Cattleya aclandiae ‘

[big923cattleya]

Recent awards to aclandiae have shown that petals have been flatter, broader. It may not have anything to do with ruffled edges.
All I suggest is to scroll back up and look closely at the segments, the petals in particular. I think that they looked to be rolled back along the top and bottom margins. Maybe that what the judges saw? I don’t know.
But to call them stupid, arrogant, ridiculous or ignorant is not helpful. Isn’t ignorant and stupid the same thing? And remember the AOS utilizes a three person team, so in discussing a candidate for an award, it is harder for one person to dominate the team with an individual opinion. Now I will admit, you can run into ‘stronger opinions or personalities’ on a team.
It takes one accredited or associate judge to nominate the plant for an award. The three persons score it. If the scores fall within the “6 point range”, like 79-85, the scores are averaged and the award granted based on the averaged score. So if a difficult or opinionated judge scores a plant with an 73, and the other judges score it 79 and 80, it is out of range. Scores are returned to possibly reconsider. If they remain the same, that plant goes to a second team. They start the whole process over.
But like anything else in life, everyone is entitled to their opinion. We may or may not agree. Arrogant or opinionated judges are hard to find in my opinion. Some have more experience, some have different strong suits, some have less experience here or there. But that is the purpose of a three person team, it is a blending of experiences, knowledge, and information.
We may agree or disagree on a result. But there is little chance is stupidity or arrogance being behind the result.
IF every plant was awarded for sheer beauty, there would be millions more of awards. What would that accomplish?? If we awarded 50, 70, or 95% of the plants, what is the point.
BUT if you are fortunate enough to be among the FEW that can get an FCC, or the ones that get an AM, etc., doesn’t that mean so much more then awarding everything? Award the best of the best, not the mediocre of the average.

 

[tomp]

Yes “stupid” is a very loaded word.

The only real way to know why a plant was screened was to be on the team, at the table, seeing what the team actually sees, and hearing the discussion.

A photo does not always give the “full” story.

 

[clearsky57]

big923 i have been at judging and actually stood behind the judges table when judging was ongoing... Is it an AOS rule to have "3" accredited judges at the table persay, because i have seen where there were as many as 8 or 9 people (including student judges) involved. Now i know of a couple times where there were more than 3 judges there. just wondering if 3 was the minimum number??
But if anyone wants to be enlightened to the judging process, it is well worth the time spent to hear how they approach the actual judging... I have never heard anyone being over the top about nixing a judging unless they have some sort of proof from documentation, and not without much discussion...

 

[big923cattleya]

The minimum breakdown for a sanctioned or legal judging team is 3 “certified” judges. Certified judges are Accredited and Associate Judges. The older term for Associate Judge was Probationary Judge.
Teams can go as high as 7, 8 or 9 people depending upon how the center breaks down the available judges.
Accredited Judges must number more then Associates. A legal team can be 2 Accredited and one Associate. 2 Accredited judges and one student judge is NOT a legal team because a student judges score does not count. Their scores are presented to their advisors and Center Chair in order to keep track of their progress.
A team of two Accredited and two Associate
Judges is not legal since Accredited must outnumber Associates. Associates can sit on a team together and participate in the discussion about a plant but they take turns scoring in that immediate example of 2-2.
Every effort is made to keep the number of legal judges on a team to an uneven number to avoid ties.

 

[Tony]

big923 i have been at judging and actually stood behind the judges table when judging was ongoing... Is it an AOS rule to have "3" accredited judges at the table persay, because i have seen where there were as many as 8 or 9 people (including student judges) involved. Now i know of a couple times where there were more than 3 judges there. just wondering if 3 was the minimum number??
But if anyone wants to be enlightened to the judging process, it is well worth the time spent to hear how they approach the actual judging... I have never heard anyone being over the top about nixing a judging unless they have some sort of proof from documentation, and not without much discussion...

Three is the minimum.

 

[big923cattleya]

I should have added that AOS Judging is open to the public if anybody wants to listen.
Good behavior is a must. Judges will be more then happy to answer questions at the end or during if there are ‘breaks in the action’!
That might explain why so many people are there.