Bad Guy Jason Felong - sold me a het that didn't prove out

[Dbz4246]

That's a hard call, but my rule of thumb when it comes to hets: if supposed 100%, give it at least 3 clutches. If no visible, then there is something wrong.

 

[Celtic Constrictors]

My question is if you are producing animals from a "100% het" that you doubt is a het, are you still selling the neonates as a 100% or 50%?

I'm not sure what the resolution is here as I don't have the original seller's side just yet but if it were me I would sell the litter as possible hets so what you claim happened to you won't happen to someone else.

 

[hhmoore]

My question is if you are producing animals from a "100% het" that you doubt is a het, are you still selling the neonates as a 100% or 50%?

I'm not sure what the resolution is here as I don't have the original seller's side just yet but if it were me I would sell the litter as possible hets so what you claim happened to you won't happen to someone else.

I don't understand your logic - whether the female proves to be het or not is irrelevant to the status of the babies....the sire of both of the OP's clutches was an albino, so the babies are all 100% hets. Period. No discussion necessary.

 

[Celtic Constrictors]

Maybe after a few more clutches and she still doesn't prove out would I really be suspecting foul play. But right now, only after one clutch... Just sounds like bad luck to me. Either way, that still sucks.

Just being lazy but wouldn't the odds of "8 eggs, no visuals" be the same as "8 eggs, all visuals" ?

There are two different numbers at play here. As Nickolas said in an earlier post, each egg has a 50/50 chance of hatching out either homozygous or heterozygous. That's the important thing to understand. The fact that he struck out 11 times is possibly just a case of bad luck. I wouldn't be buying any lottery tickets or planning a trip to Vegas.

 

[Celtic Constrictors]

I don't understand your logic - whether the female proves to be het or not is irrelevant to the status of the babies....the sire of both of the OP's clutches was an albino, so the babies are all 100% hets. Period. No discussion necessary.

Haven't had my coffee. I had it in my head he was breeding het to het. My bad.

 

[RichsBallPythons]

THis is a case of bad luck, can never cross off a het after 2 small clutches.

 

[bcmaddox]

I bred a het pied to het pied and produced 3 pieds out of 7 eggs. The following season I bred a hold back male pied back to his mother (the het pied female already proven) got 8 eggs and no pieds. Bad luck happens!!!!!

 

[Guy Castro]

I bred a het pied to het pied and produced 3 pieds out of 7 eggs. The following season I bred a hold back male pied back to his mother (the het pied female already proven) got 8 eggs and no pieds. Bad luck happens!!!!!

Sperm retention comes into play with your case!

 

[RichsBallPythons]

Sperm retention comes into play with your case!

But still Not a sure way to prove anything, Unless DNA tests are done to prove who is the father, cant rely on that in this case either.

 

[bcmaddox]

Sperm retention comes into play with your case!

Even though her first breeding produced eggs she will still retain sperm from that first breeding?

 

[Celtic Constrictors]

I don't know what kind of shelf life the sperm has but yes. A clutch can be laid and another fertile clutch thereafter even without copulation.

I don't believe the OP answered me as to whether an email has been sent to notify the seller was sent.

 

[dvangorp]

I would like to hear from some who have put an absolute 100% het to a visual and produced no visuals.

We have a het clown female bred to a clown male and produced both clowns and hets. On a subsequent breeding of the same pair, 6 eggs, all het females.

On a het Axanthic x het Axanthic ... 11 eggs, 9 visibles.

Odds are odds and they always apply to each egg and not the clutch.

 

[Pacman213]

If I was the op I would give it one more shot, but he is correct the odds of missing on all 11 is pretty low. Also people keep saying that the odds ONLY apply to each egg and not the group, which is incorrect. In this case each offspring does have a 50% chance of being visual, but you can look at all the offspring as a group as well, which would be done by multiplying each event together (in this case .5 raised to the 11th). For the people who disagree explain how you would determine what the chance of getting 0 visuals out of 11 hatchlings would be.

 

[nickolasanastasiou]

If I was the op I would give it one more shot, but he is correct the odds of missing on all 11 is pretty low. Also people keep saying that the odds ONLY apply to each egg and not the group, which is incorrect. In this case each offspring does have a 50% chance of being visual, but you can look at all the offspring as a group as well, which would be done by multiplying each event together (in this case .5 raised to the 11th). For the people who disagree explain how you would determine what the chance of getting 0 visuals out of 11 hatchlings would be.

Each egg is an independent genetic event and has no impact on separate independent genetic events. I would not try to predict future independent genetic events based on current or past independent genetic events. However, one does have to make a call at some point in order to "move on".

For me, that would depend on clutch size. If I had two decently large clutches of -for example- sulcata tortoise eggs in a simple recessive morph project and got no homozygous offspring from a homozygous parent to heterozygous parent breeding (in isolation so as to rule out conflicts such as sperm retention), then I would probably feel it was time to make the call and move on. If the female is small/young and I only got a clutch of six and then a clutch of eight (which happens despite what sulcata articles exclaim), I would at least wait on results of a third clutch or so before making any big decisions that could end up with me throwing away a great deal of monetary value and project progress (assuming I am supposed to be working with a 100% het female in this scenario and I have enough project animals to afford my plans and actions).

Some individuals win the lottery multiple times. This does not create the scenario that some guy who has always lost is due for a win. It neither increases or decreases either individual's probability of winning in the future and would not be part of a responsible calculation for the sake of prediction.

 

[demonicreptile]

#1) I did not post this to argue genetic inheritance or statistics. I calculated my probabilities correctly. Here is a video tutorial if anyone would like to go over my calculations, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4Ne9DXk_Jc.

#2) There is a difference between "bad luck" and statistical probabilities that border impossible. Getting an albino wasn't hitting the lottery, not getting any albinos in 11 eggs was hitting the lottery. With 11 non-albino eggs, it doesn't matter if they were all in one clutch or I had 11, one egg clutches: the results are the same. 1/2048. Try flipping a penny 11x with heads each time, you're not going to do it.

The closest other ball python experience was 8 non-pieds in a pied X het pied clutch, which would be 1/256, which is almost 10 times more likely. Not to mention the chance of sperm retention mentioned above.

#3) to Celtic Constrictors. I sent Mr. Felong an e-mail (posted in my op) 11 days prior to this post. I sent the same PM 7 days prior to this post. I checked his log-in activity on fauna, and he logged in at least twice since I sent the PM and before I posted this. I am done contacting Mr. Felong, as my last e-mail said I would post my experiences on the BOI and be done with it. He had plenty of time to contact me before I posted this, and I feel that adds to his suspicion. Any reply now to this post from him, I believe, will simply be covering his arse, because "oh no" I did post on the BOI. And it seems like he may get plenty of support from the replies so far, but so be it. I know when to stop betting on a losing horse.

If you would like to contact him, all of his info is in my op.

 

[nickolasanastasiou]

Best of luck, then.

 

[Guy Castro]

Does this look like his info?


Jason Felong

Location - Manchester, NH, US

Address - 24 Pond Dr

Phone - (603) 622-5527

 

[Guy Castro]

Got this off the email addy:
http://www.advancedbackgroundchecks.com/d/georgette-felong/23224352

Them click on his name in possible relatives and got this:
http://www.advancedbackgroundchecks.com/d/jason-felong/367664278

 

[Skinker]

#3) to Celtic Constrictors. I sent Mr. Felong an e-mail (posted in my op) 11 days prior to this post. I sent the same PM 7 days prior to this post. I checked his log-in activity on fauna, and he logged in at least twice since I sent the PM and before I posted this. I am done contacting Mr. Felong, as my last e-mail said I would post my experiences on the BOI and be done with it. He had plenty of time to contact me before I posted this, and I feel that adds to his suspicion. Any reply now to this post from him, I believe, will simply be covering his arse, because "oh no" I did post on the BOI. And it seems like he may get plenty of support from the replies so far, but so be it. I know when to stop betting on a losing horse.

What's most telling to me is his seeming lack of interest in backing up the genetics with so much as a response. The probability crap with only 11 eggs doesn't do anything for me, honestly. I've had similar bad luck. There's a reason it's a probability - not a definitely. When you say .05% proves she's not a het, are you saying it's simply not possible you are one of those 5 people out of 10,000? They have to be somewhere, otherwise what's the point of statistics? The person who wins the lottery hit scarcer odds than those. Walk up to someone who just won the lotto and rip up their ticket explaining, "sorry, just not possible".

 

[Celtic Constrictors]

We aren't supporting the seller. We just aren't supporting you either until we have both sides of the story. My question to you wasn't "have you threatened the seller with a bad guy BOI thread". I was asking if you emailed him a link To THIS thread. I'm assuming not.

Good luck. I'll check back if/when he posts.