<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns:v xmlns:o><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<STYLE></STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1170" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=MailContainerBody
style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; PADDING-TOP: 15px; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; TEXT-DECORATION: none; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none"
bgColor=#ffffff leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 name="Compose message area"
CanvasTabStop="true" acc_role="text">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Consistant judging is a perpetual problem. I seem to be
doing more scoring than competing now days. Judging consistancy is down.
After we have a mandatory series of Judging Seminars it always gets
better. The scoring software I use lets me choose an "alert level" when the
two judges deviate. I keep it set at 2 points and I verify the data was properly
keyed in each alert. Some deviations are to be expected, especially those
involving box violations. There is a general feeling that the upper class flyers
are better judges, but they are no more consistant than those in lower classes.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Many (most?) of our best judges are not especially known
for their flying skills. In fact, quite a few don't fly at all!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> <BR>John Ferrell <BR>6241 Phillippi Rd<BR>Julian NC 27283<BR>Phone:
(336)685-9606 <BR><A
href="mailto:johnferrell@earthlink.net">johnferrell@earthlink.net</A><BR>Dixie
Competition Products<BR>NSRCA 479 AMA 4190 W8CCW<BR>"My Competition is Not
My Enemy"<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=jed241@msn.com href="mailto:jed241@msn.com">jed241@msn.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, June 09, 2003 9:45 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Scoring Vs Judging</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>I agree...</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>If we have consistent judging, then the low average round becomes a
product of the environment for the round. More difficult environment should
produce a lower scoring round and the weight of the raw point should then be
rewarded for doing better than the other pilots.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I'm not worried about winning right now. I feel like I've had a real
good flight when I survive to fly the next round...</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Larry</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>From:</B> <A
href="mailto:WHIP23@aol.com">WHIP23@aol.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, June 09, 2003 8:15
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Scoring Vs Judging</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=arial,helvetica><FONT lang=0 face=Arial size=2
FAMILY="SANSSERIF">In a message dated 6/9/03 5:05:27 PM Pacific Daylight
Time, <A href="mailto:jed241@msn.com">jed241@msn.com</A> writes:<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
TYPE="CITE">You need to blame this e-mail thread on two things. One is the
post that said it was quite; and two, you will soon see I have too much
time on my hands...<VBG><BR> <BR>Before reading any further,
I'm only trying to drum up trouble <VBG> I could be way off base
here....I really don't know...<BR> <BR>Due to my competitive nature
(certainly not my flying ability) I have given thought to the relationship
of judging, scoring, and the potential outcome of a certain phenomena
called a low average round (aka...a typically low scoring set of judges by
nature)...<BR> <BR>I could be wrong on this so please correct me if
I'm wrong...Here we go...I'm putting on my flame suit as I
type...<BR> <BR>Theory:<BR>Since the scoring procedure is to
normalize each round, a set of judges that scores low by nature will have
more influence on the outcome than a set of judges that scores higher by
nature.<BR> <BR>Data:<BR>I pulled a spreadsheet together and came up
with the following numbers (rounded to the nearest .01):<BR>
<BR>Sportsman - Total KFactor points per round is 19. This translates a
perfect round that each raw score is worth 5.26 normalized points per raw
point (19*10*5.26). A round with an average of 7.5 KFactor points has a
normalized value of 7.0 normalized points per raw point.<BR> <BR>If
this is true (not claiming it is, cause I don't know) and two pilots are
close (separated only by 1 raw point per round). It's possible that the
pilot winning the lower averaged round could win even though they share
the same exact raw score. This wouldn't be the case if they scoring system
normalized the combined raw scores for all rounds to determine the winner.
This may be the case but I'm just trying to start
trouble...<VBG><BR> <BR>Average for rounds one and two per
KFactor point is 8; Rounds three and four is 7. Who should win?<BR>
<BR>Raw Scores:<BR>Pilot One (R1-152; R2-152; R3-132; R4-132) = total of
568<BR>Pilot Two (R1-151; R2-151; R3-133; R4-133) = total of 568<BR>
<BR>Should this be a tie?<BR> <BR>Nope, cause when you normalize by
the round and add individual rounds together you get the following
results. (assuming the formula is -->1000 / Highest raw score for the
round X pilots raw score for the round)<BR> <BR>Normalized:<BR>Pilot
One (R1-1000; R2-1000; R3-992.5; R4-992.5) = total of 3985<BR>Pilot Two
(R1-993.5; R2-993.5; R3-1000; R4-1000) = total of 3987<BR> <BR>Pilot
two wins due to the influence of the lower average scoring
rounds.<BR> <BR>I don't know how the scoring system works to compute
the winner, but would be interested to know if it is by the sum of the
normalized rounds or by normalized total of the raw scores per
round.<BR> <BR>If you really want to complicate things, just start
thinking about the shift of the outcome on Masters Maneuvers with high
KFactors when the difference between two pilots is only separated by 1/2
point on a given maneuver.<BR> <BR>Conclusion:<BR>Consistency of
scoring from judge to judge is just as important as judging each pilot in
a round. Unless again the total raw score is normalized to define the
winner.<BR> <BR>Now as my favorite comedian always says, "This is
only my opinion, I could be wrong". I also admit that I may not know what
I'm talking about cause I don't understand the math behind it. Not meant
to be sarcastic, cause it could be true.<BR> <BR>If you actually got
to this point, you are truly as demented as I am...LOL<BR>
<BR>Larry<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>I'll chime in here a little. I'm
sure we can find problems with the scoring and judging in any given
situation, but remember our flying is not perfect and the judging and
scoring will never be perfect. I think if you work it through you will
find that normalization solves more problems than it introduces. That
said, we need to continue the current trend towards better, more consistent
judging, it's come a long way. And, I'll add that if you are winning
or being beat by a point or two then you don't really know won anyway, all
you know is you had a good fight (I mean a good time :-) )
Solution, beat the "sucker" by a 100 points :-)<BR><BR>Bob</FONT>
</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>