j .wanless
674 posts
Mar 07, 2009
5:50 AM
|
hi all
ive just read a post about how body type + feathering decide weather the bird will roll good or bad. i think it was taken from a page out of kowalski/s book.ive bred + flew rollers a long time + i can tell you now that that is a load of bull.i fly some of the fastest birds in the uk.
as in my area thats what we all strive for.and i can tell you some of the best rollers ive ever seen is generally the little weeds that should have been killed.the late breds that have the worst feathering you could possibly breed.dont ask me why but these horrible little birds seem to always turn out the best rollers.i have seen this many many times at mine + plenty of other lofts.rollers that are so scrawnny you would find it hard to believe they can fly never mind roll with extreme velocity.
|
3757
1200 posts
Mar 07, 2009
6:05 AM
|
Jay - This is one that I totally agree with!!! There are a few families down here that are the most beautiful phenotype birds on the ground. Docile and like house pets. In the air they are cow manure! The birds have to have the mental capacity to spin. Now, I would say if a family has the genetics and the velocity/style then that is icing on the cake. I picked out three awesome pairs for a guy (who is a great guy by the way) and they were sent back. These birds were packed with speed and velocity. I will bet 10,000 that the birds he bought from another fancier will not beat mine in the air on an individual contest for speed and velocity. If he is willing to do it just let me know. This is on record and is legal in court.
Last Edited by on Mar 07, 2009 6:09 AM
|
Scott
1795 posts
Mar 07, 2009
6:37 AM
|
Good post John, it seems my best have poor feather and look like dog crap in the kitbox,so much so that I had a really good hen that looked so good I was afraid to stock her due to it, I finaly pulled her for stock this year.
As for scrawney,I want them scrawny in feather only, I insist that they hold thier body wt without haveing to be babied,the best will also have a good clear strong expression.
It is worth noting that with a good rich feed and a solid molt these birds transform into a rich looking pigeon once out of fly condition.
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
Last Edited by on Mar 07, 2009 7:41 AM
|
ammy1512
177 posts
Mar 07, 2009
6:43 AM
|
hi john.and all the rest from all over the world.john you are right.but there are still folk out there that are allways going to go for coulour body shape ect,ect,ect.only the true fanciers go for style,rolling abillity, control,kitting ect,ect,ect.then go for coulour.ive seen birds that looked like they've been attacked by fether might,bop,and been beaten with an ugly stick.till there nearly dead.but wen there up in the air.your left with your jaw open and wondering how the hell you gonna breed 20 more of them.lol.
kindest regards ammy
|
Lipper
GOLD MEMBER
416 posts
Mar 07, 2009
7:34 AM
|
----------
Mike Trevis
The Bigger the Dream the Bigger the Leap
I would also agree with this to a point...I have seen some really good lookers here that are also in the stock loft..Looks to me as it goes both ways?
|
Tony Chavarria
Site Publisher
3161 posts
Mar 07, 2009
8:00 AM
|
Well there you have it. Breed for poor feather quality and your birds will spin like tops...lol
Hey j.wanless, seriously, my own philosophy is to consider the entire bird and look at it as a complete "system" where several parts contribute to the end result; which is to perform at or near the aerial standard as is possible.
I believe it is understood by most that a roller pigeon with strong and proper mental character can overcome its own lack of good feather, body style and balance to roll well. That being said, how would desiring birds that feel balanced in the hand, express feather tinsel sufficient to stop fast velocity rolling, exhibit a body structure and size that would seem aerodynamically advantageous toward more efficient rolling, be harmful to preserving the aerial standard of the breed?
Also, are the "little weeds" you referenced the only birds you have ever seen roll as fast as you have ever seen?
----------
FLY ON! Tony Chavarria
|
Scott
1797 posts
Mar 07, 2009
8:16 AM
|
Actually Tony, it is more a case of not going through good molts and not having a wealth of feather, a wealth of feather is not a good thing where this breed is concerned , and the best tend to not go through good solid molts exspecialy in their first year, Pensom made the same observations many moons ago.
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
|
Scott
1798 posts
Mar 07, 2009
8:45 AM
|
P.S. and where performance is concerned poor feather is not a negative in any way shape or form,where too much rich feather most certainly is.
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
|
j .wanless
675 posts
Mar 07, 2009
8:46 AM
|
hi all
most of you have understood what ive been saying .ammy is from the uk so he will know exactly what i mean.scott you are right about once you stop flying them + feed them propperly they go through the moult + look as good as all the rest.as i had a little hen was that good i stopped flying her in the winter .as i thought she would not survive the cold.
she is now in my mates stock loft in s/africa.
tony im not saying that anyone in thier right mind would want to breed this type of bird .but what i are saying + i have plenty of experiance is that when they do come along they do tend to be the birds that everyone seem to pick out of the air because they are rolling that good.and like ammy said they have none of the charistics that you + the rest of us really want.in fact they can be a bit of an embarresment to look at.but in the air its a diffrent matter.as for your question about them been the only fast rollers i may have seen.tony without sounding or trying to sound big headed as im really not lol.i doubt if there is anyone on your site that as seen as many 1st class rollers or bred as many as i have .though they may be just 1 .
|
Tony Chavarria
Site Publisher
3162 posts
Mar 07, 2009
9:13 AM
|
Scott, here is what I took from the original post:
1: A physically balanced bird is not required to roll well: I agree
2: Some of the best birds HE has seen are "little weeds": If he says so
3: Late bred birds for some reason, turn out to be the best: Really?
Now as for your take, here are a couple questions:
1: If possible, explain how feathers add to or take away from fast rolling?
2: You believe that insufficient molting is an early indicator of a good bird?
3: Are all other types than described by both of you worthless? If not, what ways might they have value?
If I did not know better, here is what I would come away with from this thread so far:
...that in order to breed the best rollers, we need to select late bred weeds that have a lousy propensity to molt...
Is this really the secret?
----------
FLY ON! Tony Chavarria
|
Tony Chavarria
Site Publisher
3163 posts
Mar 07, 2009
9:17 AM
|
Scott and J., I am not challenging your experience or observations, using this as a teaching/learning opportunity.
----------
FLY ON! Tony Chavarria
|
harrison
328 posts
Mar 07, 2009
10:36 AM
|
Hi all.
Last year I was at my friends house.
The guy who bread my stock.
He was showing me his young bird kit and they was stunning birds to look at.
nice and clean, good feather,good posture.ect..ect..
There was this red grizzle and my friends words was :look at that scroney thing, and he was going to kill it.
He said that it was the ugliest pigeon he had ever seen.
I told him that he should see what it his like after its mault and even thuough it was aggetating him he did.
This bird (GOD AS MY JUDGE) has to be the best yearling he has in his yard and he has some good onces. I have one of those yellow checks and she dont even tumble never mind spin, I paird her to a blue grizzle cock and they through yellow grizzles (Scruffy little things) How the hell they lived I do not no.
They was chuckd out of the nest early and abbandond but managed to survive.
I gave them to my naibour and as the weeks months whent by they turnd into verry deep controled pigeons.
So I do agree that the scroney little birds do for some reason turn out verry good.
A local man called BRI has the most shittyist kits ever and his birds are coverd in shit and starved. These birds are ace. He says that due to them been starved and there living condishions it goes to there heads and makes the abit mental? He his old school. But I dont take no advice from him lol. harrisn uk hull. sorry about my spelling
Last Edited by on Mar 07, 2009 10:41 AM
|
Lipper
GOLD MEMBER
422 posts
Mar 07, 2009
11:23 AM
|
----------
Mike Trevis
The Bigger the Dream the Bigger the Leap
Wow Harrison..To use a quote from Nick....Lordy! LOL
|
harrison
331 posts
Mar 07, 2009
11:35 AM
|
whats that? GOD?ha ha
|
Lipper
GOLD MEMBER
425 posts
Mar 07, 2009
11:39 AM
|
----------
Mike Trevis
The Bigger the Dream the Bigger the Leap
Hey Harrison...It was those last couple sentences..LOL
|
harrison
333 posts
Mar 07, 2009
11:45 AM
|
what bit? the mental,shitty kits, starved, ?
just (moderated) tell me.lol
Last Edited by on Mar 07, 2009 5:26 PM
|
Lipper
GOLD MEMBER
426 posts
Mar 07, 2009
11:47 AM
|
----------
Mike Trevis
The Bigger the Dream the Bigger the Leap
A local man called BRI has the most shittyist kits ever and his birds are coverd in shit and starved. These birds are ace. He says that due to them been starved and there living condishions it goes to there heads and makes the abit mental? He his old school. But I dont take no advice from him lol. harrisn uk hull. sorry about my spelling
|
harrison
334 posts
Mar 07, 2009
11:54 AM
|
HA HA
The guy I am gong on about is one crazy dude.
He his about 66, 6ft5, one eye, and wears his trousers around his neck. Kits in 12 inch of shit, birds in terrible state.
Its a wonder e hasnt been shut down.
But everyone gets birds off him. NOT ME.lol.
He has Bob Brown birds and has got one he got from Bob that his apparently 14 years old and still filling its eggs.
I have a red checker that his ten years and still filling.
What his the oldest you no of a bird to still fill its eggs?
thanks harrison.
|
Lipper
GOLD MEMBER
428 posts
Mar 07, 2009
11:56 AM
|
----------
Mike Trevis
The Bigger the Dream the Bigger the Leap
14 is the oldest I have right now..an indigo no less..
|
Velo99
2062 posts
Mar 07, 2009
12:12 PM
|
OK T
My opinion is, the scrawny ones are too worn down to resist the roll and probably wont last long in that state of physical conditioning. Thier feather is shabby from a diet without the proper nutrients to allow the feathers to grow properly during the moult. This in turn gives them less lift and control of thier performance which could lead to deeper roll. Given a bird bred from a family with a strong ro gene it is possible for the right combination of factors to allow for some decent performance(s). Question I pose to the proponents is how long do these birds last?
----------
V99
blue sky single beat
in cadance performing now
earth beckons the winged
drawn breath is let quickly forth
orchestral movement follows
___ ~_____
\__\_/-|_| \__\____
/()_)__14___()_)\__\
|
harrison
336 posts
Mar 07, 2009
12:21 PM
|
the 10 year old cock was off a friend as a prezzie as he keeps no prisoner (WHATSOEVER) due to this birds age he carnt fly to good.
But he told me it still fills.
He was on young upto a week ago but the cold wiped them out.
14 god that bird mut have done you proud over the years.
yours in roll harrison
|
Scott
1801 posts
Mar 07, 2009
12:29 PM
|
1: If possible, explain how feathers add to or take away from fast rolling?
(To rich of feather causes many proplems,from large wide primaries and secondaries to too much cover over the hinge points causeing restriction,there is a reason athleates don't wear over coats and or thick clothing regardless of the temps.)
Here is another, why are softer feather birds more frequent than hard tight feathered birds on a whole ? although the harder tight feather birds are the fastest over all due to the reasons above.
2: You believe that insufficient molting is an early indicator of a good bird?
(absolutly,as always there are exceptions like the hen I described in my first post,but she did not have too much feather either.)
3: Are all other types than described by both of you worthless? If not, what ways might they have value?
(No not worthless,some are good unless they have too rich of feather which makes it a mute point,the rest make good fosters)
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
Last Edited by on Mar 07, 2009 1:04 PM
|
j .wanless
676 posts
Mar 07, 2009
12:55 PM
|
hi all
hey scott has it ever occured to you those that argue our point dont really know what a true exceptional roller really is .i have my doubts.one thing i can say is every fancier that has been to my house from abroad + theres far too many to mention have always been amazed by the quality of my birds weather y/brds or old.and i can recall 2 1 which is in johnny conradies stock loft + he is one of the top roller men out there.and another that was that good 3 diffrent people took her home to breed off.but both of these birds were of bad feather quality.in my oppinion scott is dead right what he says about soft + over feathering.but as he said thats just my oppinion lol.
|
pigeon pete
201 posts
Mar 07, 2009
12:57 PM
|
Anyone reading JW's post and then suggesting that he breeds for poor feather and weakness is trying to pull Johns chain IMO. I'm sure John doesn't deliberately breed for weak feathers any more than he breeds for unaerodynamic bodies, that's just a silly assumption.
If you saw his birds fly, then the body type has to be right to get so many fast spinners. If they were rolling well in spite of the body type then he wouldn't get so many good ones.
What I think he is saying is that many of his top spinners are smaller, (and that is generally true anyway), and they don't have pristine feathering, and that what is written about the ideal in books and articles isn't always neccesarily spot on.
A newcommer who reads that the best rollers have to show a ceratin body shape, and have good feather quality, could go and cull his best young birds if he doesn't understand why they look as they do. Many hardworking young bird will not moult through in their first year unless they are rested for a few months. It therefore follows that the next year they will be flying with some old feathers that will be getting a bit shabby looking.
They will look a little ragged anyway if they roll deep and fast in their first year.
Don't kid yourself that every early developer can't hold it together in the next year either. If I get an older bird that looks like it should be in a show pen I start to look at it closely to see if it has gone off the roll. You do get exceptions though and I have a blue bage hen that always looked a picture with excellent plumage and always well muscled, she never stayed on the floor to feed for half as long as the other kit birds, even though she was the last to start feeding. I presumed she wasn't rolling or was very seldom and/or slow in the roll. I was ready to weed her out of the kit when I watched her for a whole fly and she was spot on in the air. Nice roll with good depth and frequency. She has been in my old bird kit since then and still looks good.She is a 2001 bird and I have just stocked her this year for the first time.
Pete
|
j .wanless
677 posts
Mar 07, 2009
1:06 PM
|
hi all
thanks pete i could not have put it better myself.which i obviously hadnt????.but then you are better educated than me lol.for anyone to seriously think that i try to breed for poor quality feathered birds are from another planet BEAM ME UP SCOTTY LOL.
|
Tony Chavarria
Site Publisher
3166 posts
Mar 07, 2009
3:19 PM
|
Hey pigeonpete, I am not suggesting anything like that but just as he is coming to conclusions through certain posts regarding Kowalski's book, I think his own post can be taken dogmatically as well thus potentially misleading the uninitiated.
That's why the questions, lots of guys say things and don't explain themselves very well. Feathers don't make the bird, they are part of a complete package. Birds that have a lousy molt as being an indicator of a good bird sounds like an old wives tale when it is to be applied to every family. Is this what he is suggesting or does he mean to refer to his family and stock selections?
I think what he has observed are the results of his beliefs played out in selections he has made over the years. Thus proving that any pigeon can roll properly provided it has the motor.
----------
FLY ON! Tony Chavarria
|
ammy1512
189 posts
Mar 07, 2009
10:28 PM
|
hi guy's and gal's.pigeon pete explained my way of thinking better than me.but i would never breed from a roller that has a fault.if a bird is excepitional in all qualitys except from fethering. then you can look at the aspect of bringing in good fethering to get to the ideal.but in many occasions.with out crosses or inbreeding it leads to a hole lot of different problems.especially noticeble through the next genarations.my point in all this is that occasionaly a bird will come along that looks like it would never look good on a perch but has all the rest of the genetics that we are striving for.once it has gone through its moult. it looks like a buety.as far as feeding ect.if all the birds are fed the same.there should be no problems about,poor diet.but as you no there are different kinds of birds that are even from the same family that extra need feed,less feed.more protien.ect.and that is another suject.
kindest regards ammy
|
winwardrollers
175 posts
Mar 08, 2009
8:40 AM
|
Some birds just don't molt well because their energy is going toward the ..roll and not..the molt.
I look for bird with not a lot of feathering in the kit box..but then later setting and good feed in the breeder pen thay seem to have plenty of feathering. The puffy fluffy birds seem to be floaters and the ragged birds the workers.
I find it interesting the some birds tear out the secondarys and some don't yet both birds are rolling and seem to have the same form/style of rolling.
If I had the choice to stock a well feathered bird or less feathered bird for the breed pen I would pick the latter. I just pulled a breeder to replace because it had the fluffy puffy feel to it when handing as well and percentages of good young were limited compared to other breeders.
Also
The Second and third round of birds seem to be the best birds of the year each and every year.
bwinward
|