AHS Registered Multiform Cultivars and The Multiform Classification Code for Shows.

update notice Jan. 11, 2009: I have still not been informed of any changes to the following situation.

For years now we have been told by the AHS Board that there are simply not enough cultivars to warrant a polymerous division in flower shows.  However, at the Fall 2007 AHS Board of Directors Meeting the Board approved a comprehensive change to show schedules and the creation of the multiclassication for flower shows based on a total of only 16 multiclass flowers at the time.  Reference Spring 2008 Daylily Journal and AHS web site at http://daylilies.org/Multiform_Classification_Code_4-19-08.pdf

There are currently 122 cultivars registered as polymerous. 75 of these are at least 50% polymerous.  Several do not record a polymerous percentage.

AHS Exhibitions lists only 6 cultivars as polymerous multiforms registered through November 2007 (reference same pdf file above). My Polymerous Database clearly proves that there are 28 polymerous cultivars meeting the multiform classification. AHS is only missing 22 of 28 cultivars from their official list.

AHS Exhibitions reports a total of 23 multiform cultivars registered through November 2007. Of these 23 cultivars, 17 of them are not polymerous (14 unusual form/doubles, 1 double/spider, and 2 spider/unusual forms). When these 17 cultivars are combined with the correct number of polymerous multiforms the correct number is actually 45 not 23 multiforms. This is assuming that AHS is correct in reporting only 17 non-polymerous multiforms.

I find it hard to believe that AHS took such action believing there were only 16 cultivars at the time of their decision. 

I support the creation of an AHS exhibition classification that groups all polymerous daylilies of 50% or higher into a single category.  Polymerous cultivars reporting less than 50% should be placed in their proper show division without consideration of being polymerous. 

Non-polymerous multiforms should be placed in the division that the exhibitor desires.  If a flower is both a spider and a double then it should be placed in either of these categories and judged accordingly. 

Afterall, AHS says: “When evaluating registered daylily cultivars, standards have been established by the hybridizer who has registered each cultivar and described its particular characteristics. When a registered cultivar is shown and displays its ‘approach’ to perfection, it is referred to as being ‘true to cultivar’ or ‘typical of cultivar.' When it is determined that the quality being judged is ‘true to cultivar’, full credit is given.”

To further illustrate what the AHS Board has done to polymerous daylilies consider this in addition to the multiform classification.

The remaining 92 non-multiform polymerous daylilies  have been unilaterally reclassified as doubles by the AHS Board for the purpose of flower shows. A 5% polymerous cultivar such as H. 'Ajure Sunrise' is classifed as a double by AHS Exhibtions. AHS Exhibitions considers all polymerous daylilies as doubles while AHS Registrations considers all polymerous daylilies as polymerous daylilies .  The left hand of AHS does not know what the right hand is doing.

Can anybody explain the logic of these decisions and why any of the individual Board members voted for these changes?

A listing of the AHS Board of Directors with their email addresses is available on the AHS web site at http://daylilies.org/AHSofficers.html