CHAPTER IV 

 JUDGING RHODE ISLAND REDS BY COMPARISON 



HANDLING AND SELECTING WINNERS IN THE SHOW ROOM BY COMPARISON— A 

 FINE RECORD CARD THAT COULD BE USED TO ADVANTAGE BY ALL JUDGES 



J. H. DREVENSTEDT 



We are very glad to be able to reproduce this article and also the comparison record card spoken of above as we believe 

 that this is one thing that is leading-us toward more uniform judging and is of great help to breeders an well as judges. — Editor. 



PRIOR to the Madison Square Garden Poultry Exhi- 

 Vjition held in 1891, at New York, the score card 

 system was universally used at all wii^ter shows 

 held in the United States. In England judging by 

 comparison has been in vogue many years, the score card 

 method never having gained a foothold on the other side of 

 the Atlantic. It was not practically available at the one 

 or two day exhibitions held in England. Today at all the 

 larger shows held in the larger cities of the United States, 

 and nearly every other show 

 in the Eastern and Middle 

 States and in the Domin- 

 ion of Canada, the com- 

 parison method of judging is 

 used and bids fair to be in 

 vogue for years to come. At 

 the majority of the smaller 

 shows in the West and 

 North, the score card 

 method is still popular and 

 in no immediate danger of 

 being discarded in favor of 

 comparison judging. As to 

 the relative value or merit 

 of these two systems, it is 

 unnecessary to discuss in an 

 article of this kind. It is a 

 subject that has been thresh- 

 ed out most thoroughly in 

 the poultry press during the 

 past twenty years and the 

 modern poultry exhibitions 

 clearly indicate the trend 

 of public opinion in this 

 matter. 



Our subject treats prin- 

 cipally on the proper hand- 

 ling and examination of ex- 

 hibition specimens at poul- 

 try shows where fowls are 

 judged by comparison. 

 Some of the suggestions 

 offered are equally ap- ^ \ 



plicable where fowls are 



judged by the score card. The object of both systems is 

 the same, viz; to award prizes to the most meritorious speci- 

 mens. By one, we arrive at this, by carefully comparing 

 the few best specimens after eliminating the often larger 

 number of less meritorious candidates for the honors; by the 

 other, we score every specimen not disqualified, and allow 

 the footings on the score card to determine the winners. 



The rules for cutting for defects and scoring all varieties 

 of poultry are printed in the American Standard of Perfec- 

 tion and will serve as a guide for the judge in marking his 

 "outs" by points on the cards. These will vary according 



54 



^ 



S C BHObE ISLANb REb COCrLREL 

 VJINrSER FIRST PR12E CINCIHNATTI SHOW IQlQ. 



B-H-SCRANTON RISING SUN IND.. 



to the interpretation judges place on the various sections, 

 which accounts for the lack of .uniformity found in the scores 

 of the same birds made by different judges. Uniformity of 

 judging by score card system will have to await the millenium, 

 when all poultry judges are absolute masters of the art of 

 scoring and their minds are working in beautiful unison. 



But do not for a moment entertain the idea that we 

 believe the comparison system or the judges who apply it 

 so vastly superior to the above as to eliminate the lack of 



uniformity entirely. Deci- 

 sions made by judges at 

 comparison shows are sub- 

 ject to criticism and judges 

 differ in their awards the 

 same as they differ at score 

 card shows. Awards made 

 by judges at comparison 

 shows are criticised some- 

 times justly; at other times 

 unjustly, and this will con- 

 tinue until the race of man 

 is run. Judges also differ 

 in their awards on the 

 same bird at comparison 

 shows, but not quite to such 

 an elastic degree as at score 

 card shows, for they are not 

 handicapped by a system 

 founded on theory, but must 

 depend on their own prac- 

 tical knowledge in arriving 

 at a decision. 



Furthermore, this differ- 

 ence of opinion is confined 

 to the winning few only 

 and rarely extends over 

 the many and it is this se- 

 lection of the few from the 

 many that makes the work 

 of the comparison judge a 

 very serious and painstaking 

 business. It requires a 

 thorough knowledge of the 

 variety he is judging, a pos- 

 his ability to handle the 

 ownership 



^^ 



session of confidence in 



classes, an absolute indifference as to the 



of the specimens and a determination to emulate Davy 



Crockett's advice: "Be sure you're right, then go 



ahead." When he gets through with the job conducted on 



these lines he can face the crowd and stay with it. The 



American poultry exhibitor is too good a sportsman to 



"haggle" the judge who tries to do his duty, even if he has 



made a mistake or two in his awards. Judges are human; 



consequently they will commit errors of judgment in tight 



places where competition is keen. The veteran exhibitor is 



