From

Location

Message

Date Posted

Everywhere there are growers

We have combined both our Standard and Enhanced OTT charts for 2013 into one file. The charts can be located in the "How to.." section here on Bigpumpkins.com under "Team-Pumpkin 2013 Enhanced OTT Chart". Both charts are based on the largest possible data set containing over 6500 pumpkins. The Standard chart serves well for day to day evaluations while the Enhanced chart provides better insight into what to expect at the scale. Growers evaluating pumpkins for 'heavy to the chart' when making seed selections should begin a new way of looking at weights. % heavy or lite should be relative to the limits of the range for each OTT, not the value in the standard chart.

3/13/2013 2:35:12 PM

Fairfield, CT, 06825

Way to go guys

3/13/2013 3:18:52 PM

Wi

Is this the same chart I received from the GPC?

3/13/2013 5:05:37 PM

Western NY

no, Chris.

3/13/2013 5:15:04 PM

Willamette Valley, Oregon

Nope, not the same, Chris.

3/13/2013 5:28:06 PM

Wi

What the heck....lol.

3/13/2013 5:46:58 PM

Pocatello ([email protected])

Great job!

Do you happen to have this in spreadsheet form?

I'm working on my own SS, to work in Google Docs. With the Google Docs, I can enter data into my SS right while I'm standing next to the pumpkin, on any device, or I can enter it at home, or away from home, at any time I'm connected.

3/13/2013 6:23:35 PM

Torrance, Ca.

Whats the difference Andy?

3/13/2013 7:01:11 PM

Western NY

It's some complicated math, but I goofed up the estimations a bit last year. Overall, not a big deal when averaged out, but it was way more pronounced on the upper end (overestimating). Scott Holub pointed out a much better formula to come up with a couple months ago, and we reworked it. His technical explanation and the chart we plan to use going forward can be found here: http://gpc1.org/index.php/resources

And remember, it's just an estimate. The scale will tell the tale.

Andy

3/13/2013 7:11:10 PM

Torrance, Ca.

Thanks Andy! So its going to be a little different then the nice laminated ones we got in Vegas?

And I'm sure I won't have to worry about any of my stuff being in the upper range:)

3/13/2013 7:43:49 PM

Western NY

The one you have is correct. The one I did last year says 2012 on it.

3/13/2013 8:00:37 PM

Connecticut, USA

Has anyone applied the various formulas to the thousands upon thousands of pumpkins already weighed to see which gives a more accurate estimate?

3/14/2013 6:37:39 AM

Menomonie, WI ([email protected])

I was going to do a histogram when I got a chance. Last year I did and it was pretty accurate with the mean being centered. It is hard when you throw fliers in there like 37% heavy and 26% light

3/14/2013 7:23:57 AM

Western NY

Scott looked at the 2008-2012 numbers, i think that's how he caught my errors. Nick Harp also did an in depth look at the numbers for a presentation he gave at the seminar in ohio last spring.

3/14/2013 7:42:20 AM

Little-TON - Colorado

ThankZ AW for your constant accuracy and your care to share same! I am so reminded what my MOM constantly told me....... TOO MANY COOKz Spoil the broth....

I love that new GPC chart, and so will our club.... even includeZ Field PumpkinZ...and available in Metric... NICE JOB Team GPC!

3/14/2013 10:06:56 AM

Denver, CO

How did you guys calculate the range on the enhanced chart? Is it a certain confidence interval?

3/14/2013 11:44:48 AM

The bottom of New Jersey

Certainly no disrespect to Andy or anyone else who has calculated these charts in the past - the math is waaaaayyyyyy beyond my brain - but I really like the enhanced OTT chart a lot. It is a lot more realistic to think of your pumpkin's weight as being within a reasonable range rather than one fixed point. A lot of factors can affect your final weight, most of which have nothing to do with genetics, so I really think this helps us ID the pumpkins that are truly genetically programmed to be denser. Which brings me to an important question - since the data shows that "Our pumpkins are getting bigger but
the relationship of OTT to Weight has not changed.", does this mean we are not succeeding in making them thicker?

3/14/2013 12:42:12 PM

Saegertown Pa.

To get this straight we have the pre 2012 chart that some used last year and we have the 2012 updated chart that Andy did last year that some people used. Now we have a updated chart we got at the GPC convention in Vegas that I thought fixed some problems and every one was going with. Now we have another updated chart from team pumpkin ? I don't now about any one else but I'm confused on what chart to use ?

3/14/2013 12:45:33 PM

Connecticut, USA

Seems to me that last year everybody was just comparing OTT inches anyway.

3/14/2013 1:06:45 PM

Willamette Valley, Oregon

This issue with the old charts is not overall accurracy, which they were all fairly good at, including Team-pumpkins new one. The problem was with a bias, or over-prediction, at the large OTTs (over 400-420+ inches).

It's all explained in the article titled:
What's With All The Big Light-to-Chart Pumpkins in 2012? New OTT Chart Needed

Here's a direct link:
http://gpc1.org/PDF/Holub_changes.pdf

3/14/2013 1:44:16 PM

How could anybody call the 2009 light or heavy to chart when it is the first and only pumpkin to weigh that much?

Would there not need to be more big ones grown before you could get a proper average?

3/14/2013 9:07:18 PM

Piqua, Ohio

quinn
I'd use the one that shows em being the heaviest

3/14/2013 9:26:09 PM

Willamette Valley, Oregon

Spudder, Strictly speaking there was actually one pumpkin bigger OTT than the 2009 pounder and another that tied OTT-wise, so that helps. But to your point, that isn't many.

The real issue though is the shape of the equation used for prediction. If the equation fits the data well, prediction out beyond the range of the data should be ok. One that doesn't fit well over the whole range of data will be off even worse when extrapolating out.

Here's a little table of the top 5 OTT pumpkins and the chart predictions with the 2013-Holub/Wolf-(Vegas) chart predicted weight and the 2013 Team-pumpkin chart predicted weight (I hope formatting on this works):

OTT___Actual.Wt_GPC/Holub-Wolf_%chart__Team-P__%chart__Team-pumpkin Enhanced    
464___1872.0_______1907________-1.9_____2099___-10.8___1916-2281(out of range)
458___2009.0_______1856_________8.2_____2021_____0.1___1845-2196(in range)
458___1775.0_______1856________-4.4_____2021___-12.2___1845-2196(out of range)
448___1794.0_______1770_________1.3_____1896____-5.4___1730-2060(in range)
447___1630.5_______1762________-7.5_____1884___-13.5___1719-2047(out of range)

Avg___1861.1_______1830________-4.3_____1984____-8.3


Basically you can see that the Holub/Wolf chart is closer on average and all pumpkins by that chart are within 10% of the actual weight, which is about as good as we can hope for. If I showed more pumpkins the Holub/Wolf chart would average pretty close to 0% for the whole range of the data (as shown in the article). There will still be variation around the average, though.

3/15/2013 12:02:11 AM

Johnston, R.I.

As far as I can see more info is a good thing..Thanks everyone who spent time working on these projects. We can test the charts against the scale this fall and see what they bring.. Remember the word is estimate ladies and gentlemen..

3/15/2013 4:28:05 AM

Bathabitat, I have read your new chart and understand the differences and why. Thanks to all who volunteer their time for the pumpkin community. Very much appreciated.

After reading what you said in your paper , Would it be of help for growers to measure (using parallel points) the actual width, height and length as well as the usual measurements to help you guys in your research in which shape is the heaviest?

3/15/2013 5:14:56 PM

Rhode Island

all the new and improved charts in the world dont matter if the people doing the taping are not correct in their placement of the tape.it makes a big difference.

a couple inches up or down on all three measurements on a pumpkin taping over 1,500 pounds makes a big difference in your chart findings.

thats why the scale is the one and only best tale of the tape.

3/16/2013 10:15:51 AM