[NSRCA-discussion] Judging FAI
vicenterc at comcast.net
vicenterc at comcast.net
Tue Oct 16 16:06:05 AKDT 2007
Don,
Very nice and compact, thanks. What about wing level? Probably, you didn't mentioned because it is obvious but I think it could be important. I believe is the same case in FAI. I see many cases using rolling to compensate for cross winds and that is a deduction (one point per 15 degree per visible occurrence).
Issues in snaps are important but I understand that we have been discussing a lot in the past. No visible break is a zero in FAI. In AMA is 5 point deduction. I know it is very hard to write that zero but we have to do it is we don't see the break. It is a pilot responsibility to show all the required elements of each maneuver as described in the rule book. I think the snap issue is going to spark a lot of discussion here.
Regards,
--
Vicente "Vince" Bortone
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Don Ramsey" <don.ramsey at suddenlink.net>
Jim,
I think applying the normal standards of judging are very adequate.
- maneuver starts and ends with a straight line within 175 meters of flightline
- radii equal, this is a big one. For 2008 the first radius determines the radii for all others in a maneuver.
- rolls on the center of lines
- rolls rate the same except in unlike rolls in the same maneuver (unsure this is in 2008 rules)
- rotation of the stall turn, 1/2 span is 1 pt down, 1 span is 2 pts, 1-1/2 is 3 points and more than 2 spans is a zero.
- wind correction in maneuvers, are they done in the same plane?
- centering
- box violations including top of box violations
- loops round and rolls started and ended at the proper points for rolling elements in a loop
- distance out, 1 pt for further than 175 meters and 3 or more pts for more than 200 meters (except rolling circles)
- snaps along the geometry of the maneuver and all the other issues of snaps
- spin, does not weathervane on entry, does not spiral, entry not forced, etc.
- 1 pt per 15 degree rule
- size of the maneuver relative to the size of other maneuvers and the position in the box
- smoothness and gracefulness
This is abreviated but this should be the criteria. I use only the criteria in the rules and apply it in a consistent unbiased manner. It's simple, read and know the rules and apply them.
Don
----- Original Message -----
From: Woodward, Jim
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 10:18 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] D3 FAI
In attempting to understand “how” the FAI scoring is delivered, I have made more rationalizations, hypothesis, or excuses for judges than anyone can imagine – which range from:
Maybe I suck J
Intentional bias
Unintentional bias
Ignorance of rules
“Impression” judging
What I am finally left to guess is that a hybrid method of judging is used by some FAI judges. Pure speculation (beware): When a pilot begins disrupting a maneuver by 20 + degrees of error, the judging standards are easily applied without too much difficulty.
However – when more than one “outstanding” flight is being witnessed, some judges may confuse their roll from “applying-downgrades”, to that of “determining a winner.” Determining winner is not what judges do. Normalization does that. In the instance of intensely good flying, the judges may be saying to themselves, “…. This maneuver is teetering on an 8 or 9, but I just watched person X fly and I know person X is better than person Y, so I need to score this an 8.” Of course, this is not accountable to our judging standards of code of ethics.
Again – this is just a WAG. I have made more attempts to understand, appreciate, support, and preserve the integrity of our institution as anyone possible could. At this point I need the Masters pilots to speak to how they judge FAI. How do Masters pilots apply the 15 degree rule for instance??? I cannot really speak to what goes on in the FAI judges mind, but would like to know so that I can meet their standard as a new FAI judge.
Thanks,
Jim
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and proprietary information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient(s), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of schroetere at bellsouth.net
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 10:59 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] D3 FAI
Sounds like a good idea, Vince. We have at least a couple of east facing fields that we have to wait for the sun to vacate the box.
I agree with Gary. Usually I see my scores and I think it's more than I would have given myself. Judging is, to me, usually a tough thing to do and be correct. Things happen so quickly.
I absolutely agree with Jim that we all, as judges, need to be as fair as possible, regardless of the pilot flying. I'm not sure that I understand what you are saying with these statements...
7. Normalization does its part to compare flyers, judges should not use RAW scores as the primary “real-time” comparative force while in the process of judging. RAW scores should be independent of anyone entered in the contest or other factors.
and 1. It is not the responsibility of a judge to use “real-time” RAW score evaluations from maneuver to maneuver (against previous or future flights) to ensure an “order” is reached, or room is left at the top (…. If this is happening….)
I too want to leave a contest with a good feeling. This weekend as an example, I felt pretty good about finishing third. I flew fairly well, but not near as good as Joe and John. Anyway, please clarify what you are saying in the above statements. I'm not trying to be a smart &**, I just want to make sure I understand what you are saying.
Thanks,
Emory
-------------- Original message from vicenterc at comcast.net: --------------
I think there is one possible solution: just more judging clinics and training. In the last contest at central Kansas, one good friend and experience pilot suggested that we should have judging clinics when we are waiting for the sun get out of the way. In our area, we usually wait until 11:00 AM to start the contest. We know that pattern flyers are usually early birds. We could have judging clinics between 9-10:30 AM both days. This is 3 hours of training in one weekend. I know that this is not necessarily the case for other districts or fields or when the contest is very well attended. I will say that this clinics are very easy to implement when we have less than ~20 pilots registered. However, if there are more than 20 pilots just loosing a round to accommod ate the judging clinic won't be a big problem.
Regards,
--
Vicente "Vince" Bortone
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Courtney, Gary Ray" <grcourtney at tva.gov>
From: Courtney, Gary Ray
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 7:07 AM
To: 'schroetere'
Subject: RE: [NSRCA-discussion] D3 FAI
yes!
All I can hope for is to please my hardest critic and judge (myself) because he truly knows what's being done in the air...That's why I very rarely look at the score sheets and standings they are always 4 or 5 points higher than I would give myself. It's like x-mas every contest.
The ? mark was referring to the fact that I don't have a solution, Judging is not ever 100% perfect(human factor) it is what it is accept it or pull your hair out over it.
Having judged FAI on rare occasions, I can say it's not very enjoyable because the pressure I put on myself to try to be fair and consistent is considerable. just to many elements for my feeble brain to process...
Gary
From: schroetere [mailto:schroetere at bellsouth.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 6:33 AM
To: Courtney, Gary Ray
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] D3 FAI
I don't know, Jim started it and I just want to see where it goes. Did you read his email below?
----- Original Message -----
From: Courtney, Gary Ray
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 7:07 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] D3 FAI
?
gary
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of schroetere
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 5:20 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Cc: Jim Woodward
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] D3 FAI
Hey Jim,
I debated with myself to respond to you or the list. But, since you brought this up here, I'd like to hear some more from you and others as well.
I know that you are not alone in your frustration. We talked about this mid-season at length. I'm just not sure what can be done to "fix" judging differences. When it comes down to it, we are all human. Until we get some sort of camera hooked up to a computer, we will never have perfect judging. Even then, I'm sure someone will complain that the software algorithm that calculates the score isn't correct. All we as judges can do is sit down in the chair and do our best. Some times we get it right and some times we don't. It will never be better than that (my opinion).
I hate to see that you are feeling so beaten down that you feel a class switch is the only way to fix it. I have no doubt that you will have great success in Masters if that is what you choose. To me, all the guys flying FAI in our district should be there. You are all fantastic pilots.
So, what needs to be fixed in your opinion and how should this be done?
Thanks, Emory
----- Original Message -----
From: Woodward, Jim
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Cc: McLaughlin, Ryan (FRS.JAX) ; NSRCA District III ; Joseph Walker
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] D3 Championship
It is my opinion that abject failure to score FAI rounds and standings accurately has been consistently occurring in District 3, punctuated by the final two contests of 2007 (JAX and D3 Champs). Recognizing these inequities in FAI, I look forward to joining the Masters class for the 2008 season beginning with the Tangerine.
Copied from www.dictionary.com Abject:
–adjective
1.utterly hopeless, miserable, humiliating, or wretched: abject poverty.
2.contemptible; despicable; base-spirited: an abject coward.
3.shamelessly servile; slavish.
4.Obsolete. cast aside.
Thank You,
Jim W.
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
__________ NOD32 2519 (20070910) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20071017/a24ae7e8/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: vicenterc at comcast.net
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging FAI
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:15:31 +0000
Size: 1224
Url: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20071017/a24ae7e8/attachment-0001.mht
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list