OCA judging guidelines
July 30th, 2009, 09:24 AM
#1
Old(s) Fart
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 47,612
OCA judging guidelines
OK, first, despite my occasional rants on things like correct W36 stripes, I have never really been a paint-dab-and-chalk-mark restoration guy. As a result, I've never really paid much attention to the OCA judging guidelines. After the responses to the W36 thread, I went to www.oldsclub.org and actually read the requirements. I was a little disappointed that the depth and detail was frankly not much more than what is published on the last page of JWO. Also, am I the only one who finds it ironic that the guidelines for the race car class are more detailed than for the stock/restoration classes?
July 30th, 2009, 12:46 PM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,856
The horse has already left the barn (or Elvis left the building 
) for the stock classes, where it has become the norm for the theme to be "my car was assembled at the Rolls Royce plant" and the standard paint has become glossy, plastic stuff instead of lacquer. Couple that with putting judges into classes where they only sort of know how the cars came from the factory. [I'm not blaming OCA for that; they have a limited pool of judges and do the best they can.]
I wrote the race car rules in coordination with, and with approvals from, the racing committee, head judge, etc. The point of the rules was to INCLUDE as many racers as possible and not bias the rules in favor of one type of race car over another. Another point was to encourage the racers to "promote Olds at the track" with a theme more meaningful than "I bought everything Summit had to sell" or "I am racing a rust bucket with boatloads of nitrous instead of knowledge." The third point was to cater to cars that are actually raced, not restored cars kept in ziploc baggies.
Most cars didn't have much in the way of paint daubs or tags on the undercarriage either because the factory didn't put them on, or the dealer's prep guys were instructed to remove that stuff. I see lots of "restored" cars with silver gray parts underneath, although the correct finish would be semi-gloss (or semi-flat) black or natural, rusting metal, in some cases dark gray phosphate.
) for the stock classes, where it has become the norm for the theme to be "my car was assembled at the Rolls Royce plant" and the standard paint has become glossy, plastic stuff instead of lacquer. Couple that with putting judges into classes where they only sort of know how the cars came from the factory. [I'm not blaming OCA for that; they have a limited pool of judges and do the best they can.]I wrote the race car rules in coordination with, and with approvals from, the racing committee, head judge, etc. The point of the rules was to INCLUDE as many racers as possible and not bias the rules in favor of one type of race car over another. Another point was to encourage the racers to "promote Olds at the track" with a theme more meaningful than "I bought everything Summit had to sell" or "I am racing a rust bucket with boatloads of nitrous instead of knowledge." The third point was to cater to cars that are actually raced, not restored cars kept in ziploc baggies.
Most cars didn't have much in the way of paint daubs or tags on the undercarriage either because the factory didn't put them on, or the dealer's prep guys were instructed to remove that stuff. I see lots of "restored" cars with silver gray parts underneath, although the correct finish would be semi-gloss (or semi-flat) black or natural, rusting metal, in some cases dark gray phosphate.
Last edited by Run to Rund; July 30th, 2009 at 12:48 PM.
July 30th, 2009, 03:25 PM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,031
I have a whole page on my site documenting paint daubs, spring stickers, paint stripes, etc, stuff that apparently doesnt exist. I also have magazine scans where you can see these things too.
A lot of parts are painted to preserve them. Why clean a part and put it back on only to see it rust after a season of driving?
A lot of parts are painted to preserve them. Why clean a part and put it back on only to see it rust after a season of driving?
July 31st, 2009, 04:37 AM
#4
I got my judging sheet in the mail yesterday, and compared it to last year's.
Got a 902 this year and a 900 last year.
1st place both times, but both times they are inconsistent.
Got dinged for stuff last year that was still there but I guess ok this year, and vica versa.
As I have said before, I do not think I am going to subject my car or myself to judging anymore.
I just don't find it to be consistent.
I am just gonna enjoy it and show it.
Got a 902 this year and a 900 last year.
1st place both times, but both times they are inconsistent.
Got dinged for stuff last year that was still there but I guess ok this year, and vica versa.
As I have said before, I do not think I am going to subject my car or myself to judging anymore.
I just don't find it to be consistent.
I am just gonna enjoy it and show it.
July 31st, 2009, 05:59 AM
#6
Trying to remember member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,112
I don't think anybody can, or should expect the judging to be anything close to an exact science the way it it. Yes, it will be "all over the place".
As I've previously said, I think a total revamping of the judging system is needed. OCA (which is just a group of people) needs all the help they can get to accomplish it.
There are many layers to problems.
First, judging, by nature requires a standard. Once the standard is established, the judging is done as a comparison to the standard. We need to establish a knowledge base of our cars, and thereby establish standards. Not in somebody's head, and it is not a matter of opinion. But down in writing and keep in data bases by OCA.
And that's just a start. But without the basics being done, I don't see how any improvement can be made. I think we're expecting too much from judges that are not armed with the information they need to do a judges job. As a potential judge, my first question would be "what standard am I supposed to use?"
There seems to be a lot of discussion/criticism of the problems on the surface without looking into the root causes.
And BTW, one of my biggest concerns is the overwhelming priority and support of restoration over preservation. Which is ironic because what do you restore to if you have no standards and discourage preservation? (I'll give you a hint.......you end up with W36 stripes in the wrong place)
As I've previously said, I think a total revamping of the judging system is needed. OCA (which is just a group of people) needs all the help they can get to accomplish it.
There are many layers to problems.
First, judging, by nature requires a standard. Once the standard is established, the judging is done as a comparison to the standard. We need to establish a knowledge base of our cars, and thereby establish standards. Not in somebody's head, and it is not a matter of opinion. But down in writing and keep in data bases by OCA.
And that's just a start. But without the basics being done, I don't see how any improvement can be made. I think we're expecting too much from judges that are not armed with the information they need to do a judges job. As a potential judge, my first question would be "what standard am I supposed to use?"
There seems to be a lot of discussion/criticism of the problems on the surface without looking into the root causes.
And BTW, one of my biggest concerns is the overwhelming priority and support of restoration over preservation. Which is ironic because what do you restore to if you have no standards and discourage preservation? (I'll give you a hint.......you end up with W36 stripes in the wrong place)
July 31st, 2009, 07:27 AM
#7
Old(s) Fart
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 47,612
I know I'm going to regret saying this, but it would seem that the resources exist on the internet to start to compile documentation on a model-by-model basis. Yes, it's a lot of work, and yes, it won't get done overnight, but to me one big contribution that OCA could make to the hobby would be to compile and curate documentation like this. Not only would it promote better judging and preservation, but it would also be an outstanding resource to buyers, particularly first timers. I dare say that it might even become a reason for some people to join OCA.
July 31st, 2009, 07:47 AM
#8
Trying to remember member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,112
Amen Kurt.
I know I'm going to regret saying this, but it would seem that the resources exist on the internet to start to compile documentation on a model-by-model basis. Yes, it's a lot of work, and yes, it won't get done overnight, but to me one big contribution that OCA could make to the hobby would be to compile and curate documentation like this. Not only would it promote better judging and preservation, but it would also be an outstanding resource to buyers, particularly first timers. I dare say that it might even become a reason for some people to join OCA.
I know I'm going to regret saying this, but it would seem that the resources exist on the internet to start to compile documentation on a model-by-model basis. Yes, it's a lot of work, and yes, it won't get done overnight, but to me one big contribution that OCA could make to the hobby would be to compile and curate documentation like this. Not only would it promote better judging and preservation, but it would also be an outstanding resource to buyers, particularly first timers. I dare say that it might even become a reason for some people to join OCA.
I recently was corresponding with Bob Handren about '67 W30 rear ends and the 4-pinion carriers, and I said there was not much known about them. He rightly corrected me and said plenty was known, but just forgotten!
If this ever gets off the ground and help is needed (and I know it will be), I'M IN!
July 31st, 2009, 09:28 AM
#9
Oldsdruid
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southside Vajenya
Posts: 10,343
I recently was corresponding with Bob Handren
It's going to take a concerted effort to get OCA to buy into anything like this, because my experience is that the National Judging Committee is just plain lazy and does not want to take on any project that god forbid might require some effort and work on their part.
There are a number of people on this forum who have an incredible amount of info in their own files, and know other people to contact when they don't have it themselves. Those people in turn know others, and on and on.
It can be done, just getting it started. I can contribute, just not computer-savvy enough to set it up and administer it.
One of my big concerns is what will happen to my literature collection when my time is up. I'd like to keep it intact and all of it go one place simply for the reference value. If it's sold at my estate sale it will go to four corners, if not thrown out because no one wanted it.
July 31st, 2009, 09:54 AM
#10
Trying to remember member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,112
One of my big concerns is what will happen to my literature collection when my time is up. I'd like to keep it intact and all of it go one place simply for the reference value. If it's sold at my estate sale it will go to four corners, if not thrown out because no one wanted it.
July 31st, 2009, 12:25 PM
#13
Trying to remember member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,112
July 31st, 2009, 01:40 PM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Scranton, Pa.
Posts: 177
I got my sheet also. Amazingly, I had to agree with most of it, although I got dinged for incorrect headlights when they were clearly T3's. My largest deduction was for Radial Tires. I have the Eagle ST's on which most of the showfield had on their Cutlasses & 442's. Just wondering how many got or didn't get the same deduction at Seven Springs.
July 31st, 2009, 02:44 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 32
Judging standards
I've never really paid much attention to the OCA judging guidelines. After the responses to the W36 thread, I went to www.oldsclub.org and actually read the requirements.
http://www.oldsclub.org/Judging/OCA_NatCarShowRules.htm
Bob
July 31st, 2009, 03:08 PM
#16
I got my sheet also. Amazingly, I had to agree with most of it, although I got dinged for incorrect headlights when they were clearly T3's. My largest deduction was for Radial Tires. I have the Eagle ST's on which most of the showfield had on their Cutlasses & 442's. Just wondering how many got or didn't get the same deduction at Seven Springs.
But I do agree with most of it.
July 31st, 2009, 07:20 PM
#18
Old(s) Fart
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 47,612
Is this what you are talking about or is there more I don't see?
http://www.oldsclub.org/Judging/OCA_NatCarShowRules.htm
Bob
http://www.oldsclub.org/Judging/OCA_NatCarShowRules.htm
Bob
August 1st, 2009, 07:32 AM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Scranton, Pa.
Posts: 177
My 72 Cutlass was restored by a local restorer that specialized in Oldsmobiles. He purchased it from the original owner with 30k on the clock and, as far as he knows, the headlights were never replaced. The lights have a T-3 embossed on them with a large T running through the middle of the dash. The word "GUIDE" is embossed at the bottom with the numbers 1 & 2 embossed at the top corresponding to high & low beams.
According to the judging guidelines, wear dated items such as tires, batteries, shocks do not disqualify the car from the stock class. Does that mean that radial tires are or are not allowed? Going through my pictures, radials were on most of the 442's & Cutlasses.
According to the judging guidelines, wear dated items such as tires, batteries, shocks do not disqualify the car from the stock class. Does that mean that radial tires are or are not allowed? Going through my pictures, radials were on most of the 442's & Cutlasses.
August 1st, 2009, 07:56 AM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,856
Radials were factory optional beginning in 1966, so would be accepted without any points penalty in 66-up cars. As of the judges guidelines for 7 Springs, otherwise radials are "driver preference" not a "safety" issue. Personally, I don't care if they take off a few points for something I really want to do, whether it is radials or dual master cylinder in a pre-67 car.
August 1st, 2009, 08:21 AM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,031
The more I think about it, winning a BOC at the OCA doesnt mean that much.
August 1st, 2009, 08:28 AM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Brazil Indiana
Posts: 11,513
My 72 Cutlass was restored by a local restorer that specialized in Oldsmobiles. He purchased it from the original owner with 30k on the clock and, as far as he knows, the headlights were never replaced. The lights have a T-3 embossed on them with a large T running through the middle of the dash. The word "GUIDE" is embossed at the bottom with the numbers 1 & 2 embossed at the top corresponding to high & low beams.
According to the judging guidelines, wear dated items such as tires, batteries, shocks do not disqualify the car from the stock class. Does that mean that radial tires are or are not allowed? Going through my pictures, radials were on most of the 442's & Cutlasses.
According to the judging guidelines, wear dated items such as tires, batteries, shocks do not disqualify the car from the stock class. Does that mean that radial tires are or are not allowed? Going through my pictures, radials were on most of the 442's & Cutlasses.
August 1st, 2009, 09:29 AM
#24
Trying to remember member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,112
Without *set* standards being established, and exceptions like mentioned being *very* specific, there *will* be arguable variations.
For instance with exceptions for safety, the general statement is by itself worthless, because it can (an is) variably argued. Each allowable exception must be specified. End of debate, it ether is, or isn't.
There are answers for how to dramatically improve judging. Some are easy, most are not.
August 1st, 2009, 10:05 AM
#25
Oldsdruid
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southside Vajenya
Posts: 10,343
Radials were factory optional beginning in 1966, so would be accepted without any points penalty in 66-up cars. As of the judges guidelines for 7 Springs, otherwise radials are "driver preference" not a "safety" issue. Personally, I don't care if they take off a few points for something I really want to do, whether it is radials or dual master cylinder in a pre-67 car.
Radial tire option first shows up in the parts book optional equipment list in 1967. Disappears in 1970 and then reappears in 1973. Even then I think 66-69 they were available only on big cars and Toronados but not positive on that.
The dual M/C could be retrofitted to 1962-66 cars using a factory issued kit, so I would not quibble much over a dual M/C there unless it was obviously a disc brake unit.
I think the 1972 T3 were a temporary reaction to new federal lighting standards. The Guide PowerBeam headlamp was introduced mid 72 and obsoleted the T3. You have no idea how bad I wish 72 Chevelles and Monte Carlos did NOT use the PowerBeam- thanks to them, I cannot find a reasonably priced working set for my 1974 Pace Car.
I'm starting to think like TK on BOC too. Until the judging guidelines are standardized, an Oldsmobile Club of America BOC doesn't measure up to, say, an AACA Junior First. The AACA judging program has its flaws too, but they have rigorous judges' training and great references as to when a car came equipped with what.
August 1st, 2009, 10:22 AM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,031
To you, maybe. Just become the system is flawed, and/or one doesn't agree with it doesn't mean that it doesn't mean much. I know that you're just reacting to the flaws, though.
Without *set* standards being established, and exceptions like mentioned being *very* specific, there *will* be arguable variations.
For instance with exceptions for safety, the general statement is by itself worthless, because it can (an is) variably argued. Each allowable exception must be specified. End of debate, it ether is, or isn't.
There are answers for how to dramatically improve judging. Some are easy, most are not.
Without *set* standards being established, and exceptions like mentioned being *very* specific, there *will* be arguable variations.
For instance with exceptions for safety, the general statement is by itself worthless, because it can (an is) variably argued. Each allowable exception must be specified. End of debate, it ether is, or isn't.
There are answers for how to dramatically improve judging. Some are easy, most are not.
I guess what I mean is that I would be honored to receive the award and it is something to want to achieve, but not winning it isnt something to lose sleep over. Know what I mean?
With reading everyones experiences and my own, OCA judging is very subjective and inconsistent. So not winning isnt that big a deal, and winning doesnt mean you car is the absolute best. Thats what I was getting it, I think.
And Rocket is right, winning a BOC at the OCA is nothing compared to a Bloomington award or a GTOAA award. Mainly because the judging is top notch at those shows.
Last edited by TK-65; August 1st, 2009 at 10:28 AM.
August 1st, 2009, 10:39 AM
#27
Trying to remember member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,112
I guess what I mean is that I would be honored to receive the award and it is something to want to achieve, but not winning it isnt something to lose sleep over. Know what I mean?
With reading everyones experiences and my own, OCA judging is very subjective and inconsistent. So not winning isnt that big a deal, and winning doesnt mean you car is the absolute best. Thats what I was getting it, I think.
And Rocket is right, winning a BOC at the OCA is nothing compared to a Bloomington award or a GTOAA award. Mainly because the judging is top notch at those shows.
With reading everyones experiences and my own, OCA judging is very subjective and inconsistent. So not winning isnt that big a deal, and winning doesnt mean you car is the absolute best. Thats what I was getting it, I think.
And Rocket is right, winning a BOC at the OCA is nothing compared to a Bloomington award or a GTOAA award. Mainly because the judging is top notch at those shows.
Maybe I can look it pretty objectively because I don't think any trophy is any big deal. A car is what it is, and judging as a whole (everywhere) is not any measure of originality or correctness, which *is* what I find of interest. Not shiny baubles or contests. As Rund says, I know what is correct, and I'll still do my car the way I want it.
August 1st, 2009, 11:40 AM
#28
I said it 1st:
"As I have said before, I do not think I am going to subject my car or myself to judging anymore.
I just don't find it to be consistent.
I am just gonna enjoy it and show it."
"As I have said before, I do not think I am going to subject my car or myself to judging anymore.
I just don't find it to be consistent.
I am just gonna enjoy it and show it."
August 1st, 2009, 05:31 PM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Southport, NC
Posts: 19
My car was judged and I agree with most of what the judges saw. The amount of the point deductions I thought was high and simply not knowing what you are looking at were my only issues. After one on the judges got up from laying under the car, he thanked us for coming out.
I just wanted people to see the car and have a good time, so mission accomplished.
I just wanted people to see the car and have a good time, so mission accomplished.
August 1st, 2009, 05:48 PM
#30
Trying to remember member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,112
My car was judged and I agree with most of what the judges saw. The amount of the point deductions I thought was high and simply not knowing what you are looking at were my only issues. After one on the judges got up from laying under the car, he thanked us for coming out.
I just wanted people to see the car and have a good time, so mission accomplished.
I just wanted people to see the car and have a good time, so mission accomplished.
It's kinda simple. If you're an OCA member and you say "OCA sucks", you mean "we suck". If you're not a member of OCA and you say "OCA sucks", then that's fine, we'd rather not have you.
Last edited by wmachine; August 1st, 2009 at 05:51 PM.
August 2nd, 2009, 07:42 AM
#32
Trying to remember member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,112
Thanks Bob. I never looked into all the variations of the bulbs. Because if COs size limits, the pic comes out a little fuzzy. Would you e-mail me a copy?
Thanks. wmachine@shubes.net
Here's from a "where to buy"
http://www.lectriclimited.com/images...bulb_chart.pdf
August 2nd, 2009, 08:21 AM
#33
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 32
Copy size for t-3 chart
Because if COs size limits, the pic comes out a little fuzzy.
Bob
August 5th, 2009, 02:17 PM
#35
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,031
I got my plaque and the judging sheet today, didnt think the sheet was coming since I didnt request it. So that was a bonus!
Anyway my beef points were for pitted exhaust manifolds, for the wrong wiper blades, and wrong trunk latch color. From what Ive read on the Pontiac boards, the A bodies in California in 65 had the wing/deflector style blades. Thats what came with the car too. So thats what I put on. And all three trunk latches I removed from the three 65s Ive had all had galvanized looking upper latches. I cleaned my original are put it back on. Last year I was nicked for the lower latch, I didnt change a thing this year and it passed.
I scored 25 points higher this year and all I did was add bias ply tires!
Overall I am glad I went, the next few are going to be to far away for me to attend. Cant wait till it comes back to the Midwest. Its still the best Olds show around.
Anyway my beef points were for pitted exhaust manifolds, for the wrong wiper blades, and wrong trunk latch color. From what Ive read on the Pontiac boards, the A bodies in California in 65 had the wing/deflector style blades. Thats what came with the car too. So thats what I put on. And all three trunk latches I removed from the three 65s Ive had all had galvanized looking upper latches. I cleaned my original are put it back on. Last year I was nicked for the lower latch, I didnt change a thing this year and it passed.
I scored 25 points higher this year and all I did was add bias ply tires!
Overall I am glad I went, the next few are going to be to far away for me to attend. Cant wait till it comes back to the Midwest. Its still the best Olds show around.
Last edited by TK-65; August 5th, 2009 at 02:20 PM.
August 6th, 2009, 05:01 AM
#36
Trying to remember member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,112
Got my judging sheet back, too. My 1992 SCX got 989 points, but that's not a big deal, as I've had the car since new and kept it to preserve it. It is all original except for the battery, fluids and filters, so there is only some minor points to take away for it not being in *perfect* condition. Not much of a judging challenge.
August 6th, 2009, 06:57 PM
#39
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Brazil Indiana
Posts: 11,513
in 03 i lost best of class from a little dirt on my clutch peddle and a replacement battery. this was the 442 W-41 i just sold. speaking of. i took my 85 442 to work today and give a couple people a ride in it. they thought it was fast
. i told them the Quad 442 i had would whip this car bad. they all think i am lying. these cases like this will haunt me in the future for selling it. these guys at work would not know fast if it bit them.
. i told them the Quad 442 i had would whip this car bad. they all think i am lying. these cases like this will haunt me in the future for selling it. these guys at work would not know fast if it bit them.
August 6th, 2009, 07:22 PM
#40
2 '66 98's
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: central New Jersey
Posts: 489
I say "Accept the judging for what it is". Since most of the judges are volunteering when a lot of knowledgeable people are sitting on the sidelines, we should be thankful for the job they do. I certainly wouldn't expect them to study, study, study just to make a few people a little happier. What we don't want is to end up like NCRS or MCA where everything is picky, picky, picky. When that happens, 75% of the show cars drop out and the real reason for being there is lost. It is all about "having fun". I go for the enjoyment and what the car gets is secondary. It doesn't change the way I feel about my cars! Lighten up!!
