<HTML>
Boy Jim,
<BR>Our I-Pods are playing the same tune!
<BR>When I returned from the Nats I told my wife, "The only way this thing
is ever going to possibly be scored fairly is if everybody flies the same
identical aircraft and the judges are screened from visual contact with
the pilot and all competitors are recognized on a number basis".
<BR>Had this been a possibility this year, there is no doubt in my mind
that the final result would have looked nothing like the actuality (excepting
Somenzini).
<BR>As long as we have human beings in the chair, biases ( real or unrealized)
will always prevail over reality.
<BR>Georgie
<P>Jim_Woodward@beaerospace.com wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<BR><FONT FACE="sans-serif"><FONT SIZE=-1>Hi All,</FONT></FONT>
<P><FONT FACE="sans-serif"><FONT SIZE=-1>The scoring formula thread brings
in two camps of thoughts (from my reading) that each should be addressed.
Troy, Earl, and Eric have touched on the method or "process" that should
go into scoring and tear sheets for FAI. Troy had some great, valid
points about the tear sheets in which I agree would lead to a more honest
judging result, and create the "transparent" view of the contest to the
contestants. Besides process or following FAI rules, the other issue
several people have tried to delicately step around is the topic that if
one brings up, is typically attacked as having "sour-grapes" or upset in
other ways at the outcome.</FONT></FONT>
<P><FONT FACE="sans-serif"><FONT SIZE=-1>So lets bring up the big question
and debate as free-thinking adults: How do we ensure that the flight
in question (any class) is being judged purely on the technical quality
of the flight compared against the known set of downgrades? If the
flight in question is judged with integrity and without prejudice, it is
quickly recognizable as a less than perfect event. The judging committee
has gone a long way to create information sets and education regarding
the rules and technical guide lines for the patterns and the individual
maneuvers. In the class though, we then typically say something like,
" .... but you have to remember that judges are human." While this
catch all statement is used (in the class room setting) to present a case
as for why there may be minor differences in scoring (judge-to-judge),
we may not be giving the "human" factor the priority of education it deserves
as compared to the affect this same "human" factor has on the outcome of
the event. How do we ensure that each flight is being scored on its
quality and merits, without regard to any additional factors? How
do we ensure that any institutional or historical bias does not turn one
fliers "7" into an "8", and another's "7" into a "6"? We have taken
the "technical" education pretty far - but how can human behavior
be changed?</FONT></FONT>
<P><FONT FACE="sans-serif"><FONT SIZE=-1>Ideally, the judges should not
even "know" who is flying which is to say again, that the score is not
based on the flyer, but the quality of the flight. For example:
Should the pilots all fly the same plane, with the same color scheme, with
the judges shielded from view of the identity of the pilot? I doubt
this would go over well for many reasons however - one reason is that recognition
for past performance is a key factor in today's or future results.
Thus, each pilot with excellent or poor prior results is at advantage or
disadvantage to have the judges to know that it is indeed, them who is
flying. Opposition to such on the high end in regards to scoring,
is evidence of this "X" factor in the overall final results. I'm
not advocating a 1-design class, just using it for example. How do
we ensure that judges are evaluating the flight on its merits alone, and
not according to additional factors such as (name your favorite).
The additional human factors if brought to the chair, are worthy
of discussion. Heres a question: Do you want habitual long
standing judges with years of experience in the FAI/Masters finals chair,
or somewhat newer judges who are technically educated but bring less prior
experience to the chair of this same group of competitors? </FONT></FONT>
<P><FONT FACE="sans-serif"><FONT SIZE=-1>Again, the point is process (in
the FAI since following what rules are there), and human, ensuring the
each flight is evaluated solely on the its own merit, as unique discreet
events without regard to past performance or future expectation.
However, from the previous threads, it appears that "Advanced" suffers
from a lack of technical knowledge in the chair where as the other end
of the spectrum (FAI) can suffer from the human factor part of the equation.</FONT></FONT>
<P><FONT FACE="sans-serif"><FONT SIZE=-1>All ideas welcome,</FONT></FONT>
<BR><FONT FACE="sans-serif"><FONT SIZE=-1>Jim W.</FONT></FONT>
<BR> </BLOCKQUOTE>
</HTML>