JWM2 said:

As I’ve stated in the original post this isn’t a referendum on any breeder or strain. Just what we’ve ran that didn’t turn out how we had hoped. We’ve already had a few that have grown one strain and had bad luck and someone else grew it and thought it was awesome.

It’s not about the genetics themselves but what we had in mind as far as expectations and how it actually turned out in our unique growing environments. I can run a strain and have great luck and my neighbor could run it and have bad luck. It’s nothing to do with the genetics but rather the combination of factors that lead us to conclude what we do.

Click to expand...

I agree with all this but I am saying if we are disappointed even after growing a pack of something we don’t really know the results on the first try.

Just like you are saying one had good results and another not so good.

I am saying that with any decent genetics the second or later results could be much better and different.

I think in most cases the responsibility of outcome is Grower-Environment-genetics. I realize this is an unpopular opinion among the seed hunters and pollen chuckers.

MIMedGrower said:

I agree with all this but I am saying if we are disappointed even after growing a pack of something we don’t really know the results on the first try.

Just like you are saying one had good results and another not so good.

I am saying that with any decent genetics the second or later results could be much better and different.

I think in most cases the responsibility of outcome is Grower-Environment-genetics. I realize this is an unpopular opinion among the seed hunters and pollen chuckers.

Click to expand...

Actually I would the opposite to be true. And I think that each of the three are important in their own right. You need a combination of them all to get great results. Anything lacking in one area can be compensated for to a degree but the outcome won’t be on par with someone who has all three dialed in.

And what I meant by my opening statement of my previous post was that a pheno hunter or pollen chucker would gladly blame grower or environmental errors before taking responsibility for their own genetic error.

And really who are we to judge? I mean I’ve seen plenty of ugly people and yet a portion of the population probably thinks their beautiful. It’s all subjective and we all have different tastes. But we all have expectations and sometimes those expectations are let down. That’s the point of this thread. Not to inform but to learn.

In light of the idea of it just being the most disappointing, i would go with the new c99. I found it to be nothing like the old and just all around kind of a disappointment. A big part of that was i got excited for the release, maybe my expectations were a bit high (like me), but my take isnt unique. I still think the original is great and am interested in duke's solo lines (some of the nicest looking out there), but it killed my interest in anything coming from bros grimm.

Worst weed would be some sort of pretendo my little brothers friend had once. It looked and smelled good, standard nugs of the day, but absolutely zero high. I am not even sure if it was weed, it was less of a buzz than you got smoking ditch weed in middle school.

Papasomni said:

Cat piss.... the name alone is off putting enough, but the flavor and high are really underwhelming

Click to expand...

I don't know what Catpiss you smoked or grew but the San Diego one was fucking top notch.

Sweet purple by paradise was the strain I was referring to in an earlier post. Smelled like old lady perfume.