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

[George Kennie]

Awesome Buddy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BUDDYonRC at aol.com wrote:

>    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/20050807/e291144e/attachment.html