Scoring Vs Judging

[Rcmaster199 at aol.com]

In a message dated 6/9/2003 8:05:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jed241 at msn.com 
writes:


> Conclusion:
> 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.
>  
> 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.
>  
> If you actually got to this point, you are truly as demented as I am...LOL
>  
> Larry
> 

Larry,

I got through it. And I'm not demenetd; just Greek Armenian.

Seriously, this had been hashed over, 20 years ago, when the main move to go 
to normalization was prominent. It resurfaces every five or so years, as new 
pattern pilots are delving into the scoring details.

Technically you are right in what you are saying, but practically, there are 
many variables that often preclude this situation from dominating any one 
event. The possibility exists, in other words, but the probability is small.

In regard to judging consistency, judging has come a long way and has really 
never been better. It doesn't mean it can't or won't improve. We still have 
work to do to get better maneuvers descriptions and improve everyone's 
understanding of the downgrades.

This has always been and will continue to be a work in progress. 

In the meantime, we have taken several additional small steps in measuring 
the individual judge's consistency round for round, by comparing his/her 
performance to his/her peers for each round. Please go back and re-read Tony's and 
Ron's columns from March and April. And if you have specific questions, I'll be 
glad to answer them. Contact me directly. I will be unsubscribing for the next 
week or so

Matt Kebabjian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20030609/23e43c0c/attachment.html