<!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 8/1/2005 1:22:28 PM Central Daylight Time,
pattern4u@comcast.net 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>
<DIV>Buddy, </DIV>
<DIV> "You called
me a trouble maker at the Nat's" - Did I do that??? Certainly not
meant in any nasty way, I assure you.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>I actually want people to stir things up. If you let
a pot of stew just sit there the bottom burns and the top never gets
cooked.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>I have held about every opinion expressed in this
thread. I have changed my mind many times as my education continued in
the judging arena. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>I have not typed a lot of responses because a
box-cutter and I had an exchange where the box cutter won ;-(</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>A few years ago we sent a bunch of heavyweight judges
to site-4. (Earl Haury is heavier than I am - and he's in Texas so he
can't visit me tonight either). Boy! did we upset some pilots with accurate
judging. Not sure they wanted us back. Same thing in FAI or
Masters.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>I used Earl's name because his raw scores and mine
have tracked pretty closely. I score a bit higher than
him these days because I am one CIAM memo ahead of him - just teasing
Earl :-)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>The Nats this year had the same standard of
pilot judges that it gets every year. All certified. As you said that needs
some improvement - I totally agree. Dave said that if he had 10 full time
experienced judges he could improve things a lot. All I have to do is find
them... any thoughts on that one. Would two really good judges be better than
three not so good and who decides who they are?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>I think that I can say that about half of the pilots
did two session or more, some even did three. All scores were included in all
classes in all AMA rounds. The AMA rules book is totally silent on scoring
standards. Anyone want to get into that one?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>We will be putting a whole bunch of info on eth
scoring system, the matrix, the finals calculations etc in the next
K-Factor. I figure that the more we publish the more we will get
understanding and increase the chances of coming up with a better mouse
trap.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>We also want to leave a bunch of better and more
accurate documentation for those who succeed us.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>Regards,<BR><BR>Eric.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Eric</DIV>
<DIV>Another note that may shed some light on the subject. Most judges I think
make an effort to score maneuvers correctly but what I have noticed is that the
new and less experienced ones seem to miss the geometry requirements of certain
maneuvers, this can make a huge difference in scores they judge defects but
overlook basics, such as hight and width which should match, entry and exit
altitude requirements and so fourth. They seem to focus on the fine points but
don't see the forest for the trees. This can only be overcome when they
have studied and understand the requirements of each manuever. We teach how
the downgrades should be applied but may be failing to stress the
importance to them of the need to be aware of the geometry requirements.
For example I made a point to look at some tear sheets where obvious major
errors in geometry were flown very smoothly my score in one case would have
been a six at best, guess what, would you believe a nine and one half from two
judges and a five from the other. likewise on the other hand I compared
one where the maneuver was performed correctly but with a couple of small errors
flown at a faster speed my score would have been eight the tear sheet scores
were two, sixes and an eight and a half. I may not be the best judge around but
I believe that only one of the scores in each case was correct and these
were both four k-factor maneuvers so the pilot in each case if I am correct
received about a twenty point bonus on his normalized score but worse yet
everyone else was penalized if he won the round. Think about it.one or two
rounds where this happens and some pilots best effort becomes his throw
away.</DIV>
<DIV>Buddy </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>