The perspective of a Challenge judge...

Just want to say thanks Paul for putting this thread together. 

I've started typing up replies about a dozen times since the challenge was over and never posted any.

I'm sorry I missed it this year, and even just as a spectator I have to come down next year. That said, I'm glad I didn't drag my 230k mile basically stock hulk down there this year because it really wouldn't have done well in any part even with my concourse cheat code. 

After last year's challenge and the threads I thought I had a pretty good idea of what to expect and how to compete. This year, with the videos(thanks everyone involved there) and these threads, this one especially, I've got a much better idea of how to be competitive and where I'd just been wasting time and spending pointless dollars. 

The key, it seems for being from PA, is needing a tow vehicle. Not so much for the ride itself, but because of how much budget went to keeping the car road legal that could have gone to go fast parts. Not getting around safety rules, but stupid stuff that doesn't affect challenge worthiness.  I won't be making that mistake again, but I do admire those of you who are able to use your dailies as challenge cars. 

Back on topic, thank you again to the competitors the video crew, and all these post challenge threads that are cutting back scope creep. 

DrBoost said:

Did the Insight actually place above the bottom of the pack in the concourse judging? If so, you need to change the name of that portion of it because the word concourse conjures up fit and finish, workmanship, attention to detail, etc. something that might be on a magazine cover. If the traits that the Insight had scored it high, that's fine, but change the name or that part of the competition. Something someone else said is that, in the beginning, the magazine put a concourse judging into the mix to stop a bunch of terrible looking heaps from descending on Florida and getting the group kicked out, or not allowed back next year.      

My admittedly limited understanding is that a 'real' Concours d'Elegance is about much more than just looking good.  While a perfect scroing car will look amazingly perfect, bringing a Chip Foose creation to Pebble Beach would probably get beat out by grandpa's tired-but-unmodified daily driver for the past 50 years. So first and foremost the spirit of the event is about 'factory original' condition over looks.

In that context, I'd argue that the static judging of Challenge cars being based on their conformity to the overall spirit of the event is actually closer to the intent of a Concours than judging cheap amateur built racecars simply on how they look.

In reply to Driven5:     

I get that, and have no problem with that. But the Insight is an abomination, and not in a good way. But some of Paul's comments are about scoring teams higher because of what they had to overcome (no problem with that) or that it was a kid team (no problem with that). I just don't know how that fits in with what people think is a concours judging, or how me, a guy in his mid-40s, working out of his garage on beer money, after 45-50 hours a week at work, and raising kids would fit into the mix. Since I paid my own way, with no gofundme page and 6-figure machine shop, that's gonna be worth some points, right?   

Again, I didn't have a dog in this fight, and even if I did, I wouldn't really care because this is a free event put on be a magazine with volunteer support with no prize money at stake. It just seems like trying to score well in this part of the competition is like nailing jell-o to the wall.     

But I appreciate Paul taking the time to explain things. Next year, if I can make it, I'll be sure to try and score well.   

Hey, can someone clear this up? I can't remember if it was this thread or another one, but a few folks have said something about "taking the 12 points" or a 12 point hit or something like that related to the concours judging. What does that mean?

In reply to DrBoost :

This year it was possible to opt out of the Concours judging. If you opted out voluntarily, you were awarded 12 Concours points (out if 25). 

If you submitted to judging with a piece of crap, you could earn fewer than 12 points. Several cars did. 

I Did just Imagine someone trying to Nail Jell-o to the Wall,  Like Jim Said d' Innovate or something like that But assuredly it is not d' Elegance, I was there, I am Glad Tech Won, I am Glad the Kid Teams Did well,  I did not like the Tech Car's Appearance ,Fact is to me the Common Miata  of Smith's looked better and I dislike Miata's No Good reason Just don't. 

The car I will bring will be a Race Car But with a Finished Look like something you might drive around. Hopefully like a 70's Mclaren with Carpet. I'm even dong it to the Fiero.

No prize money but certainly not Free. And if I spent my beer money on it It might get Done.

Dude Build a Car, come Down Have More fun than you can have at home, and If well done An autocrosser for the rest of the Year

In reply to DrBoost :

Oh, and your 6 figure machine shop is DEFINITELY worth some Concours points...

...if you know how to use it!  

 Paul would my Ply wood floor Shop earn me Points

SVreX said:

In reply to Pat :

Presentation has existed for several years.  Ever since the current rule set was adopted. 

You are right, it's subjective. But there is a great deal that is not interpretation. 

A bone stock Miata is not innovative. That's pretty clear. 

The specific words used have specific meanings. "Creative" doesn't mean "I just bought this cheap and brought it. I didn't do anything". (Yes, we judges heard that from more than one competitor).  We may be interpreting WHICH car is MORE creative when we look at Patrick's Z, or Andy's Q, but a car that lacks creativity lacks creativity. That's not really an interpretation- it's just reading the rules. 

The BEST thing competitors could do is to read every word of the rules very carefully, then ask themselves, "Is my car creative?  Is my workmanship good?  How is my attention to detail?"  

Very few competitors (perhaps none) considered every descriptive word in the rules carefully. The judges did. For every car. 

Hey Paul,

To be clear, I wasn't complaining.  I read the rules, saw what was being looked for based on how the concours was structured and personally made a decision that it wasn't worth it to do all of that.   The car was never going to be a winner...it was slammed together to go have some fun, and we did just that.   We did want the car to be clean, presentable and look as good as it could, which we did try to accomplish.

My comment on interpretation should have been phrased differently.  Judging is by nature subjective, not objective/fact based.   What I think is innovative could be different than what motor trend guy thought was innovative, or creative or well executed...and neither of us would be wrong.  

In reply to Pat :

I understand. I didn't hear it any other way. 

GTXVette said:

...d' Innovate or something like that But assuredly it is not d' Elegance...

Luckily, I don't see "d'Elegance" mentioned anywhere in the rules. Just "Concours"...And I have yet to see a more fitting suggestion for what to call an event that encompasses static judging of cheap racecars builds on a combination of everything from creativity, to design, to engineering, to fabrication, to resourcefulness, to fit/finish, to story-telling.

DrBoost said:

It just seems like trying to score well in this part of the competition is like nailing jell-o to the wall. 

Why? If appropriately judged in a vacuum (not directly compared against any other cars past or present) and as defined in the rules, I honestly don't see anything necessarily out of line with the Insight score.  Assuming they rocked the innovation portion (in which their work included numerous independent areas that did show "things like cleanliness, workmanship and attention to detail"), and nailed the presentation (including conveying to the judges all of those "things like cleanliness, workmanship and attention to detail"), it would follow that even with a less-than-successful attempt on the DIY bodywork portion of the build they would be able to easily get above a 5 (but certainly less than a 10) out of 10 on the Execution portion. If the time is taken to fully comprehend and internalize the letter and intent of the rules, there really isn't anything particularly arbitrary or elusive about it.

it seems to me, admittedly as viewed from a distance, that pretty much anybody else should be entirely capable of doing likewise. But maybe I just like the idea that any genuine racecar build can be competitive in this event, simply by playing to the personal strengths of the builder(s) in what is done to the car and how it is conveyed to the judges.  I don't possess the experience in paint and bodywork necessary to make a visually great showing car, but I know that there would be plenty of ways in which my "things like cleanliness, workmanship and attention to detail" would be able to shine in other technical areas...Magazine covers be damned.

In reply to Driven5 :

You just described perfectly the scenario for the Insight.  That's what happened.

Seems to me it should be an encouragement for a lot of people around here who complain they hate bodywork. You can STILL build a competitive Challenge car. 

I suck at Body work that's why it will take a YEAR.

GTXVette said:

I suck at Body work...

...and STILL managed to score 19.25 out of 25 on the Concours!

Thanks Paul, But that was ALL Jamie and Joe and Shelly,  I was Just Reverse Gear.

In reply to GTXVette :

Team member. The whole team gets credit. 

SVreX said:

In reply to DrBoost :

If you submitted to judging with a piece of crap, you could earn fewer than 12 points. Several cars did. 

We were one of those teams.  We hoped that telling our sob (Saab!) story and fragment of trans case would be good for a few points (which is exactly what it was probably worth).  But given the obvious effort and resources many teams invested in their cars, we fully agree with our meager concours score.  This is part of the reason I have suggested that taking the 12 points is the way to go.  Well, that, and I'm sure the judges would like that 3 minutes of their lives back.

Also, for those that have not attended and see things like the Scooby van or the GT Insight, and/or are maybe still holding on to their impressions of cars from the early Challenge years, I think there may be a bit of a misconception about Challenge cars being llipstick'd crap boxes and heaps.  There might be a couple (such as our Last Chance Saab), but the majority are most definitely not.

In reply to darkbuddha :

I shouldn't have worded it that way. I apologize. I liked your car, but just couldn't justify a higher score based on the rules and what was there. 

Some people just wanted their stories to be heard, even if it meant lower score. We were happy to listen. 

Wow, I've missed the past few Challenges but the concourse discussion is still a hot button issue. I think it's cool that they had a former challenger as a concourse judge. Paul is a super nice guy and as a challenge fixture understands all aspects of the challenge to a very high degree and it's cool to see him use that insight in an official capacity. Congrats Paul.

I think it would be cool if future concourse were judged exclusively by former concourse winners, or at least podium finishers in concourse as these are people who clearly get what it takes to get it done and what it looks like when it's right. Just a thought.

In reply to evildky :

Thanks man!

I think I was the guinea pig. We will see what happens from here. 

I was asked for a couple referrals to other potential Challengers who could do it. I gave a short list, and threw a few of you under the bus. 

Mazdadeuce would make an excellent judge.  So would john welsh.

SVreX said:

In reply to evildky :

I was asked for a couple referrals to other potential Challengers who could do it. I gave a short list, and threw a few of you under the bus. 

I would do it if asked.  Hint hint.

AngryCorvair said:

SVreX said:

In reply to evildky :

I was asked for a couple referrals to other potential Challengers who could do it. I gave a short list, and threw a few of you under the bus. 

I would do it if asked.  Hint hint.

Pat will do almost anything is you ask nice enough 

I'd second John Welsh, but I think he is better suited (gifted) to give presentations than to listen to them. 

Jonny Pruitt would probably be a good judge.  He's been there every year, and understands our side of the builds.

I'm not gonna discuss that. It's a staff decision. 

I don't see it as a hot button issue like it was in previous years.  I think the judges were fair and did a good job.  I fell short presenting my car and my work.  This is why i scored what i did.  Judges aren't telepathic