From

Location

Message

Date Posted

Greencastle, PA

Who is planting a 1408.5 this year? There will be one in my patch. This seed wasn't planted much last year, but grew a 1300, and a couple over 1100. One was dmg, so don't say that I didn't warn you; but those are good odds so far.

Now look at the pedigree: 1068 Wallace x 805 Pukos

Now listen to me ramble about how great this is: This will require multiple posts.

That 1068 is not just any 1068; the 1408.5 is the biggest 1068 grown in the Pacific Northwest region. In fact, the only bigger 1068 offspring from west of the Mississippi is the 1662 Young. East of the Mississippi, only two 1068s have outperformed the mother of the 1408.5; those two grew the 1502 and 1450 Wallace. The 1408.5 was bigger than the 1385 Jutras and the 1125 McKie (pollinator of the 1041.5 McKie), which speak for themselves.

Before I continue, let me explain something about how I select seeds, because I fear that I may be confusing some new giant pumpkin growers/breeders whom we (the community of experienced growers) have so well instructed to look at the genetics...

4/19/2009 8:56:09 PM

Brooklyn Corner, Nova Scotia

Tom, that 1408.5 is a nice lookig cross to be sure, do you think maybe the experience of the grower had more of an influence on the result rather than a special 1068. When it comes to genetics size is unimportant, the fact that the 1408.5 was bigger than the 1385 is like saying the 1083.5 Martin or 1072 Girard were bigger than the 998.5 Pukos. You obviously are passionate about the 1408.5 and I can definitely relate to that. I wish you nothing but the best this season my friend and look forward to your reply.

4/19/2009 9:56:17 PM

Greencastle, PA

Genes are important; but size is important too. It has probably said on this site that good genetics produce the biggest pumpkins; so new growers' intuition that the biggest pumpkins have the best genetics actually follows as a corollary. Consider the 1420 LaRue/1446 Eaton crosses, like the 998 Pukos, as examples. As I came to learn more about growing, I came to suspect that this piece of advice, "Size doesn't matter; look at the genetics," was oversimplified. This website is called Bigpumpkins.com. Here, a pumpkin's size is exactly what matters and having the potential to grow big pumpkins is exactly what "good genetics" means. However, I learned quickly that it takes a lot to push these pumpkins to their full potential. Poor soil, poor weather too little space, too little light, and lack of adequate attention are a short list of common reasons for pumpkins falling short of their potential. Therefore, while I consider a pumpkin's weight, I consider it in light of the circumstances in which it was grown. Regarding both the mother and father of any cross, I ask questions like these:

4/19/2009 11:59:39 PM

Greencastle, PA

1. What did you think about this plant? Starting with this broad question can help you get a lot of key information about the plant (likely answers to some of my other questions and maybe some knowledge that would have otherwise slipped through the cracks) without pestering growers with too many questions. To my astonishment, I've learned that even heavy hitters have real jobs and real lives. Thus, if you ask them too many questions (especially ones that seem redundant) there's a good chance that they will either take a long time to respond (which is often a good thing and indicates thorough answers) or they will give you shallow answers.

2. Did it weigh heavy? If you don't like the answer you receive, ask my follow-up questions: A. "Was it rotting inside?" and B. "When did it stop growing?" Pumpkins lose weight as they rot and as they sit in the garden after they quit growing. The future is heavier. The first 1-ton pumpkin (yes, it will happen if the world does not end in 2012) must weigh heavy. Although the 1469 Checkon proved that thin pumpkins get big, just think about how many inches you would need before one that thin could break 1 ton. Being just over 17% light, it would have to have been about 2410 est. If it weren't to split, it would just collapse on itself.

4/20/2009 12:00:45 AM

Greencastle, PA

3. Was the pumpkin internally sound? This question always makes me think about how weird pumpkin enthusiasts must sound to normal people. I don't mean, "Was it deemed sound at the weigh-off?" At weigh-offs, soundness only signifies external qualities (lack of rot and/or hole to the cavity). Internal soundness concerns the structure of the fruit. You want to know about any dill rings (a dill ring is an interior crack in the wall of the pumpkin that runs perpendicular to the ribs), deep ribs, excessively concave blossoms, or any other unusual structural features. Although these are internal problems, they can be identified from outside. For example, Larry Checkon vividly describes the appearance of a dill ring as a "Sag line." Browse through the photos on here and you'll know when you see one.

4. Did the plant show any mutations? Perplexing mass doesn't count. Some common mutations are: seeds in blossom, club root, double vine, ribbon vine (do a site search for "octopumpkin" if you haven't seen a vine mutation before)

5. If applicable; how did this plant compare to the other plant(s) in your patch? This question calls for a simple response, but can give you an idea of how well (or not) a plant performed relative to near-by plants. If the grower only grows one plant per year, then find and compare results within the grower's area (first, find on a map where the pumpkin was grown; second, look on the GPC page for weigh-off results for individual sites in a grower's region; third, exclude pumpkins that came from a significantly different climate). For this question, I try to use the smallest possible geographical area for the sake of minimizing the number of variables. This way, it should be more difficult to overlook seeds from a good pumpkin that suffered from drought, hail, flooding, ufos, undesirable photoperiod, or any other local problem. This data should also be from the same year.

4/20/2009 12:01:04 AM

Greencastle, PA

6. How did this plant compare to its siblings? I do this comparison in two ways: historically and yearly. This is information that you can find for yourself. You can see a historical comparison in my first post, and you may have noticed that I was mistaken, the 1068 also grew the 1423 Wallace. Thus, the 1408.5 is #5 all-time, and was the third heaviest 1068 from 2007. The data for thess comparison are just lists of progeny from the parent seeds. For the 1408.5, I would compare how well that 1068 performed against every other 1068 (see post #1) and how well that 805 Pukos performed against every other 805.

7. Under what conditions was the plant grown? You want to know as much as you can about where and how the pumpkin was grown so that there are fewer factors that can skew your judgment. Find out whether the plant was grown for competition. Growers usually note on the seed packet whether a plant was grown purely for genetics, but if there is no indication, there's no harm in asking the grower. We all already feel like we could do a little (or even a lot) better, so I doubt that any growers would take it personally if you ask. There's a big difference between a 500lb genetics pumpkin and a 500lb competition pumpkin.


that took a while.... now back to the 1408.5....

4/20/2009 12:01:29 AM

Greencastle, PA

You're right and wrong, Andy. Let me explain after a brief disclaimer.

These statements are solely intended to shed light on the quality of the 1408.5 Daletas seed, so let it be known that I have a lot of respect for both Steve Daletas and Joe Jutras. However, I won't be sorry if a contest springs from this, because Daletas v. Jutras would be an awesome contest. We'll see which one of them can grow the biggest pumpkin outside of Pennsylvania!

Here's how I see it: Joe Jutras is a top grower too, on the same level as Mr. Daletas; yet in Rhode Island soil, with numerous attempts, even in the same year in which he grew the immortal 1689, Joe has not topped 1408.5 with the 1068. The one that grew the 1408.5 was definitely a special seed. Among 1068 offspring, the 1408.5 was #5 all time, #3 in 2007, and heaviest ever in the PNW. It won the famous weigh-off in Canby which seems to be the Canfield or Topsfield of the PNW. Plus, that 1068 had more than just the juice! It weighed 10% heavy, and was well structured. Poor density and structure are problems that I've seen in 1068 progeny, so the 1408.5 stands out mostly because of its soundness. I agree that the 1408.5 wouldn't have gotten nearly as heavy without Steve's attention; but neither would it have grown as heavy if it didn't have the genetics to do it in the first place.

Don't get carried away; I didn't say that the 1408.5 is better than the 1385 (yet). The comparison was only intended to help us get a general idea of the quality of 1068 genes that are available in the 1408.5. Indeed, the mother of the 1408.5 looks as good (or slightly better than) that of the 1385 when you consider my 7 points of interest. Check it out...

4/20/2009 2:07:43 AM

Gold Hill, Oregon

wow! some good information and history that i didn't know. i wish i would have known about it sooner i would have looked for it in auctions. i'm always a day late and a dollar short. lol! thank you. hey you.

dave

4/20/2009 2:43:16 AM

Gold Hill, Oregon

this reminds me of the 227 leland. who would have thought that little guy was so potent. i know someone had faith in it! and proved that it had potential.

dave

4/20/2009 2:50:42 AM

Greencastle, PA

Steve Daletas's 1068 Wallace vs. Joe Jutras's 1068 Wallace
Analysis in light of my 7 points of interest (see posts 4-6)

Correct me if I'm wrong; it has happened before.

Round 1 (grower's overall opinion): Obviously, I'm not the grower, but I'll do my best. Steve's 1068 was a strong, trouble-free plant. Unfortunately, I can't justly compare the plants on this point because it's so subjective and I have not asked Mr. Jutras much about the 1068 that grew his 1385. I didn't intend to plant one last year, so I figured that he could use his time better by filling SASBP's than talking about my 7 points ad nauseam. Joe and I spoke for about a minute at the Niagara Falls seminar in 2008, so all I could find out was "yeah," it was a good plant. We'll call this round a tie unless someone has something to add...

Round 2 (% heavy): I've been looking around the site for a while, but can't find a record of how the 1385 weighed to the chart. It was just about 10% over, correct? That would put it in another tie with Steve's 1068

Round 3 (internal soundness): See for yourself; it's a close call. The 1385 is smoother and doesn't have that little dip near the bottom right side of the blossom end like the 1408.
1385: http://bigpumpkins.com/displayphoto.asp?pid=5361&gid=1
1408: http://bigpumpkins.com/DisplayPhoto.asp?pid=5404
I think the 1385 barely wins this round

4/20/2009 3:04:43 AM

Greencastle, PA

Dave, thanks for bringing up the 227 Leland. That seed shows the importance of point #7, the conditions. The 227 Leland was grown from a cutting of a 723 Bobier plant. I haven't asked Thad Starr, but I bet that he knew it was from a cutting. He lurks around here, so maybe he can enlighten us

4/20/2009 3:13:12 AM

Greencastle, PA

Round 4 (mutations): Neither 1068 plant had any mutations that I know of. However, as I mentioned, I didn't get to ask Joe a lot about his 1068; so I'm not sure whether I have the complete picture. THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT IS PURELY HYPOTHETICAL: A couple of blossoms with seeds in them are easy to overlook when you're finally in the same building as your new Orange Jacket with your best friends and a couple hundred other people who want to talk to you. Remember, Joe's lie by omission is only a fictitious example of how I could possibly end up making a bad call in this round. Therefore, I will call this round a tie as well and add that I'm sorry for any errors.

So, now is a good time to say: the people here who really know me know that I really am just trying to see a one-ton pumpkin. It doesn't matter much who grows it or on whose seed it's grown. Sure, it would be nice if I were the first to grow a 'ton'kin, and it would be nice if it were grown on my seed; but it wouldn't mean as much if I only got to the top by knocking others down. I'm not trying to slander the 1385. In fact, I expect to see it in the family tree of the first tonkin. So go plant your 1385s, work harder on that plant than you ever have, and cross it with the 1255 VanKooten, if possible.

Round 5 (King of the patch): The 1408.5 is the irrefutable champion of this category. The 1408.5 was Steve's biggest in 2007 and still stands as his personal best (I will talk more about the significance of this fact later). It was 38 pounds heavier than his second best in 07. On the other hand, the 1385 Jutras was 304 pounds lighter than the 1689, Joe's heaviest from 2007. It was 33 pounds heavier than his 3rd heaviest, the 1352 from the 840 Parks...

4/20/2009 4:12:23 AM

Greencastle, PA

Round 5 (continued): If Joe's 1068 was a great 1068, then perhaps he would have had a pair of 1600's in 07. He's obviously capable of growing a 1600lber and another 1068 seed grew Don Young's 1662 that year. Plus, there was a heavier 1068 (the 1423.5 Wallace) grown locally in 2007. All of the stats in this round make Joe's 1068 look like an average plant. The 1408.5 is the outlier, #1 in the patch and the region, it wins round 5.

Round 6 (sibling rivalry): The easy round! 1408.5-1385=23.5; Steve's 1068 wins. Since they were both 2007 pumpkins, Steve's 1068 also wins for the year 2007. However, 23.5 lbs is only slightly more than 3 extra pounds per day for a week, so its not a very convincing win. Such a small difference could be attributed to so many factors, maybe genetics, but maybe just a few more days of sunshine or an extra inch of rain. Results like this are why I started asking question #5. Remember the goal? Minimize the number of variables.

Round 7 (The circumstances): Both pumpkins were grown for competition by experienced, accomplished growers.


Time for another disclaimer. Sorry if it's redundant, but I remember what happened when I said that the 1068 Wallace wasn't the best seed in the world. Here it is: I am not telling you to salt and roast your 1385. The 1385 is an excellent seed. Having good structure and that nice 998 Pukos pollinator, it really could be as good as most think it will be. It might even be as good as the 1130 Jutras; let's plant a few of those and find out.

So now that my appreciation of the 1385 Jutras seed is perfectly clear, I have to say that the 1068 Wallace that grew Steve's 1408.5 was better than the one that grew Joe's 1385.

4/20/2009 6:10:18 AM

Greencastle, PA

Andy,
Now that I got the 7-point comparison out of the way, I want to tell you about the significance of the fact that Steve Daletas was the grower. You asked, "...do you think maybe the experience of the grower had more of an influence on the result rather than a special 1068?"
I would be inclined to agree with you, had Steve grown a heavier pumpkin in 2007 or ever. We aren't talking about a 1068 that was left eating the dust from any other plant. It was (and remains) Steve Daletas's personal best. That means a lot to me, because Steve has been growing for over a decade (the oldest pumpkin of his that is documented on briansinsanity is an 847 from 1998), has held the world record (1385 lbs in 2003), and has inspired our community by growing two 1000lbers on one plant (the 1230 and 1016) when it was still rare to see a 1000lber. There are a lot of new growers here now who don't really understand how the 1230 Daletas changed competitive pumpkin growing. When I first joined bigpumpkins.com, the 1140 Stelts had just become the new world record. It was the autumn of 2000, and the world record hadn't even increased by 100 lbs since the first 1000lbers, the 1006 Greer (R.I.P., Bill) and 1061 Zehr, were weighed in 1996. Top weights had been stagnant since the last big year, 1994, when 4 growers broke the 900lb barrier and Herman Bax held the world record for the next two years with a 990lb monster. Belief in the possibility of a 1500lb pumpkin was dying out, but that 1230, taping 416", renewed a lot of people's hope. You could feel it. Everything was different after the 1230.
Steve Daletas has been giving expert care to the best seeds in the world for a decade. A seed that stands out in his patch must be a special seed.

Okay, now I have important things to do. We can talk about the 805 Pukos later...
Peace

4/20/2009 6:47:07 AM

Preston CT

The 1385 was picked a month early...and sat in his basement until weighoff due to a bad stem....

4/20/2009 1:48:06 PM

Greencastle, PA

WOW, that's not good. Do you know the estimated weight, or whether Joe weighed it when he picked it? Thanks for the info.

Now, if that 1068 supplied half of the genes to the hottest 2007 seed, how could anyone doubt the 1408?

4/20/2009 6:56:03 PM

Greencastle, PA

True, the 1408's pollinator wasn't THE 998, but it was still pretty nice. It was my favorite seed, the 805 Pukos (1092 Burke x 723 Bobier). The 1092 (935 Lloyd x self) was the 1998 world record, and was definitely an outlier in Gary Burke's patch. I've never heard of anything else that he grew; honestly, I'm not completely sure whether I got his first name right. The 805 was one of the biggest (maybe #2) 1092 offspring, and was crossed with the 723 Bobier (935 Lloyd x 865 Mettler). That 723 produced the 1096.8 Pukos, which was identical to the 1407.3 Wolf, 17% heavy, and the third heaviest pumpkin in the world in 2000. That was the 723 that got everybody's attention.

As the purest proven source of nice 935 and 723 genes, the 805 has a lot to bring to the table. It's reliable for producing good structure and high density. Steve's 805 produced a heavy and nice looking 1203. The 805 can grow bigger (top weight=1373), but overall, I think Steve's 805 was a good one.

Great 1068 x Good 805 looks good to me.

4/20/2009 7:55:28 PM

Brooklyn Corner, Nova Scotia

Tom, there is no question that the 1408.5 is a great seed and hopefully it will get the attention it deserves, HOWEVER, I was about to concede when I did a little research as you did. 2007 was the dream season that produced the 1689, 1662 and 1631. It also produced the 1408.5. As far as personal bests go, the 1068 must lead the pack. Look at the top 15 weights from the 1068 and check the personal bests. In 2007, the top 5 Daletas fruit on 5 different seeds were all over 1000 lbs. The 1370 Daletas was only 15 lbs short of Steve's previous PB, not on a 1068, special seed or special grower? 23.5 lbs. over his previous PB is less than 2% as was the difference between the 1385 Jutras and the 1408.5 Daletas. In 2007 Joe Jutras top 5 weights on 5 different seeds were well over 1000 lbs, special seed or special grower? I don't want to knock any seed out there but experience and dedication are the two most important factors when it comes to growing the big one. The right seed in the right hands leads to the results obtained by Steve Daletas, Joe Jutras, Don Young and other HH out there. Hell, those guys could grow a field pumpkin bigger that a lot of folks reading this. All I'm saying is that the 1408.5 could produce the next record, or like many, many, other under planted and under appreciated seeds, it may fade into obscurity due to marketing, popularity or flavor of the month. Personally I hope it sees lots of dirt. We'll see.

4/20/2009 10:19:56 PM

Cornelius, Oregon

People overlook another 1068 that was weighed in at the same weighoff as the 1408, was only 8.5 pounds less than the 1408, was the growers PB by 250 pounds, yes it weighed light, but was still 413 inches and was crossed with a plant/seed stock that was 27% heavy, had decent color and the traditional snout of the 1068, and has never been grown. Note too that the seedling I have growing from the 1400 is the most aggressive seedling in my patch.

4/24/2009 6:39:26 PM

Utah

I grew the 1408.5 Daletas last year.
Steve had been giving me seeds for a long time but I had never planted one. So in 08 I though I would change that so I tried the 1408.5 seed... big pumpkin, great genetics, good color and shape.
It was a great carefree plant. the pumpkin developed two deep ribs. One was on a side the other was on top. The one on the top eventually split. That was in early Sept. I didn't seal it but still it kept growing till a couple of weeks before the weigh off.
Mine was the unlucky dmg one ... but it still came in at 1170.5 lbs. If you include dmg pumpkins, then it's the biggest one ever grown in Utah.
I set it in front of my house right after the weigh off and carved it. It big rotten spots inside. I think
You can see pictures of the plant and pumpkin in my 08 diary.
I am going to grow it again this year.

4/24/2009 7:54:20 PM

Utah

here is the link to my 08 diary

http://bigpumpkins.com/Diary/DiaryView.asp?season=2008&grower=3085&action=L

4/24/2009 7:55:42 PM

Bemidji Minnesota

My pick for the best genetics out there, for an unproven seed, would be the 1483 Werner.

1385 Jutras x 1207 young

What is so special about that?

1385 Jutras is a 1068 (many records) crossed with 998 Pukos (male from the current WR 1689)

Now, the 1207 Young, is a 1370 Rose (many records) crossed with 1068 (same as the 1662 plant)


The 1483 Werner was also very sound and sturdy, with no dill rings or internal cracks.

She was 11.8% heavy as well.

4/25/2009 11:04:30 AM