Scoring formula

[Don Ramsey]

I can't answer that just now.  Some issues to resolve unrelated to the 
judges.

Don

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Cameron Smith" <dentdoc007 at adelphia.net>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 9:06 AM
Subject: RE: Scoring formula


> Very Nice!  Do you think the ranking number spread could be made public?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]
> On Behalf Of Don Ramsey
> Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 9:59 AM
> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: Scoring formula
>
> There will be judge evaluation done on the finals judges.  5 judges is a
>
> minimum  to do any kind of reasonable evaluation.  There are some
> software
> issues but they will be resolved and we will have numbers.
>
> Don
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Cameron Smith" <dentdoc007 at adelphia.net>
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 8:53 AM
> Subject: RE: Scoring formula
>
>
>>
>>
>> Where there any Judge ranking numbers produced from this years NATS?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
> [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]
>> On Behalf Of Bob Pastorello
>> Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 6:10 AM
>> To: discussion at nsrca.org
>> Subject: Re: Scoring formula
>>
>> I remember a Nats (a few years' back) when I *was* the toughest judge
> on
>> the
>> FAI line, both Prelims and Finals.  I know because the CD came up and
>> told
>> me "you're being too hard".  Okay.  After it was all done, my higher
>> scores
>> tracked the overall placements of the standings pretty darn well.  I
>> felt
>> pretty good about that, because there were some pretty high-falutin
>> judges
>> on my panel with me!!
>>
>> Then I learned - quite by accident - that my scores HAD been tossed.
>> EVERY
>> round that I sat there, doing my damndest to be consistent, fair, and
>> downgrade by the rulebook....in the heat and wind, only to learn that
> I
>> DID
>> NOT NEED TO BE THERE !!!!!
>>
>> Some stupid jerk actually had the gall to justify that by telling me
>> "since
>> your scores got tossed, that makes the other judges' scores more
>> accurate".
>> I didn't wring that guys' neck....but he also made it to my list of
>> "persons
>> likely to be left out of my will".... :-)
>>
>> Actually had someone ask me a couple years later, "Why don't you get
>> certified, Bob?"
>>
>> I'll put my judging consistency and skill up against anyone's..... but
>> not
>> if it's gonna be thrown out later.  As difficult as it is to train,
> and
>> then
>> *recruit* judges at big events, WHY would anyone want to toss their
>> efforts
>> in the trash????   Why bother to play at all, if there is no more
> value
>> placed on someone's best effort than that?
>>
>> Bob Pastorello
>> www.rcaerobats.net
>> rcaerobob at cox.net
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Atwood, Mark" <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
>> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 10:16 PM
>> Subject: RE: Scoring formula
>>
>>
>> I have to agree with Derek on this one, 100%.
>>
>> The conventional thought on "throwing out Highs and lows" is that
> you'll
>> get rid of the spurious ZERO from some Snap-roll nazi  along with the
>> gift "10" that the pilot's buddy awarded him.   That could be true.
>>
>> But what really happens...the down side... Is that the toughest judge
> on
>> the panel...get's EVERY SCORE THROWN OUT...   He might as well pack up
>> and go home.   Same is true for the "easy" judge.  Forget about the
> fact
>> that they're consistent...  Tossing Highs and Low's doesn't really
> care.
>> In fact...the more consistently "tough" they are...the more likely
> that
>> they wasted their time.
>>
>> TBL on the other hand looks at judges across the entire pool of
> flyers..
>> If a judge is consistently tough...fine.  But if he's tough on 8
>> pilots...and easy on 2...it's going to catch it.  Same goes for the
> easy
>> judge that's suddenly tough.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
> [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]
>> On Behalf Of Derek Koopowitz
>> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 10:30 PM
>> To: discussion at nsrca.org
>> Subject: RE: Scoring formula
>>
>> There is a big difference between TBLP and TBL.  TBL does not change
>> individual maneuver scores at all - it may change the overall round
>> score
>> for a judge based on how that judge has scored other pilots and
> relative
>> to
>> that judges' scores compared to the other judges.
>>
>> I have given explanations of what TBL is several times - certain
> people
>> are
>> set in their ways and will not open up their minds to understanding
>> statistical methods.  I can equate TBL vs high-low throw out to
> people's
>> understanding of the impact on turnaround in pattern.
>>
>> The problem with high-low discard is that you are eliminating the work
>> of
>> 40% of your judges scores if 5 judges are used.  Is that fair to the
>> judges
>> and pilots?  TBL changes that by keeping about 90% of all judges
> scores.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
> [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]
>> On
>> Behalf Of Grow Pattern
>> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 6:13 PM
>> To: discussion at nsrca.org
>> Subject: Re: Scoring formula
>>
>> Check this out I was researching TBL formulae and I ran across this.
> The
>> parallelisms of the full-size aerobatic world to our world are pretty
>> scary.
>>
>> _ Eric
>> ================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.
>>
>> =================================================
>> 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.
>
> =================================================
> 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.