Judging Protocol Question

[Donald H.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Why is it sour grapes if a person is relative new to the judging process and is trying to understand the best way to present his/her car for judging. I would think we all want to get the least deducts at any judging event as possible. I have had one car through the process (Regional and National), I studied the books (TIM&JG and Reference Manual), I participated as an OP at a regional. All of this helped, but by no means made me an expert.

However, there were still a lot of surprises at the actual events. Many of my deducts were for things not referenced in the TIM&JG but rather upon the individual judge's knowledge. That's fine with me as I know not everything can be captured in a book. I got deducts at the national event for things that did not get deducts at regional. Again, that was a learning experience for me as judges can and do miss things and have differing opinions. Some of the judging criteria is very objective, but not all.

As a person still newer at the process, I read all of Frank's comments as trying to understand the process and how the deducts were arrived at. Belittling comments about sour grapes and similar comments related paint do little to encourage newer members to have their cars judged and fuel the negative opinions of non-NCRS folk regarding NCRS and the judging process.

This thread started out with Frank looking for ways to improve his score and ended with him deciding to not have the car judged again.

Just my opinions - most folks have them!!!

Don

[Gene M.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

There is nothing wrong with a second flight award. It has become expected by most NCRS members that enter for flight judging is to acquire top flight award. Sorry but the car must attain a minimum level of originality by way of points deductions that meets the standard. It is not to the benefit of NCRS to lower the standard so persons can build their car to suit their own preference. The judging reference manual ruling was such that Corvettes remain with only the options they were originally built with. Saying an option is after market produced does not preclude it from the ruling. In fact it makes it more wrong (wrongest, more incorrect, worst, what ever) than a reproduction or an original removed from another car in that it does not even look right.

I will say it again there is nothing wrong with second flight. Some cars do not meet the standard of top flight are still flight recognized by subsequent second and third flight awards. No shame here. The award and the evaluation are equal in value.

[Ken A.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

There is nothing wrong with a second flight award. The award and the evaluation are equal in value.

Not when he goes to sell it. I think the judging chairman should weigh in here. I'm sure he's been reading the posts. There's no sense beating up on a member who's asking a legitimate question and not getting anything but peoples "opinions". He obviously (the OP) spent a lot of time & a LOT of money to show up for judging, as everybody does, & deserves straight answers. Roy would have clarified this situation many posts ago.
Why do keep wanting to lose dues paying members?????

[David H.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Typo, sorry

[Richard M.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Yes, We all need some clarification. Obviously some of us are having differing opinions of what should or should not have been deducted.

I do not know the details of that other car, the '67 with the aftermarket A/C system, but it has been disclosed here that the handling of that car was different from Frank's car. This is not right. This is the issue now. We seem to have done one car differently than the other. This is not fair.

It is unfortunate that the Judging teams of both the '67 and the '63 didn't talk to each other regarding this situation. Each of them just probably didn't know of the "other car". If they did, then the two Team Leaders may have discussed it, then both TL's would have discussed it with the National Judging Chairman. Dave Brigham would have likely been approached at that time to help the decision making process. Maybe it would have been decided differently for the other car. Maybe not. Dave may have had a clue then as to what was happening and the confusion we all find ourselves in now could have been eliminated at the event.

For the record, my opinion still stands, whether or not it's correct. The 1963 that was judged was improperly deducted. If I am wrong, then I have been misled by the guidelines and their interpretations.

Frank has a fine example of a very special car and should be proud of it. Be proud Frank. You worked very hard and did a fine job to present your car for Judging. BTW, I had the pleasure a year ago to help Frank return much of his car to original. He corrected engine intake and carburetor non-typical pieces, water pump, miscellaneous engine bay issues, interior flaws, paint flaws, chassis related restoration, etc. He wanted his '63 coupe to be presentable as the day built, but with the ability to drive it every day, even in a hot climate.

Frank, please don't let this confusion deter you from future events. Hang in there. We need excellent examples like yours to be present at these events.

Maybe by bringing your car to Lakeland and this situation at hand will have a positive effect for future events. That is, to maintain consistency in results for all that partake. I hope to see your car there next year with those other little deducts corrected and the things corrected that you learned about in the process. Learning is the best part and helps to make all of this fun.

===

[Frank D.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Why is it sour grapes if a person is relative new to the judging process and is trying to understand the best way to present his/her car for judging. I would think we all want to get the least deducts at any judging event as possible. I have had one car through the process (Regional and National), I studied the books (TIM&JG and Reference Manual), I participated as an OP at a regional. All of this helped, but by no means made me an expert.

However, there were still a lot of surprises at the actual events. Many of my deducts were for things not referenced in the TIM&JG but rather upon the individual judge's knowledge. That's fine with me as I know not everything can be captured in a book. I got deducts at the national event for things that did not get deducts at regional. Again, that was a learning experience for me as judges can and do miss things and have differing opinions. Some of the judging criteria is very objective, but not all.

As a person still newer at the process, I read all of Frank's comments as trying to understand the process and how the deducts were arrived at. Belittling comments about sour grapes and similar comments related paint do little to encourage newer members to have their cars judged and fuel the negative opinions of non-NCRS folk regarding NCRS and the judging process.

This thread started out with Frank looking for ways to improve his score and ended with him deciding to not have the car judged again.

Just my opinions - most folks have them!!!

Don

Precisely stated sir! I have written several times on that "other" forum I thought a Second Flight for a regularly driven car, never judged before, in a regional with national level judges, was a fine first outing for my split window. Since the Lakeland event, I've been asked about 1/2 dozen times by others that are considering having their car judged for the first time, the same question I asked going in, "....is it worth it with aftermarket A/C?" Vis a vis, what is the 'hit' for it, point-wise. I've had to tell them that I simply don't know; unlike tires, batteries, paint, etc.. the scoring for this addition is not codified. Vilifying me for asking the question doesn't address this gap whatsoever... Asking a legitimate question is hardly cheating or whining. Yes, I asked the judges about my paint and how close to factory the door jambs looked (so I could improve things) and that led to them reassessing my score in that area. If that's whining so be it. I know - its easier to come at me than pull the covers back on gaps in the process. Frankly, I'm surprised and delighted at the number of folks here more or less supporting me on the issue....that was unexpected and pleasant.

Seems pretty simple - for ALL year cars put a section in the JG Ref manual on judging aftermarket A/C on:
a) non originally air conditioned cars, and,
b) originally, factory air conditioned cars.

None of us are kids and if the NCRS truly encourages driving your cars; its pretty hard to cruise around in a mid-year coupe in summertime Florida with a menopausal wife with hot flashes without A/C. In fact its dangerous (* SMILE *)

So, now I'm waiting for some here to tell me I should have bought a factory A/C midyear if I were heading for judging I guess.

I have no 'skin in this game' at this point as I'm not considering going further in judging (although I'm correcting the majority of the issues the judges found on the car anyway). I'm simply no longer invested in the process as my car is clearly in some 'gray' area that will always hold it back.

[Frank D.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

If nothing else possibly this string highlights an ambiguity in the judging rules as to how two similarly equipped cars at the same meet ended up with very different results.

One camp uses the example of the mirror or luggage rack where only the holes in the body work are 'visible' and not the added component.

The other camp says that since the RPO was available in that production year, all the components get judged.

Let me ask then- what is the value in asking the owner prior to judging if he was presenting the car as a 'factory' A/C car?

The pivotal issue IMO and since my response was "No"; I questioned the judging scores (apparently an anathema to some)...

[Gary H.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Consistency with judging is something that really needs to be addressed within this group. I went through two rounds of regional flight judging in kissimmee a few years back with only minimal deductions for dealer applied undercoating.

2012 FL regional 47 point total chassis deductions. This was a few months after getting my car back on the road after a 30 years of storage.

2013 FL regional I did a PV

2014 FL regional 21 point total chassis deductions. I installed original shocks, cleaned up a lot of the grime on chassis. Installed correct bumper bolts, hardware for valences etc. I was happy to gain the 26 points.

2014 National Convention had a 65 point total deduction for chassis. Zero changes were made between regional and national judging.

I went through BG judging a few weeks before the national and got screwed for the Undercoating. Every single finish deduction in chassis also had a corresponding deduction in damage and deterioration. Essentially I was penalized twice for the undercoating. Ended up with Silver and had a 240 point total deduction for chassis. Just throwing this bit of info in to show some of the inconsistencies.

These were all at the same regional event, which is highly touted as one of the best. I fully expected to have the same or similar outcome at the national but that clearly didn't happen. I still managed to get the duntov but had absolutely no points to spare. 4366 out of 4510 points.

[Joe C.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Section 4, item 14, page 24 of the JRM: "Added or Deleted Items" addresses how a car is to be judged if the owner tries to pass off an added option as originally installed equipment. The operable word here is "detectable".

The subject car here, Frank Drano's 1963 coupe, was presented as originally being a non air conditioned car, therefore any variation from original should have been judged using the CDCIF matrix.

[William F.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Judging is about restoration. If you want to add air, fine, but it's not in keeping with standards of restoration and will and should get deducts(although would seem there should be consistency). Frank, you have several choices;1. Enjoy ad on AC and know you're going to get deducts. 2. Buy a factory AC Corvette. 3. Drive non AC Corvette and get a younger (or older) wife or girlfriend. LOL.

[Bob J.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Frank,
sorry to hear what happened.
Maybe write carlton and ask for his explanation.
Understand, you'll need to include a SASE for his reply.
Bob Jorjorian

[Don H.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

I will add this for consideration by the group. I believe the question concerns the application of Standard Deduction Guidelines Sect 4, Item 13 OR Item 14. Item 13 discusses GM service replacement and reproduction AND non-OEM parts. If the parts appear similar to original parts, they are judged per CDCIF. However, if they are significantly dissimilar, as would be the case with Vintage Air they receive a FULL deduction. This would apply to any non OEM option added to a car, such as Borgeson power steering, non OEM power brakes, non OEM tilt column, non OEM electronic ignition, etc, etc.
On the other hand, Section 4, Item 14 applies to Dealer or owner installed Accessories which were NOT available through the GM assembly plant. This differs from options as described above which WERE available through the GM assembly plant.
So, the crux is which Item of Section 4 is applied by the different judging teams under direction of the different team leaders. Certainly it would be best if all teams applied the same Item in judging owner-added, non OEM options.

[Harry S.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

I will add this for consideration by the group. I believe the question concerns the application of Standard Deduction Guidelines Sect 4, Item 13 OR Item 14. Item 13 discusses GM service replacement and reproduction AND non-OEM parts. If the parts appear similar to original parts, they are judged per CDCIF. However, if they are significantly dissimilar, as would be the case with Vintage Air they receive a FULL deduction. This would apply to any non OEM option added to a car, such as Borgeson power steering, non OEM power brakes, non OEM tilt column, non OEM electronic ignition, etc, etc.
On the other hand, Section 4, Item 14 applies to Dealer or owner installed Accessories which were NOT available through the GM assembly plant. This differs from options as described above which WERE available through the GM assembly plant.
So, the crux is which Item of Section 14 is applied by the different judging teams under direction of the different team leaders. Certainly it would be best if all teams applied the same Item in judging owner-added, non OEM options.

This is a slippery slope. Think about side-pipes. If the car was not born with side-pipes we don't take a full deduction. We simply apply CDCIF to the the original parts that are to be there on a non-side-pipe car or original parts that are altered to add the side pipes. Saying that there are several other factory available options the could be added later such as heater, radio, windshield squirter, etc. The car is judged as if they are not there. There are no standard deductions for adding/deleting any of these items. Is it time to create a standard deduction. I imagine the Team Leaders and Dave will consider it.

[Don H.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Harry
Added side pipes ARE a full deduction. And, there is a Standard Deduction for adding the options you listed, it is Section 9, Any detectable ADDED Regular Production option is subject to a FULL Deduction. This was described by others in the first few posts of this thread. So, it again comes down to different judging teams applying Items 9, 13, OR 14 to given owner-added Options or Accessories.

[Harry S.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Harry
Added side pipes ARE a full deduction. And, there is a Standard Deduction for adding the options you listed, it is Section 9, Any detectable ADDED Regular Production option is subject to a FULL Deduction. This was described by others in the first few posts of this thread. So, it again comes down to different judging teams applying Items 9, 13, OR 14 to given owner-added Options or Accessories.

The full deduct is on the underbody pipes as they are missing.

See you in Dallas