Today started the Top 10 Judging of the 2022 International Rod Building Challenge! Today we had Paul Sims, president of the C R B G, and Howard "Barney" Barnes, Director of Membership of the C R B G. They poured over all the top 10 and spent hours judging and scoring these amazing works of art! Stay tuned each day as more judges take time to score the largest and most participated Rod Building competition in the world!

I have posted some in my photo gallery and will be adding more each day!
Here is the link [www.rodbuilding.org]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/03/2022 02:55PM by Kevin Landers.

I'd be a terrible judge...subtracting points for too much bling.

Comments like those Chris made appear here frequently and seem to continually fall on waxy ears. These albums give me a really negative perception of this event and how it represents rod building, but I will try to be constructive. It’s not that these aren’t amazing art pieces, they absolutely represent incredible skill in building. It’s that putting them all together, while excluding the best of the 99.3333% of the type of rods built, paints a strange image (one might really be a walking stick).

“The Knifemakers’ Guild” stays relevant and grows in stature by recognizing a diverse range of functional and artistic cutlery. Every style and genre in knife (and rod building) offers opportunities to excel in design and execution. The Knifemakers’ Guild obviously understands this. Conversely, no one seems to smirk at art knives. They awe at them, but probably go home with a skillfully built tactical or hunter. Kevin’s albums give the appearance of an event that is more anachronistic to rod building, and the year 2022, than the word “antediluvian”.

Kendall Cikanek Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...
> Kevin’s albums give the appearance of an event
> that is more anachronistic to rod building, and
> the year 2022, than the word “antediluvian”.

Todays embellishments, though not necessarily modern (but some are), are more popular today then ever before.
I frequently get asked to add extra thread work to a rod all the time. My generic one color black, no foregrip, split grip is just plain vapid.
It would be interesting to see the weights of those rods.

I can appreciate rods built to be works of art. I can also appreciate rods built to be fishing tools. The two different goals and the different rods they result in can not be fairly judged by the same criteria.

How could they possibly pick the most functional rod without actually using them for many hours for their intended purpose? Without fishing a rod, all you can do is judge how much work it took, how pretty it is, and what level of quality the work has. I make functional rods, with some slight bling, but I can appreciate the amazing craftsmanship in these rods. Besides, do you really need to see a picture of the world's most awesome drop shot rod with plain black wraps and a simple grip? Extreme function in a fishing rod doesn't photograph well.

Peter:

You made my point. Rod-building judges evaluate appearance, not utility. The most ornate rod is usually a poor casting/fishing rod, while the best casting/fishing rod is usually unremarkable in appearance. A competent caster can quickly identify the rod which casts best. I'm not sure the blank or guide placement or even decorations much influence a rod's fish fighting ability.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/05/2022 10:45AM by Phil Ewanicki.

I have not commented or shared any pictures of my entry. Some individuals are very excited and cannot wait for the results, and that is very understandable. The amount of work, money and time invested in these rods will never be recouped by winning any of the three places. I can understand the issue with the ornate nature of these rods, but after all, it is a competition. Why would you expect someone to enter a competition whose criteria is clearly spelled out and not give their absolute best? Hopefully everyone that commented negatively on the original post submitted an entry. If not, you really have no reason to comment. Next year enter the contest and submit what you believe is the perfect rod. You never know, it may win. My entry is the "could very well be a walking stick". However, it is a double handled spey, centerpin combo. Feel free to build one and show me how yours looks.

The ol’ it can’t be pretty & functional/performance argument. I call bull on that argument. It can be very highly tuned to the intended use with tip notch performance and still have “bling” that sets it apart as a true one of a kind piece.

There were a lot of very nice works submitted this year and the finalist represented the best of the best in terms of execution of the basics of rod building while also the artistic flair

Wade...please dont construe my comments as negative...they were never intended that way.
Please accept my apologies if they were received as such.
My hats off to all the entries. Amazing craftsmanship and artistry...as well as functionality.

There are precious few reports of MEASURED rod performance. I can only think of one, and that's for fly rods only. Vague reports of rod performance such as "Smooth" or "Fast" or "Powerful" or "Soulful" still abound. It may be that the differences in physical performance between most rods is so small as to be insignificant. That could explain the absence of published facts (eg: accuracy, distance) about the performance of specific rods. I still enjoy seeing an ornately decorated fishing rod, regardless of its other qualities.



'



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/06/2022 06:46PM by Phil Ewanicki.

Make sure you read the evaluation criteria of the competition before you comment on what the judges look at. The blank you are given comes with no information. Therefore, a builder must go through the steps of evaluating the blank using the Common Cents method, or other tools at their disposal to even figure out what it is. To think that a builder would blindly throw fancy material at a blank and hope that it is good enough to win is simply irresponsible. I can assure you that many hours of evaluation and critique has been placed on functionality as well as form. After all, when the competition is over, what do you do with the rod? Hopefully break it in half on a massive catch and send it into history as a pile of well built trash.

The only way I know how to evaluate how a rod casts is to cast it. If rod-building contests include how well the rods cast the findings should be made known, not hidden.

I love to see comments/opinions on the competition but I tend to agree with Wade here… Next year enter the contest and submit what you believe is the perfect rod.

But understand that this competition is about demonstrating the craft as a whole not just functionality. Likely the most functional rod won’t have ornate anything on it which based on the point system works against some of the other scoring topics.

To begin with, the top 10 were voted on by about 30 builders/industry people at the show but now the final 10 judges are going to be voting on the following topics:

- Appearance
- Functionality
- Grips
- Guide Placement
- Guide Straightness
- Threadwork
- Finish Application
- Cleanliness
- Design
- Choice and Flow of Components
- Innovation
- Handle Design

Each topic has a separate set of criteria for consideration. I haven’t looked at all of this year’s entries yet but can say that last year’s group of rods were amazing with the winning rod covering all topics exceedingly well according to judges’ scoring.

Best Regards,

Darrin Heim
American Tackle Company