Designed for the concours field
A familiar process, reorganised for clarity.
Traditional judging forms can carry decades of accumulated structure. M100 rebuilds the form around the sequence judges actually need in the field.
Evaluation areas are arranged alphabetically, colour-coded and paired with a Suggested Deduction List. The forms are treated as living documents and will continue to develop through use and informed feedback.
Body Exterior
Finish, fit, presentation and the visible exterior specification.
Body Interior
Materials, trim, instruments, fit and appropriate presentation.
Chassis
Structure, suspension, brakes, wheels and underbody presentation.
Drivetrain
Engine, transmission and associated mechanical systems.
Functionality
Meaningful operational checks relevant to the automobile’s intended use.
Early field response
Easy to use. Logical to follow.
Judges encountering the redesigned sequence responded positively even without prior discussion, indicating that the structure supports intuitive use rather than requiring extensive retraining.
Deduction philosophy
Assume the car is correct until a deviation is confirmed.
Judges do not search for opportunities to subtract points. A deduction is made only when the team can reasonably identify a deviation from the relevant specification, condition or quality standard.
- The Suggested Deduction List supports consistency but does not replace informed judgement.
- Deductions are strictly limited to two points per section on every M100 judging form to prevent over-penalisation.
- The only exceptions are an out-of-period rebody and an engine that does not start.
- Technical checks are limited to items essential for safe driving and basic operability.
- Technical Points and up to five Significance Points help judging teams separate the strongest contenders without punishing entrants excessively.
A minor deviation should remain a minor deviation. A fundamental issue should be recognised as one.
Entrant experience
Feedback should guide, not merely criticise.
M100 encourages a post-judging feedback form that directs entrants toward areas they may wish to review — for example, the engine compartment, interior, carpets or overall mechanical presentation.
The language remains constructive because knowledge can vary from event to event and even experienced judges can be mistaken about a specific detail. Feedback should open a useful conversation rather than present every observation as unquestionable fact.
Clear
Useful direction
Owners understand which areas deserve closer review.
Fair
Respectful language
Observations acknowledge uncertainty where specialist research may still be needed.
Two-stage judging
From class winner to Best in Show.
The established two-stage judging process used at major events remains fully compatible with M100: class judging comes first, followed by a separate election for Best in Show.
Determine the class winners
Each judging team applies the relevant M100 format to determine the winner of its class. Only class-winning automobiles may proceed to the final Best-in-Show process.
Confirm Best-in-Show eligibility
The team that judged the class should also decide whether its winning automobile possesses sufficient design, technological, historical or provenance significance to enter the Best-in-Show election. A class victory therefore does not automatically require nomination for the final vote.
Elect by secret ballot
The nominated class winners enter a separate, confidential vote. The Best-in-Show decision is made independently of the class scores and without an open show of hands.
Voting eligibility must be defined in advance.
Depending on the structure of the event, voting may be limited to the Chief Class Judges together with the Chairman and Chief Judge, or it may be extended to every member of the full jury. The selected model should be stated before judging begins and applied consistently to every nominated automobile.
A secret ballot is essential to a fair and independent Best-in-Show decision.
Confidential voting reduces personal pressure, deference to senior figures and the influence of visible group opinion. Every eligible voter should be able to select the automobile they consider most deserving without having to defend that choice publicly during the vote.
The ballot count must nevertheless remain accountable. The designated counting officials should prepare a confidential written record for the organiser documenting voter eligibility, the number of ballots issued and received, the result of the count and any tie-breaking procedure applied. The individual ballot remains secret; the integrity of the process remains documented.
Judges or referees
A concours is a competition between automobiles.
Some events may describe judges as referees to underline that the competition is between the cars, not between their owners. The team applies an agreed framework consistently while allowing the automobiles themselves to determine the outcome.
Class judging can be highly structured. Best in Show will always contain a stronger subjective element — an informed response to the complete automobile and its presence on the field. Under M100, winners from supercar and hypercar classes can stand in that wider competition alongside historic automobiles.
The M100 balance
Structure for the class. Judgement for the exceptional.
The scoring framework creates fairness and comparability. Experienced human judgement identifies the car that transcends the score.