• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

How to produce Hypo-Lavender-Bloodreds

Yep. We all know that the best way to produce Hypo Lavender Bloodreds would be to breed two Hypo Lavender Bloodreds, but I think for most of us that just isn't an option. I'd rather breed my 2.4 for 5 years and hope I get a triple homo pair while making extra cash off the byproducts then spend thousands on a hatchling pair that could die or escape on me. And actually even with those odds, I should get a pair in just two years. Of course there are a few other shortcuts one could make, but we all do what we can with what we got. I don't think Gregg was trying to create a tutorial. :)
 
Hmmm, when I read the beginning of the thread again, I don't know what the deal is. I added a Step 4 - perhaps I should have also put some :grin01: :grin01: :grin01: :grin01: behind my sentence.
Post two from me was a simple statistics fact, neither more nor less.

I bet if Serp would have added the little mathematics things, there wouldn't be any discussion about anything.

Taking your thoughts one step further - we could breed Bloodred X Lavender het. Hypo and keep 8.16 and have the same chances to achieve HypoLavBloodred.
 
Menhir said:
Hmmm, when I read the beginning of the thread again, I don't know what the deal is. I added a Step 4 - perhaps I should have also put some :grin01: :grin01: :grin01: :grin01: behind my sentence.
Post two from me was a simple statistics fact, neither more nor less.

I bet if Serp would have added the little mathematics things, there wouldn't be any discussion about anything.
Click to expand...

I don't know what the deal is either, perhaps something is getting lost in translation. You posted a simple statistics fact, Gregg acknowledged and said you were right. Then he stated a simple statistics fact and said he could increase his chances by keeping more animals.

When you disputed that, we just began to explain that even so we thought the pairing is worth while and then gave our reasons why. Gregg was just playing around with the recipe theme, and even said "The Cornsnake Pit Recipe". Now it might not be the fastest reciepe, but it works.

We all recognized you were right, then explained our reasons for taking on the challenge, what more do you want?

Menhir said:
Taking your thoughts one step further - we could breed Bloodred X Lavender het. Hypo and keep 8.16 and have the same chances to achieve HypoLavBloodred.
Click to expand...

Now you're just being facetious, and I really don't understand why.
 
Menhir said:
Step 4: Praying to Murphy - the chance is 1/64.
Click to expand...
I did go for the same endresult but I did breed a hypolavendermale to a bloodredfemale het for hypobloodred .
If I keep the hypos from this clutch , what is my chance then ? :crazy02:
 
i'm going for this breeding pair later this year too.
there is a good chance i will keep all the babies and breed from them all in 3 years or so... cant wait for that one.
 
mvervest said:
If I keep the hypos from this clutch , what is my chance then ? :crazy02:
Click to expand...

I would call it "way better". :grin01:
Any interest in exchanging animals? I will breed my light and nearly patternless Pewter male to my LavBlood female...
 
Menhir said:
Hmmm, when I read the beginning of the thread again, I don't know what the deal is. I added a Step 4 - perhaps I should have also put some :grin01: :grin01: :grin01: :grin01: behind my sentence.
Post two from me was a simple statistics fact, neither more nor less.

I bet if Serp would have added the little mathematics things, there wouldn't be any discussion about anything.

Taking your thoughts one step further - we could breed Bloodred X Lavender het. Hypo and keep 8.16 and have the same chances to achieve HypoLavBloodred.
Click to expand...


Dear Menhir, and any other people who have missed the point of this post,

Please, in the future, assume that people already know the information you are about to bestow upon them out of your wisdom, and NOT that they don't know it. Pedantic and edifying statements belong in those sections where they normally occur. All I wanted to do is share a moment between two of my snakes in the act of coitus. I did not ask for, nor do I appreciate, some 'Expert' jumping in to tell me what needs to be done when the information was not invoked.

In short, Menhir, in all due resect, I did not request, nor do I want, your 'Expert' knowledge. When I do, I'll ask for it directly.

To the rest of you, I deeply apologize for the turn this thread has taken. It was my simple attempt to show you all two of my snakes. I assumed that most, if not all of you, knew the genetics behind the coupling, or were intelligent enough to work it out eventually on your own, and that,--obviously--it wasn't my position to 'inform' you of the statistical probabilities.

Post script: Serpwidgets would, and maybe did, control his genetic knowledge with the wisdom that there was no question being asked here.
:shrugs:
 
I was just wishing I had the ingredients to hand here so I could cook my own insteads of drooling over pics of other people's :crazy02:
 
Sometimes, I feel very sorry that I do add anything to this board. Adding information does not mean that you are dumb, you do not know by yourself or you are not able to caclulate the results!!! Did I somewhere propagate, that you are not able to derive the propabilities by yourself? I don't think so...

Did touch your own "expert" knowledge or do you feel that I did you wrong because someone may think that you do not know by yourself? I don't find another answer to the question why you feel so offended by adding simple facts to your thread. But as I said, I will stop doing that - I am sure, that no one in the world needs my wisdom.
 
carol said:
hope I get a triple homo pair while making extra cash off the byproducts
Click to expand...

I was wondering what some hets might cost :
het bloodred het hypo het lavender ???
hypo het bloodred het lavender ???

PM me please
 
I don't think you can compare US prices to overseas prices...I'm always curious to know how high things are priced out've the states.

Rich's prices:

2005 - Normal Corns het for Lavender and Blood Red $250.00
2005 - Normal Corns het Hypo Lavender Blood Red $50.00

I'm thinking the het Hypo Lav Blood is a typo considering the het Lav Blood is $250.
 
Gregg said:
Dear Menhir, and any other people who have missed the point of this post,

Please, in the future, assume that people already know the information you are about to bestow upon them out of your wisdom, and NOT that they don't know it. Pedantic and edifying statements belong in those sections where they normally occur. All I wanted to do is share a moment between two of my snakes in the act of coitus. I did not ask for, nor do I appreciate, some 'Expert' jumping in to tell me what needs to be done when the information was not invoked.

In short, Menhir, in all due resect, I did not request, nor do I want, your 'Expert' knowledge. When I do, I'll ask for it directly.

To the rest of you, I deeply apologize for the turn this thread has taken. It was my simple attempt to show you all two of my snakes. I assumed that most, if not all of you, knew the genetics behind the coupling, or were intelligent enough to work it out eventually on your own, and that,--obviously--it wasn't my position to 'inform' you of the statistical probabilities.

Post script: Serpwidgets would, and maybe did, control his genetic knowledge with the wisdom that there was no question being asked here.
:shrugs:
Click to expand...

Just for the record, Gregg does not set official policy on this site. Actually I encourage people to be helpful and volunteer information even if it is not specifically and pointedly asked for. That statement above about assuming someone already knows everything there is to know about all of the information someone else may be able to offer is utterly foolish, at best. Heck, I was going to suggest that someone knowing what they were doing would have started STEP 1 with a Hypo Blood Red and Hypo Lavender to increase their chances by limiting the number of heterozygous genes, but apparently that is already common knowledge for Gregg, so I won't bother.... :rolleyes: 1 in 16 odds beat 1 in 64 any day of the week.

To those people who seem to resent the helpfullness offered by other members on this site, please take note: I would sincerely appreciate your NOT trying to put a damper on the enthusiasm of those people who are offering their knowledge and expertise for free even without the asking. Perhaps you don't appreciate it, but I'm willing to bet that MANY others here really do.
 
Rich Z said:
To those people who seem to resent the helpfullness offered by other members on this site, please take note: I would sincerely appreciate your NOT trying to put a damper on the enthusiasm of those people who are offering their knowledge and expertise for free even without the asking. Perhaps you don't appreciate it, but I'm willing to bet that MANY others here really do.
Click to expand...

Rich,
I don't think it was the helpfullness that was resented. Perhaps it should also be appreciated if people did not try to put a damper on others breeding projects.
It wasn't the genetics info that turned this thread bad, it was Menhir's decision to take on a rude tone. He made his statistic facts, Gregg acknowledged them, and agreed. Then we both explained our reasons for working with triple hets dispite the obvious challenges. At that point no harm no foul, then he decided to pursue it and ask what the deal is? Maybe with the language barrier he felt attacked, but we were just explaining our reasons for why we work with what we do, not attacking him. He responds with this...
Menhir said:
Hmmm, when I read the beginning of the thread again, I don't know what the deal is. I added a Step 4 - perhaps I should have also put some behind my sentence.
Post two from me was a simple statistics fact, neither more nor less.

I bet if Serp would have added the little mathematics things, there wouldn't be any discussion about anything.

Taking your thoughts one step further - we could breed Bloodred X Lavender het. Hypo and keep 8.16 and have the same chances to achieve HypoLavBloodred.
Click to expand...
Were we not allowed to respond with reasons why we work with triple hets?
I don't know how you read this Rich, but personally I got the feeling that he expected us to just say, "Well then, I guess I better just throw my triple hets in the garbage." before he was satisfied. So it wasn't the "sharing of knowledge" that tipped the scale, it was the rude tone of his response to our decisions. I don't agree with Gregg's last post as one rudeness does not deserve another, but I don't think this should turn into a "cry for Menhir" tribute. He stated facts, we stated facts, he got rude, Gregg got rude. :shrugs: We have heard the *sigh, I'll just leave then" pity tactic before and it is childish. Just as if I said *sigh, I don't know why just wasted the last 3 years growing up my triple hets*.
 
carol said:
I don't know how you read this Rich, but personally I got the feeling that he expected us to just say, "Well then, I guess I better just throw my triple hets in the garbage." before he was satisfied.
Click to expand...
And personally, I didn't get that feeling at all. Interesting how we all, to a greater or lesser extent, read something into a post that's not there. Thus, the cottage industry of smileys. :)

So it wasn't the "sharing of knowledge" that tipped the scale, it was the rude tone of his response to our decisions.
Click to expand...
Again, I didn't see this as a rude tone - matter of fact, I've seen much more rudeness (and more frequently) from a number of "veterans" talking down to those new to the hobby about faulty or questionable husbandry practices, much less breeding practices; so in this regard, I hope you're only speaking for yourself. (Just as I am here. :) )

regards,
jazz
 
Yes, I read the entire thread. Then I just read it a second time up to the point (post #14) where I would still post my previous message, all things considered. And I do know exactly who it was that started getting snippy in his posts. From Gregg's post #12 it was very easy to understand how Menhir might not know how much Gregg knew or didn't know about statistical probabilities and was trying to help with finer detail. So at post #14, Gregg was getting snippy in his comments about Murphy's Law, and at post #20 was getting positively antagonistic.

Agree or disagree, that is how I am calling it and reiterate my statement earlier. I don't want people on this site spitting in someone else's face when they are trying to assist them, even if it is not specifically asked for.
 
jazzgeek said:
Interesting how we all, to a greater or lesser extent, read something into a post that's not there. Thus, the cottage industry of smileys. :)
Click to expand...

True, I think this phenominon occured in all parties. I don't see anything "snippy" about any comments made before post 22, just sarcasim. I just saw it as a way to say, "Hey, we know 1 in 64 is really bad, but we don't care we are just having fun.". Nobody disagreed, it was noted that we didn't care if our odds were bad. Actually as a religous person, I found the comment that one "should pray to Murphy" not only sarcastic, but offensive, but I know that is just a matter of my sensitivity and I'm not going to impose it on others.

Rich Z said:
Agree or disagree, that is how I am calling it and reiterate my statement earlier. I don't want people on this site spitting in someone else's face when they are trying to assist them, even if it is not specifically asked for.
Click to expand...

Let me be the first to say, I agreed with every word in your earlier statement (and humbly accept that is doesn't amount to a hill of beans whether I agree or not). I'm not on anyones "side", I'm just calling how I see it. I just didn't see any personal attacks made to Menhir that would cause him to make post # 22. It totally confused me. It's as if 1 in 64 = bad idea and any reasons given disputing this are personal attacks. I guess I'm just missing the boat on why Menhir got so upset by post 22, what was so bad about saying, "we know and we don't care"? In all reality, speaking for myself, that's the truth. I hope nothing I said make him feel like the statistics were worthless info, I just wanted to continue the conversation on why those statistics don't bother me. I could actually write a few more lengthy posts why they don't bother me, but it was apparent those ideas are attacks. :shrugs: I think both parties made posts that were not conducive to an open discussion. And would love if Menhir pointed out exactly what statement(s) prompted post 22 so I could have some insight. I also want to agree that # 28 was way out of line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top