Karl, I would say that, as stated, that is false as it is too absolute of a statement. Performance test: The blade can either cut the rope or it can't, the master can intervene if there are circumstances that keep the applicant from cutting the rope, such as a disability or injury, but the knife still has to cut the rope. Cutting a 2x4 twice is pretty straight forward and I don't see how much discretion can be involved, unless you get a master that insists you cut the knots etc... and some people think a couple of loose hairs that may have been cut or may have been pulled free is shaving, I personally want to see a smooth bald patch and an equivalent pile of hair. The bend is the bend, and while some Mastersmiths may desire specific parts of the blade to take more of the bend before calling 90 degrees it is still the applicant on the bending bar.

In the judging room I think there may be more truth to the statement inspiring this thread as sometimes it can get hairy with what is subjective and what is not, and some judges can certainly be tougher than others. But the best fix for this are the lectures and talks on the judging standards that we do at almost every hammer-in, this not only lets the applicants get a feel for what is expected it also lets potential judges know how tough we may or may not be on different aspects. It is for this reason that I think it is a good idea for those who have already got their stamps to still sit in on these talks in order to be better prepared should they be asked to judge.

Thanks, Kevin.This comment came as a response to an ongoing discussion about performance testing procedures.

Earlier in the discussion he said that if a person showed up with a blade that was hardened less than 1/3 of the way from the edge, he would fail them.

His exact quote: "DO NOT COME TO ME WITH A BLADE THAT IS NOT HARDENED AT LEAST 1/3RD OF THE WAY. IF YOU DO i WILL FAIL YOU."

I stated that this is not in the rules anywhere regarding how much the blade "MUST" be hardened and it was not grounds for giving the tester a fail.

(This has nothing to do with how far it can crack. That wasn't the point.)

I suggested that the rules set standards for everyone to follow and go by so as not to set up a different set of rules in every testing situation.

My link to the rules page solved nothing in the conversation.

That quote about failing a blade with less then 1/3 hardened made me smile. I find it somewhat comical, and a little bit sad that someone's head would get so big that they feel they can interject their own "desires" into a set of testing rules. Where the problem lies is not with the rules, its with people who try to make them what they want them to be.

The simple reason the rules are written the way they are is to avoid confusion. PROVIDED people understand and follow the spirit/intent of those rules. Theres simply no way the rules could be written to cover every possible "what if" scenario.

I don't know who made that statement, but in my opinion its an ego issue, not a rules issue.

Guys, the rules as posted on the website are pretty plain. The testing Master has some discretion in some areas, but not total discretion during the test. His judgement is involved in determining the 90 degree bend, certainly, and to a degree, what kind or whether the edge incurred damage during the test.

The rules also say that the Master will ask the applicant to cut the 2 x 4 AT LEAST TWICE. I have seen applicants bring a soft fir "whitewood" board for testing, which obviously doesn't test anything. I normally allow the cutting of the boards, after which I present him/her with one of the hard yellow pine boards I keep around to test my own blades. No one has failed at my shop yet due to this procedure, and its a heck of a confidence builder. Will the blade cut rope after the 2 x 4 cut? Most will sing right through, and it's another big confidence builder.

Additionally, the Master may require the Journeyman applicant to forge a blade during the test, and my require the MS applicant to make a billet at his (the testing Master's) forge. He may also ask pertinent questions in order to get an idea of the applicant's knowledge of the process. As to the Master making the rope cut, this can occur as stated above, if the applicant has some debilitating condition that would keep him/her from successfully performing this function. The Master may, at his discretion, make the cut if the applicant is unsuccessful after three tries. If the Master believes the knife is correctly made and that the applicant simply doesn't have the technique to make the cut, this is justified by the fact that we are testing the applicant's ability to make a knife to our performance specifications, not the applicant's ability to cut rope.

There really isn't any further discretion on the part of the testing Master during this procedure. All of the required measurements, etc. are plainly laid out in the rules. It makes no difference how far up the hardness line appears on the blade, as long as it was heated and quenched in a liquid medium to harden the edge. It will perform properly or it won't. The purpose of the test is pretty plain - can you make a blade to our performance specifications? The testing should be honest and standardized for all applicants, and the testing should encourage, rather than intimidate. I believe we have this in the ABS, and in the many tests I've either witnessed and/or conducted since 1993, I've always tried to see this done.

Thanks for all the comments and thank you, Greg, for clarification of what are very simple and plain rules.

I really hate to see people possibly confused by misinterpretation and conjecture.

It will probably never end, but it's nice to have this as a reference to clarify future confusions.

Thank you.

Yes I saw that conversation you had Karl. I cannot add anything to Kevin's and Greg's excellent answers. Personally I think the person in question needs to go back and re read the testing rules again. They are pretty clear and his personal preference should not enter into it.

Brion

I would be rather busy and in the middle of a lot controversy if I applied all of my desires for optimum heat treatment to the ABS tests blades; I’m not sure who could be more obsessive than me about heat treatment. I don’t like bent blades and I don’t think I have ever tried to hide that, if that were the case I have done a very poor job of hiding it, but that has never got in the way of my administering the test or even teaching it. My philosophy is that the rules state what the blade has to do, do what they state, get your stamp and then make the knives that you want people to have for everyday real world use. None of my blades that I sell have any resemblance whatsoever with an ABS test blade, but I realize they are two different beasts. One is a an example for judges of what a smith is capable of with heat control, it is not about the knife it is about the skills of the smith, what I would sell to the public is about the knife and what it was designed to do.

I draw this parallel often from martial arts experience- in many martial arts you learn forms. Forms are not meant to be used for self-defense or in the sparring ring, they are a specific and standardized set of moves used to display your technique in blocks, strikes and basic stances for assessment by a panel of judges. Attempting to perform a form during a mugging or in the ring would illicit laughter at best or get a sound thrashing at worst. However, the individual skills repeated in form can then be used in various levels and combinations in more real world situations. Some martial arts have lost all self-defense and combat effectiveness because they became all about the form and not the real world use of the skills and are now more of an aerobics or dance class.

I mention that last part because some knifemakers decided to focus so heavily on the ABS test knife that they believe a good knife is all about the spectacle of the test rather than real world use. I believe the ABS has come a long way in promoting the idea of the test blade not necessarily being a great knife but a good display of the smiths skills, and then using these skills in different combinations to produce a well-made knife with greater strength and edge holding properties. None of my knives will bend to 90 degrees, I demand more strength from my blades than that, but I want to see that an applicant is capable of making that test blade and has the understanding of which of those properties and skills will give him a quality blade.

Bravo Kevin! Bravo!

Kevin,

I have to say, that is one of the most concise and comprehensible things I have ever heard you say!

It was also completely in agreement with what my personal perception is regarding the performance test.

I am happy to know that I am clear about at least one thing.

Excellent Kevin! I am with you.

Brion

Thanks Kevin and Greg, not only for clarifying the rules and standards, but also for expounding upon the spirit behind the tests.

|quoted:

Additionally, the Master may require the Journeyman applicant to forge a blade during the test, and my require the MS applicant to make a billet at his (the testing Master's) forge. He may also ask pertinent questions in order to get an idea of the applicant's knowledge of the process.

Regarding some of these discretionary supplemental requirements, I have often thought that they would be a valuable addition to the testing, especially if they too were standardized. While it would certainly add a bit of time and effort to the testing process, it would allow the ABS to ensure that the applicant truly possesses the skills and knowledge required to forge a high quality blade. As the testing exists currently, it is only the products of that skill and knowledge that are ever tested, with the rest being taken on faith.

Thanks Karl for bringing this up. I just wanted to expand on the concept a little. I heard at a recent knife show about a fit and finish issue. I was told for the 5 MS knives for judging that what some call a museum fit is unacceptable. What I mean by museum fit- for example ivory handle is a little proud around the fit to the ferrule. This I thought, was common on most natural materials to allow for movement. Any clarification ?, or is this just subject to the judges?

Thanks Steve

Steve maybe Kevin can add to this but I do believe that one time I heard him say that type of fit was fine. But if you're going to do it make sure that it is consistent around the circumference.

Edit - I went and looked at my collection of JS/MS knives and there are countless knives at the MS testing that have the museum fit.

Thanks Karl. I thought it was ok. I had heard a MS say he would give that type of fit a thumbs down if judging.

I have looked a some photos of ms knives with what looks like a museum fit but hard to tell from pictures.I am a big fan of that fit for some of the natural materials ie ivory,stag etc.

Thanks

Steve