AOS Judging

[Bolero]

Interesting thread again. I make the point here again that there should never be a "max out" on a cross being awarded. I receive awards quarterly & look in disgust at some of the awards given ( hybrids mainly ) and wonder where judging is going. As was discussed at length in the thread of Paph Macarbe, if the plant is worthy of an award it should be given. If comparisons are made between crosses, about one third of the Cattleyas awarded in the USA should have been rejected as inferior enough to be even classed out as a showbench plant. If the theory of enough clones of a cross have been awarded then the next cross given an award of quality due the number of clones exhibited then that should nearly wipe out any chance of further plants of the cross being awarded. For what its worth for those with awards quarterly, have a look thru at the pics, the across the board consistancy is zero. As an observation, some judging groups are up to date and recognise quality where other groups are assessing orchids that were out of date 40 years ago, even as show bench plants.

So what would be the solution to that dilemma? If you live in the right area you will get a plant awarded that wouldn't have been considered from another area.

That happens in Australia as well, if you only occasionally see certain plants then you have to go on what you know. I would hate to refer to measurements as a guide as you never really know what that plant in AQ looked like unless you saw it clearly in person.

It's an interesting discussion though and one all judging panels should have.

 

[Roy]

Bolero, your exactly right. The Head of the Judging panel should have with them at each show, have enough material to refer to for information on unusual orchids for award judging. Notification to the panel of the presentation should be made by the owner prior to presentation so data can be gathered. The more common awarded orchids should be easily identified as awardable or not by the 'training' supposedly undertaken. The biggest problem comes back to the individual judge/s or at the end of the day, the Chairperson / Registrar of Judges / AOS, AOC, not being competent enough to request an explaination as to why this plant was awarded OR reject the award because of the lack of quality compared to previous awards granted for that GENUS ( or ) crossing. They have the capabilities to refer to all awards and stats for each award plus colour pics. Should the quality of the awards being granted by a panel or panels show a decline in quality, as being exhibited at present everywhere, then they should instigate a meeting of that / those panels to find out why and have them do a refresher coarse or get out. To put it in a nut shell, put up the last 6 AM's awarded to similar bred Paphs from different panels across the country and look at the variation.
See AQ.
Roy.

 

[Bolero]

That's a great idea Roy and it should probably be implemented. It's difficult thought, that process would be quite time consuming and technical. But in order to find improvements or at least an equivalent plant we should be able to reference the material you suggest.

It's interesting where I judge, we learn by appreciation and not so much the technical aspects of the plant when compared to previous awards. Measurements and such information is not often taken out (note: I live in Australia). With the amount of judging and training we do it would be impossible to cover everything, let alone every genus I have to say. Maybe judges should be made to specialise now???

 

[Roy]

Hey Bolero, note my location. We are neighbours ( almost ). Maybe even the same judging system ?? The specialist Judge is great but how then would they get an award ? Appreciation is fine but it doesn't teach you how define a quality flower. This where the variations occur. Some judges appreciate certain orchids more than others. If you have been able to access an orchid under the old AOC Standards book then apply it to appreciation and see what the difference is, it might surprise you. The better Judges I grew up with and the way I judge is by having used the old system for years which taught me the rights and wrongs of a flower. It is too easy to be "attracted" to a flower and award it easier or higher than you should. Any one can judge by appreciation, example: a club meeting members popular vote, not by accessing the qualities of the orchid for shape, size, colour, substance & texture, spike habit & flower count. Memory and looking at 100's if not thousands or orchids is the only way you will know if the orchid you are looking at is awardable or not. Or use the old Standards on the new stuff and see if its still worthy of an award.

 

[Ernie]

We frequently use all of the mentioned resources- award slides, computer databases (e-AOS/AQPlus, OrchidWiz, WildCatt), "Fisher Bishop", Award Quarterlies, RHS registry, original taxonomic literature (darn Pleurothallids!)... in considering plants for awards. It doesn't take a lot of time to do, BUT usually a good judge will spot the award winners quite easily. Certainly, everyone has their strengths- that's why there is a team. We almost never see Cymbidiums, so we rely on help from a couple California judges that moved here and the references for guidance when they pop up. Also, we have a couple AWESOME vanda growers here, but we always need to see what the Floridians are up to to stay current and fair.

-Ernie

 

[NYEric]

But as the world shrinks the oppertunities to find the next kovachii decreases, and all the new species quality awards will go to weird micro pleurothalids.:evil:

Hmm... Lepanthes, Stellis, Yum Yum!

 

[NYEric]

There's an interesting point to the regional aspect of AOS judging. I think that the selection of judges from other regions at the GNYOS show is such that plants wont get more credit than is due because no one is familiar w/ them.

 

[slippertalker]

We frequently use all of the mentioned resources- award slides, computer databases (e-AOS/AQPlus, OrchidWiz, WildCatt), "Fisher Bishop", Award Quarterlies, RHS registry, original taxonomic literature (darn Pleurothallids!)... in considering plants for awards. It doesn't take a lot of time to do, BUT usually a good judge will spot the award winners quite easily. Certainly, everyone has their strengths- that's why there is a team. We almost never see Cymbidiums, so we rely on help from a couple California judges that moved here and the references for guidance when they pop up. Also, we have a couple AWESOME vanda growers here, but we always need to see what the Floridians are up to to stay current and fair.

-Ernie

I agree that usually there is more than enough information to make informed decisions. It isn't too difficult to compare prior and recent awards from other regions. It comes down to judging ability, and with a good sized team there are enough opinions and specific expertise to cover most genera. I also agree that an AM is usually spotted immediately, but the arguments generally revolve around low HCC's and high AM's. It's true that all regions are deficit in their knowledge of plants that are never brought in to judging. It's important to travel to other parts of the country to get perspective.

 

[Ernie]

Slippertalker,

Yes, great point about traveling!!! Can't be emphasized enough! I love going out of region! We get an extra zero on our paychecks for judging out of region shows!

-Ernie

 

[littlefrog]

I'll be going out of region tomorrow. See you in Chicago, Ernie?

Rob

 

[slippertalker]

Slippertalker,

Yes, great point about traveling!!! Can't be emphasized enough! I love going out of region! We get an extra zero on our paychecks for judging out of region shows!

-Ernie

Unfortunately it is a 2-3 day drive to get to another region, or a healthy airplane ride....You must get paid more than me!:evil:

 

[Ernie]

I'll be going out of region tomorrow. See you in Chicago, Ernie?

Rob

For sure! See you there! Er... here.

-Ernie

 

[Rick]

So how regionally insular are judges? I know that some of our judges in the Atlanta center travel "out of region" fairly often. One makes regular trips to Taiwan.

I'm not sure if there is regional judging bias due to limited exposure to out of region material, or attitudinal bias on how plants should be awarded.

There is considerable controversy over lateral awarding vs vertical awarding (using terms from this arguement posted in the past).

 

[slippertalker]

So how regionally insular are judges? I know that some of our judges in the Atlanta center travel "out of region" fairly often. One makes regular trips to Taiwan.

I'm not sure if there is regional judging bias due to limited exposure to out of region material, or attitudinal bias on how plants should be awarded.

There is considerable controversy over lateral awarding vs vertical awarding (using terms from this arguement posted in the past).

In every region there are judges that regularly get out, and others that don't.
Not everyone has the means to travel all over the globe.

Regional bias comes from 1) a lot of quality plants of certain genera, 2) a deficiency of plants of certain genera, 3) quality of judges, and 4) a lack of interchange between regions. I don't think there is a huge attitude difference regarding how plants are judged.

Lateral awards vs vertical awards (your terminology) will always be an object of discussion. Arguments can be justified both ways, and exceptional crosses seem to stir the drink.

 

[Bolero]

Hey Bolero, note my location. We are neighbours ( almost ). Maybe even the same judging system ?? The specialist Judge is great but how then would they get an award ? Appreciation is fine but it doesn't teach you how define a quality flower. This where the variations occur. Some judges appreciate certain orchids more than others. If you have been able to access an orchid under the old AOC Standards book then apply it to appreciation and see what the difference is, it might surprise you. The better Judges I grew up with and the way I judge is by having used the old system for years which taught me the rights and wrongs of a flower. It is too easy to be "attracted" to a flower and award it easier or higher than you should. Any one can judge by appreciation, example: a club meeting members popular vote, not by accessing the qualities of the orchid for shape, size, colour, substance & texture, spike habit & flower count. Memory and looking at 100's if not thousands or orchids is the only way you will know if the orchid you are looking at is awardable or not. Or use the old Standards on the new stuff and see if its still worthy of an award.

Yes we are practically neighbours, about an hour apart. I'm in Geelong, just near Melbourne. As I don't know your name I am guessing that you are OSCOV and I am AOC but I won't hold that against you. I'm an associate judge so far. I think appreciation judging is about seeing thousands of plants and judging from memory, the more you judge the better your appreciation skills become. I for one think that we are too hard on plants in this state and have unrealistic expectations of a plant that should be awarded. Note the lack of any FCC's in this state over the last 20 years.......surely there must be at least a few benchmark plants that were well grown during that time????

Let me know when you're ready to come over from the dark side.......;-)

 

[Roy]

Hey, ask Clive Hayman if he knows a ROY in the Judging panel VRJP.
Or Grant Garrett. I've been a panel member for many years. Don't get to too many meetings these days for various reasons. I'm on the emeritus list at the moment.

 

[Bolero]

Hey, ask Clive Hayman if he knows a ROY in the Judging panel VRJP.
Or Grant Garrett. I've been a panel member for many years. Don't get to too many meetings these days for various reasons. I'm on the emeritus list at the moment.

Ah ok, I will check my listing, I am not familiar with your name.........or maybe I am and just don't remember.

I will ask Clive and Rita the next time I see them........good to talk to you!!! Hopefully we see you around soon.

;-)

 

[British Bulldog]

Judging!!

Looking at all the comments on judging made me smile!!oke:
I have been an RHS Judge since 1971!!
AND I am still amazed at some of the comments I hear from these "experts" around the world.

What is a perfect orchid?
They do not exist!!
One comparison that always makes me fume is the one that says complex paphs should always be bigger to be better.
That is B******* rubbish.
Colour should be the main criteria, then shape, THEN size.
With our attempts to get new colours often size is lost.
Look at some of the first bessae hybrids??

Going back to breeding Pygmy Paphs we will get "perfect" complex shapes
but only a quarter the size
Keep stirring
Paul

 

[Roy]

Paul, you won't get any argument from me on your points. Although I would put shape before color but then again but thats me. I would like a dollar for every time a Judge?? said " it would be nice if it was a bit bigger". I'm not sure what they are referring to a times. One only has to look at the advancement in Mini Catt' breeding. Some of them are better than any Standard size?? catt's ever bred. The one thing that really annoys me is the judging voting for the well flowered, highly colored Paph hybrid with the shape of an insigne. coz it looks nice.....derrrrrrrrrr

 

[slippertalker]

In judging complex paph hybrids, size is certainly a consideration. I consider with standard complex hybrids that shape, color and size are the primary indicators of quality. Size is the most important 10 points on the scoresheet as it gives a fuller flower with wider segments which enhances the shape, and the visual impact of a colorful flower of good size and full segments is greater. I look for these standards to work in concert; a big poorly shaped or colored flower is obviously inferior. A compact well shaped and colored flower would be superior.

Now, the parents always have to be taken into consideration, and miniature crosses are still judged according to full shape, good color and size according to the parentage. These criteria are always important whether the hybrids are derived from P. insigne, P. rothschildianum or P. helenae. A wise judge will always consider breeding lines and the effect of certain parents in a cross.