What you are saying is exactly my point. You are detailing your philosophy
of judging. Someone with a different philosophy might give that same car a
completely different score in the area of chips. I was a 3.5 player in Volvo
Team Tennis a number of years ago. (I don’t know who sponsors it now.) The
description of a 3.5-flighted player included something like this: “Can
consistently return backhands, but not with consistent accuracy or
placement.” Of course they had descriptions of other parts of the game, too.
That was when playing someone of equivalent skill level. Did that mean the
guy was a human backboard and that if he missed an occasional return he
wasn’t as high as a 3.5? Did it mean that if he could pick a side of the
court and hit it there he was a 3.5? When the USTA ran films of players that
they had determined, at the top, were 3.5s, they found that people from
different areas ranked them anywhere from a 2.5 to a 4.0. So they called
representatives in from all areas of the country (pre-Internet days) and had
them view films so they would all rank players consistently.
I’ve heard that you aren’t supposed to deduct for a touched-up chip, but I
don’t think I’ve read it anywhere. If there is a perfectly prepared car and
one with 50 repaired chips, should they both receive the same score for the
paintwork? Is your philosophy about overlooking tiny specks right or is
someone who deducts for a speck right? Or how about this one, which I’ve
heard: the nicest car is the one that should win, so if there is an
excellent example present and one that is very slightly roadworn, that one
should not score as high as the perfect example, which should win.
Judging guides for models will be helpful as references when there is some
question about something on a car (or missing). But until everyone one is on
the same page regarding the philosophy of judging, there are going to be
discrepancies, some sizeable, from area to area, show to show, and even
within shows. JCNA has recognized that there can be differences in
individual judging philosophies and knowledge levels, which is why they
require the same people to judge the same areas within a class of cars.
The way to minimize the variations is to test as many judges as possible,
but at a minimum Chief Judges, and require at least one certified judge at
each concours.
“Mark 1” Mark Stephenson (@Mark_Stephenson2)
1952 XK120 Roadster S673129
1958 Mark 1 / 1984 XJ6 / 1985,6,7 XJ6 VDP
Jaguar Club of Central Arizona (Internet Service Provider, TV & Phone | Sparklight)-----Original Message-----
From: owner-concours@jag-lovers.org
[mailto:owner-concours@jag-lovers.org]On Behalf Of Egan8@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2001 11:54 PM
To: concours@jag-lovers.org
Subject: [concours] Re: Concours Digest V1 #219
In a message dated 10/14/01 10:21:09 PM Central Daylight Time,
owner-concours-digest@jag-lovers.org writes:
<< recall one discussion that raged a few years back in our club. The score
sheet indicates a minimum .1 deduction (out of a thousand) for paint chips.
If a guy has 25 chips do you count each one and deduct 2.5? That was the
strict interpretation of some. But there’s also a maximum deduction 7 pts.
for a Saloon. So that would be 70 chips.
Mark, when I am judging a car that I know has " been down a road or two" I
will only deduct for the rock chips that have NOT been repaired. The last I
heard, Jaguars had round tires and they were meant to roll and at high
speeds
when safety permits. Our Jaguars do and we get rock chips and bird chips
and
all sorts of other road rash but it can be fixed. This is not meant to
encourage negligent driving habits, rather the opposite: take car of your
Jaguars. And drive them. A super clean slick Jaguar that has minor chips
repaired should not be penalized in my opinion. This reasoning stops when
it
is obvious that an entire panel should be refinished for the Jaguar to
remain
concours quality. I draw the line on a “chip” as being something larger than
the size of a dull pencil head, maybe about 5/32" diameter, (where I can see
primer or bare metal) anything smaller I consider a “speck” (no deducttion).
Anything larger should be touched up, a gross multiple of the smaller ones
on
one panel would be a reason for deduction of points. This is the standard
that I hold myself to and judge accordingly. Again, this is usually a call
on the part of the judge involved and difficult if not impossible to
standardize. We have all got to be realistic about this or it won’t be fun
anymore and then who is going to be out there driving AND showing their
Jaguars?
David Nichols