Lollipopping ( Any Scientific Evidence? )

[Doer]

Fake Fake, yo mama!! Nah, just kidding. Really it all looks like good ganja to me. Good grow.

That, being said, I do see the difference. And it does LOOK bigger. But, at the end of the day and weighed down to the bowl sized stemless morsel, does the un-pruned side yield more?. So, Apple = Looks, Oranges = Yield.

OTH, I'm not really sure, I would called that lollipopping, either, as you have mentioned.

IAC< isn't the experiment about did you dis-prove you could get bigger colas? No. You got bigger colas and only changed one variable but didn't have real tight controls.....still.

... your hypothesis stands, for you, after one run. Science!

 

[Thecouchlock]

I got banned for calling someone an asshole for spreading misinformation, that's about as much bullshit as you can get.

Fuck the system, the moderators can lick my ass if they don't realize that misinformation makes this forum suck dirty cunt.

 

[Uncle Ben]

View attachment 3270760 Ok, on the left, trimmed out plant that shows Indica traits. On the right the same plant not trimmed out. You can already see the size difference.

Perhaps, but even if I (or you) did based on some cherry picked small area of a garden with a photo angle down the row as opposed to directly overhead which will make the subject up front appear bigger..... it might be because:

1. You have an expectation based a belief system that there will be positive results contrary to botanical facts,

2. You have assumed incorrectly, that popcorn buds sometimes found at lower levels are directly related to light levels/intensity,

3. You have developed one or more hypotheses, or educated guesses, to explain this phenomenon.

You are not using nor do you understand a scientific approach as has been pointed out. It's all conjecture, hearsay, and seeing what you want to see.

"4.1 Principles of experimentation

Almost all experiments involve the three basic principles, viz., randomization, replication and local control. These three principles are, in a way, complementary to each other in trying to increase the accuracy of the experiment and to provide a valid test of significance, retaining at the same time the distinctive features of their roles in any experiment"
http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/X6831E/X6831E07.htm


Uncle Ben

 

[Uncle Ben]

Here is a short but concise course in Experimental Design:
http://www.compuhigh.com/experimentdesign.html

 

[PetFlora]

My $0.02

Any light has a certain max penetration, beyond which is pop corn

As plants stretch during flower, unless they've been well controlled, the main stalk will stretch as well

My reveg went from nothing above the surface to > 12", none of which gets light

I employ a cube set up to open up the middle of my plants to get more light deeper, but big leafs fill it in.

Controlled Defol for the win

I would post a couple pics but File Uploader not working again.

You can see them in my multispectrum or DIY Mini-Me threads

 

[Doer]

My $0.02

Any light has a certain max penetration, beyond which is pop corn

As plants stretch during flower, unless they've been well controlled, the main stalk will stretch as well

My reveg went from nothing above the surface to > 12", none of which gets light

I employ a cube set up to open up the middle of my plants to get more light deeper, but big leafs fill it in.

Controlled Defol for the win

I would post a couple pics but File Uploader not working again.

You can see them in my multispectrum or DIY Mini-Me threads

Did you note the thread title? What is all this?

Beyond here, be popcorn?

Well controlled against main stalk stretch?

..for a win?

What a joke!

 

[Doer]

I got banned for calling someone an asshole for spreading misinformation, that's about as much bullshit as you can get.

Fuck the system, the moderators can lick my ass if they don't realize that misinformation makes this forum suck dirty cunt.

Well, then, ban you then.

 

[PetFlora]

Did you note the thread title? What is all this?

Beyond here, be popcorn?

Well controlled against main stalk stretch?

..for a win?

What a joke!

Guess I wasn't crystal, I also remove fan leafs judiciously, almost none by harvest time

 

[Thecouchlock]

Well, then, ban you then.

Bastards only ban the good names, ban me again for good measure

 

[Doer]

I completely agree

 

[bud nugbong]

I like your post but i think you over lolly popped those a little bitski :/

If you saw the location I grow you would understand...I literally have 10 ft walls of trees all around and its pretty pointless to keep the lower shit. Actually a good way to think about it is Im growing in the bottom of a 10 ft shaft or hole. Im on a mission to get that direct sunlight. Ive been working on widening out, but I NEED to get tall and lose the lower growth. Had a lot of nice sunny days and a good feeding schedual so when the heavy rains finally came they couldn't hold up the fat colas with there unexercised branches. And I guess my bottomless pot idea didn't help me much on that.
Im going to get more evidence for the case, Ive got a few at home that get bad sunlight because I planted them too close. I did quite a bit of lower trimming BUT I did miss a few, so ill try to get a couple shots of how measly the lower stuff is. and how much better the trimmed stuff is. I know it wont prove anything, but I will show you guys anyways.

 

[bud nugbong]

Got the pictoral evidence. Nothing proven, besides the neatness and using the nutes and water for the bigger branches. From the front it looks like one big plant because of poor planning, Then 3 pics of the main stems all trimmed up. If I left these the branches would be about as thick as a shoelace and nuggets would total to maybe a half ounce. Not worth it to me. And Your honor, I believe the potted one shows some evidence for my theory, nothing side by side but this is just a 2 gal pot. And again the lower buds would have just been a waste of my nutes/water And I think weight wise it will do just as good as if I left them, just less time sitting and trimming.
Just some things to keep in mind, these too only get limited sun. Unlike my high in the sky babes, these only get good sun in the morning. then its real patchy. Took the wider shot from the east were most of the sun is soaked up. I try to let the ones getting good light thrive and trim the scraggly stuff during veg. I rest my case, nothing really proven.

*and yes that fat nugget in your face (top right corner area of 5th pic) is on the end of that skinny ass branch on the back one that's super trimmed.

 

[Pepe le skunk]

Recommend not wasting your time as this section has been hyjacked by Uncle Ben, Chuck Estevez and his follower Doer.
If you look at their post history you will see few pictures of their gardens if any. Could be the same ip address as chuck and Ben might be the same person with two accounts.

Facts:
Uncle Ben is not an employee at a dispensary.
He is not at the forefront of research in indoor growing of cannabis.
He is not doing large volume growing of cannabis indoors.
He has not written his method of growing indoors to increase yield and harvest the biggest most desired buds from a plant.
He does know how to grow trees and vines outdoors because he works at a garden center and has hours a day to post on a website.
He purposly spreads false information and trolls this section.

Here is what he says doesn't work.
Pruning and or lollypopping to increase desired large buds at the top of the canopy for maximum bud size while minimizing low branch larf.

He claims no pruning is necessary and you will have better results with higher yields from not lollypopping and pruning.
If this is not a claim you are making then what is your suggested grow method indoors because I have not seen it written anywhere.

Here is your chance to set the record straight Uncle Ben.
Tell us how to grow indoors and produce the biggest yield with the largest buds and smallest amount of larf.
Include overall plant size when done, container size to use and expected yield per container per 1000 Watt light.

Any one want to bet he does not answer the question?

 

[Uncle Ben]

I aint telling you shit Pepe. Go back to a dozen forums I've posted to over 15 years and find out for yourself who I am and what I've done. Sorry son, but you're not even in the same league.

Here's your chance to stop acting like some disrespectful, smart ass, snot nosed fool.

 

[Uncle Ben]

Got the pictoral evidence. Nothing proven, besides the neatness and using the nutes and water for the bigger branches. From the front it looks like one big plant because of poor planning, Then 3 pics of the main stems all trimmed up. If I left these the branches would be about as thick as a shoelace and nuggets would total to maybe a half ounce. Not worth it to me. And Your honor, I believe the potted one shows some evidence for my theory, nothing side by side but this is just a 2 gal pot. And again the lower buds would have just been a waste of my nutes/water And I think weight wise it will do just as good as if I left them, just less time sitting and trimming.
Just some things to keep in mind, these too only get limited sun. Unlike my high in the sky babes, these only get good sun in the morning. then its real patchy. Took the wider shot from the east were most of the sun is soaked up. I try to let the ones getting good light thrive and trim the scraggly stuff during veg. I rest my case, nothing really proven.

*and yes that fat nugget in your face (top right corner area of 5th pic) is on the end of that skinny ass branch on the back one that's super trimmed.

I also grow "in a hole" and my plants don't look like that. They are fuller with fat green leaves all the way to the ground and the yields are high. You have not mastered something. Whatever it is or a combination thereof I don't have a clue.

 

[Sativied]

You have not mastered something. Whatever it is or a combination thereof I don't have a clue.

 

[Ninjabowler]

Really it all looks like good ganja to me. Good grow.

thanks man. this grow is staying super green thanks to using the grow fertilizer through flower. they still have a long way to go but they've put on some nice weight so far.
i know that one side by side isn't the most definitive proof in the entire world, but it is one example and it does support the lolly popping theory and what I've been saying. The buds in the pictures are clearly larger on the lolly popped plant and its not like i knew this debate was going to happen and purposely made the plants do that. It was a random over sight that happened to become relevant.
As for the science part...the only way i could see further proving it to be an advantage would be to grow more plants to compare a whole row of trimmed vs. a whole row of untrimmed. And id love to do it but thats like agreeing to have something you like stolen from you. Id love to do two AKs next to each other so you can see that but thats my favorite strain. who knows, i might have to though to put this argument to rest.
As for lolly popping like some do.......i cringe. But with a really packed trellis its necessary to remove all that junk under there. It is really bad weed, and theres no need to grow it. After all, the plant only has the resources to grow a certain amount of flowers and id rather it be the flowers that will develop the best to take that energy.
For now I'm satisfied with my work and with my pruning, that seems to be working as the pictures show.

I've said what i needed to, given pictures as evidence, theres not much more that i can do to prove that under cutting is an effective tool for producing the best quality medicine available. So you guys can have the thread back to trash on it again.......CAAAAAAAR!!!!.............................GAME ON!!!!!!!!

 

[chuck estevez]

Recommend not wasting your time as this section has been hyjacked by Uncle Ben, Chuck Estevez and his follower Doer.
If you look at their post history you will see few pictures of their gardens if any. Could be the same ip address as chuck and Ben might be the same person with two accounts.

Facts:
Uncle Ben is not an employee at a dispensary.
He is not at the forefront of research in indoor growing of cannabis.
He is not doing large volume growing of cannabis indoors.
He has not written his method of growing indoors to increase yield and harvest the biggest most desired buds from a plant.
He does know how to grow trees and vines outdoors because he works at a garden center and has hours a day to post on a website.
He purposly spreads false information and trolls this section.

Here is what he says doesn't work.
Pruning and or lollypopping to increase desired large buds at the top of the canopy for maximum bud size while minimizing low branch larf.

He claims no pruning is necessary and you will have better results with higher yields from not lollypopping and pruning.
If this is not a claim you are making then what is your suggested grow method indoors because I have not seen it written anywhere.

Here is your chance to set the record straight Uncle Ben.
Tell us how to grow indoors and produce the biggest yield with the largest buds and smallest amount of larf.
Include overall plant size when done, container size to use and expected yield per container per 1000 Watt light.

Any one want to bet he does not answer the question?

 

[Ninjabowler]

Recommend not wasting your time as this section has been hyjacked by Uncle Ben, Chuck Estevez and his follower Doer.
If you look at their post history you will see few pictures of their gardens if any. Could be the same ip address as chuck and Ben might be the same person with two accounts.

Facts:
Uncle Ben is not an employee at a dispensary.
He is not at the forefront of research in indoor growing of cannabis.
He is not doing large volume growing of cannabis indoors.
He has not written his method of growing indoors to increase yield and harvest the biggest most desired buds from a plant.
He does know how to grow trees and vines outdoors because he works at a garden center and has hours a day to post on a website.
He purposly spreads false information and trolls this section.

Here is what he says doesn't work.
Pruning and or lollypopping to increase desired large buds at the top of the canopy for maximum bud size while minimizing low branch larf.

He claims no pruning is necessary and you will have better results with higher yields from not lollypopping and pruning.
If this is not a claim you are making then what is your suggested grow method indoors because I have not seen it written anywhere.

Here is your chance to set the record straight Uncle Ben.
Tell us how to grow indoors and produce the biggest yield with the largest buds and smallest amount of larf.
Include overall plant size when done, container size to use and expected yield per container per 1000 Watt light.

Any one want to bet he does not answer the question?

Thats funny that he did just what you said he would like you had him on puppet strings And now that you mention it, the only plant I've ever seen from ben is a horrible looking sativa in a wheelbarrow that looked like the worst weed I've ever seen in my life. the plant was grown nicely and looked healthy but it really looked like some landrace schwag.

 

[chuck estevez]

thanks man. this grow is staying super green thanks to using the grow fertilizer through flower. they still have a long way to go but they've put on some nice weight so far.
i know that one side by side isn't the most definitive proof in the entire world, but it is one example and it does support the lolly popping theory and what I've been saying. The buds in the pictures are clearly larger on the lolly popped plant and its not like i knew this debate was going to happen and purposely made the plants do that. It was a random over sight that happened to become relevant.
As for the science part...the only way i could see further proving it to be an advantage would be to grow more plants to compare a whole row of trimmed vs. a whole row of untrimmed. And id love to do it but thats like agreeing to have something you like stolen from you. Id love to do two AKs next to each other so you can see that but thats my favorite strain. who knows, i might have to though to put this argument to rest.
As for lolly popping like some do.......i cringe. But with a really packed trellis its necessary to remove all that junk under there. It is really bad weed, and theres no need to grow it. After all, the plant only has the resources to grow a certain amount of flowers and id rather it be the flowers that will develop the best to take that energy.
For now I'm satisfied with my work and with my pruning, that seems to be working as the pictures show.

I've said what i needed to, given pictures as evidence, theres not much more that i can do to prove that under cutting is an effective tool for producing the best quality medicine available. So you guys can have the thread back to trash on it again.......CAAAAAAAR!!!!.............................GAME ON!!!!!!!!

Where did you learn that????????????????