The "Judging" game.

[Dick W.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

8th revision of JRM states that those caught loaning/borrowing parts from one another on the judging field will recieve a FULL DEDUCT (on both cars) for the part in question.

tc

Ok, was close I guess. Close counts in horseshoes and hand grenades

[Michael J.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

8th revision of JRM states that those caught loaning/borrowing parts from one another on the judging field will recieve a FULL DEDUCT (on both cars) for the part in question.

tc

Ouch!!! Now that is harsh punishment for trying to help out your fellow NCRS member.

[Arland D.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

Not as harsh as an owner found borrowing or returning a part before, during, or after a PV that will result in the failure of the Performance Verification effort. It has happened before................

[Henry S.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

There are a couple of ways to look at the exchanging of parts among members:

1) It can be gentlemen helping each other in a friendly way -- part of the friendship of the organization.
2) It can be a financial transaction between a "have" and a "have-not."
3) How about those who own multiple Corvettes and transfer parts between them (the cars) as each is judged? I have judged the same rocker covers on several different cars owned by the same member, as an example.
Is #3 any better, more moral or honorable than #1/#2?

How is this exchange of parts (whether finances are involved or different people are involved or not) different than buying a bunch of OEM or NOS parts in an effort to improve your Corvette?

Because of the way most of us are wired we want that Blue ribbon, and will do anything to get it. The fool is the person who believes that ribbon means much of anything.

There used to be a time when the exchange of parts among members on the judging field was condoned and encouraged. Those of us who have judged for several decades will remember when we judged the same gas cap all the way down the line. Some judges even brought parts to the field. Gave them to the first car owner and collected them from the last car owner. This was considered "gentlemanly" and the "friendly" thing to do. We were helping the owner win his award.

At some point the National Judging Chairman (and I can't remember if it was Roy or Dennis -- I have been at this too long) pointed out the absurdity of this process, regardless of how well intentioned it might have been. A rule was instituted to prohibit the transfer of parts from one car/owner to another on the show field, and to also prohibit "repairs" on the show field. Unfortunatly all that did was drive the process underground to the trailer parking area. I could compare it to some Federal programs, but I would probably get in trouble for stating that so openly.

Interesting thread Mike. I believe the vast majority of NCRS members agree your comments. Unfortunately since the value of ANY restored classis car (insert ANY make, model) increases substantially when it has some "documentation" there are owners that will do ANYTHING to obtain that documentation. We, the NCRS, should do everything possible to discourage that. But as we all know every time a rule is changed there will be SOMEONE trying to figure a way around it. It seems we are moving in the right direction just not there yet. As Terry pointed out in the past you had some judges supplying the parts to cheat with. Terry, getting a "flight award" back in the day almost sounds like peewee baseball where they give everyone a trophy. I'm sure it wasn't quite that easy though.

[Russ S.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

Ouch!!! Now that is harsh punishment for trying to help out your fellow NCRS member.

I wouldn't think of that as harsh at all. They could disqualify both cars from judging, or worse.

[Terry M.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

Interesting thread Mike. I believe the vast majority of NCRS members agree your comments. Unfortunately since the value of ANY restored classis car (insert ANY make, model) increases substantially when it has some "documentation" there are owners that will do ANYTHING to obtain that documentation. We, the NCRS, should do everything possible to discourage that. But as we all know every time a rule is changed there will be SOMEONE trying to figure a way around it. It seems we are moving in the right direction just not there yet. As Terry pointed out in the past you had some judges supplying the parts to cheat with. Terry, getting a "flight award" back in the day almost sounds like peewee baseball where they give everyone a trophy. I'm sure it wasn't quite that easy though.

No, it wasn't quite that easy -- but almost. We have come a long way in stopping that, but we still have a long way to go.

We would make the greatest step if Corvette buyers would read and understand the disclaimer on the back side of the Flight Awards. I still see people on this board asking for pictures of details from Top Flight cars. What you really want are detail pictures of original Corvettes.

And as I frequently tell my Advanced Judging Seminars: Even if we are looking at a Bowtie Award winner, do not assUme that absolutely everything on that car is original. You will have a far better chance that it is, but: "There and no Corvette virgins."

[Dick W.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

[QUOTE=Terry McManmon (3966);617684

And as I frequently tell my Advanced Judging Seminars: Even if we are looking at a Bowtie Award winner, do not assUme that absolutely everything on that car is original. You will have a far better chance that it is, but: "There and no Corvette virgins."[/QUOTE]

There are some very skilled owners and restorers. Caveat Emptor