Forum Concerns on Judging

[V63]

All of this reminds me why I have ZERO interest in the whole judging conundrum. Do we really need it to appreciate our hobby? Look at how crazy the corvette hobby has become with all the numbers. Less is more sometimes!

[Tom Hall 7485]

Mike Josephic, I believe you are a fine person with the club's best interests at heart, and I appreciate your defense of our Chief Judge.  I shall edit my comment above to lessen its harshness.  I am aware that I have some sharp edges.

The fact remains, though, that this club failed to ask the membership whether we wanted judging changed; what changes we might like; and over what period of time those proposed changes should be implemented.  The Chief Judge already had a lot on his plate when he was appointed Chief Judge, and for that reason alone, another person should possibly have been appointed Chief Judge.  (He was then Director of Technical Services (oversight of the Authenticity Manual program, etc.) and if I am not mistaken, also supervisor of Museum construction, or soon would have that role).  He and the other members of The Closed Circle of Chairs quickly began changing our judging, abolishing Senior Division (maybe for good reason, but I wouldn't know what that reason is because the case for it was not made very conspicuously); changing award names, and adding things that don't make life any easier for us.  This was not work that urgently needed to be done.  "Old judging", while flawed, was at least familiar.  (One of its main difficulties is that staffing needs are so great that exhibitors sometimes need to judge, meaning that they have to be at their cars for one part of the judging, but serve as judges during another part of the judging -- nearly the dilemma of having to be in two places at once.  This problem requires very clever planning of shifts and is not treated by revising Mr. Steig's carefully chosen words in the old judging manual or adding classes of cars and new display areas.)

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

All of this reminds me why I have ZERO interest in the whole judging conundrum. Do we really need it to appreciate our hobby?

The short answer is that more Club members prefer judging to be an integral part of the CLC than those that do not.

Nobody is imposing participation in the judging process on anyone who simply prefers displaying his/her car. If that isn't enough to satisfy the anti-judging crowd, I don't know what is.

[druby]

Any board members reading.........Tom has a very valid point that should be addressed.

[Dan LeBlanc]

Tom, you make another excellent point.  I think there was a bit of cart before the horse.  It was no secret that we had a problem in the judge's pool that needed to be addressed first.  Logical step number one would be get more judges and then do the education bit.  THEN, once you have EDUCATED judges, then you change the judging criteria.

I remember in Lake George, one lady on the team judging my 61 made the comment to me that she knew next to nothing about 61/62's and was put there.  Thankfully, Jim Eccleston was the team captain and I was in good hands knowing that here score was going to be thrown out (if I recall correctly, under the old system, four judges judged and either the highest or lowest - maybe both - scores were factored out).

Like Eric says though, whether I agree or disagree with the new judging rules, it wouldn't stop me either from attending a GN.  Our plan is to attend in 2021 in New Jersey with the 70.  It will be a display only car, and I likely won't participate in judging either, but I'll still enjoy my time there seeing some old friends and meeting some new ones.

[cadillacmike68]

"The Closed Circle of Chairs" - I Like it

[Mike Josephic CLC #3877]

[ Logical step number one would be get more judges and then do the education bit.  THEN, once you have EDUCATED judges, then you change the judging criteria./quote]

Dan, your comment doesn't make any sense.  Let's say we
manage to recruit new judges -- then educate them with the
"Old Rules".  Then you turn around and tell them "sorry
folks, we now have a new rulebook" --  can you imagine how
confused these new recruits would be?

Sorry that you had an inexperienced judge in Lake George,
but that is an issue in all clubs.  I'll relate a short story from
an ACCA meet when I had my 1955 Eldorado up for a First
Senior.  One of the judges looked under the hood and smiled
to me and said:  "Wow -- I love those trip deuces on your car".

Yes, he was serious.  As we all know the 1955 had dual quads.


Mike

[Dan LeBlanc]

No. My comment was to educate them on what they're looking at and what it should look like to be correct first THEN tighten up the requirements. What's the sense in having stringent requirements if judges don't have experience in what should be correct?

Not that all judges are like that but there should be an established baseline.

[gkhashem]

I am reading this in amusement. I have made comments before about this topic and was shut down immediately. They were about the process and not about the people.

They were also less personal than what I have read here. Yes some of the comments are VERY personal, but to be honest there is some degree of truth in them. But I will not detail my personal experiences with some of the powers that be.

But with that being said. You can try to educate all you want but people need to really work at this when they start to judge. The people who judge have to take it seriously and educate themselves too.  They need not only to go to a seminar but read the Judging Manual. 

Also people who enter the cars need to read the manual!! If you do you would not be whining about this deduction or that if you are being honest with yourself about your car. I read the manual did what I wanted to do and did enough to have 2 Primary winners and a Senior Crown winner. I did my homework, so if you do yours you can decide if you want to put in the work. If you don't you don't win. It's that easy.

Also how about giving an authenticity manual to all who judge a particular class? Also making sure an expert in the class is with each team. But at the end of the day it will be inconsistent to a point since well people are people. They can be inconsistent.

I have felt I know more about the process than some of the judges, why? I read the manual!!!!

My biggest issue with the new rules are not throwing out the high and low scores. Since I know scores can vary from my experience, but when I discussed this in private with the proper people I got shut down and ignored. So there is a culture problem here too.  Where input was not appreciated nor wanted. I have mentioned this to a few other board people but have been ignored. But as a 3 time winner you would think my opinion might be respected and considered.

[Jason Edge]

No. My comment was to educate them on what they're looking at and what it should look like to be correct first THEN tighten up the requirements.

Dan, I am curious what "correct" means in this context? The  judging process includes operational (e.g. do the turn signals work), workmanship (e.g. are your valve cover covered in grease), condition (e.g. is the chrome on your bumpers pitting) and authenticity (is it like it was delivered new to the 1st owner?).  Authenticity is just 1 of 4 criteria.
To successfully judge a car everyone needs to read and know the Judging Manual, and you need at least one authenticity expert on the team. You do not need 4 authenticity experts.  If the suggestion is that you need 4 experts on every team I disagree. Almost anyone can help in the way of operational, workmanship and condition.  As I noted in another thread you can lose a lot more points by way of operational, workmanship and condition deductions than a few authenticity issues. 
If your comment was to educate in general regarding how to deduct for condition, workmanship, and inoperative items, as well as authenticity I tend to agree to a point. As noted in the old judges manual, most of us car guys and gals are pretty good judges as to whether or not something operates (works), condition and workmanship, and feel a refresher, like the new one-day workshops where several can go over a car they may not be familiar with, is a good thing. Getting 4 SMEs on one class of car at a GN will be a stretch!  I've judged in classes I am not as familiar with (19 and 21) and as long as I had that someone to turn to quickly for guidance on authenticity issues I felt capable to judge regarding operation, workmanship and condition.  Just  my 2 cents.

[Mike Josephic CLC #3877]

Jason makes some excellent points that make sense.

Having one expert on "Authenticity" on a team is
sufficient.  That person should be the Team Captain.
You only become an "expert" in this area either
because you (1) have judged that particular class for
a number of years (2) have restored a car in that class
(3) have helped write an authenticity manual for that
class.

If you think those requirements are impossible to
meet -- they are not because I've done them as have
others.  Experience is your most valuable friend here.

Authenticity is one subject that can be taught only on
a limited basis.  Every class has slightly different
nuances and any educational effort, at best, can only
give a novice an overall idea of what items need to
be looked at -- but not what all of the correct details
should be.

Mike

[The Tassie Devil(le)]

In 2008 at Cherry Hill, I entered my car, and it was placed in with all the other like-years, and looked really nice.

BUT, when it came to judging, I opted out simply because (to me) it wasn't worth wasting the judges time, as it would have rated so lowly in the scale that the points would not have gone low enough.

I found out that if I initially didn't want it judged, I would have been parked off to the side, and probably out of sight.

I felt proud that it was parked with its' like years, and have some lovely pictures of the event.   Actually a lot of pictures.  Would have had more pictures if the hotel hadn't been locked-down, blocking me from returning to my room to get replacement batteries.

The only awards I usually receive is Longest Distance, and Hard Luck.

Bruce.

PS.   My problem with the awards is that there are so many, and the Awards Ceremony (Dinner) goes on for so long that after the first 20 are presented, the masses get bored, and don't appreciate those receivers toward the end of the night.   Heck, I have seen people actually leave the venue well before the end.

[Greg Powers]

I must say that I am pleased to see that I am not the only one with some questions that I think need to be addressed. I also hope that the club officers are aware that there are some concerns as to how decisions are made and implemented. I also do not want to speak ill of any person but collectively I think we as a club should have had an opportunity for input before all the changes were made. I don't have my Cadillacs judged because I know their flaws and still find great enjoyment with them. I do wish for those that want to have their cars judged the very best and fair judging system that our club can offer. I do agree that there needs to be more incentive for members to become judges but I'm not sure what that is. I think that there have been some good suggestions made by others in this post. Perhaps an opportunity for a survey from the club of all registered judges and interested members.

[Cape Cod Fleetwood]

...Also people who enter the cars need to read the manual!!...
...why? I read the manual!!!!...

Jeez, I said I read the manual and was immediately indicted here like a felon...

So there is a culture problem here too.  Where input was not appreciated nor wanted. I have mentioned this to a few other board people but have been ignored. But as a 3 time winner you would think my opinion might be respected and considered.

Ah! I'm so glad its not just 'me' being told to go sit in the corner! 

It seems we need more judges? I have an idea, HEY, keep reading -
Imagine more people becoming interested in showing their cars...
That should result in more people becoming interested in the judging process...
Which could result in more people becoming interested in becoming judges...
None of which is going to happen if you're compelled to spend 10's of thousands to be competitive
in the simple 'touring' class.

If there was a class that recognized what the majority of CLC members owned (cruisers), that would be
a step forward in 1) getting new members, 2) getting new members interested in showing, 3) getting new
members interested in showing interested in judging.

Survey the membership, by email, snail mail, heck Survey Monkey. As soon as you determine what type of car is owned by the majority of the membership, you'll know where to spend your time and focus your efforts for growth in showing, judging, membership, club income, etc...

I'll go sit in the corner again...

\m/
Laurie

[gkhashem]

Laurie

I think your missing the point so I will try to be diplomatic and more exact about what I am saying. Not all opinions are equal. Sorry in today's world we are told to respect all opinions and on and on. But an opinion without any experience attached to it should not bear as much weigh as one born of experience and knowledge. Now with that being said you can have an opinion but is it a well  based one?

So in this matter people who give an opinion on CLC judging should gather up the knowledge and combine that with experience before they are all bent on changing the rules.

So I will repeat again what I said before.

You learn the rules by reading the rule book, in this case the CLC Judging Manual. (which is available on the CLC website)

Also you gain experience by attending a CLC GN to see how the manual rules are applied in the real world.

To do one without the other is not a good idea too. I think some who have been to the CLC GN may have not read the rules too. Well if you have done both then present all the ideas you want.

Then your opinion carries more weigh since it is well based in knowledge and experience. Until you gain the knowledge and experience your opinion is not as good until you do. Which is not saying you cannot have an opinion but maybe you should recognize that you could be wrong until you have that knowledge and experience.

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Well said George.

[Cape Cod Fleetwood]

Well said George.

Eric, I have the feeling you and I aren't going to hang out and get plastered at a GN...

\m/
Laurie

[Jason Edge]

Many have expressed concerns and made accusations in this latest thread on CLC GN Judging that are not completely accurate and some are outright false. I wanted to point out a few things for those non-CLC members and those with what I call selective memory:

First: Chief Judge Bill Anderson posted a periodic Chief Judges Blog on the old Web Site starting at least back in January 2015 (I have 4 in my hand spanning Jan to July 2015). He discussed various changes that were under consideration, changes that were being made and how they were being phased in.  It covered the new judging scoring process, the new divisions, the new Judges Recognition Program, the new Judges Training Workshop to provide hands on training.  He ended his blogs with the comment: "Your questions and comments about CLC Judging and what the future holds for it are always welcome".   I remember sending him a 2 page write-up on some of my concerns and suggestions. He was very receptive to my feedback. I had at that point maybe judged 2 or 3 events. Definitely not a senior judge, but someone with some ideas, and he listened and provided feedback.  I remember one of the key points was don't let the cars leave the show field so early as had happened at Lake George. I was happy to later see the "Can't leave before 4pm rule". I know I was just one voice, regarding that concern, but still feel that my voice added to the chorus and made a difference.

Second: There were several articles related to the new Judging process in the Self-Starter. Bill Anderson introduced himself and explained his experience and vision back in 2014 followed by several articles in 2015. For example the March 2015 Self-Starter gave an overview of the Future of CLC Judging", followed by a Preparing for the 2015 GN article in the April 2015 Self-Starter. In these articles he explained this was being phased in over a 2+ year time frame. So it was not thrust on us overnight. There was even a practice run at a regional meet before the 1st GN to use the new process in 2017.

Third: there are general surveys after each GN, and judging surveys sent out after the Grand National's where we can provide feedback on the show field, CLC judging. etc.  Not to mention we can all simply call or email Bill.

Fourth: CLC members can volunteer to join committees and become part of the solution.  The committees are always looking for new volunteers that can bring new ideas and energy to the table.  I remember looking at some of the judging committee members and felt they were in very capable hands. As director of the 63/64 Cadillac Chapter and someone that knows a bit about those 2 year model years, I saw 1st hand some of the work being done by the committee by some of their intense questioning I received on tires, and other judging criteria. They asked, I told them what I knew and they listened.  (Go to the tire section on the 2018 Judging Manual for 63/64 Cadillacs... that came from me!)

Finally: Bill Anderson is a no-nonsense get it done type of person. He is not one to sit around chew the fat on coulda, woulda, shoulda type things. So he had an idea in late 2014 on how to improve our judging process based on his many years of experience, brought together a knowledgeable committee, kept us informed via blogs, Self-Starter Articles, surveys and personal contact, and saw the new process implemented 3 years later in summer 2017, and continues to fine tune it here in 2018. 

I appreciate the questioning and concerns, but would suggest we all try to do less assuming and more assisting as we try to improve the judging process.  Again.. my 2 cents.

[Steve Passmore]

This thread seems to be a continuation of the last one that got padlocked

[Mike Josephic CLC #3877]

From Jason Edge:

appreciate the questioning and concerns, but would suggest we all try to do less assuming and more assisting as we try to improve the judging process.  Again.. my 2 cents.

A well written post -- thank you.  I agree with you.

Less griping and complaining and more stepping up 
to the plate to assist and work with the Club committees
is  needed.  That's what people should do if they are
sincerely interested in effecting change.

Mike