[SPAM] Re: Scoring formula

[BUDDYonRC at aol.com]

In a message dated 7/29/2005 6:48:47 PM Central Daylight Time,  
cjm767driver at hotmail.com writes:

I agree  100% with Verne.  In fact, I would absolutely agree to judge 2 days 
at  the NATS instead of the 1 day if that meant we would have a 5 judge panel 
for  all rounds in all classes.  As it is, one judge CAN affect and change the 
 outcome of the contest.  This should never be the case.  The guys  flying 
advanced this yr need only look at what happened in round 5 to see that  one 
judge can change the contest.  If we are going to Muncie to just have  a contest, 
then leave it at 3 judges, but if we really want to make sure that  we have 
accurately and fairly chosen, then we need 5 with the high and low  dropped per 
maneuver.

Chris

Verne Koester wrote:  
Eric,
I doubt that it's in the AMA rules. It's just the way  it's always been done. 
Otherwise, there's no need to bother using 5  judges.  I think it's probably 
in the FAI rules somewhere, but I  suspect that's for World Championships 
which wouldn't apply here. However,  we've always used 5 for them as well and 
dropped the high and low, and  again, if we don't, why bother using 5 judges. You 
can use 2 or 3 or 5 or 7  and one cheater (or bad judge if you choose) can tip 
the scales in any  direction they choose, whether to make sure someone wins 
or someone  loses.
 
My purpose in pointing this out is to prevent it from  happening in the 
future. I think it would be a huge mistake to do anything  that changes the posted 
results from this Nats. The outcry could only damage  our credibility and 
attendance at future Nats would suffer. There'd be sour  grapes from those who got 
moved down as well as from those who moved  up.
 
On the other hand, there was a lot of buzzing going on  amongst the Masters 
competitors all through the Nats about the scores one  particular pilot was 
getting. I wasn't made aware of it until Tuesday and  then I started paying 
attention as well. Most thought the guy wasn't flying  well enough to make the 
Finals but everyone knew he would with the scores he  was getting. Most figured 
the system (dropping the hi/low) would finally do  him in during the Finals and 
he'd probably finish last in that group. You  know the rest and his caller's 
scores put him very near the top since they  weren't dropped.
 
I think I speak for everyone when I say we only want a  fair shake and the 
closest we can get to that is the traditional method of  dropping the hi and low 
with 5 judges. Take that away, and I don't see much  sense in going through 
all the time and expense it takes to be competitive  in that arena. Having said 
all that, I still emphasize what a mistake it  would be to change the posted 
results from this year. We just need to make  sure it doesn't happen again.
 
vk

-----  Original Message_ ----- 
From:  Grow Pattern_ (mailto:pattern4u at comcast.net)  
To:  _discussion at nsrca.org_ (mailto:discussion at nsrca.org)  
Sent:  Friday, July 29, 2005 7:02 PM
Subject:  Scoring formula


Verne,
             I could write the following and say it as an answer to almost 
everything I  had to get working this year. "Nothing is written down", [It will 
not be  like that next year believe me!]
 
It may be somewhere, but I find myself  asking for help to find it..
 
In this case the "it" is, where can I  find the rules on five panel judging 
or larger panels for  AMA contests? Dave G. is looking for the FAI  rules.
 
If you know "where" for either please point  me. Spent a fruitless day 
chasing this ghost.
 
My plan BTW, is to re-crunch the numbers with  high and low scores dropped 
per maneuver because that is what was done  last year.  May have to update 
Gene's program as well.
 
Regards,

Eric.





I will second that.
Buddy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050730/25e49c7b/attachment.html