You are not the only one that is getting confused with rose classification. In the old days, breeders kept to a known way of breeding roses. That way was very strict and governed by rose societies. David Austin went outside of the rules and crossed the very old roses with modern ones and was denounced internationally for doing so. It would probably be correct to call an Austin rose a modern shrub rose. However Mr. Austin labelled them English Roses and wanted everyone else to call them by that name. So you can see how confusing classification gets when you step off the known way of hybridizing roses and even create a new classification. I was the one that separated the Rose Forum from the Antique Forum and it was fairly easy to do back then, except for the Austin roses which I decided to put on the Antique Forum because at that time, they had more of the old rose's bloodline in them. Perhaps it is time to put the Austins into the Rose Forum. !n the late 1960, hybrid teas were born and from then on all roses were considered to be modern and all roses before that date, antique. Try not to get too unset with classification just get to know what roses will do well in your area. Growing roses is about enjoying the beauty of the rose and what that beauty gives to you.

I think you meant that Hybrid Teas were born in 1860 - specifically, it was in 1867 that La France was released, the very first Hybrid Tea.

You're on point on everything else you stated. Classifications are stated by the breeders. You even have the class called Grandiflora that is supposed to be for Hybrid Teas crossed with Floribundas. Strictly speaking, Hybrid Teas were supposed to be crosses between Tea roses and Hybrid Perpetuals and between two or more Hybrid Teas. Alas these days breeders cross anything with compatible genes. Based on how the plant looks, the breeder then chooses a classification for it.

A lot of rose classification is driven by the ARS for show judging purposes. In last 20-30 years, many hybridizers have been crossing roses of all kinds without regards to class to create things like disease resistance, hardiness, vigor, etc. Now we have lots of mixed parentage roses that end up being called modern shrub roses that can be easily confused with HT's, floribundas, OGR's, etc. So if you are not an ARS exhibitor, I suggest selecting what you like, what goes with your planting scheme & what grows best in your climate without regard to class.

"Miniature" refers to the size of the bloom, not the size of the plant. I have minis that are 4' tall. "Minifloras" are supposed to be between the size of a miniature and a floribunda, but there are minifloras with blooms that are the size of miniatures, and miniatures (I'm looking at you Nancy Jean) that can have blooms the size of a small car (just kidding, but those blooms can be huge). The hybridizer gets to select the classification.

As others have said, figure out what you want as far as what grows best in your climate and your care tolerance.

It sounds like you got scared away from the Antique Rose Forum (home of the nicest people on the planet) and I'm sorry about that. It's my Gardenweb home. My experience with that forum has been that people post there about old roses, older roses which aren't strictly antiques, such as the Polyanthas, Hybrid Musks, and Ramblers, often about modern shrub roses, and about species and species hybrids. Oh, and the English roses. No one will shoot you if you post a question about a modern rose there. The very rough division between the Roses forum and the Antique Rose forum, as I've experienced it, is that on the Roses forum the emphasis is on roses grown for their blooms, while on the old rose forum, while people still love the flowers, they pay more attention to the rose as a shrub or climber...to its overall character as a plant.

Concerning your difficulties with classification, join the club. I've been cataloging my roses, mostly antiques, placing them in classes, and at times categorization has been a brain twister. I find it does make me study my roses, and think about rose breeding.

Hi Sharon, most of what's been said is accurate. There are two ways to look at classification. The first is what genes were involved in creating the plant. Breeders and collectors often find that information interesting and useful. If you like R. Californica and want to collect roses bred from it, then calling them "Hybrid Californicas" would help, but it otherwise tells you little to nothing about what you should expect from it in your garden.

Then, you have the artificial classes most of us "grew up" reading...Hybrid Tea, Floribunda, Grandiflora, Polyantha, etc.. At one time, supposedly, a Hybrid Tea was supposed to grow more like a vertical rectangular solid and carry primarily one bloom to the stem. Floribundas were supposedly more horizontal rectangular soilds with more cluster flowered blooms. Grandifloras were taller HTs with smaller flowers in clusters, etc., but that doesn't (and likely didn't) really hold true.

It might be easier to consider there are really only two types of roses, bush and climbing. Anything that will support itself, freestanding, is a bush, whether it's an HT, floribunda, "shrub", mini, etc. Minis and polys are actually "shrubs", bush roses. Anything that won't support itself, freestanding, is a "climber". Ground cover roses can be bushes or climbers left to lay on the ground and mound on themselves. If you support a Flower Carpet like you would a climber, it can make a climbing plant. There is much overlap between bush and climber. Many climbers can be whacked and left freestanding, without support, and they will develop bushy growth. Quite a few bushes can be supported and trained as climbers.

The majority of the 'classifications' actually mean very little, and were generated to help provide you the information you need to determine if the variety will fill the desired use you have for it. Ignore the classifications and look at the reported sizes of plant and flower; whether the flowers appear more singly or in clusters; and whether it is reported to be hardy and disease resistant in your location and conditions. No matter what we call them, the roses can't read and are going to do what they want with the conditions and resources they have available.

Roseseek, how do you determine if a climber can be kept as a "bush"? I though climbers only bloom at the end unless you make the canes go vertical. For example, not that I wanting to do this - but wanting to understand, if you took a climber that wants to be 8, 14, or 20 ft tall and tried to trim it to 4 or 5 feet tall. Aren't you just cutting off all of the flowers. Would it it still bloom at that height if cut. What if you take this 20 ft rose and peg it or wrap it back and forth keeping it at the 4 or 5 foot height.

So on the David Austin roses I see that certain roses can be grown as climbers in warm (hot) areas. I thought that meant they got really tall and leggy not keeping the "bush" branches. So do they get leggy? Do they have to be pegged in order to make lateral bloom. ( I am not sure if I am using the lateral term correctly, I just recently saw a video on pegging - and didn't even have a clue what pegging meant.) And what about the hybrid teas that seem to get long and leggy here in the heat - can they also be pegged.

Glad for the explanation on the Grandiflora. I thought the size of the flower was supposed to be larger. I probably would have never bought one if I thought it would be taller than a hybrid tea. Some of the hybrid teas gets plenty tall in my area. But I love the Grandifloras I have.

Everyone, I really appreciate everyone's comment on forget classification and purchase what you like, but if you don't get to see a rose in person it helps to kind of think about qualities of the roses that I have and try to match my favorites. But I guess that isn't holding true. I have purchased some real "doozies". I have purchased a couple of rose bushes- that were supposedly good for the south east Florida area. The flowers were "ok" - but the habit of the bush was awful in my opinion. No leaves on the bottom 3/4 of plant. For the longest time I thought it had some disease, until someone told me or I read that that was the characteristic of that certain hybrid tea or that certain floribunda. So I thought I would be smart and pay my due diligence of looking up on helpmefind researching on how tall or wide they should get only to find out that it doesn't always hold true for my area. That is why I love this forum people are so helpful and knowledgeable and for people like me it is a place to learn. Now I try and find out from the wonderful people in my area on this forum what they grow and it has helped quite a bit.... However there are times that I just can't resist myself, because I see a picture of a rose and feel like a kid in a candy store and have to have it even if no one else is growing here - nothing like being a guinea pig - then kicking myself for getting a dud - or being ecstatic for getting a gem.

Thanks

*OT*

I'm still waiting for you to write that book, Kim.

*Stern look, arms crossed and tapping my toe*

lol...seriously Kim, I'll even proof it for you!

If nothing else, we need to get you, Jeri, Lyn, and Paul and a couple of others in a room for about a week and record everything you say. Then I'll be happy to transcribe it!

John

Kim that was well said and is sure to make anyone new to growing roses or anyone who already grows roses, have a better understanding of rose classifications. I know it helped me! I always enjoy reading your advice and take something for my own garden even when it's not directed towards me. Thanks for being there for us on the forum!

Thank you, John. It doesn't WORK that way. I look at the plant and just DO. I don't "think" about it. They "tell me" what they want, "show me" what will stimulate them to do what I want them to do. I require a question to "think" about it, otherwise the responses are all just "there", waiting either to just come forth as action or be translated into words. You "learn it" by observing as many different plants in as many different situations, environments, climates and conditions as possible, watching their responses to the differing conditions, then digging out pieces of information from books, lectures, other peoples' observations and experiences, forums...anywhere there is information. You distrust accepted "wisdom", become a "heretic", challenge the "doctrines of rosedom" and make them prove themselves to your satisfaction. If something works, question why. If it doesn't, find out why then figure out what's wrong and fix it. That may require failing MANY times (or not), and even then, it isn't universal, no matter how badly we want it to be.

People, all of us, want concrete "truths", whether it's classifications, cultural practices, or whatever, so we can simply follow the recipe to obtain the guaranteed, perfect results. What works that way everywhere, every time? Very little. As with virtually everything else, many roads will get you the results you desire, but few "recipes", including mine, are going to work exactly as they do for me, right here, right now, how they might for you, there, at some other time. So, you figure out what works where you are, then why it does, or doesn't work elsewhere so you can understand how the plant reacts, what's required to enable it to do what is desired. The more different variables you can observe, read of, be told of, the more pieces you can put together of that wonderful, fascinating, frustrating puzzle.

As more of the picture reveals itself by more and more pieces fitting together, the more I'm convinced "recipes" hinder our successes. What's really required is understanding the botany of the plant, "learning to speak rose". That also requires learning the mechanics of soil and water as well as the chemistry of fertilizers. Following recipes will work to a point, until something not taken into consideration by the recipe happens. But, understanding the chemistry, botany, effects of climate, soil, water, fertilizers; what the lowest common demoninator is of the plants, helps you just "know" what you need to begin with, then begin massaging it from there to make it work as expected. I don't know if you bake, but no recipe can fully take elevation, humidity, temperature, gas versus electric, etc. into consideration, yet every one of them is going to materially alter how something baked requires being handled and processed. I moved from a thousand feet elevation of arid, high heat to a bit over two hundred feet, in a much cooler, damper, wetter climate, and went from thirty year old electric appliances to new gas ones for a few months, then to new electric units. Talk about feeling "challenged"! What only worked for four to six weeks there, seems to work for months here. Nothing cooks the same here as it did there, so most of what I have just "done" for years has now required "massaging". But, I understood why things worked, so massaging the methods to take the new variables into consideration helped to quickly get things back on the "just do" track. How do you write all of that in an engaging book?

Sharon, all of the info/advice you are getting here is great. I will not repeat any of it, except to say that your questions cannot be answered categorically, because it ALWAYS "depends". The people who tell you how a rose will grow (pretending that one rose will act the same way everywhere) are wrong. It depends mostly on local soil and climate conditions. For example, a rose which loves the "warm" climate of Southern Calif., which has dry summers, may hate the "warm" climate of the US South, which has humid summers.

The main ways you can decide what roses will do well in your actual garden are two (I would advise trying the first one first, so you do not waste time and money and get too disappointed):

1) Find some LOCAL advice from folks who garden near you, in similar conditions. The easiest way to do this is usually a local rose society. If you are mostly interested in growing roses which will be healthy (hopefully without much chemical intervention) and look good in your garden, ask about that. If you are, on the other hand, interested in roses for their blooms, and are thinking about competing in "rose shows", ask about that. Most local rose societies have members who are interested in one, or both, of these things.

I also look around my neighborhood - does anyone grow roses? Do you like the way they look? Meet your neighbors and ask about them!

2) Experiment with growing roses in your own garden - that is how I found out which ones like my climactic and soil conditions the most. In my case, it was not HTs or any other modern roses - it was old roses such as teas, chinas, hybrid musks, gigantica hybrids, and polyanthas. I just planted more of the ones which were healthy and that I liked the best. Growing roses which LOVE your garden conditions solves a host of problems. You will not have to endlessly fuss with unhappy roses, trying to make them happy. There are roses which love almost every sort of climate and soil conditions, so finding out which love your is very important, as there are also a host of roses which will HATE your conditions, and are not worth wasting time on, even though they may be fantastic somewhere else. I never pay any attention to statements such as :"such and such a rose does, or blooms, or looks.........." unless the writer tells you exactly where they are, so you can figure out if their statements will be true where you garden.

Jackie

Thank you, Boncrow. My sincere hope is to help people think of these things more fluidly. They're all continuums. What you observe, depends upon where the observation falls on the continuum. I'm glad you enjoyed. Thank you! EXACTLY, Jackie! Many which loved triple digit heat, single digit humidity Encino HATE double digit heat and double digit humidity Santa Maria. That changed many selections. I've dumped things I've grown and loved for decades, and I've obtained things I hated in the heat because they flourish in the "coolth".

Well said, Kim. I've been enjoying your comments.

Thanks, ma'am!