Gene Schurg wrote:
That's interesting Rob.
I'm not a judge or desire to be one but find the whole process very
interesting. I was thinking that if I were asked to score an FCC quality
plant I would probably feel the pressure to keep the score close to 90
because you don't know what is yet to come from the plant and it's progeny.
Oh, you might be surprised at what you learn if you sit in on a few
judgings. It isn't nearly as stuffy and academic as most people think,
or at least it isn't in my center. I do it because it is fun, and I
have learned a lot about orchids in the process. I'd recommend trying
it a few times. You can always ask to observe the AOS judging (at your
local show, for example). The judging chair could refuse, but I've
never known that to happen. As an observer, you should refrain from
making any comments about the plants unless asked, but that is about the
only rule. You can always ask questions, and are encouraged to do so.
In our judging center, at least, we don't ask to score for a
specific flower quality award. We discuss the merits (and demerits) of
the plant in comparison to what we know about it. In that process we
may discover that it is 'better' than a previously awarded plant, or
several. Or it may be in a range of expected outcomes for the plant.
After discussion, if one judge on the team nominates a plant for
'scoring', then the chips fall where they may. You need three certified
judges to make a valid team, although the team could be any size larger
than that. The average of the team's scores is used to designate where
on the scale the award is. 75-79 pts = HCC, 80-89 = AM, 90+ FCC. If
the point spread is too great (more than 6 points) and nobody wants to
move, then the plant is sent to another team. This means, effectively,
that several judges on the team could score above 90 points on an
excellent flower, but the average could still be an 89pt AM. Or some
schmo might insist on scoring it at 72 points and force a deadlock. We
tend to be remarkably close in point scores, however.
I also understand the feeding frenzy that occurs when a new exciting plant
like armeniacum shows up for the first times in front of judging teams.
The problem with pretty is that you need a basis to compare it to.
That is part of the three+ years of training that you are supposed to
get as a student judge, but sometimes people get carried away.
So if an early plant was awarded an FCC of say 94 points and a later one has
better color and larger petals and a bigger pouch, how do the judges score
this new plant? Does it qualify for an FCC?
It is eligible to be considered for an FCC. Any plant is eligible
to be considered... Should it get one? That is a matter of some
debate, and different judges may answer that differently. My answer is
that there are 100 points to give and a notion of what an 'ideal' flower
of the type would look like. You can (and should!) use the previously
awarded plants as a guide to the potential of a plant. However, the
ideal flower is a moving target, and after seeing a few dozen or a few
hundred your target gets harder to hit. So I don't see any reason not
to award a plant today with an AM if it is in the 80-89th percentile of
what the 'ideal flower' looks like (in my head...), regardless of what
the FCC clone looks like. The standard may have changed between the
FCC award and the AM award.
Actually, a plant that is not quite as good or equal to the FCC
plant could be awarded. We (I at least) call that a 'lateral award'.
Some people hate lateral awards. I'm pretty conservative about it. I
might consider a lateral award if the plant has some other feature that
makes it desirable, rounder petals but smaller size, better color, etc.
Often absolutely huge flowers have terrible form, that is why size is
only allocated 10 points (although it seems the most important 10
points...). There are many different categories which go into the final
score, and it is rare that any flower would be perfect in all of them.
That is why it is hard to get a high score.
Rob
--
Rob's Rules:
http://www.msu.edu/~halgren
1) There is always room for one more orchid
2) There is always room for two more orchids
2a. See rule 1
3) When one has insufficient credit to purchase
more orchids, obtain more credit
LittlefrogFarm is open - e-mail me for a list )