inconsistant judging

[Leonard W.]

This has been bugging me for awhile. I've been to two local chapter meets to have my car judged and after the first time I tried to correct some of the things that were incorrect so that I could get Top Flight because I wasn't off by much. So the second time I go and things that they said were correct the first time (such as engine stamping, etc) were no longer correct, which was a huge deduction. I even had my previous year judging sheets. They told me it was up to each judge. I spent alot of money and time to get the car right and it was very disappointing. I'm afraid to put more into the car because it just seems very inconsistant. Glad I got this off my chest.

[Stephen L.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Leonard, That is very discouraging for you. Was there a satisfactory explanation of why the engine didn't pass? Did you pursue the decision with the lead judge?

Remember, judges are human and in many instances the condition of the stamping is very subjective. I would suggest that you continue to "fix" the inexpensive items and enjoy the car and hobby to its fullest. There are so many things to be learned about your Corvette and cars in general from NCRS people. I find it both challenging and gratifying to address every detail of the car and make it as close to original as possible. I try to do all the work myself. The end result will be a car you can be extremely proud of at the local car shows and cruise-ins.

Join your local chapter or go to another meet as a sportsman (not judged), ask the appropriate engine judge, as a favor, to take a look at your stamp and offer an explanation. I think they'd be happy to help you out and also help you understand how he arrived at the conclusion.

[Chris E.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Leonard,

Steve's advice is great, lots of content there for your to consider.

Additionally, I'd ask this. What else was inconsistent from one chapter meet to the next? Certainly, the engine pad is a big deal. But what else?

The reason I'm asking is that I found between my first two chapter meets a great deal of consistency. However, when I went to Regionals, more things were brought to my attention.

Help us better understand what was inconsistent and we can offer explanations as to why that might be.

[Chuck S.]

Re: inconsistant judging

...So the second time I go and things that they said were correct the first time (such as engine stamping, etc) were no longer correct, which was a huge deduction. I even had my previous year judging sheets. They told me it was up to each judge...

Actually...it's NOT up to each judge; that's why we have judging guides; to make judging and restoration objective.

Everything, however, is not in the judging guides (and everything that's in the guides is NOT guaranteed correct in 100% of the cases); the quality of judging is often dependent on the interests, knowledge, and thoroughness of the individual judges. The fact that a judge overlooks something at the chapter level does not mean that he has tacitly said it's OK...it just means you got credit for a shortcoming out of benign neglect. Truth is still truth; correct engine stamps, dates, etc. can still only be one way...the day of reckoning has just been postponed.

At the chapter level, my experience is there is even more emphasis on making the experience fun for everyone. It's more laid back, most of the participants are local friends, and evaluation that should be objective somehow becomes more subjective, and it's usually in the favor of the owner.

My advice...one chapter judging should reveal some glaring errors, and another set of chapter judges will reveal even more. You're probably ready to bump it up to the regional level now. When the regional judges introduce themselves, express your desire to make your car the best it can be, and request as much commentary as they can provide with the time available.

[Domenic T.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Could it be that the judges learned more about the enjine pad after it was judged the first time?

DOM

[Domenic T.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Could it be that the judges learned more about the enjine pad after it was judged the first time?

DOM

I want to clarify what I was trying to say in this post.

What I meant was that from what I read in these posts, it makes me believe we (NCRS) are finding out things about fonts and other things that we didn't know about before.

I do agree that things should be concistant untill changed.

DOM

[Chuck S.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Perhaps, Dom, but I suspect this is a case of one chapter level judge being better informed than another, and not a new discovery for NCRS collectively. I hope there has been a misunderstanding on Leonard's engine stamp because that's a deficiency that's hard to overcome.

Leonard is not the first to complain about inconsistent judging; it's a lament heard here before. For a first time restorer, it's tough to do your best as directed, only to be told by a judge it's wrong...it should be this way; only to fix it as redirected, and then be told by the next judge that, no, it was right the way it was before.

My objective has always been to be as informed as possible before I did the restoration, and then if a judge has a problem with something, either be in agreement for just cause, or just disagree, appeal, or move on. For Leonard, I think the best strategy is move to next level; there's no guarantee that will be free of frustration either. But...team leaders are often in attendance at regional meets, and will have input on judge selection; judges should be the best qualified in attendance.

[Jerry W.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Excuse me...But i'm a little confused....Engines wear out....blocks must be decked for repair.....If an original Flint engine with correct casting dates is decked and restamped using the correct size and font style after replicating broach marks would that not be representative of what it was when it left the factory ?

[John H.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Excuse me...But i'm a little confused....Engines wear out....blocks must be decked for repair.....If an original Flint engine with correct casting dates is decked and restamped using the correct size and font style after replicating broach marks would that not be representative of what it was when it left the factory ?

Jerry -

It would be if the stampings and broach marks were typical of factory production; that's the determination the judges have to make.

[Terry M.]

Re: inconsistant judging

This has been bugging me for awhile. I've been to two local chapter meets to have my car judged and after the first time I tried to correct some of the things that were incorrect so that I could get Top Flight because I wasn't off by much. So the second time I go and things that they said were correct the first time (such as engine stamping, etc) were no longer correct, which was a huge deduction. I even had my previous year judging sheets. They told me it was up to each judge. I spent alot of money and time to get the car right and it was very disappointing. I'm afraid to put more into the car because it just seems very inconsistent. Glad I got this off my chest.

The entire NCRS judging system is based on volunteers. The judging is entirely dependent on who shows up that day. We all hope that people with the skills to do the job will offer their services, just as they hope that car owners will bring their pride & joy for judging. Both parts of that equation have to function, and perform well, for the day to be a success.

As has been pointed out judges have an obligation to explain to the owner the reasons for their deductions, and there is an appeals process for the owner who questions those decisions.

In leading the Advanced Judging Seminars, it has been my experience that folks more often comment on the consistency of judging than the flaws -- but the system is not perfect.

Don't take you bat and ball and go home. Hold the judge's feet to the fire to explain their deduction -- and if you still don't agree take your appeal to the next level. The system is in place to serve the car owner, but the owner has to make it work for him by using that system. It (the system) only gets better through use.

[Jerry W.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Thank You for the answer....Should one tell the judges that it is a "restamp" after decking to replicate the factory condition or should you let them evualate weather it is the "original" machining and stamping ?...It would have to age a number of years to look original.

lots of posts here always refer to VIN stampings....."is it original" or "a restamp"

[Pat M.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Everything, however, is not in the judging guides (and everything that's in the guides is NOT guaranteed correct in 100% of the cases); the quality of judging is often dependent on the interests, knowledge, and thoroughness of the individual judges.

For a first time restorer, it's tough to do your best as directed, only to be told by a judge it's wrong...it should be this way; only to fix it as redirected, and then be told by the next judge that, no, it was right the way it was before.

Chuck's dead nuts on, and it's just the way it is, despite most judges' best efforts. As I've often said the real challenge is to get the award you're after knowing you'll face these inequities. But not everyone understands this, particularly those being judged for the first few times.

The entire NCRS judging system is based on volunteers. The judging is entirely dependent on who shows up that day. We all hope that people with the skills to do the job will offer their services, just as they hope that car owners will bring their pride & joy for judging. Both parts of that equation have to function, and perform well, for the day to be a success.

As has been pointed out judges have an obligation to explain to the owner the reasons for their deductions, and there is an appeals process for the owner who questions those decisions.

In leading the Advanced Judging Seminars, it has been my experience that folks more often comment on the consistency of judging than the flaws -- but the system is not perfect.

Don't take you bat and ball and go home. Hold the judge's feet to the fire to explain their deduction -- and if you still don't agree take your appeal to the next level. The system is in place to serve the car owner, but the owner has to make it work for him by using that system. It (the system) only gets better through use.

VERY well said Terry.

[Stan E.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Leonard, I carted my old Vette around 5000 miles for a Duntov and felt the same at one point. One day it dawned on me that overall it works out OK in the end. stan 19259

[Pat M.]

Re: inconsistant judging

I carted my old Vette around 5000 miles for a Duntov

Interesting analysis. I carted my 70 around 4200 miles for my Duntov. Although, that includes 820 miles for a failed PV. And yes, it was worth it in the end.

[Chuck S.]

Re: inconsistant judging

...Should one tell the judges that it is a "restamp" after decking to replicate the factory condition or should you let them evualate weather it is the "original" machining and stamping ?...It would have to age a number of years to look original.

My opinion would be...NO. Be attentive to their requests, but keep that and other "confessions" to yourself.

First, it's their job to know a ringer when they see one.

Second, in my opinion, most judges would prefer to make an objective evaluation without prejudicial prior knowledge.

As unlikely as it is, the goal of the NCRS restorer is to make the pad appear like it was stamped last month. Weathering (darkening) should play no part in the evaluation of originality even though a fresh appearing pad would likely be an indication of possible "restoration". The judge has to look for the appearance of original broach machining...if he doesn't find that appearance, then his suspicion will be confirmed. Edit: I am NOT saying that all original pads have broach marks that are clearly visible to the naked eye. What I am saying is if your pad appears to be in freshly machined condition, modern rotary broach marks will immediately confirm that it's not typical factory production.