I'll jump into the mindfield.
First though an observation - the quality of bikes at this year's Cirque was outstanding. The bar is getting higher every year!
I think I know something of the subject at hand, as I contributed heavily to the judging system used at Larz and which was a partial starting point for the categories used at the Cirque many years ago (and my early efforts were heavily influenced by the shows that Jim Cunningham at CyclArt ran years ago).
I hate to say it, but I'm starting to think that indeed the judging is more work than it is worth. To do it well really takes a lot of time - an amount that is usually unfair to the judges. And the kicker is that any objective criteria, even if correctly applied, is the reflection of what the criteria maker feels is important. I have received awards at the Cirque in past years that seemed illogical - and at times I've brought bikes that I felt were way off the charts in rarity and originality but received no recognition. Part of the problem is that the experts in a category are often the ones showing the bikes, so these are often taken off the table at judging time. How many awards has Dale Brown received at the Cirque for his bikes? He had bikes at times that were clear winners, but he took his out of contention. Same thing at Larz when judges out of courtesy didn't consider their own machines when they should have.
I think most of the issues with judging could at least in theory be dealt with, objective standards worked out and codified, and qualified folks brought on to be the needed experts. But it is so much work! So instead I think its best to either have no judging, or peoples choice judging, or continue with judging as it is - with the caveat that nobody gets too worked up about the results. If you get a certificate or a prize, enjoy the moment, but don't read too much into it.
The grand prize at the Cirque and other similar events is getting to be among friends. For years I thought (and wrote) that bike show competitions were fun and exciting, but now it just doesn't seem to matter. Besides, in many cases, a show winner can simply be "purchased" in the world of ebay and elsewhere. And at most competitions, all else equal, the rare bike trumphs the common bike. That means that those with pockets that aren't so deep loose out to equally prepared machines that simply cost more.
So now in a way I'm kinda sorry I helped get the whole vintage bike concourse judging thing off the ground. But I think it is all Dale's fault - he created an event where friendships and community are so strong that the bikes now play second fiddle - at least to me.
Mike Kone in Boulder CO
> David Toppin wrote:
\r?\n>
\r?\n> > How about making all the awards peoples choice. My club, the
\r?\n> > Wheelmen, quit
\r?\n> > judging many years ago, and I miss it. It used to be kind of informal
\r?\n> > judging, best restored & best unrestored in the differnet
\r?\n> > categories they
\r?\n> > had. For some reason, they decided to go to a points system, like
\r?\n> > the old
\r?\n> > car guys, and what a mess it made. I think there were too many hurt
\r?\n> > feelings so they just dumped it all together. I wish that didn't
\r?\n> > happen, I
\r?\n> > miss judging, it brought out the good bikes.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Hi David,
\r?\n>
\r?\n> As I mentioned, the first couple of Velo Rendezvous I had Entrant's
\r?\n> Choice awards for first, second and third. I did this to keep the
\r?\n> mood light... no white gloved judges poking around the nether regions
\r?\n> of people's wheeled mistresses.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> I also didn't want it to be a People's Choice award because the
\r?\n> general public makes a very poor judge (distracted by bright shiny
\r?\n> objects I think) so I made just the people that entered bikes
\r?\n> eligible to judge the bikes. But the judging criteria was still left
\r?\n> up to each person. When asked, I told people it could be as
\r?\n> frivolous as just picking the three nicest blue bikes!
\r?\n>
\r?\n> I think it did help show attendees by highlighting three highly
\r?\n> regarded bikes regardless of the judging criteria.
\r?\n>
\r?\n> Chuck Schmidt
\r?\n> South Pasadena, Southern California
\r?\n>
\r?\n> .