later fender/best possible repop rule

[joestuff]

So I had my bike, a 62 XLCH, judged at jefferson(restored). It was a positive experiance, and I'll do it again. One think is bothering me that I would like some opinions on. The bike has the 67 and later rear fender on it, the only difference between that and the earlier fender is a coil indent under the seat. It is painted correct, and is a OEM harley fender. I was deduted 4 points for the rear fender. That hurts. I agree some points should be taken off, but 4 seems a bit high to me.

Do y'all think that is a bit high of a deduction.

Any advice on how to argue for a lower deduction at the next judging.

Can I say later OEM is the "best possible repoduction" and beg for less points.

I came in 83 1/4 points total for the bike, the other stuff is all cheaper/easier fixes.

Joe

[Chris Haynes]

I was deduted 4 points for the rear fender. That hurts. I agree some points should be taken off, but 4 seems a bit high to me.Joe

4 points is like saying that you didn't have a fender. Fenders show up on eBay. Good luck.

[gmarakas]

Minus four points is like saying you didn't have ANY fenders!

[Sportster Jerry]

I lost 1 point for having holes drilled into my fender (original paint) where the previous owner had a pillion pad. I would say 1-2 points would be a fair deduction for later style rear fender. The other reponses were correct....4 points is like saying you had no fenders of fenders from a different bike.

[scoop]

The first bike that I had judged was a 47 knucklehead several years ago. I had 2 1/2 points deducted because the brace rivets were too large . This deduction also included the fender mounting bolt set-up where the rear crash bar attatched. I fixed the mounting problem but never lost the 2 1/2 point deduction because of the rivets.

[kval]

Joestuff
I will look over your judging sheet and get back to you

[joestuff]

Thanks y'all
Kevin, I'm AMCA number 10023. 1962 XLCH.
Note that I did have the correct tail light and lens on the fender, but the incorrect license plate bracket.(I just got the correct one).
What I'm really looking for here is how to present this issue at the next judging to reduce the deduction, while still noting that it is incorrect, if you think that the deduction was too high. If you feel it is the correct deduction, then I'm OK with that. I can provide pictures if you wish.

As for the rest of the sheet, all is good.

Thanks
Joe

[gmarakas]

Hi Joe,

I have had similar problems in the past but when all is said and done, the right thing always takes place. I can assure you that Kevin insists that we get better every time and, over time, those that don't become known to all.

Some advice from past experience -- you are going about it the right way to ensure the deduction is minimal. Just be sure when you suggest that you are using the best available that you are really sure that is correct. The tins for most bikes back to the 40's are readily available in good quality replica offerings. Also, as Chris pointed out, fenders come along all the time. If it's wrong, then it's wrong. The notation was probably correct but the deduction was way over budget ;-)

I hope we get a chance to meet in Eustis. I'll be the guy with all of the 65 Pans.

Good luck

[kval]

Joe
a revised sheet is on the way to you. put this one in your portfolio for the next judging
it is now a 3 point deduction

[jwl]

Well at least you got one point back. That's good. I don't really know what this is leading to though. Your bike was judged by a team and they obviously judged your rear fender too harshly. If everyone who has a problem with the team's decision expects Kevin to review the judging sheet he will be real busy. Is this really what the judging is about? I'm not saying it's right or wrong but I always thought that the bike should be judged by a team at a meet and then if there was some disagreement you should have it judged again at another meet and provide supporting documentation to support your position. AGAIN, I AM NOT SAYING WHAT HAPPENED WAS RIGHT OR WRONG! I'm just trying to see what the policy is going to be. It seems to me that by having Kevin, no matter how noble his intentions, review and change a team's judging sheet is not much different than having the Cheif Judge judge a member's bike by himself in a trailer at a meet the day before the official judging takes place. There was a big blowup about this a few years ago and I don't think we want to go through that again. Again, I am not trying to open a can of worms but am just trying to clarify what the policy will be going forward. I think Kevin does a great job, but let's not make things too tough on him by expecting him to review and change everything that we think was a mistake made at an official judging. Comments or opinions??? John Lindemann 8855

[jmanjeff]

John
Joe did not ask Kevin to review the judging sheet

Thanks y'all
Kevin, I'm AMCA number 10023. 1962 XLCH.
Note that I did have the correct tail light and lens on the fender, but the incorrect license plate bracket.(I just got the correct one).
What I'm really looking for here is how to present this issue at the next judging to reduce the deduction, while still noting that it is incorrect, if you think that the deduction was too high. If you feel it is the correct deduction, then I'm OK with that. I can provide pictures if you wish.

As for the rest of the sheet, all is good.

Thanks
Joe

[kval]

John
the 4 point deduction was wrong, he had a fender on there. if there was no fender at all then the 4 points would have been correct.
anyone can protest a judgement, they MUST supply factory documentation to back up their point, then I will check with the team leader or another senior judge to see who is right.

[jwl]

Thanks for the explanation. Glad to hear that the team leader was involved in the decision to change what he and his team did. The judges get my utmost respect for volunteering their time , even if they make some mistakes from time to time. I was just a little concerned that their findings were geting overruled by one person, not at a meet, without any input from them. Keep up the good work!! John Lindemann

[40 Nuck]

To me, this is what it's all about ... respectful discussion of the pertinent points, with no one getting defensive or abusive. I too have had a lot of points deducted (and deservedly so, I might add), and appreciate the positive attitude toward the experience. I also appreciate Kevin's initiative and appropriate working of the issue. Although I have not pursued this avenue, it may make sense to address the issue at the show if there is still enough time (not always the case), so that your challenge can be reviewed by the judging team. Keep it fact-based, positive and reasonable, and no one should get their feathers ruffled. These judges do great work under lots of pressure and should be respected.

Great post.