Despite 35+ years experience in drinking and often enjoying big reds I don't hold any aspirations as a judge, I'll be happy to be a steward with tasting privileges on this one.
[/quote]
I reckon Brian could judge as well as anyone. Ric too for that matter. Both arguably could judge better than me.
As for the idea of the Dirty Big Wine Show itself ... it's marketing genius. The results will be as meaningless as they are for all wine shows, but from a marketing viewpoint it is gold.
This is the future. Wine shows these days are way out of control - we need to carve them up and make them relevant to their niche. The Dirty Big Wine Show, the Great Australian Red, the Organics Wine Show ... this is the way to go. Make the results, and the intention, clear - some might even call it pre-determining the result, which of course it is, but that's kind of what happens anyway - rather than just handing out dozens of trophies across dozens of categories that most people can't understand.
Market to your niche.
Campbell.
You keen Campbell?
) give a big 
whenever you get up on the pulpit, so making yourself a neutral facilitator would avoid some of the 
) then you'll be aware they discard the highest and lowest values and average the rest. This stops one judge giving extreme values and dominating the results over those that apply a finer scale of marking. e.g Judge 1 votes 19.6 for wineA and 12.2 for wineB. Judges 2-5 award 18.2, 18.6, 18.3, 18.2 for wine A and 18.9, 18.7, 18.7, 18.6 for wineB. Wine A wins when only one judge out of 5 preferred it.