Photo Page 4
Home Page

Page 2

Page 3

Photo4 Page

Photo5 Page

Photo6 Page


COMPETITION FLYING WITH ROLLERS

From Pigeons, of England, September 20, 1929

Does competitive sport with rollers improve the quality of the bird as a roller? Myself, as a fancier of about twenty years, I think not. We know that a given number of birds are flown in competition, and the kit making the most turns is judged the winner including, of course, the style of fly, but the quality of the birds, which should come before anything, receives no notice or attention.


Now to get a kit of birds to make these turns requires little or no experience whatever. You can buy them from anywhere, and breed them without any thought in selection and stock, and get good results. Birds of this caliber are those which can do anything but roll. When performing a turn, it is noticed that the fall is a good depth, but I have noticed no good rolling. Of course, you get one or two that roll, but surely these pigeons cannot be classed as good rollers, not in the sense of the word known to fanciers and breeders of the true English Roller. A good roller is a bird which can roll tight like a ball through the air for four or five yards.

I find it most difficult to describe a good bird, but I have noticed that strangers to the hobby have easily discerned the marvelous way in which they roll. They readily grasp the fascination of keeping birds that roll in the way described, birds which are really worthy of being called rollers. There are dozens of ways in which birds roll, but only one way that appeals to and attracts the attention of a real lover of a quality roller.

To get a kit of rollers together takes some time and patience. Firstly, the selection and breeding and the fixing of a strain covers a period of years. Tumbler breeders are aware of this, although it would seem that some of them will not be educated to know what a good bird is, or they will not go to the trouble to cultivate the real roller. They appear to be content to keep, breed, and fly birds that are in their opinion, more likely to win them a few shillings. They thereby deceive not only themselves but the public, that their pigeons are genuine rollers. It is quite safe to say that today there are fewer breeders of the true English Roller, better known as the Birmingham Roller, than there were twenty years ago.
______________________________________
Used with the express permission of Tom Monson, from: The Collected Writings of William Hyla Pensom, Copyright © 1996 by Tom L. Monson, All rights reserved, including all rights reproduction.

COMMON AND PERFORMING TUMBLERS (Rollers Not So Good As They Were) From PIGEONS of ENGLAND, March 20, 1930
Now we are getting some Roller news. Perhaps the time is opportune for some discussion on what performance is expected of a good Roller pigeon. Some fanciers consider the Roller is an improved bird to what it was twenty to thirty years ago. Myself, I do not think it has improved; in fact, I am inclined to think it has deteriorated. My ideal Roller is a bird that can roll tight like a ball for at least four or five yards without stopping, and to end that performance with what is known in Birmingham as a “twizzle.” Such shows the bird has some sort of control over itself, and also adds brilliance to its performance. It has been said that long Rollers are no good for competition, that they do not seem to get back to the kit after their performance, fly out of the kit, and kill themselves, etc. Such remarks I consider ridiculous, except when describing a bird which is no good whatever, and which we all get often. Our hobby would not be interesting if we had no duds at all.
I have conversed with many an old fancier of Rollers, and they all seem to be of the same opinion: that the Rollers of today are not near so good as they were years ago. They consider it is dying out, and that a tumbler or short performing bird is taking its place. It is not being displaced by a long way, except by some most ardent and enthusiastic competition flyers, on the ground that this class of bird (the shorter performer) is a more sure and regular performer, flies and packs closer together, and is not so dangerous. Certainly every praise is due to all these preservers of this class of bird, but I am of the opinion that the longer rolling bird has not been tried out, as yet, in real earnest for competition, except by a few, and brought down to such a fine standard as the shorter working bird.
We know that the deeper performers are more difficult to cultivate, but bred scientifically on the right lines, I do not see why they could not be cultivated in time. I have to admit myself that I have seen very few kits of long-rolling birds put up in competition that, from my point of view, were perfect. One kit in particular which I shall never forget was a kit of twenty birds put up in one competition to become eligible to fly for championship honors, which it won. To describe them is beyond me, except that they all flew close together, and when doing a turn or a break they must have fallen anything from twenty to forty feet, and on occasions twice that distance. They must also have made ten or twelve complete full turns in the fifteen minutes allowed. That was in the first competition. In the championship they were not so good. They fled [Compiler’s note: “fled” is Black Country dialect for “flew”] different, and did not perform so regular, but they were still good enough to win. That is why some fanciers do not care for deep Rollers: because they are not so certain as the shorter ones. The kit referred to was eventually lost. If they could have been kept, and their performances preserved, and other things bred for—regularity, etc.—I think it would have startled even the old-time Roller fanciers. Much can be said of the performances of the “shorter” working birds on the distance they fall while doing a turn, but I think there is little comparison when seeing a kit of deep Rollers break and then seeing a kit of “shorter” Rollers doing a turn. Then take a kit of deep Rollers flying on a day when they do not seem inclined to work much. You get a certain amount of satisfaction—in fact, a thrill—to see an individual bird come rolling at a terrific speed through the air. Such cannot be said of the “shorter” Rollers when in the same mood. I am told that in the old days competitions were made for the deep rolling, the number of times they rolled, and the style of flying of an individual bird. I think, therefore, that if you can get one good deep bird, it is possible to get another one to go with it. I have set myself to breed a strain of long Rollers that will fly and perform close together; in fact, to do everything appertaining to competition flying, combining good looks at the same time. The laugh is on me now, but time will tell. Anyone out for a change of breed, or a beginner, should give the Roller a trial. It would certainly find a permanent spot in any fancier’s heart if only he would. They are inexpensive to keep, easy to manage, and very docile, and the variety of colors found in these birds is astonishing; practically all the colors and markings known in the pigeon world. Little mention need be made of the well known Harborne Roller Pigeon Club and the good work it is doing for the fancy, and of which I am proud to be a member. Its name may not be of long standing, but the fanciers are some of the staunchest breeders that ever lived. Every credit is due to them for the way in which they preserve the interests of the Birmingham Roller. In conclusion, these lines are from an enthusiastic fancier young in years, and I hope anything I have written will be taken in the good sprit in which I have written. I have no wish to be antagonistic in any way towards anyone, but simply out for an even greater improvement in a great pigeon family.

______________________________________
Used with the express permission of Tom Monson, from: The Collected Writings of William Hyla Pensom, Copyright © 1996 by Tom L. Monson, All rights reserved, including all rights reproduction.
ROLLER MATTERS (1930)

It is with much pleasure I read Mr. W. B. Carter’s notes from New Zealand. I was particularly interested to see he is interested in Flying Tumblers (performing). Mr. Carter’s question as to whether tumbling and rolling is the same? My answer is: No. I can only conclude, unfortunately, that you have not yet seen a Roller. There are several varieties of tumbling pigeons in existence, but the most clever and fascinating performer of all is, no doubt, the true Birmingham Roller. All these varieties come under the same heading, Flying Tumblers. Why, I cannot quite understand except, perhaps that common and performing Tumblers and Rollers are identical in type and colour. The performances, however, are totally different. Flying Tumblers are birds which, when performing, make all their clever and erratic movements, detached, for several years through the air. The Roller, on the other hand, rolls solid like a spinning ball, for a considerable distance through the air in such a way that, while rolling, it appears like a cricket ball with a small hole in the centre, and recovers itself with a series of detached performances similar to the Tumbler. Tumblers and Rollers are flown chiefly in kits of twenty to twenty-five. The main feature of this is that these birds all tumble or all roll together, gathering themselves, and again mounting to repeat the same performance. (September 10, 1930). Most Roller fanciers should now be fully occupied with the breeding and rearing of youngsters. Everyone has my best wishes for a successful season. When the youngsters are about four to five weeks old they should be separated from the old ones, when they will soon learn to do for themselves. At six weeks old they should be ready to put out, and every attention is needed to break them to their surroundings. If a few old birds are let out to fly, and when they drop play the young ones about with them (they should be kept on the hungry side), little difficulty will be experienced in breaking them in. When you are satisfied they know where they live, the next thing is to get them to fly by stirring them up with a few good old birds. When they reach the age of about twelve to fourteen weeks, if the stock were good, they should show signs of rolling near to perfection. This period, in my opinion, is the most critical time for your future sport. Care should be taken to watch for the duds, which are at times difficult to detect, because when doing a turn every bird seems to roll or do something. It is that something we watch for. It is easy to pick out the best birds, but not so easy to find the duds. There may appear to be no duds among them, but there are. It is comparatively easy to get a kit of young birds to do a turn, and some fanciers are perhaps satisfied with such, but that is far from having a first class kit of Rollers. A good kit of Rollers is only got by judiciously sorting out the best birds and keeping them on their own, even if you can only pick out half or less of the number started. Much harm can be done to a kit of Rollers by letting them go on their own way, not sorting them out at this period as mentioned. Another important point to watch is the weather. Young birds should not be liberated in rough weather, because in wind they are apt to develop a nasty swing while flying, which, once they develop, they never forget, and their good performances are finished. Whether they enjoy it or not, I do not know, but they race up to a point, and turn back like lightning, similar to the fly enjoyed by a large kit of Tipplers. If they do develop it, there is no cure, and the best place for them is under a piecrust, or they should be put down for stock. Therefore, it can easily be seen how your year’s work can be ruined by letting your birds out at an early age in windy weather.
Another matter I should like to point out is the feeding. There is no doubt that proper feeding is the only way to succeed with a stud of pigeons. You can take it from me; there are no secrets in feeding. It only comes by experience, and if fanciers would only pay more attention to feeding than merely buying mixed corn, better sport would result. One thing I am certain of is that they should be fed with each sort of grain separate. I should like to hear other fanciers’ views on this subject. Another point I am deeply interested in is the showing of Rollers. I see one of our American correspondents is in fear of the day when we shall fix a standard for showing. I see no danger whatever. The breed is too old established for its performances for it to be spoilt by a suggested show standard. We must admit that beauty upholds anything, and I am convinced that the Roller Fancy is yet in its infancy. I say breed for good looks as well as performances; it can be done. The rolling tendency, in my opinion, is too well transmitted into the breed to give cause for anxiety for spoiling by introducing good looks as well. I have had many good performers that were really ugly, and I feared I might spoil the performances of their offspring by trying to breed beauty, buy my opinion has altered. It is just as easy to combine good looks with performances, as it is to breed for performances only. I would point out that I do not advocate the use of a cross, far from
it. It is certain that I should not lose sight of breeding, or keeping only the best performers, even if I failed to breed a good looking bird. Except for a few cases in recent months, it is about the only breed that is kept shy of the show pen. I am speaking of the British Roller and not the Oriental, or West of England Tumbler. There are many who keep Rollers and Tumblers simply for the pleasure they derive from them, with no thought for improvements. Fanciers must admit that the pigeon Fancy, as a whole, is today far more pleasing than it was years ago. The news items, tips, and practically everything that is known about our hobby has been put before the Fancy through the medium of pigeons. It is a paper that is worthy of greater support. Such literature was not available in the old days to help those pioneer fanciers, and who make our hobby more easy and interesting by giving their experiences. To these I offer my humble thanks. I should like to mention that I have had marvelously good results from every point by careful inbreeding, and I am convinced that, as in all livestock, inbreeding in Rollers is the way to success. I have proved it both with performances and good looks. How would Mr. G. Storey like another bird like his rosette winners with yellow eyes, which is truly a nice bird? I congratulate him on its success. What is Mr. G. Mannering doing these days? We have no news. We have lately been asked for some idea of a standard for Rollers, so below I give my opinion on same. My ideal Roller, taken as a whole, must be well balanced in all properties, a nice medium sized bird, with full, round chest, tail well shut, appearing as if it was only one feather; legs well placed and rather short, with small feet and devoid of feathers, keel shallow to medium depth, nice round head, with yellow or white eyes, surrounded by a very fine cere. The neck should be rather thick in keeping with the body. I like purity and richness of colour and regularity of markings. The feathers should be broad, fair length in wing tips, and these about half to three-quarters of an inch from end of tail. The secondaries should overlap and be a fair length, well covered with small feathers; birds with good secondaries and feather generally, can stay and fly with little effort, being more buoyant, which must certainly aid the vigorous performances of a good pigeon. (October 4, 1930).

From Pigeons of England, September 10,1930 and October 4,1930

______________________________________
Used with the express permission of Tom Monson, from: The Collected Writings of William Hyla Pensom, Copyright © 1996 by Tom L. Monson, All rights reserved, including all rights reproduction.

SHOWING ROLLERS (1930)


It may seem rather out of place to write on the above, because we seldom see a show, which caters to Birmingham Rollers. Why, I do not know. Is it because show secretaries have not heard of them? Or is it a fear of the classes not being filled? If the latter, then I cannot agree. I know of Roller fanciers who would like to show their birds during the winter months, but cannot because there are so few shows, which cater to them. I would like to appeal to secretaries to give them a trial. Flying Tipplers are well catered for, and seem to pay. Why not Birmingham Rollers, for it is hard to which variety of the two is most popular? However, the real object of my notes is the interesting question opened up by Mr. L. Guise in his very interesting contribution in the issue of October 2nd; i.e., the placement of the keel in flyers. I have often read with much interest the views of fanciers of flying pigeons, and their opinions on the keel or breastbone of the birds. There is no doubt, to my mind, that the placing of the keel settles the type of the bird as a whole. Mr. Guise says the keel should be deep and long, but I fail to see how a flyer can appear long and graceful with a deep keel. The beauty of a stud of flying pigeons is in the uniformity of type. Often we get a bird, which is a very gluttonous eater, and always hungry, which, to my mind, is a bad sign. This kind you will often see come idling out of the kit, and find them bad flyers, bullies, etc. It may seem odd, but on handling nine birds out of ten you will find they are deep keeled. I find also that deep keeled birds put on flesh very quickly; in fact, they seldom seem to handle tight and compact, even when they are in good condition, and are almost always very wide at the rump. This latter point is, to my mind, one of the chief points that is absolutely essential to the best flyers, also performers. The rump is the spot where the weather settles most, and a bird with a well-tapered rump is more likely (in theory) to fly a much longer period than a bird wide at the rump. I quite agree that the keel should be long and straight, but I have not seen one deep and long in a good flying pigeon. In my opinion, more thought should be given to the type of the bird -- I mean its build. I know we get a lot of nice-looking birds with shapely heads, etc., but there is something about them that does not spell “flyer.” There are, no doubt, a good many who Judge on the depth of the keel, because it denotes more body, etc. But do they take into consideration the fact that it takes a terrible amount of flying to develop that big body to make it full of muscle? It is very difficult to find the muscle of a deep-keeled bird. Some of the birds, which win at our shows, have been kept in for months, or perhaps have never been outside the aviary. How such a bird can develop muscle to be compared with a bird that has had its liberty, I fail to see. To sum up the differences, I find that deep-keeled birds are big in body, which means more weight to carry, and which requires more vigorous use of the wings. On the other hand, a shallow keeled bird flies without any effort at all. It is a bird that can soar in the air and is more easily noticed in its butterfly action than most long-time flying strains of Tipplers. What looks better than a bird which stands up sprightly on its toes, with prominent, well-rounded, wing butts folded tightly on a full, round chest, a good straight back tapering well at the rump, well-shaped flights almost reaching the end of a good, long, and strong-looking tail? All this, to me, is governed by the placing of the keel. What has this to do with showing Rollers? Well, send a bird of this type to a show, and you need not be afraid of it not being looked at, even if it stands card less. The old saying, “A good bird is never a bad colour,” is wrong. It should read, “A good bird is never a bad type,” for type is more valuable than anything. Now I write these lines in good spirits, and if the theme of this article can be better explained and show than I am wrong, then I shall feel more than pleased. I am ever out to learn. This I have not written in any way to be antagonistic to Mr. Guise, for, from the different notes I have read by him, there cannot be any greater enthusiast in the pigeon fancy than he.


From Pigeons of England, October 23, 1930.


____________________________________________________________________
Used with the express permission of Tom Monson, from: The Collected Writings of William Hyla Pensom, Copyright © 1996 by Tom L. Monson, All rights reserved, including all rights reproduction.

ROLLERS WEST AND ENGLISH (1931)

I was interested to read letters of G. Manning and E. Overy concerning Rollers. I have often wondered why this subject was not brought up before; i.e., the difference between a West of England Tumbler and an English Roller, and the showing of these birds. I was, unfortunately, unable to attend the Palace Show this year. I have very little to do with "Wests", but what I have been led to understand about them is that they are bred chiefly for long time, high flying. I have been pleased to read of the good times put up by these birds. All this is quite in opposition to the Roller. I have crossed Rollers with "Wests" and the result was vigorous flyers, but no rolling they tumbled. However, I plead ignorance as to what constitutes a West. I should be glad to know the true value of the "Wests" as a performer. Regarding the showing part of this subject, I have always noticed that West of England Flying Tumblers were in the majority in classes allotted to Rollers. Usually every variety has a name, and only by its name can it be judged. Is the West of England High Flying Tumbler known by two names, the other being Roller? In my opinion it is unfair for all sides that the respective varieties are not catered for by their own names. This includes the Oriental Rollers. I have yet to see a class scheduled for West of England's Flying Tumblermeans nothing. Mr. Manning mentions that Rollers are judged for periods of twenty minutes, which is quite true. The reason for this is that the chief governing feature of these competitions is that the greatest number of turns gets the most points. A turn consists of a kit of birds flying in close formation, and rolling and tumbling at the same time. That is the time when the birds show off their best performances as a body. Twenty to twenty-five is the usual number of birds in a kit, hence the training for the duration mentioned. Rollers, like all other flying breeds, must be in perfect flying condition to give of their best in the way of performances. To fly and train a kit of birds that are in perfect flying condition takes some doing. My experience has been the trouble of getting them down. Sometimes they will keep flying for a couple of hours with the droppers continually being worked under them. Rollers can be trained to fly for many hours. They then cease to be Rollers, because they soon lose their rolling propensities. Now, as regards the size of these birds, my experience with Rollers, along with the literature I have read and the illustrations I have seen, has taught me that the best Roller is a bird about the Size of the average Flying Tippler. Myself, I like a bird that is long cast in type but not too big. I have always found that the bigger a bird is, the more open it is in its rolling. They do not roll tight, but appear more like a cartwheel than a cricket ball. There seem to be a number of people who are skeptical as to how far a Roller should roll, there being no standard on this or any other point. It is difficult to say. A fancier who likes a deep Roller will value a bird that rolls no more than six to eight yards. Myself, I consider eight yards the limit for a bird to be of any use for pleasure. Birds rolling farther than this invariably kill or injure themselves for life. I hear of recent enquiries by fanciers for birds that will roll twenty to thirty yards and keep perfect control. This suggests to me that their imagination has run away with them. I should like to see some myself. I sympathize with Mr. E. J. Overy, and suggest he has been unfortunate in his purchases, and I trust his experiment will not prove a failure. In conclusion, I hope this debate which can be made most interesting and useful will not be misconstrued and turned into a miserable argument.

From Pigeons of England, January 15.1931

ROLLERS AND TUMBLERS (1931)
ROLLERS AND TUMBLERS (1931)
Madam, -I was glad to see that my last contribution on the above was found to be of interest by J.W.S. His disappointments in purchasing stock are common. He also mentions that he would be an incurable optimist who expects to buy Rollers at 4s. per pair, a fitting phrase to the situation, I am sure. You cannot buy Rollers at this price; in fact, he would be a fortunate optimist to buy a Roller at all, except for a few isolated cases and in the event of a fancier giving up the Fancy altogether. The performances of Rollers or Tumblers can be graded from the bird that tumbles once to the finished Roller, a bird that rolls solid six to eight yards like a cricket ball. Between these two many grades of performers are to be found those which, in my opinion, after twenty odd years with them, should be classed as common Tumblers. That a Roller is a cultivated and finished Tumbler must be obvious. The best way of starting is to procure at most three pairs from a reliable fancier and follow advice given until experience teaches one better. After seeing a good bird in the air it is easy to see what is wanted. Mr. J.W.S. writes that I deprecate the holding of competitions. No, not the competitions, but the class of bird used for same; they are certainly not Rollers. Although I fly in competition, and have done for years, I have not yet seen a kit of Rollers flown that have won; neither has anyone else. Rollers cannot make the number of turns as the Tumblers, but a turn from a kit of Rollers is worth six of a turn by the Tumblers and as the most number of turns count to win a fly, there is a great sacrifice of quality for quantity. Mr. J.W.S. asks for a few lines on the management of Rollers. The first thing wanted is a good dry loft. A popular size is one with a floor space of not less than S ft. square, about 6 ft. high at the back and S ft. at the front. On this I favor a covered-in flight about 3 ft. wide. Perches V shaped are the most popular, so made to well cover the length and width of the bird. These are nailed to a board directly over each other, the full depth of the loft, and fixed round the sides. For food a. good variety of mixture suits them well, although they do not require such a heavy mixture in the summer as they do in the winter months. I only fly my birds once a day at present and I usually feed as much as the birds will eat immediately after getting them in. Fly and feed regularly. For the best performing results it is best to train the birds to fly no more than one-half to three-quarters of an hour. It is a known fact that if Rollers and Tumblers are given unlimited liberty they soon lose their performing propensities. Rollers will fly for hours if trained, of course. It is just as difficult to check the flying of a bird in tip-top condition, as it is to make one fly a long time. Rollers should be flown with an empty crop because if they have any food in them they are apt to choke themselves during the roll or roll down and kill themselves. A White Fantail is an excellent dropper, and if the birds are well trained to drop to it they will seldom fly longer than required. I will endeavor to make the management of Flying Rollers more clear at a later date; in the meantime, should I hear of any walking competitions for Tumblers I will let J.W.S. know. This sentence written in response to the last sentence of J.W.S. article, in which he ended by writing, I must now conclude, as it is time to give my acrobats their evening walk.
From The Feathered World, of England, September 10, 1931.

THE HARDY ROLLER


Roller news at present is very scarce, and it is with the hope that a few scribes will come out of their shells and wield the pen that I write these few lines. What about it, some of you Roller men? Do your bit to make Pigeons more interesting. Although some of the fanciers round Harborne and district suffered in the way of breeding losses during the early part of the season, I am glad to report that members have come out wonderfully well. Most Roller fanciers are, or should be; flying kits of young birds, and those who had a kit flying early should be sorting their likely ones out for the first competition. Young birds should not be long turning out, or performing. I like to see them start to tumble and knock about before they drop their first flight, or the tenth primary. As soon as they do start to tumble, they are best fed on their own and the kit made up as others start to turn out. A few good old ones fed with the youngsters in the first place works wonders; the young ones seem to learn to fly steady and turn out much quicker. From experience, I have found that Rollers will fly on almost any mixture of corn, but enquiries recently show that some novices are not getting the results expected, although feeding on good, sound recipes. I think the reason is more in how the feed is given, regularity being the chief point. A good way to get good high flying out of them is to feed as much as they will eat once a day, or feed by hand till the birds bird goes to drink, then stop. A mixture of tares, baked wheat, dari and buckwheat in equal parts is excellent for high flying and performing during the summer. I give a handful of canary seed or mixed seed, for twenty birds, before feeding after their fly. Peas and dari, half and half, with a handful of Spanish canary seed I can also recommend. Other fanciers opinions on feeding I am sure would be much appreciated. I recently paid a visit to a few lofts, making my way to see one of our genial veterans, Mr. H. Hedgecock, who has a find lot of red colours on view. I hear he is truly on the warpath this season. The usual quality is also to be seen at the loft of Mr. H. Davies, our Chairman, while Mr. K. Payne has also a nice collection of youngsters in all colours, and is of a deeper rolling strain than most of the fanciers birds that fly in the competitions.


From Pigeons 0F England, June 9, 1931.