If my name goes down on something, I would hope that it would reference timing and the ability to protest the original test (I've found out other tournaments have this)

This fishing tournament ended on Sunday morning, and the results were final. The tournament director waited a week, then called me the following Sunday to give me the name of the person to set up the test with. I called that nigth, and we set up the test for Tuesday afternoon.  We then waited until THursday morning to tell me that i failed, and he had to start the engraving of the plaques. I think that is why he didn't allow the second test, because then the plaques wouldn't be done in time.

Fisherman67 wrote on Dec 16^th, 2015 at 10:49pm:

Fisherman, polygraph examiners are not supposed to allow anyone to hijack the polygraph exam. The questions should only be formulated by the examiner during the pre-test interview. This is your legitimate beef; forget the analog vs digital polygraph instrument concern, that's irrelevant.

It's my understanding that the rule question was "locked".  Should the polygraph examiner tell me that?

Also, when the polygraph administrators are instructed how to issue questions, is there any information given to them about the impact of having the person taking the test, change their answer?
For example, is there an instruction manual discussing how to format questions?

I have filed this in court, and am trying to get all the information I can, showing that this question should have been re-phrased, so I was in total agreement with it.

Thanks for all the help.  I have one last question (hopefully).

There was four relevant questions about the fishing tournament - should the examiner be able to tell which one I failed?  I was able to obtain a copy of the report, and it doesn't state which question I failed.

Thanks Ark... thanks makes more sense.

At first the examiner said I showed a reaction to the rules question, then later said it's graded on the whole test. 

I guess now I see more of why polygraphs are not reliable.  As someone with no experience in polygraphs, I always assumed it was like the movies, the needle spiked up when the person lied.

Fisherman, I will be happy to conduct a thorough quality assurance review of your polygraph "test" at absolutely no charge.

In order to do that, I will need the complete polygraph "test" file, which I suspect will be unavailable for one reason or another.

Why? 

Well, Fisherman, in some cases -- maybe yours -- polygraph "testing" is simply a racket. 

Your situation may prove otherwise. Let's hope so.

That said, polygraph "testing" for fishing tournaments is a farce, in my opinion. 

Still, your case could be the exception to the rule.

As for the validity of the CQT, the apologists at the American Polygraph Association are your "go to" guys for evidence. I suggest you visit www.polygraph.org, drill down to the board of directors, then reach out to past president Barry Cushman, current chairman Raymond Nelson, and current president Walt Goodson for guidance.

All three of those individuals are considered to be heavyweights within the polygraph industry.

Please tell them I sent you.

Again, I'll be happy to review your "test" at no charge.

Feel free to email me at polygraphexam@gmail.com or call me 9:00AM to 9:00PM EST at 603-801-5179.

Daniel Mangan, M.A.
Certifed Polygraph Examiner
Full Member, American Polygraph Association

Fisherman, you said:

"Of bad news for me, I signed a wavier, that pretty much states that [I] can't be held liable for anything as a result of the lie detector."

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you meant to say that the waiver you signed states that you cannot find the contest promoters, or the polygraph examiner, liable for anything.

If that's the case, then it's "game over."

Most every examiner has a so-called consent-and-release form, which serves as a convenient loophole.

In large part, that's how the polygraph racket survives.