Performance Judging? (how did we get where we are)

[BUDDYonRC at aol.com]

I believe that the present quality of judging has / is improving  except in 
some areas that inject a measure of personal opinion driven by errors  in 
interpretation and definition that tend to magnify the error factor in  contest 
scores.
It seems to me that the controversy about score differences was  escalated 
when, a few years ago people complained about weather snaps  and spins being 
performed by FAI pilots were to fast and the question arose as  to weather they 
were not actually doing a snap or just a fast roll. Much  emphasis was placed 
on a judging criteria to determine the correct methods  to assure that those 
particular maneuvers were judged correctly.
Due to the human factor, inconsistencies filtered down to all classes and  
since most of the snap maneuvers are high K-factor this fact has resulted in  
skewing scores to the point where    the ability due to personal  opinion for 
some judges to accurately distinguish the correctly performed  maneuver is 
resulting in an error factor which decreases the  probability of selecting the 
proper results in a contest. 
This leads me to believe that the descriptions of actual performance  
requirements is much better than the ability to judge them correctly in many  cases 
and makes me wonder if descriptions which fall in this area are actually  an 
obstacle that leads to a worse situation when our goal is to determine  the best 
pilot.
 Two choices exist to minimize our situation, 1. Eliminate the problem  
maneuvers. The AMA rule description is somewhat confusing at best and in  fact 
incorrect or misleading if taken literally I believe the FAI rules  provide a much 
better description ("At the start of a snap-roll,  the fuselage attitude must 
show a definite break and separation from the  flight path, before the 
rotation is started." ) instead of the AMA rule which  says (" Since the maneuver is 
defined as a stall maneuver (induced by a rapid  stall of the wing induced by 
a change in pitch attitude"), The nose of  the fuselage should show a 
definite break from the flight path in the direction  of the snap while the track 
closely maintains the flight path.  
In reality the nose and the tail should show a definite break in attitude  
(the angle of the model in relation to the flight path) from the flight path. 
I think wording of the AMA rule overlooking this reality is a primary  cause 
which results in many of the errors in scoring and in fact in relation to  
less experienced judges actually foster it.
2. Make an all out effort to correct the description and judge training in  
this area.
Many newly trained judges actually award a higher score for a rapid barrel  
roll than they do for a well done snap that is done at a higher speed and  
actually zero many if them incorrectly.
Likewise another area which results in large point spread errors with less  
experienced judges is their lack of firmiluarity with the geometric  
requirements of the maneuvers.
Spin entry is another problem area that must be addressed that is also a  
culprit that in many cases is judged incorrectly. 
We have a ways to go guys but the effort will be rewarded, look where we  
were a few years ago and I believe you will agree we have come a long way toward  
improving the system.
Just a few of my thoughts and a lot of rambling on in an effort to get  you 
to thinking of solutions and the means to an end.
Buddy   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050805/691cb0c7/attachment.html