Why I think we need unproven dominant

[OhhWatALoser]

not a criticism of your post, but i dont like the guide you linked: http://ball-pythons.net/forums/showt...Basic-Genetics i dont like it, because i consider every single graphic to be a bit misleading. it looks a bit like 2 chromosomes, but two genes hit one chromosome, really strange, but then you realize that the long strands are supposed to be the whole genome of the snake and the little colored circles get distributed, also really strange. In fact chromosomes get distributed, genes like albino always sit on the same chromosome. And each BP has each chromosome 2 times. Heterozygous: the two chromosomes in question are different. Homozygous: the two chromosomes both have the gene in question.

All it shows that two genes sit together, and the statistics of inheritance. which is about as far as you need to know for this discussion. I also know judy would be more than happy if you made some accurate pictures to replace them.

But you did a good job. I wonder if it catches on, or maybe it will evolve into slightly different categories. like: recessive, codominant, nice dominant, problematic/questionable dominant.

We could go recessive, not recessive, co-dom, and dom?