How do judges really know?

I'm nearing the end of a restoration of what I intend to be a very nice, 99% complete and original driver, but now I'm thinking I may want to have it judged a few times to see how it stacks up against AACA regs. It is a rare, but not particularly valuable car, but when done it will be very close to its original "like new" condition.

I just got back from a national convention in which a similar car, which has already won a 1st Jr., was exhibited. It's a beautiful car and did very well in their points judged competition. But knowing what I know about how it should be ? what's correct on it and what's not ? I could find 25 or more things "wrong" about the car, some small, others pretty large.

I've owned a car of this type for 40 years; have been restoring this particular one for two years; have done extensive research on the vehicle; have (and read) all the factory literature/photos; talked to old timers about it; etc. etc. So I know that it should have an oval, not rectangular, back window; that Phillips head screws are incorrect for this '36; that the heater color is wrong; that it's on a sedan, not convertible frame; that wire wheels are correct for '35 but not '36, etc. But how can a typical judge ever know such things, things it has taken me years to learn, about such a rare car?

As I said, this car, beautifully done, scores very well in AACA meets, but technically speaking it is not a 365 point car.

How do judges handle situations like this? Assume it is probably correct because the owner has obviously spent a lot of money on it and because what has been done was done very well? Challenge most everything and make the owner document each item? From what I can see with this car, the former seems more true than the latter.

I left the show appreciating how difficult a judge's job is in these circumstances. I'd be interested in hearing how some of you who take on this challenge handle situations where you have no particular indepth knowledge of a particular marque/year, yet are asked to indicate a score.

Thanks!

I can relate to what you are saying, and it bothers me when a car has a First Junior plaque that on a sunny day wouldn't or more correctly, shouldn't place higher than a second. No judge can know everything about all cars, but most request to judge cars they know, have studied and have a true love for. If you enjoy judging one or two classes of AACA vehicles you get to be real good about what is and isn't correct. Fit and finish are what you see first, if the wrong parts have been made to fit and flow they can be overlooked. I don't know if I'd know if an open car was on a sedan chassis, (soulds like this was a high end body swap rebuild), but having redone one yourself you would. Document everything you think a judge may question. They are judging your car by the point sheet NOT against the car next to you. However the deductions tally that is what determines 1-2-3 place winners. I think 99% of the time it turns out right, but those ones that slip by do make the system look bad at times. Good luck with your showing.

1937hd45 is right, that the judges typically request to judge classes they are knowledgeable in. As for your "I'd be interested in hearing how some of you who take on this challenge handle situations where you have no particular in depth knowledge of a particular marque/year, yet are asked to indicate a score." That's one reason why I don't really want to know anything about judging any thing pre-WWII. Lots of "odd stuff" out there. I like the fact that people bring them out, and I like to learn about them but I'm not knowledgeable enough about them to be fair. The "odd stuff" I run into are usually called Kaisers.

If I do run into a car that I'm not familiar with, I'll use common sense (like a '34 model x shouldn't have Phillip screws at all)and also if something looks like it might be wrong I'd ask the team captain and he should ask for documentation. Things like the chassis would most likely be really hard to notice. Yes, things do get past judges because we are not "all-knowing" on all makes and models.

What would benefit AACA and the AACA judges would be for people like you that have rare cars to help train some of the judges on the particular makes and models. This way there are judges out there that do know about these cars. There is a man around here that has a Continental Beacon. If I remember correctly, one of four known to exist, and the only sedan known of. We need get the information on these cars documented not only for the current judges but for future judges and people that might be restoring that one car nobody knew about "that was bricked in the bottom of Uncle Ed's barn".

Talk to Fred Young, judge's training. If you need contact info let me know.

I can relate to that too David. Back at Greensburg I got to judge the MG's. I don't know squat about MG's. When I had a question, I asked the Team Captain. If I wasn't sure, I followed what is said in judging school:

<span style="font-weight: bold">" <span style="font-style: italic">If you don't know, don't deduct</span> ."</span>

For the sake of creating bad blood, don't deduct points if you don't know. The owner may be right.

I would recommend going to judging school. It'll give you an idea of what the judges are looking for, and give you an idea of how the judging process works. Remember, you know your car better than anyone else does. The judges only have 10 minutes to judge your car, and they don't know what's wrong with your car.

Remember that the judges don't know what's wrong with your car and they only have 10 minutes to find it . Once the judging process is done, they can't come back and look for more things wrong and take more deductions.

In addition a good team will truly work as a team not just four people judging four areas of a car. We had a 1958 Chevy at one time. Knew them pretty well. One year at Hershey I was on a team judging exteriors on 56-57 Chevy's. Didn't know much about them. Thank heavens for the guy judging engines because he came up and whispered in my ear that not only were the radio antennas wrong on a perfect looking '57 but there were two and there was only supposed to be one.

So even if one team member does not know much about a certain car usually someone on the team can help them out.

We need get the information on these cars documented not only for the current judges but for future judges and people that might be restoring that one car nobody knew about "that was bricked in the bottom of Uncle Ed's barn". Talk to Fred Young, judge's training. If you need contact info let me know.

If you think it would be useful, I'd be glad to put a reference guide together keyed to the judging checklist of the kind of unobvious things I cited. A 1936 Pontiac isn't particularly rare, but the cabriolet is - less than a dozen known to survive. I also saw a GM Heritage 36 sedan they had restored at the show and even it had 6-8 incorrect features. The older these cars get, the harder it will be to find anyone who knows what they ought to look like.

Unfortunately, I don't live very close to many AACA judging meets, and don't have a way of transporting the car great distances, so judging school is probably a long shot.

Thanks for the responses.

Someone told me that GM used Pontiac as a testbed for a lot of features. If they worked out they went into other divisions. If that is so I would think there would be a lot of things that might not look right to some judges.

Shoprat, I have to admit I had to look it up, but the '57 Chevy was available with dual antennas. According to my book it was available with a rear left and right manual antenna, or a electric fender mounted antenna.

All I can tell you that the Team Captain told me, when I mentioned what I was told, that the other team member was a past president of I think it was the national club of '57 Chevy owners. It has been so long now that I would have to look back in my records and see when and who it probably was. But the Team Captain felt we should take the fellow's word for it. The owner was not around to provide any information.

rqshafto,

"How do judges really know? "...

Great question! I'm an AACA judge with 30 judging credits... not a lot compared to most, but enough to be dangerous.

So to answer your question based upon my personal judging and experiences and knowledge... many times I don?t have a clue!

What I do have though is a general knowledge of all things antique auto related, and with specific knowledge of vehicles I'm most interested in (46-60 Chrysler products). When I can I try to judge just that, but more often than not I get post war cars in general. Occasionally I?m put in a class I'm not so familiar with... like motorcycles or classics.

Thankfully most judges know other judges who they can refer to when a question comes up. And keep in mind that a car isn?t judged by an individual, but a team of 4-5 judges. Between them they can pretty much fairly judge the details of a car.

In your case you point out things that are tough to spot unless you are an absolute expert on a vehicle, like: type of screw heads, correct color of specific parts, and the difference between a sedan and convertible frame. Even a judge with 300 credits would probably NOT catch those details.

Judges do the best they can do to be fair and impartial in the 10 minutes typically given them to judge their area of a car. When it doubt they ask have the team captain ask the owner for documentation. If no documentation exists then the other judges on the team are consulted - and occasionally questions are escalated to the meet judge.

Although not perfect, it?s the best system I've seen of any club.

If you want to see the "inner working" of the AACA judging system I strongly recommend you attend a judging school. You'll get some great insight into how the system works. Heck, you may even want to be a judge yourself! It's fun after all... (better be - the pay is terrible!) <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Peter

Oh yea, one more thing... read the AACA judges manual. It explains the who system much better than I can. Its available to download free.

http://www.aaca.org/publications/manuals/judges/default.aspx

Chances are REAL slim that you'll ever see me judging post war cars. If the antenna question did come up, I'd take a quick look down the line to see how many others were so equiped and deside if the majority were right or wrong. If the owner was not there to answer the question no deduction would be taken.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Someone told me that GM used Pontiac as a testbed for a lot of features. If they worked out they went into other divisions. If that is so I would think there would be a lot of things that might not look right to some judges. </div></div>

Any idea of what some of those were? My 36 has an automatic choke, and idiot light and the 8 cyl. had an elaborate gas pedal initiated starting system. Were they common to other 36 GM marques?

Thanks for all the feedback. I did download the Judge's Manual Peter. Quite interesting. Wish I had a way to get me and my car to AACA events easily -- most are some distance from Maine.

That test bed info came from a fellow that bought a 1934 Pointiac radiator from me a few years ago. I think it was items like those you mentioned, if they turned out well and owners liked them they went on other GM products.

I saw a senior award on a car @ Hershey< a 70 dodge challenger 340 R/T convertible, but here wasn't any 340s in 70 challenger R/Ts.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I saw a senior award on a car @ Hershey< a 70 dodge challenger 340 R/T convertible, but here wasn't any 340s in 70 challenger R/Ts. </div></div>

Well, I for one wouldn't have known that, but is has bugged me that the same award was given to a 1912 Ford Touring car that the owner displayed without both front doors. This was the key selling point of the 1912 Ford line, and introduced the term Fordoor.

Doors are five points each. So if everything else was there and in good shape and they were within ten points of the highest scoring car it explains why they got the award. It happens.

Shoprat, my new rule book says, on page 17 no. 7, "Missing body components such as a missing fender will be subject to the same point deduction as a non-authentic body component{i.e., 40 points per item up to 120 points maximum}. Maybe I'm reading it wrong. But I think 37's point was how could a car even get a senior award while missing the doors? What would this same Challenger look like with a senior award without doors?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What would this same Challenger look like with a senior award without doors? </div></div>

Laughing stock of the meet to Challenger owners, just like a doorless 1912 Ford Touring is to us '12 T guys!

Only 10 points off for a car without it's doors? Then add the deduction for the original dual antenna's on my '57 and I can still win. This judging thing sure can get confusing, huh Choc?

Rick

This could the a selling point on your next restoration. Those on a "budget" may want to forgo the cost or restoring and aligning both doors. Enclosed trailer to show field with seatbelts should not be a problem. No power window rebuilds is another cost saver.

What a great idea Bob!! I like your thinking a lot! But, I must also give credit to Shop Rat for explaining how the point system and deductions work. Isn't this forum wonderful?

Rick

Mr. Shafto, as you can see, if you are still following this thread,the easy answer to your question of how the judges know is simply "they don't". At least not all of them. I certainly am not an expert in this field, but I've read the rule book and am still confused. Because of this I won't put myself on a judging field making rookie mistakes that someone with 60 or more credits is still making. I know there are good judges out there. Shoprat, we have tried to be subtle and it hasn't worked. PLEASE DON"T ANSWER JUDGING QUESTIONS!!

Just for interest sake I went out into the living room and asked Bill, who has more school/CJE/judging credits than I do since he started judging sooner than I did, what the three times are that a judge can deduct the maximum points for an item (excluding when there is a maximum number with a circle around it to indicate that amount must be taken). His answer was exactly what I have heard in every judging school I have ever been to (and we attend a school and a CJE every year) if the item is missing, incorrect or unfit for the purpose it was designed for.

My answer was based on that. And if someone that was judging that car was in the same classes Bill and I were in, had never seen a car with a missing body component and had honestly missed that one paragraph in eighty-four pages of text I bet they took just the ten points off. And no one, not even the Captain, questioned the deduction or called their attention to the error. And if the folks at the table where the sheets are turned in did not question it and all the people in Admin. that look at those sheets did not question it, then no one caught it. And that is how it can happen. So if none of them caught it, and some of them have credits of one hundred and above, I don't feel all that bad that I didn't know. But I do now. And it is an item that they should make sure in the classes that they talk about.

How can you possibly justify this mistake by rationalising it's the committes fault? They look at judging sheets, the judges look at the cars. All they are doing is checking math. The judge has to know what part of the rule book applys and when to apply it. The committee could be looking at 1500-2000 sheets{Hershey}, this was one statement about one car, no time limit. If you didn't know the answer you could have looked it up like I did. Think worst condition, would the Challenger deserve a senior award without doors? You will never judge a car I own. I'm begging you, STOP ANSWERING JUDGING QUESTIONS!

For those that didn't read the original post here it is again.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How can you possibly justify this mistake by rationalising it's the committes fault? They look at judging sheets, the judges look at the cars. All they are doing is checking math. The judge has to know what part of the rule book applys and when to apply it. The committee could be looking at 1500-2000 sheets{Hershey}, this was one statement about one car, no time limit. If you didn't know the answer you could have looked it up like I did. Think worst condition, would the Challenger deserve a senior award without doors? You will never judge a car I own. I'm begging you, STOP ANSWERING JUDGING QUESTIONS! </div></div>

I did not judge the car and make the mistake. I am not justifying the mistake that was made by someone else. I was explaining how it probably happened. And it is a reasonable explanation as to what happened. And it is a fact that the error made it past the Captain who should have caught it first and the committee then missed it. So it slipped through. It is very regrettable that it happens. But it does.

Shop Rat ~ Your ignorance of the AACA judging system is spread all over your posts for all owners and judges to see. You should really follow the suggestions made previously on this thread, and either go away or refrain from uninformed comment.

Your contention that the committee is responsible is ridiculous. The committee does not judge the cars. They are never on the judging field as a committee.

And saying that the administration people should catch the error is equally stupid. They are working in the office checking math and tabulating the work of the teams. When they see a sheet with 10 points taken off for doors, they have no way of knowing if there were doors on the vehicle or whether there was a lot of bad paint or workmanship on 4 doors of a car.

Quit trying to blame someone else for the shortcomings of the team. The <span style="font-weight: bold">TEAM</span> that judged the 1912 Ford, and no one else, is responsible for the Ford with the missing doors getting an award. And you guys, through the ignorance of a member of your team, probably screwed the poor devil with the 2 antennae.

Perhaps you should slip back through the rat hole and stop issuing misinformation here on the forum. Yes, you have told us all about your 60+ judging credits and all the training you have taken. That does not make you an authority.

Howard Scotland

Former Judges Training Director, 4 years

Former Vice President of Class Judging, 2 years

Now retired from judging after 34 years with 265 credits upon retirement.

Now, do you want to match credentials, background and experience.

....that's where the CJE system really needs to be expanded. The current judging manual only covers the basics, and this is where the specifics of different models need to be enhanced through CJE. After speaking with Fred on Saturday, the steps are being taken, and within time, things will get better.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Doors are five points each. So if everything else was there and in good shape and they were within ten points of the highest scoring car it explains why they got the award. It happens. </div></div> No one said you judged this Model T without doors. Your post was explaining why it was no big deal and the car still qualified for a senior. You should not embarrass yourself and the AACA by giving wrong advise. The rule book may need some work but it clearly has the right answer to this problem.

Nowhere in any of my posts have I said it was no big deal, including the original one. As you quoted, I said it happens. If you took that to mean that I in any way feel that it was no big deal that was not my intention at all. It is a very big deal when a car that does not deserve an award gets one.

For the record, I am glad that you pointed out the paragraph on page 17, number 7.

So given that the rule book tricked you by only mentioning the missing part thing once, given that the committee does not look at the cars and can't fix mistakes the judges make, given that '57 Chevies can have 2 antennas, can we count on you not answering any more judging questions or comments? There are people that ask real questions about judging and you have given several wrong answers. This does not look good for the club when you brag about having 63 credits. If you make this many mistakes here with time to look up the answer, how many are being made on the judging field when the integrity of the club is at stake. This is one of several reasons I feel owners should see their judging sheets. The owner deserves to know if the judges really know what they are doing. Can we at least count on you to not answer any more judging related questions?

Part of the problems are caused when people get forced to judge in classes with cars that they're not familiar with..... That is not on the fault of the judge!!

That I don't believe Pat. That's when they should either excuse themselves completely, have one of the other judges help them throughout the class or at least seek help with any technical questions that arises. Who's really not at fault here is the poor guy showing his or her car after spending a ton of time and money only to get wrongfully deducted because of a incompetent judge who won't admit he or she is wrong or doesn't know. That's what I see happening here.

Rick

Very true Rick. Even when I have little doubt, I at least discuss it with the Team Captain, but that isn't always the case.

Rick, What would happen in the situation serval years ago at Carlise. This was probalyRick, what would happen in the situation I was several years ago at Carlisle, if every judge excused themselves completely if they were unfamiliar with the class? At that show, the team I was on, ONLY the team captain had ever judged that class before. Also, a lot of comments I heard was judges saying they didn?t get the classes they asked for. And I believe they were short handed for judges too.

You are correct thought that they should be relying on team members and the team captain for assistance.

Nearchoc, yes you were reading the judges manual right. If that Model T was missing two doors it should have had an 80 point deduction. 40 points per door.

Everybody, The 40 points falls under the Body category subsection non-authentic which is a mandatory 40 points. Remember, when there is a major component missing so is a lot of other things usually. For an example on a missing door you are also missing interior & exterior door handles, window crank handle( or control), inner door panel, interior trim pieces, etc. all of which would be more than the 5 points per door.

This deduction has been pointed out in judges traing. The photo in the 2004 school was a yellow 20's something car, missing a trunk lid. Maybe what isn't clear here to the judges is exactly where to make the deduction on the sheet. I'll mention this to the chairman of judges training.

David ~ That yellow '20s car with the missing deck lid is probably a Model T roadster. I made a slide of that car back in 1979 or 1980 at a Meet in Casa Grande, Arizona, for a judges training program I prepared when I was Judges Training Director [that was the title back then.] A number of those slides have been recycled over the past 25 years into new programs, probably because they clearly illustrate an item that the Judging Committee feels should be continually stressed.

Since that was 25 years ago, this missing component thing is nothing new that has just been sprung on the judges. It has been around and stressed for 25 years. Some people either just can't read, listen or comprehend. I think we know one or more of those people, self appointed experts who think they know more than they really do, and don't mind sharing their ignorance with the rest of us.

hvs

Howard, I had to get out a copy of the judging sheet in order to determine where the deduction was suppose to be taken since I normally don't do exteriors. If the words missing conponet was added to the spot where it says non-authentic would help personally. (pardon spelling- I'm doing the quick at work)

David, I'm also wondering what happens when only those in the know can actually be on a judging team? You have to start somewhere. That's what apprenticeship is all about, I would think.

As far as ShopRat is concerned, since she wasn't the team captain, I don't see where she had anything to do with the problem. Of course my one (1) judging point doesn't give me much authority, does it? <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> Wayne