Proposal to Modify CLC Judging Rules for Touring Class (but not for Primary)

[The Tassie Devil(le)]

That is simply the trouble I find with the CLC awards following every GN.

Too many awards given out.   The top marked vehicle should get the 1st prize, the next one down 2nd prize, and the next one, 3rd.

If there are only 3 cars, then only a 1st prize should be given.

Plus, if there are only, say 4 cars being judged, there should only be a 1st and 2nd, and not how Dan describes it.   Sounds a bit like the school awards where every child wins a prize.

Bruce.

[Dan LeBlanc]

AACA makes it a little tougher.  For a First Junior, the minimum score must be 370, AND your car must place within 10 points of the top scoring car in your class to have multiple firsts in the class. So, if you score 371, another car scores 369, and another scores 383, even though two cars both scored the minimum for a first place junior, only the car that scored 383 gets a first, the 371 gets a second, and the 369 gets a second because it was within 10 points of the second place finisher.

Confused yet?   

The car then advances to Senior class.  First senior is minimum 380 points.  That's as high as you can go at a National Meet (Hershey, etc.).  Then to get higher awards, your car must compete at the annual Grand National meet - you must have a Senior from a National Meet to enter.  This is where the cars that score near 400 points (perfect score is 400) show up.

Even more confused yet?      

[76eldo]

Bruce,

I disagree. If you did the work to make your car score in the range to get an award then you should receive the award regardless of how many cars compete.

And then you may run into several cars scoring the same so what do you do about that ?

I think that the rules as they are make sense.

Normally a discussion about judging and scoring is taboo on this board.
Funny how this thread continues and my writing about damaged magazines being received gets locked up.

[jdemerson]

I think the discussions on the forum have been very healthy for our club. The main question or may I say the "elephant in the room" is "How do we put this information into the right hands?" Is there anyone involved with judging criteria seeing any of these discussions? Is this something that CLC Board members need to address? I guess what I'm asking is  "Who is listening?" Or maybe the question should be "Is anybody listening?" - Greg

Glad you raised this point Greg because until someone actually puts forth the effort by bringing these matters to the attention of the appropriate board member(s), these proposals will ultimately go nowhere.

Greg and Eric,

   Your points are well taken. I did not start this thread to initiate a new round of general discussions (and complaints) about our Judging Rules. Rather I made the proposals to offer one possible type of solution to some concerns that have been well-documented here in past posts.  You will find no criticisms in my posts of the current guidelines for Primary Classes or for Preservation. Two important purposes of these proposals have been: 1) To see if others have suggestions for further fleshing out and improving the suggestions I made in the original post; they have and I would adopt several of those ideas, 2) To see if there is enough interest and support to take a proposal forward to Bill and his associates; it appears there's some interest in the general idea of differentiating the Touring Class more clearly from Primary Class, but I'm not sure how much.

   I'm willing to advance a proposal to Bill and the CLC IF there are some folks who would support it and who know and understand the present rules. I'm interested in including in the Touring Classes some cars that are just as nice as those in Primary, but with equipment only adopted in subsequent years by Cadillac Division. I would include cars without points deductions for:

***Radial tires with appearance of originals
***Disc brakes
***Upgrade 6 volts to 12 volts
***Use worm-type hose clamps
***Electric fuel pump
***Modern battery inside a period-correct battery case with original-looking cables
***Undercoating when it was originally applied by the selling dealership (and, yes, Cadillac Division DID approve this and even provided some advice to dealer service departments about it.)
***Vacuum wipers converted to electric
***Air conditioning as supplied by Cadillac in later years, and appearance of Cadillac is maintained (NOT an after-market unit hung below the dash -- but willing to discuss these issues!)
***Original radio and clock converted to modern internals but preserving the original Cadillac appearance

   I'm appreciating those with serious thoughts about a possible expansion of participation in our judged events without "watering down" our standards. I'm not interested in a "one-person crusade" because that isn't how we get to any improvements.

   Please send me an e-mail if you would consider participating in developing and advancing a proposal.  Thank you!

John Emerson
1952 Cadillac Sedan 6219X

[gkhashem]

Bruce,

I disagree. If you did the work to make your car score in the range to get an award then you should receive the award regardless of how many cars compete.

And then you may run into several cars scoring the same so what do you do about that ?

I think that the rules as they are make sense.

Normally a discussion about judging and scoring is taboo on this board.
Funny how this thread continues and my writing about damaged magazines being received gets locked up.

Brian

Absolutely right, people that want only one winner are making some flawed assumptions.

They seem to think judging is a science where no scores deviate and the judges are consistent all the time. Well people are inconsistent and do not kid yourself they will be consistently inconsistent. They will score cars differently from car to car.

Also the one winner game will bring favoritism and along with hard feelings about the whole event. If anyone thinks a judge will not favor their buddy overtly or subconsciously you are kidding yourself.

While I have a few issues with the new CLC judging rules they are very few and much superior to the OCA meet I just went to.

The car is either good enough or not. No politics and when you reach the range for a placing. The score range is wide enough to accomodate some judge error. This is why I do not get all the whining about tires or clamps.

If some things are wrong you can still win. It's when 20 things are wrong you don't win. I am not sure how many times I can say it.

[druby]

Guess what people, I brought 3 vehicles to the 2017 GN and left without and awards, trophies, plaques or anything of the sort. But what I did leave with was much more rewarding. I left with a wealth of information, lasting memories, new friends, and a chance to meet members I never met before ! I've been to several GN over the last 30 years being associated with the CLC as a vendor and participant. There is so much negative talk about "judging" going on, keep in mind that YOUR NOT GOING TO PLEASE EVERYONE ! That's why they make chocolate & vanilla! Instead focus on the many fine things that go on at a GN, if everybody put their car in "display only" and enjoy the company it be a better show to go to and nobody would get "butt hurt" !

[Cape Cod Fleetwood]

There is so much negative talk about "judging" going on, keep in mind that YOUR NOT GOING TO PLEASE EVERYONE ! That's why they make chocolate & vanilla!

Dan, you hit the nail on the head with your post. Judging is based on a stated criteria, and that criteria is  available to the public for consumption/action prior to competition. Its not vanilla and chocolate, its black and white. It should not be a case of 'pleasing anyone' never mind everyone. For fairness it needs to be a case of strict adherence to the stated criteria. Tower clamps + 5, worm clams - 5, etc. Judging at this level is objective, not subjective.

In my imaginary "cruiser class", its just the opposite, purely subjective. "Do you like the car", yes or no, period.

\m/
Laurie

[Jeff Rosansky CLC #28373]

I know this will add fuel to the fire but I saw this in a Corvette at a car show I went to today.
Jeff

[cadillacmike68]

I know this will add fuel to the fire but I saw this in a Corvette at a car show I went to today.
Jeff

OK, as soon as I stop laughing.....  We'll need all the fire extinguishers in the show to put out the flames on this one. 

[druby]

How about "peer judging" for each class, works on the local levels !

[harry s]

How about that big a** Petronix sticker on the Corvette.     Harry

[cadillacmike68]

This one seems to be headed for the lock button too.

I really think that the touring class needs to have Different criteria than primary. This extremely vague sentence in the latest judging manual makes it even more imperative that Touring needs some re-work.

page 3:

"The same standard applies in the Touring
Division, with consideration given during
judging to the effects of regular usage."

So what does that mean when the criteria and scoring sheets and instructions are all the SAME for both classes 

Seriously, the touring class is begging for some changes.

[Cape Cod Fleetwood]

I know this will add fuel to the fire but I saw this in a Corvette at a car show I went to today.
Jeff

LOL!

Did someone say "FUEL"?? Cue the band... Where's Lexi?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1cjHbXdU0s

\m/
Laurie

[Cape Cod Fleetwood]

This one seems to be headed for the lock button too.

I really think that the touring class needs to have Different criteria than primary. This extremely vague sentence in the latest judging manual makes it even more imperative that Touring needs some re-work.

page 3:

"The same standard applies in the Touring
Division, with consideration given during
judging to the effects of regular usage."

So what does that mean when the criteria and scoring sheets and instructions are all the SAME for both classes 

Seriously, the touring class is begging for some changes.

Define 'regular usage' for a show car... Goes to work with you Monday through Friday year round, or goes to a cruise-in twice a month during the good weather?

Dan my imaginary "cruiser class" is exactly that, peer judging. 3 judges, 2 common people. All rate the car on its looks from a score of 1-10. You hate it, you love it, pass the trophy. Some 'rules' would be necessary to keep the true Primary and Touring cars from sandbagging the Cruiser class. I can come up with a few that would be garlic to the vampires...

\m/
Laurie

[quadfins]

So, Mike, write up your proposed guidelines and criteria for changes to the judging manual, and submit them to the Chief Judge. Put in all the details that you think would work.

Then the committee can consider them. You know that term, "Official Channels".

We can talk all we want to on this forum, but unless someone actually takes positive action, you can't expect any changes.

Jim

[jdemerson]

This one seems to be headed for the lock button too.

I really think that the touring class needs to have Different criteria than primary. This extremely vague sentence in the latest judging manual makes it even more imperative that Touring needs some re-work.

page 3:

"The same standard applies in the Touring
Division, with consideration given during
judging to the effects of regular usage."

So what does that mean when the criteria and scoring sheets and instructions are all the SAME for both classes 

Seriously, the touring class is begging for some changes.

Mike, yes I agree fully with your thoughts here. Also, Jim E. is right that there needs to be a thoughtful proposal going to established channels.

It would be helpful to have some general parameters for framing such a proposal before actually trying to write language about Touring Classes for the Judging Manual. Some thoughts:

• Do NOT propose any changes for Primary Classes. Those rules are new, are much improved over what preceded them, and deserve a chance to be applied as is for some more years.
• Add flexibility that would not deduct points for changes that enhance safety and/or functionality, yet that affect appearance minimally if at all.
• Continue to deduct points for non-authenticity when changes made are primarily for appearance or aesthetic reasons.
• Examples of modifications permitted in Touring might include: radial tires  where not originally available, electric fuel pump, conversion of 6 volt to 12 volt, conversion to disc brakes, adding power steering, undercoating where thought to have been applied when car was first sold, add flexibility with hose clamps, permit insulated fuel lines.
• Consider using the SAME numerical cut-offs for awards as in primary class, to the Touring Class is different but NOT just a "lower standard".

Please note that these suggestions are for illustration and specificity in our discussions, and any of them should be open to debate about whether they make reasonable sense in a class that differs from Primary and is called "Touring". Mostly for practical reasons in judging, I'd be reluctant to have a minimal mileage/usage requirement for being considered in "Touring" category.

On a somewhat different note, if the CLC is to consider having a "Cruiser Class" with peer judging by attendees, I think that should NOT be called "Touring Class". "Touring Class" should still be judged by objective stated criteria.

As I said earlier, I'd be quite willing to help (even lead) a team effort to frame a proposal to be forwarded to Bill Anderson, as Jim suggests. I think it needs to be a collaborative effort involving at least three CLC members who have some experience with judging (or at least who have read the Manual and studied the form).

John Emerson
1952 Cadillac Sedan 6219X

[cadillacmike68]

LOL!

Did someone say "FUEL"?? Cue the band... Where's Lexi?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1cjHbXdU0s

\m/
Laurie

Damn Laurie, that was too early in the morning for me. I need to go back to XM's Yacht Rock radio.

[quadfins]

Yes, John, That is precisely what is needed. Thank you.

A method to do it would be to go through both the Judging Manual, and the actual Judging Score Sheet, (both of which are readily available), and making point-by-point suggestions.


And we must keep mind that every change could result in a ripple effect, and every "improvement" might result in one or more new problems. Also, as with any committee system, no one ever gets everything they want. The Judging Committee spent over a year making the recent changes, which ARE an improvement, but as we see, there are unintended consequences, and new toes to be stepped on.

Jim

[jdemerson]

Jim -- Fully agree!!

[druby]

I bet Bill Anderson is sitting back reading all these messages and shaking his head in disbelief over all this mess........lol.