After many years, I've concluded that pruning roses is -- no matter what The Books try to make you think -- much more of an Art than a Science. Much depends not only on the type of rose you're working with, but the specific variety. ("Mr. Lincoln", for example, is a hybrid tea -- but [at least under my conditions] really wants/needs to be pruned much higher than is recommended for that type.)
And then there's your goal. Severe cutting-back typically results in larger flowers, but (often many) fewer of them. My guess is that you're not interested in winning a blue ribbon at a flower-show, but want some showy color in the yard and bunches of attractive cut flowers. For that, the kind of pruning you describe having done -- thinning-out crowded centers & crossing-branches, and cutting-back to pencil-thick stems, just above an outward-facing bud, is probably perfectly fine. (If you're like me, you're likely to end up with masses of blossoms a foot or so higher than you expected them to be, but most gardens aren't so tightly-designed that this will be a problem. And there's always next year.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
zaluzianskya and ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
skylark_photos
no subject
Date: 2008-02-16 10:47 pm (UTC)And then there's your goal. Severe cutting-back typically results in larger flowers, but (often many) fewer of them. My guess is that you're not interested in winning a blue ribbon at a flower-show, but want some showy color in the yard and bunches of attractive cut flowers. For that, the kind of pruning you describe having done -- thinning-out crowded centers & crossing-branches, and cutting-back to pencil-thick stems, just above an outward-facing bud, is probably perfectly fine. (If you're like me, you're likely to end up with masses of blossoms a foot or so higher than you expected them to be, but most gardens aren't so tightly-designed that this will be a problem. And there's always next year.)