Proper role for an OJ

[Chuck S.]

Re: Proper role for an OJ

...How about if the original gasket on a carburetor had four square corners and a 1/16 " radius. If the OJ who is a carburetor restorer said the gasket should have 1/8" radius corners and about ten other things wrong that were as small as the gasket corners and you take off one point for each that's 14 points and the Duntov award would be out of reach...

If you're RESTORING a car that you expect to win a Duntov award, YOU should know what the carburetor looks like. Further, if you're JUDGING a Duntov car, YOU should know what the carburetor looks like. An OJ that gives comments based on current rebuilding practice rather than what that the carb looked like in 73 should be firmly put in his place with a detailed explanation of why he's incorrect...he'll probably be more "discrete" once he knows that you know what you're doing.

...The Duntov award should not be easy to get but also it would be easy for a person to put the award out of reach for everyone.

I believe using the Duntov award as an example in this discussion is inappropriate. There's no doubt Duntov judging is special and should have only the best judges; any OJs should be experienced mid-level judges, and have the good sense to learn and minimize comments. The better example for this discussion is judging oversights at chapter and regional Top Flight judging since this is what affects more of us.

But, making a Duntov car comply with the exact standard of TFP should not put ALL cars out of reach of the award, nor is it too much to ask in my opinion (at least, to the limit which presiding judges can agree on what TFP was). Do you want credit for having a "real" Duntov award, or will you be satified with a devalued "Peso" Duntov because judges didn't nit pick to set the true TFP standard?[/quote]

...At the 100 judging level I was just starting to understand the system and now at over 400 I temper my deductions by grouping things together or no one could score under 36. If we make the award out of reach at some point we will not have cars to judge or the numbers will need to be changed to allow more points to be deducted to get the Duntov...

Everyone that judges has to temper their deductions for numerous small items; the judging sheets guide us in that direction, and compassion compels us to do it once the carnage becomes excessive.

Time constraints also force us to simply begin overlooking the great mass of deductions that should be made on cars that aren't going to gain even Third Flight, but it's because we simply can't write it all down in the time allowed. Those cars have a lot further to come, and the owner didn't do his homework...he SHOULD be required to be judged numerous times.

However, on cars that are contenders for Second Flight or Top Flight, we should take the time to make the deductions, and record good comments for the owner. An attitude of accepting judging incompetence and oversights in such cases, however seldom it occurs, is not an acceptable policy in my opinion...but what do I know.

If we exercise good people skills in telling owners how their cars fall short of the standard, we won't run out of cars to judge because our standards are too tough; it'll be because no sees that standard as something worth acheiving.

[Henry S.]

Re: Proper role for an OJ

Their is one thing in the picture you may need to think about. In order to get a Duntov you can only lose 36 points per area if your opps are perfect. If the judging on each item is done by an expert on that item it would be hard to score under the 36 point deduction. I agree that no major item should be missed. How about if the original gasket on a carburetor had four square corners and a 1/16 " radius. If the OJ who is a carburetor restorer said the gasket should have 1/8" radius corners and about ten other things wrong that were as small as the gasket corners and you take off one point for each that's 14 points and the Duntov award would be out of reach. The Duntov award should not be easy to get but also it would be easy for a person to put the award out of reach for everyone. As a restorer who has done frame offs restored every part on a 73 Corvette I need to bunch small items together and not take one point off for every item I see. At the 100 judging level I was just starting to understand the system and now at over 400 I temper my deductions by grouping things together or no one could score under 36. If we make the award out of reach at some point we will not have cars to judge or the numbers will need to be changed to allow more points to be deducted to get the Duntov. In the end it's really about the people and the friends we make along the way. The cars just bring us together.

Lyle,
From your experiences of restoring Corvettes do you think we (NCRS) put too much emphasis on exact detail? I'm just asking and trying to learn here (just as I assume most other newer members) and value the opinions of those of you that have been around the hobby longer. Working in a factory for 30 years I know how detail may vary from one worker to another and even from the same worker from one day to another. Assuming the parts were all the same the way they may be installed may not be, maybe missing washers or such. I know the judging manuals give some leeway on areas such as undercoating coverage for example. I'm sure most of the master judges have pretty much seen it all over the years. It was pretty impressive to me as I watched some of the judges "work" at the National, especially those going for a Duntov. You could tell they really enjoyed what they were doing and seemed to appreciate the chance to judge the cars. As you said the cars bring us together.

[Jack H.]

Re: Proper role for an OJ

I've tried to intentionally BRAINWASH myself to eliminate the term 'Duntov Award' from my vocabulary... Why?

The award is officially called Mark of Excellence (MoE) and we have three versions of it: Duntov, McLellan and Hill. While many think Duntov = MoE, that kind of short changes the other versions of the award (by exclusion). So, I prefer to use the generic term MoE and let things drop there...

[Harmon C.]

Re: Proper role for an OJ

Lyle,
From your experiences of restoring Corvettes do you think we (NCRS) put too much emphasis on exact detail? I'm just asking and trying to learn here (just as I assume most other newer members) and value the opinions of those of you that have been around the hobby longer. Working in a factory for 30 years I know how detail may vary from one worker to another and even from the same worker from one day to another. Assuming the parts were all the same the way they may be installed may not be, maybe missing washers or such. I know the judging manuals give some leeway on areas such as undercoating coverage for example. I'm sure most of the master judges have pretty much seen it all over the years. It was pretty impressive to me as I watched some of the judges "work" at the National, especially those going for a Duntov. You could tell they really enjoyed what they were doing and seemed to appreciate the chance to judge the cars. As you said the cars bring us together.

Henry
I agree that to know what happened on the assembly line is a plus. I did work on an assembly line tied to the chain as we called it. I also worked in the machine division where their were broaches. I'm a retired auto woker after 30 years. My background,restoration projects,and having cars judged is all part of the journey.

[Troy P.]

Re: Proper role for an OJ

Just to make sure everyone understands my position, I don't expect judges to know it all. As one responder stated "judges are human". But if there is going to be judging I believe it should be as accurate as NCRS can make it within reason, accounting for judging resources and time available. Following this logic I believe the OJ's should point out known (and potentially possible) discrepancies that the judges did not observe. Then let the judges decide what if anything they want to do about it. Sometimes three sets of eyes are better than two.

So I guess I'm on the side of accuracy of restoration and not heavy into the award winning angle. One will lead to the other however.

Anyone know why this thread is no longer listed so others can read it and contribute? I can only find it under MY POSTS. So it looks like it has been hidden from all except those that have commented so far.

[Patrick H.]

Re: Proper role for an OJ

Anyone know why this thread is no longer listed so others can read it and contribute? I can only find it under MY POSTS. So it looks like it has been hidden from all except those that have commented so far.

Still listed here for me.
Problem must be on your end.

[Harmon C.]

Re: Proper role for an OJ

Just to make sure everyone understands my position, I don't expect judges to know it all. As one responder stated "judges are human". But if there is going to be judging I believe it should be as accurate as NCRS can make it within reason, accounting for judging resources and time available. Following this logic I believe the OJ's should point out known (and potentially possible) discrepancies that the judges did not observe. Then let the judges decide what if anything they want to do about it. Sometimes three sets of eyes are better than two.

So I guess I'm on the side of accuracy of restoration and not heavy into the award winning angle. One will lead to the other however.

Anyone know why this thread is no longer listed so others can read it and contribute? I can only find it under MY POSTS. So it looks like it has been hidden from all except those that have commented so far.

Would you feel three sets of eyes are better than two if you paid the $2500. it can cost to get you and your car to a regional and needed a score to get to the next level?
I have never had any owner say he wished I had taken off more points so his car would get more correct next time.

The reason you can't find this post is it goes to the bottom with no new posts. If you only look at new posts it will be gone if their is nothing new.

[Chuck S.]

Re: Proper role for an OJ

Would you feel three sets of eyes are better than two if you paid the $2500. it can cost to get you and your car to a regional and needed a score to get to the next level?
I have never had any owner say he wished I had taken off more points so his car would get more correct next time.

The reason you can't find this post is it goes to the bottom with no new posts. If you only look at new posts it will be gone if their is nothing new.

No one likes to hear that their efforts are not equal to the accepted standard of performance. It doesn't matter if it's lack of knowledge, lack of skill, or lack of ambition. So, what you describe is a natural human reaction from the owner's point of view.

However, the accepted standard is still the standard: If some non-compliance to the standard happens to be missed because someone didn't get enough rest the night before or is getting too old to remember everything, it changes nothing. The standard is still the standard, and you still missed the mark. If you receive an award due to oversight, you're just suffering from self-satisfaction that is false and hollow.

I don't have any problem with making your best effort to try and "fool the judges". You and I both know that the best judges have pretty much seen it all, and unless they are inexperienced, you aren't going to fool the judges. If you can achieve an appearance that is equal to their vision of TFP, you deserve the points. But, to argue that only officially appointed two-team judges can find and deduct for obvious defects in order for owners receive awards is bad policy in my opinion.

If NCRS had competition at our meets such that there could only be one Top Flight, one Second Flight, and one Third Flight, with everyone else sucking wind, I can understand why the exact same judges should judge all the cars the same with NO outside input. But, one of most important sayings of NCRS is there is no competition between cars, only with the standard of TFP. If a Top Flight is awarded due to inattention on the part of the judges, every Top Flight awarded by NCRS is slightly devalued in my opinion.

BTW, Lyle, many of our senior judges also travel long distances to virtually every regional and national meet. They're not pulling a trailer with a car on it, but their expense to do this is considerable. They don't do that for an award...they've spent their money just for the priviledge of telling owners where they have fallen short of the standard.

[Jack H.]

Re: Proper role for an OJ

Sometimes three sets of eyes are better than two.

And, by logical extension, four are better than three, five are better than four... The point is the line HAS to be drawn somewhere and we do that in our Judging Reference Manual by requiring TWO team judges/section of Flight with the role of the OJ being to 'OBSERVE'.

Now, in many cases you WILL find the team judges you're paired with during OJ duty ARE receptive to occassional OJ inputs/comments and they WILL/DO do take such into consideration during scoring. So, this is an area where you'll find human differences from meet to meet.

But, I can GUARANTEE you at each/every meet there WILL be errors of commission and errors of omission! That's simply the nature of the beast.

Last, we work under the clock with limits on 'senatorial debate'... The max work load is 8 cars/day for judging. That works down to roughly 1 hour/car for analysis, scoring and owner debrief (average).

No system is perfect, and I'll readily admit, the NCRS judging system has its drawbacks (consistency from meet to meet, differences between Chapter/Regional/National in terms of judge's knowledge, Etc.). So, we work with what we've got and that's reality.

[Edward S.]

Re: Proper role for an OJ

Gentlemen,
In following this post for the past two days, IMO it's one of the best I have ever seen on this Board. There are many great viewpoints given in both the pros & cons being discussed. In the years I have been involved in the NCRS, most were spent working long hours (like many of us) I never wanted to take the time to try and learn everything I could about what ever I was driving at the time. At meets I always looked to the judges for the knowledge to make me a much more informed owner. I do remember though how bad I felt when a deduction was made, only to find out later, the deduction was incorrect. I am not saying this to take a swipe at judges, heaven knows we all make mistakes. Learning about a incorrect deduction is still learning and made me more prepared for the next meet. It did, however,get me to think that I never wanted to get in the position where my lack of knowledge would short change an owner who worked long and hard on the car. So all the years I have been a member I have only tried to judge OP's - which has let me contribute and at the same time interface with judges and owners which I love. Just wanted everyone to know that I think that the manner this post has been handled says alot about the organization and the membership we have. Once again proud to be a member and keep up the good work.

[Harmon C.]

Re: Proper role for an OJ

No one likes to hear that their efforts are not equal to the accepted standard of performance. It doesn't matter if it's lack of knowledge, lack of skill, or lack of ambition. So, what you describe is a natural human reaction from the owner's point of view.

However, the accepted standard is still the standard: If some non-compliance to the standard happens to be missed because someone didn't get enough rest the night before or is getting too old to remember everything, it changes nothing. The standard is still the standard, and you still missed the mark. If you receive an award due to oversight, you're just suffering from self-satisfaction that is false and hollow.

I don't have any problem with making your best effort to try and "fool the judges". You and I both know that the best judges have pretty much seen it all, and unless they are inexperienced, you aren't going to fool the judges. If you can achieve an appearance that is equal to their vision of TFP, you deserve the points. But, to argue that only officially appointed two-team judges can find and deduct for obvious defects in order for owners receive awards is bad policy in my opinion.

If NCRS had competition at our meets such that there could only be one Top Flight, one Second Flight, and one Third Flight, with everyone else sucking wind, I can understand why the exact same judges should judge all the cars the same with NO outside input. But, one of most important sayings of NCRS is there is no competition between cars, only with the standard of TFP. If a Top Flight is awarded due to inattention on the part of the judges, every Top Flight awarded by NCRS is slightly devalued in my opinion.

BTW, Lyle, many of our senior judges also travel long distances to virtually every regional and national meet. They're not pulling a trailer with a car on it, but their expense to do this is considerable. They don't do that for an award...they've spent their money just for the priviledge of telling owners where they have fallen short of the standard.

I do most Regional and all the Nationals so I know what it costs. I have not had an OJ point out anything I didn't see in years. My coments have been more about how owners feel as I have been their many times. I have no less than 50 NCRS ribbons and have every award you can get for a Duntov years car except for a race car award. I got to pack for the Regional next week.
Se Ya Their