Jan,
So far I like your perspective and suggestions best. I'm actually not
fond of the whole thing myself; but it is the nature of people in
general to be somewhat competative when we gather in groups such as
ours.
There are probably somewhat more complex emotions when one has a
personal hand in some of the projects as either a restorer or builder
of the machines in question. Deeper involvement creates deeper
feelings; not to mention that in some cases these things can effect
our livlyhood.
If we could leave out the politics and such the whole thing would
probably be quite pleasant. Like I said, I'm not really a fan of the
judging part of the shows and I generally do my best not to care nor
get too wound up in it; but it's more difficult to do that when
you're a pro in the business.
Thanks for your imput based on your experiences. I always refuse to
be a judge. I don't like doing it and I much prefer to hang around,
talk to people and buy stuff at the swap, and relax. For me being a
judge is too much responsibility. The casual approach to standards
does produce odd results much of the time, and then it becomes
difficult to even take it seriously. The past few years at the
framebuilders show have demonstrated this quite clearly.
If we are to continue with the judging part, I would prefer that we
fall into a system along the lines of what Jan has outlined. So far
it's the only approach that seems to make ultimate sense under the
circumstances. I think at present there is a tad too much politics
and no guidelines to keep people focused on the approiateness of each
selection.
Brian Baylis
La Mesa, CA
I once judged at a local concours d'elegance and classic bike show.
Indeed, people felt slighted afterward, even though the choices were
clear. One guy, whose 1973 Schwinn Paramount was equipped with cork
tape and modern aero rims with clincher tires, could not understand
why we gave the award in his class to a 1980s DeRosa that was all
original down to the leather-wrapped TTT handlebars. One problem may
have been that the judges' bikes won quite a few awards that day.
I feel it is important to state beforehand what is being judged. Are
you looking for original condition and parts? Accurate restoration?
Historic significance? Rarity? Cool parts? Prettiness? Beauty?
Pristine condition?
Then the judges should get a sheet where they can award points for
each criterium, and the bike with the most points wins. This is
better than asking the judges to pick a bike out of the crowd without
evaluating it in detail.
Once you make it clear what you are judging, few people will be
upset. But if just out of the blue, some bike gets an award and
another does not, then people begin to wonder.
Another good idea is to have judges who are both knowledgeable and
impartial. That means they cannot enter bikes themselves...
It helps to publish both the categories and criteria beforehand.
"Competitive collectors" then can decide what bikes to bring. (One of
my bikes once won best French at a local show simply because it was
the only French bike there! And because "Best of Show" was awarded
based on how many votes a bike got in its category, the bike got
"Best of Show," too - it probably had a 100% rating in the French
category.)
Finally, "people's choice" awards can turn into a farce. Like
Italian bikes winning "best French" or something like that. If the
awards are there to show exemplary machines, they should be judged by
educated people.
The alternative is not to judge at all. Vintage Bicycle Quarterly
makes a point of not reporting on which bike won awards at bike
shows, because the results often appear so subjective.
One other idea is to give the awards to bikes without mentioning the
owner's name. After all, a collector isn't a more important person
because they are the temporary custodian of a special bike. --
Jan Heine
Editor/Publisher
Vintage Bicycle Quarterly
c/o Il Vecchio Bicycles
140 Lakeside Ave, Ste. C
Seattle WA 98122
http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com