Hi all out there in Internet modeler land;

A topic that seems to come up every once in a while, and often generates much debate, revolves around contests and judging. Judges get raked over the coals for incompetence, insensitivity with regards to comments about models, breaking models, being too slow, not letting people know what separated the winners from the losers, and the general decline of civilization as we know it. Damn! That's a lot of things for one group of people to have to deal with.

Many, but not all, of us have entered our models in a contest at one time or another. Some, but not as many, have stepped up to the plate and volunteered to judge. Some will do it again, some won't. Some SHOULD do it again, and others definitely shouldn't. Unfortunately, as in most things, there are those who are really good, those who are pretty good, and those who should just plain not do it. However, as also is often the case, those in the latter category tend to get way more than their fair share of attention, and make things tougher for the good and excellent judges than they deserve.

Clearly, the people most likely to be unhappy with the judges are those who lose. Also fairly obvious is that there are likely to be more losers in a good contest than winners. This, while not surprising, could possibly explain at least the volume of negative comments about judges, if not really addressing the substance of the complaints. Generally, people's criticisms of judges tend to center on the fact that the judges are incompetent, biased, using the wrong criteria, or maybe just ham fisted model busters.

I should state right up front, since it's my column and I'm the one risking a tongue lashing from my boss for typing this at the office, that I'm not a good judge. I think I'm not a bad modeler, and I think I'm pretty fair and impartial (and when I HAVE judged I excused myself from categories in which I was entered), and I don't get wrapped up in judging based on what's historically accurate, as that can be a real minefield. But, my problem is that I don't concentrate on the minutiae of seam lines, wing and tail alignment, canopy panel line paint, or any of that stuff. My approach is to look at all the models from about 12 inches away (30 cm for you metric folk) and ask myself "Which one would I most like to say I built?" This gives me a winner based on the overall quality of the construction, and the impression of the model as being the most "correctly" captured "essence" of a real aircraft that it could be. By going on this approach, I hope to reward the modeler who most convincingly created a miniature version of a real machine. As well, I think this helps me from getting too heavily influenced by fancy paint jobs, heavy detailing, or other such things.

But, having rambled on in that self-indulgent last paragraph, I think it's important to examine how most other judges approach contest judging. And that IS to look at the details: panel lines, glue blobs, decal silvering, and component alignment. And maybe this isn't such a bad thing. After all, it IS a "model" contest. And those are all clearly skills needed to be a good modeler. Plus, they provide a very good way to quickly differentiate between the excellent modelers, the average modelers, and the so-so modelers. So why then, are so many people so constantly annoyed at the judges?

My guess is there are a number of reasons, including but not limited to: judges who ARE incompetent; judges who are biased; overly optimistic expectations on the part of the modeler; or maybe just simply bad luck.

As mentioned above, there are some judges who simply shouldn't judge. They have done it in the past, have not done well, and, while their efforts are appreciated, maybe it's best if they sell hotdogs to the attendees while the other people do the actual judging. In most cases it's not anything malicious in what they do, but little things, like: something as simple as being clumsy and damaging models while judging; deciding in their mind that a certain model shouldn't be in "this" category, and thus not considering it; failing to notice not only the flaws in a model but it's strengths as well, or; most controversial; judging based on their "knowledge" of the model's historical accuracy. Unfortunately, most of us have seen some or all of these behaviours exhibited by some individuals, and perhaps even lost out because one of these types was judging "our" category. In most cases, there's little to be done but to chalk it up as "one of those things", and hope for better next time.

Some of us have also seen biased judging, which can be a problem. Again, this doesn't HAVE to be malicious, although it's often very difficult to convince people otherwise. One example that sticks in my mind is a large IPMS sponsored show I attended, where the local club "style", as it were, was to build clean, non-weathered aircraft. Not surprisingly, but disappointingly, these types of models tended to win in most categories. Even poorly built but "clean" models were placing ahead over much better built but weathered models. And, as the local club style tended to favour models built that way, most of the winners ended up being the local guys. Were the judges deliberately picking their friends? I don't think so. They were tending, I think unconsciously, to go with what they were most familiar with. Their mistake was in NOT selecting respected out-of-town attendees to help in the judging. Regional or club preferences can greatly be eliminated as a bone of contention if this is done.

That's not to say that out-and-out biased judging hasn't occurred from time to time. I'm sure it has. It's just that in many cases I don't think it's a grand conspiracy: it just happens unconsciously. The problem is, as in the case noted above, that the judges get accused of favouring their friends and club members when that wasn't the case. This gets people all wound up, resulting in dropping show attendance, bad reviews, and anger and upset by both entrants and judges alike.

Probably the single most vexing problem we hear about in any post-show analysis is judging decisions based on alleged "historical accuracy" issues. THIS, to me, is the single most vexing problem facing judges and show organizers. Clearly there are many, MANY grey areas as regards markings, colours, weapons, and other things that affect how we finish a model. And, as modeling enthusiasts, we invariably run into much reference material as regards the markings and colours of various historical planes, tanks, and whatever else. To keep this from entering into your decision making is very difficult, as there are often models entered that you just "know" are wrong. Everybody agrees, even Osprey publications!

As frustrating as it might be to some, it seems pretty obvious to me that in no way can historical accuracy, especially in regards to paint and markings, be used as a judging criteria. Even though there may be a model that just seems wrong, without irrefutable proof the scheme can't be used against it. And, even WITH irrefutable proof who can say that, at any given day, it DIDN'T look like the modeler has portrayed it? The simple answer is that nobody can.

So, to sum it all up, what can clubs do to minimize the problems with judging at their upcoming events? Well, based on my own experience there are a few, and they are:

1. Don't let Jim Penhale judge!
   
   
2. Be SURE to involve trusted "out-of-towners" in the judging, to avoid any sort of regional bias.
   
   
3. Set the criteria well in advance as to what will be judged, TELL people, and write it down and publish it.
   
   
4. Have your judging teams picked BEFORE the judging actually starts, and appoint a team leader to each group. Make sure this person is not only a good modeler but also someone whom will work well with the other judges on their team. Also, be sure the other judges on that team know this person is in charge.
   
   
5. Make sure there are enough judges to go around. There's nothing worse than having a very slow judging session just because they're overloaded with models and/or categories.
   
   
6. Don't be afraid to award multiple First, Second, or Third place models in any given category. Sometimes two models are equally well done, and trying to split hairs on things not even originally specified as criteria can lead to unfair and unpopular results.
   
   
7. Don't get swayed by bigger or flashier models. Hopefully most experienced judges and modelers won't get caught on this one.
   
   
8. DON'T judge historical accuracy, no matter how badly you think the guy screwed up, at least as far as painting or markings are concerned.
   
   
9. To the inevitable complainers, remind them that, in some parts of the world people don't have enough to eat or clean water to drink, and to focus on issues that are REALLY important.

Folks, if and when you enter a model in a contest, do it to support the organizers. Don't do it for fame and fortune, or to one-up your fellow modeler, or to try to fill your trophy case. Those aren't good reasons to enter any model contest. And the main reason I say this is because, like it or not, the results sometimes don't come out the way YOU feel they should. If that happens, be gracious in defeat, pack your model in it's box, and head home pleased that at least you entered and left a positive impression with your fellow modelers. Believe me, I've judged, and I've had the pissed off competitor come up to me afterward demanding to know why his model lost out to "this model", followed by a detailed explanation of all the flaws on the winning entry.

If you lost, get over it. The judges, people with all the foibles people are known to have, did the best they could. If you think it's so easy (or rewarding!) you're free to try it yourself! And to those of you who DO play nice, thank you!