Judges

[John Ferrell]

My apoligies to Wong, I meant to say "Wrong".

John Ferrell
http://DixieNC.US

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Ferrell" <johnferrell at earthlink.net>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 9:30 AM
Subject: Re: Judges


>> I contend that judge competency is better than it's ever been. Primarily 
>> two things account for that, the NSRCA certification program and 
>> pilot-judges. Our cert program is designed to ensure that everyone is 
>> exposed to the proper judging techniques and the current rules. Using 
>> pilot-judges provides an indication that the judges are interested in the 
>> details of the game. As with anything, there are some outliers and they 
>> need to be addressed - especially at the Nats.
>
>
> I think we are going about this in the wong way.
>
> The judges we have are what we must use. Most of them are only in the seat 
> because they have to be. They would prefer to be elsewhere. It is a form 
> of forced labor and it shows. Unfortunately, it is the best judging we can 
> afford. The reward for being a good judge is more judging assignments! 
> Whatever it takes, we must make the judging experience less of chore if we 
> are going to improve the quality. More training won't do it because the 
> guys who need it most are the ones that resist it the most.
>
> A step in the right direction (from the judging standpoint) is to simplify 
> the task. Either quit flying maneuvers that we cannot agree on how to 
> score or at least relegate them to K1's. I know that is harsh, but it is 
> realistic. Remember, it is the judge you cannot fix!
>
> The rules call for making the tear sheets public. Following this and 
> encouraging the judges to compare their scoring would tend to standardize 
> results. In theory, isolating the judges seems a good idea, but in 
> practice it is a deterrent to learning.
>
> Judging is like jury duty, very few actually want anything to do with it.
>
> John Ferrell
> http://DixieNC.US
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Earl Haury" <ehaury at houston.rr.com>
> To: "Discussion List, NSRCA" <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 10:47 AM
> Subject: Judges
>
>
>> There are two overlapping issues being discussed. Judge competency and 
>> score accounting at the Nats, this note is about judges and another will 
>> address Nats scoring.
>>
>> I contend that judge competency is better than it's ever been. Primarily 
>> two things account for that, the NSRCA certification program and 
>> pilot-judges. Our cert program is designed to ensure that everyone is 
>> exposed to the proper judging techniques and the current rules. Using 
>> pilot-judges provides an indication that the judges are interested in the 
>> details of the game. As with anything, there are some outliers and they 
>> need to be addressed - especially at the Nats.
>>
>
>
> =================================================
> 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.