Fury among the fuschias over Chelsea Flower Show So loud were the protests that the normally resilient RHS recruited a High Court judge to lead a review of its procedures. This in turn brought a backlash from supporters of the current system, who accused the organisation of making a "knee-jerk reaction" to the complaints. At an "open forum" held at RHS headquarters in London to soothe gardeners' feelings, attendees said the debate became so heated that there was heckling from the floor. The outcome will be revealed at the show in May, when visitors will be confronted by radical changes to the judging procedure. Under the established system, three assessors give each show garden a score out of 100, followed by seven judges who decide on a show of hands whether they agree. For a gold medal, 75 points are needed. Following the reforms, the pool of potential judges will be expanded from 30 to 45, and they will be named publicly in the show programme for the first time. The scoring system, under which points are awarded for conformity to the original design brief, overall impact and originality, balance and scale, construction and planting, will be phased out by 2014. Instead, assessors will suggest whether each garden has met a set of clear "objective criteria," then the judges will accept or reject their recommendation by raising a small wooden paddle. Garden designers may even be allowed to listen to the judges' deliberations, instead of watching out of earshot. Instead of verbal feedback, they will be handed a written verdict. Complaints about last year's judging focused not on the selection of Best in Show, but on the gold, silver-gilt and silver medals handed to the rest of the exhibitors. There are not fixed numbers of the different tiers of award; each garden is given the level of prize it is felt to deserve. Some gardens were considered to have been judged too generously, others too harshly. Ann-Marie Powell, the garden designer, who was disappointed at getting only a silver medal, said: "Judging has been all over the place. The system is not transparent. It's well overdue an update. Many felt the Robert Myers-designed garden, with its sea kale and Chusan palms, deserved gold, not silver-gilt. He said: "There are a lot of people who think the judging system is too opaque." Andrew Duff, garden design director at the Inchbald School, London, added: "The judging at the RHS is very closed. It needs to be transparent. Others were unconvinced. Andy Sturgeon, the leading designer who won Best in Show in 2010, said last year's problems had been about inexperienced judges, not the system. The knee-jerk reaction from the RHS following complaints has been to change the process rather than just go back to the tried and tested system using experienced judges. I'm still not sure what was wrong with the old system," he wrote in his blog. Bob Sweet, the RHS head of shows development, said the 2011 judges were "an extremely experienced panel, producing absolutely correct results." He added: "Everyone wants greater transparency, so that has been key to the review." He insisted that he had not heard any heckling at the open forum in February, saying: "People had strong views, but it was orderly."