Quote Originally Posted by MaxT815 View Post
In one of Colin Weaver's articles he states that...

"Pair Genetically Greater Boys with Genetically Lower Girls …But Never the Other Way Around
(Put Another Way: Never Breed a More Expensive Female to a Less Expensive Male)

It is reasonable to buy a male dominant/co-dom morph and use it to make more of the same (e.g. breed it to a normal female). However, you should never do that with a female. When you acquire female dominant/co-dominant morphs it should be with the full intent of breeding it to a male whose genetics are different (and typically of greater financial value than hers). It is economically effective to acquire a male dominant/co-dominant animal and breed it to a genetically lower female. The opposite is never true. Do not acquire a dominant/co-dominant female and breed it to a genetically lower male. Please note that ‘genetically lower’ refers to the financial value of the morph. For example:

  • It is sane to buy a pastel male and breed it to a normal female. It is insane to by a normal male and breed it to a pastel female.
  • It is sane to buy a champagne male and breed it to a pastel female. It is insane to buy a champagne female and breed it to a pastel male.
  • It is sane to buy a silver surfer male and breed it to a ghost female. It is insane to buy a silver surfer female and breed it to a ghost male.
  • It is sane to buy a male albino and breed it to a het albino female. It is insane to buy an albino female and breed it to a het albino male. Please note that your sanity is also in question if you breed an albino male to an albino female. At the very least breed female albinos with a male who is albino plus something else (albino spider, albino pinstripe, albino black pastel, etc.).
  • Do not buy a pastel female with plans of breeding her to a pastel male (even though you can make super pastels). It is no longer true that breeders intentionally produce super pastel ball pythons; they are almost always the product of missed opportunity in a different pairing (e.g. lemon blast x pastel lesser can produce super pastels but it is not what the breeder was trying for). A female pastel bred to any other co-dom morph will, in the best case, always produce babies that are worth more money than a super past.

Anybody know WHY this is so? He states that it is and gives multiple examples but he doesnt really say why. With recessives specifically why would it not be wise to breed a Het Albino male to a visual female, I mean I understand business wise obviously you buy het females early and buy a visual make when the girls are ready and the price dropped slightly but is this the only reason he is suggesting this rule or is there a genetic related reason? I heard a while back that the gene power comes from the male side, suggesting maybe throwing more combos or visuals if the male is of higher genetics?? I dont know anybody else have any thoughts?
This is all from a financial perspective; there is not any biological/genetic reasons for these standards aside from getting a greater return on investment in the form of genetically 'greater' babies.

With recessives, which is more expensive: an albino male or female? Of course, the answer is a female. Now this female can only produce 1 clutch in a season when paired with your het albino male. But for the price of 1 albino female, you can get 4-6 het albino females (depending on age, quality, your negotiating skills, etc). But the point is, you can get a clutch out of each of them if paired with an albino male.

However, if you do this the other way around, you'd be spending thousands of dollars on albino females to pair with a single het albino male. Does that make sense?