<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>Bob<BR><BR>I
tend to agree with you that the judge scoring lower may be (correctly)
<BR>seeing more defects, especially on complex maneuvers. What I don't know how
<BR>to handle is the situation where a pretty flawless (not too complex)
<BR>maneuver is severely hammered by one judge. We've pretty clear metrics in
<BR>place to define the appropriate downgrades - do some double those? Do they
<BR>double deduct - 1 / 15 for an error and another 1 / 15 for the correction?
<BR>Do they deduct a whole point for a 5 degree error? Are they watching the
<BR>wrong airplane? I don't know the answer, but I've seen enough score sheets
<BR>to recognize that some judges consistently score errors much lower than
<BR>their peer group, while scoring (relatively) flawless maneuvers generally
<BR>high. Maybe they (inappropriately) award points for smoothness, but the
<BR>consequence isn't "more critical - but consistent ( if outside the rules)",
<BR>but an inappropriately larger delta score between nearly equal quality
<BR>flights.<BR><BR>There may not be a way to legitimately smooth well
intentioned, if <BR>erroneous, scores when the number of judges is low, and I
really do <BR>appreciate the efforts of everyone that sits in the judges chair.
But what <BR>would we do if someone (at -say the Nats) chooses to score all
zeros or all <BR>tens?<BR><BR>Earl<BR><BR><BR><BR>----- Original Message -----
<BR>From: "Bob Richards" <</FONT><A href="mailto:bob@toprudder.com"><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>bob@toprudder.com</FONT></A><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>><BR>To: <</FONT><A
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org"><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>discussion@nsrca.org</FONT></A><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>><BR>Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 1:35 PM<BR>Subject: RE:
Performance Judging? (back to original discussion)<BR><BR><BR>>
Ed,<BR>><BR>> I tend to put more faith in the lower scores. This
is<BR>> especially true on high difficulty manuevers since<BR>> there are
more opportunity for downgrades.<BR>><BR>> I have, on at least one
occasion, given a zero for a<BR>> maneuver when there were no mandatory zero
mistakes<BR>> made. Just because the maneuver was flown, and may<BR>> have
even been recognizable, doesn't mean that it<BR>> deserves a non-zero
score.<BR>><BR>> The snap "did it stall first" problem is, itself,
a<BR>> judgement call.<BR>><BR>> Bob
R.</FONT><BR></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>