5 68 



POULTRY CULTURE 



same class or breed, and that corresponding sections may differ in value in 

 different breeds and classes. If this principle is admitted, it opens the way 

 for indefinite variation and confusing multiplicity in scales of points. That is 

 exactly what has taken place. The Standard of Perfection specifies more than 

 twenty different scales of points. In the decimal system of scoring, the num- 

 ber of sections is fixed at ten, and each allotted ten points, the same for 

 all kinds, classes, and breeds of poultry. Theoretically the decimal system is 

 very much simpler than the other ; actually the two systems are almost identical 

 both in process and results, because the specific cuts are the same and the 

 mathematical symbol of perfection the same. A slight difference in results may 

 occur quite regularly, because the number of sections is less in the decimal 

 system, and the number of specific cuts is consequently less. This would make 

 no difference if, where sections are combined in the decimal system, the ordi- 

 nary cuts are increased proportionately, but with the common practice of 

 making the same specific cut for the same estimated degree of defect in each 

 section, the general result of reducing the number of sections is to reduce the 

 number and total value of cuts, and so to increase slightly the score of birds 

 judged by the decimal system. 



On the theory that scoring consists in deducting, from the number of points 

 assigned to a section, the percentage of fault in that section, it has been gener- 

 ally assumed that the scale of points was a prime factor in score-card judging. 

 The fallacy of this becomes apparent when we turn from the theories of scoring 

 and consider what it is in fact. Scoring consists simply in making specific cuts 

 for defects. The cuts usually made are , i, and i^, but occasionally cuts of 

 2 and, more rarely, 2^ and 3 are made. That these cuts are specific and do 

 not represent carefully computed percentages any one may demonstrate for 

 himself by taking a few score cards of different breeds, made out by a com- 

 petent judge, and computing the percentages which would give the same specific 

 cuts in the corresponding sections in different varieties. A demonstration of 

 this kind will show very plainly that the ordinary cuts, ^, I, i^, are simply 

 convenient symbols for indicating three grades of moderate defects, and the 

 extraordinary cuts, 2, 2^, 3, symbols for indicating grosser defects. 



Percentage as applied to things not measured by an absolute standard is 

 merely a figure of speech. Its association with the theory of score-card judging 

 has only served to confuse those who undertake to get, by a percentage system, 

 results which in practice are reached by a system of specific cuts. The scale 

 of points is an absolutely negligible factor in judging. Attempts to introduce 

 it only serve to confuse. 



Essential factors in score-card judging. The specific cuts and 

 the symbol of perfection 100 are the essential factors in score-card 

 judging. The use of a score card serves its purpose only when the 

 score secured approximately represents the common expert estimate 

 of the general quality of the specimen. Scoring, as has been shown, 

 is not judging, but recording judgments. To score properly, that 



