The difficulty of getting it perfect!

[Cincy Ranchu]

After visiting the INDI show, I have a question for the page. While we have standards for each fish, there is no mention of how difficult it is to breed, raise and perfect the various varieties. For example if you breed a comet, the only limitations on getting 80% to 90% perfect large fish is space. While if you breed a Tosakin or Ranchu you have to not only provide room, but shallow water and management of the various fin and tail mutations. You must ask the question if a show competiton is a beauty show or if we should consider the mastery of the difficulty in getting a perfect fish. For example at the INDI show, the biggest fish were Orandas and Ryukin, (see video). they are also relatively easy to produce. The difficulty with Orandas is to get the right color and a wen, and for the Ryukin you are bothered by equal finnage,two anals and a hump. If you have room you can still get 50% Keepers. These open shows, or all species ( type) shows are not equitable because the average viewer can not fathom the difficulty in getting a perfect fish that is line bred and is extremely difficult to reproduce as a perfect specimen.:exact:

Now that I have dribbled on for a while, I ask this question. Should open shows give points for the degree of difficulty? Personally I think so,it also has the added benefit of limting the value of buying a half pund Ryukin or a one pound Oranda the day of the show.

A second question. What do you think about this rating table for difficulty?

Most Difficult to Least Difficult

TVR & Tosakin
Jikin & Veiltail & Edonishiki & Hamanishiki
Broadtail ( any type) & SVR & Pearscales
Any fish > 8"
Telescope Butterfly & Bubble Eyes
Eye Types
Ryukin, Oranda, & Bristols
Fantails
Other Single Tails


Once we agree on the Difficulty table, then we must ask if it is feasible to place this into play at shows

What Say you?:yess::exact:

[bigbettadan]

As a judge, I always keep that in the back of my mind......

Maybe Jikins should be moved up with TVR and tosakins...

Dan

[johnatoranchu]

After visiting the INDI show, I have a question for the page. While we have standards for each fish, there is no mention of how difficult it is to breed, raise and perfect the various varieties. For example if you breed a comet, the only limitations on getting 80% to 90% perfect large fish is space. While if you breed a Tosakin or Ranchu you have to not only provide room, but shallow water and management of the various fin and tail mutations. You must ask the question if a show competiton is a beauty show or if we should consider the mastery of the difficulty in getting a perfect fish. For example at the INDI show, the biggest fish were Orandas and Ryukin, (see video). they are also relatively easy to produce. The difficulty with Orandas is to get the right color and a wen, and for the Ryukin you are bothered by equal finnage,two anals and a hump. If you have room you can still get 50% Keepers. These open shows, or all species ( type) shows are not equitable because the average viewer can not fathom the difficulty in getting a perfect fish that is line bred and is extremely difficult to reproduce as a perfect specimen.:exact:

Now that I have dribbled on for a while, I ask this question. Should open shows give points for the degree of difficulty? Personally I think so,it also has the added benefit of limting the value of buying a half pund Ryukin or a one pound Oranda the day of the show.

A second question. What do you think about this rating table for difficulty?

Most Difficult to Least Difficult

TVR & Tosakin
Jikin & Veiltail & Edonishiki & Hamanishiki
Broadtail ( any type) & SVR & Pearscales
Any fish > 8"
Telescope Butterfly & Bubble Eyes
Eye Types
Ryukin, Oranda, & Bristols
Fantails
Other Single Tails


Once we agree on the Difficulty table, then we must ask if it is feasible to place this into play at shows

What Say you?:yess::exact:

Gary, for many years we operated a bonus point system similar to what you suggest for mixed classes but even though it seemed simple on paper few judges/exhibitors really understood it and in reality the "perfect" fish is difficult to produce whatever the variety. As far as the GSGB is concerned it is no longer a problem in any event as each recognised variety (i.e. varieties with their own standard) has a class to itself. Best in Show/Section awards are not selected on a points basis. Instead such awards are normally determined by a group of judges thus minimising personal variety biases.
John

[bekko]

I like the concept, but to appreciate the difficulty associated with producing each fish in the show rink, you would need some experience in breeding each of them. If Peter and Gary are judging the show it would work. Other shows, other judges.... not so much.

-steve

[bekko]

I should have prefaced that by saying that I don't think point systems work very well when judging goldfish.... or art. Point systems evaluate the pieces and parts but forget to look at the whole fish.

-steve

[johnatoranchu]

I should have prefaced that by saying that I don't think point systems work very well when judging goldfish.... or art. Point systems evaluate the pieces and parts but forget to look at the whole fish.

-steve

Couldn't agree with you more Steve and I made a total nuisance of myself when I first joined "the UK circuit" nearly 40 years ago by preaching the same sentiments. We certainly don't use any points system in our specialist Ranchu Kai but in all variety goldfish shows it is the norm albeit some of us "adapt" the points to make sure that the "best" fish wins. I guess that one of the reasons why the points system is favoured in the UK is that few judges have the required knowledge OF ALL VARIETIES to judge whole fish against whole fish and the points system provides a degree of comfort. Also when judging dogs for example it is easy to compare the dogs side by side. This cannot be achieved easily and safely when goldfish are in tanks and is even worse in the US where tanks are allocated to the exhibitors who often put several different varieties in the same tank and the judge could well be in the position of comparing fish which are 30ft apart.
John

[TheTruth]

i think edos are the hardest followed by tosakins all ranchu jikins then the rest

[Phil4]

Can't speak to much from breeding experience but as far as raising, Tosakins es mucho trabajo. I think all can agree that the 4 fish mentioned are the toughest.

[bigbettadan]

Points systems are ideal in fantasy world, but offen fall short in practice. We all judge by comparison, whether we realize it or not...

When I train judges for IBC, I stress looking at the overall picture verses mere fault finding. If you just deduct the negative you end up with fish while having no major defects but also may end up with overall medicore fish.... As a judge you must reward excellence of development as well as fault finding..

I also find judges that fall in the trap of awarding size over quality.

I do agree it is optimal to have your judges be also excellent breeders, as they tend to go hand and hand.

I am looking foreword to judging in Chicago..
Dan

[nygold]

You make some excellent points Dan but when it comes to size if all else is fairly equal I think size should then be taken into consideration.
It maybe easier to find show quality Ryukin and Oranda than most other fish but it's still very difficult to get those fish BIG and still maintain the quality.

[bigbettadan]

I agree....... If both fish are equal, the bigger fish wins... But again I find it rare in actual occurance........

Dan

[nolaveils]

I think point systems are good up to a point, but then other things must kick in. For example in dog shows each breed has it strict standard and a point system. But then the judge puts it all together. I have terriers, wheatens. You can have a wheaten with all the parts perfect but when you put it all together, the dog must have "type", it has to have the look of a "terrier" and a "wheaten terrier" at that. So perfect parts do not always make a perfect whole.
On the other point, I always had a problem in judging, which fish should get the nod, a perfect metallic ranchu or an almost perfect calico ranchu?
I don't know the answer, I know what I think as a breeder, obviously the calico, but is that fair? In a dog show some breeds never win best of show because they do not approach their standard as closely as others, difficulty not taken into account.
What we shouldn't forget though is that the judging process should be as transparent as possible for the exhibitors in order that they believe they are getting a fair shake. A judging commentary post judging helps in that regard as to some extent judging will always be somewhat subjective. Other than that, not sure what the perfect path in judging should be.

[Cincy Ranchu]

It seems the AGA needs some articles on this subject. It is pretty obvious that the pattern people (koi) and new goldfish folks do not understand the various breeds and their selection.We have standards, if you have a perfect Bristol Shubunkin and a perfect TVR- is it judges preference or the more complex fish wins.
At the Indi show a TVR got first over a giant ryukin and other simplier breeds, I think the Goldfish folks were pleased, I think the people that had bought large simple fish were baffled.

[TheTruth]

gary i just gave some details on azumas but this site wont allow me to submit it

[small_ranchu]

gary i just gave some details on azumas but this site wont allow me to submit it
Please tell me what happen? On the other hand, you can send the article to me via email (goldfishkeepers at gmail dot com)

[George Washington]

I like points marking to some extent, especially when judging fish of the same variety. When a new enthusiast is selecting fish to buy; to cull or to take to a show they need to judge the fish for themselves. Points marking can take the guesswork out of the equation for a new enthusiast. It is a language that we can all communicate in.

Judging variety against variety, as in the selection process for Best in Show, is a different process and must take into account the Judge’s personal knowledge and an understanding of the degree of difficulty. That is why judges tend to be experienced in the Art of the Goldfish

Having said that I don’t think the degree of difficulty should be set in stone. The popularity of different goldfish varieties comes & goes. When a variety is ‘in-vogue’ a group of breeders tend to take up the challenge and the resulting competition can quickly develop a superior line with more stable characteristics.

A difficult variety of 10 years ago may not be so difficult today. Therefore a written list would not necessarily be current in a few years time. The judges need to use their discretion on the day. However the Judge should communicate their decision to the exhibitors so that the in-experienced understand why that decision was reached and are not left baffled, as described by Cincy.

I have been breeding a line of Red Commons for 15 years now and it is one of the most frustrating varieties. I am making progress but it could take me another 15-20 years to get there. Anyone who suggests that breeding single tails (Commons; Comets; Londons & Britols) is easy has never done it seriously. So for me a top quality Common is as difficult to achieve as a top quality Ranchu.

Well why not throw the cat in among the pigeons!

[marlin08]

I just have to say that this is the type of thread that is an example of what I love about this forum.
There is such a wealth of knowledge and experience here !
For anyone seriously wanting to learn, this forum is a goldmine of information and informed opinion and it is much appreciated. :exact:
Even the heated debates are generally educational ( and often entertaining, you have to admit, LOL! )

Ok, back to the discussion...

[bekko]

a top quality Common is as difficult to achieve as a top quality Ranchu.
I agree George. And, I breed red/white commons which are easier than full red.

-steve

[bigbettadan]

Could you elaborate Steve? Since the common is wild type(with the exception of color) it should be the easiest by far for proper conformation...

Just curious.

Dan

[Cincy Ranchu]

I agree that the commons are difficult to get perfection, but they do not carry several genetic mutations that have to manged along with body shape and color. Just got in from Monroe Ohio and my lifelong friend Jack have a pond of red commons, he is in F-10 or so, generally only culls for bad swimmers and the fish because of lack of mutation baggage are extremely hardy. They never come inside.

Perfecting any breed is difficult, but single tails are just a world easier than most of the twin tailed and dorsaless fish. Metallic single tails are significantly easier than Bristols or Londons. This thread started with a discussion about all types shows in which commons have to compete with multiple genetic mutation types, all things being equal at the show a perfect more complex fish has to beat a single tail with a color mutation unless the more complex fish is undersized or the single tailed fish is gi-normous and perfect.

[bekko]

First, let me clarify that what George breeds and what I breed are completely different fish despite the fact that they are both called common goldfish. I do not know George (but would like to because he seems very wise) but assume he breeds to the British show standard and is influenced by his British goldfish breeder predecessors. I, on the other hand, breed common goldfish for top view in a pond/water garden. Selection for side-view profile is much less rigorous while color pattern is stressed. Selecting patterned commons is much easier than selecting for the best self-colored red common, as described below.

Now, let’s go back to Gary’s contention that the rarity or degree of difficulty should be a factor in judging goldfish. As discussed in posts above, there are logistical problems associated with implementation, but no one could argue the validity and desirability of this approach.

One way to express the rarity or degree of difficulty is using percentages. Would a given individual be expected to occur in one-in-a-dozen offspring (top 8%, 92nd percentile), one-in-a-hundred offspring (top 1%, 99th percentile), one-in-a-thousand (top 0.1%, 99.9th percentile), one-in-a-million, etc.? In the US, we crown grand champions which are often no better than the top 1 or 2% of a batch of offspring and almost all entries would fall in the top 4% of a batch of offspring. If you have a fish which is in the top 0.1%, then you should have a winner. In England, an exceptional common goldfish can take grand champion. In the US, we have yet to develop a proper appreciation of them and have not yet trained our “eye”.

But anyway, let’s take a thousand Japanese ranchu fry and a thousand common goldfish fry and find the best one (top 0.1%) of each variety. We all know the routine for doing that… keep culling the undesirable ones while preserving the best. Now, let’s examine the time line for finding that one-in-a-thousand fish.

Japanese ranchu offspring are fraught with gross deformities. Spikes collapsed tails, lumpy backs, missing anals, etc. Depending on your temperature, space and approach, the first cull is usually done in at three to eight weeks and in that first cull you can often dispose of 90% of the ranchu offspring. Common goldfish have few gross deformities. If you do the first cull at the same time as the ranchu, you will only be able to dispose of about 10%. So, after the first cull you have 100 ranchu and 900 commons. The resource requirements (space, food, water change, labor, etc.) of the two varieties are similar at this age so you will need nine times more space, food, water and labor to maintain the commons until it is time for the next culling session. This makes commons more difficult to breed.

Again, depending on your situation and approach, the second culling session may happen at eight to twelve weeks of age. Since we only want the very best individual from the original group of one thousand, we can afford to be ruthless and dispose of 90% of the ranchu again keeping the best ten individuals. By this time they will have started to demelanize so if you are selecting the commons for the best top-view pattern you can now dispose of 80%, keeping the most promising 180 individuals. If, on the other hand, you are selecting for the best full-red English common then you may have to keep 500 individuals for now. So, the resource requirements for the commons is now eighteen to fifty times more than that of the ranchu.

For the ranchu, there may not be a third culling session per se. With only ten fish you can toss out one or two at your leisure keeping a half dozen until it is time for the show or the final selection of the best single individual is made. For the commons, you need to keep culling aggressively every month or so in an attempt to thin out their numbers and keep them from becoming over-crowded as they grow. By six months of age (in a warm climate) you may finally get them down to a dozen fish which have the best variegated pattern and from here on it is just a matter of bringing them along at the proper rate so they do not become too fat or too thin and do not out-grow their pattern. But, compared to the ranchu, you have invested a lot more resources to finally get them to this point. For the full-red English commons it is a very different story. Again, you have to keep culling aggressively and at frequent intervals for conformation, but there is only so much you can do. By six months of age (in a warm climate), you will have a pretty good idea which ones have the best bodies. However, the color continues to develop for a year (two years in a temperate climate) so you’re faced with keeping a large number of fish for a long time before the best few individuals can be identified.

And, that’s why I think commons are more difficult than ranchu.

-steve

[Cincy Ranchu]

Nice illustration, but the discussions ended at the point of enhancing the characteristics. Ranchu require many feddings of specific types and shallow water and commons benefot from excellent food but they are not growing a wen, this counters the extra fish care easily.
Also, small breeders would just give away all but a 100 key fish to grow.

[bekko]

You don't get it. The most important factor in ranchu or common goldfish husbandry is adequate and appropriate space. No amount of food, type of food or number of feedings can compensate for the lack of enough space. Space is the most precious resource for most of us. For the reasons discussed above, it takes more space to make a very good common than to make a very good ranchu.

-steve

[bigbettadan]

I think it depends on how you define degree of difficulty. If we are talking the ratio of quality fish per spawn, breeds such as ranchu or tosakin are always going to have a much lower % of quality ratio. One thing I did like about ranchu is their tough standards which allows for deeper culling earlier....less waste of space and food. But in retrospect that also means a sickness or equipment malfuction can destroy your work pretty quickly, or lax culling can lead to quality loss quickly...

I would still like to hear more in detail what makes up a good common.

Dan

[Cincy Ranchu]

I get it, no one raises hundreds of commons to produce one show quality fish unless you are Dave Mandley, he is the only one with acres of water. So you raise a few with the room you have, because at the end of the year, few folks appreciate a beautiful common and you are stuck with 90 nice fish that are difficult to give away....

[bekko]

We can make the game as easy or as difficult as we want it to be. The Bristol Aquatists Society says that a show-quality common goldfish comes along at the rate of about 250:1, which equates to being in the top 0.4% or 99.6 percentile. In the U.S., investing the time and space to produce a top-quality common goldfish is for your own enjoyment only because nobody else is able to appreciate the feat. Not your club, not the show judges, not the U.S. forums.... trust me. But, then again, it was not that long ago that you could have said the same thing about Japanese ranchu.

http://www.bristol-aquarists.org.uk/goldfish/common/common.htm
http://www.raingarden.us/snap-hibuna-2.JPG
http://www.raingarden.us/3606a.JPG
http://www.raingarden.us/3606d.JPG
http://www.raingarden.us/hibuna-1.JPG

-steve

[harzan]

Guys and Gals....

I am sure we all realized just about anything or any point of view may be rationalized.

Many here, myself included, are a little nuts to be so passionate about goldfish to begin with. I say do what ever you love to do, create, or hope to create...

I say luck, as in life in general, is a very key element as well. Nothing ventured...NOTHING GAINED!

On that note...check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCSiwqb7oMo

With a little imagination and luck...I think I got it!:):):)

[BruceP]

Great work Harris!!!!!!!!!!!!! :worship:

I dont think we will ever come to agree on what is hardest to breed but its a fun discussion..... lol

[bigbettadan]

Nice work Harris........

Did you get some pure metallic nankin spawns going as well?

Dan

[Cincy Ranchu]

Guys and Gals....

I am sure we all realized just about anything or any point of view may be rationalized.

Many here, myself included, are a little nuts to be so passionate about goldfish to begin with. I say do what ever you love to do, create, or hope to create...

I say luck, as in life in general, is a very key element as well. Nothing ventured...NOTHING GAINED!

On that note...check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCSiwqb7oMo

With a little imagination and luck...I think I got it!:):):)


Very nice work, I havn't seen these in over a decade, any chance we can see the parents?

[Cincy Ranchu]

We can make the game as easy or as difficult as we want it to be. The Bristol Aquatists Society says that a show-quality common goldfish comes along at the rate of about 250:1, which equates to being in the top 0.4% or 99.6 percentile. In the U.S., investing the time and space to produce a top-quality common goldfish is for your own enjoyment only because nobody else is able to appreciate the feat. Not your club, not the show judges, not the U.S. forums.... trust me. But, then again, it was not that long ago that you could have said the same thing about Japanese ranchu.

http://www.bristol-aquarists.org.uk/goldfish/common/common.htm
http://www.raingarden.us/snap-hibuna-2.JPG
http://www.raingarden.us/3606a.JPG
http://www.raingarden.us/3606d.JPG
http://www.raingarden.us/hibuna-1.JPG

-steve

Don, over in Northern Kentucky has some of you hbuna that are beautiful. These are really great, the British page is very cool also.
THX
GH

[Bucks Koi]

Guys and Gals....

I am sure we all realized just about anything or any point of view may be rationalized.

Many here, myself included, are a little nuts to be so passionate about goldfish to begin with. I say do what ever you love to do, create, or hope to create...

I say luck, as in life in general, is a very key element as well. Nothing ventured...NOTHING GAINED!

On that note...check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCSiwqb7oMo

With a little imagination and luck...I think I got it!:):):)

Luck ?
I think you are just a VERY GOOD BREEDER !
Congrats.

[suphi]

Patrick, out of curiosity, how tough is it for koi people in terms of getting quality offspring or grooming them?

[opera]

Steve,
Thank you for sharing hibuna with us. I never imagine they could be so nice and colorfull:worship:

Buck Koi,
I was also wondering how difficult to get the high quality koi.

Opera

[George Washington]

[QUOTE=Cincy Ranchu;17949]
1) Should open shows give points for the degree of difficulty? Personally I think so,it also has the added benefit of limting the value of buying a half pund Ryukin or a one pound Oranda the day of the show.

2) What do you think about this rating table for difficulty?

Most Difficult to Least Difficult

TVR & Tosakin
Jikin & Veiltail & Edonishiki & Hamanishiki
Broadtail ( any type) & SVR & Pearscales
Any fish > 8"
Telescope Butterfly & Bubble Eyes
Eye Types
Ryukin, Oranda, & Bristols
Fantails
Other Single Tails

QUOTE]

Steve, thank you for your views and for the links to your raingarden site. The hibuna are beautiful and must be a joy to watch in a pond setting.

Getting back to the original questions:-
1) I do not think that there should be a 'degree of difficulty' league table. Everyone has their own opinions based on either experience or perceptions. It just wouldn't work and would be devisive on several levels.
2) From my limited knowledge of the 6 varieties of goldfish that I have bred your league table is not correct. I also doubt anyone alive has experience of breeding all of these varieties to compile a definitive list.

Cincy, I have enjoyed thinking about your two initial questions and they have raised some very interesting responses. Because of your personal responses I have reflected on 'why am I bothering to try and improve a variety of goldfish that few folk appreciate'. Having thought it through my response is that I do it for my own enjoyment and in my view a top quality common goldfish is the arabian stallion of the goldfish world. They give me great pleasure from watching them and the challenge that they create trying to improve them.

Additionaly the purpose of showing my goldfish is mainly to see how I have progressed in improving my strain. No matter what the judge decides, just having my fish on the show bench allows me to stand and judge, for myself, how they compare to other strains and that is more important than winning.

And finally........
"Never under-estimate the beauty of a blade of grass"

[harzan]

That is what i was trying to say...RAISE WHAT YOU LOVE!

This hobby is a very individualistic one. I believe this is why, with few exceptions in the US (like Gary and his local friends...and expanding across the country), we generally work alone.

I think it is rather unfortunate that we do not have clubs of different types of goldfish that can compete like in Japan...hopefully one day in my life time.

I think this list or point system is idealistic and until Judges are all on same page...forget it. Like Bekko said...not so easy.

Edonishiki is the hardest period...as you should have all the qualities of Ranchu and then coloration.

If anyone here has a link to a breeder that has Edonishiki to standard, please post!

I am sure quantity is very limited even at the breeders place...:)

[afertuna]

I like the idea mainly since I have been showing Bristols and Veils primarily and I always get overlooked for a oranda or Ryukin. They point system for the fish is where the changes are needed and there needs to be a section for bred by exhibitor. I have an example the last two years in the Portland Show have been won by under 6 month old Orandas both black Giant Thai Orandas. The fact they were so large was a HUGE factor of the decision. After talking to one of the judges after the show they said that it is hard to get an oranda that large and the keeper did a great job over the years to get it that way. I know the owner of that fish....It was 4 months old and bought 1 1/2 months before the show.