judging

[Bill Glaze]

Dean:
I picked up on a point you touched on:  Seems as if some of the best 
flyers are the most merciful judges.  Maybe a lot of reasons; perhaps 
they remember how encouraging a good score was when they  themselves 
were struggling.  Perhaps they are unconsciously trying to "grow" the 
sport.  I'm not for one little second suggesting anything unethical 
here; but your statement just mentions a point that has been stated by 
some of the top flyers.  Interesting.  Conversely, some of the toughest 
judging has been by pilots who have recently moved upward from one of 
the lower classes.  Go figure!  Just goes to show that there is a wide 
spectrum of abilities, etc.
Bill Glaze

Dean Pappas wrote:

>Hi Earl,
>I know that you were in the room, at least one time that I remember this automated judging system was discussed.
>It still is feasible and it still ain't cheap! Beer was certainly present, at that meeting. A transponder, in the plane, and at least three  ground based receivers would do it. Maybe now, telemetry from a GPS in the ship, and a computer on the ground, would do. You could even evaluate all sorts of bobbles, with the exception of wings level. But then what would we complain about? Our flying? Heavens to Mergatroid! NO!
>
>Jeff,
>It is going to be fun to interact with your enthusiasm for this subject. I do have a "graphical" system I would like to discuss with you. It can be made to produce a score, but that becomes problematical, for reasons that I can only explain by anecdote. By the way, your assumption that a good judge separates the best and worst flyers by a greater amount sounds good, and is actually true in many cases, but is flawed. We judge against an absolute standard. Yes, many judges don't separate the worst from everyone else by as much as they might. Even  bloodthirsty competitors tend to show mercy to windblown underclassmen, and competitors at all levels who are no threat to win!
>
>I do think that as you spend more time in the event, you'll find out that if you come up with a genuinely original idea, everyone will let you know. For now, I am content to try and educate new judges as to how to execute what the rule book says, and trusty the rest to statistics.
>   
>Regards All,
>
>
>Dean Pappas
>Sr. Design Engineer
>Kodeos Communications
>111 Corporate Blvd.
>South Plainfield, N.J. 07080
>(908) 222-7817 phone
>(908) 222-2392 fax
>d.pappas at kodeos.com
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
>[mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Earl Haury
>Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 2:46 PM
>To: discussion at nsrca.org
>Subject: Re: CD's
>
>
>John covers most of the points. It's important to recognize that the class 
>that someone competes in only addresses his / her flying skills, not judging 
>skills. Our certification process is the basis for ensuring that everyone 
>has taken a look at the rules and been exposed to discussion of the finer 
>points. Judging skills may advance much more quickly than flying skills if a 
>little work is applied, so it's important for CD's to inquire as to where 
>individuals fit in and use them in their judging matrix accordingly.
>
>A ranking system incorporated into out cert process would certainly be 
>useful, however the methodology for arriving at a proper ranking is not 
>without difficulty. Maybe group (non competition) judging of several flights 
>during the certification event, with scores compared to the "experienced" 
>judges used for ranking (a real judging test)? Of course the logistics of 
>this, considering many cert programs are conducted during the offseason when 
>weather precludes much flying, are also difficult.
>
>The best answer may be some sort of electronic flight scoring system that 
>handles geometry, box limits, centering, and distance, leaving only the 
>subjective smoothness / gracefulness to the judges. Just think - all of the 
>objective elements, that we're all sure that we do correctly, would be 
>accurately scored every time! Dean - you should be able to handle the 
>hardware, just make sure that it's simple to use, light, cheap, and 
>accurate. Would this ever make a great practice tool!
>
>Earl
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "John Ferrell" <johnferrell at earthlink.net>
>To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
>Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 6:59 AM
>Subject: Re: CD's
>
>
>  
>
>>I have been at this for about ten years and I will never really be a good 
>>contestant.
>>Here are a few of my observations:
>>Some of our best judges don't fly at all.
>>Many of our top flyers are poor judges, sometimes because they simply are 
>>not interested in being a good judge.
>>Some people who know the rules cannot apply them fairly.
>>Most entry level pilots have enough to worry with their flying without 
>>adding juding to the load.
>>When we do a local judging seminar the raw judging scores of the two 
>>judges get a lot closer together.
>>The person presenting the Judging Seminar is not there to interrpret the 
>>rules. His/her duty is to present the package and facilitate orderly 
>>discussion.
>>An overly criticized judge will avoid conflict at the expense of accuracy.
>>All judges make mistakes. If judges were perfect we would only need one 
>>per line.
>>Poor judges miss downgrades. Their scores tend to be higher.
>>A judge that downgrades items not documented in the rules is corrupt.
>>Judging is getting better all the time but it will never meet contestant 
>>expectations.
>>Masters and FAI flyers are more comfortable judging each other.
>>The most important quality of a judge is his motivation to be a good 
>>judge.
>>You can do a pretty good job of judging even if you don't know the 
>>sequence. You will miss the call when a wrong maneuver is flown.
>>A maneuver that takes longer to call than it does to fly is difficult to 
>>judge fairly.
>>The rules are not clearly defined and the current process is not likely to 
>>improve them.
>>The whole FAI game is out of our hands.
>>
>>John Ferrell
>>My Competition is not my enemy!
>>http://DixieNC.US
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- 
>>From: "Jeff H. Snider" <jeff at snider.com>
>>To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
>>Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 5:57 PM
>>Subject: Re: CD's
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Coming from outside, I'm amazed we don't have a process for ranking
>>>judges in this sport.  It may be that a Sportsman has keen eyes and
>>>a good understanding of the rules, and can capably judge Masters,
>>>or even FAI, even though he doesn't yet have the skill to compete
>>>in Intermediate.  It may also be that a Masters pilot lacks the
>>>proper temperment or attention span and can't consistently judge
>>>an entire round of any class.
>>>      
>>>
>>=====================================
>># To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>>and follow the instructions.
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>=====================================
># To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>and follow the instructions.
>
>==================================# To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>and follow the instructions.
>
>
>
>  
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20041029/7c4f9900/attachment.html