Maybe.
The only real difference between NWS and other major capital city shows is that for many classes wines must have won a medal at another recognised show to be eligible to enter.
But then the usual vagaries take over - Chairman and panel chairs preferred style guidelines, large classes of wines, some with more than one judging panel, etc.
The end result is that wines winning gold or other medals at other shows win no medal or lesser medals and all the random variations of choice on the day. So the medal rates are the same / similar as for other shows, so a large proportion of medal winning wines from other shows end up with no medal.
Are all the judges at the NWS more capable and discerning than at other shows? In many cases they are the same judges in different panel combinations and classes.
The show judging process is so flawed that only the most distinctive wines that match the current preferred styles perform consistently across multiple shows. If you are looking for (old fashioned?) fuller-bodied cellaring styles (reds) with a fair kick of oak and tannin then you mostly won't find them amongst the medal winners these days.
I've been to many post-show tastings at the NWS and my personal tastes often don't match those of the judges. I find show results about the least useful indicator to me in guiding buying decisions.