Everybody a breeder ?

[indicadom]

@Indicadom & Tom

Great to have such a formidable breeders like you aboard.

Here, high up in the northern hemisphere we experience a severe lack of capable 'auto' breeders.

With all your knowledge and expertise, I'm sure you could point us in the right direction and tell us were to obtain your highly priced auto flowering genetics.



Common. Now please don't tell us to start reading and spent a life time reinventing the wheel ourselves.

I was hoping ppl like you would have paved us the way already.

Is any of you having connections out there at your level of expertise that are capable of delivering real distinct auto stuff.

All that has come my way thus far was merely rubbish.

Sorry for going off topic, but I felt like I had to snatch this opportunity.

(yeah I know, I sound like I'm trolling, maybe I'm not. Prolly I'm mostly curious at what you've got to say.)

The problem here with breeding and selecting for feno's is the low light intensity combined to cool temps & high humidity.
Other then size and mold resistence, I'd say all plants are pretty much the same in effect. Hence, I rather turn them all into hash and enjoy it that way.

Did you really just ask why we haven't done all the breeding work in the world for you? Lol...breeding takes time.

They do go hand in hand. You have to create seed to be a breeder, but everyone who creates seed isn't a breeder. If I take Dj's Blueberry and open pollinate it I wouldn't be saying I bred it even tho I produced seeds of it. It was another mans work...

Ahhh, okay! Now I see what you're saying and I totally agree.

You're right, some landraces do exist. But they mostly aren't what people want. They are unimproved and frankly pretty damn hempy when compared to most of the Kush and Chems that get passed around today. Their value I don't doubt and their preservation is important. Genetic diversity doesn't grow on trees But you aren't going to be finding warehouses of them for medicine and they aren't going to be filling everyone's backyards for recreational smoke either.

Of course, but the landrace strains contain valuable properties like hardiness, bug resistance, mold resistance, and resistance to drought. When people are able to start having large fields of cannabis around the world, what happens when they try to take those indoor strains back outdoors? They most likely won't perform as well and breeders might have to reevaluate their stock. These things aren't as important to people who have a couple plants in pots in their backyard. However if you have a lot of plants and end up losing 60% of your crop due to a bug infestation, that is absolutely devastating. Especially when you learn that for some reason the other side of your field isn't affected at all...

Cannabis has progressed, there's no way to stop it. The drug war, real wars, destroyed areas of cultivation, the gene pool is ever changing. The progress of landraces was incredibly slow to begin with. They are our building blocks, but to act like we need to get back to Africa before we breed cannabis or that somehow out in a greenhouse in africa it'll be easier to make advancements than here doesn't make any sense to me.

I agree, cannabis has come a long way but we aren't out of the woods yet. All the strains we have today came from these places, why wouldn't you want to go back to the source to look for more treasure? I am not suggesting going to Africa, I am suggesting having their politicians no longer pressured to pursue cannabis growers. Then we will be able to get 100,000 seeds at a time from a particular region and grow them out. I mean imagine if multiple farms were growing out multiple crops of 100,000 plants? That would be an incredible treasure trove! And depending on what lottery you play, the chances of winning are...say, 1 in 100 million. How long would it take you to go through 100 million plants? That doesn't even guarantee you'll get that golden ticket either.

The DNA cannot lie.

The answer is likely nothing. There is a PAR region of the cannabis Y that already recombines in females. I've seen no evidence of loss of value with properly selected gynoecious lines so I'm still waiting on Dave.

Exactly, I want to be able to have a grower bring something to me, take a sample, run a test, and be like...shit's clean! Lol. Hmmm, maybe he will pop back up in a day or two.

 

[gloryoskie]

Everybody's a breeder?

I wish I had started with that intent. Cull all the males,
grow killer seedless they said. So that's what I did.
I've thrown away more male plants than I care to admit.

I grow in a couple small boxes, I could flower maybe 8
small plants at a time. Breed cannabis?
No way, too many plants needed for selection.

Fast forward a couple years, and now I make seeds.
There's a great effort to veg, take cuttings, flower, make
selections. Low expectations yield better results. Lol.

I'll leave preservation to the growers with larger rooms.

I've come to learn that my objectives will be met in years rather
than months. Distinct plants bred from the parents I've chosen,
having the traits I desire.

I've given seeds to others that share our passion for growing,
and been complimented on great results so far.

Everybody's a breeder? We'll see.

Great thread, subbed.

 

[Weird]

Why do you think you need to simplify things for me?

because I see you as being very simple

You don't know anything about mathematics or genetics, so how are you setting up scenarios with no experience or knowledge?

I know enough math and science to have scored high on my SAT and ive bred and run my own strains for over 20 years, started before the luxury of seed banks

ive also had a good majority of the elites in my stables as a comparison and still run the strains i breed years ago today so I that is my measure of relative success

those are my qualifications like them or not

"will they be major and minor? "; "give me, in mathematics, the margin of difference. How much better will Tom A's seeds be than the seed hacks?";"how different will the quality of selection be between the seed hack running 1000 seeds in one run versus Tom Hill running 10 runs of 100 seeds. What is the measurable margin of difference?"

We've already stated over and over that selection is unique to the individual.

ohh really what royal we is this? Tom argues the numbers and declines giving a value to selection, I argue that the selection of traits is not unique but individually relative

you don't get this term or understand how to turn it into an algebraic equation, but that does not mean you cannot

see if the pool you select from is the only factor in determining the quality of your outcome then it is simple

size of pool you select = breeder quality

now lets say its not just the size of the pool you are selecting from but also the value of selection so the equation looks like this

size of pool + value of selection = breeder quality

now how do you assign a metric to something like value of selection

we can make it a simple Boolean value, a positive value if the value of the selection is relative to the selection or negative one if its not

so lets say someone is breeding indica and I want an indica

then the equation would look something like this

size of pool + value of selection (1) = breeder quality

if i wanted a sativa then equation might look like this

size of pool + value of selection (0) = breeder quality

now this is simple and needs to consider many more variables such as what percentage of that pool of plants you are selecting, the breeding environment (outdoor vs. indoor as an example)

if we consider breeding environment (we could add many more variables but im making it simple)

size of pool + value of selection + breeding environment = breeder quality

if it is an indoor indica i want and the breeder is offering a indica selection bred indoors the equation may look like this

size of pool + value of selection (1) + breeding environment (1) = breeder quality

while the values may not be factored in relative terms, they coudl be if this were refined.

What someone picks for is irrelevant from the breeding practices, I will say it until you understand.

really, so if someone selects lower flowering times as the main objective of their breeding project it has no relevance?

For anyone who understands anything about mathematics, or statistics can comprehend how idiotic these scenarios are, and how impossible these questions are to answer.

i just proved otherwise with the equations above. They are simple and need refinement but im not the one claiming to be so genius in math that I know what can and can't be done mathematically

im just saying if your using math as your proof of performance then show it or stop using it as a basis for determining the quality of a breeder

Yet you are saying, and I quote, "its a math and genetics question that can be easily answers if all you say is true". You lack a fundamental understanding of how data is collected, how research is conducted, or how math plays into the propagation of plant genetics.

you keep on saying i dont understand but you qualify it in any manner

No, it isn't food for thought because you are just glaringly ignorant of all things scientific. Where did anyone say that the skill of the breeder doesn't matter?

Tom made it pretty clear that NUMBERS were paramount, your not making any claims other than I don't know anything

you cant prove it with logical proofs, just accusations

hope your getting a free pack of beans for it at least

We are talking about the best breeding methods, I think you need to do more reading before you are able to digest what is being said.

really, then share with me all the BEST breeding methods you learned in this thread

please

and while your at it tell me some of the criteria for your selections

i doubt you have any to be honest but ill give you the courtesy of benefit of doubt

 

[S2B]

look...you make more money having 57 new "strains" coming out in a couple 4x8 tents than you do being an actual breeder. Hell if "everybody" wasnt a "breeder" this site wouldnt even exist.

 

[indicadom]

yes they give you larger body of plants to compare against each other (which makes selection anecdotal, does it not) and this I see as the greatest advantage

i don't expect you to have a method of scientific measure but an "anecdotal" one, and yes Tom I do trust your anecdotal experience in strain selection thus your success, but when you look and see better, by how much?

Let me be completely honest with you Tom, I ask you this because the minute you call people imbeciles for breeding in small plant numbers ESPECIALLY when you know many people are forced to due to prohibition, it makes me ask how much better are you that you feel this way. It also makes me question HOW MUCH better you should be in order for me to believe it.

and no Tom I am not doubting the quality of your work, just the validity of your claim that any one not running numbers is a complete hack or imbecile, especially when you claim math as the basis and can't use the same basis to prove the claim

let me leave you with a little math analogy in regards to pools of numbers and odds

any poker player can calculate odds, but not everyone can actualize them at the table because it is not the pool of cards ot the odds involved but the applications of strategy based on them that matters

This is just pure gold! I also love how you managed to work in anecdotal another hundred times as if that some how refutes actual evidence. Nobody needs anecdotal evidence, we have real evidence, called empirical evidence. Also this thing called knowledge of breeding practices, and experience utilizing these breeding practices. Now you are twisting what has been said, there was a clear distinction between people NOT running proper breeding methods and people who are running proper breeding methods. Number of plants is irrelevant to that, you are in one category or the other. Also your "math" analogy using poker is just absurd. The reason other players can't "actualize" calculated odds at the table is because they can't calculate the odds at the table without knowing every single card. All they can do is speculate, and that is where the strategy comes in, not math. Worst analogy ever...

 

[indicadom]

look...you make more money having 57 new "strains" coming out in a couple 4x8 tents than you do being an actual breeder. Hell if "everybody" wasnt a "breeder" this site wouldnt even exist.

Um no, by saying that you are discrediting not only the founder of this website, but all the people who devote their lives to making strains everyone else can use. Where do you think those 57 strains came from pal?

 

[S2B]

Um no, by saying that you are discrediting not only the founder of this website, but all the people who devote their lives to making strains everyone else can use. Where do you think those 57 strains came from pal?

when i can fucking take all the same strains and breed them in my fucking basement and do the same thing all these other "breeders" are doing thats not breeding.

when you fill a greenhouse or warehouse full of 500 of the same cross, pick the best, then keep refining...well my friend then you are fucking breeding.

until then STFU with all the closet pollen chunkers pretending to be seed breeders. I can go fuck a dog...doesnt mean im breeding.

 

[Quasimodo]

Hes of a different breed than most of the posters here

I dunno... I read his posts and I'm like... "Wtf did I just read?"

It's the same feeling I'd get listening to a rambling homeless person.


EDIT: here comes the neg rep

 

[Tom Hill]

They dumb, they no picky uppy booky, smart men make powerful juju available to them but they no likey, they still think world flat and like to get together on sundays with like minded fools, they no likey change. you understand that any fucking better? FU

 

[indicadom]

because I see you as being very simple

Right...

I know enough math and science to have scored high on my SAT and ive bred and run my own strains for over 20 years, started before the luxury of seed banks

ive also had a good majority of the elites in my stables as a comparison and still run the strains i breed years ago today so I that is my measure of relative success

those are my qualifications like them or not

Your credentials are irrelevant to proper breeding methods. Also I think it has been awhile since you've taken any formal courses in math or science.

ohh really what royal we is this? Tom argues the numbers and declines giving a value to selection, I argue that the selection of traits is not unique but individually relative

you don't get this term or understand how to turn it into an algebraic equation, but that does not mean you cannot

Is that your best attempt at flexing your math muscles? The selection of traits it not unique huh? Wow, now I see why you don't understand what is going on. Yes, the selection of traits is unique to the individual making those selections. I think you don't understand that proper selection is a subset of proper breeding. Proper selection are things like, out of 100 plants, you don't select the smallest, weakest, sickest, and hungriest plant. However, what height, smell, high, taste, color you're selecting? That is completely unique to the individual and can never be duplicated. Cannabis will never taste identical to us, smell identical to us, or give us identical highs. That is the unique part of selection I'm referring to, do you see now why it is separate from proper breeding techniques?

see if the pool you select from is the only factor in determining the quality of your outcome then it is simple

size of pool you select = breeder quality

now lets say its not just the size of the pool you are selecting from but also the value of selection so the equation looks like this

size of pool + value of selection = breeder quality

now how do you assign a metric to something like value of selection

we can make it a simple Boolean value, a positive value if the value of the selection is relative to the selection or negative one if its not

so lets say someone is breeding indica and I want an indica

then the equation would look something like this

size of pool + value of selection (1) = breeder quality

if i wanted a sativa then equation might look like this

size of pool + value of selection (0) = breeder quality

now this is simple and needs to consider many more variables such as what percentage of that pool of plants you are selecting, the breeding environment (outdoor vs. indoor as an example)

if we consider breeding environment (we could add many more variables but im making it simple)

size of pool + value of selection + breeding environment = breeder quality

if it is an indoor indica i want and the breeder is offering a indica selection bred indoors the equation may look like this

size of pool + value of selection (1) + breeding environment (1) = breeder quality

while the values may not be factored in relative terms, they coudl be if this were refined.

Just, no...not even close to anything remotely sane.

really, so if someone selects lower flowering times as the main objective of their breeding project it has no relevance?

i just proved otherwise with the equations above. They are simple and need refinement but im not the one claiming to be so genius in math that I know what can and can't be done mathematically

im just saying if your using math as your proof of performance then show it or stop using it as a basis for determining the quality of a breeder

Nobody is going to accuse you of being a mathematical genius. Post my proof of using math? You mean besides all the countless books on botany and genetics? The quality of a breeder depends on a lot of factors, but the main foundation of every good breeder is proper breeding technique. On top of that, a good breeder is going to know that his breeding techniques are based on empirical data, evidence, and confirmed by his fellow breeders. That is so he doesn't spend 20 years working a strain only to scrap all of his work.

you keep on saying i dont understand but you qualify it in any manner

Tom made it pretty clear that NUMBERS were paramount, your not making any claims other than I don't know anything

you cant prove it with logical proofs, just accusations

hope your getting a free pack of beans for it at least

Lord, could you get anymore desperate? I know you don't see that you're wrong in this moment, but give it a few weeks. Read some more, sit on it, let the information sink in and then come back here. Also, while you are gone please, please learn to stop hitting enter after every sentence you write.

really, then share with me all the BEST breeding methods you learned in this thread

please

and while your at it tell me some of the criteria for your selections

i doubt you have any to be honest but ill give you the courtesy of benefit of doubt

Now you want me to read a 35 page thread to you? Now you want me to write out my individual tastes and preferences in cannabis, to satisfy your inability to comprehend that everyone selects uniquely? Ridiculous...

 

[indicadom]

look...you make more money having 57 new "strains" coming out in a couple 4x8 tents than you do being an actual breeder. Hell if "everybody" wasnt a "breeder" this site wouldnt even exist.

when i can fucking take all the same strains and breed them in my fucking basement and do the same thing all these other "breeders" are doing thats not breeding.

when you fill a greenhouse or warehouse full of 500 of the same cross, pick the best, then keep refining...well my friend then you are fucking breeding.

until then STFU with all the closet pollen chunkers pretending to be seed breeders. I can go fuck a dog...doesnt mean im breeding.

One giant contradiction.

 

[offthehook]

Quote indicadom:I was hoping ppl like you would have paved us the way already [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I[/FONT]Did you really just ask why we haven't done all the breeding work in the world for you? Lol...breeding takes time. Unquote.

Well, If you would have only worked one strain that actually works at my lattitude, It would have worked allover the whole fucking planet ^^

But so that is your response to that, tyvm.

I said 'us' btw. It's not just polar bears here yanno.

Maybe Tom could do any better?

 

[GreenintheThumb]

One giant contradiction.

It's not a contradiction when they take 57 "keeper" mothers, toss them in a room with untested pollen and dust the room; then release 57 "strains" all in three months like some of these fools.

 

[SooperSmurph]

I dunno... I read his posts and I'm like... "Wtf did I just read?"

It's the same feeling I'd get listening to a rambling homeless person.


EDIT: here comes the neg rep

I've known beggars to be kings, and kings to be beggars, all because they believed it to be so.

 

[Weird]

They dumb, they no picky uppy booky, smart men make powerful juju available to them but they no likey, they still think world flat and like to get together on sundays with like minded fools, they no likey change. you understand that any fucking better? FU

reading a book of math doesn't make you a mathematician Tom nor does reading all the books on hemp and horticultural give you a degree

you made this a them vs us thing the minute you started that shit the minute you called people imbeciles for running smaller plant numbers and just so you know you offended bunch of people including people who sell and contribute to the site

do you need me to show you the post where you said it?

and you made it pretty fucking clear it was all about the numbers

do i need to find and post those posts too?

then when I ask about the influence of all the other factors such as the criteria of selection, the environment the stock is bred in and most important the genetics themselves you don't dignify it with an answer you simply say my posts are too long and convoluted

but a few posts later you include some of those variables in your formula

would you like me to show you those posts as well?

then you continue to drop the "using scientific technique to verify empirically measure results" yet you never mention them

you want me to show you that post too Tom?

And Tom FYI if you are using empirical measures to gauge the results you can post them they can be used to calculate your value add

but boy do you get fucking mad when i ask you to

you want to see that post too?

why did you get so mad Tom when i asked you to prove how much better you are that you can try to make everyone else look like they are beneath you instead of just selling yourself on the virtue of your work?

now you start talking in a Chinese dialect and say fuck you because you read books and I don't?

you didn't even dignify prohibition being a factor not a matter of "choice" in a breeders decision making process

so please tell me again how people breeding in small numbers are imbeciles for doing so

tell me how everyone but you and the few breeders you hold in regard are exactly the same kinda suck because they "didn't read the book"

 

[Tom Hill]

Heya Offthehook,

The breeding of autos will likely always be an uphill climb no matter who is breeding them. The problem is that because they are "autos", very many valuable breeding tactics are off the table with them - and the significance of that can not be overstated. Namely, we can't go back and say okay this cross of these two parents did best and then repeat the cross in bulk (because the moms long gone by the time you find that out). So no matter who's doing the breeding the very best examples will be limited to the number of seed a single mother can hold, never again to be repeated exactly. While I sympathize with your plight I feel it will not be remedied anytime soon, not with the type of breeding methods we are currently discussing.

 

[Tom Hill]

"so please tell me again how people breeding in small numbers are imbeciles for doing so" let's just slow down there Weird and take it one at a time. Yes, Show me where I said that ^^^ for starters.

 

[Tom Hill]

What I was trying to convey, is that 20 closet breeders added up starts to equal significant numbers, and so because of that, good things are bound to come from it sooner or later.

 

[Tom Hill]

anyway yes Weird, I want to see where I said all that shit, or failed to explain and give examples of wtf I was talking about, are you sure you have the right guy, lol?

But yes please do take them one at a time if you would, thanks.

 

[offthehook]

Thanks Tom, Hence, all that comes to my mind with auto breeding is to stick to heirloom survival of the fittest inbreed breeding methodes in large numbers, and trying to get them as big and vigorous as regular plants at first.

Once that's achieved, I would need to look around for regular, more potent outcross candidates of suiteble speed & cannabinoid profile right?