The "Judging" game.

[Clark K.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

As with any endeavor, it is important for honesty to be maintained. When one person cheats, that puts everyone else at an unfair disadvantage. Then, in order to level the playing field, everyone is "forced to cheat" to remain competitive. It has happened in collegiate athletics, in pro athletics, horse racing, automobile racing, ad nauseum.

Now, with that written, I always loved to read the stories about how Smokey Yunick "played with the rule book" in order to beat his competition!
-Clark

[Patrick H.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

WOW Patrick,
Didn't know that when I made the joke.
So the joke was something that really happened?

DOM

Let's just say it was one of the straws that broke the camel's back at the time...

[Dick W.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

Let's just say it was one of the straws that broke the camel's back at the time...

And lack of respect for other users, language, personal attacks, etc.

[Pat M.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

That was proposed several years ago.... and was part of the reason the Discussion Board was shut down several years ago.

And lack of respect for other users, language, personal attacks, etc.

Wow, I didn't know this. How long was it down?

[Terry M.]

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.

[Pat M.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

The fool is the person who believes that ribbon means much of anything.

Terry all of your points are well taken, especially this one. But the ribbon does mean that at one time (the more recent the better) the car reached a very high level of "correctness."

And while I've heard the stories of taking parts off an award-winning car while still on the judging field, there are people like me who've changed virtually nothing since my Duntov, save the battery, tires, and gas cap. The only other very minor things I've changed are items that were judged to be incorrect (and confirmed to be so through research and consultation), so, if anything, my car has arguably become "more correct" since my award.

Just a thought that there are some people who value, respect, and honor the award by not dismembering the car to make a fast buck. JHMO.

[Loren L.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

To be fair and accurate, the caveat also applied to the current state of accuracy of the Judging Manual in place, the knowledge level and judgement of those doing the judging and the simple reminder "That was Then", do your own homework. It also should be obvious that in most cases, the evolutionary development of the manuals is progressive and improving - but sometimes that's not true. In short, the caveat says "You're responsible for your own actions", not NCRS.

Now you know why the awards all have the caveat on them that they were applicable only on the day of judging.

I distinctly recall an owner selling a rare 1969 alternator off his car on the judging field immediately after the team awarded him his Survivor Award.
And, like many of us, I've seen cars go through dealers or subsequent owners and get stripped of correctly coded parts before being resold.

[Clem Z.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

buying judged car should be like buying a used race car. you buy it right after it takes the checkered flag at the track. you never let them leave the track with the car

[Gary H.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

I am going to go for a PV at the regional in Kissimmee next year. In order to even get a PV, I need to spend a fortune for a set of Bias Ply tires.

There is nothing wrong with the brand new redline radials on my car now. I dont see how having a set of bias ply tires on my car has anything to do with the car working properly.

I would be crazy to spend the money for a set of reproduction bias ply tires. I will borrow a set of bias ply's for the PV. Should I try to borrow the receipt for proof of ownership?

I now know just how hard it is to get a top flight with an un-restored car with modern battery and radial tires.

Unfortunately, the amount of money you are willing to spend directly relates to just how high you score...

[Loren L.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

The "Real World" according to Clem Z., and accurately so.

buying judged car should be like buying a used race car. you buy it right after it takes the checkered flag at the track. you never let them leave the track with the car

[James W.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

It's what your conscience can bear. If a person is going to be dishonest, they are not usually dishonest about one thing. To me, a Top Flight car should be an accomplishment, something to be proud of. Not because of the ribbon, but because of the time and effort that went into the car. I'll have my car judged again in Frisco and it will have only the parts it came with

Jim

[Terry M.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

Terry all of your points are well taken, especially this one. But the ribbon does mean that at one time (the more recent the better) the car reached a very high level of "correctness."

And while I've heard the stories of taking parts off an award-winning car while still on the judging field, there are people like me who've changed virtually nothing since my Duntov, save the battery, tires, and gas cap. The only other very minor things I've changed are items that were judged to be incorrect (and confirmed to be so through research and consultation), so, if anything, my car has arguably become "more correct" since my award.

Just a thought that there are some people who value, respect, and honor the award by not dismembering the car to make a fast buck. JHMO.

Perhaps I over simplified my comment to make a point. The value of the ribbon, as you state, is dependent on not only when, but also where the ribbon is earned. But because NCRS has a volunteer judging system, each ribbon is not created equal. At some events in some classes the same judges will show up as at a National Meet -- and at other events any warm body has to be pressed into service. It is not always easy a year or two down the line to know which situation prevailed at a given event. That is why I was so sweeping in my statement. The best defense against the situation of volunteer judges is to arm ones self with knowledge and then one doesn't have to depend on a ribbon or someone elses opinion or what may have transpired between the time the car was judged and the time you are looking at it.

[Pat M.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

The best defense against the situation of volunteer judges is to arm ones self with knowledge and then one doesn't have to depend on a ribbon or someone elses opinion or what may have transpired between the time the car was judged and the time you are looking at it.

Again, you make great points. The recentness and level of the award should surely be taken into consideration, and, in any event, everyone should still "do their homework" to assure the car's not been altered significantly since that award. My only point was that a recent, high level award may be indicative of a car's current condition, although that may be the exception to the norm.

[Terry M.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

Yes Pat, we can narrow the discussion to where we agree.

Good hunting.

[Tracy C.]

Re: The "Judging" game.

I suggest that ya'll read the Judging Reference Manual. Best of my feeble recollection, the car owner and the parts owner can be disqualified from judging.

I remember when this rule was put into effect. I saw a cigarette lighter element get judged seven times in different cars. This was at one meet.

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