That depends... if it's something I have looked and waited for a very long time, I will give it many benefits of doubt. If it's something more common, it likely won't have more than a few chances to prove itself.

I also have more patience with a rose I imported at some cost and trouble than more common varieties. I usually give a rose 4 years before evaluating it. Roses grow slowly in my climate. But I regret keeping Claus (or Klaus) Groth for 7 years waiting for blooms on an ugly bush. I could have used that prominent place better. I keep smaller roses longer than the big shrubs as they don't bother me so much if they don't live up to expectations. I have room enough and if they are green and healthy they can live on anonymously among perennials in a bed until I need the place for something better.

More patience, Nik. Just like your marriage, you don't 'shovel prune'. :-) Just joking. You collect good roses from far away, give them a chance of 30 years, and you have land can fit 2000 roses.... I only shovel prune root stocks, never roses. I have room for them to stay so far. Some of the repeat roses won't repeat in my garden, I just plant good repeat roses to grow with them. You can always plant something else next to it while you're waiting. :-)

My garden is my refuge, a place that gives me beauty and peace. Having to look at a non-performer year after year is not conducive to that feeling. Three years is usually the most I will give, and often less than that. Some roses, like Annie Laurie McDowell, a very slow grower, I am keeping because the little bush is pretty, healthy and is putting out the occasional bud so I know it's trying. Some gangly, thorny specimen with blooms that disappoint will be gone a lot sooner, without any guilt on my part. I have to worry about giving water to a questionable performer in drought conditions and that is a large consideration. I have found that roses that haven't done well since the drought have recovered well in a cooler spot, so moving them to give them another chance, since they were desirable roses, has been a satisfying experience.

Four-five years at least. I once rooted a cutting of Belle Portugaise from a plant in the neighborhood. It grew and grew and grew, but no flowers, not one. After its FOURTH Spring with no blooms, I inquired on here (at this point it was 12-15 ft high). The advice I got was to feed it, water it, and wait for next year. The following Spring it covered itself in the most gorgeous blooms I had ever seen on any rose, ever. My neighbors and passersby on the sidewalk were taking pictures of it. It has continued to do that every Spring every since.

Ditto 'de la Grifferaie', which came up as rootstock after I thought I had shovel pruned a very boring yellow rose tree. It grew into an 8 ft by 6 ft bush (took 4 years) before it bloomed for the first time. It was and is still spectacular every Spring.

Now, both of these plants were disease free and healthy and growing, it was just that they needed to get big before they would bloom. Both now (15 years later) still in my garden, and still blooming great. If they were diseased it would have been different matter, although I do agree with Jeri that tea roses sometimes mildew when they are babies and then grow out of it.

Jackie

I can't ever do it. I resorted years ago to giving the ones that underperformed to other ARF members, and have given others to neighbors. But I wouldn't give it to someone who I wasn't sure about. I have to be confident that they would be taken care of.

I have this climber called Captain Kidd, which I know I could never replace. It has to be five or six years old and bloomed once. Once. But, the foliage is so pretty. Healthy, new growth a great red color. I'll probably never s/p it.

Now reading my post the whole thing seems a bit silly, but it is what it is.

Oh, forever (or until it dies of neglect). When I have a new plant, I am all eagerness until it blooms (or not) at which point I am (shamefully) onto the next big thing. I have a plot full of non-performers but until I actually find the need to bulldoze a space (and I have been cramming stuff in insanely) I just...ignore the duffers...which is probably why my garden looks particularly rubbishy this week/month/season...but there always next season's orders coming along.

We had two rooted cuttings from "Grandmother's Hat." Both from the same great mother plant. Both planted next to the garage, 4-ft. apart. One bloomed in its first year. The other took more than two years. They're terrific now, and a good match, and I'm glad that I did not (as I was tempted) give up on the laggard. You just never know.

That's a really iffy question. I've held on to some for way longer than I should have just because I was SO hoping they would improve. Summer Fashion comes to mind immediately. It was the wimpiest plant you ever saw but it had taken me years to find one, and the blooms really were pretty when it did bloom, but it just wouldn't grow. I had it a good 5 or 6 years before I finally decided the real estate was better used with something that would grow and bloom more reliably. Others I tore out after the first year because not only were they wimpy or sickly but they were cheapie, baggie roses and I didn't like the blooms. I will always keep my Angel Face, even though it's really a dog here, because it's one of the few roses left that were from my Mom. Sentimental old fool that I am.

Ha, I wrote a novel and didn't actually answer the question.
The TLDR: when I decide it's a dud and not just slow AND I want the space.

I have waited more than seven years for seedlings to flower from wild crosses I geniunely wanted to the results of. None have lived up to what I felt was their promise and all have been discarded. One actually turned out to be a very nice standard stock. Does that mean I won't wait years for the occasional seedling to flower, again? Nope! If the cross has been a difficult one to achieve, I'll wait.

It must be different with warmer climates. In the cold, mountain regions...most plants that don't do well also don't survive the winters.

Between deer, cold, wind chill and very short growing season...anything that survives is going to find a place in our garden :)

I used to think like that too, lavender lass. I figured if it could survive my winters who was I to sentence it to death? I've gotten better about that though. Why wait for a hanger on to finally bite the dust over winter when there are SO many roses still out there that I want to try. Now, if it's a dog I'll find something new to put in it's spot this spring and see how it winters!

Hard to say...I've sent a few to new homes that became wonderful plants after being duds for years. I've moved plants and watched them make a transformation. Never can tell, but if it's been more than 4-5 years, I say move it and see what happens.

I'm mostly with fduk and lavender lass on this one - only if it either dies or I need the space for something else. Only a few times has a rose annoyed me enough to put forth the effort to remove it (Harlow Carr mostly), but I'd probably remove Rountuit and Fimbriata if they weren't at the back of a tough spot. They're big enough that I could replace them with something more interesting if I were a little more annoyed. Of course both of them decided to put on a decent show this spring, which delayed the issue of moving them and allowed me to continue my usual lazy approach. As for Seil's point - if a rose is obviously failing I don't bother to dig it up, but plant something I like better close to it so there'll be an instant replacement if and when it bites the dust. If it surprises me and survives- well, I choose roses that will mingle well, so it's win-win (and again, lazy).

All this will change someday when I run out of rose space, but it hasn't happened yet and I'm pushing 1000 roses. Cold zones allow us to keep hangers on around without wasting too much garden space for the most part. Oh, and I've planted some more interesting big roses like Blush Noisette near Fimbriata and Rountuit and plan to chop them back ruthlessly after their one spring bloom next year like I do Variegata di Bologna, hence getting a "two-fer" in that space, allowing the better rose to grow up and cover the empty spot.

Cynthia

I have an area where I've had a different problem. Soil was light, well drained and weeds thrived there. Roses didn't. Didn't matter which rose, roses just didn't like it. Tried Elderberries there. They didn't like it either.

It was in the back yard near where the wood shed had been and also where livestock had stood and pooped for over a century, on and off.

I finally decided to see what was down under the organic rich, high draining soil.

Not only had the woodshed been there, but that's where (for a while, at least) the family had coal dumped for heating. Lots and lots of coal. Still there. Poison Ivy and Virginia Creeper and Penny Plant love it. Even multiflora-descended roses don't like it. Looking at it from a seasonal perspective, not all weeds like it and the weeds there tend to be less vigorous....and that is the positive.

Following from what fduk said above, about duds vs lazy ones, how do you tell the difference? Is it sickly appearance that tells a dud from a slow starter? In my soil, many a rose (and lots of other plants) that would thrive in a pot looks a dud in the soil, due, I suspect to my alkaline calcareous conditions that no matter how much I try to ammend using organic stuff, often prevail.