Koi Standards
In who's eye?

A series of post on the Nishikigoi International magazine's web board concerned just what sets a good Koi apart from, well. . . bait. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder," but some common ground must be defined when dealing with a subject like Koi, when so much time is spent talking about the relative quality of individual fish. Here is what JR came up with:

Posted by James P on 10/21/2002, 9:37 am

There have been many "back and forths" between NI contributors on the eye of amateur critics and the eye of breeders. We have focused on judging and judging decisions as evidence of the vast difference in the over all opinion and approach to appreciating koi held by these two groups. In truth the differences are not so extreme as both recognize basic standards as being necessary.

I would begin by saying that no one knows more about a particular line of koi than the breeder who made that koi! It is a bad joke to think otherwise. But when that breeder releases his best to the amateur koi world he is entering his personal masterpiece into the world of critique.

If we look at gosanke for instance, the ideal show standard would talk about the pattern as follows:

The head pattern (hachi hi) is most desirable as horseshoe or kutsubera shaped.The shoulder area (kata) is critical for balance in all gosanke and ideally kohaku should have kirekomi or white gap at the shoulder. The mid section of kohaku benefits greatly from kuragake (or horse saddle) to set a balance to the pattern. Finally, the koi is best finished off with a beak in the pattern at the tail called ojime, or odome. This provides a neatness and refinement to the pattern.

It is also important to understand that these guidelines are meant to be a point of departure. From here, kohaku with exceptional qualities in other areas can easily "overcome" a lack of these ideals when reviewed as a "whole fish." The classic red in the pecs is a perfect example of this. A super negative on production grand kohaku. No biggy at all on a world-class 90 cm kohaku!

And then we have the breeder's view of these things. I recently read an interview with Sakai in Hiroshima, regarding what he looks for in a sanke. He first looks for size potential. He next looks for sumi quality. From his point of view tsubo sumi (black on white area OR black on red but grounded in white) is the ONLY sumi. In his eyes this is all that is worthy of keeping in the breeding program so kasane sumi (black on red and also ground on red) has no place in sanke in his eyes. Placement of that sumi that critics like to see on the shoulder, is not at all important to him at this point in his breeding program as the quality of sumi is more important in his eyes.

So here we have a master that marches to the beat of his own drum and has done quite well in the world of the critics. In the case of sanke he freely admits that there is a long way to go in producing a fish of the highest/largest quality that matches the standard as well as kohaku do theirs .At least at this point. Is his a universal opinion among breeders? Does Sakai of Matsunosuki fame see sanke the same way? I'll guess, yes and no. Each has a similar goal but also have their own "vision" of what the ultimate sanke should be. And both admit that getting the conformation, sumi and beni done on one fish is very difficult. This is likely what drives them.

I think that as a result of this energy and dream making, we have many fish that have very highly accomplished traits and features in one area and yet go completely lacking in other areas. The sanke for instance with incredible body and skin but completely menkaburi (masked) leaving the koi looking interesting but with a distinct lack of grace when compared with other koi of similar quality. Another example would be the highly artistic sanke with one lone massive sumi mark that is tsubo sumi but located on a renzoku or ippon hi. Very fascinating- but NOT a show fish.

So in closing I would say, That there are two worlds in koi. The world of the artist breeder that is striving for his personal vision of gosanke and the world of the critical review. They each provide a function-- creation and feedback. Koi Judging standards provide boundaries and "reality checks" so the process doesn't spin off its axis. If you think about it, one can't exist without the other.

JR
Back to The "Old" Reilly Factor!