IRIS SCORE CARD (AIS Bulletin No. 15, April 1924)
The growing plant, in flower, and its value to the garden picture is the point to be judged, but it must be
remembered that each variety should be compared with others of similar color or habit and credit given
only for superior development. Partial credit only is often advisable.
PLANT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20%
Growth exceedingly strong and vigorous. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10%
Effect in garden; free- flowering, floriferous. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10%
STALK. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20%
Poise: the flowers pleasantly proportioned in size and shape to the height and branching habit. . . . 10%
Height: 3 feet or over in the taller groups; 27 inches in the intermediates, variegata, or amoenas. . . 10%
FLOWER. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35% *
Color: clear; venation or reticulation, if noticeable, clearly defined.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 %
Form: if distinctive and pleasing; e. g., Iris King, Dalmatica.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10%
Size: e. g., Monsignor, Dorothea, Juniata, Loreley in their class.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10%
Substance: firm and resistant to weather conditions.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10%
OUTSTANDING QUALITIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15%
Unless a variety is both clearly distinct and pleasing, it should not receive further credit.
General all round excellence, the full 15 %
Fragrance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 %
Foliage; good thru out the season . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10%
Value for exhibition or as a cut flower. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 %
100%
* We believe this to be a typo as the subsets add up to 45%, not 35%. This was repeated in the 1925 version as well.
This lent some credibility and consistency to
the AIS effort to make the judging process perhaps
more structured and more objective than the first
two Dykes awards in their year of introduction.
The rating system disappeared at some point
and was replaced by our Judges’ Handbook as our
society matured. Reportage of Dykes winners in
the AIS Bulletin through the years was inconsistent
depending on who chaired the Committee on
Awards. Some years the winner was listed with vote
totals and runners-up. Other years only the winner
was listed with no votes indicated. The number of
judges voting was listed sometimes, others not. At
some point in time the AM became a requirement
for eligibility for the Dykes Medal and later still the
Section Medals as the system matured.
No awards were given in later years when no
variety received 15% of the total votes (1946, 1960,
1969 and 1987). In 1970 as in 1969, no iris received
15%. But since six received 5%, by rule second place
votes were counted, thus ‘Skywatch’ (Cliff Benson
1964, TB) with 121 combined votes became the Dykes
Medal winner. The 15% rule was deleted after 1987.
The highest vote total ever attained was in the 1968
landslide victory vote of 272 for ‘Stepping Out’
(Schreiners 1964, TB). That was 67% of the votes
cast! No wonder it topped the Symposium poll as
number one for over 20 years. The two most recent
Dykes Medal winners have both received less than
10% of the total votes cast. Perhaps the old 15% rule
should be readdressed.
Coulda-woulda-shoulda varieties (those
considered by many to have warranted a Dykes
Medal) have included ‘Snow Flurry’ (Clara Rees,
1939, TB); ‘Ballerina’ (Dave Hall 1951, TB); ‘Melodrama’
(Paul Cook 1956, TB); ‘White Swirl’ (Fred Cassebeer
1957, SIB); ‘Emma Cook’ (Paul Cook 1959, TB); ‘Cup
Race’ (Stedman Buttrick 1963, TB); ‘Cotton Blossom’
(Bennett Jones 1970, SDB); ‘Archie Owen’ (Ben
Hager 1970, SPU); ‘Lemon Mist’ (Nathan Rudolph
1972, TB); ‘Joyce Terry’ (Tell Muhlestein 1974, TB);
‘Ann Chowning’ (Frank Chowning 1976, LA); ‘Rare
Edition’ (Joe Gatty 1980, IB); ‘Lady Friend’ (Joe Ghio
1981, TB); and, ‘Bluebeard’s Ghost’ (Paul Black 2006,
SDB). All of these won awards and have stood the
test of time in AIS symposiums and popularity polls.
They just didn’t win the big one. Close but no cigar.
d
Winter 2019 AIS Bulletin 27