I partially answered this question in the current thread about landscape roses. The most underrated rose I have grown is a sport of the rose, Bonica, and is called Royal Bonica. I grew a small hedge of RB at my previous home, and it was constantly in bloom with beautiful medium pink flowers that received many comments and compliments from passersby. As mentioned in HMF, Royal Bonica is extremely disease resistant. I can attest to its vigor--it's a fast grower, reaching a height of 5-6 feet with about a 4 foot width. Unfortunately, I have no photos, but there are some good ones on HMF. It is available from Hortico.
I also think the recent Tantau roses hybridized by Evers are among the most underrated and hard to get in this country. I've bragged too much about Ascot, plus Astrid Grafin von Hardenburg is another beauty. Then there is Augusta Luise, Mariatheresia, and Pastella. All these are being grown in Europe and given high praise. Palatine has Ascot, and Hortico carries Augusta Luise. The others are not available in the U.S., as far as I know. Diane

Some of the most underrated ones in my garden are English Sonnet, Brilliant Pink Iceberg and Home Run. Those three bloom nearly continuously all season with little problems and good hardiness.

Overrated? Mr. Lincoln, Ingrid Bergman, Oklahoma, Intrigue. All four get rave reviews all the time but in my garden they're all duds!

seil,
I just took a look (for the second time) at your incredible photos of English Sonnet on HMF. How do you think it compares to the "Easy" roses by Harkness (if you have any of them?). Thanks for letting me interrupt here, kes. Diane

For me over the years the two most under rated roses have been HT's. Brinessa---Grows like a weed and has the most beautiful smoky pink blooms with foliage that looks like leather. Raspberry Swirls---Great rose for me. It's biggest drawback is short stems on 1/2 of the blooms and it can be a little (?) dangerous. Packed full of thorns. Over rated roses?? Ground cover roses. Scrouny, twiggy, pathetic little things.

"The Rodney Dangerfield of roses--Poor Old Iceberg" by Kim.

Here is a link that might be useful: Poor Old Iceberg

Good question, and I guess a lot depends on where you live. Diane, I have Royal Bonica on order from Hortico. I'm glad to hear you like it! Off the top of my head, here are a few of each of over/under rated...

Overrated:
Can I count an entire rose class as overrated??? If so, HYBRID TEAS!!!! Ugh, just not a big fan of the needy fellers, but with the right care, they look great for some people (just not for me)!
Morden Blush-hasn't made it out of a gallon pot in 2 years and mostly due to dieback, not lack of growth, and its suppossed ot be super hardy!
I agree with Seil on Oklahoma and Intrigue...neither has performed well for me (HTs again) and OK is a gonner!
Ballerina- very vigorous grower on the plus side, but either covered in blackspot or defoliated 90% of the time and was shovelpruned last summer, which resulted in my being covered in scratches for two weeks!

underrated:
Pied Piper: I've mentioned it before, but that rose can BLOOM! Keeps its deep red color, good repeat, blooms last upwards of a week even in the hottest summer weeks!

Some others that pop to mind that are less known, but deserve to be grown more...
Ramblin Red (climber)
Cancan (climber)
Larissa
Gideon Lincecum (great hips!)
Glamis Castle (well known, but I've heard a lot of negative reviews due to scent...I just don't mind its scent I guess)

I'm sure a ton more will come to me :)

Tammy

Awww, Tammy, I loves my Ballerina, a great bloomer that attracts a lot of attention and is carefree, but I live in a climate with no black spot and very little of other fungal diseases. I hope you like Your Royal Bonica as well as I did, and it proves to be healthy. Diane

New Dawn springs immediately to mind as overrated and, consequently, one of the most inappropriately planted roses. It is hardy and easy to grow, but it is a thorny monster that should never be planted on arbors or trellises by doorways, which, of course, is where everyone plants it.

The most overrated, at least by the garden stores around here, is the whole family of Knockouts.

I SO agree with cats rose! I made the mistake of planting New Dawn on my 10 ft arbor which turned in to a true monster. I could not control this rose and after the spring bloom, looked horrible. Took a week last fall to cut her to the ground. I will miss her, but not too much. Over-rated to me.

As many have said here many times before, ratings of roses lose all relevance as one moves from zone to zone. For instance, gardeners here in the sultry coastal South read Kim's paeon to "Poor Old Iceberg" with utter disbelief (and envy, I must add). While 'Iceberg' in all its forms and sports is jubilantly ubiquitous in many parts of the world, it's a freaking disease-ridden disaster in my neck of the woods -- even with attempts at chemical intervention.

Coming to the rescue of the entire class of Hybrid Teas in general - in 9b they are weeds. Stick'm in the ground and give'm water, and a monkey could grow them. And make them look good. Straight from the mouth of a monkey!

I will bet every rose has a place where it's happy, and places where it's not. So, climate, sun and soil are everything. Medallion was the ultimate dud for me, one of my very few SPs. And I know lots of people have great luck with her.

Count me in agreement with catsrose and lesmc about New Dawn. I was fool enough to grow more than one of these monsters. The last one got the ole shovel about a year ago. What a wave of relief hit me when it was gone. Diane

My Cl Iceberg is STILL blooming, as it has been all through the Winter. I don't mean scattered bloom either, but I would say at least 2/3rds of what it does in the Spring. Despite the fact that we have had 23 inches of rain since the beginning of Dec (and any of my other roses that are trying to bloom are covered in balled or rotten blooms), each bud has opened successfully - no ugly dead or rotten ones. It drops its petals cleanly, too.

Although I live in No Cal just like harmonyp, I have found the mid century HTs to be a disaster here. They do grow, but are covered with either blackspot, or rust, or both. I do not have any very new ones - they may be better, I don't know. The really old HTs I have (Cl Crimson Glory and Madame Alfred Carriere), however, are fantastic. I still do not understand why the rose industry ruined the HTs in the 40s & 50s & 60s, but they did.

Re New Dawn, mine is doing fine, thank you. However, I hardly ever try to "control" roses, except to keep them from blocking the paths or the driveway, so this might be an issue of one's style of gardening, not the rose. My New Dawn has outgrown the trellis it was planted on, has gone in one direction to make a lovely tangle with the large climber 'Summer WIne' on the fence, and in the other direction it has joined Cl Iceberg on what was supposed to be Iceberg's arch, and when it hit the house at one end of the arch it started to climb up the house. All with my blessings and admiration.

Jackie

Maybe it is me, I want to love Burgundy Iceberg, she was bareroot last spring and is a lovely green shrub. Happy, healthy perfect size. But I have a love hate relationship with the actual flowers. Just not feeling the color I think? Bright Pink Iceberg is interesting because each bloom looks different in the shading from pink to white.

Maybe this season I will like her more? Or maybe I will dislike her as much as the neighbors, she does not like hers either but did not know the name when I picked up mine.

What about the new introductions in the catalogs and the descriptions they come with? Most of that praise is greatly exaggerated I think. I loved it when people would point out the photoshopped pictures from famous catalog pages and renamed flowers that were flops in the past for the company.

That's why it used to be so great reading the Week's Wholesale catalog, which contained very telling descriptions written by Tom Carruth. Nothing really awful because the roses they sold weren't awful, but if something was a turkey in the heat, he said so. Same for those requiring heat; demanding cool, moist; and those requiring time to establish. THOSE descriptions you could rely upon and they made selling their roses a lot better because you could actually give people a decent idea what they could expect. Kim

For the east coast, a few of the most underrated are some of the teas - Isabella Sprunt. It's as care-free as Knockout, smells wonderful, has the palest pastel hint of yellow, and grows vigorously. I love it and I've planted some dark purple clematis to grow with it. No one ever talks about it.

Another is La Marne. Right now in NYC we have finally been hit with a cold spell. It's late January. That rose has 2 dozen blooms on it. It just doesn't stop until we get a few days/weeks of deep freeze. Otherwise it's the last thing blooming in the garden every year. And with the cold, the blooms become a dark pink. In the heat of summer, they're a dried out parchment ivory. It's extremely disease resistant as well.

I love the Knockout roses, but both of these are every bit as good.

Most overrrated are many of the Austins. They're kind of Dolly Parton-ish to me. Maybe nice, smell good, but a little too much.

Knockouts are not roses. Lol

That's what "rose snobs" have said about Icebergs for many years around here. Ubiquitous, definitely, but an excellent rose where suited, none the same. Ditto for Knock Outs, and no, I don't have any Knock Outs in my garden, but I've specified them for quite a few others where they've done what has been expected of them perfectly, and with little to no effort by the owners. One of the consistently best looking is chock full of Iceberg, Double Red Knock Out, Sally Holmes, Scarlet Flower Carpet, Mutabilis, Weeping China Doll standards and Gourmet Popcorn standards. There are other roses in out of the way places to cut for the house and a small "collection" of more special interest things, but those are the bones of the garden and they consistently look "on stage" almost year round. Kim

haha Susan that is what a local nursery say when I asked them whether they had roses - "well we have knockouts, but they're not really roses."

Don't tell mine that - they're in the rose garden always covered in blooms and they only blackspot and mildew a little bit. However, they do not look their best with no care, despite what advertising claims, so I can see how they can be considered overrated.

{{gwi:215278}}

This post was edited by Karolina11 on Sat, Jan 26, 13 at 23:51

I have one Knockout bush left of the five I had 6 years ago. I didn't pull them due to any disease or illness problems, I just needed the space. Mine were/are vey healthy and bloom wonderfully...however, I do look at them a little different than my other roses. I guess I don't see them so much as overrated, I just see them as just too common. They're the one rose that everyone who knows nothing about roses raves about...and I can see thier point; they were the first roses I grew also.

Tammy

There's a reason some people like knockout roses! If they do this easily, why knock it.....

Whether you like them or not, you have to admit that is a gorgeous flowering landscape shrub. Now, imagine that with white Icebergs as full, lush and loaded with flowers. The average HT often pales in comparison (and I LIKE HTs!). Kim

Let me defend my statement that Knockouts are overrated. In Florida, where I live, 90% of the roses available at the big box stores are Knockouts. The few private nurseries around here only occasionally stock roses, and when they do maybe 40% of the stock is Knockouts. I don't think any rose deserves to dominate that much. I went to the a big box store the other day and bought an Ebb Tide, the only one in a sea of Knockouts, and an employee stopped me and congratulated my choice of a Knockout because they are wonderful plants. I just smiled.

The reality in Florida is that Knockouts look bad 75% of the year. They do not look like the pictures posted here. They are attacked by chilli thrips in the summer, the leaves look twiggy and branchy, and the blooms are plain ugly. No one takes care of them because they are "easy and dependable."

I think if I lived in California or up north with better conditions I might grow Knockouts, but only if I had lots of room for the prettier roses.

I like Icebergs and Drift roses by the way, even though I can't grow Icebergs without spraying here.

This post was edited by amberroses on Sun, Jan 27, 13 at 10:51

I couldn't agree with Windeaux more! However, this type of thread is lots of fun. Especially in January.

Now, for all you Knock Out haters: You're just missing the point. KO was bred to be a landscape plant. If you are trying to compare them to HT's, Austins, etc., you'd do just as well to go bang your head against your arbor.

KO's are not meant for your rose garden. They belong in mixed beds of shrubs or as part of your foundation planting. They are most effective when viewed from a distance. I have one of mine in the front foundation squeezed between a Blue Spruce and an Alberta Spruce. On more than one occasion people have stopped their cars to ask me "what is that beautiful big red shrub?".

I used to be a plant snob when I first began gardening, but after dealing with my climate for 25+ years, hey, if it will grow, I don't care if it is just a wax begonia, I'll find a place for it. Same with Knock-out. I don't have any, but I have on occasion considered using them as a landscape shrub. Heck, I even grew an OGR for many many years, even though I don't understand the love affair some people have with them and won't grow any more any time soon. The point is to me, grow what you like and what's suited to your taste and your area.... Years ago it seemed as if every house around me sported a climbing Blaze. Most of the year they were just semi-leafless(from BS)gangly shrubs, but come early spring when they bloomed in scarlet profusion you could understand why they were so popular.......Maryl

I agree with Harry's post above - good to see you chiming in again, Harry! My favorite underrated roses are the whole class of shrub roses, which includes the Knockout family. When I think of the roses that are the most frequently blooming and trouble free, it's almost always a shrub class rose that comes to mind. Some of the shrubs have HT or Austin-like flowers (like the Renaissance series that I love), but I find a majority of them have flowers that are individually unexciting. However, they are the kind of truly constantly blooming mass of color that we wish the rest of our roses would produce.

I do respectfully disagree that the shrubs, including Knockouts, don't belong in the rose garden - since all of my rose gardens are mixed beds anyway. If you're building a formal HT bed like those in the public gardens, then yes they would look out of place and not stay within their specific boundaries. For me, I'm always looking for blocks of color to add focal points to my garden beds, all of which have mostly roses but many other perennials and other kinds of plants. We often talk about mixing in things like Salvias and perennial geraniums into the rose beds, and I have shrubs including Knockouts mixed into all of them too. For me it's the best of both worlds - the shrub roses keep the bed as a whole from looking boring during down times between repeat blooms, and the more traditional large flowered roses provide the up close interest and scent that's largely missing in the Knockouts and other shrubs.

As always, to each their own, but I find that rose gardening isn't "either/or" but "AND", each type of rose used for the purpose they best fill.

Cynthia