First of all, the GPHG 2026 will go down in history as one of the most efficient, most fair and correct editions ever. But having said that, perhaps there are a few too many categories and awards if it takes around three hours to run through it all?
To me this edition clearly shows that the closed voting of the jury really works. If anyone ever thought there was any way to sway the results, this shows that you can’t. If it weren’t for closed voting you would not have ended up having four of the golden statuettes ending up under the roof of Chopard / Ferdinand Berthoud for Chopard L.U.C 1860 (Time Only), Chopard Mystery Nut (Jewellery), Ferdinand Berthoud Chronomètre FB 2TV (Tourbillon) Ferdinand Berthoud, Naissance d'une Montre 3 (Chronometry Prize)
To me, it is also very interesting that the Grand Prix prized alternative ways of wearing a watch. The aforementioned Chopard Mystery Nut necklace was accompanied by the Piaget Swinging Pebble (Gemset) pendant, and Audemars Piguet showed with the 150 Heritage (Calendar & Astronomy) that it can extremely complex pocket watches – which inadvertently became an interesting antipodean statement to its Royal Pop.
In my book all of the above, and all the other palmares truly deserve their awards. But since I am a 52-year-old white male, please allow me to also whinge a wee bit. First of all, the Revelation prize given to Dominique Renaud. To a 67-year-old. Really? Especially since the conferenciers waxed lyrically about the next generation and so on. Don’t get me wrong, I love Dominique’s work, he is an extremely creative watchmaker, and I know his eponymous brand is new. But I thought this category was about young watchmakers? Equally puzzling was the Complication Watch Prize awarded to Cleguer, for the Inspiration One. I know it is an extremely complicated watch, but this is the brand’s first watch. How will the new escapement perform over time? Servicing? I do know that Mr. Cleguer has more than 10 years in the industry, and I do believe that most of the interesting new watches come from the new generation of unapologetic watchmakers to which I would count him. But forgive me for wanting a more solid track record for such a heavy award. But I have a solution: wouldn’t it make sense if Dominique Renaud and Mathieu Cleguer simply swapped prizes?
There was also the Iconic Prize. This prize has been awarded since 2019. And four of these eight years – 2019, 2021, 2025, and 2026 – it has been given to some kind of Audemars Piguet Royal Oak. Give me a break! Perhaps that is the only problem of exchanging virtually every jury member every year – that nobody remembers who got it last?
And don’t get me started on the Chronometry Prize. I am sure FB could potentially be an eligible winner. But shouldn’t a Chronometry Prize be based on accuracy? Let the nominees be tested over two weeks, and may the best watch win!
I also have a question – is it fair to let rather voluminous pocket watches compete against small wristwatches? I am a pocket watch lover; perhaps it would be more fair of there was a separate category of pocket watches?
Let’s finish on a high note with another observation: Blancpain winning the Mechanical Exception category with the grande Double Sonnerie just shows that this brand is on its way back to the very top where it belongs.
