in the rollers a long time ago and it could not be perfected upon.David
|
highroller
93 posts
Jan 14, 2006
10:39 AM
|
Scott,
I respect your decision to pull the offer. A fly like this, while very entertaining could also serve to divide the hobby/sport even more and leave some with hard feelings. Competiton flys are all about getting together with other roller nuts and having fun and I think you understand that very well. If you and Cliff want to get together on your own as you said, that would probably be a good way to go. I don't think you are chicken as some might suppose, but a very wise person. I respect your family of birds and your desire to keep them "pure". I hope through all this you can begin to understand and respect the "color" birds that roll with quality and style as well.
Dan
|
Shaun
244 posts
Jan 14, 2006
11:03 AM
|
OK, Russ first, then Gregg, then David.
Russ, yes, I just saw the part you mention. I was thinking in more general terms, rather than it just being about Cliff having to carry the torch. I was just thinking aloud from the prospective spectator's point of view.
Gregg, I'm sure the whole colour genetics thing is indeed a science, but it's unlikely I'll ever look too deeply into it, as it doesn't interest me. I have a loft full of what I consider to be very pretty birds, all based on standard colours which exist now as they did a long time ago. I'm still gobsmacked by the myriad of patterns which can result from those colours, so I'm not in need of anything more. However, I do take your point and perhaps it's one which hasn't been raised very often. It seems you're saying that it's all well and good producing a 'non-standard' colour, but to go on producing it, is no easy matter. The breeder will, in all likelihood, produce more standard colours than non-standard, even when trying hard for the former. If that's the case, then I can see the practical issue of trying to put a kit together of all colour birds. But, are there really that few of them about - there do seem to be many out there promoting coloured birds?
David, I think most would agree that the roll couldn't be improved upon. The debate is whether colour breeding via crosses with other pigeons, has or has not taken the roller backwards, if you pardon the pun.
As for the roll gene being the same, I can't agree with that. Rollers can produce everything from birds which don't roll, right through to rolldowns.
Shaun
|
Gregg
3 posts
Jan 14, 2006
11:12 AM
|
Dave,
Scott makes a valid point. The higher the quality the team, the easier they are to judge. A superior team will give you consistently above average quality, depth and numbers. Once they establish what they are doing in the judges mind, the judge then only has to count and keep an eye on the consistency of the already displayed quality and depth. One of the easiest kits that I ever had to judge was Randy Steepletons a couple of years ago. They stayed low and they stayed consistent with good depth and above average velocity. It was a real pleasure and took quite a bit of the work out of it for me.
Gregg.
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
636 posts
Jan 14, 2006
11:16 AM
|
Shaun. You said:David, I think most would agree that the roll couldn't be improved upon. The debate is whether colour breeding via crosses with other pigeons, has or has not taken the roller backwards, if you pardon the pun.
I feel that what Most of what we (that work with color) are doing is taking the roller to a whole new level.And that is Performance with Color.
I am not talking about working with color to sell rollers.
The roll gene is still the same.Just some rollers can,t and don't handle it the same. David
|
Phantom1
94 posts
Jan 14, 2006
11:30 AM
|
Hey Shaun,
I haven't caught up on everything posted just yet, but wanted to addres "surely I'm not the only one to find it peculiar that those who breed for 'colour with performance', have to fall back on standard colours to make up the numbers for this sort of challenge."
This is not something that I expect the straight preformance driven individual to understand. Genetics are not something of their concern. However, I can explain in simple terms a response to your dilemma.
ALL, ALL, ALL - 100% - of ALL Modifiers, Factors, Expressions, etc. are PUT onto what would be considered a HARD Colored bird (Ash Red, Blue, Brown). These are all dominant traits that even the most niave person to the concept of genetics would understand. That being said, we have Recessive Genes, Dominant Genes, and Partial Dominant Genes. Ther are genes that can be carried, and those that can be expressed. When mating best to best and one of the birds is of "rare color" and the other is not, it is completely possible, and probably favored, that a Hard Color would be produced in the process.
Yours in the hobby,
Eric
|
Gregg
4 posts
Jan 14, 2006
11:30 AM
|
Shaun,
I'm going to get B'slapped for saying this. I'll probably end up out on an island all by myself. There is a difference between "promotion" and "excellence." Perfection is not within the realm of this world. Striving for excellence with exceptionally high standards is where it is all at.
Reference the genetics part. Let me encourage you to seek out Joe Quinn's "The Pigeon Breeder's Notebook: An Introduction to Pigeon Science." Here is my reasoning: It is really simple. To be the best that you can on any given subject is to know everything that you possibly can about that subject. You might not think during a high school physics class that any of this is important, until later in life while you are welding a pipe together in a ten foot ditch, you look up at the angle of the dirt walls and realize just how dang unsafe the situation is and exit same. I know you think that is an absurd example, but it is a true one, those walls did collapse. Happened to a friend of mine. It is simply knowing everything that you can about something. In the long run you will appreciate that knowledge.
Gregg.
|
Shaun
245 posts
Jan 14, 2006
12:00 PM
|
Eric, I get the gist of what you're saying and I could see where Cliff was coming from with his claim to standard birds being included in a 'non-standard' colour kit. However, it does seem strange that with the number of people advocating colour breeding - as David says, "taking rollers to a whole new level" - well, someone like me, not really interested in such matters, might well wonder how a performance kit of such birds can't be conjured up relatively easily. With 2007 having to be pencilled in....well, I'm somewhat puzzled.
Greg, I'm with you on the whole accumulation of knowledge thing; that for me is a given with whatever it is I'm into. Right now I'm studying general pigeon genetics (as opposed to colour genetics) and have added to my vocabulary (and understood) such big words as homozygous, heterozygous, allelomorph and epistasis. I've even learned how to press the relevant parts of a cock pigeon in order to obtain semen, should I wish to dabble in artificial insemination (apparently, practising on garden birds is the thing to do).
But, there is only so much time for any man to devote to his roller hobby. Within the timeframe I have and the usual work and family commitments, I'm naturally going to focus on the aspects of the sport which I feel will benefit me the most. At this point, colour genetics is unimportant to me. Indeed, colour genetics is unimportant to England's most prolific and consistent roller flyers. I've yet to have a conversation with any of them which even touched on the subject of colour - other than a rudimentary description of a particular bird.
Such is the difference between our two countries.
Shaun
|
fhtfire
293 posts
Jan 14, 2006
12:34 PM
|
shaun,
I agree with you. The birds in the color kit should be of vivid or exotic colors...not normal colors from a pedigree saying the parents are vivid colors. Pedigrees are a crock....they are only as honest as the person making them....Hold on...I could build you a pedigree right now... David, would like some 514 in it....how about some Mason blood and then some 904 ruby roller blood....Pedigrees do not mean a thing!!!! A pedigree can be manipulated!!! With a stroke of a pen or a punch of a key I could change a birds mother and father and nobody would know unless you see the egg come out of the hen with your own eyes....A Lace Ice barless brown yellow SOB right in front of your eyes tells you it has the mongral blood. So I agree with you Shaun....every bird in the kit should be a vivid, exotic color. I can see why Scott pulled it.....I mean come on..if you had half the kit with blue checks, blue bars and recessive reds and someone is saying that the mother and father are lace milky whatever...you are taking somwones word.....who knows if they have the vivid colour...but they may in the back ground..but obviously the rr bird came out with the good side of the gene pool....if it is a lace ice whatever...then that is for sure carrying the mongal gene without a doubt...you can see it with your own eyes.... It was pretty clear to me....put a kit of color birds together...(color you see with your own eyes) and fly against scotts kit. That simple....Shaun...I saw what you saw man....
rock and ROLL
Paul
|
Alan Bliven
317 posts
Jan 14, 2006
12:38 PM
|
The motive of those that hate rare colored birds is envy and not for the protection of the breed as they claim. Too bad it eats them up.
----------
Alan
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
637 posts
Jan 14, 2006
12:50 PM
|
Paul.My point exactly.Who has any right to say their rollers are the real deal and only their birds can be traced back to be Pure Birmingham Rollers.No one living today can make this Claim.
So what you are saying now is unless it shows the Color it is a Rare Color Crossbred Mongrel and anything else is accepted as a Birmingham Roller? David
|
motherlodelofts
557 posts
Jan 14, 2006
1:24 PM
|
Just to clear things up here on why I pulled, everyone of you are wrong other than Dan (Highroller), he understood and hit the nail on the head.
What really opened my eye's was this morning where I could see this could be heading towards one of the guys here and him ending up in an embarrasing spot, that led me looking at the whole picture and the potential damage that it could cause and I could see this as being nothing but detrimental and serving as nothing positive.
I can get wrapped up in this garbage far more than I should as some can here and at times I have to remind myself that they are just frigging pigeons , this morning I did that.
trust me when I tell you that it wasn't the birds as I have a fine established team of birds that can compete with any, nor was it the money, I have plenty of money , when I bailed on this I knew full well what was coming which is why I didn't react on some of the comments here even though some got cocky.
I feel what I did was right and what was best and I will hold my ground on this decision.
The major flys will determine where these birds are heading and what works and what doesn't , and even then it is about what we enjoy and is what is even more important.
Scott Campbell
Last Edited by motherlodelofts on Jan 14, 2006 1:35 PM
|
Phantom1
96 posts
Jan 14, 2006
1:32 PM
|
Shuan,
"With 2007 having to be pencilled in....well, I'm somewhat puzzled."
It's simply because we don't breed for color, rather the colors are inherint in our families and are used as such not to get more of the same, rather to move forward with performance. The genes will be there to reproduce the color at anytime we chose. But this is not the focus. I could have very easily put enough pairs together last year to produce 20+ Barless in a variety of colors as well as Indigo and Opal combinations, but I did not. I was mating birds together based on the performance factor.
Does this help clarify?
Eric
|
Shaun
248 posts
Jan 14, 2006
2:02 PM
|
Yes, Eric, it helps explain your own perspective, but not necessarily that of others. Just above you there, David said "I feel that what Most of what we (that work with color) are doing is taking the roller to a whole new level. And that is Performance with Color".
Now, that doesn't sound to me like all you guys trying to keep the funny colours at bay, if I can put it that way. It still sounds like the pursuit of colour remains a firm and ongoing objective for many.
But, I have learned a bit today about the way the colour thing works, in terms of the relationship between the hard colours and funny colours within the same loft, and I have found that interesting. Wouldn't dream of doing it myself, you understand, but I suppose it's no worse than what I've been reading about - practising the jerking-off of garden birds for when you're ready to artificially inseminate your rollers.
Shaun
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
638 posts
Jan 14, 2006
2:15 PM
|
Shaun.I don't try to keep the Colors at Bay. I breed for it.But always with performance first.How hard is that to understand.If I have an Opal Cock that can roll top quality and I have a Blue Check hen that can do the same why wouldn't I put them together to get Opal Check.Or one of my newest that I am working with.Pencil.Very pretty and can roll too.Hope to have one or 2 in my kit for the NBRC Fall Fly.Just sit back and watch what these pretty rollers will do in many of the Lofts in the next 5 years.LOL. David
|
Gregg
5 posts
Jan 14, 2006
3:34 PM
|
Scott,
"I can get wrapped up in this garbage far more than I should as some can here and at times I have to remind myself that they are just frigging pigeons , this morning I did that."
"then it is about what we enjoy and is what is even more important."
Scott Campbell
I am going to give you credit for the above lines. And while I am not sure that what was happening was going to be in any way detrimental to another, I appreciate your concern. The people will always be more important than the birds. We all tend to get wrapped up in these little mental exercises, self included, and as long as you maintain perspective, that is fine. I love and cherish my birds and hobby but also realize they are just frigging pigeons.
But you know and I know that we will wander down this path again. It was good seeing your name on here. I haven't seen you on Earl's in a while. Thought you had dropped off the edge of the left coast, square world right?
About all of that extra money.....Smile.
Take Care,
Gregg.
|
merced guy
41 posts
Jan 14, 2006
4:45 PM
|
Gentlemens, I am in a way sorry to have stirr up this sort of stuff, but I fiqure it wasnt the first time, and this has been a long debate from post to post in the past. what is a true Birmingham roller and a birmingham roller that has nice colors? The question is can the performance separate the two. well, guess we'll find out when you guys do this fly. Please do it, as everyone in the hobby is so drawn into to it like a moth to a flame, we need this challenge to happen, everyone is anticipating this great event if I read the posts correctly. I am not going to side with anyone just yet,but more importantly, I see something grandeous from all of this. Plus it's going to be educational for all the hobbiest. This event if it happens is going to have historical significance in the Birmingham roller realm. Scott and Cliff you two will make history!!!!!just do it.
thong
|
knaylor
38 posts
Jan 14, 2006
5:59 PM
|
Scott, good post. Anyone that really knows you knows that you are a class act.
Now about rollers that are showing rare color. I have yet to see or even hear of someone doing very well in the finals of any major fly with a full team(20) of colored birds. I also believe that it is funny that a person can put a pair of birds together to make a certain color and still say that they have performance first. Kevin
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
639 posts
Jan 14, 2006
6:53 PM
|
Kevin.Its really not that hard to understand.Which came first the Chicken or the egg?Which came first the Roll or the Color? Believe it or don,t believe it.Rollers with Color can roll with the best of any Rollers out there.David
|
Ballrollers
232 posts
Jan 14, 2006
7:22 PM
|
Gentlemen,
Let's not think less of Scott for this retraction of his boast. After all, who among us is not proud of his birds' performance capabilities? Who among us has not mis-spoken at one time or another? I know that Scott has fine birds. He has a fine fly record to prove his birds can perform and that he knows how to manage them. I hope, however, that he has learned that the James Turner family of rollers, possessing a range of color modifiers, are equally capable of performing to standard, and equally accomplished in competition. We who have chosen to breed them for performance are equally proud of these birds and their performance.I do not feel the need to join Scott and Kenny in their history of negative attacks on another man's birds that have never been seen in the air, purely on the basis of their pedigree, their heritage, or their color.
I am, however suspicious of the motive for withdrawing. Personally, I was having great fun with it, and I saw only more fun expressed by the men on the list.hehehe There was great potential for the hobby and the organizations to possibly benefit from the match, as was expressed by many. Certainly things have gotten much bloodier in the past with the same individuals involved, yet I didn't see this humanitarian concern for the possibility of having a negative impact on anybody, regardless of the issue! In posts to me and other men breeding this family, I have never in two years, seen you concerned about my feelings or anyone else's feelings when you are on the attack. So this new kinder, gentler, Scott is something new to us.
I am, particularly,blown away by the reversals of position and opinion, that we saw from the "purist" side, when it was convenient for you, in order to support your position on the groundrules you wanted for the fly-off. All of a sudden pedigrees are not adequate to prove heritage! Rollers bred from rollers with "mongrel" blood that did not show a rare color all of a sudden were not considered "mongrel" enough to fly as "mongrels"!!Your inconsistency; which goes back on the very heart of the criticisms you have expressed in all your prior arguments and debates on this topic; (that being; that "mongrel" blood has a serious negative impact on performance, or "mongrels" can't compete with purebreds) calls into serious question, the validity of your entire position in this debate, AND QUALIFIES YOU FOR A BULLSHIT CALL IF WE EVER HEAR IT AGAIN!. The mere fact that you have any reservations whatsover, conveys to the reader the fact that, deep inside, you have your own doubts and reservations about the validity of your position with regard to the performance of this family of birds; to say nothing of the impropriety of the antagonism that you have heaped upon the hearts and minds of the men who breed rollers with color modifiers, all for the sake of a position that you , yourself so quickly walk away from when the chips are down. If you sincerely believed in it, you couldn't care less what color they were, as long as the "mongrel" blood could be proved by pedigree. Either "mongrel" blood DOES HAVE a serious negative impact on performance, in which case they should have qualified, or it DOES NOT for all the birds in the family, only the rare-colored birds in your mind, which could only have been proven with only rare-color birdsin the fly. You don't get to have it both ways depending upon the circumstances in which you find yourself. As I posted, I was, and am, perfectly happy, and ready, and able to field an 11-bird kit of rare-colors to fly against your 11-bird "purebreds" tomorrow, if your game, for money, for pride, or for silence on the color issue on the lists, as was suggested hehehe. I need another breeding season to meet the criteria you have established for rare-color phenotypes only, just as you would need another season had I stipulated only certain colors. MONGREL BLOOD or MONGREL FEATHERS? Which is it that you are so concerned about impacting the breed so negativley?
Your unwillingness to compromise , in order to level the playing field, with regard to flying an 11-bird and a 20-bird, with regard to the mongrel blood vs. feathers, with regard to the fly rules, all communicates your reservations about a true head-to-head grudge match except on your own terms. We have to ask ourselves why you feel the need to hedge your bet, so, if you are so confident in the position and philosophy that you preach so adamantly! heheheheh Throughout the history of the hobby we have seen, unfortunately, that a man's loft does not have to necessarily show rare colors to be falsely labeled. Performance always speaks the loudest truth. The score sheet does not lie as people do. Master points are earned; scores are settled, and credibility gained and lost, best, through open and fair competitions. Let the birds speak for themselves.
YITS
Cliff
Myth-Masher
|
dave
57 posts
Jan 14, 2006
10:06 PM
|
I'm just a newbie but if we are all so concern about the birmingham roller and their performance then why can't you be as passionate trying to recruit new members as you are debating this old topic. Shoot, there will always be people with different opinions to everything. You will have people to the left, some to the middle, and some to the right. I thought it was amusing at first but now it is just getting ridiculous. Everybody should just lick their wounds and lets move on.
|
knaylor
39 posts
Jan 14, 2006
10:09 PM
|
David, I asked for proof that it has been done. You just gave me your opinion.
Cliff, when Scott posted the challenge who was the one that wanted to change the rules of a fly. I did not see Scott ask to flag up birds if they came down too early. He wanted W/C rules. Why the 11 bird fly?? I know why Scott dropped the challenge and it is not of any fear at all!!!!!!! Also have you ever seen the show "Myth Busters" you should watch it and see how myths are really busted. Its not by talking about it.
Last Edited by knaylor on Jan 14, 2006 10:11 PM
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
640 posts
Jan 15, 2006
3:38 AM
|
Kevin. You said:David, I asked for proof that it has been done. You just gave me your opinion.
In the post I answered you said:I also believe that it is funny that a person can put a pair of birds together to make a certain color and still say that they have performance first. Kevin
Not my opinion just a fact.By the way what family of rollers do you work with and how long have you been working with them? David
|
knaylor
41 posts
Jan 15, 2006
6:09 AM
|
David, what did you answer??? I asked what kit of all color birds showing color have done well in a major fly?? You said that color birds can roll with the best of them. The only fact is that you can only have one Master, Color?? or Roll??
My family of birds bo back to KGB and Joe Kiser. Kevin
|
Mongrel Lofts
107 posts
Jan 15, 2006
4:55 PM
|
Guys,
Like always a whole lot of something about nothing when it comes to the topic about crossing the Birmingham roller on other breeds for color. The challenge was never excepted or picked up. Scott made a challenge to fly against a kit of colored birds. Cliff Changed the challenge and then blames Scott for backing out.. You can't really back out of a challenge, that was never excepted in the first place .
We already have the two major fly's were guys can fly whatever kind and color of roller they would like to put in a kit box. Guy's who breed Mongrel colored rollers can put a few birds of color in with a normal colored kit and give the colored rollers credit for how good the kit is.. That was not Scott's challenge!! It would make no sense for Scott to make a challenge to color Breeders, that is already out there and being flown.. Scott's challenge was about a full kit of color.. A full kit, an 11 bird kit is 9 birds short of a grown up kit! LOL
Guys, it makes no sense at all to say color birds are just as good as the Birmingham roller and we are going to fly blue checks, blacks and red checks to prove just how good these Milky, toy stencil, opal, almonds are!! This is Clearly BULL SHIT!!
So men, the challenge was never excepted that Scott offered.. Scott withdrew, because like all things that have to do with color breeders.. The facts get clouded, twisted and covered up.. Scott's Challenge never changed, but the guys claiming to except it, changed everything he challenged.. They want to fly normal colored rollers to prove how good the Mongrel cross bred for colors are. They want to fly 11 birds and be able to flag them up if they land early.
You know a kit of color birds does not mean a blue check that has a Mongrel colored relative.. This too they have tried to change in this challenge. The Mongrel color, pattern, or factor means the bird is further away from the Birmingham roller and that is the reason a full kit of Mongrel colored birds will always have a tuff time competing. Breeding for color, means breeding away from the Birmingham roller.. Why do you think even the guys that fly and breed the colored birds, have 75% or more normal colored rollers in their winning kits? The birds that come most like the Birmingham roller are the ones even from the cross breeds, that tend to roll best.. At least in MUCH higher Percentages..
You will never prove how good the Mongrel colored rollers are, by flying Birmingham roller colored pigeons. Scott's challenge was never excepted and the worms are still in the apple for you Mongrel breeders.. Mongrel Lofts
|
highroller
95 posts
Jan 15, 2006
5:58 PM
|
KGB
Please don't let your passion for the pure colors blind you to the genetic facts and to the bigger picture here.
You say "Guys, it makes no sense at all to say color birds are just as good as the Birmingham roller and we are going to fly blue checks, blacks and red checks to prove just how good these Milky, toy stencil, opal, almonds are!! This is Clearly BULL SHIT!!"
But KGB, it is a fact that blue checks, blacks, and red checks are produced from milky, toy stencil, opal, and almonds and do carry the genes of those color modified parents so whether they look like mom and dad or not they are what you personally call mongrelized.
A few of you guys are passionately arguing that once a bird or family has been crossed with one of these colored rollers it is hopelessly doomed to be forever impure and inferior.
Just step back and look at the bigger picture here...sure Scott challenged for a whole kit of "colors" but a mongrel is a mongrel by it's genes, not just it's appearance. If these black, blue and red birds bred from "color" are not fit to be called BRs because they have "color" in their background then by your own beliefs they can only be mongrels and classed with their nestmates showing "color".
So even though the challenge was all color birds the bigger picture based on genetic fact and your own beliefs must include all birds produced from color.
Scott wisely withdrew the challenge and it seems he is mostly respected for it. So let's quit beating a dead horse and be open to learning and seeing a part of the picture we hadn't recognized before. I am not suggesting that you embrace color rollers but I do hope you will realize that great rolling birds bred from color rollers do exist and that you can understand the reasons that even though they carry the same genes not all of them will look like mom and dad.
Passion is a good thing but can also blind us if we are not careful. Don't lose your passion, but don't go blind either.
Dan
|
Ballrollers
233 posts
Jan 15, 2006
8:07 PM
|
KGB, I am not sure why I even dignify that abortion of human communication with a response. The ignorance and stupidity it represents is, truly, unbecoming of ANY human being. It was an interesting tactic for you and Scott. Have Scott delete his boast and all his posts about it when he realized that his mouth had written a check that his birds might not be able to cash. And then to have you come in, after the fact, and attempt to lie, twist and distort the facts in the matter. You ought to know better than to try that with me, and I know that the men who have read this thread from the beginning can see through your pitiful attempt to rally your cause. Sorry, mac. You have failed again.
I accepted Scott's challenge completely. "Put a full kit of so-called rare-colored mongrels together and I will fly against that kit for $5000." Because it is a large amount of money, we were in the process of defining what he meant, and how to define the exact terms of the boast.
First was "full kit". The NBRC recognizes two classes of kits in competition; a 20-bird and an 11-bird. I suggested we fly both. Only an idiot could twist this into "changing the challenge", when it was not specified to begin with. Next came the settling of the issue of exactly what he meant by "so-called rare-colored mongrels" in his challenge. I had no idea that his and your knowledge of basic genetics was so limited that you could not comprehend that an indigo ash red looks exactly like a standard color ash red, though one be a full "rare-color" and one a "pure-bred". I am very pleased that the two of you have expanded your minds towards the guys who breed rollers with color modifiers, as you expressed in your statement,"....a kit of color birds does not mean a blue check that has mongrel-colored relative". Though it defies all sense of logic and elementary genetics, we accept your strange, yet convenient, notion that you do not consider any roller of standard color to be a "mongrel rare-colored roller" even though it was breed from parents that were both rare-colors of "mongrel" blood. That was an important distinction to make. I STILL accepted the challenge, even on that basis, to fly an 11-bird rare-colored kit "tomorrow", and a 20-bird kit fly to be scheduled in the spring of '07. So by what defect of human intellect do you see this as not accepting the challenge, KGB? The only reason to include all birds bred from rare-colors was to expedite the fly and do it this spring. You also distorted my statement that it was allright with me to flag up an early lander, not because that is what I wanted, necessarily, but because I did not want to hear excuses like, "the purebreds really outscored the color birds. They just lost because of an early lander." That offer was declined, end of story.
Finally, I want to address your assinine assertion in the form of a question, "Why do you think the guys that fly and breed the color birds have 75% or more normal colored birds?" As has been previously posted by other experts and again, conveniently ignored by you, it is simple Mendelian gentics. Go look it up and read about it and you will understand it better. I am not going to waste my time explaining such elementary basic percentages to you.
I recognize that this is killing you, Kenny and Scott. We, who breed rollers with color modifiers are no longer a small voice in the darkness. Performance flyers of Birmingham Rollers that have a family of birds that happens to contain color factors have gained a serious foothold, in the hobby and in the arena of competition, and many are showing that their birds can perform with any other Birmingham Roller family. For the life of me, I cannot understand why you cannot celebrate that fact rather than damin' and hellin' it.
It's unfortunate that Scott declined. What started out as a fun and exciting opportunity to let the birds tell the story, has now been turned into something much more ugly. By doing so he created much more diversity in the sport than had he remained true to his word and his boasting and let the birds do the talking. Instead, now he has his cronies twisting and distorting what occured and what was intended, as usual, in order to support their agenda. It represents a disusting and revulsive aspect of some of the men in the hobby. It is no wonder that this crap contributes to the loss of more roller men from the sport than hawks, disease, or even death.
Disgusted,
Cliff
|
Ballrollers
234 posts
Jan 15, 2006
8:30 PM
|
Kevin N.,
Ask yourself how many patterns and factors you have in your breeding pairs. Now go look in your "A" team. Is that entire kit made up of only one pattern or factor? Or is there a little of everything that is in your breeding pairs, represented in that kit? Same difference if you have rare colors in your breeding pairs. You will get some non-rare or standard colors, some rare colors that many could not identify as rare colors, and some easily-recogizeable rare colors. The quality performance will show up in all of the examples above in certain percentages. Good spinners are few and far between. Good rare-colored spinners are even fewer, simply because of percentages. Is that so hard to comprehend? YITS Cliff
|
Ballrollers
235 posts
Jan 15, 2006
9:01 PM
|
Shaun,
You made reference to the fact that many roller fanciers in the U.S. seem to have rollers with rare colors. Yes, that seems to be true in many cases, but I would like to share with you, a few observations:
1. If the rollers from families with rare-colors did not perform with quality, the men who fly them, like Joe Bob, Brian McCormick, Alex Hamilton, Jay Yandle, Gregg Sale, David Strait, Bob McGuan, Alan Bliven, Eric, Dan, and myself (just to name a few), would not breed and fly them.
2. No one that I know has ever crossed a non-roller pigeon breed with their performing rollers, and incorporated the progeny into their flying kits or their breeding program. Maybe there are a few isolated men who show pigeons and are outside the maninstream of the hobby who do so, but not the competition flyers or other men who are committed to performance.
3. The men who compete with families of rollers that contain rare colors are not color breeders. We are performance breeders. We fly our birds, compete, and some even win-locally, regionally, nationally and internationally, just like any other roller man, but with with families of birds that contain Birmingham Rollers with rare color genes in their blood and feathers.
Do you prefer coffee or tea, Shaun? Crickett or baseball? Rugby or football? It is a personal choice....not a crime.
YITS Cliff
|
motherlodelofts
559 posts
Jan 15, 2006
9:28 PM
|
Well I had my reasons and motives for doing what I did which I tried to do tactfully ,some were gentlemen about it and some were down right pricks , Cliff was his usual.
Sure I knew it would get a little bumpy and some a little cocky , but some of you clowns took it down a path that I cannot or will not ignore and it seems that all I did was create a feeding frenzy that went beyond even this fly , all based around something that I guess that you couldn't understand.
No Cliff Kenny had absolutly nothing to do with any of my decisions.
Here was my challenge " I will fly any rare color mongrel kit for five grand " that offer is back on the table, nor do I give a rats ass where they come from as long as they are a kit of rare color birds , other breeds were crossed in for one purpose and one purpose only and that was for color , you guys want to color breed for particular colors and those birds are leaning towards the cross , period , and I say that a good team of rare color birds cannot be put together , over and over again some of you have bragged about "rare" colored birds doing this and doing that.
Color breeding and color breeders evolves around on thing "Color" surely a team of rare color birds can't be that hard to put together without a smoke screen , Dave breeds what 400 birds a year ? and professes that you can breed for color and roll and that he has 20 good "rare" colored birds, there is your Huckleberry Cliff.
But it doesn't seem like you want to pinch birds from color breeders such as Dave.
Cliff I don't care where you get these "rare" color birds from , obviously it can't be done out of one loft so collect them up , looks like Dave has his game cap on also !.
Never once have I boasted about my birds , never , I have always let my birds talk for themselves, besides I have the experience to know that the best of teams can make you look like a fool on any given day.
What sets me off ? The non stop bragging of these so called "rare" color birds , you guys don't brag about normal color birds that may or may not have it in the background, you brag about how good "rare" color birds are and nothing else , well here is your chance to prove that these so called rare color birds have what it takes under the fly rules that sets the standard that being the world cup rules.
And no I don't want to here about some normal color birds that may or may not have it in the background nor do I trust you anyway.
Also my money says that when you color breed for the rare colors that you are following the cross and that is why no one person can field a good team of such birds.
So Cliff you have the entire world to pull in a team of rare colored birds, surely that must be possible !!!
Like I said my offer is back on the table and it is as simple as it gets
And I will fly against that team of rare colored birds for five grand , with the rules that sets the standard that being world cup rules , these kits will be flown at your loft on your end and at my loft on my end , have Jay help you , so you want my five grand ? take it !!!
Don't bother wasting my time with concessions and doing the normal smoke screening trying to cover up the short comings of rare colored birds , this is it , a kit of rare colored birds anyway you can muster them up (beg, borrow ,steal them, breed them I don't care) flying by the rules of the most prestigious fly in the world , if you don't think those birds can handle that don't waste my time .
Scott Campbell
Last Edited by motherlodelofts on Jan 15, 2006 10:25 PM
|
motherlodelofts
560 posts
Jan 15, 2006
9:46 PM
|
Re:purist versus "color"
« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2006, 06:22:49 PM »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess I see Scott moving away as letting his mouth write a check his birds wouldn't cash. He has a history of being less than sporting, enough said.
Jim
Lets here a little bit about that history Jim ,Also my birds have done their own talking more that once , when was the last time "you" put a kit up with a judge under them ?
Scott campbell
Last Edited by motherlodelofts on Jan 15, 2006 11:01 PM
|
fhtfire
298 posts
Jan 15, 2006
9:54 PM
|
BAM!!!!
PUT IT IN THE BOOK AND SEND HIM TO THE LINE!!!!!!
ROCK AND FREAK'N ROLL!!
Man, I knew Cliffs last post would be like poking a tiger in a cage with a sharp stick!!
I hope this gets excepted....the most prestgious fly...the World Cup..(20bird kit)...Does SouthWest fly back east...LOL!!
|
JWM65
1 post
Jan 15, 2006
10:27 PM
|
Clif,
Scott let you off the hook, but you wouldn't let it go. You actually thought Scott was scared to fly against you, that's like pee-wee herman calling out Mike Tyson.
Clif do you thing there's a reason Scott withdrew his challenge? You wanted to do away with the DQ if a bird lands early, you wanted to fly birds of color that didn't show color, then you wanted to know if you could get birds from your buddies ect,ect..Good news, I just talked to Scott, he's going to withdraw his withdraw. How about that Clif? and he doesn't care who or where you get the birds your going to fly. Hopefuly, after Scotts kit kicks your kits a--, and thry will, mabe you'll gather up all your Birmingham trumpters, and find your way back to the darkness.
JWM65
|
Ballrollers
236 posts
Jan 15, 2006
10:36 PM
|
Kevin Naylor,
Regarding the reasoning behind my choice of fly rules in my wager with Scott, when did the overwhelming majority of the World Cup flyers first gain knowledge of the fact that the World Cup fly rules had been changed? Was it when the World Cup RDs told the LADs and the LADs told the World Cup flyers? Or was it months after the rules were changed, and the results were printed in the World Cup 2003 bulletin? I strongly suggest that 80% or better, of the World Cup flyers had no knowledge of the proposed changes, nor the fact that they had any input into the decision, until AFTER all was said and done. How can anyone consider this fair? Oh, I see. All the World Cup RDs that voted think what they did was fair. But neither I nor the flyers in my region got a vote. My RD did not get to vote. Nor did the flyers and RDs in several other regions.
However, as a party in the wager, I WAS entitled to negotiate the fly rules by which we would fly. I believe the NBRC fly rules were a much better choice. Everyone has had an opportunity to vote on the NBRC fly rules; not just a select few. Not so for the World Cup rules. So the NBRC rules are fairer in my mind. That said, I am not criticising in any way, the hard work the World Cup RDs put in to coordinate and run the World Cup Fly. YITS Cliff
|
motherlodelofts
561 posts
Jan 15, 2006
10:44 PM
|
Quit your bullshit , you going to fly or not ?
|
knaylor
43 posts
Jan 15, 2006
11:28 PM
|
Cliff, all i asked was a simple question that STILL has not been answered because it has not happened. Also what does the W/C RD's have to do with the challenge between you and Scott. Personally I think you were a fool for not letting it go when he withdrew his challenge. Good luck buddy... LOL Kevin
|
Shaun
249 posts
Jan 16, 2006
3:58 AM
|
Cliff, I'm not sure what you're getting at regarding my observatons regarding colour breeding. I think I've been pretty benign, given what I really feel about it. I don't much get involved because I feel it's not my battle; I'm from England. The colour-breeding topic doesn't exist. We still have 'barn pigeons', just like we did back in Pensom's time.
My posts have mainly been ones of curiosity. Firstly - and I think this has now been reiterated elsewhere - whilst acknowledging that there's bound to be standard colours among the non-standard, even when deliberating aiming for the latter, I couldn't see how it was seemingly so difficult to gather together enough, strikingly coloured birds (surely, the whole reason for the colour breeding in the first place) to form a comp kit.
But, Cliff, as you've drawn me out somewhat, I'll make a few observations. The first is that you and others seem to present a united front. You mention names like Eric and David, yet in the space of a few minutes, their respective posts were clearly not of the same approach when it comes to colour breeding. Forgive the British U in colour; I forgive you lot for losing it somewhere along the line (grin).
Eric says: "...we don't breed for color, rather the colors are inherint in our families and are used as such not to get more of the same, rather to move forward with performance".
David says: "I don't try to keep the Colors at Bay. I breed for it".
Both guys obviously wanting performance but very different on the subject of colour.
So, on my part, I remain confused by your collective stance.
Whilst I witter on, I should then tell you that colour breeders quoting from Pensom gets my goat. Cliff, you, as an example, recently wrote this:
"In Pensom's writings, he makes note of the positive role that "the gayly colored birds" add to the fancy, by getting more folks interested in these pigeons".
What you fail to mention is that Pensom, at the time, was referring to the standard colour set within the Birmingham Roller, and not those which were achieved later by crossing with other pigeons.
What you and others also fail to quote from the same Pensom book is this:
"In Rollers we also have a color problem, for while all colors and patterns roll perfectly we cannot breed for correct spinning and color at the same time. If we continue to breed for color we lose the finer qualities of the spin..."
I quote further from Mr. Pensom: "Breeding for markings is right out, for by so doing one would produce rollers only in name"
And then the killer punch as far as I'm concerned: "For any fancier to breed birds of a color and marking to meet his tastes he would naturally have to breed a lot, in fact he would have to breed far more than he could successfully manage. It is possible to breed any color and marking but the ratio of good birds produced would be extremely small. This is the difference between a successful strain for ideal spinning and the pursuit of colourful pigeons."
Shaun
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
647 posts
Jan 16, 2006
5:36 AM
|
Shaun. Your passages from Pensoms book is very good.However you forgot to tell the rest of the story.
The one thing that made Bill Pensom great in my mind was that He was always trying to move the Roller and the Hobby forward.It is well known that He was always changing his way of thinking.When He saw something that was a better way He would go with it.The book was written in 1958(I think).What was His way of thinking and doing in his later years before his passing?Read his letters and articles after this book was printed and then quote us his way of thinking.Tom Monsom probably has more knowledge and collections of Pensoms writings than anyone.I wish He would publish all his gaterings into one book.It would be a best seller.LOL.
We can only speculate how He would think about where things are today but if He was still with us I wonder if He would still get as much Heat as He did back then.David
|
Post a Message
|
|
|