message received loud and clear

[foxfire42]

So.....what I'm hearing is the if the seat upholstery isn't stuffed with cotton in the pleats it should receive deductions. My seats do not have pleats. Where can I find in the JS's how they should appear so no deductions are received? Also there's no reference to what the upholstery material should be. It can be assumed it should probably be similar to or exactly like a Station Wagon, but is it? I don't know.

It's not an ego boost at least for me to build a Blue Ribbon A. Both the A's I put up for judging were unique in some way, rare and had a long traceable history. I felt I owed it to the A's to bring them as far back to their assembly line departure as I was capable of. I'm proud of it but I don't think my head is any bigger than before I started. I competed against the "Book" not any other A. I'm happy for those that received higher scores.

[Mike V. Florida]

I sucks when you work your ass off on a restoration doing what you feel is correct. The work you have done is even "verified" by judges at a national event. Then when you tweek your work the rug is pulled out from under you for the "approved" work you have done.

The question now becomes which event is correct. Without the reason for deductions by the group how does one know?

[Bob Johnson]

I have judged in several regional and one national meet. I have talked to many chief judges about this issue and as of yet I still have questions about the following excerpt from the JS.


In the past, judges may have used their technical knowledge of specific items that were not included in the Guidelines available at the time a vehicle was judged. Individual judges must not use their own ideas, knowledge, interpretations and/or opinions as this puts the owner at a disadvantage when his vehicle is judged against information not in the Guidelines. This practice shall be discontinued.


I usually pose the following. The JS specify the paint colors for each body style / year. However there are no examples of the colors in the JS. If a 1930 Cabriolet is painted yellow and brown how does a judge know if it is the correct yellow and brown. Is canary yellow and light brown acceptable? Most say no it has to be the correct yellow and brown. But there is nothing in the JS that describe the correct colors. If a judge "knows" what the correct shades are and uses that knowledge is that wrong based on the above statement? If you have three judges and one knows exactly what shade the colors are the second knows approximately what the color is, and the third does not know what the correct color of yellow then what information do you use. The first will deduct points for any color other than the "correct" yellow. The second will deduct points for yellows that are not close to the original color. The last will give full points for any yellow. My conclusion here is that the amount of deduction may depend on the "technical knowledge" of the judge making the deductions.

The above example of paint color is just one of many areas that I could have used.

Bob

[jw hash]

here is what the standards say and a copy of what they gave me.
" scoring should be done by deducting points from the area total. when two or more judges are selected to judge an area,((( the judge having the highest certification ))) shall enter the judging points on the score sheets after a consensus has been reached. point deductions that exceed 30% or more of the total for the area shall be explained in writing and initialed by the judge. such deductions shall be reviewed by the team captain. if the judge fails to explain deductions over 30% the judge sheets will be returned to him for completion.


well said Bob

[asapguy]

I was a team captain at Puyallup, my team judged three area (not interiors). Two members of my team were master judges & helped write & update the JS. They were very tough on the area they judged & they knew it well. On other other hand I have entered my 68C in fine point judging six times & not in the last six yrs. The points have varied from 352 at the lowest to two award of excellence's, 411 & 419. The restoration on this car was completed in 1972 so it's a 40+ yr. resto. I once got full pts.(15) in an area & the next time it was judged a red alert & received 7 pts. in that same area with only 50 miles diff. between the judging. Judging is subjective & depends how the judges feels, it shouldn't be that way but it is. I solved the problem by no longer having any of my Model A's judged.

[mshmodela]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

All Dog and Pony shows are based upon who you know... Don't waste your time when the odds are with the house as it their game, their rules.

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

Originally Posted by Merc Cruzer

Seems like Marco have a conflict of interest in judging cars where they have not done the interior. Just my opinion.

Marco's comments above speaks for his perceived conflict of interest however please allow me to expound on this perception as it applies to the entire Judging process, and not him. What Bob said above is what I have preached over & over yet it continues to happen. l will drop that topic and address the conflict of interest issue...


Imagine the perception of a ‘conflict of interest’ if a Little League Baseball umpire had a sideline business where he was a pitching coach mentoring a few of the same kids he is calling a ballgame on! Could this cause any controversy? What would the public reaction be if a T-Shirt Shop business owner sold jerseys to a few of the football teams, AND was also a Referee during a few of their games? Imagine a local race track’s Tech Inspector going out for a few beers with a team after a race?? In each of these scenarios the individuals did not necessarily do anything unlawful or unethical …however the general perception of their behavior leaves room for doubt, speculation, and questions, ....and that is why each of these hypothetical officials should abstain from being placed in such a situation.

The same mindset can be applied for MARC/MAFCA judging practices. When you have a Team Captain making judgment calls in an area where they have a financial stake, it simply “looks bad” for everyone. I would venture a guess that maybe 50% of the recent 23 area Team Captains receive some sort of financial compensation for their items which are installed on vehicles in competition. Contrary to the way an 'insider' spins it, this just has the appearance of "looking bad" for the judging process. Therefore, if someone sells Model-A tools to the very hobbyist who will have them displayed in competition, then they ethically should not be a Team Captain. If someone is a Team Captain over Area 22, AND throughout the year they also sell restored hubcaps, valve stems, and other items pertaining to that area, then ethically they shouldn’t be a Team Captain over that area. If someone derives their living ( -receives compensation) making/installing interiors, tops, etc., then they should abstain from being a Team Captain over that area. This should also apply for Restoration Shop owners who have vehicles in competition at that show, and should apply for anything --no matter how small or insignificant (Horns, Wipers, Pinstriping, etc.) where compensation has been made in exchange for an item that is installed on the vehicle entered into that competition. Folks, this just looks bad when this happens!!

Now I am NOT saying, …suggesting, …nor implying anything unethical has happened by any person mentioned above, however it is the mere perception by the public's eye that it could happen which creates the image issue. We live in a day and time where transparency is expected by someone in a controlling situation and this is no different. As it stands right now with the way the judging process is being handled, it casts a dark shadow that sets a very negative tone to the public’s eye regarding judging, -most importantly including those hobbyists who have spent vast amounts of time & money on a vehicle entered into competition!

To me it is a simple fix to get headed in the right direction. A Team Captain needs to make a choice which is more important to them, selling goods/services in an area they want to judge, OR being a Team Captain. If they choose to continue selling goods/services, then they should step away from being a Team Captain and only be involved in the capacity as a team-member Judge. Then if the Team Captain is being moral and ethical in his/her duty, they will make sure the appearance of favoritism or partisanship does not occur. While that may not be the perfect solution, it is a huge step in the right direction in my view.

In addition to this, I believe Team Captains should be ‘judged’ on their performance by both team-member Judges AND the car owners of vehicles in competition. It is my view that a Team Captain has certain responsibilities to the car owner where only legitimate deductions need to be made, and clearly written & legible reasons for the deduction need to be listed on the sheet. If a Team Captain chooses to use unethical behavior (such as deducting for items not specified in the J/S book) or not writing reasons on the score sheet, then they should receive a poor grading score on their performance in that role, ...and as such are subject to being barred or placed on probation if their practices continue. The only ones that would feel this mindset being ludicrous are likely the very ones who are possibly guilty of that behavior.

For the ones that say it is difficult enough to find qualified Judges now, let me just offer this thought that if suitable Team Captains cannot be found, then it proves the system is flawed and needs immediate attention, --or it needs to be abolished until such a time where corrections to the system/process can be made. If that means that Fine-Point judging is dropped from the club curriculum, then so be it but understand the negative publicity generated by the actions of a few individuals damages what the rest of the club is trying to do for the betterment of the hobby.

[DougVieyra]

I too have been a long-time member of both MARC (1965-2007) and MAFCA (1964-2014), and became a Master Judge in 1987. I too built and entered a car for 'Fine Point' judging. So I understand John Hash's frustration and disappointment.

It is always sad to hear about disappointing experiences. To have high expectations dashed is a traumatic and emotional (and even exasperating) thing to have to go through. Sometimes 'venting' can help one get through the emotional drama the rages through one's mind. So it is good to 'vent'.

However, for the person who is not 'hurt' by the 'injustice' , a somewhat clearer picture may emerge. In reading John Hash's post, I sense that "Winning is Everything"! And the most stringent game of all is entering into 'Fine Point' Judging. That is true whether it is ballet, or chess. Or cars.

The driving force behind 'winning', is the extreme attention to detail. That is what separates the the players in the game. And for 'Fine Point' judging 'extreme attention to detail' is both required and demanded, if one is to succeed to the top of the pile. That arena is NOT for very many people. Some don't have the money for it. Some don't have the desire or inclination for it. Some don't have the ability for it. But I suspect most just don't have an interest in such competition. And that is what 'Fine Point' judging is - competition.

However, when emotionalism takes over, we loose some of our objectivity. When John Hash riles with words like 'stinking', his lack of objectivity begins to creep into his argument. I mentioned earlier that 'extreme attention to detail' was needed to succeed in 'Fine Point' judging. I hope I was not the only one who noticed that John Hash's post may have given a clue as to why he did not fare as well as he expected. I am referring to his use of the word 'interred' and 'interring'. Attention to detail would have given us the correct 'entered' and 'entering'. If he lacked 'attention to detail' in such a simple task as writing a forum post, he may have also lacked some 'attention to detail' in his cars upholstery.

There is an old saying - "If you can't stand the heat - move away from the fire". But that does not mean that you have to move out of the building ! There are so many facets to our Model A hobby, and 'Fine Point' judging is - to my mind - the smallest part of it. There are so many fine people, so many fine events, so many fine social activities, and so much more. If John would avoid the 'corrupt' world of 'Fine Point' judging and instead enjoy all the other benefits of the warm camaraderie that make up the Model A family, I think he could 'have his cake and eat it too'.

[Vern]

Really, a spelling & grammar lesson? I caught the word use as well, but overlooked it as well as the use of "stinking".

But it is hard to look past the point deductions on the sheet offered up by John and wonder as to the explanation. And, to add to his frustration, to receive completely different scores for the interior finishes is hard to fathom when the standards are supposed to be across the board for both national groups.

I've never had any experiece in the Fine Point arena, so I don't know one way or the other.

[DougVieyra]

Beyond such things as 'cronyism', 'corruption', 'good ol' boy', etc. is the real fact that, like all of life's trials and judgements, decisions are made by people. People make judgement calls on every aspect of their everyday living. Some decisions are good - others are not. People are fallible. People make errors. People have flaws. People are the weakest link in humanity. People are also the strongest link in humanity. People are NOT perfect. They just do the best they can. And that is something we all have to live with.

[[email protected]]

I signed up to be a judge at the MARC Nat'l Meet back in 1996. I don't know if things have changed in the judging since then but I certainly noticed the politics that were in play back then on how certain cars were judged. Certain cars were "pre-judged" by the team leaders before the team could even pick at them.

I also learned of the "Queen For A Day" cars that were being judged. The perfect wheels were from this club member's car. The battery from someone else's car. The NOS fan belt that had been on different fine point cars over the last 8 years, etc.. It was like an inside secret that only the "in crowd" knew.

That judging process (read politics) was such a disappointment to me that I scrapped my own plans for building my fine point car and I never signed up for National judging again.

With that being said, I really do enjoy going to the National Meets when I can and looking at the Fine Point cars. I enjoy it when I talk to the FP owners that say I did the restoration all by myself, then you compliment them on the quality of something. "Oh, that was done by this guy who is the best in the industry." I now know that they are a Contractor and know all the sources and have the check book ready.

[Bob Johnson]

Looking at the judging sheet you will see that for each area there were reasons given for the deductions. The circled abbreviations give the reasons for the deductions. In the first 2 areas the reason is IP (Improper part/material) and WS (workmanship). The third area it was IP. The last 2 areas it was WS. Granted there could have been additional information but to say there was no reasons given would be incorrect. When I judge I try to put down more specific information to help the owner know why points were lost.

Bob

[vermontboy]

"If he lacked 'attention to detail' in such a simple task as writing a forum post, he may have also lacked some 'attention to detail' in his cars upholstery."

A bit of background - 40 years ago I was writing voluminous proposals for multimillion dollar projects to major corporations around the world. At that point in time one grammatical error would pretty much eliminate you from consideration. Twenty years ago I was teaching college and I stressed how important proper grammar and word usage was in every day business dealings - I took off substantial points for errors even if the answer itself was basically correct.

I fail to understand how you can correlate spelling errors in the informal environment found in this forum with an overall lack of "attention to detail" when restoring a car. As for "emotionalism" taking over while recounting the details of a perceived wrong - how does that correlate to the statements made being factual or not. Some people get emotional when they write - some don't. The ability to express facts without emotion has no bearing on the correctness of the facts themselves.

Frankly I am appalled that the "perception of conflict of interest" was ever allowed to occur, much less allowed to continue.

Reading Brent's excellent Post #28 certainly gives me pause to wonder whether or not I will join MAFCA, or renew my membership in MARC. It appears to be a very incestuous group if the facts are as inferred.

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

Originally Posted by DougVieyra

However, for the person who is not 'hurt' by the 'injustice' , a somewhat clearer picture may emerge. In reading John Hash's post, I sense that "Winning is Everything"! And the most stringent game of all is entering into 'Fine Point' Judging. That is true whether it is ballet, or chess. Or cars.

The driving force behind 'winning', is the extreme attention to detail. That is what separates the the players in the game. And for 'Fine Point' judging 'extreme attention to detail' is both required and demanded, if one is to succeed to the top of the pile. That arena is NOT for very many people. Some don't have the money for it. Some don't have the desire or inclination for it. Some don't have the ability for it. But I suspect most just don't have an interest in such competition. And that is what 'Fine Point' judging is - competition.

However, when emotionalism takes over, we loose some of our objectivity. When John Hash riles with words like 'stinking', his lack of objectivity begins to creep into his argument. I mentioned earlier that 'extreme attention to detail' was needed to succeed in 'Fine Point' judging. I hope I was not the only one who noticed that John Hash's post may have given a clue as to why he did not fare as well as he expected. I am referring to his use of the word 'interred' and 'interring'. Attention to detail would have given us the correct 'entered' and 'entering'. If he lacked 'attention to detail' in such a simple task as writing a forum post, he may have also lacked some 'attention to detail' in his cars upholstery.

There is an old saying - "If you can't stand the heat - move away from the fire". But that does not mean that you have to move out of the building ! There are so many facets to our Model A hobby, and 'Fine Point' judging is - to my mind - the smallest part of it. There are so many fine people, so many fine events, so many fine social activities, and so much more. If John would avoid the 'corrupt' world of 'Fine Point' judging and instead enjoy all the other benefits of the warm camaraderie that make up the Model A family, I think he could 'have his cake and eat it too'.

Doug, asking it this way, does it take someone with a college degree to be able to be a fine craftsman?

As for John's initial post, the way I interpreted his thoughts, he received strong deductions but without explanation as to why. Would his reaction been different if there would have been an explanation and a reference to the J/S for the car owner to compare what is written to what the vehicle has? I definitely think so.

While Marco was just 1 of the 5 on the team, all 5 should share responsibility for Mr. Hash's frustration, however whomever the Team Captain was over that respective area is the person that has the ultimate responsibility to ensure all of his team members are following protocol. It is very apparent they did not do their job correctly. As you put it, their lack of 'attention to detail' by failure to make deduction notes (as instructed to do so) and the Team Captains failure to follow instruction by initialing the Red Alert scores (as instructed to do so) might have given an indication of their poor attention to detail in their evaluation process of Mr. Hash's vehicle. While I am not saying this did happen in this instance, surely you can see how these failures could create some turmoil in a car owner's mind after receiving a low score such as John did.

[1wonton]

Only a tiny percentage of Model A fans really care about who "wins" a judging contest but no one wants to be associated with an individual who crys about not being "first" then says he's going to quit the club because of it. I surely wont miss him or his attitude.

[160B]

Originally Posted by DougVieyra

................ I am referring to his use of the word 'interred' and 'interring'. Attention to detail would have given us the correct 'entered' and 'entering'. If he lacked 'attention to detail' in such a simple task as writing a forum post, he may have also lacked some 'attention to detail' in his cars upholstery. ...........................................

Do not let ones typing ability and or proper English grammar lead you to believe that the individual does not have the ability to focus on detail.

John's memory and attention to detail and skills in body work, body alignment, paint, stainless steel restoration, door handle restoration , bumper clamp restoration, spark plug restoration, frame straightening, and all the facets of restoring a Model A Ford go far beyond the average restorer.

John is not upset about the fact that he did not have best of show; he clearly recognizes the best vehicle did get best of show. He is upset about a judging process that was not followed by a senior judge and a master judge who is on the Judging Standards Committee.

RG&JS page 12 Revised 2011 lower RH column states
“Scoring should be done by deducting points from the area total. When two or more judges are selected to judge an area, the judge having the highest certification shall enter the judging points on the score sheets after a consensus has been reached. Point deductions that exceed 30% or more of the total for the area shall be explained in writing and initialed by the judge. Such deductions shall be reviewed by the Team Captain. If the judge fails to explain deductions over 30%, the judging sheet shall be returned to him for completion. In addition to using the suggested codes, a judge can make specific comments. By doing so he will provide the owner with information by which to improve the vehicle or produce another higher point restoration.”


The Area 12 Judging sheet posted by John uses only scoring codes for deductions and provides no written detail, thus there is no specific basis for the deduction. The RG&JS state “Point deductions that exceed 30% or more of the total for the area shall be explained in writing and initialed by the judge”. Just using the codes allows the judge to hide his bias, use his tribal knowledge and not judge to the RG&JS.

Rather disappointing when a senior judge and a master judge who is a member of the MAFCA Judging Standards Committee cannot follow the RG&JS!!!!!

[Rowdy]

My pre-2006 experiences with the people judging, writing the standards and building cars to judge did not show politics to the level of what it appears you are implying. It is just their application, importance and definition of some loose terms and when to apply them.
The "90 Day Rule" and "Carried Over on Commercial Vehicles" until supplies were depleted are not all terms weiged in the same terms by everyone and even nearly disregaurded by some. When discussing different, somewhat controvercial parts near or shortly after a major change I got varying opinions depending on who I talked to and how the question was asked.

One example of this was the carburetor (and I have several others). The carburetor that was with the pickup was the early version of the single venturi with the false boss. JS stated (as I remember it) the single V carb was introdiced in mid June. The prorated manufacturing date of the engine was May 23rd. which should have had the later Double V carburetor. Yes, it is possible it may have been changed over the years, but what are the chances it would have had the wrong carb by under a months worth of change. I feel like there was an error in the research as to the introduction of the change. I do not however think it was intentional and there may very well be some lost records. Just to get a sense of how frustrating it can be for someone building on for fine points.

I am however alittle curious, why does this regional meet almost always seem to have the most and most legitimate complaints about the judging? I have noticed this more and more thae last several years. Possibly that participation is higher than some of the others or that the participants are more passionate than other areas???

Rod

[31Tudor]

I've never understood why anyone would want to enter their Model A Ford in "fine point judging". I suppose it is some kind of ego boost to out-point your fellow car owners but must hurt a lot to get beat out by some other guy who devotes his entire life to win some cheesy plastic trophy. I drive my old Ford because it's fun; not afraid to scratch it, get it dirty or wworry about something not being "factory". How many owners really give spits about "fine point" judging. Too bad you lost, too bad you entered in the first place. I wouldn't quit the club over this, it's just a Ford, not a Dusenberg.

Wonton, by your post it would appear that you have never pushed yourself to be the best at anything. Golfers play to get better, teams practice to get better. Fine Point Judging is not for everyone, but for those that do participate we enjoy the PERSONAL challenge of making something the best that we can do. I am building a fine point car because "I" want to. I want to make the car as accurate as my ability and my finances allow me to be able to do. Again because I want the personal satisfaction. It is not to impress anyone, or to show off a "plastic trophy". My friends won't care about my trophy but I am not building it for them or to impress anyone.

[DougVieyra]

1wonton - "Only a tiny percentage of Model A fans really care about who "wins" a judging contest but no one wants to be associated with an individual who crys about not being "first" then says he's going to quit the club because of it. I surely wont miss him or his attitude."
____________________________________________

Well said, 1wonton. That IS the point. No one said 'Life is Fair'. Every aspect of our daily life risks some degree of disappointment or unfairness. It is what life is made up of. After awhile, we grow up and stop complaining. We pick up the pieces and move on.

My 1928 Phaeton won a First Place at the Portland National Meet in 1984. And while I too (few do not) suffered some 'inconsistencies' in the judging, it was NOT the cause that that was the last time I entered it into ANY kind of competition or judging. Focusing on the 'Fine Point', caused me to lose out of MUCH of the FUN that went along with socializing and 'car grazing'. I had reached the 'been there, done that' point. For the last thirty years my '28 Phaeton has been a constant companion, friend, mistress, and daily driver. The judging arena is a combat platform that I do not miss. Again as I said earlier, I understand and sympathize with John Hash's frustration and disappointment. Like me, it may be time for John to just enjoy the car and all the joy it brings to others, and not get involved in the judging world.

- And Brent, 160B, et.al. - 'If' and "may have" are an important part of the message that I don't think you give enough weight to. It does allow that the rest of the sentence may not be true.
- "vermontboy" - 'Emotion' does often time cloud 'facts'. And 'attention to detail' has nothing to do with a college education, as Thomas Edison and Henry Ford can attest.

[Vern]

Wow, that is harsh 1wonton! Mr. Hash isn't crying about not being "first" or not winning, but rather the inconsistency in applying the "judging standards" to his particular car in two different instances. While I have never met John Hash, I have had some dealings with him and never found him to have an "attitude" He has posted often on this forum and offered valuable input. I certainly hope he does not quit the Barn!