Sea of green.. hydo or coco coir medium.. bottled nutes.. good light and genetics. But if i'm going for flavor there's a diff method i'd use.

The longest veg In the biggest pots you can tolerate lol

RDWC in 13 gallon pots with a month or more of veg. Depends on size of grow space and light footprint.

SCROG and train to put a cola in every 6x6 square in the net.

Yield goes up with N so feed it full strength to the end, THC be damned we are just looking for poundage.

2Bad said:

Sea of green.. hydo or coco coir medium.. bottled nutes.. good light and genetics. But if i'm going for flavor there's a diff method i'd use.

Click to expand...

So you're 100% positive that the Sea of Green method gives the best yield compared to the traditional method of growing vertically? Is this subjective or is this fact? Do other growers debate that the Sea of Green is best? Never tried, and would love to but would love to hear others opinions too. Thanks!

GrowHobo said:

The longest veg In the biggest pots you can tolerate lol

Click to expand...

So lets just say I do a 12 week veg. Wouldnt the plant get so tall that the light would only hit and penetrate the top 1/3rd of the plant (give or take)? Or would you lollipop her so only the top 1/3rd (give or take) of the plant is left so all the energy of the plant goes there during flower? Or would you top her a bunch of times to keep her bushy and not so tall? If so, how many times would you top her generally? Lastly, and more important, do you think a longer veg and growing vertically will get you more yield that doing a Sea or Screen of Green? If so, why? Thanks!

Frosty.McDanknugs said:

So you're 100% positive that the Sea of Green method gives the best yield compared to the traditional method of growing vertically? Is this subjective or is this fact? Do other growers debate that the Sea of Green is best? Never tried, and would love to but would love to hear others opinions too. Thanks!

Click to expand...

Sea of green plants grow vertically as well so i'm a bit confused. Sea of green lets you get to harvest much faster in my minimal experience because you don't have to veg as long. More plants = less space = faster to flower. I'm gonna drop out this one since i'm only finishing my 3rd grow right now. I trust @Moe.Red .

Moe.Red said:

RDWC in 13 gallon pots with a month or more of veg. Depends on size of grow space and light footprint.

SCROG and train to put a cola in every 6x6 square in the net.

Yield goes up with N so feed it full strength to the end, THC be damned we are just looking for poundage.

Click to expand...

Thanks! I'll ask the same question I asked 2Bad.

So you're 100% positive that the Screen of Green method gives the best yield compared to the traditional method of growing vertically? Is this subjective or is this fact? Do other growers debate that the Screen of Green is best? I've never tried, and would love to. What make's it so much "better" in terms of yield?

Do you have any idea why so many commercial and other growers still use the traditional method of growing in pots vertically as opposed to the SCROG method? Is it more high maintenance or something? I don't get it. Do you know?

2Bad said:

Sea of green plants grow vertically as well so i'm a bit confused. Sea of green lets you get to harvest much faster in my minimal experience because you don't have to veg as long. More plants = less space = faster to flower. I'm gonna drop out this one since i'm only finishing my 3rd grow right now. I trust @Moe.Red .

Click to expand...

I was thinking SCROG. My bad.

Frosty.McDanknugs said:

I was thinking SCROG. My bad.

Click to expand...

Makes sense now! haha

Frosty.McDanknugs said:

Thanks! I'll ask the same question I asked 2Bad.

So you're 100% positive that the Screen of Green method gives the best yield compared to the traditional method of growing vertically? Is this subjective or is this fact? Do other growers debate that the Screen of Green is best? I've never tried, and would love to. What make's it so much "better" in terms of yield?

Do you have any idea why so many commercial and other growers still use the traditional method of growing in pots vertically as opposed to the SCROG method? Is it more high maintenance or something? I don't get it. Do you know?

Click to expand...

Commercial moves pots to different rooms as the plant grows. Scrog is not an option. But they also have a different light setup than you’re allowing for. They grow more than 2 plants there is no comparison between commercial and your op.

What are you driving at here? I don’t know many folks that grow 2 plants and go for single grow yield over all else. Quality doesn’t matter? No limit on space? Wouldn’t poundage per year be the right metric? Without a space or time limitation you can veg for a year and grow a jungle. But that’s not good weed.

2Bad said:

Sea of green plants grow vertically as well so i'm a bit confused. Sea of green lets you get to harvest much faster in my minimal experience because you don't have to veg as long. More plants = less space = faster to flower. I'm gonna drop out this one since i'm only finishing my 3rd grow right now. I trust @Moe.Red .

Click to expand...

I was thinking SCROG. My bad.

Moe.Red said:

Commercial moves pots to different rooms as the plant grows. Scrog is not an option. But they also have a different light setup than you’re allowing for. They grow more than 2 plants there is no comparison between commercial and your op.

What are you driving at here? I don’t know many folks that grow 2 plants and go for single grow yield over all else. Quality doesn’t matter? No limit on space? Wouldn’t poundage per year be the right metric? Without a space or time limitation you can veg for a year and grow a jungle. But that’s not good weed.

Click to expand...

I'm not really "driving" at anything. I'm asking you why you think a 2 or 3, or 5 or 10 plant SCROG grow will produce more weed than a regular traditional soil grow with the same amount of plants, where the plant grows upward. Admittedly my commercial grow reference was a bad choice of comparisons. What I should have asked is.... "Why would you guess, for example, my two friends that run commercial grows here in Colorado, choose to grow the traditional way in their home grows where plants grow upward in pots, as opposed to a SCROG when they could easily do either one? ? Frankly I've asked them and their answers are vague and make it sound like SCROGS are for rookies and not experienced growers. I refuse to believe that.. Or better yet why do any of the great growers on this board that DO grow the traditional way, (vertically) , chose to NOT grow using a SCROG if a SCROG gets a better yield on the genetics they already grow?? I get it. You can't "speak for them" but if you had to guess, why do some really good growers choose NOT to do a SCROG even though they can? Appreciate your opinion on this.

Also you said "Quality doesn’t matter? No limit on space? Wouldn’t poundage per year be the right metric? Without a space or time limitation you can veg for a year and grow a jungle. But that’s not good weed."

My response is simple. Of course quality matters. But I have amazing genetics already. So all I care about is getting as much yield from those particular genetics as I possibly can in the 550 square foot grow space I have to work with. You feel me? The Quality part is already taken care of because I have killer genetics and have had 12 years worth of amazing results growing vertically in pots using Nectar for the gods nutes. I just have zero clue about SCROGS

I'm not trying to be a smartass or anything. I haven't researched this much yet, so I really want to know if it's been "proven" over time that a SCROG, using the same genetics, grow space, lights, food, temps etc, will produce more yield in one grow OR poundage a year like you suggest than a traditional vertical grow using the same exact setup and footprint etc. Thanks man!

Scrog can be a pita for maint or making changes but forces better use if available photons. If you are not going for yield over all else leaving plants free to be moved around it twisted in the position they are in is an easier grow style.

Quality is far more than genetics. I made the example of feeding N heavy thru to the end that will produce a higher yield of inferior smoke.

More plants vegged for a shorter time will get you more yearly harvest than 2 plants vegged excessively long.

I think I would set up this hypothetical differently from the get go.

Frosty.McDanknugs said:

So you're 100% positive that the Sea of Green method gives the best yield compared to the traditional method of growing vertically? Is this subjective or is this fact? Do other growers debate that the Sea of Green is best? Never tried, and would love to but would love to hear others opinions too. Thanks!

Click to expand...

nothing can beat SOG in term of gr/w/m²/"weeks spent veg + flo"

but if you don't take into account the time spent growing others method can compete.

(and plant do grow vertically in SOG)

I dunno bout that..if that was the case you’d see a lot of commercial growers growing like that.…but I’m not seeing it..

I’ve done it both ways I always train and scrog my canopy now but simple staking will do the same thing as long as it’s trained flat you get an even canopy better light coverage and overall my yield went up with the same strain by a lot with not as much larf I think the key to it is supporting the flowers allowing em to chuck on more weight than the otherwise would have so I’m firmly in the train and stake or scrog camp

Madmax said:

I dunno bout that..if that was the case you’d see a lot of commercial growers growing like that.…but I’m not seeing it..

Click to expand...

True. Commercial operations have something that home growers don’t have though and it’s the biggest cost of virtually every commercial operation…labor. Even if you could make more bud by running a lot of small plants in the same lit footprint, if it takes two more employees to manage it, it’s a loser to the business all day long. One of the many reasons that trying to compare anything about commercial to this scenario is a bit of a trick bag. I don’t know what constitutes a “fact” in growing weed. I’m pretty sure I know very few scientifically provable absolute facts about what I do, but it turns out a good bit of top shelf. All of that said, if I wanted the most out of one run, I would hammer out a big SCROG with big plants in it. That is what I am running now. If you gave me a year to grow as much good weed as I could with the same space, I would run a lot more smaller plants that have a big stretch on short veg and would pack as many of those bishes in as would fit. It’s a ton more work to manage that many root systems instead of a few, but that’s how I would roll it. Hypotheticals hurt the brain…bong rips should help. Cheers

Fromunda506 said:

True. Commercial operations have something that home growers don’t have though and it’s the biggest cost of virtually every commercial operation…labor. Even if you could make more bud by running a lot of small plants in the same lit footprint, if it takes two more employees to manage it, it’s a loser to the business all day long. One of the many reasons that trying to compare anything about commercial to this scenario is a bit of a trick bag. I don’t know what constitutes a “fact” in growing weed. I’m pretty sure I know very few scientifically provable absolute facts about what I do, but it turns out a good bit of top shelf. All of that said, if I wanted the most out of one run, I would hammer out a big SCROG with big plants in it. That is what I am running now. If you gave me a year to grow as much good weed as I could with the same space, I would run a lot more smaller plants that have a big stretch on short veg and would pack as many of those bishes in as would fit. It’s a ton more work to manage that many root systems instead of a few, but that’s how I would roll it. Hypotheticals hurt the brain…bong rips should help. Cheers

Click to expand...

Completely agree.

Mainline each to 32 tops, then slowly train those tops horizonal.

Fromunda506 said:

True. Commercial operations have something that home growers don’t have though and it’s the biggest cost of virtually every commercial operation…labor. Even if you could make more bud by running a lot of small plants in the same lit footprint, if it takes two more employees to manage it, it’s a loser to the business all day long. One of the many reasons that trying to compare anything about commercial to this scenario is a bit of a trick bag. I don’t know what constitutes a “fact” in growing weed. I’m pretty sure I know very few scientifically provable absolute facts about what I do, but it turns out a good bit of top shelf. All of that said, if I wanted the most out of one run, I would hammer out a big SCROG with big plants in it. That is what I am running now. If you gave me a year to grow as much good weed as I could with the same space, I would run a lot more smaller plants that have a big stretch on short veg and would pack as many of those bishes in as would fit. It’s a ton more work to manage that many root systems instead of a few, but that’s how I would roll it. Hypotheticals hurt the brain…bong rips should help. Cheers

Click to expand...

Agree. I would add that being able to move plants around is critical in a commercial environment. Infecting an entire crop because a few of your SCROGS got infected or infested would make for a quick trip to bankruptcy.

I would offer that the anectdotal response to your question of why many consider SCROG your highest yielder would be that since lower flower sites on the individual branches get more light your per plant harvest weight would logically go up. I just did a SCROG in a 5 x 5. I'm in final trim but it looks like I may be yielding around 500 - 600 grams. Not bad for 2 plants.