# Why are long bodies not ok?



## snowflake311

Our domestic bettas are so far from the wild thing they don't even look like the same fish. Wild males have long strong bodies but domestic bettas are shorter and thicker. Long bodies are a fault I read. 

I have this hmpk dragon that has a very long body. But the long sleek look is growing on me. I think it would be cool to see more fish with longer bodies. They seem to be getting shorter. 

I guess I just like my fish long and slim. 

What do you think about body length?


----------



## lilnaugrim

I don't remember longer bodies being a fault, I do remember that very short stocky bodies are a fault, mostly stemming from DT's. I think it's more to do with body to fin ratio than how long the actual body is honestly. But I could be wrong of course


----------



## snowflake311

lilnaugrim said:


> I don't remember longer bodies being a fault, I do remember that very short stocky bodies are a fault, mostly stemming from DT's. I think it's more to do with body to fin ratio than how long the actual body is honestly. But I could be wrong of course


Oh that makes sence .


----------



## Setsuna

if long bodys are Faults then im very pissed off at the person that said that lol. No joke All wilds have long bodys and if whoever said that long bodys are faults then that person is stupid because domestic bettas came form wilds


----------



## trilobite

I think its the thin bodies that are faulted in show bettas since a thin body doesnt match their big heavy fins. I love long thin trad pks though


----------



## snowflake311

I read it here 
http://www.bettaterritory.nl/BT-AABPKproposal.htm

FORM AND FINNAGE FAULTS – (ASYMMETRICAL) TRADITIONAL PLAKAT

"13. Body extremely slender comparable to some wildtype Betta species (major fault). "

Maybe this is old or something.


----------



## whatsupyall

You should really read the entire write up. It's a great read and I find it quite interesting. But just reading the title would have told it all lol. It's a proposal by Joep. Not sure if IBC adopted it or not. It would be in your best interest to become a member of IBC that way you would stay updated on their current standards for each class. AND you would learn a lot of things about betta in general. But about my personal preference of body type, I like them all. If fins are in proportion to body, I don't see why I would not like it.


----------



## snowflake311

Yeah I know it's a proposal. I read that. Proposal or not why would some one want to make long bodies a fault?

I have been playing with I idea of joining the IBC.


----------



## Ilikebutterflies

IBC standards say "3 to 4 times as long as it is deep" for the body length. Then you have to take into consideration the fin width. IBC standards say the caudal should be 1/3 the body length(plakat). All other non-paired fins should match that. Sooo plakats are meant to be more stout. They would then be closer to 3x the body width than 4x the body width standard. 
Plakat standards:

Body 3x longer than width
caudal 1/3 length of body
anal and dorsal-not greater than body width(if you go by the above recommendations for body width and caudal length then it is 1/3 the body length so anal, caudal and dorsal would match(from the center of the anal of course) therefore creating a balanced fish.

So a "long" body would be one longer than 4 times the width...I think that would look funny and should be a fault. It looks find on wild types because they have smaller fins and look balanced. It would be nearly impossible for such a long fish to be balanced with plakat fins.


----------



## whatsupyall

I read the standard for IBC, but where did you get this information about dorsal and anal length?


----------



## Ilikebutterflies

> Specifically the dorsal and anal fins should not greatly exceed the body width
> and the caudal fin should not exceed 1/3 of the body length.


It is found at the very top under Plakat Standards. When reading further down under Show Plakat everything stays the same except just a few things not having to do with the anal or dorsal size.

If you aren't interested in traditional plakats it's easy to miss. That's kinda the way the standards are set up though, you have to read the whole thing to see what standard stays the same and what changes between variations.

I am looking at 2010 standards. I went to the IBC website to find the newest standards and I do not see them or a link to them. What's up with that? I know I downloaded them last year when I joined but that was the old website.


----------



## snowflake311

Ilikebutterflies said:


> IBC standards say "3 to 4 times as long as it is deep" for the body length. Then you have to take into consideration the fin width. IBC standards say the caudal should be 1/3 the body length(plakat). All other non-paired fins should match that. Sooo plakats are meant to be more stout. They would then be closer to 3x the body width than 4x the body width standard.
> Plakat standards:
> 
> Body 3x longer than width
> caudal 1/3 length of body
> anal and dorsal-not greater than body width(if you go by the above recommendations for body width and caudal length then it is 1/3 the body length so anal, caudal and dorsal would match(from the center of the anal of course) therefore creating a balanced fish.
> 
> So a "long" body would be one longer than 4 times the width...I think that would look funny and should be a fault. It looks find on wild types because they have smaller fins and look balanced. It would be nearly impossible for such a long fish to be balanced with plakat fins.


Interesting thank you for that. 

Ok so here is my petsmart rescue. Sorry not a good flare photo he was not feeling it during the photo shoot. I think this guy is long I know he has flaws. I am working on fattening him up. 

Is he too long? Because he reminds me of a wild betta a bit. His look has grown on me.


----------



## whatsupyall

Ilikebutterflies said:


> It is found at the very top under Plakat Standards. When reading further down under Show Plakat everything stays the same except just a few things not having to do with the anal or dorsal size.
> 
> If you aren't interested in traditional plakats it's easy to miss. That's kinda the way the standards are set up though, you have to read the whole thing to see what standard stays the same and what changes between variations.
> 
> I am looking at 2010 standards. I went to the IBC website to find the newest standards and I do not see them or a link to them. What's up with that? I know I downloaded them last year when I joined but that was the old website.


Nevermind, you this isn't the place for this discussion. Sorry about that Snowflakes311. I will pm you Ilikebutterflies.


----------



## Ilikebutterflies

He doesn't seem to be too long. I kinda eyeballed it with a pencil but he looks 4x long as wide so not technically tooo long. I like my plakats more stout around the middle. Bulldog-ish but that's just me. You should see the giant I have it the spawn tank now...he's a tank!


----------



## Basement Bettas

snowflake311 said:


> I read it here
> http://www.bettaterritory.nl/BT-AABPKproposal.htm
> 
> FORM AND FINNAGE FAULTS – (ASYMMETRICAL) TRADITIONAL PLAKAT
> 
> "13. Body extremely slender comparable to some wildtype Betta species (major fault). "
> 
> Maybe this is old or something.


These are not IBC standards...


----------

