Lollipopping

Old Fat Dude said:

Heck it's just a weed !!!

Click to expand...

dats right

blueybong said:

So my goal(totally experimental) to have one huge cola and a few large buds.

Click to expand...

So you think that "huge cola" is just gonna pop up out of no where? Some fairy is gonna wave a magic wand over your garden and you wake up to find this "huge cola"?

Sorry, but those plants look pathetic and will NOT produce squat, reason being is V V V

.....and have been cutting off branches, along with their fan leaves, since week 2 in veg.

Click to expand...

Why?

You will not get one huge cola by removing the very unit that produces them. Plain and simply put, it's all about botany, not some love affair with forum gimmicks.

Learn what makes a plant tick,
UB

Uncle Ben, I don't care if you are the best grower in the world, you come off like a know-it-all asshole. Who the fuck are you to call someone's plants pathetic? And I don't think you really know what you're talking about in the first place. Lollipopping, as lame as a name as it is, is a legitimate strategy for maximizing yield, depending on strain and space issues like I said before. While you are waiting for your second harvest to finish I already have new plants going because mine finish all at once. Plus removing lower branches decreases the footprint of the plant because the lower branches are longest and stick out the furthest. You could fit three lollipopped plants in the same amount of space as one of yours without a single shaded branch. And with MOST strains, removing lower branches will increase growth at the top, I have actually tried it - side by side clones from the same mother with some pruned and some not. Can you say you have done the same? If you are pushing the limits of plants per square foot then some amount of lollipopping, pruning, whatever you want to call it, is a must. No one growing style maximizes yield for all strains and all growing situations like you seem to believe. And did you really tell people who use chemical nutrients not to flush?!?!?! Completely green leaves all the way until harvest, huh? That's how nature does it, right? Give me a break.

have to done side by side flush tests as well?

If so, what the hells the diff?

mared juwan said:

Uncle Ben, I don't care if you are the best grower in the world, you come off like a know-it-all asshole. Who the fuck are you to call someone's plants pathetic? And I don't think you really know what you're talking about in the first place. Lollipopping, as lame as a name as it is, is a legitimate strategy for maximizing yield, depending on strain and space issues like I said before. While you are waiting for your second harvest to finish I already have new plants going because mine finish all at once. Plus removing lower branches decreases the footprint of the plant because the lower branches are longest and stick out the furthest. You could fit three lollipopped plants in the same amount of space as one of yours without a single shaded branch. And with MOST strains, removing lower branches will increase growth at the top, I have actually tried it - side by side clones from the same mother with some pruned and some not. Can you say you have done the same? If you are pushing the limits of plants per square foot then some amount of lollipopping, pruning, whatever you want to call it, is a must. No one growing style maximizes yield for all strains and all growing situations like you seem to believe. And did you really tell people who use chemical nutrients not to flush?!?!?! Completely green leaves all the way until harvest, huh? That's how nature does it, right? Give me a break.

Click to expand...

I could not have said it better.

This is a lively discussion No ....

Most of the time it seems like newbies ...

But sometimes it's real .....

Thanks mared juwan....

Could anyone quote any actual scientific study , on pruning ....

maybe we should give Greg Green a call . BTW who is doing today's cutting edge research ?

Does anyone know which foreign universities have studies / research ...

This is a multi billion dollar Industry ....

you sure as hell arent going to get any "REAL" info from any universities in the USA... I agree and would like to see some real scientific proof...

Old Fat Dude said:

This is a lively discussion No ....

Most of the time it seems like newbies ...

But sometimes it's real .....

Thanks mared juwan....

Could anyone quote any actual scientific study , on pruning ....

maybe we should give Greg Green a call . BTW who is doing today's cutting edge research ?

Does anyone know which foreign universities have studies / research ...

This is a multi billion dollar Industry ....

Click to expand...

mared juwan said:

Uncle Ben, I don't care if you are the best grower in the world, you come off like a know-it-all asshole. Who the fuck are you to call someone's plants pathetic? And I don't think you really know what you're talking about in the first place. Lollipopping, as lame as a name as it is, is a legitimate strategy for maximizing yield, depending on strain and space issues like I said before. While you are waiting for your second harvest to finish I already have new plants going because mine finish all at once. Plus removing lower branches decreases the footprint of the plant because the lower branches are longest and stick out the furthest. You could fit three lollipopped plants in the same amount of space as one of yours without a single shaded branch. And with MOST strains, removing lower branches will increase growth at the top, I have actually tried it - side by side clones from the same mother with some pruned and some not. Can you say you have done the same? If you are pushing the limits of plants per square foot then some amount of lollipopping, pruning, whatever you want to call it, is a must. No one growing style maximizes yield for all strains and all growing situations like you seem to believe. And did you really tell people who use chemical nutrients not to flush?!?!?! Completely green leaves all the way until harvest, huh? That's how nature does it, right? Give me a break.

Click to expand...

burnnnnneeed

mared juwan said:

Uncle Ben, I don't care if you are the best grower in the world, you come off like a know-it-all asshole.

Click to expand...

Those that listen to me will have bigger dingle berries than those that do the "feel good" drill.

Who the fuck are you to call someone's plants pathetic?

Click to expand...

I have earned that right. How's about 50 years of gardening experience, shit-fer-brains. My analysis stands pat - those are some pathetic looking plants that will not yield much based on the fact that he, nor you, understand simple botanical concepts. It's healthy leaves that produce buds, not some stupid forum wannabe crap.

And I don't think you really know what you're talking about in the first place. Lollipopping, as lame as a name as it is, is a legitimate strategy for maximizing yield,

Click to expand...

It's yet another strategy for noobs that seem determined to fuck up their plants.

Go fer it.....

crazy ass pics man! awesome!

Uncle Ben said:

Those that listen to me will have bigger dingle berries than those that do the "feel good" drill.

I have earned that right. How's about 50 years of gardening experience, shit-fer-brains. My analysis stands pat - those are some pathetic looking plants that will not yield much based on the fact that he, nor you, understand simple botanical concepts. It's healthy leaves that produce buds, not some stupid forum wannabe crap.

It's yet another strategy for noobs that seem determined to fuck up their plants.

Go fer it.....

Click to expand...

Did you even read my post? I do not advocate removing any branches or leaves that have plenty of access to light. BUT when you start to move the plants closer together the lower branches begin to intertwine and the result is some branches are in complete darkness. Those branches are not supporting the plant or themselves. Why would you move plants so close together? Three 4 ft tall plants which have the lower branches removed will yield more than one 4 ft tall plant which is untrimmed and fits in the same amount of space. Or you could try to fit three untrimmed plants in that space and watch all your lower leaves die from no light and all your lower busites just be a couple pistils at the end of flower. It all has to do with the STRAIN, GROWSPACE and LIGHTING, which is different for every grow. That is my main point and what you completely ignored, electing to call me shit-fer-brains instead which BTW makes you look real smart. How about you share your vast botanical knowledge instead of that bullshit. I agree that leaves are important and removing them needlessly like I see a lot of people do drives me nuts. But if you remove lower BRANCHES which you know will underperform the top anyway you are decreasing the number of BUDSITES and keeping the same amount of roots. This means more root mass per budsite. Does your botanical expertise cover the roots? More roots equals bigger buds, or am I wrong? If you have the same amount of roots feeding less buds those buds will yield more, all other conditions being the same. I promise if you know what you are doing and can pick out and remove which branches will not effectively use the light provided then you will increase final yield. There are circumstances (strain, growspace, lighting) where your method works best but there are many others where it does not.

I encourage others to try both methods. Pack some plants of a cola dominant strain tightly together from the beginning of flower and as they stretch remove the lowest branches which become completely shaded. Try another group packed tightly together and leave the lower branches to watch them waste away if you want. Then try untrimmed plants that are spaced far enough apart for no branches to overlap and wait around to harvest twice. You might be surprised by the results but it makes perfect sense to me. Increased root mass per budsite in addition to all remaining buds/leaves being unshaded in addition to all the remaining buds/leaves being closer to your primary light source in addition to a quicker finish in addition to a higher number of plants equals more total yield.

Finally, I could grow for 100 years and I would still never call anyone's plants pathetic. Does that make you feel big? King of the castle, King of the castle...

mared juwan said:

Completely green leaves all the way until harvest, huh? That's how nature does it, right? Give me a break.

Click to expand...

Wait a minute...

Are you saying that you think "nature" has some kind of awareness of what stage of growth an individual organism is in, and some how adjusts the elements it makes available to that organism?

Is it not the organism that makes use of what it needs from what is continually available to it?

mared juwan said:

Did you even read my post? I do not advocate removing any branches or leaves that have plenty of access to light. BUT when you start to move the plants closer together the lower branches begin to intertwine and the result is some branches are in complete darkness. Those branches are not supporting the plant or themselves. Why would you move plants so close together?

Click to expand...

Because I have to #1, #2 if you use appropriate side reflecting panels your lower leaves will not be in darkness. There is no such thing as "darkness" in a well designed garden. I want you to see what a cramped garden really looks like. The leafsets on these plants were "intertwined" to use your words, but the results were excellent.

https://www.rollitup.org/general-marijuana-growing/9114-spin-out-chemical-root-pruning.html

Three 4 ft tall plants which have the lower branches removed will yield more than one 4 ft tall plant which is untrimmed and fits in the same amount of space.

Click to expand...

Not true. The plant has a CO2 flag residing in the leaf. When CO2 processing levels (a determinant of photosynthesis) falls to a certain point it becomes a flag to the plant that the leafset is no longer productive. The plant will then pull the metabolites out of the leaf, send them to other plant parts and drop that leafset.

Or you could try to fit three untrimmed plants in that space and watch all your lower leaves die from no light and all your lower busites just be a couple pistils at the end of flower.

Click to expand...

That has never happened to me. Something else is working against you in your case. See my avatar? That 6" wide rock hard cola was produced in a closet, cramped in with a shoehorn.

I do double harvests. By retaining healthy leafsets until the end, I take out the "huge" colas and put the bottom of the plant back under the lights to bulk up the lower buds, which always form late on the plant but can be higher in THC than the buds at the top according to Mississippi university tests studies. It makes a big difference in overall yields and increases efficiency in regards to buying light, time, maintenance, etc. I have posted those results many times over the years using different gardens' photos of such.

How about you share your vast botanical knowledge instead of that bullshit.

Click to expand...

How about you checking out all my posts? I have taught for 14 years in cannabis forums and had to put up with know-it-all jerks every step of the way. Here I am teaching the value of leaf retention and you have people who obviously don't have a clue about the function or value of a leaf advocating removal. It's laughable!

I agree that leaves are important and removing them needlessly like I see a lot of people do drives me nuts. But if you remove lower BRANCHES which you know will underperform the top anyway you are decreasing the number of BUDSITES and keeping the same amount of roots.

Click to expand...

See the above. True, an abundant root system is important, my plants always finish up potbound, as they should.

Look, I'm gonna start a thread on this issue, hopefully it becomes a sticky. The leaves (and roots) are the most important system for a plant and there needs to be a sticky thread where members can go for info on the function, health, and retention of leaves. It's up to our fine mods though.

Finally, I could grow for 100 years and I would still never call anyone's plants pathetic.

Click to expand...

That's because you're a politically correct mofo that hasn't got an ounce of honesty running thru his veins. What do you want me to do, be disengenious, lie, and tell this poor noob that they look terrific? They don't, they look like they've been butchered, which they have, all for the sake of being kewl in a forum and going along with The Herd, which is usually wrong.




It's the blind leading the blind. He said he's doing an experiment which is all well and good, but the results should be evident before even trying. Gotta know what makes a plant tick first. I have experimented with cannabis for many years, that's how you learn, but I also understand the function of plant parts and know what comes first. I wish him the best and hope that my candid posts will help him more than some dude mainly interested in protecting his ego.

Hey, perhaps they need epsom salts? That's it, he should add 1/2 cup/gallon of epsom salts!!!!

UB

lightmonger said:

"That's how nature does it, right? Give me a break."

Wait a minute...

Are you saying that you think "nature" has some kind of awareness of what stage of growth an individual organism is in, and some how adjusts the elements it makes available to it?

Click to expand...

Of course. One mentioned in my previous thread is a CO2 flag, the others are hormonal processes. Know what really germinates a seed? It's an act of bringing a living embryo out of dormancy, an action of auxins struggling against anti-auxins.

Is it not the organism that makes use of what it needs from what is continually available to it?

Click to expand...

You're hip, good on ya!

fuck me no wonder we have wars, sad sad sad

im still stickin with the world being flat, no way im sailing into unknown waters lol

blueybong said:

UB ~ I came to Fred's Lollipopping thread because I'm interested in seeing how well this works. As I said earlier, this is an experiment. If it gets you bent out of shape because I'm trying something new with unknown results until 6 or 7 weeks from now, why not just walk-on???

It's know-it-all's like you who try to diminsh ones desire to try something new that you don't agree with, but then again, I tend to ignore people like you.

Oh by the way, I agree that my plants look weird since the lower 1/3 has been removed, but that doesn't mean I'll go shit on someones experiment.

Let's stop the Ego War Uncle Ben and get back to learning & growing.

Click to expand...

I know what your results will be as I stated before.

This is the results of NOT lollipopping. Your plants should look like this now, full of leaf, nice and green. These are large plants BTW:



....in order to get results like this, about a 26" cola, 4"+ across, crammed in with others:



If this is an experiment, where's your control group? They all look butchered to me. Without a control group, your experiment is useless. Just saying.......

Some people just gotta learn the hard way, so, I rest my case. You're on your own.

Good luck with your experiment,
UB

Well sorry to step right into the middle of a raging battle but I have been following Uncle Bens advice religously and have read him on several different topics and am getting great results. There may be other ways out there but as far as Im concerned Uncle Bens word is as good as gold. Its about time someone tells it like they see it. +rep to Uncle Ben for speaking his mind, helping out noobs and not being scared to stand up against a whole thread of pretenders.