In 1935, a Committee on Varieties and Standards endeavored to formulate a working schedule that would be adopted as official. This committee set up a score that represented the best thinking of the group at that time (1). Twenty-five nut samples were used. The score was the sum of the weight of an individual nut in grams plus twice the per cent kernel of the weight of the nuts recovered in the first crack plus the total percentage of kernel plus 1/10 of a point for each quarter kernel recovered. Penalties were proposed for shrunken kernels and empty nuts. Through the years a large number of samples have been tested according to this scoring schedule (11). In 1943, MacDaniels and Wilde (12) summarized the previous work done, added many tests and evaluated the scoring system. This was not considered to be altogether satisfactory. In the first place, it was somewhat cumbersome and had never been adopted by the Association nor had it been used much by others. The figuring of percentages and penalties made a score too involved for wide aceptance. A very serious difficulty was the problem of shrunken kernels and empty nuts. Obviously, with a score related to the weight of the sample before cracking, the inclusion of a number of empty nuts made it impossible to make any accurate correction in the percentages that were used in the score. Penalties did not solve the problem. Also the initial weight of the sample varied with the amount of husk clinging to the shells. From this work it was evident that an acceptable score would have to be formulated on some other basis. The next approach was to analyze data of this type statistically in an attempt to devise a better scoring system (1). The results from such a study proved valuable in answering such questions as 1) the size of sample necessary to obtain significant differences between samples; 2) the significance of small differences in measurements or in scores and 3) the amount of variation that is normal and without significance in comparing varieties. The following qualifications were considered essential to a workable schedule: 1) The schedule must be easy to use. 2) The schedule must concern itself with objective qualities or characters which can be weighed or measured. It cannot be concerned with flavor and other characters upon which there may be disagreement and which depend upon personal preference. 3) Characters must be avoided which vary with the treatment of the samples themselves such as color of kernels. 4) It must give a score that will separate samples on small differences.