AMERICAN SCORE-CARD SYSTEM. 



pernicious ; but in smaller degree there are 

 constant fluctuations as to the faults which 

 prevail at a given period, and thoughtful 

 breeders have held it distinctly desirable that a 

 judge should have freedom, and be able to lay 

 more stress upon some fault which is becoming 

 prevalent, and which it is therefore desirable to 

 meet with a more decided check. 



In America it was different. Though the same 

 imperfect standard formed the original basis 

 there also, its total " points " were from the first 

 raised to a practicable figure ; the 

 Score-Card most evident errors were corrected, 

 System in and it was adopted in public con- 



America, vention, with the intention, from the 



start, of being actually put to use. 

 There was not available a personnel with the 

 knowledge and experience of English judges, 

 and such judging as had been possible had 

 given ample cause for dissatisfaction. Here, 

 therefore^ the experiment was maae under far 

 more favourable conditions. We did not at the 

 time think it practicable ; but the event proved 

 otherwise, and set aside all a priori British 

 notions, for the leading American shows were 

 actually judged by standard and score card for 

 years, and the judging became admittedly far 

 better and more consistent than it had been 

 A printed score card is under this system 

 supplied for every pen, on which the " cuts " for 

 defects are written for every point, and the 

 totals added up, and when this is done the 

 prizes are awarded accordingly. Experienced 

 breeders are able to score their own birds pretty 

 nearly ; and a system has moreover grown up of 

 selling birds by their " score," and of judges, for 

 a fee or otherwise, " scoring " specimens for the 

 express purpose of sale. The development o/ the 

 whole system is both interesting and instructive, 

 and proves that judging in this way is perfectly 

 practicable under the necessary conditions. 



Nevertheless, there has been some gradual 

 reaction against it, and in favour of the English 

 personal system, termed in America " compari- 

 son " judging. We will not venture 

 Reaction to predict the ultimate issue, since 



Against the the reaction itself may be only a 

 Score Card. temporary phase ; but during the 

 last few years one after another 

 of the largest American shows has returned to 

 the personal system, and the subject is one 

 constantly discussed in American poultry papers. 

 The first reason for this reaction was undoubtedly 

 that of time* Again and again it happened that 



* It is probable that an equal number of pens could be 

 scored almost as quickly as they could be judged by comparison. 

 But in the latter system the jutlge does not waste time over all 

 the birds alike, whereas at score-card shows every pen is expected 



the scorings and consequent awards were not 

 completed even when the show closed ! That 

 would never have been endured in England ; 

 it began to be unendurable in America. People 

 wanted to know what had won, while they could 

 still compare the birds. There were probably 

 further reasons, in what we think the unsatisfac- 

 tory scale of cutting laid down in the standard 

 itself, as immediately indicated ; but however 

 this may be, the whole question is now matter 

 of debate. It is curious to observe that one of 

 the chief reasons for maintaining the score 

 system, constantly urged by very many of its 

 advocates, is its cash or selling value to the 

 recipient of the score card. The writers aver 

 that they can sell upon a score card, whereas 

 they cannot upon a mere award, unless it be one 

 of the prizes. This they term " intrinsic value" 

 of the score, and so long as it really exists it 

 will probably keep the score card in favour. 

 But the press has been full of cases of the 

 alleged worthlessness of fowls scored fairly high 

 in this way ; and altogether we would not like 

 to predict the system of American judging ten 

 years hence. 



Part of the reaction, as we have already said, 

 we think is due to the faulty method of using 

 it laid down for judges in the standard, and 

 which might be improved. In many 

 Faults in cases, when birds had been duly 



American scored and placed by it, somehow 

 Scoring. Q|. other (except the winners them- 



selves) no breeder preferred them. 

 Something was wrong ; and it is pretty easy for 

 any student in these subjects to see what it is. 

 Another proof of the same error lies in the 

 absurdly high scores which are the present 

 result. Scores of 96 are habitual, and the 

 standard itself lays down that no bird below 85 

 should receive a prize, and that a first prize 

 ought to score 90 or more. All English 

 breeders, who are (allowing for differences in 

 their standard itself) quite as skilful as Ameri- 

 can, know that such approximation to perfection 

 is not in practice generally attained, upon any 

 valid system properly carried out ; and will 

 know equally that even 92^ birds (92^ seems 

 quite an orthodox and customary " selling 

 score ") are not really plentiful as blackberries, 

 though in America they are made to appear so. 

 But when we come to the directions given to 

 judges, the mystery is made clear, for many 

 of the "cuts" made as directed in the standard 

 are obviously far too small. Judges are " asked," 

 if they find too few or too many serrations 

 in a comb, to cut half a point for each ; if 

 side sprigs, one point for each ; if a thumb mark, 

 not less than one ; if rear of comb " turns 



