<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #8000ff; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
face=Arial color=#8000ff size=2>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 7/30/2005 5:31:23 PM Central Daylight Time,
ehaury@houston.rr.com writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>The "one
point per 15 degree" metric quantifies many downgrades (no - we <BR>haven't
always had this) and, in most cases, removes the high and / or low <BR>judging
standard if followed properly. While overall impression affects <BR>whether or
not points are deducted for a lack of "smoothness and <BR>gracefulness", most
everything else is now quantified.<BR><BR>I judged a good number of rollers at
the Nats that didn't roll at all for <BR>the first 15 - 30 degrees, then
stopped rolling for a similar number of <BR>degrees in the 2nd quadrant, then
finished 30 to 45 degrees before center, <BR>that's 4-7 degrees off before any
other elements (roundness, altitude, <BR>centering, smoothness, etc.) were
considered. Many of these were quite <BR>smooth. I know that some received 2 -
3 scores from judges using the metric <BR>and 7 - 8 scores from those only
looking for the impression of smoothness. <BR>The pilots that did rollers
correctly (rightly) distanced themselves from <BR>the rest (I saw a few to be
in the 8-9 range). A judge choosing to overlook <BR>defined downgrades and
judging on impression shouldn't be in the judges <BR>chair.<BR><BR><A
href="mailto:Earl@nsrca.org">Earl</A></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Earl</DIV>
<DIV>I think you are correct.and would like to share a few points that I think
are important that seems to be overlooked. From my experience at many local
contests and observations at the past eight Nat's those who shouldn't be in the
judges chair have had a significant impact on deciding the order of finish,
unfortunately many inexperienced judges award higher scores for smoothness and
gracefulness (impression judges) and overlook obvious
downgrades.</DIV>
<DIV>Those effected the most by this fact at the Nat's is the group flying
Advanced, in most contests FAI pilots judge the Masters class, Masters pilots
judge FAI, Advanced pilots judge Intermediate and Advanced is predominately
judged by Intermediate pilots, many who have little judging experience. This was
the case at the Nat's this year. In the prelims. for FAI and Masters only
FAI and Masters judges were used to judge each other, Likewise only Advanced
pilots were used to judge Intermediate. In Advanced, the first two days the
majority of judges were intermediate pilots, some who had little experience and
on the third day all judges were Masters pilots which may explain and point out
why the order of finish changed so much each day.</DIV>
<DIV>As you know I fly advanced and I am aware that there were many
pilots at the Nat's this year and in the past that flew much better than me so
please understand that my views are not sour grapes when it comes to my
performance or placing in the final standings but is an effort to point out
why Advanced has come to be known as the Crap shoot class at the Nat's I
for one would be willing to judge more to see this situation corrected and
suggest that all pilots in all classes should have equal opportunity by adding a
finals format to the Advanced and Intermediate classes the same as FAI and
Masters </DIV>
<DIV>Lower classes (Intermediate and Advanced) in our sport should not lead to
the impression that the people participating in them are in some way inferior to
those in the higher classes or are in any way less important to pattern as a
whole.</DIV>
<DIV>I would think that if all was well there would be many more and increasing
numbers of participants in Intermediate and Advanced at the Nat's
each year but that is not the case, Increased participation in these classes
will spell growth in the higher classes in the future and advancing the
image of equality across the board would be a big step forward in achieving
that goal. </DIV>
<DIV>Another point, last year a seniors award was initiated to recognize the
high scoring senior in each class to encourage participation by seniors in
pattern at the Nat's obviously the small cost of these awards was not
deemed important enough to justify them this year. (yes I am a senior but not
the high scoring one in my class) It seems to me that if Increased
participation is what we are striving for the small things that could help
increase our numbers are being overlooked in favor of the big picture.</DIV>
<DIV>From my point of view the following is true, FAI is the destination class
in pattern for those who have the ability, money and desire to reach the top in
this sport.</DIV>
<DIV> Masters is the destination class for those who have the
money but lack the desire or ability to fly FAI and likewise Intermediate
and Advanced is the destination class for those who have the desire to compete
but lack the money and/or ability to compete at a higher level.</DIV>
<DIV>Over all I think pattern should concentrate on those things that seem
unimportant and are often overlooked as well as Items which are now in effect
that in reality possibly hinder growth that may benefit the lower class levels
and help to grow pattern. I say start at the bottom and fix the things that
would yield the most benefit.</DIV>
<DIV>Back to the judging Issue, My question is who would have won the Nat's this
year in FAI and Masters had there been no Finals and who would have won
Intermediate and Advanced had there been a Finals? Not me for sure.</DIV>
<DIV>The largest differences that I observed in round totals posted by
individual judges occurred in the Advanced class which in some cases were
around 100 points. In my case it was only 63 points, but some of my obvious 0
maneuvers were scored in error and in another couple of cases I
received a single 0 which could not be explained which were scored 8.5
and 7 by the other judges. I wish I knew why so I could attempt to fix the
problem. In the round that I judged in Intermediate after back checking the
score sheets the totals per judge were very close in the five to ten point range
in most cases. I believe that the top pilots in Intermediate finished on
top in the correct order but am not so sure that they did in Advanced.
</DIV>
<DIV>We are getting better in the area of judging accuracy but we are not quite
up to a totally acceptable level yet in the area of being sure that the
best at the Nat's are selected as winners and in the correct order.</DIV>
<DIV>We hear all of the reasons and complaints of why people don't want to judge
more than a half day at the Nat's but it is time to realize that if it takes
everyone judging everyday to assure that the very best judges are used to
determine the winners. I think that everyone should be available to the
managers of the Nat's in any capacity that they see fit to assure that and
that everyone who enters will benefit by being assured that their long days
of practice, building and investment in equipment is worth the effort and will
not be wasted due to under or unqualified judges.</DIV>
<DIV>Into the shelter awaiting the incoming.</DIV>
<DIV>Buddy </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>