Strange judging of some exhibits at Bandung Indonesia 2017

[ikanek]

Here I reproduced two articles which were sent to the FIP president Mr. Tay Peng Hian about our indignation about judging of Traditional class at Bandung stamp show 2017.

So, first is an article written by my friend and expert on early Afghanistan Mr. Jaromír Petřík.

Strange evaluation of Afghanistan exhibits at the Bandung 2017 World Exhibition by judges evaluating the traditional class of Asia

The jury evaluating exhibits of philatelic materials has surely not an easy work. Critical remarks by dissatisfied exhibitors are present at almost every exhibition.


But there should always be certain limits, because the jurors' defence that they can not know everything is valid to a certain extent.

Nobody knows everything in the world. But, if someone is a philatelic juror especially at world exhibitions, he should have at least basic knowledge of the exhibits whose list he or she gets several months in advance.

There is no problem to study at least basic information from catalogues such as Gibbons, Michel, Scott, or to find some information on the internet. It is also common practice to borrow the necessary literature from libraries and to browse commonly available materials on online auctions such as eBay and Delcampe to get the material in the eye if they do not know it.

All exhibits of traditional class of Asia at Bandung were judged by a three-member team led by Mr. Chen Yu-An from Taipei (China). The other jury members were also of Asian origin. It is logical to assume that an Asian jury team at the Asian exhibition will know the entire area of Asia very well.

However, as it was evident at first glance, it was unfortunately not the case in many areas. So judge yourself what the jury members did not mind on one of the Afghanistan exhibits.

In this critical article, I will deal with Afghanistan of the 19th century where two 8-frame exhibits were shown. One exhibit was mine (Jaromír Petřík from the Czech Republic) and the other was by Mahmud Sultan from Pakistan.

Both exhibits had a similar focus with the difference that I exhibited Afghanistan from 1871 to 1900 and Mahmud Sultan Afghanistan of the 19th century from 1871 to 1880 with the forerunners.

I got 87 points and a large vermeil, Mahmud Sultan got 90 points and a gold medal. The difference in the exhibits was apparent at first glance. I had at least 3 unique materials described in my exhibit and 1 significant discovery, which I have refuted the ever-reported data in the world catalogues of Gibbons, Scott, Michel, Yvert.

This discovery was related to the status of the so -called small Tiger Head stamps and was properly described and published in a study in the very prestigious magazine Fakes, Forgeries, Experts.

The unique materials in my exhibit include:

1. Block of 19 handstamped stamps - the highest number of stamps on the sheet known - the biggest Afghan rarity - Ex Theodore Light
2. Cover with a purple stamp (proof) of issue 1290
3. Cover with unissued stamp on blue paper from issue 1316 - ex Dietrich

Mahmud Sultan had no described rarities and none of his own findings.

I had correct plate reconstructions of all 4 printing plates from the 1st issue of stamps called large Tiger Head, which, apart from the exhibit of R. Jaretzki (exhibiting his exhibit in the FIP Championship class), had no other philatelist at the exhibitions.

Mahmud Sultan had only 2 plate reconstructions, while in plate A (the rarest) he had 3 errors, replacing the missing positions 1, 2, 3 with the stamps of plate B and C. Therefore, he had only one correct reconstruction of the commonest plate C.

The exhibit of Mr. Sultan also included a considerable duplicity of material, both stamps and covers.

Incorrect plate reconstruction of plate A, pos. 1 = plate B (pos.10), pos. 2+3 = plate C (pos.3+15)

The correct plating is shown for comparison; also compare the stamp quality in both reconstructions.

[ikanek]

Mahmud Sultan does not have any literature resources on his exhibit from which he gathered knowledge. Studies by Afghanistan experts such as Horst Dietrich, John Wilkins and Robert Jack refute the statement that in 1876 were issued stamps of tiger head in yellow colour for the city of Herat. There was no Afghan post at this time and the earliest covers from Herat date back to the late 1890s. Nevertheless, this erroneous information is given by Mahmud Sultan in the introductory page.

Other mistakes are shown vertical strips of five marked as occurring on plate C. The strip of five on the left comes from the plate D (pos. 1,4,7,10,13), which is very easily distinguishable due to the full inner ring (on plates A, B, C are dotted). In addition, in 1871 denominations Paisa and Karan were not used, so there was no reason to mention them in the description above the item.

Another mistake from the first issue of the 1871 stamps (1288) is a block of four which is not from 1288, but from 1290 (1873) from the third issue. The year 1290 is written directly on the stamps and, in addition, the stamps are certified. The certificate must also indicate that these are not stamps from the first issue 1288, but from the third issue 1290.

Detail – clearly visible year 1290 on stamps (and not 1288):

[ikanek]

Another mistake is the wrong identification of stamps of the plate A - 1288. The first stamp on the left is from the plate D (pos. 4) and the strip of three on the right from the plate C (pos 1,4,7). In addition, all stamps are denominated 1 abasi, only 1 shahi was present on plate A. The author shows unfamiliarity with Arabic script.

Next wrong plate reconstruction is from issue “1292” where the stamp from pos. 15 is replaced by the stamp from pos. 12.

[ikanek]

That has been the wrong classification of items and now we are going to even more serious faults – occurrence of clear forgeries. The shown forgeries are not dangerous one but of primitive and often smiling quality. All forgeries are very different from the originals and well described, for example, in a specialized catalogue from Robert Jack - Afghanistan 1870-1900 (2012).

This primitive forgery of 1 abasi is documented in the aforementioned catalogue under the identification 1292F1.

Denomination of 1 abasi was printed only on 5 positions and the exhibitor and jury had the opportunity to compare it with the stamp positions printed from the original plate shown in the exhibit exactly 1 row above. As you can see at first glance, the stamp does not match any of the 5 possible positions.

Even worse is the case of extremely primitive forgery from another issue where it is clearly visible that the green stamp marked Cabul Issue is larger than originals and does not conform to the rest of the issue. Again, this forgery is described under number 1293F3.

Detail of the forgery

What else to say to the exhibit of Mahmut Sultan? The exhibit is entitled „Afghanistan of 19th century with forerunners“.

On the first 7 sheets, there is the British Field Post from 1838-1842 which does not fit into the exhibit. Instead of it, there should be pre-stamped letters from Afghanistan which are known in a limited number of 17 examples.

During the exhibition, the jury was repeatedly alerted to all the abovementioned discrepancies and forgeries. Evidently, as can be seen from the evaluation of this exhibit, these "defects" were not taken into account at all and the evaluation was not reduced (the exhibit should not get 90 points).

What to say to the judges evaluating Asia? When discussing the exhibit, it was clear that they know nothing about the Afghanistan stamps. And the exhibits of Afghanistan are shown at every world exhibition. In my remark that if they do not know something, they have to study it (after all, they have the introduction sheets of exhibits several months in advance), I was told that they do not have to study everything they will judge. On the contrary, it is their duty to prepare properly and responsibly for the evaluation.

I hope that we will not meet again with such jury at other world exhibitions and that FIP will draw some conclusions.

Author: Jaromír Petřík

[ikanek]

And now my article as I was not satisfied with the result of my exhibit.

The Ottoman Empire exhibit – another incorrectly evaluated exhibit

The exhibit „Turkey before 1st World War“ by exhibitor Muhammad Aurangzeb from Pakistan is another case where exhibition jury visibly failed. This general exhibit without any rarity and use of greater knowledge with about 10 primitive forgeries got finally 80 points as well as my study exhibit „Travancore – official stamps 1911-1949“ with many rarities including unique items.

Introduction page of my exhibit „Travancore – official issues 1911-1949“

Next are shown some examples of the rarities in my exhibit as they were shown in Bandung, some of them are unique.

A very rare strip of three of blue overprint on 4 ch denomination

The only recorded stamp added before overprinting in Official issues

[ikanek]

One of two recorded examples of an inverted O variety on cover

A unique sheet of 1 ch denomination with three examples of the inverted left S variety

A very rare sheet from the combined setting (Types O6 and O8)

My exhibit was judged by the same jury from Asia as Afghanistan exhibits about which a separate article is dealt with. The exhibit of Turkey (which should be more precisely called Ottoman Empire) was judged by another jury team.

Besides, judge yourself, my specific essential comments about his exhibit follow.

[ikanek]

The introduction page is full of mistakes, the exhibit is not fully specified, there are missing references to literature, own research is not mentioned and so on.

I would not mind that the exhibit was purely general without the slightest specialization if the series were at least complete. In all cases, there were no scarcer stamps worth more than 10 dollars which are easy to get. It is surprising that the exhibitor did not invest in the completion of the series, but had no problem paying exhibition fees of almost 400 dollars. The completion of the missing denominations would not require large funds, say, 1,000 dollars.

Besides the missing stamps in the series some stamps were damaged, even with bad stains. Such condition should not be present at world stamp show with the exception of very rare items.

In the exhibit, there were several forgeries to defraud collectors similarly as in the case of one Afghanistan exhibit. The first were from issues known as Duloz and Large crescent. Both forgeries are of the same provenience (Spiro) and were made at the end of 19th century. They are usually cancelled with one type of faked blue cancel. The forgeries differ in the design (especially the corner numerals) and in singles are common. They are depicted for example at https://stampforgeries.com/forged-stamps-of-turkey-duloz/. They are also mentioned in the book of A. Passer from 1938 (The stamps of Turkey).

[ikanek]

Forgery

Genuine stamp for comparison

Forgeries made by Spiro

Genuine stamps

[ikanek]

Therefore, it was no surprise, that the exhibited overprints Imprimé on 1892 issue were all fakes. These overprints belong to the most faked overprints in the world philately. There are several hundreds fakes of several dozen types to one genuine example.

The last forgery of 2 Piastres was probably made by lithography. What about the fact that genuine overprints are always sharp and made by typography. The exhibitor was also not confused by different overprint colour (black for red).

Forgery

Genuine

What to say at the conclusion to the evaluation jury? Is it normal for them to evade such unsuccessful forgeries?

Author: Jiří Černý, Ph.D.
National commissioner of Czech Republic

[dwhopper]

Comments about my one frame exhibit of Northern Territory (of Australia) Squared Circle Cancels

there were only two judges as the Team Leader had a Visa problem, xxxxxx from yyyyyy who could not get a longer Visa and was only allowed a 7 day Visa but because it was imperative he had to attend the FIP conference he was absent the first 3 days. The Team Leader was xxxxx from zzzzzzzz and he is an old friend but his Philatelic knowledge is lacking. The other member was from Slovenia and I doubt if the pair even know where the Northern Territory was let alone know what a squared circle was.

I asked xxxxxxxx some questions but his English is about as good as my Chinese.

And my Queensland TPO Exhibit
As far as I am concerned the judging of your material was a shambles.

There were no Australian judges in the team, I do not know who the others were but they were European.

My medal level was a lot lower than it has ever been internationally despite the exhibits being much better.

[Global Administrator]

Heading and first post had no COUNTRY or month in heading which is silly - I personally had zero clue where BANDUNG was or is - they are -

http://bandung2017.org/international-stamp-exhibition/

Exhibition Under FIP Patronage 2017

Exhibition Name : BANDUNG 2017

Venue: Trans Studio Convention Center, Bandung, INDONESIA

Date : 3rd – 7th August 2017

Category : Specialised World

Competitive Classes : Traditional Philately, Postal History, Postal Stationery, Thematic Philately, Youth Philately, Philatelic Literature, One – Frame Exhibit, Modern Philately

Total Frames : Ca 2 200
Frame Fee : US$ 75
Frame Fee for Youth Class (per exhibit) : Free
Frame Fee for One-Frame exhibit : US$ 100
Frame Fee for Literature Class (per exhibit) : US$ 85 Frame Fee for Modern Philately : US$ 75
Deadline Entries : 30 November 2016
Deadline Acceptance : 25 January 2017
Deadline Payment : 31 March 2017
Website : www.bandung2017.org
Consultant : Mr Michael Ho
General Commissioner : Mr Tono Dwi Putranto

[Global Administrator]

Have to agree that exhibits containing numerous obvious fakes, and common stamps in poor condition getting given high awards seems really inexcusable.

[David Benson]

Ikanek,

Regarding the Ottoman Empire Duloz & Newspaper overprints.

It is amazing that these hadn't been deemed forgeries earlier by previous Judges. The 5pi. is very simple, the top of the 5 is entirely different and well known as a quick guide to forgeries. Anyone with basic knowledge of the items should be able to pick the Spiros. The Newspaper handstamps should only be shown with certificates as all are considered bad without one.

David B.

[Allanswood]

Why didn't the exhibitor know all this? And chose to exhibit anyway?

[David Benson]

Allanswood,

You will have to ask the Exhibitor, maybe he knew they were forgeries, maybe he didn't but the exhibit should not have got so far without the forgeries being noted by the Judges,

David B.

[thecloudwatcher]

Is anyone really surprised at this? A three-man team to judge all the traditional exhibits, many of which will be exotic or esoteric in nature and require a deep-level of knowledge to fully understand and appreciate? Even if the judges had 6-months to prepare I doubt they would be able to judge most of the exhibits in a truly knowledgeable manner.

[David Benson]

Cloudwatcher,

There would have more than one team to judge Traditional. One of the Teams would be for Asian Exhibits and I agree the Afghanistan may have been difficult to find a team member who was proficient in that country. There should have been team members proficient in Turkey as it is entered more and the forgeries that were there should have been easily recognised by anyone who had a basic knowledge of that period,

David B.

[ikanek]

Yes, there were at least three if not four judging groups for Traditional Philately. One for Asia, one for Europe, one for Africa and America. Each group had roughly about 20 exhibits to judge. The judging took about 2 full days and one afternoon.

For example, just to get at least basic knowledge of Travancore official stamps, you need to go through only 2 pages in SG. That´s task for a one afternoon of study.

I try to prepare for exhibit judging more. First, I gather information from various catalogs - Scott, Michel, if Commonwealth SG, Yvert. Then, I try to find similar exhibits online (Exponet, AAPE and other sites). And if possible I try to find more info in our libraries. It is also possible to look on what is usually offered for example on eBay and Delcampe.

[ikanek]

Ikanek,

Regarding the Ottoman Empire Duloz & Newspaper overprints.

It is amazing that these hadn't been deemed forgeries earlier by previous Judges. The 5pi. is very simple, the top of the 5 is entirely different and well known as a quick guide to forgeries. Anyone with basic knowledge of the items should be able to pick the Spiros. The Newspaper handstamps should only be shown with certificates as all are considered bad without one.

David B.

David, yes I agree. The Spiro forgeries usually have different shape of numerals - English as well as Turkish ones. Very easy to spot if you have ever seen them once.

1892 Imprimé overprints are very easy to spot if genuine (99 per cent of forgeries have not this genuine characteristics). In the genuine copy, there must not be a right frame. This is mentioned in Michel catalogs for several years, but many readers don´t bother.
This was the reason why they were very soon withdrawn. They also must have cancels from Constantinople area.

P.S: Sorry Glen, but not having a picture with me right now (of genuine copy).

[David Benson]

Ikanek,

re.

For example, just to get at least basic knowledge of Travancore official stamps, you need to go through only 2 pages in SG. That´s task for a one afternoon of study.

It is not uncommon for a judge to bring along a catalogue during judging sessions, to double check what is there and more importantly " what is not there ".

David B.

[Allanswood]

The other point is that if you know enough to locate and then reconstruct a plate of stamps, as you should - you just made exhibition pages out of them! - then you should also have known that you have placed the wrong stamps in your reco sheet. Otherwise, what game are you playing trying to fool the judges - although it seems they were anyway.

If it were me, I would return the award, apologise for the errors and set about finding the missing items that are now leaving gaps in my exhibit. Who would want a reputation ruined when this comes out and then you try and enter the same exhibit in another competition?

Then when you have them, enter the competitions again with all the boxes ticked and take the Gold it may deserve.

[David Benson]

Allanswood,

If the plate is small enough then the exhibitor should show illustrations or scans that show the details that prove the positioning. if the plate is large it would be almost impossible. There was a well known exhibitor in Sydney who showed an Eastern European issue of 1860 ( no names mentioned but not too difficult to work out which country and who the exhibitor was. I doubt if any of the positions allocated were correctly identified. Judges do not have the time to check every position even if they had the relevant information, they have to accept the Exhibitors word,

David B.

[Allanswood]

I'll never understand this game.

An exhibitor has peppered an exhibit with forgeries, plated issues showing the wrong positions and/or the wrong plate and also titled pages and shown stamps that do match the description in the title even when the stamp clearly shows it is not what he called it in the title. It also seems that no evidence is given citing any authority or reference to prove plate or position.

The way it's been shown above, there is almost no page without something fundamentally wrong with it.

And on the basis of they have to accept the exhibitors word, he gets a Gold.

[David Benson]

Allanswood,

re.

And on the basis of they have to accept the exhibitors word,

I never said they have to accept the Exhibitors word, astute judges should have picked up the discrepancies during the different phases of the exhibit from the first time it was exhibited and as it rose through the levels to attain acceptance at the top level.

The problem is that in this case and many other cases the various judging teams did not have the knowledge.

David B.

[thecloudwatcher]

Cloudwatcher,

There would have more than one team to judge Traditional. One of the Teams would be for Asian Exhibits and I agree the Afghanistan may have been difficult to find a team member who was proficient in that country. There should have been team members proficient in Turkey as it is entered more and the forgeries that were there should have been easily recognised by anyone who had a basic knowledge of that period,

David B.

Well that certainly makes more sense!

Yes, there were at least three if not four judging groups for Traditional Philately. One for Asia, one for Europe, one for Africa and America. Each group had roughly about 20 exhibits to judge. The judging took about 2 full days and one afternoon.

For example, just to get at least basic knowledge of Travancore official stamps, you need to go through only 2 pages in SG. That´s task for a one afternoon of study.

I try to prepare for exhibit judging more. First, I gather information from various catalogs - Scott, Michel, if Commonwealth SG, Yvert. Then, I try to find similar exhibits online (Exponet, AAPE and other sites). And if possible I try to find more info in our libraries. It is also possible to look on what is usually offered for example on eBay and Delcampe.

Thank you for the clarification - I did wonder how it was possible for all the exhibits to be judged by just three jurors

[camelspotter]

In the case that one of the jurors observes an item/items that are not genuine in an exhibit, how is the exhibit judged? Is there a specific rule for this, or points are deducted for knowledge (or other category)?

[David Benson]

From the FIP regulations

Should an exhibit be determined to contain faked, forged, repaired or wrongly identified items which are not clearly marked as such, the exhibit shall be downgraded as determined by the Presidium and approved by the jury. If an exhibit contains many faked, forged or repaired items which are not marked as such, the exhibit may be put out of competition.

Where the exhibit has been downgraded, the exhibitor, National Commissioner and the national Federation shall be duly informed by the President of the Forgeries Commission.

Exhibitors whose frames have been opened to inspect material and who have been required to provide certificates before material is shown again shall likewise be advised

[David Benson]

Before we start condemning judging & exhibitors, there would only be a very small minority of exhibits which contain unmarked forgeries or mistakes in identifying positioning. These are usually from obscure areas which are beyond the knowledge of the judges which have been allocated to those exhibits and haven't been reported to the Expert Group.

David B.

[Global Administrator]

"If an exhibit contains many faked, forged or repaired items which are not marked as such, the exhibit may be put out of competition."

The one highlighted above should have the high level medal removed. Medals are clearly a joke if sloppy entries like that get one!

[David Benson]

Glen,

re.

Should an exhibit be determined to contain faked

The key word is determined. I am sure the next time the exhibit is entered word would have got around to whoever is judging it and the exhibit would be closely examined to see if the problem items have been removed.

David B.

[Global Administrator]

David if this got a high 80 points, the Judges were all asleep I'd suggest.

Missing anything of value, sets incomplete, condition poor, and many obvious fakes.

The introduction page is full of mistakes, the exhibit is not fully specified, there are missing references to literature, own research is not mentioned and so on.

I would not mind that the exhibit was purely general without the slightest specialization if the series were at least complete. In all cases, there were no scarcer stamps worth more than 10 dollars which are easy to get.

It is surprising that the exhibitor did not invest in the completion of the series, but had no problem paying exhibition fees of almost 400 dollars. The completion of the missing denominations would not require large funds, say, 1,000 dollars.

Besides the missing stamps in the series some stamps were damaged, even with bad stains. Such condition should not be present at world stamp show with the exception of very rare items.

In the exhibit, there were several forgeries to defraud collectors similarly as in the case of one Afghanistan exhibit. The first were from issues known as Duloz and Large crescent. Both forgeries are of the same provenience (Spiro) and were made at the end of 19th century. They are usually cancelled with one type of faked blue cancel.

The forgeries differ in the design (especially the corner numerals) and in singles are common. They are depicted for example at https://stampforgeries.com/forged-stamps-of-turkey-duloz/. They are also mentioned in the book of A. Passer from 1938 (The stamps of Turkey).

[GJ50]

It is logical to assume that an Asian jury team at the Asian exhibition will know the entire area of Asia very well.

This I find rather a rash statement !!!
Therefore all European judges know majority of material from ALL 35 plus European countries now and in the past. I doubt it very much.
GJ50

[ikanek]

It is logical to assume that an Asian jury team at the Asian exhibition will know the entire area of Asia very well.

This I find rather a rash statement !!!
Therefore all European judges know majority of material from ALL 35 plus European countries now and in the past. I doubt it very much.
GJ50

Perhaps, it is a rash statement. And what about the statement we have been told by them "they do not have to study everything they will judge"?

Every judge should be responsibly prepared for judging. At least, I study as much as I can.

[ikanek]

And I forgot to mention that due to such wrong judging I did not get a necessary qualification to be an apprentice at Praga 2018.

[David Benson]

Ikanek,

sorry to hear about your predicament as I am sure you will make a fine judge. Is there any other exhibitions you can enter in time to pass the judges accreditation.

David B.

[faro]

It is logical to assume that an Asian jury team at the Asian exhibition will know the entire area of Asia very well.

This I find rather a rash statement !!!
Therefore all European judges know majority of material from ALL 35 plus European countries now and in the past. I doubt it very much.
GJ50

The judges presumably spotting none of the errors made in the Afghan exhibit seems extremely careless given their decision to award it such a high score (90 points).

The incorrectly read 1290 date for 1288 is glaringly obvious even on the smaller scan above and even a casual glance at readily-available online material http://www.afghanphilately.co.uk/9.html / http://www.afghanphilately.co.uk/13.html would have sufficed.

That's aside from concerns that apparently poorer quality, incorrectly identified material - including missed forgeries - also scored higher than another exhibit from the same country. (I presume you clearly highlighted all the unique items, ikanek?).
If they were overly "generous" in one case, why not the other?

[ikanek]

Ikanek,

sorry to hear about your predicament as I am sure you will make a fine judge. Is there any other exhibitions you can enter in time to pass the judges accreditation.

David B.

Yes, there will be. But to do this at home FIP show would be more easier and less expensive for me (no airfare). The second problem is that there is a huge demand to be a judge, so it can take many years to be on the list.