inconsistant judging

[Clem Z.]

Re: inconsistant judging

LEN-
WOW! Your experience has brought me to admit to myself and this Board that I too am having issues about having my car judged. I've been a NCRS member for a little while and I always wonder where I'll (and my car) will fit in? The Tech & Judging guides are one thing, but where does an Indviduals heart & pocketbook fit in ? This is the BEST Advice Board to be involved with. THANK-YOU!

Marty

as a former tech inspector in a couple of different racing disciplines there are people involved who do not think they are doing their job unless they find something wrong.

[Roy S.]

Re: inconsistant judging

I find it very informative reading about judging inconsistencies and why NCRS attends specific events from individuals that admittedly do not participate, but have all the answers. Or maybe I should say very informative reading comments of those with half empty glasses.
Show me a single hobbyist organization that has produced more publications, better publications - no; or maybe as many publications, equal publication - no; how about any publications - still no.
Show me a single hobbyist organization that does a better job of judging any marque - no; has judged more vehicles -no; has presented more awards to deserving vehicles and owner - no; has trained more members in the judging process- still no.
NCRS is far more than judging, always has been always will be, those that set on the sideline and complain and never participate will seldom realize that.
That does not mean we can't improve, does not mean we haven't improved either.

[Domenic T.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Roy,
I see your frustration and agree with you as I am relativily new and I am sorry if that was supposed to end the post but I do want to say that what I see here is what makes NCRS so great.
There are ones out there willing to say whats on there mind and I have found myself changing gears when a new opinion comes up sometimes.
There is always more to learn about things once we (as a group)think we know it all.
It is the best (NCRS), and I take the good with the bad and we have far more +s than -s.

DOM

[Clark K.]

Re: inconsistant judging

I surely agree that there are inconsistencies in NCRS Flight judging from meet to meet. Many of us feel your pain.

I wish that NCRS would make the judging guides THE STANDARD, no matter what some "expert" judge thinks. First, make sure that the judging guides are dead to nuts correct and tell the wind bag judges to go by the written standard or go home. If you could just go by the judging guide when doing restoration work, it would be easier to Top Flight (not to mention fairer).

I know too many guys who own correct Corvettes who would never go back to NCRS due to frustrations such as yours. Too many of the expert judges go by what is on their original car and fail to take into consideration all the myriad changes in Corvette parts over that model year. -Clark

[Jim D.]

Re: inconsistant judging

First, make sure that the judging guides are dead to nuts correct and tell the wind bag judges to go by the written standard or go home. If you could just go by the judging guide when doing restoration work, it would be easier to Top Flight (not to mention fairer).
Clark

That would be a great start. Unfortunately, even after being notified of inconsistencies, the guides remain in error.

Jim

[Paul J.]

Re: inconsistant judging

In any event whenever a block is removed of its original number and re stamped with another VIN the reason is to deceive. The deception can be for as little as to gain points on the judging field or as major as to acquire big money selling the car once the show field award is achieved. The implication of the re stamped engine block is appear as original manufactured situation still in intact. But far be it from the truth is it is only an imitation of the original.

When the vehicle was created the major items were stamped with a serial number or a derivative of it that is associated with one and only one vehicle. It is not interchangeable with another vehicle and representing the same intent. To recreate this serial number on another piece is deception.

The legal world has no issue when pieces are removed and replaced that do not contain serial number. There is no intent to deceive here other than to improve the condition or appearance.

Replacing serial numbered pieces from another vehicle WITHOUT recreation of serial numbers is NOT deception as nothing is "covered up".

What you've said is true, and if a restamped block (or part) is sold under false pretense then that is covered under the articles of fraud. None of it has anything to do with Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 113 or any of the State laws cited therein.

With respect to your comments on deception and judging, then I understand that you feel that putting correct or reproduction parts on a car that were not original would be wrong (not illegal unless it was sold as original, just wrong). Even though the part numbers and dates were not tampered with, the purpose is to "deceive" the judges and gain points.

[Chuck S.]

Re: inconsistant judging

I find it very informative reading about judging inconsistencies and why NCRS attends specific events from individuals that admittedly do not participate, but have all the answers. Or maybe I should say very informative reading comments of those with half empty glasses.
Show me a single hobbyist organization that has produced more publications, better publications - no; or maybe as many publications, equal publication - no; how about any publications - still no.
Show me a single hobbyist organization that does a better job of judging any marque - no; has judged more vehicles -no; has presented more awards to deserving vehicles and owner - no; has trained more members in the judging process- still no.
NCRS is far more than judging, always has been always will be, those that set on the sideline and complain and never participate will seldom realize that.
That does not mean we can't improve, does not mean we haven't improved either.

I've expressed opinions here about NCRS judging based on past experience, and some related cases from the past, and...as Dom said, this thread has made me rethink conclusions formed years ago.

NCRS HAS improved a lot since I've been a member, and you are one of the primary reasons. I don't think you should take any comments here as critical of the progress that's been made.

If we're concentrating on NCRS judging in this thread, it's because that was the original poster's topic. He's expressed what seems to be justifiable frustration. Some of us "know it alls" have thought we could help his understanding, but our "experience" might be dated. If you prefer to handle threads like this one, I would rather defer to your position and expertise.

[Terry M.]

Re: inconsistent judging

I believe the reason paint became consistent is because the judges can only use their eyesight. No magnifying glass or broach buster.

If the pad was judged with the naked eye and experience I would expect less inconsistency. You look at the pad, if it looks good it passes.

Har4ry, Please show me where using magnification on the exterior or a Corvette is prohibited in judging. I need some edumication.

[Terry M.]

Re: inconsistant judging

That would be a great start. Unfortunately, even after being notified of inconsistencies, the guides remain in error.

Jim

Jim, Please define "notification."

Remember the judging standard is Typical Factory Production (TFP). That means the Team Leader, with the manual revision team, has to decide what configuration or finish constitutes TFP before that information goes into the judging manual.

One original car, regardless who owns it, does not necessarily constitute TFP. It is one data point. There are countless threads on here of folks looking for more data points for specific items, and if they had 20 responses they would be quite happy. Yet that percentage of production for a given year is worfully low, even for some of th elow production C1 years.

[Roy S.]

Re: inconsistant judging

I've expressed opinions here about NCRS judging based on past experience, and some related cases from the past, and...as Dom said, this thread has made me rethink conclusions formed years ago.

NCRS HAS improved a lot since I've been a member, and you are one of the primary reasons. I don't think you should take any comments here as critical of the progress that's been made.

If we're concentrating on NCRS judging in this thread, it's because that was the original poster's topic. He's expressed what seems to be justifiable frustration. Some of us "know it alls" have thought we could help his understanding, but our "experience" might be dated. If you prefer to handle threads like this one, I would rather defer to your position and expertise.

Chuck, Believe me my comment was strictly judging related, you were not the target of my response, those that participate and understand such as yourself are not the individuals that point fingers and draw conclusions based on uninformed opinions with half empty glasses.

[Dick W.]

Re: inconsistant judging

I surely agree that there are inconsistencies in NCRS Flight judging from meet to meet. Many of us feel your pain.

I wish that NCRS would make the judging guides THE STANDARD, no matter what some "expert" judge thinks. First, make sure that the judging guides are dead to nuts correct and tell the wind bag judges to go by the written standard or go home.

First let me tell you about another organization that has judged their cars a lot longer that we have. I have restored many cars other than Corvettes. We were finishing up a vehicle that was over 70 years old when we get updates to that marque's judging guidelines. There were over 100 revisions to what had been published.

A lot of effort, by a lot of volunteers, go into the information in these manuals. The manuals are written around what is observed and documented on original vehicles. Every effort possible is made to eliminate any and all errors, but sometimes a few slip thru.

Some of the most vocal complainers have never had their car judged or contributed one **** thing to the betterment of the manuals. 'nuff said

[Don H.]

Re: inconsistant judging

I surely agree that there are inconsistencies in NCRS Flight judging from meet to meet. Many of us feel your pain.

I wish that NCRS would make the judging guides THE STANDARD, no matter what some "expert" judge thinks. First, make sure that the judging guides are dead to nuts correct and tell the wind bag judges to go by the written standard or go home. If you could just go by the judging guide when doing restoration work, it would be easier to Top Flight (not to mention fairer).

I know too many guys who own correct Corvettes who would never go back to NCRS due to frustrations such as yours. Too many of the expert judges go by what is on their original car and fail to take into consideration all the myriad changes in Corvette parts over that model year. -Clark

Clark,
do not hold your breath waiting for this to happen. Production line cars built 100s per day, in pretty primitive conditions means 1000s of variations in every aspect of the automobile. Really, the Guides do quite a good job I think of identifying what is acceptible as TFP. There is always going to be subjectivity unless they make Watson the sole judge. Watson would have a tough time getting to a National, six Regionals, and dozens of Chapter meets every year to judge all the cars that members of this club want to participate in. We're gonna have to rely on people to do it, and they all have different levels of experience, aptitude and pre-conceived ideas.
I say, make your car the best you can via the meets and the Club literature, this Board, and all the input from the members of this club. Drive your car a lot, have it judged if you want, and enjoy the hobby. Don't sweat the inconsistencies. It's not life and death (....I know, some of you would say it's more important than that)

[Mark D.]

Re: inconsistant judging

If you could just go by the judging guide when doing restoration work, it would be easier to Top Flight.-Clark

You've boiled it down nicely, Clark.

It is my opinion each member should download the judging sheets for their car. Pour a good hot cup of coffee or bourbon and then proceed to judge your own car fairly (I know you'll do this so, I'm not worried.) When finished, mail the completed judging sheets to Roy along with a nominal fee of, say, $1.00 (please send postal service collect.) Roy can then simply see your final percentage score and mail you your certificate...for free.

Now, as for the PV...

[Mark D.]

Re: inconsistant judging

tell the wind bag-Clark

Pot, meet Kettle.

[Michael W.]

Re: inconsistant judging

You've boiled it down nicely, Clark.

It is my opinion each member should download the judging sheets for their car. Pour a good hot cup of coffee or bourbon and then proceed to judge your own car fairly (I know you'll do this so, I'm not worried.) When finished, mail the completed judging sheets to Roy along with a nominal fee of, say, $1.00 (please send postal service collect.) Roy can then simply see your final percentage score and mail you your certificate...for free.

Now, as for the PV...

Mark,

This just proves that you fly-boys are light years behind in technology. Simply self inspect the car with your Iphone or Ipad in hand (with the Flight Judging app installed) and allow it to calculate and wirelessly print the appropriate flight certificate.

Mailing stuff back and forth? Pffft. Back to work Gramps- watch out for the geese.