Our virtual meeting on the 18th March 2021 was the Easter competition. The theme for the competition was to make Chess Pieces, the competition was arranged by Nick Simpson and was judged by Nick Simpson and Errol Levings. There were 3 categories for the competition, beginners, intermediate and experienced, each category had a different set of criteria set for them to follow, the beginners were requested to make a Chess Piece of any rank, the intermediate category were requested to make 2 Chess Pieces that were matching of equal rank, the experienced category were requested to make 2 matching Chess Pieces of equal rank from Rook (Castle), Knight or Bishop plus 1 Queen or King. Here are the results of the competition.
The Beginners category was won by Jeff Buttress for his Queen.
There was a tie for the second place in the beginners category between Craig Dickson’s Pawn and Jeff Buttress for his King.
4th place was taken by Geoff Potter for his Knight.
5th place was also taken by Geoff Potter for this Knight.
There were no Intermediate entries so we now move on to the Experienced category.
1st prize was taken by John Ruickbie for his Queen and 2 Castles.
2nd Prize went to David Ross for his Queen and 2 Bishops.
3rd place went to me Alec Mutch for my Queen and 2 Bishops.
4th Place went to Dave Line for his King and 2 Bishops.
That concludes the competition entries, we will be running more competitions over the next few months, and we hope to see the entries increase in number, do remember there is a £25 first price to be won in each of the 3 categories.
To help you understand the judging criteria Nick and Errol have produced a chart to help you all understand what the judges would be looking for. Scroll right or left to see all the criteria.
|Design & Innovation
|Not pleasing to the eye
|A poor copy No innovation
|No attempt to finish or sand
|No finish applied (when one is required)
|Crude workmanship, little effort made
|No attempt to match
|No real attempt at design
|A copy, no innovation shown
|Crude attempts at finish either turning or sanding
|Inappropriate finish poorly applied
|More than one distinct feature
|Crude attempt at match
|Clear attempts at design demonstrated
|A good copy with some enhancements
|Some tool marks and/or inconsistent sanding
|Some inconsistencies in the applied finish
|Several interesting features, well integrated
|Clear attempt at matching
|Good design elements incorporated but not executed as well as possible
|Some unique features and/or different materials and/or techniques
|Good overall, minimal tool marks and fairly good, reasonably consistent sanding
|Reasonably good overall finish but some issues still evident on close inspection
|Good level of features and detail and/or use of different materials, techniques etc..
|Good level of skills demonstrated in producing this item.
|Some, but not all elements match
|Good design – some small improvements potentially possible.
|Good attempt to innovate and/or combine materials and/or techniques
|Some imperfections in the wood surface that could have been rectified
|Some imperfections in the finish that could have been rectified
|Contains a series of complex features
|Multiple complex techniques required and most achieved successfully
|Some minor mismatches only
|No improvements could realistically improve the design. Visually pleasing and very interesting.
|A very innovative design, or significant progression of an existing design.
|No obvious way to improve the turned/sanded finish.
|The best finish for the item. All areas finished very well
|Exceptional complexity in the turning and construction.
|Exceptional technique in all elements
|Excellent match in all aspects.
I wish to take this opportunity to thank all of you who took part in the competition and also our thanks to the organisers and Judges Nick and Errol.
Do remember the clubhouse remains closed.