Sentinels and super sentinels.

Would it be a fair assessment of the sentinels to call them visual het for sentinel? One of Ben's posts in his sentinel threads was that he thought he should rename the currently (well, them in 2010) named supers to just sentinels and call the currently named sentinels, het sentinels?

I got a trade offer involving a sentinel, and he was short with me when I passed due to my understanding of sentinels to be visual hets. If I'm wrong, I'd like to officially know it haha.

I'm not quite sure what you are asking here, but the Sentinel's are the visual hets to the Super Sentinels. It's the same as Paint's and Super Paints. Paints/Sentinels are very subtle morphs on their own, but their combos are beautiful. Once you get more into them you'll be able to differentiate them and normals. Not only that, they are co-dom, and when people say het, they usually think recessive. I think Ben should keep the Sentinel/Super Sentinel name going.

So is it logical to think of them like yellow bellies? How they are visual hets for ivory?

Logical yes, but IMO redundant. Every incomplete dominant can be logically called a visual het for its super. We could call pastel visual het super pastels. Or lessers visual het bel etc. If the incomplete dominant is visually recognizable, it should not be reffered to as a het in my opinion. It just causes more confusion.

It is not "wrong", just not needed. Again, this is all my opinion.

I can see where you're at on it, I admit that it is redundant. I sorta feel its needed, when the pictures I was sent of these "sentinels" looked really normal. And, in cases like that, I would want to tack on a "is visual het" just people would understand that while it may look really normal, it isn't and here is why.