Scoring Vs Judging

[gene.maurice at attbi.com]

Let me preface by saying that judging is not, and never will be, a science, 
it's an art form. Which means, by it's nature, we are asking people to make a 
value judgement based upon a perception of what they have "seen" in what is 
sometimes a split second. Between and among the six schedules there are over 
100 individual maneuvers, 30 pages of rules, any number of "interpretations" 
and "guidelines". The best we can hope for is an unbiased score that is issued 
an a consistant basis within the class and round being scored.

I had a situation this past weekend where I issued a couple of zeroes to two 
different pilots who performed the Humpty Bump with Options in error by half 
rolling on the down line. This was in Intermediate in the forth round of a 
contest. Both pilots stated that they have been performing the maneuver this 
way for some time yet had NEVER been zeroed before! The maneuver description in 
the rule book is pretty clear that a half or quarter roll should be performed 
in the up line and the only roll allowed in the down line is a quarter roll.

So, am I the "inconsistant" judge??? At least now these pilots know how the 
maneuver is supposed to be performed. 
--
Gene Maurice
gene.maurice at attbi.com
NSRCA 877
AMA 3408
> What I wonder is the results of a sharp judge catching a wrong way horrigan 
> mistake (thus zero) and other judge awards a positive number. Does the matrix 
> look at judge giving the correct zero as being inconsistent. The other judge 
> could be a random number generator..
>  
>      Del K. Rykert
>      AMA - 8928 
>      NSRCA - 473
>      Kb2joi - General 
> 
> 
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: John Ferrell 
>   To: discussion at nsrca.org 
>   Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 8:12 PM
>   Subject: Re: Scoring Vs Judging
> 
> 
>   Consistant judging is a perpetual problem. I seem to be doing more scoring 
> than competing now days. Judging consistancy is down. After we have a mandatory 
> series of Judging Seminars it always gets better. The scoring software I use 
> lets me choose an "alert level" when the two judges deviate. I keep it set at 2 
> points and I verify the data was properly keyed in each alert. Some deviations 
> are to be expected, especially those involving box violations. There is a 
> general feeling that the upper class flyers are better judges, but they are no 
> more consistant than those in lower classes. 
> 
>   Many (most?) of our best judges are not especially known for their flying 
> skills. In fact, quite a few don't fly at all!
> 
> 
>   John Ferrell 
>   6241 Phillippi Rd
>   Julian NC 27283
>   Phone: (336)685-9606  
>   johnferrell at earthlink.net
>   Dixie Competition Products
>   NSRCA 479 AMA 4190  W8CCW
>   "My Competition is Not My Enemy"
> 
>     ----- Original Message ----- 
>     From: jed241 at msn.com 
>     To: discussion at nsrca.org 
>     Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 9:45 PM
>     Subject: Re: Scoring Vs Judging
> 
> 
>     I agree...
> 
>     If we have consistent judging, then the low average round becomes a product 
> of the environment for the round. More difficult environment should produce a 
> lower scoring round and the weight of the raw point should then be rewarded for 
> doing better than the other pilots.
> 
>     I'm not worried about winning right now. I feel like I've had a real good 
> flight when I survive to fly the next round...
> 
>     Larry
>       ----- Original Message ----- 
>       From: WHIP23 at aol.com 
>       To: discussion at nsrca.org 
>       Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 8:15 PM
>       Subject: Re: Scoring Vs Judging
>       Bob 
=====================================
# To be removed from this list, send a message to 
# discussion-request at nsrca.org
# and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
#