There's a discussion elsewhere about OOB. How do people feel about this? Should it be a sub-category of the major categories? Should a place award also qualify for OOB or should OOB go to another kit? SHould OOB be a separate category altogether with larger classifications of simply OOB armor, aircraft, and auto?
Also, how do people feel about place awards, 1-2-3 for the 3 "best" models in the class, no matter how good or bad the models in the class are? Would people rather see an open AMPS figure show style where unlimited (or no) gold, silver and bronze for categories such as armor, auto, air, figure, ship, dio/vignette/ and miscelaneous with accomodation for entrants' skill levels?

I like the way it was done at PATCON. They gave out 1st, 2nd, 3rd as well as an OOB. The OOB could be one of the top three winners or a sort of "4th" place. That way the OOB builder gets to compete for a gold, silver or bronze but still has the ability to get an award if totally outclassed by those aftermarket money pits.

Setting up a separate OOB category for each genre would be OK for the larger categories like 1/48 scale aircraft or 1/35 scale armor, but it could split already meager categories even further.

Rob Makes a good point.......Some of the meager categories would be even smaller..........

I like the AMPS way of doing things where you are judged on your talents and not by what someone else has done. 99.9% of the entries wins (G,S or B) and to me that's a good thing for the hobby, especially in promoting it to the youngsters. Regardless if you OOB it or hang all kinds of AM stuff on it. Gold, Silver or Bronze.... period.

Disclaimer: I have competed at the National level at both AMPS and IPMS shows (been lucky at both too), but I prefer the AMPS method by far. I am NOT a current member of either orgs.

Bingo!!!!! Well said.

Steve

Personally I don't like place awards very much. I think the medals system is a much more fair way to judge models. With place awards, it always seems to me that the winners are restricted to the "aftermarket money pits" as Rob called them. It intimidates beginning and intermediate modelers as well.
I also think that OOB, in IPMS judging, needs to be separated from said money pits. How they should be divided, I don't know. Maybe just to separate the OOB within each main category would be the best (1/35 armor, 1/48 planes). You wouldn't want to separate them in 1/72 armor because there usually are barely enough as it is.

The last IPMS show I went to (PATCON), I won a 2nd place award with a kit I bought for $5 and change, added two bits' worth of scrap styrene strips and rods and some accurization with a set of needle files and elbow grease. It does not always take a lot of money to build a contest winner.

Well, I have a lot of feelings about this question...

Personally, I don't care whether or not the event system is FST or GSB - as long as the criteria for evaluating models is present and adhered to by the judging staff. If it is a contest, then let it be a fair one and no artifical handicaps. If it is an evaluation of a model against a set of criteria, let it be fair across all categories and structure it to broad classifications or levels based on experience.

OOB, in my mind, should not be broken away from a traditional category. I never feel an OOB model is at a disadvantage - usually the more the modeler adds to the model the more the chance is that something is futzed in the end. For the seasoned modeler - not the guy trying to buy a trophy - it is natural to stretch the model subject beyond what comes in the box. A modeler might have deep pockets, but consistent construction, painting, weathering, and finishing makes the grade - not the bank account. In those terms, OOB has an equal chance against a "money pit". If enough OOB's show up in a category, and the host chapter is able, then grouping them together separately is a nice thing to do for the competing modelers.

I am a National level member of organizations who practice both FST and GSB systems. I like them both for what they are, and I compete on a National level in both systems. There are pluses and minuses to both approaches - none will be perfect and one can never please everyone. It is good to give modelers a choice between systems. As a modeler grows in skill level and experience, so too their preference might change, mine did.

I do think that the FST system is not as "friendly" and welcoming for a novice or entry level modeler. GSB is better in that respect because the cut between win and lose is tough in the FST system. However, in the tiered GSB system, when a modeler reaches the top of the classification system - there's nowhere else to "go". FST might become more attractive to this modeler.

My thoughts...

If you're going to give awards in a 1st-2nd-3rd system, this is the way to go.

Otherwise, I much prefer the AMPS system. OOTB is out of the running for "bonus" points, but they can still do well if they are built well and are put in the proper experience category.

That brings up the one rub I have with AMPS -- the experience categories. For those who don't know, they are Beginner, Intermediate, Advanced and Master. Only those who have been declared "Masters" at the AMPS Nationals can enter that category, so that effectively (at most regionals) leaves three categories. The higher the experience level of an entry, the tougher the judges scrutinize it.

The trouble is that many modelers -- whether through vanity or ignorance -- tend to want to put themselves in a higher category than they really belong. Against a tougher judging standard, they don't do well, then get discouraged and bad-mouth and/or boycott future contests.

It's a tough thing to deal with, from a contest organizer point of view. We want to encourage modelers, but we also want to judge honestly. I've helped out and judged at a few AMPS regionals, and it kind of bothered me how some modelers shot themselves in the foot.

One guy came in with several major scratch-built conversions (no aftermarket here -- strictly home-made from strip, sheet and rod styrene, wire, etc.) of modern AFVs, including a couple very detailed recovery vehicles. It was the guy's first AMPS contest and he insisted on entering Advanced class -- which was fine, except that most of his models were obviously brush-painted, weathered with white school chalk and had hand-drawn markings. Despite suggestions from me and others, he wouldn't downgrade to Intermediate -- out of at least a half-dozen entries, I think one won a bronze. I hope he took the comments on the judging sheets as constructive criticism (as they were intended) and not as rips.

I prefer the AMPS method by far.
I do not build for shows or to win contests, I build for fun and to improve my skills. It is nice to have those efforts recognized. There are a lot of modeling big dogs up this way and in a 1.2.3 show, I am outta luck when I walk in the door. At the smaller New England shows I am going to be out of the running unless I enter smaller catagories -ordinance, rotory wing sometimes, etc-

At least in the AMPS system I am competing against myself and and against the ideal at my skill level.

Interestingly enough, I took a Tamiya Challenger to AMPS 02 and barely scored enough to earn a bronze in the intermediate catagory, but at that year's Granitecon it took a place , 2nd I think, and the club award for best British armor. Go figure..

Mike

The last contest I attended a modeler was told, "You had first place locked up till we saw all the PE on _______'s model." The feeling was that a model with all that a/m stuff just deserved to be first.
I am a big fan of OOB (even though to model I entered was not OOB this time).
For me, the best part of the contest was the door prize drawing. I cleaned up.