Scoring Formula

[Earl Haury]

The rules are to be followed, or changed by due process. However, at issue seems to be whether the U S Nats are defined as a "Continental Championship", looks like a National Championship to me (last time I checked there were other countries on this continent) and as such our Nats seem not to be bound by the exact procedural formats specified in the F3A Code for world and continental championships. Certainly the procedures adopted for the Nats must be published beforehand as required by the AMA rules.

I oppose dropping highs and lows, as this practice is more justified by bias (supposed) than error. If one considers each judge being dedicated to a conscientious job, then each individual score should be considered valid (we teach that independence and confidence are requisites of judging). Certainly there will be errors made - both high and low. (I'm aware of several instances where incorrect maneuvers were flown at this years Nats where the majority of judges didn't zero them, I doubt that anyone really wants to pitch the valid zero).

In my opinion, averaging the conscientious work of all the judges is the only way to go. I venture that a number of folks would not consider judging (especially Nats finals) if their work is to be pitched because their evaluation differs from the other judges. I assure you that I would likely be in that group! 

I contend that it's time to apply technology to do the technical portion of judging. Somewhere in our talented group (world wide) there is someone who has the skills and/or resources to pursue this. Gee - a much lighter load for judges - just smoothness and gracefulness - let a machine handle the details.

Earl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050730/4f8ae081/attachment.html