Challenge Town Hall extended - Concour feedback

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ said:

In reply to SVreX :

To be fair, you would have to talk at full auctioneer speed in order to do justice to the story AND highlight all of the improvised parts on the MR2.  I think we picked the right stuff to cover in the time we had.

That is a VERY fair statement.

But the 3 minute pitch is part of the process. It’s in the rules, and we all knew it in advance.

Failure to do it is still failure to do it.  (And everyone is at the same unfair disadvantage in this)

If innovation was really taken into account almost every miata should get a 0. It isn't new or original, 95% of the field could cobble together a fast autocross miata in a week. Maybe the magazine really wants to see a field of 50 $2000 miatas battling it out for top time, but that isn't what I want to read about. Being innovative should be taking something that shouldn't be fast and making it fast.  

In reply to Robbie :

Cutting the roof of a standard sedan to make a pickup was discussed (and approved) at the town hall meeting in 2016. 

Though you may very well have been first to do it! 

I'm now a bit confused about the meaning of innovation. I would've expected a low/medium innovation score for the Corvette because it's a bone-stock 'Vette with some slicks and an optional wagon body over it. That's very creative and makes for a great presentation but it's not really innovative, other than in an aesthetic sense. Cars like the Hybrid Fiero or the Cheaparral deserve high innovation scores. I would say the Zamboni would deserve a higher innovation score than the wagon though - it was a similar concept but the secondary control system that allowed the car to be driven from on top of the optional body rather than through a hole in it deserves more innovation points.

On the other hand, I would've expected a higher execution score for the 'vette because of the way it looked with the wagon body on, even though the car underneath is quite plain.

So I guess it's a matter of "where do you put points for making the car look cool?" and I think that belongs in execution rather than innovation.

For the Saab wagon I'd say it deserves a medium innovation score just for the work done to convert it into a pickup, it's a functional modification (an innovative way to build a quick pickup) that took some outside-the-box thinking.

In reply to Andy Neuman :

I can’t speak for this year, but I can confirm that in 2017 stock-ish Miatas were consistently punished with low scores for innovation. 

I am gathering my notes and will gie more details for the resulting scores, but that work stuf has got me up to my ass in alligators today trying to get caught up.

Stampie directly said he would be interwsted in his (my raw scores) so I will provide those as an example along with my reasoning for them.

It will be tonight before I can sit down with any serious time to put into the responses and I will try to address the issues raised in as much depth as I can.

If you have other requests/questions, add them to the list and I will compile the answers.

In reply to GameboyRMH :

“Innovation” covers things like design, engineering, creativity and modifications.

“Execution” covers things like cleanliness, workmanship and attention to detail.

“Presentation” covers things like originality, theme, showmanship, team spirit, moxie, chutzpah, backstory and anything else that falls under the heading of “je ne sais quoi.”

In reply to SVreX :

not at all. this is truly helpful to me. Driving home yesterday I made the connection that I should have addressed the innovation, execution, and presentation points directly in each of the pitches. In fact, I decided that not only was I making the notes for myself next year, I was making a big 3 fold board with one side dedicated to each topic.

Even with all that thinking and 'judging myself' according to the rules, I still missed the boat by a lot compared to your perception. If you note the first post in this thread I said I thought I got mediocre innovation, poor execution and full presentation. Apparently I could be flopping the innovation and execution completely.

I do think it is important to note that all of this from me is still basically minutia. If you did the flip-flop test that nordicsaab is suggesting while walking through the concour pavilion, you would probably end up with a very similar concour finishing order to what the judges already established. (Which is supposed to be a nod to how good the system already is). The point of concour is to find quality, and with two cars of similar quality one still has to win over the other. But overall, the high quality cars are already being scored at the top.

Also, Thanks to Paul for helping answer some of the questions before i get a few minutes to put the responses down. Your experience as a judge should absolutely be considered as direction for future events.

SVreX said:

In reply to Robbie :

Your score (and others’) would have raised if you had written down 3 cue cards with the words “Innovation”, “Execution”, and “Presentation” on them with short lists on each. 

That's the best thing I've ever heard you say. 

SVreX said:

In reply to GameboyRMH :

“Innovation” covers things like design, engineering, creativity and modifications.

“Execution” covers things like cleanliness, workmanship and attention to detail.

“Presentation” covers things like originality, theme, showmanship, team spirit, moxie, chutzpah, backstory and anything else that falls under the heading of “je ne sais quoi.”

That would make sense, is that the official judging criteria breakdown?

In reply to GameboyRMH :

That’s in the rules. And it’s the official judging criteria. 

That exact quote was written at the top of my score sheets, and I re-read it before almost every car I looked at. 

Robbie said:

In reply to SVreX :

 In fact, I decided that not only was I making the notes for myself next year, I was making a big 3 fold board with one side dedicated to each topic.

I'd suggest that you buy two 3-fold boards, and scab them together so you get two middles and one edge... that way the "area" of the board is matched to their points value.  Proportionality in area might help with proportionality with time, and so will follow score? 

Stampie said:

SVreX said:

In reply to Robbie :

Your score (and others’) would have raised if you had written down 3 cue cards with the words “Innovation”, “Execution”, and “Presentation” on them with short lists on each. 

That's the best thing I've ever heard you say. 

The reason I never said cue cards before is because there are probably a hundred ways to do it effectively. 

But if cue cards work for you, by all means use them!

I agree with Sleepyhead that a board is a good idea. I don't think Presentation needs to be on the board. YOU are the presentation.  The GXP Lumina had a great board with photos of some of the key elements (innovation) of their build that were VERY easy to quickly scan. As a judge, the boards worked well.

In 3 minutes I didn't have time to listen to your story, look at your car AND dig through your build book. I tried but it was not always possible. A photo board and a practiced 3-minute presentation hitting the key GOALS and SUCCESS/FAILURES of your build went a long way. If you don't tell the judges the interesting stuff, how will they know?

So, my car, while not completely stock mechanically, it's fairly close.  Appearance judge for yourself.  I think it looks very "racecar" but it's my daily driver (Chutzpa?).  So I did the eye catching paint to "fit the part" loaded up my race wheels and tools and luggage and drove it to and from the race, and was a team of one person all weekend.  I washed it Sat am with a hotel garbage can and that scores ONE point over the minimum?  Paul why dont you score my Miata so I can see how this works? 

In reply to Justjim75 :

To be honest, I didn’t look at it closely. I’m sorry. 

Describe it better for me, and I’m willing to try. 

In reply to Justjim75 :

And be careful...

12 was NOT the minimum. 0 was the minimum. You chose to be judged, not take the 12. 

In reply to Justjim75 :

How bout we do this in reverse?  Why don’t YOU judge it, and help everyone else see how it works?  Forget what you were scored, and start from scratch. I will walk you through it....

Ok “Innovation”.  “Innovation” covers things like design, engineering, creativity and modifications.  What would you rate your car on a scale 0-10?  The benchmark is the Justang (and be honest with yourself. There isn’t anything innovative about a stock Miata)

“Execution” covers things like cleanliness, workmanship and attention to detail.  On a scale of 0-10, What would you rate your car? The benchmark is Wreck Racing’s BMW  

“Presentation” covers things like originality, theme, showmanship, team spirit, moxie, chutzpah, backstory and anything else that falls under the heading of “je ne sais quoi.”  On a scale of 0-5, What would you rate your car?  The benchmark is the parking lot build. 

What did you score it, Jim?  How did the judges do?

And to say this again: Yes, our judges scored very highly this year, and that greatly diminished the 12 point "Standard Score." We could have corrected the scores with a formula and standardized them, but were trapped by our own rules, which say the raw scores will be used. With better judge training next year, we'll again have the bottom end of the field scoring 3, not 12. 

Ok, I'll rephrase that, EVERYONE could have gotten at least 12, for doing nothing more than writing a one sentence note.

In reply to Justjim75 :

Jim, I know you are a little hurt. But beautiful appearance can only earn a maximum of 10 points, according to the rules. 

Your car was beautiful. 

One other note: at the conclusion of judging, every judge was handed a list of cars sorted by concours score. This was done to identify any mistakes or inaccuracies in the ranking, and to correct any score drift throughout the day. After taking about 10 minutes to look over the list, the judges all reached the agreement that the cars were sorted in the correct order from best concours to worst concours. So while the points definitely skewed high this year, the concours ranking, which is more important, was correct. 

Paul, John, Steve, I really appreciate the insight you guys are providing.  It is very helpful and will make for better performance in the concourse in the future.

In reply to Justjim75 :

I get the labor and time spent thing, but at the end of the day it's a stock appearing Miata. Your 50 hours of appearance work is what it takes to wring that Concours score out of a stock Miata.