From

Location

Message

Date Posted

Rhode Island

its a great time to discuss the future of our champion pumpkins. will we ever see a 2,000 pound pumpkin?
personally id love to see it or even better yet be the guy who grows it however, i just dont see it happening in my life time.

think about for a minute. the average ag has 90 to 100 days of growth and shes done correct?

even the biggest at 1689 was about done at weigh-off time.
do the math for even that massive fruit to go 2,000 joe would have needed to put on an additional 319 pounds between mid august and late september.thats an average of 10 more pounds a day for almost 32 days.
so instead of 45 per day during her peak you would need 55.? ( and not blow open either ) and so on once the daily gains start to drop.
also our weather plays a major roll as we saw this past season.

i think it will take a real freak to break the current record. one that just keeps growing and growing in spite of the goings on around it.even at that 2,000 pounds? i really dont think its in the cards for a very long time.
but we can sure dream cant we?

pap

12/5/2008 2:26:30 PM

Minnesota

Well was'nt it about 10 years ago that 1,000 was unbelievable, I think 5 years at the most and someone will hit 2,000. I think last year was a bit of a fluke, bad weather everywhere, I think if the weather was fine, there would of been alot more closer to 1689, maybe even a few over.

12/5/2008 2:40:12 PM

Pembroke, New Hampshire

I think your arguement has merit, but why not think out of the box?
If we've engineered pumpkins that grow over 1500 pounds, why can't we select out pumpkins that also grow longer then 80-90 days? Why can't we get them to grow 100, 110 or even 120 days. If we can, we don't need to put on higher daily weight gains, just for longer periods of time.
Looking historically, we've been getting them bigger and bigger each year, despite repeated advice that it couldn't be done. I don't see why we can't get higher weight gains per day, AND a longer growing interval. We just need to keep selecting the heavier and thicker pumpkins.
The only reason it won't be done in your lifetime, Pap, is if you don't stop smoking. ;)

12/5/2008 2:40:30 PM

Cologne Brescia Italy

Do you think Pap??
keep an eye on my diary next year,you will see how I'm able of to do LOL..............., just i'm crossing my finger only for half of how you are saying, I can't to think nor for drim to 2000 lbs, but never to say never!
Sergio

12/5/2008 2:52:32 PM

Western NY

It will happen, probably another 5-10 years away.

Here's a pumpkin that did 63# per day:

http://bigpumpkins.com/Diary/DiaryViewOne.asp?eid=73782

Here's another one that did 70# per day:

http://bigpumpkins.com/Diary/DiaryViewOne.asp?eid=53769

(sorry to pick on you, Kevin)

The pace is there if they can hold together at that speed. Considering at least 30 years of the history of giant pumpkin competitions, we've just started to get into better plant management practices.

2,000= 600# on day 30, another 3 weeks @ 38#/ day, 25#/day the next 2 weeks, then tapering out to an average of just over 7# per day for the last 5 weeks. That's 100 days, and I know there's pumpkins growing almost 120 days, which would bring those numbers down a touch.

12/5/2008 3:20:27 PM

2000 lbs will happen its just a matter of everything falling into place perfect warm weather pattern and right rainfall along with soil balanced and many other factors that some are things we can control. here in iowa 2007 was 17th warmest year ever things were realy growing then august turned into wettest year in 135 years. interesting to look back at weather to see how things played out

http://www.agriculture.state.ia.us/climatology/weatherSummaries/2007/fms200708.pdf

12/5/2008 4:14:47 PM

Hamburg, NY

Somehow - somewhere - someone will get it done. Watch out for those island growers! Pap, I hope you're planning to stick around a little while to see it!

12/5/2008 4:30:08 PM

Boise City, Oklahoma, USA

I think it's going to take some falling back to select for fruit structure, after having one here develop horizontal internal dill like cracks--had it grown like it SHOULD have, instead of like it DID, it would've 'blown'. I haven't been growing for ages like most of you in this thread, so far, but. Fruit that blows from developing internal defects... along with needing more rapid gain and/or a longer growing time... are what I think are going to be major factors on pushing past to 2000# and beyond.

As cndadoc said, selecting for heavier, THICKER pumpkins... I've said in chat that I'm starting on 'pretty' and adding 'heavy' and I'll be asking about what did that fruit look like inside... did this line blow a lot of them?

I know I got a long way to go to handle the 'growing' part, but everyone's gotta have a plan. Mine will be what did the inside of that fruit do as well.

Of course, we could have another jump or two like the one from 1502 to 1689 and 1662 in one year. Two jumps like that would net the prize. But. I think in the long run it may need a rededication to how the fruit is structured as well. Just my .000002 worth from way down here.

12/5/2008 4:41:02 PM

What IF the 1689 had gone 18% heavy?

12/5/2008 4:53:14 PM

Adams County

I dont know about 2000 lbs. but i think 1700 + lbs is very near. alot of good growers out their getting close, would not surprise me if it wasnt Quinn W or Jutras. but just my opinion.

12/5/2008 5:17:57 PM

Pocatello ([email protected])

I just want to get to 1000 before someone else gets to 2000. ;-0

12/5/2008 6:08:46 PM

Minnesota([email protected])

It's hard to predict. When the record was 1502, I thought(more like guessed) the top weights would start to level off, and new records would come less frequently, with only modest jumps. Then came 2007 and the record was broken by 187 lbs.
Dick makes some good points. I'm still guessing that we're close to a leveling off period regarding top yearly weights. Although many make good points to the contrary.
Dan, if the 1689 went 18% heavy, it would have had an OTT that estimated at 18% less than it actually did. In all due respect;-)
Keep an eye on Kevin Marsh in the future. He seems to know how to grow em.

12/5/2008 6:26:39 PM

[email protected]

It will happen sooner than later, in my opinion. It would have already happened if we weren't copycat growers, There are seeds out there that will go 20% heavy, their just not getting the attention they need because their not out of 1000 pound plus pumpkins.
Joe Jutras, in my opinion maxed out the 998, and if it was heavy to charts, he could have been close, Also the same for Larry Checkon with his 1354.
We just need to keep planting the 227 Lelands, the 125 Wolf's, etc.
The genetic makeup of the seed is far more important than the size of pumpkin it came from.

12/5/2008 6:34:44 PM

along eddy's line of thinking and rewording for doug's sake,

"what IF the 433"OTT (of the 1689) had gone 18% heavy?"

12/5/2008 7:09:15 PM

Minnesota([email protected])

Dan,
I'm sorry if I seem like smart aleck. I don't mean any offense. Every time I hear someone ask something similar to what you stated, I think the same thing. The pumpkin would still have to grow 18% faster than it actually did.

12/5/2008 7:29:32 PM

Minnesota([email protected])

I mean 18% more than it actually did.

12/5/2008 7:30:16 PM

Cornelius, Oregon

We have had a multiple fruit of some size go over 25% heavy, and the CHeckon fruit at what 442 inches... What does that combination make? Somewhere over 2200? Genetically we are there, we just need the structural integrity of the barrell shape and to combine the genes we already have. It will happen.

12/5/2008 7:35:21 PM

[email protected]

Doug, I disagree with growing 18% faster, All it needs is to have heavier flesh, Now what I mean, you can have 2 fruit that are both 8 inches thick, one goes light, one goes heavy, you need the heavy,
Takes just as long to grow a light 8 inch fruit as a heavy 8 inch fruit.

12/5/2008 7:35:54 PM

Ontario, Canada.

Andy I don't know how you found that Marsh pumpkin. Man what a good find for this discussion.

Those daily numbers are really remarkable. That pumpkin was grown from the 1446 Werner. Those 1446's are amoung the fastest growing plants I have ever seen. I had one that split on me this year that simply astonished me with its growth pace. If there ever was a seed that could break the 2K barrier the 1446 would be one of my top choices.

Cornerstone Update > Surprize the 1446 Werner plant starts to kick into gear. This is a picture of the bird bath fruit Nutty x 752* Landry 07. Day 35 = 131 + 71 + 74 = 276. Not too bad and well on its way to the 1200 pound level it it stays together. Nutty went from D27 = 87" on July 31st to D35 = 131 today. Just doing the CC math an incredible number of 45.5 pounds per day is calculated.

http://www.bigpumpkins.com/Diary/DiaryView.asp?season=2008&grower=24016&action=L

12/5/2008 7:47:48 PM

So. Maine

wait til next year !

12/5/2008 8:14:30 PM

Brooklyn Corner, Nova Scotia

What if the 1689 had gone 18% heavy? Dan I love ya but that's just another way of saying what if the 1689 weighed 1993 lbs. Eddy you're right on "The genetic makeup of the seed is far more important than the size of pumpkin it came from." However, percentage heavy is WAY over emphasized. The 1306 Jutras produced the 5th heaviest pumpkin this year, 14th overall, and went 3.75 under. The OTT method is accurate + or - 20%, great for benchmarking and that's all. Balanced soil, experience, weather and a great seed will produce a 2000lb fruit. Percentage heavy is a red herring. A 1500lb fruit -5% beats a 1000 fruit +5% every time. My humble opinion, sorry for diverting this post.

12/5/2008 10:06:59 PM

I guess a few of you don't agree that for these fruit to ever reach 2,000 lbs thick walls and no flaws will be major keys in getting there,,,just my .02

We'll all have to wait and see at this point, but my money is on a heavy % fruit making the mark first.

12/5/2008 10:14:10 PM

Darfield, British Columbia, Canada

It will happen. I grew a 774lb pumpin and that was up in the north country. Good growing up here and 1400lbs is not too crazy to ask and down south a bit should be able to push the envelope

12/5/2008 11:23:34 PM

Elk Grove,Ca USA

Pap
You and I had this talk in Niagra last year. Genetics is all the same; plant animal etc. When you go after performance in any species you give up structure, reproduction, and immune system. I have seen it in my industry. When you go too far out on the limb on a tree, the weight of performance breaks the limb on the tree. We go down to the nearest fork and rebuit at times cutting the tree down and bringing in new genetics all together. We have to be very careful in our breeding work and look at other facors just not the weight and performances. I have said as well it is many years if at all that we see 2000. The poultry indusry has benefeited from genetics, nutrition and technology and also being able to get two generations in a year; which speeds up genetic progress. Those same factors help us acheive in the AG's

12/5/2008 11:43:04 PM

Littleton, Colo

Az long az we keep trying and are smart about it...it will happen.....good post !

12/5/2008 11:52:14 PM

(rocky) Bonney Lake Wa.

Very much agree with Eddy's statement

12/6/2008 8:19:07 AM

Commack, NY

didnt we almost have a pumpkin hit 2,000 lbs this year? i saw it all over the tv, internet, newspapers......1,800 lbs and still growing!!!

Im going with Andy on this one, next 5-10 years.

12/6/2008 9:03:31 AM

southwest MO

I think unkadan is on the money. A large "frame" pumpkin with thick dense flesh is the key. One that gets out fast and piles on the inches through day 50 or 60 then sits and fills that frame out for another 50 or 60 days.

12/6/2008 9:10:19 AM

[email protected]

OK I'm in no way slamming the 998,I received a few emails claiming this.
Joe Jutras, one of the top growers in the world, one of the best weather seasons on record, add these 2 together, and that is why I claimed Joe Jutras maxed out the 998.
There is no seed that Joe Pukos produces that isn't a potential great. I would never say anything bad about any of his seeds.

12/6/2008 11:46:53 AM

Joliet, IL

i will be very interested in seeing how the 1041 mckie does as a pollinator in many of the new 2008 crosses that will be grown in 2009 and on. if those consistent heavy density genetics get passed on to something with the big ott size dominant genes, watch out. get anything near the 1700 range in size and the density must do the rest to get to 2000.

new cultural practices, soil science and fertilizer technology, and most importantly---shared knowlege---should i believe get us over the 1700 lb ott size mark more conistently with in 5 years. and then it will be up to that one magic pumpkin in the magic growing season that will have both the size and the density genetics to break the
one ton mark.

who will be that grower?

12/6/2008 12:18:33 PM

Brooklyn Corner, Nova Scotia

Eddy, I certainly didn't see anything offensive in your comments.
I completely agree with Dan's comments-"for these fruit to ever reach 2,000 lbs thick walls and no flaws will be major keys in getting there" It's the % heavy thing that bugs me. The 998 grew 12 fruit over 1000 lbs this year, what a great seed. The % heavy ranges from -9% to + 11%, mostly on the plus side. Does that mean you wouldn't plant Ben Hebb's 1262 grown on a 998.5 even though it went 9% light? I hope not. 7 of the top ten heaviest fruit weighed at Cooperstown went "light", bit of a contradiction. All world class seeds and world class growers.

12/6/2008 12:25:07 PM

Lloydminster/AB

The 1446 Eaton grew at a steady pace to the harvest day. I can't remember for sure but I believe peak growth per day was less than 30lbs a day but it held that rate a long time. There are fruit grown this year with similar genetic background that may have recorded good growth after 110days. Give that one a little faster growth for a little longer... 2000lbs is close already. length of growth period is key. I bet it will happen in a colder climate where people are used to artificially lengthening the season, after all it's easier to heat than cool and warm temps shut these things down. Now 2500lbs I'm not sure of.

Don

12/6/2008 12:36:52 PM

[email protected]

Andy, Ben's fruit on the 998 was 1281, and went 7.66%light, and was crossed with the 916 Hebb, Would I grow it, depends on what the 916 Hebb was, AGGC has no info on it.
I don't look too hard into % heavy or light, but more on a growers average of % heavy or light, By this I mean, if a grower consistently grows 5-10%light, and then grows one that is 5-10% heavy, then that makes me look at it. So going from 10% light to 10% heavy in the same patch, would be a 20% plus in a growers patch that runs at even or a bit heavy as a standard, and that's how I came up with 20% needed to make the 2000 pounds, hope that makes sense.

12/6/2008 1:20:41 PM

Brooklyn Corner, Nova Scotia

Makes sense to me Eddy and I respect your opinion. I'll save my opinions on % heavy for another time. As for Ben's pumpkin, I got the results from the GPC info page.

http://www.bigpumpkins.com/WeighoffResultsBySite.aspx?
s=20&c=P&y=2008

12/6/2008 1:40:48 PM

[email protected]

Andy, that's interesting, as I pulled my info from the AGGC, Not sure which one is right, But either way, the 916 is unknown

12/6/2008 2:31:05 PM

Upstate S.C.

It will be from someone in the south.

12/6/2008 5:02:58 PM

Newmarket, NH USA

I think it is going to take a long time if it happens at all. I have been growing since 1996 and have seen new records every year until this year and huge jumps in weight. This year was not even close. I agree with PaP that adding over 300 more pounds is really going to be tough to do. I think we may have the answere to the big question in a few years. How big can these really get.

12/7/2008 7:02:36 PM

Minnesota([email protected])

I'm thinking that as well Matt. It seems we're in the minority.

12/8/2008 1:17:20 AM