Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I'm not trying to muddy the water, but I can see where there would be a little confusion here.

Should we all agree that you go by the width of the bands on the very top?

I will give three scenarios.

(1) if the bands were straight across and the widths were the same for the black and white on the top, then that would be the same down the sides, (SA = 2 × pi × r2 2 × pi × r × h) (total area of a cylinder) hence- the 50/50.

(2) It the black and white were the same on top, but had an hour glass shape you would be losing black and gaining white down the sides. So the area of the white would be greater. Not a 50/50 even though the top distance is the same.

(3) If the black and white were not the same on top, but had an hour glass shape. You would be gaining and losing on top and gaining and losing down the sides. So you could theoretically have the same area of black and white, hence- a 50/50 without the top being the same.

Does any one agree or disagree with this thinking.

DAVY

a 50/50 is a black and white, that has at least 50% white.

If you think one has to be exactly 50% white compared to black, then your going to spend your life with a tiny ruler measuring bands and stuff. To that I say, good luck with that.

I think you may be coming from the school of Ball python morph making. I sure hope it does not lead to that. Cheers

I love you, man.
-----
Chris Jones
King of Kings Reptiles

http://www.kingofkingsreptiles.com/

"All the fancy names in the world will be of no help if you do not know the difference between chocolate pudding and pig poop." -Frank Retes

The problem with that, is there is a huge difference in looks between a king that is 50/50 on the very top, to a king with thinner white bands on the top, but makes it up on the lower sides. If we counted the sides, then tons of kings could be considered 50/50. Why even use the term anymore if it doesn't distinguish between a thin white banded on top from a wide white banded on top? I'm not directing that question to anyone, just making a point with it.
-----

Ross, I know years ago back in 1996 this one fit the bill of a "50-50", as it had MUCH more white than most all others did in the hobby at that time. Her bands were pretty much equal, but the bands were basically angled in configuration, yet the overall amounts were pretty darn equal to one another. At that time, most all other Desert phase banded kings had far wider black rings.

Maybe now days since there are tons more different variations of them out there, the criteria might be a bit different, but when I look at this one I still consider her to be a very clean black & white "50-50" from the overall percentage of each color, even though the bands are somewhat angled to one another.

~Doug

-----
"a snake in the grass is a GOOD thing"

serpentinespecialties.webs.com

I'd call it a 50/50, but I wouldn't call it a good example of one. Of course there has to be some kind of compromise on the term, but the thinner white bandeds that appear 50/50 when adding up everything on the sides, is not the way to go, IMO. To me, this is a good example of a 50/50.

This one is not (IMO), even though the sides make up for what's up on top.

-----

Yeah, the term definition is going to have some obvious variables as you mentioned, and will depend on different people's first impression when they are first looked at.

I agree that the one I had wasn't the greatest example of band width, as I had to compromise a bit between the band widths and the cleanest white and darkest black/brown possible. There were some there that were a bit wider white, but they were also light beige to butter yellow on their lower sides and especially their bellies. That just was NOT an option for me, as the cleanest white and darkest bands were my main objective for the project I was striving for. She was hands-down the nicest one available at the entire expo at that time, and the offspring she later produced were just unreal. I wish I had some pics of the babies man......arrrgh!!!..

~Doug
-----
"a snake in the grass is a GOOD thing"

serpentinespecialties.webs.com

There's no doubt that snake was very nice. I don't look at it as not being as cool as a 50/50., because in captive snakes, it just doesn't matter. If we were out roadcruising one night in different cars and you found that king and I found one that was more 50/50, I'd have to point out to you mine was better because the white was wider. LMAO!!!!
-----

LOL!!,......yeah, both would be extremely slim pickin's to find out road cruising no matter how you slice it..LOL!

~Doug
-----
"a snake in the grass is a GOOD thing"

serpentinespecialties.webs.com

>>LOL!!,......yeah, both would be extremely slim pickin's to find out road cruising no matter how you slice it..LOL!
>>
>>
>> ~Doug
>>-----
>>"a snake in the grass is a GOOD thing"
>>
>>serpentinespecialties.webs.com
-----

I pretty much get the jest of it all. So my scenario #2 would be a 50/50 and scenario #3 would not necessarily be 50/50. Got those wronge.

Good info. I thought your exsampls of a 50/50 and the other one that was not, was good.

I would not call this one a 50/50 Correct?

Yeah, not 50/50, but still very nice. Those colors look perfect for a black and white.
-----

.

50/50 or no 50/50 it just doesn't matter on this one. He is just Awesome.
DAVY

Thanks Davy......that particular one was a female..

~Doug
-----
"a snake in the grass is a GOOD thing"

serpentinespecialties.webs.com

I am as anal as they come, but even I wouldn't measure the radius of the snake's body to quantify the amount of banding. The term 50-50 in the hobby was from decades ago. It just means the white bands are wider than "normal" but the snake is still banded.

A picture is far more informative anyway to describe pattern. To me, words mean very little when describing fine details. As you see on the classifieds sometimes, any one person's description of pattern can be a bit off when you see the picture of the snake.

Some of us Cal king guys take it farther than that, because we notice every little difference than most hobbyists do. If a snake is not quite 50/50 on top, it probably falls in the line of a 60/40, like the king Doug just posted. Reason being, is because in the wild what we call a true 50/50, is much more rare than a 60/40. That's why we make a distinction between 60/40 and 50/50. Hobbyists that don't have years of experience searching Cal kings out in the wild, may call any abnormally wide white/yellow banded Cal king a 50/50, because that's what they see with their limited experience. And that's not to put anyone down, that's just how it is.
-----

This reminds me of many ads I see for things like so-called "extreme" hypos and extreme ghost Hondos. Most of them aren't even anything CLOSE to being extreme hypos. Shannon and I are always emailing each other ads and posts we see regarding what many people choose to call what they seem to "think" they have. Many of the ads and posts I've seen over the years I wouldn't even consider them as being decent "ultra-lights (not quite extreme), but basically just normal everyday decent hypos.

Like you said, people that are extremely experienced in certain specific areas will definitely scrutinize certain things or features much differently than many others would.

~Doug
-----
"a snake in the grass is a GOOD thing"

serpentinespecialties.webs.com

I know what you mean, man. There's this guy on Localityrosys that talks about how he found a 50/50 here and another one over there. Then one day he posts one of his 50/50's and its more like 70/30. hahaha
-----

>>I know what you mean, man. There's this guy on Localityrosys that talks about how he found a 50/50 here and another one over there. Then one day he posts one of his 50/50's and its more like 70/30. hahaha
>>-----
>>

What's weird is I use the term 60/40 as 60% white and 40% black.....better than a 50/50.........

To me a 70/30 would be more white.....

Either it's normally banded.......or it's a 50/50 or better or it's not worthy of the terms......60/40 or 70/30......
-----
John Lassiter
Poor planning and procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part...

"What's weird is I use the term 60/40 as 60% white and 40% black.....better than a 50/50......... "

Well, see you're doing it wrong because the most widely accepted term is Black and white, not white and black. You have to put it in order. The black is the 60 and the white is the 40. To describe a higher amount of white, it goes 40/60. I think that would be a better way to put it, but I'm just messing with you, John. You aren't doing it wrong. There is no rule. I started out on the forums as a field herper, and all we've ever talked about are kings in the wild. That's why I use the terms 60/40 and 50/50, with the smaller number belonging to the white/yellow. We never used the term 70/30, or very rarely did. And we never had to use numbers to describe a king with wider white, because those just don't pop up in the wild. The way I describe an abnormal amount of white is by either calling it high white, or describing the white in a percentage, so not to confuse things. That's just my personal way of doing it.
-----

>>"What's weird is I use the term 60/40 as 60% white and 40% black.....better than a 50/50......... "
>>
>>Well, see you're doing it wrong because the most widely accepted term is Black and white, not white and black. You have to put it in order. The black is the 60 and the white is the 40. To describe a higher amount of white, it goes 40/60. I think that would be a better way to put it, but I'm just messing with you, John. You aren't doing it wrong. There is no rule. I started out on the forums as a field herper, and all we've ever talked about are kings in the wild. That's why I use the terms 60/40 and 50/50, with the smaller number belonging to the white/yellow. We never used the term 70/30, or very rarely did. And we never had to use numbers to describe a king with wider white, because those just don't pop up in the wild. The way I describe an abnormal amount of white is by either calling it high white, or describing the white in a percentage, so not to confuse things. That's just my personal way of doing it.
>>-----
>>
-----
John Lassiter
Poor planning and procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part...

John, all I have to say is: Poor planning and procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part. lol
-----

>>John, all I have to say is: Poor planning and procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part. lol
>>-----
>>

That's the best quote Eva!....lol
-----
John Lassiter
Poor planning and procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part...

Over the decades the morph aspect of the hobby always brags about the higher percentage of white in them, and that would always be mentioned first regarding the percentage ratios. A "70-30" always referred to a 70% white animal..LOL!

It's like you just said, any ratios that were normal or typical would never be mentioned anyway until the white percentage was 50-50 or more. So like you said a "60-40" or "80-30" always referred to the higher white first. Same with the bananas and very high-white aberrants, you and I have always known the percentage of white to be given or advertised first when referring to those types.

~Doug
-----
"a snake in the grass is a GOOD thing"

serpentinespecialties.webs.com

yep, exactly!.,,HAHA!!

~Doug
-----
"a snake in the grass is a GOOD thing"

serpentinespecialties.webs.com

Ross, I believe this little fellow would qualify as 50/50. I love his spots.

--Dennis

No doubt about it. That's very nice.
-----

He was the nicest one from the first clutch of B-W's.

Dennis

Ross, would you qualify my little sweetheart as a 50/50 or 60/40?

-----
Genesis 1:1

Personally. I'd call it something like 65% white banded. There are a lot of people that call those 50/50's too. I have no problem calling it a 50/50 either.
-----

Cool!
-----
Genesis 1:1

From an old price list.

7 by RossAZ480, on Flickr
-----

...and that is the exact line mine came from.

Love those pics!
-----
Genesis 1:1

Very cool. I've always loved that page.
-----

I know what you mean. Seems to have always been an interpretational definition. Sorry about my out of focus pic. Very nice animal there Kingdome! Occasionally my Mojave’s or scissor crossings throw me one like the one in your photo. I’ve always selectively bred for/held back the blackest black above percent of white myself. Never get tired of seeing them. I can’t really think of many herps with that striking level of contrast.

Good night, I would love to own that! LOL!
-----
Genesis 1:1

finally we agree on something. out of hand cal king

Do they ever come from the wild that white?
-----
Gerard

"Sleep my friend and you will see, your dreams are my reality. "

www.livebaitclip.com

GONE FISHING!!!

No, that's from selective breeding.
-----

This one is a real beauty!

--Dennis