The Spannabis Barcelona Cannabis Cup 2020

In a previous couple of years, cannabis cups have burst onto the Spanish scene like magic mushrooms. With the increase of those competitions, we are hearing tons of opinions (not all positive) regarding the yardstick wont to judge contenders’ samples. And therefore the thing is, right now, there's a scarcity of agreement on the standards panels of judges should follow when rating the most characteristics of buds: presence, smell, and taste. 

Inevitably, judges are getting to specialize in many subjective elements when scoring a cannabis sample. By that, it means that the sampler’s preferences are always getting to have some influence on his judgment, which is why it's essential that judges be selected carefully which they're specialized within the category they're scoring.

Panel expertise

As I see it, this expertise must be supported indoor growing of marijuana seeds when it involves buds. Not everyone will share this view, but that’s what well-founded opinions are for: to be debated. In my case, I’ve been indoor growing uninterruptedly for quite ten years. I feel it’s extremely important that knowledgeable panel is made from people that grow in environments which they control, instead of just samplers, cannabis aficionados or occasional outdoor growers (with particular emphasis on the latter, who often consider themselves to be seasoned growers – which they'll rather be – but not indoors).

I say this because once we grow indoors over a particular period of your time, we start to urge a clearer picture of the differences between, say, a strain grown hydroponically and one grown in soil; between chemical, mineral and organic fertilizers; between cannabis grown in extreme situations like high temperatures and one grown in optimal conditions; between a wonderfully clean weed and another that’s not so clean; between an extended variety… etc.

A cannabis aficionado or habitual consumer could also be ready to detect many nuances but would struggle to spot the differences that characterize an honest crop and an honest treatment of the bud, which in my opinion is prime to be ready to properly evaluate the result.

If we entrust the scoring of samples to experienced indoor growers, we might have a touch more certainty in terms of their judgment (with objective and subjective aspects) and therefore the incontrovertible fact that it’s supported experience and not just momentary perceptions.

Transparency

Cup transparency is one of the foremost widely-debated topics. While opinions might not be spread publicly through websites, social networks, or blogs, there are always rumors – especially with the more well-known cups – about results potentially being manipulated.

In my opinion, the simplest solution would be for contestants, upon submitting their entry to a cup, to receive a code that uniquely identifies their sample. The sample is labeled with this code then sent to a specialized external laboratory (or similar facility) for analysis and handling, from where it's then sent to the judges, all completely independent of the organization. this is able to ensure participants’ names and therefore the link between the code and the real name of the strain or participant remains entirely anonymous.

Conducting this process under controlled, laboratory-grade circumstances would prevent samples from being tampered with or altered with external agents. it might also ensure, for instance, that samples within the solvent extraction category contain no harmful quantities of such substances or that there are not any pollutants or disease within the bud sampled.

Categories

There have also been tons of debate on which sorts of categories cups should offer to participants. After much consideration and discussions with various professionals, we believe the simplest formula is as follows:

• Sativa strains 
• Indica strains
• Solvent extraction
• Solventless extraction
• CBD-rich varieties

Terms like “resins” or “extractions” find yourself being rather non-specific and may cause confusion, and creating specific “hydro”, “bio” or “outdoor” categories makes it very difficult to say that the buds have actually been grown using these methods.

We believe it's essential to make a distinction between sativa and indica varieties (without ever speaking of pure sativas or indicas) since there are many seasoned home growers who specialize in one or both types and only occasionally (or very rarely in some cases) consume the opposite. there'll be those that grow sativa or indica strains indifferently and consume them equally, but this is often generally not the case among home and professional growers, who tend to specialize and homogenize their crops. during a perfect world, the users who are most conversant in each of those subspecies would be entrusted with scoring that category.

Meanwhile, although under CBD a distinction could even be made between sativa- and indica-leaning plants, we don’t believe they're different enough to warrant two categories. Of course, supported my personal experience, there are plants of a sativa-like appearance, with a substantially long bud and high CBD content that produce a soothing effect which, though different, is closer thereto of an indica instead of a sativa, and the other way around.

As regards extractions, within the solventless category, there's little question that an Ice-O-Lator isn't an equivalent thing as a Rosin, and therefore the same is often said for a solvent-based extraction that uses butane versus one that uses methanol. Catering for all of those discrepancies would go away us with a cup with too many categories. For this reason, we tend to generalize and divide extractions into two classes.

How to judge a sample

We probably got to await cannabis to be legalized and to become a specialist field – like, say, the wine industry – to be ready to generalize certain judgments over marijuana buds. For now, all we will say needless to say is that there's no consensus. Those renowned home growers with many years’ growing experience are given such drastically different leads to some cups (for example, with one judge giving a score of 9 for the presence and another giving a 1, or one giving 8 for smell and another 4) doesn’t make the matter any easier.

For now, without delving too far into the differences, which could cause a never-ending debate, we believe judges must be selected supported the essential experience we’ve already talked about and, in particular else, they need to tend sufficient time to gauge the samples. to realize this, there must be no quite two samplings per day. For cups with prizes that are held at weekends, I don’t think the effect should be scored, and it goes without saying that excess consumption must be avoided if we would like to properly evaluate the remainder of the bud’s characteristics.

Talking with different judges, many agree that a score of 0 should only be given to samples which present a drag like a diseased bud, or an inadequate purge within the case of solvent-based extractions. and lots of in fact affirm that awarding a really low score to a strain for any of its characteristics based solely on personal considerations is very egocentric. this is often precisely why judges must be carefully selected.

Publication of results

The organization of the Spannabis Champions Cup has decided to form public votes and analysis of the winners and can facilitate any participants their votes and analysis.

Conclusions

To summarise, we'll need to wait a touch longer for cannabis to be legalized in Spain and for general scoring scales to be established, also because of the implementation of specific training for knowledgeable home cannabis growers and professionals. In the meantime, we must leave the scoring within the hands of indoor home growers who are ready to demonstrate their experience and impartial judgment.

In turn, cups must still work on their organization if they're to implement more transparent methods and function a favoritism-free launchpad for the simplest national and international home growers.