Ten Point Rule

[Guest windjamer]

Whats wrong with Binghamton next mo, <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> Judging school fri. the 29 show sat the 30. Good luck,there is a god. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Ron Green]

Quote; "Suffice to say that I will always lose 12 points off the top, therefore I will never reach First Junior as long as there are newly restored 99+ point cars in the class."

Probably 100% correct on your comment.

If you know you are losing 12 points (which is huge amount in AACA) it seems you have a few options. If you want that trophy fix a few things to have less deductions (close the gap), be happy with 2nd's and 3rd's or just sign up as a do not judge and relax and enjoy the cars and the people. That is what I have been doing lately and it sure is a lot more fun then going for a 1st junior, etc.

[Steve Moskowitz]

<span style="font-weight: bold">Don't forget about DPC!!!</span>

[Guest quadfins]

Well, here goes (hold nose, jump in)...

twelve point... two words:

radial tires

I consider them to be as much a safety factor and drivability issue as seatbelts and turn signals. I may drive this car 500 miles to a meet, but I drive it much more throughout the rest of the year. I am of the generation that NEVER drove on bias ply tires, except on our decrepit model A, on surface streets, never more than 40 mph. Great for a parade, crummy for a cross country cruise.

I can handle the 12 points, and many others. But even so, the car rates higher than 365, as seen on the judging sheets. The ten point rule keeps it down.

If I invest in a set of bias-ply, then scratch the paint, let the engine grease accumulate, maybe throw in a dent or two, and dump coffee on the upholstery, it may still be over 365.

Which brings us back to...

Is a 365 point car, regardless of where the points are deducted, a First Junior car (excluding competitors), or is it not?

The ten point rule says that it is not. Let?s stay on track here. We USED to be discussing the merits of the ten point rule. Where are the supporting arguments? Trying to change the direction of this discussion with ?But if you did this?? arguments simply obfuscates the original question.

I know that I can gain 15 ? 20 points, if I am willing to demote the car to museum status. That would compromise the whole purpose of owning it ? driving. And even with 20 more points, it might STILL get placed with the next restoration shop newbie. So how has my original question changed?

Suggestions so far:

Fix the car

DPC

Be happy with 2nd/3rd

OK.

But I am still waiting for the reasoning behind the ten point rule, and the benefits it brings the hobby.

[Ron Green]

Well I will semi stray off topic for one more time to address some of your comments, plus I am heading out of town for a few days so I won't be able to respond.

I had the same frustrations as you getting my 1st junior however I finally got it. It was a lot of hard work which makes me feel even better about winning such an award. I went up against the best and won, finally. By the way it was my radial tires that were stopping me from winning my 1st junior, and probably you too.

I personally think the 10 point rule favored me. I too am of the generation that never drove on bias tires however my car handles fine on bias tires, but all the suspension parts, etc must be in good shape. I have zero issues with bias tires safety wise. Pick some deductions that you can correct that are not expensive like bias tires.

As you stated "I know that I can gain 15 ? 20 points, if I am willing to demote the car to museum status." (See my car on the attachment) You can have a museum car and still drive it and win awards. Mine has been on several local tours in the past 6 months and its first AACA meet was driven 110 miles, one way . Driving to a national meet requires one to clean, scrub, clean, paint, clean, dust, etc, etc, etc for many hours and maybe you just don't want to do that (not trying to start an argument here).

I do agree with Dave the AACA President when he stated "If we change the program and allow all cars 365 or more to win the First Junior then our standard of perfection is no longer 400, it is now 365."

Have a great holiday.

[Shop Rat]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, here goes (hold nose, jump in)...

twelve point... two words:

radial tires

I consider them to be as much a safety factor and drivability issue as seatbelts and turn signals.</div></div>

You and many others feel this way. However, that has fallen on deaf ears every time it has been brought up by anyone. Look at how many years everyone drove on bias ply tires and they did just fine.

You can do what we will do when our car is ready for shows. It came to us as a driver with radial tires on it. We plan to get correct show tires and use them only for showing the car. The rest of the time it will be on radials. We aren't going to buck the system, we will spend the money and stay within the rules.

And Steve M. is right, don't forget about the DPC class.

But if you have to have that trophy you are going to have to put forth the effort to earn it under the current rules or get the rules changed. And getting the rule changed will not happen on this forum. And I agree that if they leave the minimum score at 365 for a First Junior and take all that get that then why strive for better? Where is the advantage to the owner that goes that extra mile to have the car be the best it can be?

[novaman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Well, here goes (hold nose, jump in)...

twelve point... two words:

radial tires</div></div>

I figured that out work today. It took me awhile as I couldn't comeup with a 12 point deduction for any one item. That is because the two words Radial Tires usualy equal 15 points (most likely you forgot to count that radial spare, unless it can't be seen)

working on my comments from last night. I'll post them later.

[Guest quadfins]

The first thing I do upon arriving at a meet is seek out the local car wash, and proceed to prep the car. This is after hours of pre-trip cleaning, scrubbing, and detailing. The proof of this is in the 365+ points consistently awarded. Believe me; I am not averse to scrubbing engines! Especially since I drive it several times a week, so I give it a good detailing after every expedition. I derive great satisfaction from this effort (not work, mind you...)

I don't agree that the ten point spread lowers the standard. If we want to raise the standard, then raise the minimum points necessary. The standard is set by the points level. 365, 380, 390. Requiring all other cars to be within ten points of the HIGHEST car does not change the minimum points level. Especially in the bigger meet picture. That is to say, the bar is set at, say, 365. In any class, 365 is potentially a First Junior winner. That is the stated points minimum. But the additional requirement that in order to achieve a First, one must score at the minimum PLUS be within ten points of the top scoring car does not lower that minimum. All it says is that some cars, in some "busy" classes, have to compete against each other, as well as achieve the minimum. And there is the heart of my objection. We claim that the cars don?t compete against each other, but they actually do. If a car in class 10A is a First with 365 points, but a car in class 10B is not a First with 389 points, how does that lower the minimum? That 365 is still the stated required level. Remember, my only objection is with the ten point spread, not the minimum points necessary. The point spread automatically handicaps cars that are in popular categories. All that the ten point rule achieves is to set the cars against each other. If we want to raise the standard, then raise the minimum points required. The ten point rule is unnecessary for that. I don't see how the ten point rule can favor anyone. It does not add points to one's score, nor does it lower the minimum points needed. It only serves to cut off otherwise high scoring and deserving cars. Remember, the 365 point car in class X does win, but the 389 point car in class Y does not. How is that helpful? When one car gets the award in a class for making the minimum points, plus being the highest scorer, how does it help by preventing other minimum+ scoring cars from also being recognized? All it does is create frustration. 365 is not a perfect car. First AGNM is. That is where the best of the best get their recognition. First Junior is, in my opinion, the entry level. The better cars will progress and gravitate upward through the levels. That is natural. How does denying deserving entry level cars raise the standard?

I hope you, too have a good holidy, which includes classic cars. I will be taking my daughter to the local National Cemetery, to pay our repects. Maybe we'll drive one of the classics???

[Guest quadfins]

So my question is, "Why are those ears deaf?"

Why is there resistance to change?

If the system is beneficial, keep it. If it is detrimental, change it.

I have put forth the effort, and the car has earned it, as the judging feedback sheets consistently prove. Certainly the car has earned 365 points worth of credit, probably more. There are NOT many categories highlighted on the sheet. The only thing holding it down is the ten point rule. In effect, we are saying that, in order to earn First Junior in this class, 365 is not enough - you need 390. That is a double standard, if it is not applied to all classes. That is what I object to.

I am seeking, as my original post clearly states, the rational defense of a system that I feel is detrimental. So far, I have read no convincing arguments that would lead me to conclude that the ten point rule is beneficial.

I realize that the forum is not the means to affect change. It IS a means to exchange ideas. Before I bring a formal motion to the judging committee, I wanted to garner ideas and opinions, and get a consensus viewpoint - am I completely out on a limb, with nothing to support my contention, or do others perceive the situation as I do?

Again, I have read no convincing arguments that would lead me to conclude that the ten point rule is beneficial or provides an incentive for members to become involved in meets. Rather, it discourages those who have made bona fide efforts, worked to achieve a minimum standard, and then realize that their efforts will come to naught when the professionally restored car is delivered to the next spot. If this were an anomaly, a one time fluke, it would not rankle so much. But three times, with no end in sight? Where is the incentive in that? And these ARE factors that many of us must consider as we decide whether or not to continue to participate in meets.

Back to the original question?All of this frustration. For what? There must be some good reason for it (the ten point rule).

We also drove for many years without seatbelts, airbags, electronic ignition, and catalytic converters. How many times must I state that I am not contending the points that are deducted from my car? Some of these are voluntary - I CAN change them if I choose. My objection is to the ten point rule. Regardless of what the points are deducted for - radial tires, seatbelts, chrome air cleaner, bug splats - if 365 points satisfies the minimum for one car, it should satisfy the minimum for all cars. I am not trying to buck the system. If I get deducted 15 points for tires, and you get deducted 15 points for wavy body panels, what is the difference? If both cars are otherwise so well presented that they reach 389 points, why should they be denied recognition, simply because the third car in our class is a 400 point car? At the same time the 365 point car one class over DOES make the grade? Why should I NOT be frustrated?

The advantage for the owner who makes the extra effort is the knowledge that he will continue to progress up the scale -Senior, Preservation, AGNM. He will get there, no matter what. How is he harmed or humiliated if others get to the initial level with him?

It is not the trophy. I already have more that I have room for. It is the principle. Do we compete against each other, or against a scale? Do we say one thing, and do another?

[Guest quadfins]

Yes, it was unclear, since the car is of a marque that has a covered spare tire.

From the factory, or dealer added? "Only your hairdresser knows for sure."

Those luxury marques don't want to scratch your luggage, do they?

Nor your fingernails, that's why there is a power remote trunk release and pull down.

46 years old. Works perfectly, now.

AACA doesn't care.

But darned if you run on radials... Even if they are practically the only points deductions.

Looking forward to your comments.

[novaman]

Finally got the post written in Word to copy it here. 3 hours researching and typing last night for last night?s post and 2 hours for tonight?s post.

By the way, I only go to work to relax from the old car stuff. I'm webmaster for 11 chapters, 2 regions, newsletter editor for 1 region, AACA judge, working on online judging program for judges training committee, on the 2008 Sentimental tour committee and chairman for one route, and doing the tour book and all graphics work for the tour, and restoring 2 Chevy IIs.

Here's my comments. Hope they make sense.

With the information I have found on the history of the judging system leads me to deduct the following conclusion:

With a history of cars touring and being driven to the show, when the current system was setup, the idea was to award those that have tried their best to restore a vehicle back to original/factory condition and have the highest placed car start the ten point range, thus avoiding the need to deal with ties, and also covers the issue of this meet here on the east coast, being judged by ?east coast? judges vehicles tend to get judged easier than by a group of judges at a meet on the west with judges from the west coast. For example sake, say a car scored 400 points at Hershey where we all know the judges have the toughest time judging due to the number of cars and in the past being packed tight and crowd with spectators things will get missed. That same car out on the west coast, at a meet of 75 cars (not uncommon from what I?ve heard from members attending western meets) and is the best car there might only get say a 395. At either meet, the ?cream of the crop? in that ten point range gets a 1st. Now remembering the history, most of the cars most likely wouldn?t be scoring 395 and better like they are today. If it were a point blank cut-off and a tight range like the ten or 15 instead of 35 cut-off like it is, there is a good chance that judges from one meet to the next could easily inadvertently keep members from awards they should receive. The ?floating? range based on the top car helps to correct scoring if the judges are too lenient or too tough. No matter whether too tough, average or too lenient, it is still the top 10 point range cars getting 1st place. Kind of like grade school when a teacher used a curve and gave a test. If the smartest kid in the class could only get a 90, the teacher might have given an extremely hard test. Using the curve and making that 90 = a 100 helps those kids that made an 80-something also get an ?A?. Then there some like I, who would ace a test and ruin it for the class.

The above handles awarding the better cars the higher place awards. But there is a problem with that system that most people don?t think about in the more modern era of the hobby because we see a national meet with lots of cars. It had been mentioned somewhere here recently about class 5C having no vehicles. With the above, if you brought a piece of junk that could be driven onto the showfield and you were the only vehicle you could take home a 1st. That is where the point cut-off comes in. It was simply meant as this is the lowest that would possibly be accepted for that award level, not what the level is you should be trying to achieve in the restoration. If everyone did that in school,?? oh yeah I forgot geometry class, all I did was try to get a 70 to pass (got out with a 69.5, thank goodness for rounding figures).

Most every time I?m involved in a discussion about the points system and why someone didn?t achieve the award they were trying for, it usually turns out to be one of two things. I don?t want to spend the dollar to make it correct or I want the vehicle my way, and the system should change to accommodate me. There is a gentleman in my local region that has a beautiful early 70s Ford Pickup. He took it to Asheville and got a 2nd with it. When I talked to him about it, and I found out he had radial tires and halogen headlights. I explained to him that if he corrected those items, he should have no problems in getting his 1st JR, and Sr awards. He refuses to do so because he drives the truck pretty regularly and doesn?t want to spend the money on bias tires for just shows. He took it to New Bern and got a 2nd again. He is giving up an unnecessary 25 points if he?d change them.

Ex98thdrill is the best example of not needing to lay out the big bucks for a professional restoration but the awards can be still achieved with some labor. The question is how much do you want to save by sweating yourself, instead of paying someone to sweat for you. If you ever get the chance you need to look at his Plymouth Woodie wagon. I?ve seen professional jobs done on woodies that aren?t even close to that nice and he and his dad did all the woodwork themselves. One side of that car was pretty much non-existent.

I know what your comment most likely is by now, ?he hasn?t made a real argument for the 10 point spread?. Short version in my opinion is the people that set the system up intended for it to award 1st to the scores of 391 to 400, 2nd to scores of 381 to 390 and 3rd to score of 371 to 380. But to be fair to the car owners, tried to compensate for as much human judgment error as possible by allowing some flexibility to the system.

As for the statement of ?you?re competing against points and not the other vehicles? is as much true, as it isn?t. What the judging committee is trying to get across and is lost in translation, is that you are trying to achieve a perfect 400 point score and you car is being judged according to the score sheet for your total. Not a case of like some local meets where they walk down the class and say this one is nicer that that one therefore this gets a 1st and that gets a 2nd. Or I don?t like green cars or Mustangs therefore all green cars or Mustangs get a 3rd. The car is judged on authenticity, workmanship, and condition only and only compared to the figures on the judging sheet. Not to another vehicle, not to an award level, etc. There is no competition against other vehicles there. It?s just the car, and its score sheet. Most of the team captains I?ve worked with do not total the score sheets for the cars in a class until after all the cars are judges. Plus you can?t determine the awards until all the cars are judged. Where people view the statement as false is when it comes to the awards themselves. Most see it as ?that car was better than mine or worse than mine? which is the competitiveness of our human nature. Instead of viewing it as ?I?m part of the group closest to achieving the 400 point/perfect score?

Hopefully, if I?m not proper in my thinking here, Steve M., Rick or Hulon will correct me

[Guest quadfins]

Now THAT was the most rational explanation I have read. Thanks for taking the time to explain.

What it means, though, (if it is indeed the actual policy and philosophy), is that the cars DO compete against each other ? with some leeway around them, and some minimum standards.

This is really what I wanted to know.

If this IS the case, then it should be acknowledged and clarified, so as to not raise false expectations, leading to disenchantment.

All it would take is some simple re-wording. Instead of saying that a First Junior is awarded to a car that scores 365 points, unless it does not come within ten points of the top points car, it should read that the top point car is awarded First, along with any cars within ten points, and over the minimum of 365 points, with those scoring more than ten points below awarded Second, etc?

This would make it more clear to entrants what they are up against, and acknowledge the fact that cars compete against each other?

The first wording implies ?You will do well, unless in that remote instance where the perfect car shows up?. The second clarifies that the top car is the First winner, but we will let some lesser others tag along as well, providing they meet some minimum standards.

But in all of it, there is still a measure of chance that can never be predicted. It all depends upon how many cars attend a given meet, and register in a given class. So it goes back to the fact that cars compete against each other, not against a set points scale. This is perfectly fine with me. I know that AACA is the big league, both quality-wise and financially. The cars are of such high quality and rarity, they have truly brought tears to as my eyes behold them in wonder. The First place cars deserve their awards.

I am simply frustrated by the fact that a car that does make the points cut, and appears to fulfill the requirements, is always brushed aside by the ?New Kid on the Block?. As I read the guidelines, I thought that there was room for all the kids on the block. Some would eventually move up to a better neighborhood, but they didn?t need to evict the rest of us on their way up.

If someone simply wanted trophies to display over the mantle, he could then cherry pick his classes, or meets (western or eastern) and restore those cars that are least likely to have competitors in their class.

For those whose car is in a more common, or popular class, clarifying the judging guidelines would let them know that their competition is tougher, and their standard is higher.

This would be a more accurate representation, and eliminate the false expectations.

So option A would be to change the ten point rule, and option B would be to clarify the judging philosophy and guidelines.

Would any committee members out there care to tell us which is more likely? Because, after all, this is what helps us decide whether to attend a meet and which category to enter in.

So then what happens when we accept the reality, enter a meet in DPC, and find out that there is no 400 point car in our ?normal? judging class? It is too late to switch, and the opportunity is lost.

Fool me once again.

Darn that human nature!

[novaman]

Thought of something else this morning regarding this subject. That is the fact that there are really two parts to the total package. That is the actual judging and the awards. To try to get across what I'm getting at, let's use my local region's car show for an example. A couple of years ago, I was the chief judge for the meet. It was at a time when we had become a region from a chapter status. In that transition there were unfortunely a bunch of threats made by members of the parent region. Therefore we figured we could not count on their support at the show and changed our awards to a single 1st, 2nd, 3rd for each class, figuring we were going to lose half the cars in our show. Each car was point judged in all four areas just like a national meet. The judging committee got accused of being unfair, not judging according to AACA guidelines like we said we were, and even had someone write to national headquarters about it. At the last couple of meets, the judges walked through the cars with the judging sheet, walked around the car and gave it a 1st, 2nd or 3rd. I?ve watched a couple different groups and NONE of them looked under the car. The awards were given in the multiple format. Every car took home a trophy, no matter how poorly it really was. Everyone was happy. So apparently, it isn?t about accurately judging vehicles, as much as it is about appeasing everyone with an award. Remember, I?m talking on a local level here.

[ex98thdrill]

I think at this point if I was wanting to win a First Junior and couldn't due to a set of tires, I'd buy the tires or quit wondering why I wasn't winning.

I could understand if it was an incorrect engine, wrong body color, or incorrect interior where it would be a major expense to change the vehicle. But in relation to those other costs, tires are expendable. For under $1,000 you could buy another set of tires and rims, and only put the tires on when you're getting the vehicle judged at a national meet. Once the vehicle gets a Senior Award, put the radials back on the car and collect Preservation Awards. If that is all that is holding the car back, you should only have to do it for two meets. There's nothing saying that once the car gets a Senior that you can't sell off the tires and wheels again. For the amount of money that's been spent driving the vehicle to all of those meets and trying to win the First Junior, you've probably spent that amount in gas going to the extra meets than if you'd have just bitten the bullet and spent the money buying the correct tires to begin with.

My concern is if we allow the rules to be bent over tires, what will be the next authentic item that will be compromised??

I know last year they allowed electric fuel pumps, but that was so you could get more of the older cars out to the meets that were running on the vacuum pumps. I'm quite confident that had there not been a shortage of vehicles of that vintage showing up on the showfield, that rule wouldn't have been changed.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not condemning anyone for their opinions. It looks more like a case where if you follow the rules, and win the awards, then the rules won't an issue. Once you win the award, they can't take it away from you, so it's a matter of playing the game only long enough to win the award that you want.

[novaman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Now THAT was the most rational explanation I have read. Thanks for taking the time to explain. </div></div> Your welcome. I believe AACA has the best and fairest (to both judges and car owners) system you can have for a organization like it is. Most clubs only need judges to be "experts" in certain areas. Like the Mustang club would need the judges trained in ceratin era mustangs. Where there is no way you could train the majority of AACA judges to know everything about all the cars at the meet. It may not be perfect all the time, but you'd be hard pressed to find a system that would work better for variety of cars it had to cover.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> All it would take is some simple re-wording. Instead of saying that a First Junior is awarded to a car that scores 365 points, unless it does not come within ten points of the top points car, it should read that the top point car is awarded First, along with any cars within ten points, and over the minimum of 365 points, with those scoring more than ten points below awarded Second, etc?

</div></div>

My understanding has always been: 1st is awarded to the highest placed vehicle and any vehicle within ten points as long as it exceed the minimum points standard for that award.

[Guest quadfins]

Novaman, you must not sleep, either.

I agree with you.

I have been a judge at many local shows. Sometimes there are two cars in a class, while other classes have a dozen. When we have 1st, 2nd, & 3rd place for each class, it gets dicey. 4th place car in class A was FAR better than first place in class B, but still took nothing home. I have been on the other side of that clipboard, too. I am perfectly content to come in behind a magnificent car. But at least I knew that the cars were being judged against each other within the class, not upon an established standard of excellence. It can't be both - it can be the one, or the other. Otherwise it is a double standard.

I guess it is that a second implies that the car is not up to the points minimum. Maybe if the plaque was engraved with a proviso... "Would have been a first, except that..."

[novaman]

two other things just crossed my mind

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nor your fingernails, that's why there is a power remote trunk release and pull down.

46 years old. Works perfectly, now.

AACA doesn't care.

</div></div>

One of the reason AACA doesn?t car if all the systems work, is do you realize how long that would take to check on all the vehicles. It wouldn?t be bad at smaller meets but you get to the larger ones like Hershey and the judging team has to judge 20-25 cars (I?ve fallen in that range with 21 or 22). At Hershey we started at 10 am, and work until all the cars are judged. When I had those 21 or 22 cars, most of them going for their junior we finished close to 2pm. That averages out to about 10 min per car including the time judging, transferring scores and moving on. Now to add checking that the lights, horn, windows, convertible top, is going to add another 2 to 4 minutes on top of that. So now that would be 3pm and judges admin. Still needs to do their job so those attending the banquet can get their awards. Plus how would you propose checking cruise control if we are checking that all the systems work? Also, it wouldn?t be fair to require checking them at small meets and not require them checked at larger meets.

The other is:

One of the complaint/arguments has been about that 400 point car that shows up. I?m not intending any disrespect here, but it could be take wrong. You stated that you know you have 15-20 points that could be taken on your car. That means you don?t even need a 400 point car to show up to ruin your day. All it possibly would take is a 386 point car (if yours is just meeting the minimum point figure), and if you?re getting 20 taken, a 391 point car would still knock you out of a 1st.

[Guest quadfins]

Agreed, that game can be played. But to me, it still does not solve the principle of the issue.

What is the benefit of the ten point rule? How does it help the hobby?

Conversely:

Same car, same points deductions (presumably, or at least close):

Second at Virginia Beach

Would have made First at Waco

Second at Asheville

Would have made First at Sunnyvale

Second at New Bern

Would have made First at Gainesville, Northglenn, and Jeffersonville.

The difference? Who else showed up. Not the quality of the car. We DO compete against each other.

I am not wondering why the car is not winning. I am displeased about the contradiction in the system.

I suppose that it can be rationalized by saying that we are trying to encourage members in less populated regions to restore and enter meets by making it easier for them to move up the scale. But does that not create a double standard, and favoritism? Does that not "lower the bar"? 365 is acceptable there, but not at the other.

Maybe all I need is a simple acknowledgment of this fact. Then I can decide my future course of action.

But as long as the rules stand as stated, with the ten point scale, there is enough glimmer of hope (and chance), that fools like me may keep trying.

And disappointed.

The consensus, so far, seems to be that even though the system is flawed and good cars suffer, it will be retained. I can assume that any judging committee will reflect these views. So I may, then, be crying in the wilderness.

"Agitate, Agitate, Agitate", said Frederick Douglass, if you ever want change and justice.

[Guest quadfins]

I agree completely. It is impractical to check all components. I admire and respect the judges for devoting their time on behalf of others, resulting in their own inability to leisurely roam the fields and look at all the cars present. That is a generous gift they give to the club. I would not want to make it more arduous.

Besides, that would put a "loaded" car at a severe disadvantage over a Plain Jane. The loaded car could have a multitude of points deducted for faulty components that the 'stripper" does not even have. In my marque club, in which all the components ARE tested, we call that "The Penalty of Leadership", as stated in ads of the period. That is the choice you make which selecting a particular car to restore.

Like it or not, in AACA we DO compare the Imperials with the Plymouths (just a figure of speech - those are not my brands). I have no objection to that. But it does mean that I may have put much more work into my restoration that the car who gets to move up the scale. In that case, we are NOT rewarding effort. I am not advocating changing this part of the system. In theory, it is my choice whether I want to restore Grandma?s Valiant or her Continental. We all know which would be easier. Which would I choose is a different matter.

It is NOT my choice who else and how many others also join the competition. That is a matter of chance and geography.

And the competition IS against each other, with the ten point rule.

And I agree with you about the points, although the number of points overall is not my argument. I was thinking in terms of theoretical worst-case scenarios. It does not matter if the car is a 389 or a 365 point car. The only thing that does matter is that ten point spread. And as I said way before, the other thing that seems inequitable is that the theoretical 389 point car is relegated to Second, the 378 point car is Third, while the 365 point car in the next class is First. It just bothers me to not be able to break through the glass ceiling while others cars with obvious flaws (that can easily be remedied, such as incorrect hose clamps), and possibly scoring lower than mine, advance to Senior, Preservation, and AGNM.

[Guest windjamer]

Forget the score. In your local club you give one first. At aaca its possable to have 15 cars in say class 27j and 14 of them could get first, thanks to the 10 point rule.I agree with 98, if your loseing first because you have five radial tires that no ones fault but your own. I dont mean to sound crule but i bought 5 tires for my wifes car and 3 years later five for mine. If I had tyo buy tires to get a first why the he-- should we change the rules for you?Like I said I dont mean to sound hard but you have a choise . Buy the da-- tires and join us. Good luck. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Guest windjamer]

Quadfins I forgot to add, I have 4 vary good E78-14 matching good years. Come to Binghamton and Ill GIVE the things to you.

Nowe thats a good deal <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

[Restorer32]

I have not yet seen any scientific effort that radials are "safer" on old cars. The safety issue seems only to be brought up by those who want to run radials and also seriously compete for a trophy. While we're at it, those old engines are not "safe" either. Maybe we should allow small block Chevy engines in the interest of "safety". Also disc brakes, traction bars, lowered suspensions for lower center of gravity, halogen lights, fuel cells instead of tanks, fuel injection instead of those old leaky carburetors...oh wait, that's already been done, they're called STREETRODS! What part of "restored to original as it could have left the factory" don't you understand?

[Guest windjamer]

Thank you 32, Nuff said. OOPS, one more. Who said ( if you cant stand the heat,get the hell out of the kitchen) <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Guest quadfins]

Until the last two posts, this discussion was being carried out in a civil manner, free of personal invective. That appears to be changing.

?Get the hell out of the kitchen.?

Is that a threat, or just rudeness? Is that what the club wants? But like it or not, I am just as much a member as the next person.

I realize now that being open and honest about where some of my points were deducted was a tactical mistake, because it has allowed some readers to shift the focus of the original discussion to a tangential topic that does not relate to my original question.

Erase from your minds, if you will, the points deducted from my tires. Substitute, if it will make you happy, other deductions that you feel are more acceptable ? paint chips, greasy engine, fading chrome, incorrect hose clamps. Are those ?approved?? Here, I?ll help. Three for exterior body and paint, three for engine compartment flaws, three for interior stains, and three for chassis and underbody. Same twelve points.

Now, back to my original question. Having had those points deducted, and perhaps many more, does a car that scores 365 points reach the benchmark that has been established for First Junior? If it reaches 375, does it merit Senior? Why, then should this car be denied the award simply because another car scored more than ten points higher? How does this possibly benefit the higher scoring car? At the same time, will you deny that it sends a message to ?lesser? car that that he has, in fact, competed with the higher car, rather than a set benchmark of quality?

That is the heart of my contention. Try as you might to hijack the discussion, that will remain my contention. Where is the refutation?

Where the points are deducted is not relevant. How can one defend a system that has no benefit (at least as defended so far), but does have a demoralizing and detrimental effect?

The ten point rule is EXclusive, because it excludes from recognition those cars that have otherwise reached the established benchmarks (do I dare use THAT term in this context?) that have been established in order to be awarded a certain level ?the three Junior levels and Senior.

Eliminating the ten point rule would be INclusive, because it would then include all the cars that have, in fact, reached the established levels, regardless of the unanticipated chance of what others cars happen to be placed with it during a given meet.

It is not just about ME. I have spoken to others who feel this same way. Don?t believe it? Do you want names and phone numbers?

It is not a matter of too much heat in the kitchen. In fact, if you really pay attention to what I am saying, it is not a matter of how high the temperature is. It is a matter of establishing the required heat in the recipe, and then changing it while the cake is being baked.

I have, apparently, like many others, achieved those standards according to the AACA benchmarks. At best, I perceive a flaw in the system and am seeking to redress it. At worst, I am exposing a double standard and hypocrisy that some members have no trouble accepting, and some want to perpetuate. As a middle possibility, the stated guidelines are unclear or contradictory, and subject to misinterpretation.

And Windjammer, thanks for the offer of the tires. They would be too small, still not be factory correct, and would make my car look more like a lowered streetrod that my current tires.

[MCHinson]

Quadfins, You are right that most of this has been civil. Hopefully it will continue to remain civil. But, we can talk about it on the forum forever and the rule will not change as a result. As Dave Berg, current president of AACA, stated early on "write the VP Class Judging with your suggestions".

I would suggest that you put together a nice detailed explanation of your thoughts on this subject and send it off to the VP of Class Judging. Explain it in the well thought out manner that your posts here have included.

I have not personally had a problem with the 10 point rule. I received both my 1st Junior and my Senior the first time out. I am now planning to go the AGNM in July.

I do know others who have also experienced the disappointment that you describe multiple times due to another car in their class that was owned by someone with a lot more money to spend than they could afford. I don't know if the Class Judging Committee will agree with your proposed rule change or not, but I would support the idea. I am convinced by your posts. It sounds like you may have the right idea for AACA for tomorrow. Good luck!

[Guest quadfins]

MCHinson, you are right on target.

My idea was to initially toss this topic out and try to shake out some thoughts and ideas besides my own. That has succeeded. It has been a refreshing academic exercise, and I have to say that I have enjoyed it. It is kind of fun to shake up the snow dome every now and then.

Step B is to compile these thoughts into a formal request for consideration. I will be doing that shortly.

And I do appreciate EVERYONE's contributions to this thread.

[novaman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Novaman, you must not sleep, either. </div></div>

Long restful night - 5 to 6 hours

Newlstter behind schedule and needs to be mailed today - 2hour

5 minute catnap - priceless <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Shop Rat]

My advice to you on the letter is to keep it short and simple. Also send copies of the sheets that were sent to you and copies any letters that came with them to back up your claim without making them go hunting for the orginals.

I do see your point about how some people get their First Junior award with a lesser car and you can't and you may have scored higher than they did regardless of radial tires, etc.

There is a guy here that has a 1969 Rambler SC/Rambler. It is far from perfect and he knows it. But he is able to show it as a certified race car. He took it to a show, it was raining and he was the highest scoring car and he made the 365 cutoff so he got his First Junior. He knows that he will never go further than that. He does not want to restore the car, he wants to enjoy it.

But I think that if they are going to change the rules, and drop the ten point spread, they need to raise the cutoff if they are going to encourage people to keep their cars up.

[Guest windjamer]

Quadfin it was not my intent to be uncivel.In my years in the AACA I dont think I met anouther member that would deliberatly discurage anouther member. I ment only to help. I dont know where you live or what size tires you need, but my offer still stands. If you can use E78-14 tires and are close to Binghamton NY. I have 4 goodyears Ill give you. Nothing wrong with them, I bought new ones because a former pres. of class judging (Randy) pointed out to me that letter size tires where wrong for my 65. Like i said, we all try to help each outher, At least most of us.I just thought you ask the same question over and over and you kept geting the same ex. advice. If you dont want to accept it thats your busness, but dont blame the club if you are unwilling to change. I dont know anybody that restores a car to the min. and quits. Thats kind a dumb we all (Ithink) shoot for that400 and pray. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Guest quadfins]

Windjamer -

Thanks, truly, for the offer of the tires. But I need L78-15s (think BIG car), and letter series would also be too recent for me. Besides, I can't really attend more than one meet each year. Virginia Beach did not count, as it is just an hours drive away. My big chance next year will be Charlotte or Cumberland. And after having the door slammed 3 times in a row, I just don't know...

I was asking the same question because I was never getting a straight answer. Even now, with maybe one exception, I don't think anyone has adequately defended the ten point rule.

The reality is, I can't compete, financially, with the Big Dogs. And I thought it wasn't supposed to be a competition. The ten point rule makes it so.

[Peter J.Heizmann]

quadfins...

Please stay your course.

Matt McHinson answered your question very well and you responded correctly: Send your request to the attention of Hulon McCraw, VP of Class Judging with your issues based upon data you received on this forum and your opinions for improvement.

By your own admission, you wanted to use the forum for input. In so many words, I feel you received it, and, "this forum will not address your concerns without sending your letter for proper consideration to the VP of Class Judging". I can attest that the officials of "Our AACA", past and present, take issues and suggestions seriously as I have found to be true.

That being said, I have a question for you: "Have you clicked upon and read everything that this AACA Forum provides and/or offers?".

There is so much more to the AACA "Mission Statement" than meet trophies. Your choice and I sincerely hope you become involved for the benefit of "future generations. If you or I go to the big meet in the sky tonight, what good is it if we have not educated the youth of today with what we "know" about any particular vehicle?"

Again, take some time and scroll around this AACA Forum to see what we are all about...Judging, Library, Museum, Rummage Box, and, of utmost importance, "YOUTH".

My 2-cents and sincerely, I respect you if your goals are solely generated to put your vehicle through the AACA Judging system for now.

PJH... <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Guest quadfins]

Good morning PJH,

I agree with you entirely. This forum and our excellent magazine make club membership worthwhile. But there is so much more.

At the local shows or cruise-ins, when the saucer-eyed kid gets to sit in my car, honk the horns, and play with the power vent switches, it is all worthwhile. As he leaves with a huge grin, I think to myself "There goes another recruit..."

I am off to surf the site...

Best wishes this Memorial Day!

[Peter J.Heizmann]

That's the spirit, quadfins. Have a nice day.

PJH... <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

[ex98thdrill]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ex98thdrill is the best example of not needing to lay out the big bucks for a professional restoration but the awards can be still achieved with some labor. The question is how much do you want to save by sweating yourself, instead of paying someone to sweat for you. If you ever get the chance you need to look at his Plymouth Woodie wagon. I?ve seen professional jobs done on woodies that aren?t even close to that nice and he and his dad did all the woodwork themselves. One side of that car was pretty much non-existent.</div></div>

Thanks David, that was a very nice thing to say. You don't have to say that just to get an invitation to the house. As we said in Hershey, when Binghamton rolls around, you guys are welcome at our place. Whether it mean a place to keep the car and the trailer, or a place to stay, you and your family are always welcome.

Just for clarification, my dad did most of the woodwork. I am was more of the hired hand, and a lot of the woodwork was being done while I was playing in the sand. Just to repeat things, we had an estimate to do the woodwork at $15,000, we bought the wood for $800, and then spent another $1,000 for the machine to make the joints in the wood to factory specs. Two years ago when the car was down to a woodie show in Waterloo, NY my father and I were both interviewed by a reporter from Old Cars Weekly. I'll tell you the same answer that I told him..

"We heat our shop with wood, when we made a mistake, we threw the piece into the stove and tried again." "Sometimes that shop stayed really warm." <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

If you have the place to do the work, the tools to do it, and the desire to get the work done, YOU CAN WIN THE AWARDS. Sometimes you might have to take a step back and do something over, but it can be done. We started with a used trailer, and a cheap pickup, and we've slowly upgraded into something nicer. It didn't take a million dollars, but it did take some time.

We are a couple of working class people playing in a hobby where some people are far from being financially challenged, and we've BEATEN them before. If and when you can do that, people will soon find out who you are. With a little time and determination it can be done by anyone. We used to go to Hershey and spend all week sleeping in the back of the truck under a plastic tarp just so we could be close to the meet and so we could have more money to spend on parts. Now we rent a house at Fort Indiantown Gap for $42 a night, and if we can't get a house, we sleep in the barracks for $10 a night. My dad and I pool our money and do things very low budget and still win.

At the end of the month we're borrowing a trailer to haul the fire truck to Binghamton, and in order to get the trailer, we're doing a job for the guy who owns the trailer for the cost of materials only.

AACA is not a rich man's club. AACA is a club where you have people with deep pockets, you have people with shallow pockets, and you have people that don't even have the money to own a car, yet belong because it allows them to be near the cars. You've got a car, so that doesn't mean that you're totally broke. Like the rest of us, you have to work within your budget and do the best that you can with what you've got. That doesn't mean that it can't be done.

[Guest windjamer]

Jim, I sent you a pm, Good luck Dick

[Guest quadfins]

Hi Dick,

Thanks for the info. A reply is waiting in your mailnbox.

Best wishes,

Jim

[Bhigdog]

ex98thdrill, Right on bro! Could not have said it better myself.....Bob

[Guest windjamer]

Ex98, are you planing to be in Binghamton on the 29th? We had our weekly meeting last nite an I learned that a LOT of people are interested in the fire trucks coming to Binghamton, If you are here on fri. befor 5pm it sure would be nice tohave your truck in our Fri. nite parade. Also any outher members reading this we would realy like to have as many cars trucks or partisapents as possablel. Lets show Binghamton what AACA realy is!!! <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[ex98thdrill]

I expect to be in Binghamton no later than 10am Friday morning. I've made it to Binghamton in 2 hours before, but with the trailer, the hills, and rush hour traffic in Syracuse, it'll probably take us more time. We may come in by Rte 17, but in either case, we should be there by 10. As for the parade, we'll have to think about it. Usually if we're facing competition, we focus our attention on making sure the vehicle is 100% on the mark. Just look for the old Ford from Canandaigua, NY. For those that saw the truck at Hershey, it has changed a lot since then.

How many fire trucks are entered?? We're going for a Senior, and I would be interested in knowing what we're going up against. A lot of those fire trucks are professionally restored, so that tends to raise the bar for guys like us who do their own work.

[Guest windjamer]

From what I read you dont have anything to worry about as far as the pros. are concerned. We have a meeting tomorrow , Ill chk. but I think there are 2 others besides you. Dick <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />