HelpMeFind Roses, Clematis and Peonies
Roses, Clematis and Peonies
and everything gardening related.
DescriptionPhotosLineageAwardsReferencesMember RatingsMember CommentsMember JournalsGardensBuy From 
'Sundance ™' rose Reviews & Comments
Discussion id : 61-085
most recent 28 MAR 14 SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 18 JAN 12 by goncmg
Have had this a year.......not a very strong grower, a lot of die back, but difficult to judge what the plant experienced before bought in the pot at the garden center. The color is unique, so deep, mine is growing between Big Purple and Purple Torch (which are likely the same rose, see Purple Torch here).....the effect is disruptive but so intense I cannot change it! Sundance is deep, deep yellow-orange. There is often a thin red edge to the petals. If you are searching for a deep intense yellow or even an orange, this is worth a shot.........
REPLY
Reply #1 of 5 posted 18 JAN 12 by Rupert, Kim L.
This one sells in many places here in Southern California IF it has flowers on it. They are the only attraction this rose offers. It hasn't been a very good plant in my experience.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 5 posted 18 JAN 12 by goncmg
Kim, I fear the same. It is "dormant" in my insulated but unheated garage and is visibly dying back. For every basal it threw last summer it lost a cane to die back. I am actually contemplating what to put in its pot in a few months, sadly....although I would also like to try hybridizing with it to see if the intense color is passed on..........Sundance x Gingersnap, in an ideal world, could burn the retina................
REPLY
Reply #3 of 5 posted 18 JAN 12 by Rupert, Kim L.
I don't think it could actually "burn" the retina, it would fade and die back so quickly, all you'd have to do is blink. Sundance has a lot mildew and black spot here. Gingersnap has a lot of mildew and rust. Crossing them together would be like making the blind man, deaf.

My mother's nick name was Ginger and she was a red head. I bought her Gingersnap way back in the early 80s because she loved the color and the name reference. What a horrid plant that was! That fluorescent color lasted mere minutes before fading out to dirty dishwater. At least the faded flowers toned down the brilliant rust. Based on how it performed in an actually very beneficial area for roses, I can only presume it's liberal applications of toxic chemicals which have kept this rose on the market.
REPLY
Reply #4 of 5 posted 18 JAN 12 by goncmg
You are totally correct! Thank you for talking me off the ledge......

I crossed Olympiad and Gingersnap. The one seedling that resulted was everything I wanted: electric glowing cherry red with a yellow-orange reverse..........THAT is where the "good" ends...........the plant was decently vigorouos but blackspotted on the new growth (ok, drama, but you get my point)....the bloom faded to an ugly pinkish and it so disappointed me I really have no idea what came of it....I moved it to the annual border and a zinnia killed it one summer I surmise.....
REPLY
Reply #5 of 5 posted 28 MAR 14 by Michael Garhart
Yep, the bloom color is the only real attraction. It is a lot like Brandy here -- very few but cool blooms, with plants that blacken even in mild winters, and naked canes up to your waist. It is not a pretty sight. I am so glad the market is verging towards more aesthetic plants. The only rose plants I have ever seen "ohhhs and ahhs" from without blooms are Dortmund and Rosa primula, because of their aesthetic plants, and particularly their foliage character.
REPLY
Discussion id : 51-942
most recent 31 JAN 11 HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 30 JAN 11 by Patricia Routley
'Sundance' has a bred date listed of 2005. But it was on trial in Australia in October, 2001.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 6 posted 31 JAN 11 by HMF Admin
We often find dates bred and introduced are intermingled in reference sources. We've removed the date bred in this case. We can only assume 2005 was the date Week's officially introduced it. Thanks for the heads up !
REPLY
Reply #2 of 6 posted 31 JAN 11 by Patricia Routley
thanks Admin. I have often thought that having three dates would be very clear.
Bred
Reg
Intro
REPLY
Reply #3 of 6 posted 31 JAN 11 by Lyn G
Patricia...

It's not clear. For the most part, HMF uses the dating convention used by the American Rose Society as it is the International Registrar of Roses. If a rose is not regestered, we do try to find a REFERENCE that lets us report the date of introduction or bred. The date bred can be a mystery. For example, Paul Barden asked us to add the breeder's personal code, not the registered breeder's code, to a rose bred by Ralph Moore. The rose, 'Lady Moss', was introduced in 2005, but Mr. Moore bred the rose in 1970.

See the MEMBER COMMENTS on 'Lady Moss' where Paul explains Mr. Moore's method of record keeping

http://www.helpmefind.com/gardening/pl.php?n=46123&tab=1

Smiles,
Lyn
REPLY
Reply #4 of 6 posted 31 JAN 11 by Patricia Routley
Thank you Lyn. But when it is registered, and I note that The International Registrar of Roses sometimes registers a rose years after a rose is bred, in my opinion there is no need for HMF to parrot ARS information on the main rose display page when it is misleads the reader. Bred in my eyes means bred. Which is why I think the extra slot - Reg - under Origin would be helpful.

Yes. The dates for 'Lady Moss' are very clear. Different to the normal perhaps, but the facts are there.

Re 'Sundance'. Rather than removing any date at all, might it not be better to use a date of Before 2001 when there is a reference to support this? The distinguishing brackets after the name (hybrid tea, Zary, 2005) would have to be changed perhaps.
REPLY
Reply #5 of 6 posted 31 JAN 11 by Lyn G
Patricia......

You can do that for almost any rose that is introduced to commerce. Taking 'Sundance' as an example, the actual date of cross is unknown. The rose had to go through the breeder's/nursery's testing program before it was entered was considered viable to be entered into any rose trials or into commerce. We do not know how long that testing period was before the decision was made.

I think every breeder has his/her own way of keeping records about their crosses and which seedlings they bring forward. Not all of them use the same system as Mr. Moore used in his breeding program. I think it would be difficult to gather the actual breeding date for most roses. If we can find a reference of a rose going into a rose trial, then using the before date makes sense, but it still doesn't give us the real date bred.

If the rose is going to be entered into commerce, the rose has to be propagated in sufficient numbers to make it commercially available. Again, I am not certain how to judge how long of a period would be necessary.

Not all roses are registered with the ARS, so even using that dating convention as a system does not cover all roses introduced in to commerce.

I don't think there is one answer.

Smiles,
Lyn
REPLY
Reply #6 of 6 posted 31 JAN 11 by Patricia Routley
Thanks Lyn. It is always good to have your guidance.
REPLY
Discussion id : 26-113
most recent 31 JAN 11 SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 6 MAY 08 by MBoardman
Did not survive winter in zone 5
REPLY
Reply #1 of 1 posted 31 JAN 11 by HMF Admin
Good to know, thanks.
REPLY
Discussion id : 32-700
most recent 3 JAN 09 SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 30 DEC 08 by anonymous-209644
My healthiest rose! This was my first year growing roses. I have a no spray garden in central Virginia zone 7 and this is the only rose with no disease at all, even when all it's neighbors were struggling with black spot. The foliage is beautiful, lush shiny and spot free. It grew to 7 ft the first year and bloomed it's head off. I would recommend it to anyone.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 1 posted 3 JAN 09 by HMF Admin
Please consider starting a member Garden listing - it's very easy and you can remain completely anonymous. Member garden listing are a tremendous help for other site guests in your area or with a similar environment.
REPLY
© 2018 HelpMeFind.com