Judging standards over the years

[Michael W.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

I would think the rules changes on C2 trim tags could put many former TF cars in a precarious spot.

[William C.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

That's possible, I think Scott and I were thinking unmolested cars or authentic restorations. I believe a "creation" would fare worse today than 20 years ago, but an authentic car, not so much.

[Roy S.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

Thank you, Dick .... for sharing that story. That's one of many similar stories I've been told by eye witnesses.

Scott S's story also adds to this discussion.

My guess is the overall true cold, hard reality lies somewhere in between.

Hope to hear more commentary on this very good thread. We all learn from this subject....
Ridge

Before we get too far into agreeing with one individual, or sighting another situation, let me provide some fuel for the fire. First, I would bet money that Dick Whittington knows exactly why the point swing was so drastic on the specific vehicle he mentioned. Those reasons could be tenfold, and yet as simple as the first set of judges made a mistake or the second set of judges made a mistake. This is a hobby, and if you find an organization that does a better job than NCRS, please enlightens us.

The Team Leaders and I work with this system all the time. There are some major changes that have taken place in the last 25 years, and most, if not all of those have been for the benefit of the member. With that said, I truly believe that if you had a car in 1987 that scored 98.5 or better and if it had been placed in a time capsule maintained exactly as it was on the day it was judged, it would score within a fraction of the same score today. However, I would caution you that in 1987 we did not know as much about certain items as we do today, specifically added or deleted options and their detectability, engine pads, trim tags and VIN plates. Some of you probably think engine pads and trim tags were not an issue in 1987. If so, you are very wrong. It is true we did not know then what we know now. In a similar but different scenario, a 95.0 car from 1987 preserved in the exact scenario as above would most likely not fare as well today simply because it would still have the same issues and potentially more. If in 1987 they found enough to deduct 225 points, today they will probably find enough to deduct more than 225 points. We see the same thing today on the judging field. A car that scores 98.5 or better and loses 67 points or less will most likely score within a fraction of that everywhere it is judged, as long as it is a similar event, and a 95.0 car will fluctuate more.

The system has changed, for the most part for the better, but the changes have not been limited to standard deduction section of the process, paint, or engine pads. Prior to 1993 we adopted the notion of dividing the engine pad points from an all or nothing approach at 88 to the more flexible machine surface 38 and identifiers (machine code – VIN Derivative) 50. Then the entire scoring system was revised in the 1996 - 1997 timeframe, a major undertaking that now appears almost seamless in the way it was orchestrated. The system was reworked to standardize deductions from class to class. What I mean by that is they were not the same; many classes had different deductions for the same items found in all classes. So we decided in a team leader meeting that a body was a body and it was a set number of points no matter what year it was. The same was done for bumpers, window glass, seats, carpets, fuel systems, tires, wheels, ignition system, soft top, hard top, chassis components, exhaust systems, frames, etc. That meeting where all these changes took place was long and the changes that followed did not happen overnight, but the challenge was in front of us then, as it is now, to provide the best judging system available in the hobby. Your Team Leaders and I have done that with a passion in a manner that many never noticed.

To make a long story short, we have gone forward. The system is more user friendly today than it was in 1987, and the system is also more demanding, consistent, compassionate and rewarding.

But in spite all of my pleadings or all the explanations that one could type, the plain simple fact remains that it is what it is.

[Terry M.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

I suspect as Mike Ward has alluded to, a "made" car will suffer a whole lot more now days, and that includes the addition of 100 cubic inches, BC/CC, side mounted exhaust, and trim tag alterations. Absent those big point items though most of the detail knowledge is just that -- one-sies & two-sies that in most cases don't materially alter the score.

An original car with no deterioration over the years (yea, go find one of those) ought to score about tha same then and now. If the score is within two percent (90 points) we and the car are doing pretty good. One might expect a two percent difference with just a different set of judges.

Just my 2 cents.

[Joe C.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

I'd be willing to bet that there are a fair number of Duntov awarded midyears sitting out there in peoples' "museums" which have reproduction trim tags on them.

[Ridge K.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

Before we get too far into agreeing with one individual, or sighting another situation, let me provide some fuel for the fire. First, I would bet money that Dick Whittington knows exactly why the point swing was so drastic on the specific vehicle he mentioned. Those reasons could be tenfold, and yet as simple as the first set of judges made a mistake or the second set of judges made a mistake. This is a hobby, and if you find an organization that does a better job than NCRS, please enlightens us.

The Team Leaders and I work with this system all the time. There are some major changes that have taken place in the last 25 years, and most, if not all of those have been for the benefit of the member. With that said, I truly believe that if you had a car in 1987 that scored 98.5 or better and if it had been placed in a time capsule maintained exactly as it was on the day it was judged, it would score within a fraction of the same score today. However, I would caution you that in 1987 we did not know as much about certain items as we do today, specifically added or deleted options and their detectability, engine pads, trim tags and VIN plates. Some of you probably think engine pads and trim tags were not an issue in 1987. If so, you are very wrong. It is true we did not know then what we know now. In a similar but different scenario, a 95.0 car from 1987 preserved in the exact scenario as above would most likely not fare as well today simply because it would still have the same issues and potentially more. If in 1987 they found enough to deduct 225 points, today they will probably find enough to deduct more than 225 points. We see the same thing today on the judging field. A car that scores 98.5 or better and loses 67 points or less will most likely score within a fraction of that everywhere it is judged, as long as it is a similar event, and a 95.0 car will fluctuate more.

The system has changed, for the most part for the better, but the changes have not been limited to standard deduction section of the process, paint, or engine pads. Prior to 1993 we adopted the notion of dividing the engine pad points from an all or nothing approach at 88 to the more flexible machine surface 38 and identifiers (machine code – VIN Derivative) 50. Then the entire scoring system was revised in the 1996 - 1997 timeframe, a major undertaking that now appears almost seamless in the way it was orchestrated. The system was reworked to standardize deductions from class to class. What I mean by that is they were not the same; many classes had different deductions for the same items found in all classes. So we decided in a team leader meeting that a body was a body and it was a set number of points no matter what year it was. The same was done for bumpers, window glass, seats, carpets, fuel systems, tires, wheels, ignition system, soft top, hard top, chassis components, exhaust systems, frames, etc. That meeting where all these changes took place was long and the changes that followed did not happen overnight, but the challenge was in front of us then, as it is now, to provide the best judging system available in the hobby. Your Team Leaders and I have done that with a passion in a manner that many never noticed.

To make a long story short, we have gone forward. The system is more user friendly today than it was in 1987, and the system is also more demanding, consistent, compassionate and rewarding.

But in spite all of my pleadings or all the explanations that one could type, the plain simple fact remains that it is what it is.

Roy, I always enjoy reading your perspective on judging matters. I appreciate you taking the time to add clarity by giving us the behind the scenes information. Hope to see you at the Texas regional this weekend.

Since you brought up the team leaders (and the meetings you have with them) in your discussion, I would like to take this moment to thank them for so generously volunteering their time to help our club excel as the premier Corvette club in the world. I would like to offer a suggestion for your next meeting with these team leaders. If any of them might have the time, their input into discussion on the technical discussion board is always very much appreciated. Quite frankly, it's very rare to hear from one of the current slate of team leaders. Other than Mike Murray who graciously helps in TDB discussions, and your frequent help in clarification, tips from team leaders are very, very rare.
I just searched the member list on the TBD, and find that of the current 13 team leaders, six are registered, yet have never posted a comment. One appears to have never registered. Other than Mike Murray's very helpful commentary, the total posted comments from current team leaders is a total of 336 posts. You alone have 321 posts. Murray 1,448.
Contrast this to my own over 900 posts, from a guy who barely knows to come in out of the rain, much less .....help fellow members in detailed technical judging or restoration concerns.

I would appreciate your passing on the appreciate to those team leaders who do offer helpful tips and insight on the TDB. I have called by telephone the team leader overseeing the year of my own Corvette, and got much appreciated helpful advice from him. In this same conversation however, I sensed that he was reluctant to put anything into writing that might be retrieved later as ....."you said this". Surely there is another remedy to that potential problem rather than silence from the team leaders. If there is a problem with that matter, let's find a fix for it.

Once again, thank you sincerely for your helpful commentary. And I appreciate the fact that you've never mention my telling you in person I would have my '67 totally frame-off restored in ONE year,............ six long years ago.

Ridge.

[Ronald L.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

Joe,

I'd be willing to bet that there are a fair number of Duntov awarded midyears sitting out there in peoples' "museums" which have reproduction trim tags on them.

It was going on before the NCRS was 5 years old and part of the reason some think the Chevrolet documents won't surface anytime soon, if at all.

[Michael G.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

My 63 achieved Duntov, Bloomington Gold, and Triple Crown between 1989 and 1991. Then it basically sat indoors for twenty years. I have the Judging manual and score sheets for all of its over-97 Top Fights in the nineties. The judging manual is about a third as thick as today's.

Last Winter when we re-restrored it, we pulled the body off and John Hinckley came over. We went over the chassis together. (actually, John went over it, I just furiously wrote all the problems down). Three legal size sheets later we were done.....

There were lots of things correct, of course, but also lots of major stuff not found in 1991 (blue gas tank, wrong shocks, wrong struts, wrong spring, you name it) and that was just the chassis. I'm not sure how it would have scored, but, even ignoring twenty years of patina, I doubt "top" would have been in its award title.

It took a complete restoration of every part, as well as finding many originals, to achieve a just-under-97 National Top Flight at Novi. Its still getting a bunch of changes, (shooting to best the 98.1 it achieved in 1991) for next year's Nationals.

With that said, this is just one car, there are probably many cars that judged well in the 90's that also meet today's standards, so its hard to make a comparison, just based on my one data point.

[Roy S.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

Roy, I always enjoy reading your perspective on judging matters. I appreciate you taking the time to add clarity by giving us the behind the scenes information. Hope to see you at the Texas regional this weekend.

Since you brought up the team leaders (and the meetings you have with them) in your discussion, I would like to take this moment to thank them for so generously volunteering their time to help our club excel as the premier Corvette club in the world. I would like to offer a suggestion for your next meeting with these team leaders. If any of them might have the time, their input into discussion on the technical discussion board is always very much appreciated. Quite frankly, it's very rare to hear from one of the current slate of team leaders. Other than Mike Murray who graciously helps in TDB discussions, and your frequent help in clarification, tips from team leaders are very, very rare.
I just searched the member list on the TBD, and find that of the current 13 team leaders, six are registered, yet have never posted a comment. One appears to have never registered. Other than Mike Murray's very helpful commentary, the total posted comments from current team leaders is a total of 336 posts. You alone have 321 posts. Murray 1,448.
Contrast this to my own over 900 posts, from a guy who barely knows to come in out of the rain, much less .....help fellow members in detailed technical judging or restoration concerns.

I would appreciate your passing on the appreciate to those team leaders who do offer helpful tips and insight on the TDB. I have called by telephone the team leader overseeing the year of my own Corvette, and got much appreciated helpful advice from him. In this same conversation however, I sensed that he was reluctant to put anything into writing that might be retrieved later as ....."you said this". Surely there is another remedy to that potential problem rather than silence from the team leaders. If there is a problem with that matter, let's find a fix for it.

Once again, thank you sincerely for your helpful commentary. And I appreciate the fact that you've never mention my telling you in person I would have my '67 totally frame-off restored in ONE year,............ six long years ago.

Ridge.

Ridge, Thank You for your participation, is the 67 done, seems like it was penciled in as a six or seven month project on your chart.
The discussion board does just fine on its own without asking more from Team Leaders that are already overburdened for time. I did not bring up the team leaders to give them more assignments and work load. It's pretty hard for me to mention changes without including them they are a big reason the sytem is as functional as it is and the manuals exist as they do.

[Ridge K.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

Ridge, Thank You for your participation, is the 67 done, seems like it was penciled in as a six or seven month project on your chart.
The discussion board does just fine on its own without asking more from Team Leaders that are already overburdened for time. I did not bring up the team leaders to give them more assignments and work load. It's pretty hard for me to mention changes without including them they are a big reason the sytem is as functional as it is and the manuals exist as they do.

We are on the same page, Roy. I didn't mean to imply, or even hint that any of the team leaders needed to asked monitor these discussions on the TDB.

That's why I specifically used the wording: ....."If any of them might have the time, their input into discussion on the technical discussion board is always very much appreciated".
Only had hoped you might pass that sincere appreciation on. Those gentlemen provide a very, very good service to fellow members by so generously giving of their time.

I sure had hoped that you had forgotten my boastful timeframe I peniclled in. A much wiser man told me that day, that timeframe was way overly optimistic. I've since thrown that pencil in the trash, by the way ........

Ridge

[Dick W.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

Thank you, Dick .... for sharing that story. That's one of many similar stories I've been told by eye witnesses.

Scott S's story also adds to this discussion.

My guess is the overall true cold, hard reality lies somewhere in between.

Hope to hear more commentary on this very good thread. We all learn from this subject....
Ridge

The big point swing was due to knowledge gained about the cars. Car was lacquer, but.....grossly over restored. Had quite a few issues on finishes, details, resto parts, maybe a very serious resto item or two...
'nuff said. I do not want to embarrass the present or former owners. Both are very nice people and there was no attempt, in my opinion, to defraud anyone about anything.

[Ridge K.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

The big point swing was due to knowledge gained about the cars. Car was lacquer, but.....grossly over restored. Had quite a few issues on finishes, details, resto parts, maybe a very serious resto item or two...
'nuff said. I do not want to embarrass the present or former owners. Both are very nice people and there was no attempt, in my opinion, to defraud anyone about anything.

Thanks for adding that, Dick.
That "over restored" issue is quite a battle for a lot of us, as you well know.

I am so blessed to have found a low-mileage '67 that was 97 or 98% original, yet have great difficulty in leaving typical factory assembly and finish flaws.
Hopefully I'll be able to strike a balance I can live with, yet will judge top flight......

[Norris W.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

In the late '80's/early 90's I did a good bit of both NCRS and Bloomington participation, with my Gold '69 L88 & L89 cars and a friend's '67 L71 (Duntov) and L88 (Survivor). I basically wrenched and tweeked all 4 and transported them to the events and supervised them in prep for judging. Since then the only NCRS events I've attended have been in either Cypress or Kissimmee. I think the opinion that the hobby has gotten much smarter on cars is valid but also think the judging has gotten much more sophisticated, educated and consistent. In those days too, there were some exellent and VERY knowledgeable judges, however there were I think more weak ones than now, contributing to inconsistencies. I could give quite a few examples on the early judging, but several stick in my mind:

At the first Regional of the Southeast Chapter at Stone Mountain, the judge pool was light. I had already PV'd my L88 at Cypress, had a Chapter Top Flight and was looking for a high enough Top Flight at a Regional in order to take it to Anaheim for Duntov judging. Being one of only 2 L88's present, there were a number of spectators watching the car as it was being judged. There was a guy who'd admittedly never judged NCRS before, but had done NCCC judging who I unfortunately drew as a judge. He put on a white glove, rubbed under my fenders with his fingertips and announced to the crowd that it was the dirtiest car that he'd ever inspected on a judging field, this one being on dirt/grass with a dusty dirt road down to the field. (the closest I've ever come to decking a judge) He also hit me for 60% on condition on the emblems on the car, claiming they were faded. (new GM parts installed for the event and to this day I would say they're near 100% on condition) In a rage, I went and collected both Dick and Dennis. It was explained that this was a new judge and the deductions were minor and wouldn't be overturned. Unfortunately, the car scored Top Flight, but NOT the high enough score to qualify for Duntov, so it was ship it to Joplin for another shot before Anaheim, or abandon the effort. In frustration I chose the latter. At the same event there was a '67 yellow convertible that was represented as being an L88. The only problem was, there were people at the show that knew the car and it's history and stated emphatically that the car was a conversion from a smallblock. There were noticeable deviations from stock for an L88, such as cyl head studs that weren't deducted. It was also alledged that the present owner knew it as well, and coincidentally, he was judging mid years himself. He declined to answer specific questions from someone who I'll refer to as "one of the officials" as to his knowledge of the car, and it was Top Flighted. At Anaheim at the National after all this, with my friend's '67 L71, the interior judge had a cardboard tube out of a roll of toilet tissue in his hand checking for ignition switch lights. I told him that the car was not supposed to have one, but there was no selling it, so he hit the deduction, insistent that I was wrong. Our car was first in line, and I think he was on about car number 5 on down the '67 line when Roby caught up with him and was reading him the riot act when we walked off. Needless to day the deductions were reversed. My '69 L89 car had the later shifter in it, which is 3/4" too long and I didn't realize it myself. Terry M. used the car for a judging school somewhere and caught it, however it had been to several other events and the shifter length had never been questioned. Same was true for side post battery cables on the car, which a previous owner had installed, and they hadn't been caught until then as being incorrect replacement for the top posts. Side pipe conversions that usta' fly by are frequently caught now, and of course the trim tag thing. Based on my spectating at Kissimmee in recent years, I do not believe that any of that would go on in today's judging climate. Even though both of my '69 Gold cars have been stored inside for the last 20 years, and neither have spent a cumulative 24 hours in the sun since, I doubt seriously that either would get within shootin' range of a Top Flight nowdays.

I'm not sayin' the better judges are better now, just that the worse ones are MUCH better.

[Dick W.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

In the late '80's/early 90's I did a good bit of both NCRS and Bloomington participation, with my Gold '69 L88 & L89 cars and a friend's '67 L71 (Duntov) and L88 (Survivor). I basically wrenched and tweeked all 4 and transported them to the events and supervised them in prep for judging. Since then the only NCRS events I've attended have been in either Cypress or Kissimmee. I think the opinion that the hobby has gotten much smarter on cars is valid but also think the judging has gotten much more sophisticated, educated and consistent. In those days too, there were some exellent and VERY knowledgeable judges, however there were I think more weak ones than now, contributing to inconsistencies. I could give quite a few examples on the early judging, but several stick in my mind:

At the first Regional of the Southeast Chapter at Stone Mountain, the judge pool was light. I had already PV'd my L88 at Cypress, had a Chapter Top Flight and was looking for a high enough Top Flight at a Regional in order to take it to Anaheim for Duntov judging. Being one of only 2 L88's present, there were a number of spectators watching the car as it was being judged. There was a guy who'd admittedly never judged NCRS before, but had done NCCC judging who I unfortunately drew as a judge. He put on a white glove, rubbed under my fenders with his fingertips and announced to the crowd that it was the dirtiest car that he'd ever inspected on a judging field, this one being on dirt/grass with a dusty dirt road down to the field. (the closest I've ever come to decking a judge) He also hit me for 60% on condition on the emblems on the car, claiming they were faded. (new GM parts installed for the event and to this day I would say they're near 100% on condition) In a rage, I went and collected both Dick and Dennis. It was explained that this was a new judge and the deductions were minor and wouldn't be overturned. Unfortunately, the car scored Top Flight, but NOT the high enough score to qualify for Duntov, so it was ship it to Joplin for another shot before Anaheim, or abandon the effort. In frustration I chose the latter. At the same event there was a '67 yellow convertible that was represented as being an L88. The only problem was, there were people at the show that knew the car and it's history and stated emphatically that the car was a conversion from a smallblock. There were noticeable deviations from stock for an L88, such as cyl head studs that weren't deducted. It was also alledged that the present owner knew it as well, and coincidentally, he was judging mid years himself. He declined to answer specific questions from someone who I'll refer to as "one of the officials" as to his knowledge of the car, and it was Top Flighted. At Anaheim at the National after all this, with my friend's '67 L71, the interior judge had a cardboard tube out of a roll of toilet tissue in his hand checking for ignition switch lights. I told him that the car was not supposed to have one, but there was no selling it, so he hit the deduction, insistent that I was wrong. Our car was first in line, and I think he was on about car number 5 on down the '67 line when Roby caught up with him and was reading him the riot act when we walked off. Needless to day the deductions were reversed. My '69 L89 car had the later shifter in it, which is 3/4" too long and I didn't realize it myself. Terry M. used the car for a judging school somewhere and caught it, however it had been to several other events and the shifter length had never been questioned. Same was true for side post battery cables on the car, which a previous owner had installed, and they hadn't been caught until then as being incorrect replacement for the top posts. Side pipe conversions that usta' fly by are frequently caught now, and of course the trim tag thing. Based on my spectating at Kissimmee in recent years, I do not believe that any of that would go on in today's judging climate. Even though both of my '69 Gold cars have been stored inside for the last 20 years, and neither have spent a cumulative 24 hours in the sun since, I doubt seriously that either would get within shootin' range of a Top Flight nowdays.

I'm not sayin' the better judges are better now, just that the worse ones are MUCH better.

I remember the yellow car Norris, but do not remember your car. I "outted" that car many years ago as he kept representing the car as a real L/88. The owner did not judge, nor would we have allowed him to judge as "off center" as he could get at times. Up until he got mad and left NCRS, I was the object of many of his tirades.

[Norris W.]

Re: Judging standards over the years

I remember the yellow car Norris, but do not remember your car. I "outted" that car many years ago as he kept representing the car as a real L/88. The owner did not judge, nor would we have allowed him to judge as "off center" as he could get at times. Up until he got mad and left NCRS, I was the object of many of his tirades.

Dick, he absolutely judged that year. The reason I remember it distinctly was, I had a "discussion" with him about my friend LeAnna Smith's original paint '65 convertible, which he was hittin' for condition on the surround because of the factory waves and commenting on quality of the body repair. (of course the car had never been touched) I don't recall his name, but remember the blue plaid shirt he was wearing and our conversation, along with her husband was fairly direct to put it mildly. (I guess I was kind of a scrappy bitch back then which the ole' gal would say has evolved to being a grumpy one now) We had some mighty good times with NCRS back then, but my blood pressure DID HAVE some spikes.

One of my BIGGEST dissappointments happened the same year. I'd had the L88 at Cypress for PV. It was on the lawn down in front, and I'd walked up to the snack bar. I looked down toward the car and Zora was standing there looking at it with Larry Shinoda. I went flyin' back down with the camera hoping for a photo op with me, the two of them and the car. Zora said "we thought perhaps this was the aluminum case car". I said, "no, I believe the only one known to be real is yellow". The problem was, Pam had just taken the last picture in the camera of some duck in the creek there in the park. We've still got the lame picture of that duck as a grim reminder of an opportunity missed. How much value could a picture like that have added to the car when I'm gone and my kids have the auction?