Performance Judging? Trial Balloon
Don Ramsey
don.ramsey at cox.net
Wed Aug 3 09:04:39 AKDT 2005
Derek,
I agree fully,.
Don
----- Original Message -----
From: "Derek Koopowitz" <derekkoopowitz at earthlink.net>
To: "Don Ramsey" <don.ramsey at cox.net>; <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: Performance Judging? Trial Balloon
> Actually... what you really need is a breakdown by maneuver of the spread.
> You'll probably find that the most spreads come on the more challenging
> maneuvers - perhaps this is an indicator where we need more training.
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2005 at 8:51 AM, Don Ramsey wrote:
>
>> Wow, looks like judging of Intermediate was excellent. Could be that
>> when
>> > snaps and spins enter the picture the score are much more diverse. A 2
>> > point spead in the 15% range is acceptable but this doesn't seem to be
>> > very
>> > good overall. To summarize:
>> >
>> > 2 pt spread - Average
>> > Intermediate 13.1%
>> > Advance 24.15%
>> > Masters 20.11%
>> > FAI 25.23%
>> >
>> > 3 pt spread - Average
>> > Intermediate 2.94%
>> > Advance 6.55%
>> > Masters 4.87%
>> > FAI 5.20%
>> >
>> > Judging needs some more work...
>> >
>> > Don
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Gene Maurice" <gene.maurice at comcast.net>
>> > To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
>> > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 10:36 AM
>> > Subject: RE: Performance Judging? Trial Balloon
>> >
>> >
>> > > Earl, Buddy,
>> > >
>> > > Here it is..............
>> > >
>> > > Intermediate - 14 Contestants x 15 In-Flight Maneuvers = 210 Scoring
>> > > Opportunities
>> > > Round 1 2 3 4 5 6 Avg
>> > > No of 2pt "Spreads" 26 31 21 29 17 41
>> > > 27.50
>> > > % of 210 12.38% 14.76% 10.00% 13.81% 8.10% 19.52%
>> > > 13.10%
>> > >
>> > > No of 3pt "Spreads" 4 11 6 6 1 9
>> > > 6.17
>> > > % of 210 1.90% 5.24% 2.86% 2.86% 0.48% 4.29%
>> > > 2.94%
>> > >
>> > > Advanced - 22 Contestants x 17 In-Flight Maneuvers = 374 Scoring
>> > > Opportunities
>> > > Round 1 2 3 4 5 6 Avg
>> > > No of 2pt "Spreads" 102 69 163 82 77 49
>> > > 90.33
>> > > % of 374 27.27% 18.45% 43.58% 21.93% 20.59% 13.10%
>> > > 24.15%
>> > >
>> > > No of 3pt "Spreads" 23 19 67 18 11 9
>> > > 24.50
>> > > % of 374 6.15% 5.08% 17.91% 4.81% 2.94% 2.41%
>> > > 6.55%
>> > >
>> > > Masters Preliminaries - 38 Contestants x 21 In-Flight Maneuvers = 798
>> > > Scoring Opportunities
>> > > Round 1 2 3 4 5 6 Avg
>> > > No of 2pt "Spreads" 130 108 208 107 210 200
>> > > 160.50
>> > > % of 798 16.29% 13.53% 26.07% 13.41% 26.32% 25.06%
>> > > 20.11%
>> > >
>> > > No of 3pt "Spreads" 34 28 59 24 49 39
>> > > 38.83
>> > > % of 798 4.26% 3.51% 7.39% 3.01% 6.14% 4.89%
>> > > 4.87%
>> > >
>> > > FAI Preliminaries - 29 Contestants x 21 In-Flight Maneuvers = 609
>> > > Scoring
>> > > Opportunities
>> > > Round 1 2 3 4 5 6 Avg
>> > > No of 2pt "Spreads" 129 155 119 229 114 176
>> > > 153.67
>> > > % of 609 21.18% 25.45% 19.54% 37.60% 18.72% 28.90%
>> > > 25.23%
>> > >
>> > > No of 3pt "Spreads" 18 38 16 59 21 38
>> > > 31.67
>> > > % of 609 2.96% 6.24% 2.63% 9.69% 3.45% 6.24%
>> > > 5.20%
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Gene Maurice
>> > > gene.maurice at comcast.net
>> > > Plano, TX
>> > > AMA 3408, NSRCA 877
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
>> > > [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]
>> > > On
>> > > Behalf Of Earl Haury
>> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 9:31 AM
>> > > To: discussion at nsrca.org
>> > > Subject: Re: Performance Judging? Trial Balloon
>> > >
>> > > Gene
>> > >
>> > > Good info, and pretty reasonable spreads. It would be interesting to
>> > > see
>> > > like data from the other classes. One might expect Masters to have
>> > > the
>> > > lowest spread, as they are being judged by the most experienced
>> > > fliers
>> > > (not
>> > > necessarily judges).
>> > >
>> > > Earl
>> > >
>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > From: Gene Maurice
>> > > To: discussion at nsrca.org
>> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 6:51 AM
>> > > Subject: RE: Performance Judging? Trial Balloon
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Don,
>> > >
>> > > Here's some stats to mull over........
>> > >
>> > > I've pulled all of the scores into a spreadsheet and identified every
>> > > instance where the difference between any of the 3 judges raw scores
>> > > was
>> > > plus or minus more than 2 points, then plus or minus more than 3
>> > > points
>> > >
>> > > Masters Prelims had 38 pilots actually flying x 21 scored maneuvers
>> > > (excluded TO and Land.) = 798 "judging opportunities" in each of 6
>> > > rounds.
>> > >
>> > > Round 1 2 3
>> > > 4 5 6
>> > > No of 2pt "Spreads" 130 108 208
>> > > 107
>> > > 210 200
>> > > % of 798 16.29% 13.53% 26.07%
>> > > 13.41%
>> > > 26.32% 25.06%
>> > >
>> > > No of 3pt "Spreads" 34 28 59
>> > > 24
>> > > 49 39
>> > > % of 798 4.26% 3.51% 7.39%
>> > > 3.01%
>> > > 6.14% 4.89%
>> > >
>> > > Gene Maurice
>> > > gene.maurice at comcast.net
>> > > Plano, TX
>> > > AMA 3408, NSRCA 877
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
>> > > [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]
>> > > On
>> > > Behalf Of Don Ramsey
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:02 PM
>> > > To: discussion at nsrca.org
>> > > Subject: Re: Performance Judging? Trial Balloon
>> > >
>> > > We have heard from a lot of Advanced pilots about the judging on that
>> > > line.
>> > > I would like some feed back from Masters and FAI on the prelims
>> > > judges.
>> > > My
>> > > very limited survey seems to indicated that those lines had very good
>> > > judging. I had a lot of 5s & 6s and some good scores but overall my
>> > > scores,
>> > >
>> > > in my opinion, were spot on. I'm only asking about the prelims.
>> > >
>> > > Don
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > =================================================
>> > > To access the email archives for this list, go to
>> > > http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
>> > > To be removed from this list, go to
>> > > http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>> > > and follow the instructions.
>> > >
>> > > List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the
>> > > list.
>> > >
>> > > =================================================
>> > > To access the email archives for this list, go to
>> > > http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
>> > > To be removed from this list, go to
>> > > http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>> > > and follow the instructions.
>> > >
>> > > List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the
>> > > list.
>> > >
>> >
>> > =================================================
>> > To access the email archives for this list, go to
>> > http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
>> > To be removed from this list, go to
>> > http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>> > and follow the instructions.
>> >
>> > List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the
>> > list.
>> >
>>
> =================================================
> To access the email archives for this list, go to
> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> and follow the instructions.
>
> List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the
> list.
>
>
=================================================
To access the email archives for this list, go to
http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.
List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the list.
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list