Mfgc 2010 - Post Mortem, A Post mortem report Options

[goldrush]

Very few competition go as planned. Many of these encounter problems that must be corrected and a few show go smoother than planned. Regardless of how successful or disastrous a competition is, it is important to review the show in detail once the compe is over. This allows your team to figure out what things were done well and to document the things that need improvement. It also aids in building a knowledge base that teams coming behind you can review to ensure they get the most out of their upcoming shows.
Please allow me to provide some specific details of what I can gather from the ground so that you can either pursue your professional perogative, and seek to rectify these difficulties - or more likely (I suspect) so that you can have some entertaining reading material to chew on.



1)Venue:IMM.By far(not just the distance) the worst compared to the previous 2 MFGC shows.The mall appeared not to be too proactive in promoting this show.Nowhere in the mall has any information of the show existence.No posters nor any directions were placed in critical high traffic areas to create awareness of an on going goldfish competition.There was not even a mention of any goldfish compe in its monthly event column under their website.Just look at the pathetic turn-out at the plaza area and you will know what I mean.Secondly the outdoor venue was deemed not very suitable with respect to Singapore tropical climate.The heat and humidity can be quite unbearable during the afternoons at such open areas.A mall of this size is no place to hold a relatively small compe as human traffic seem to have totally by pass the show corner .Ironically the traffic congestion outside the mall seem to be a perenial nightmare !


2)Benching-in
This one I can only write on someone's behalf as I did not personally experienced it myself as I wasn't that early on benching in.I heard that the organisers were late at the venue leaving a handful of early bird of hobbyists stranded .As organisers,there should be an advance party to cater for early birds who wish to bench in right on time.From what I understand those that arrived at 6 pm then were not processed as members of the club had arrived late .Worse,they proceeded to bench in themselves oblivious to the presence of hobbyists who had waited to be processed in registration and tagging their fish to their respective tanks.As host,I think the public has the priority to be processed first rather than the other way round.

3)Media
There were not many media reports on the compe unlike previous shows.No advertisements were placed in the national papers to highlight its existence.Why?Usually Life sections of the Strait Times will carry a report of such a show with interviews,pictures of winning fish etc.What happen this time round?



4)Judging
Why 4 judges?Isn't it difficult when there is going to have a tie(which really happened) to decide on a particular winning fish.And why was there a judge from Vermillion club.who is the organiser of the comp with many of their members as participants Close affiliation will deem as biased judging no matter what reasons you can give.To avoid controversial results it is best not to include any judge afflilated to any participating club in the future.


No competition is not marred by controversy and bad decisions.There is as I have hinted at above so much confusion about this show which I would not like to go through
I would highly suggest that the organisers place the above suggestions under the looking glass to see if policies are being followed and not that hobbyists are innocently being taken advantage of. 

Dr goldrush

[ranchu_tan]

Hi,
Mr Kenneth does not keep goldfish and he is no longer a member of Vermillion Goldfish Club since 3 years ago.
Thank you & best regards.

[goldrush]

Hi,
Mr Kenneth does not keep goldfish and he is no longer a member of Vermillion Goldfish Club since 3 years ago.
Thank you & best regards.

Hahaha an ex member doesn't distant himself away from his former club.Doesn't keep goldfish doesn't make him a better or worse judge just a "rusty" one I know Kenneth since the very first MFGC which he was then actively organising and running it efficiently.So he knows too much of Vermillion's running,appreciation etc.His presence certainly does put a psychological disadvantage to hobbyists who are not members though. .I'm not doubting his credentials but there is always an uncanny aura of uneasiness when he is around .I am just speaking out for the minority

[Gold Digger]

I'm sure the organizers did their best to put together another great show for everyone who visited and joined. I know it's not easy to organize shows. There will always be room for improvement. What's important is that the organizers made an effort for hobbyists to get together to celebrate the hobby. For that alone, I must congratulate them. As for the judging, if I joined the show then it means that I trust the organizers will be fair even if I don't know them personally and they know the other participants. As I say to my friends, join the fish show even if you win and people say you cheated or if you lose and people will say you have lousy fish. But join the show anyway because it is not about winning or losing but about the hobby of fishkeeping and the friends you meet along the way.

This post has been edited by Gold Digger: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 5:00 pm

[ranchu_tan]

Hi all,
Below is the official statement send on behalf for Mr Alvin Lim, President of Vermillion Goldfish Club (Singapore). Thank you.


Dear RG Forumers,

Although it is not generally the practice of the Vermillion Goldfish Club to formally engage directly in forums, we consider it important to try to address the concerns that have been raised in connection with our recent MFGC 2010 show, particularly since they have been ventilated in a well respected forum such as RafflesGold.

As Dr Goldrush observes, few competitions go perfectly as planned. However it has always been our highest priority to tackle issues that arise at our shows to ensure that we can improve in our future shows.

I should explain, by way of background, that the comments in this posting had earlier been communicated to us via email, which we valued very much as sincere feedback from Mr. Ken Ho (aka Desireless) of RafflesGold even before the end of the show. I have followed up with him personally with explanations on the questions raised, especially on the issue of judging, and made it clear that there are certainly many areas upon which our show needs to improve on.

However since the same comments have been published in this forum without the explanations I have given, I would like to formally address them again here:


1) Venue:
We have been changing the show venue throughout the years in our continual bid to try out new venues and new ideas for the show. We have not placed undue emphasis on the distance factor given that Singapore is only a small island spanning less than 50km from East to West and 25km from North to South. We have, despite this, been blessed with the privilege of having hobbyists from overseas sending in their entries from thousands of kilometres away.

In selecting a venue, many things come into consideration, for example, the human traffic, availability of car parks, publicity and ease of loading and unloading of competition fish, et cetera. We conducted the site survey for the MFGC 2010 venue at a time of the year which was much cooler than when the show took place. We had considered the scorch of the afternoon sun in the semi outdoor environment but were assured by the presence of blower fans on the top of the ceilings. The nice pool playground where children can play while families visit the show made it seem perfect for a great family outing. Unfortunately, we underestimated the humidity and the heat of the afternoon sun and did not expect the heat wave which hit Singapore towards the day of the show.

The level of publicity of the event by the venue owner is of course a matter which is, from our perspective, entirely within the discretion, experience and judgment of the mall, as to what best fits their commercial and management objectives. The club is indebted to the venue owner for so generously sponsoring such a big area for our show free-of-charge.


2) Benching-in
We can and should improve on the benching-in process, taking on board the comments that have been made. I would like to offer our apologies for the inconveniences caused and can, at this stage, only resolve to take extra care in managing the benching-in for future shows.


3) Media
As in previous years, we notified all the major news media of our show. This year, our event found coverage in the Lian He Wan Bao newspaper which carried an article with a photograph we had submitted. The event was a volunteer-run, non-profit, free-for-public, show-cum-exhibition aimed at promoting the goldfish hobby, with the generous support of our sponsors. In keeping with the non-commercial nature of the event, we have not sought to publicize the show through paid publicity.


4) Judging
The choice of judges in any goldfish competition is a very major issue. We always aim to secure judges who are impartial and unbiased and skilled in goldfish aesthetics so that the entries are fairly and ably judged. Our experience has been that suitable judges tend to be found in people who are either experienced as breeders or avid longstanding hobbyists. In practice, such experienced candidates are often connected in some way, either directly or indirectly, with goldfish clubs or members of the goldfish trade.

While it is really not easy to find experienced judges who are completely unaffiliated with any dealer or club, we make every effort to get the best regional judges for all our shows.
Why 4 judges? Historically, the MFGC has always had 4 judges, one each from Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore. The idea behind this is that a wider panel of judges would alleviate the risk of personal biases for specific varieties, features or localised standards. When there is a tie, the judges hold discussions and attempt to reach consensus.
We had some difficulty getting the usual mix of judges from different countries this year because of a number of candidates had to pull out at the last minute due to their work commitments.
However we were fortunate enough to have as one of the judges Mr. Kenneth Ho who, as some of you may recall, also previously judged in the FishHub and the Dawson Place Goldfish shows. Kenneth was, until about three years ago, a member of our club. But I felt that his absence from the club scene for the last three years allowed us to call upon his expertise to judge in this year’s show. I have no doubts of his impartiality.
Judging is tough and serious business, as Dr Goldrush and Desireless can attest to, having both been present on the day of judging. In the hot and humid environment, our judges kept tirelessly at their tasks for more than 6 hours, with only short breaks in between. As organisers, we are somewhat embarrassed by the fact that the only thing we are able to offer in return for the extraordinary commitment and salutary professionalism of our judges is our immense gratitude for the personal time, effort and expense they devote in supporting our shows.
As President of the Vermillion Goldfish Club, let me make it clear that we hold the integrity of our judges paramount, and will not allow any suggestion that fellow goldfish hobbyists have been taken advantage of (innocently or otherwise) to go unaddressed.

I have extended personal invitations to Dr Goldrush and his colleagues at RafflesGold to attend the show debriefing session this evening (8 Jun 2010), so that I may get to the root of these issues.

We do not intend to impose further on this forum but would welcome any further feedback or questions pertaining to MFGC through our official email at GreenNgoldSG@yahoo.com. Rest assured that I will personally attend to your queries.

Alvin Lim

President,
Vermillion Goldfish Club

[goldrush]

Dear all

I believe my recent comment on MFGC raised some eye brows in the goldfish community.The optimistic outreach has been interpreted differently by different camps and the goldfish fraternity as a whole.I must reiterate that it is not my intent to ridicule any organisation or in this case ,Vermillion club in particular.I regret if my comments has offended some camps and sincerely apologise for my insensitive postings above.Yesterday cordial and unconfrontational meeting with the organisers and in particular the president of Vermillion club helped me realized the overall picture of staging the entire competition and their running.Let me assure you that Rafflesgold remain committed and will continue to work with any organisation in providing all of our members with the highest standards of informations pertaining to the goldfish industry.


Dr goldrush

[jasonq]

Hi all, frank and open discussion should always be encouraged at any stage. Defensive and offensive discussion will never improve future endeavor!

Though we do not hope any changes to the judges' decisions nor we should allow any harassment and embarrassment of our judges, again open and frank discussions should be put to record for future guidelines in judging.

Thanks for rafflesgold for being a well respected forum for such exchanges.

How I wish, such discussion was also allowed for Aquarama 2009...

Jason

[namaste]

hello RG friends,

It is a very difficult task to do a public competition.
Just to cope with the stress of the setup and balance the pressure of different interests from various can kill the organisers. With this, I salute to the MFGC organsiers.

But again, I believe a show is meant for the goldfish lovers to come together to enjoy knowledge sharing and debating, and compete happily. End of the day, as a hobbyist, I wish to learn and benefit something from the show and look forward for the next one.
Just speaking and sharing my experience and opinion..

Best Regards,
Desmond Lee

This post has been edited by namaste: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:18 am