Hey Judges does size really matter.

[Jimbo]

In an English style show if by example a size range is 12 to 16 inches how much advantge or dis advatge would a 12 in. fish have compared to a 15in. fish. If the finnish and pattern are equal?

[MikeM]

Easy question. All else equal, size wins.

Harder question: The 12" is perfectly finished. The 15" is not quite there yet, but has far superior quality. How close to finished does quality need to be to prevail over a well-finished lesser quality koi?

[MikeM]

....but in some shows they would be in different size classes. Only meet for a major award.

[RayJordan]

Yes size matters but quality comes first. Quality is body shape, skin, and color development. Some of the most interesting discussions while judging comes from these types of rankings. The best quality koi should win. A 100% finished but only medium quality koi should not be ranked over a 80% finished but top quality koi. If quality and finish is close then size comes into play especially in the top sizes for the top awards.

At this years All Japan SHinkokai Show a 84 cm showa beat out a 93 cm kohaku for GC.

To respond to the orginal question in a size 12-16 inches. If two koi are really equal in finish and quality but one is three inches smaller the larger koi should get the nod.

I would reccomend no more than 3 inches between sizes.

[dick benbow]

Just to give you an insight into the trend these days, I was visiting with my friend kentaro sakai from hiroshima. He was head judge for the Seattle show and had just taken a kohaku as GC from 2 sizes smaller than largest size. He said in japan it was not unheard of to go as far as 3 sizes down to honor a truely quality koi. So that may help you to understand the emphasis on quality right now. It wasn't that many years ago especially with ZNA shows
that much was given to the largest/thought to be oldest koi. With today's genetics and raising skils a 5-6 year YOUNG koi can compete in the 80 cm and above.

[Danjols]

Was wondering if this topic of a better quality smaller gosanke would or should win for GC over a lesser quality larger koi.

Last year we took our beautiful Kohaku to both Portland and Bothel Shows.

In Portland (ZNA judging) she lost out to a larger koi for grand champion, quality was not the number one priority but size is. After Judging, the head judge spent a long time looking at our Kohaku saying to all she is about the most perfect Kohaku he had seen. I fully understand why she didn't win, but none the less felt we had the best koi of the day entered.

Six weeks after Portland Sharon and I decided to show in Bothel. We had two Kohakus that were very close in size and quality and just wondering how a judge would compare them. One of the two ended up winning in Bothel, the Portland Kohaku entry, again displaying her fantastic qualities. Needless to say, experiencing change in judging criteria with the same koi in the same year was a fantastic experience.

Dick, I might add, she was one size smaller not two. She has continued to grow and still looking great so maybe Portland show again?

[Bern]

There is a saying in the UK judging world that " A good big 'un will be a good little 'un". The problem is that people concentrate on the size when the emphasis is on the word 'Good'.

A living example would be at the South East 2004 Show.

A 46cm Sanke was entered into size 4 (45 - 55cms) The smallest in its class.

It took best Sanke Size 4, Best size 4 overall and Adult Champ.

It returned a year later 8cms bigger and did the same again against slightly more competition.

rgds Bern

[KoiCop]

Quote: Originally Posted by Danjols In Portland (ZNA judging) she lost out to a larger koi for grand champion, quality was not the number one priority but size is.

I'm sorry, Dan, but I just can't accept your statement as a general philosophy governing ZNA judging.

One fish, one show, one judge does not a rule make -- furthermore, it flies in the face of everything I've read, heard and learned about ZNA judging.

[RayJordan]

I agree with Don. It would be incorrect to catagorize all ZNA judges as having the exact same judging philosophy or ability. From what I have experienced it is similar for AKCA, BKKS, and SAKKS, judges. Some individual judges might give a little more emphais to size or even pattern as being somewhat more important than another but all would/should say overall quality and body conformation is most important. Also it is important to realize that naturally some judges are much more experienced and/or capable for whatever reason. Judges are a diverse group of individuals and not cut from a single mold. I think this diversity is a strenght and necessary to keep moving the entire group ahead.

I really prefer the western judging style of discussing the merits of the koi being ranked and voting on the final ranking. Many sets of eyes and a good discussion make for bettter decisions (IMO). If the decision is close or if the head judge feels strongly that a certain koi should be ranked above another then the head judge should make the final decision and explain his/her reasons.

[KoiCop]

Well said, Ray. Very well said.

If I might, I'd like to add this excerpt from one of JR's rambles since it directly address this issue:

Koi Judging 201

For the history buffs among you, this event, really a new more evolved way of looking at koi, changed koi judging for ever. This evolution was born out of two emerging realities- 1) Breeders were starting to produce ‘different’ looking koi compared to the highly technically correct patterned koi, with vivid colors. 2) Absolutely amazing and inspiring fish were being produced that were technically lacking under hard standards yet somehow were ‘superior’ to the fish chosen under Koi Judging 101 perspectives.

The other reason for this inevitable move away from Koi Judging 101 (lets call that judging level KJ101) was that amateur judges in Japan were confused and threatened by the new way breeders were looking at their koi and took over all amateur koi show judging in Japan in 1971. This had the desired benefit of removing dealer and breeder manipulation of the outcome of the koi show but it also had the effect of isolating the judging decisions to the standards and slowing the amateur side of judging evolution from KJ101 to KJ201.

So slowly through the 70s the ZNA judging evolved to another plain while America was still learning how to look at koi from the KJ101 perspective. And even today you might hear an old timer or two say “I can judge like the ZNA judges if you like? I will simply pick the largest gosanke!” This of course is an example of being trapped in the KJ101 perspective.

So what is the lesson of KJ201? Well there are many lessons but the fundamental lessons are 1) the concept of subjectivity and 2) The concept of quality.

Quality is a tricky subject in that you can’t see it until you are ready to see it. Meaning you need to be exposed to many koi of many grades to begin to have ‘the clouds part’ on this subject. But basically it has to do with superior genetics manifesting itself as superior body line and bone structure, evolved refined skin and associated colors within that special skin.

This is also why today at koi shows we have BEST fish and BEST winning show fish! And the reason American judges can never understand how BREED JUDGES pick the winning fish they do! The breeder, who if you remember has been breeding since the split in judging of 1971, chooses fish everyday based on potential: Meaning fish that have a future due to inherent qualities of body and skin. The fish he sells are useless as they are certainly sellable but they hold no fascination for the breeder. It is the fish of promising superior potential that is -THE BEST FISH.

If you contrast this with the KJ101 mind set, these fish simply do not rise to the criteria taught in 101 judging. So we agree to disagree by saying things like “well on THIS day, this fish is not ready to be shown” or “in a koi show we judge THE fish on THIS day”. Fair enough! BUT do realize that this is exactly where Japanese ZNA judges were in their perspective in 1977. Today even Amateur Japanese judges lean towards Breeder’s eye views and breeder’s judging standards for two basic reasons. 1) Get on board or get run over! LOL. This is the trend in koi breeding and the job of those Japanese is to understand the koi evolution that has occurred. 2) In training to be an enlightened koi judge, they must recognize WHY things have evolved (not replaced) the judges of 1977.

Source: Nishikigoi International
Posted by James P on 2/18/2007, 1:08 pm
http://members4.boardhost.com/koimag/msg/1171807710.html