I thnk we need to go back to showing VT's as long as we have a decrease in show participation. I think that would get a lot of new people into it here in the states. I'll take the Giant and the hmpks thank you!

:wub: :wub: :wub: :wub: I agree with belle on that topic of sharing the standards the standards of the vt i think it would be interesting to know the standards

Alright, I'm going to cause a stir up, but here we go!

When people really started breeding bettas as "show" fish instead of fighters, the origional long finned fish weren't asymetrical as veil tails are. They had longer, symetrical finnage that popped open when they flaired, to have a continuous line connecting the fins. If you look at the wile bettas, they don't have asymetrical finnage like veil tails. Veil tails are a sub type of the long finned that people breed because it was easier to keep their tails than it was the "show" fish, but what we have today didn't durive from veil tails, though it is a common misconseption.

When the IBC standards were written, they never called for veil tails, and there were never any "veil tail" standards (I can't tell you how many people get pissy and yell "I want to see the origional IBC veil tail standards! and we can't show them because there were never any).

Some shows do offer pet classes that you can show veils in. I know Florida does, and a few other shows, but it is some thing we could encourage if there is interest.

Also, we have tried to stear away from veil tails because 1) if you breed veil tail into your line, it is very difficult to get back the spread and form that you started with, 2) there is genetically veil tail, and there is a lack of good care veil tail.

As it stands right now, if you wanted to show your veils, put them in "Variations" (G1 I think). When enough people breed for a specific form/color, and it is made a regular entry, the IBC will make a trial class and then a regular class for the type, but only if there is enough people breeding it. How do you think we got plakats and crown tail classes!

Interesting because I was told by several people that there used to be a Veiltail class, but it was dropped. Either way the pet fish class is a great outlet for new people in the hobby. I just think a conscientious effort needs to be made. Especially when there are notable misconceptions made when someone reads the rules. How many 14 year olds are going to say "OK I can put this in variations and be competitive?" How would it be judged? If I have a nice red veiltail and put it in G1 and there is a amazingly colored bright purple halfmoon but his its finnage isn't up to par, does color take precedence over form in a form and color class? Sorry but now I have to play devils advocate. :P

jamie what are the thai standards cause that is what we were asking to plakad??

an article from victoria parnelle site as there used to be a class for veiltails

betta splendens

The Veil Tail
By:
Submitted: 3/26/2004


The most widely-available longfin form in bettas is inarguably the Veil Tail betta (or VT). This is the natural form the fins take when they are artificially lengthened from the wild shortfin form with selective breeding. This is the type of finnage usually seen in Pet Stores. Though attractive in its own right, it is generally considered undesireable among those breeding for show-quality form. In fact, the IBC (International Betta Congress) doesn't even have classes for Veil Tails any longer, and it has become a sentiment of negativity to describe any high-bred betta of 'going veil-ish'.

The Veil Tail betta has a caudal that tends to arch and then slope downward, like a wedding veil.

I'm saying that the IBC has never had standards, and the 180 stock that we have didn't come from veils. In the breeding, some went symetrical, and others went asymetrical, got what they got, and that's how we ended up with the different tail classifications. I would also be interested in seeing the standards to see what they look for in this tail type.

:OMG: they must have had standards cause other wise vts at one time wouldnt have been allowed to enter without standards as they were allowed to enter previously and had their own class as every class of betta has standards for entering a show even vts when they were permitted at one time

There have never been veil tail standards, or veil tail classes. She is mistaken in this respect. People have shown veil tails if that was all they had, but there has never been a veil tail class, nor veil tail standards in the IBC.

um i'm sorry jamie but you are highly mistaken in this here is an email I had received from Victoria Parnelle as I had asked her myself about the veitails having their own class and standards

Hi Jillian,

Certainly they did! In the early days of the IBC, the VT betta was pretty much all they had to work with. I wasn't around when the VTs were in their showing heyday, but I would imagine they were judged on fullness of finnage, vigor and color. I think even these early breeders were trying to get their bettas as symmetrical as possible, as the overall look of balance would give the fish an edge. When I first came into the hobby, the "good" show bettas had the symmetrical, big rounded tails, but they were still coming from spawns that threw a lot of VT as well.

As to the specifics of the standards, I think Jim Sonnier or even Stuart Scott might be able to shed some light. I believe Mr. Sonnier was even a judge back when VTs were still taking ribbons.

Hope this helps!
Victoria

You know, Jamie, I think you should revisit the making of the betta as we know it.

This is incorrect.
The first long finned fish WERE VTs.
That was why I joked about the long finned asymetrical plakat.
ALL of our long finned bettas ARE decended from VTs.
You may not want to believe it, but it is true.
What you are saying here, that those who have not done their research will take to mean as there were two kinds of long finned fish, symetrical and asymetrical, and that is wrong.
Though people were breeding from the inception of the IBC for a symetrical fish, they started with VTs.
All the original classes had VTs in them.
Even the outline of the fish that Rich said was the ideal for show bettas back in the 70s was little better than a VT.. in fact, I have seen VTs, ie pet store fish, that meet those standards.
Here is a link to Jim Sonniers site, showing the first pastels back in 1973
http://www.bettas-jimsonnier.com/images/collage.jpg
These fish, again, by todays standards are little better than VTs, but they were top of the line back then.
For you to say VTs are subtype of the symetrical is completely inaccurate. If anything, the HM is a subtype of the VT, aka, the long finned bettas.
And again you are wrong about what you say about wild types.
The traditional show plakat is the larger more colorful version of the wild splendens, and what is it that is a main characteristic for that fish?
The long, sloping, pointed ASYMETRICAL anal fin.
It has long been said that if you took the tail of a traditional PK, and lengthened it, it would break, and fall over, just as a VTs does.

And yet, I was not talking about the IBC was I?
When you look at the pictures Plakad was so kind to share with us, he CLEARLY posts two VTs as winners of their classes.
Not only that, but there were OTHER organizations that DID have standards for the VT..
The only referance I gave to the IBC was to state we do not have one here.
It is self evident I was discussing the standards of the show that Plakad attended, and it is it closed minded to think that the IBC is the only betta organization.

I am sorry, that makes no sense to me, and I cannot imagine that was the mind set of those people who created the first standards for the bettas, considering MOST of the fish then were little better than VTs.
The delta tail is a new fish, the super delta and the HM are all new fish compared to the VT.
The standards were written to produce a more symetrical fish, no more, no less.

I cannot agree with this.
This is NOT a NEW variation, this is the ORIGINAL long finned betta.
THAT is why people keep asking for a standard for it.
Give people a standard to breed towards, instead of a ton of people tossing in fish willy nilly, you'll see a definate increase in the quality of the VT, and help those interested in these fish working towards the same goals.

This is so wrong, in so many ways.
Even if the IBC never had VTs standards, you are WAY off base to state that the 180 degree fish that e breed today did not come from veils.
If they did not come from veils, where did they come from?
What was the stock they were bred off, because you are in essense saying that there were TWO mutations that cause the betta splendens to grow long fins, and that is just wrong. I can't even say this in a less harsh way.
ALL LONG FINNED BETTAS ARE DECENDED FROM VTS.
This is a FACT.
You may have to go 50 generations, you may have to go 100, but you will find then there.
The VT is the ORIGINAL long finned betta and for you to say that HM didn't come from VTs is rewritting betta genetic history, and is very irresponsible.
They may be a long way, from VTs, but that is what the genetic base of the 180 fish is.

I will say this.
I have a lot of respect for V, and when you have done as much in bettas as she has, maybe then your opinion will be held with as much weight as her meticulous research, but until then, I am sorry, when it comes to you or V, I'll go with V every time.
In all honesty, as to if there were classes or not, I do not know, nor do YOU, nor does Rich. The fact is, none of us were there, and history can be written as one pleases, but I have seen some very old betta books, that had no HMs and a lot of VTs, and these fish were class winners..
So, even if they were not to standard, they WERE being shown.

This is not beat up on Jamie, it is just you are presenting your opinion as fact, and it behooves us all to correct misrepresentations where we find it.
Since this has gone totally off topic, which was, Can you, (Plakad) share with us the standards of VTs from that show, I am splitting this, and moving it to the apporpriate section.

Whew! Thanks Belle.

Very well put and said. Thank you again.
:hug:

Also, Jim Sonnier is putting together something I think everyone here will want to read at my request.

I'm thinking that a VT standard would be similar to a Plakat standard but with longer fins.
If I ever get around to making my VT/CT cross, I would think that Plato's babies could be contenders...
As he is sooooo handsome.
:D

I like the idea of a VT standard, I have thought that it would indeed be a blend of the PK and HM standards.
What is interesting is the different tail types within the veil.. which is ideal?
I like the tails that arch over, and come out straight, but many like the ones they arch over, and falls down.
For sure, a FULL tail would be ideal, but the SHAPE of the tail, what do we think is best?
I also like the full HM type vents and not the long skinny PK vents.. and give them HM pecs, lol.
There is also the question of what would the anal look like..
Do we want the sloping PK anal, or a more even HM type anal?
For sure, we want the tail line and the anal line to be even, but after that, then what?

That is why knowing what the standards of the VT were from other countries would be great.

I e-mailed Jim Sonnier, asking him (because he is now the current archivist) if he could look back into the records to see if there were any veil tail standards. This is his responce:

Hi Jamie,

I will not be able to give you a definite answer right now. I have not received the Archives yet. They should be shipped during the nest 7 days & then another 5-7 days for me to receive them. (Please tell Rich I contacted Mrs. Daugherty & she will ship the Archives via UPS) But I will contact you as soon as I can about your question.

I was active in IBC starting in 1970 (IBC was 3 years old then) & I do not remember a Standard for Veiltails. I could be wrong though since just about all we had then were Veiltails!

Thanks,

Jim Sonnier

There were veils shown, but the standards weren't for veils, and people have always breed away from them. There is a difference between the veil tail that we know of it today, and the "veils" or yesterday. The pictires that you posted didn't have asymetrical finnage (noted quality of veils today). They have "rounded" tails. What was shown some times then was veils, because that was all of the stock that people had at the time. But the classes weren't set up for "types" as we have it today, it was souly based on color. I have done my own research and talked to people that have been around. And some one at a show (forgot his name) had told me that the first bettas started out as plakats as we know it today, as fighters. Then people saw how pretty they are, and some of the first specimins had longer finnage, but not the "pointed" egde, and not the spread. Not all fish that have spreads of less than 130 degrees are necessarily veils. Today, every one refers to them as that because compaired to what we now have acheived, anything less than a delta is just veil by ignorance.

But you won't get a standard UNLESS you show that enough people have an interest in breeding that type of variation. So if you want a veil standard, enter your fish into variations, and if enough get entered, you will get a trial class, and eventually a class for veils. But only if people show enough interest!

Jamie.
READ what Jim wrote.
You asked him a question, and evidenetly you either did not like his answer, or you decided to ignore him.
He said he does not remember a standard, but he could be wrong, because all they had back then was veils.

You then go on to say There were veils shown, but the standards weren't for veils, and people have always bred away from them. Completely discounting what Jim just said... that he did not remember.
If you knew the answer, why then would you ask him, post his responce, and then dismiss it like he didn't know what he was talking about?
You then go on to say Not all fish that have spreads of less than 130 degrees are necessarily veils. Today, every one refers to them as that because compaired to what we now have acheived, anything less than a delta is just veil by ignorance.
As if Jim didn't know what a VT was, as if WE don't all know what a VT is.
Trust and believe, I think if any one knows what a VT is, Jim would.
Either that, or we are all, in YOUR WORDS, ignorant.

I find your dismissive additude towards people who have been breeding and improving bettas for a long time before you even knew what a betta was to be insulting.
I am not saying they are Gods, but they do know what they are talking about, and have a track record of reliability.
You state your opinions with such confidence, that people that do not know anything about these fish will believe you without reservation, and the truth is, half of what you are saying is wrong, and the other half is inaccurate.
These are things that we as IBC representatives need to be aware of.
And as an apprentice judge, YOU are an IBC rep.

And, you are missing my point entirely.
There IS a standard for the VT.
They used to have one in Europe,. they STILL have one in Asia.
I want to know THEIR standards.
Why should I have to wait until someone here decides to make one, when they HAVE them.
If you see my prior post, I discuss in it a couple differences I have seen in the VT type.
Now, I prefer a certain tail type in VTs someone else could prefer a different type.
Who then is right?
If everyone is throwing VTs into Variations, and there is not a standard for them, they get judged on the HM standards and they don't place.
Not only that, if no one has a common goal, then someone, IF it (trial class, ect), went through, would get pushed out, so to speak.
Like your purples.
YOU have a vision in your head what a purple should look like.
What if I also had a vision that was different than yours, we are both showing in variations as purple, and they like my version better, what then for you?
BUT if we shared our thoughts on a purple, and we both worked towards the same purple, then the playing feild is more level.
The same thing could happen with the fictional VTs being shown in Variations, which is why if people who wanted to try VTs knew what a good one looked like BEFORE they showed their fish, it would make things easier on everyone.
There is no point in them showing a fish, even in Variations, if they don't know if the fish has a chance.
THAT is why people keep asking for the standards.

Bella,
I agree that people will have different opinions for sure...
namely bc I think and VT's tail should hang more like a VEIL, than to come out and then veil down.
My reason isn't very "scientific" though.
I like it bc I can read my fish's mood more when they have a droopy tail.
When they get excited, they do lift it, just not as high. A non-droopy VT can get a heck of an extension and starts to blur that Delta line.
That being said... how VT's are raised does greatly effect their droop...
So, I dunno.

This is one of my favorite VTs of all time.


This is what to me is an ideal tail type.


This is also a very good tail


I do NOT think this is a good tail type, it's undercarriage is way too high. IN essense, he is a long spade tail.
This is another with the same fault.




These two have the same problem, they are too thin in the tail, IMO.

This is not even touching on dorsals, lol.
All of these fish, but for the red were my fish.

Holy crap it's the 1968 RBOS! Just kidding.....

The notch in the anal and the bottom of the caudal would have kept him from placing ^_^

LMAO
That is my only pic of him.. my pre breeding pics were lost with the old puter.

This was the betta that got me to love them. His name was Avalanche and he was my favorite. He also got me into loving Cellophane but alas I can't seem to breed Cellos to save my life. I still look for a VT like him just to have him. *sniffle*





Another one of my favorites.. His name is Pinkerton and while his fins were never the best, yes he had albino eyes. He was not blind, but it did affect his light sensitivity. He is one of my best desktop friends and I fear his end is coming. He's over two and a half years old.



And Mist.. Don't ask me what color he would be considered but he reminded me of a misty morning sunrise and thus the name was affixed to him.

I like all of your boys, even the ocular albino.
Misty seems interesting, like his fins aren't as long, and he has a nice thich body, like a PK...
I dunno what color he would be considered either, but I like him.

me too nate looking a your guys make me start going back at looking at my Old VT flames Pic I had seen Cello VTs at my other LFS

Oh, if you want cellos, you know my Hollywood line throws them..
I have a cello female going into the tank with her brother soon.

See now, isn't it interesting though, because to me this guy is rather interesting. I actually prefer this to the previous veil tails you've posted up there. I think it's the compact clean look of it to me.

It must be along the same reasoning I'm having lately with liking PK, in particular Syms. I like the compact clean yet full look of the finnage.

eh.. who knows.. :D

I'm about to put a pure cello female from my Revlon sister X Red Cambo male spawn with the marble I've posted on here that I got from Ruth. I'm just curious to see what I get, should be interesting. I rather like Cello.
:D

I have a cello girl in my sorrority, her name is Apparition and she's a trip.

We were talking about pin tails at my club meeting, and this fish is very close to the old pintail type, IMO.
BUT even though he is a good looking fish, he does not look like a VEIL TAIL, IMO.
When I think veiltail, I think of something hanging down, long and flowing and this guy just doesn't have the look to me.
I also like to see more drapery happening in the anal fin.. His fins, all of them look too thick, and too stiff to me, which is why he would not be an ideal VT.
But his color is pretty good, lol.