[NSRCA-discussion] F at locals?

Fri Feb 1 04:36:30 AKST 2008

Another good point Jason. The more that the F is flown and judged the better we all get at it. I can fly Masters or the P with equal mediocrity but the F always just scared me off. Maybe one of my goals for this year will be to learn it. Now if everyone promises no laughing I might try it.
 From comments I have hear a lot of guys just don't want to deal with rollers.

Anthony

From: jshulman at cfl.rr.comTo: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.orgDate: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 19:08:38 -0500Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging by committee?

Problem with that is that we're finding that enough FAI guys don't want to fly F... so why hold 2 FAI- P classes? I understand getting to know 1 sequence is easier to judge, but the Masters and FAI guys should be able to have a handle on the other class without much work. Its probably just me, but if FAI were to fly both P and F, then having "Masters" fly P might be a more Masters class this way. Then again, I may be off in left field, or is this right? And since now both the Team Trials and Worlds pick the winning teams at the end of the contest (after F) it would make more sense to start flying F locally so it's not a shock come Nats time.
Regards,Jasonwww.jasonshulman.comwww.shulmanaviation.comwww.composite-arf.com 

-----Original Message-----From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Dave BurtonSent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 6:53 PMTo: 'NSRCA Mailing List'Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging by committee?

There is  a way to solve the peer judging and several other problems with changing maneuver schedules for Master’s class.
Let Masters class fly the most current FAI  P schedule as a separate class. This provides a way that FAI class can judge Masters and be completely familiar with the maneuvers and Masters class can judge FAI and be completely familiar with the schedule. Then the rules committee does not have to come up with a new schedule periodically as it changes every other year just like FAI. The schedules (P & Masters) are so close in difficulty that flying the P schedule should not be any problem for masters class flyers.
OK, Flame suit on!

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Mark AtwoodSent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 3:56 PMTo: NSRCA Mailing ListSubject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judgeing by commitee?

For our “matrix” version, the A& B masters groups, we effectively ran 2 contests.  The scorer set up a second masters only contest for the B panel to enter their scores.  It worked quite well with only a little confusion.  It did a great job of picking the top 5 guys and getting them into the top 8.  I’m pretty sure you could argue that 7-12th place might have had some variance...but I think that’s true regardless of the format.-MarkOn 1/31/08 3:49 PM, "Anthony Romano" <anthonyr105 at hotmail.com> wrote:
  I suspected this would require super- human objectivity as well as be a logistical nightmare. However, everyone reall knows the sequence. Really like the matrix system but not sure how much work that makes for the scorer. Anyone have any thoughts on how to score that  One idea that was kicked around in D1 was fly an extra round in Masters to generate an extra throw away. Each round two masters pilots judge and don't fly rotating through the entire class. It seems like the time required would work out the same because the group had two less pilots but again lot of objectivity ( conscious and unconscious ) required especially as the contest end grew near.  Anthony

Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:14:15 -0500From: atwoodm at paragon-inc.comTo: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org; nsrca-discussion at lists.f3a.usSubject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judgeing by commitee?Anthony,I have to agree with Jim, but for different reasons.  We did this about 4 years back at our district championships with the masters class.  We had 17 pilots in masters, and only one (me) in FAI, and another 6 or 7 in advanced.  So getting any judging at all would have required heavily using the Intermediate and Sportsman classes to judge, OR, heavily burdening the few Advanced guys...and sitting through 17 masters flights is a looooong sentence.So we did the peer judging scenario.  Given the options, it worked very well.  But it requires some serious juggling to even try and make it work well.  We used peer judging for 4 of the 6 rounds.  Two flight lines, with a rolling panel of judges.  5 judges on each line, tossed high and low by maneuver leaving 7 pilots not judging at any given time.  This allowed the person before and after each flight some time to prep and decompress before having to jump in the chair for 5 flights and then start over on the second line.It’s a VERY VERY VERY busy process, not to mention that unless you completely randomly resort the flight line each round, the pilot will be judged but the same group...or maybe more importantly NOT judged by the same group each round.It worked...but it was messy.  I would only do it again if we were presented with the same grossly offset numbers of entries.   On a related note... A better solution was tried a few years later when we had similar numbers (16 masters pilots)We created 2 classes of masters...A and B.   we still used FAI and Advanced judges, but we were also able to sprinkle in B judges for A and vice versa.  We did 4 rounds for each group.  Took the top 4 from each group and combined them and they flew the last 2 rounds as a “Finalists” group (with the other 8 judging and flying in their own group for the bottom 8 spots.) This was MUCH more workable, and I think netted a fairer event in the long run.-Mark  On 1/31/08 2:46 PM, "Woodward, Jim" <jim.woodward at baesystems.com> wrote:
Hey Anthony, **** Attempting a 50 words or less approach without too much regard for political correctness ***** I don’t think peer judging works.  I don’t think it sends the right message about problem solving or achieving a more accurate score per maneuver for each pilot.   Psychology 101 would predict that it does not foster the right mindset or circumstances for a competitive environment (Reality TV shows like Survivor are based on one form or another of peer judging).   The #1 component that must be correct for it to work is that all pilot/judges see and subtract about the exact same number of points per maneuver see the same downgrades.  The situation doesn’t compute if one judge is off from the others or uses impression judging.  A bunch of stuff should probably be in place for this to work like:  large number of judges, drop high score, drop low score, etc. The highest caliber of honor, integrity, and judge-education is required by all competitors to make this work.   I witnessed this as a Masters pilot watching the FAI contest.  I watched the flying and this scenario VERY close. My opinion is that I would chose not to compete in FAI in a peer judging scenario.  Thanks,Jim W.  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.f3a.us [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us] On Behalf Of Anthony RomanoSent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:44 PMTo: nsrca-discussion at lists.f3a.usSubject: [NSRCA-discussion] Judgeing by commitee?Finally got a chance to read the current K-factor and saw a note on the Tangerine contest. The article mentioned FAI was judged by a commity of the FAI pilots. Could someone please provide details. Do you think you could keep your objectivity? For those that were there how did it work out? Sound interesting because you would finally be judged by pilots who know the FAI rules and the sequence. Could this be a solution for the oversized Masters class? Obvious drawbacks too, but trying to inspire some thought. Anthony    

Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging. You IM, we give. Learn more. <http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join> 

_______________________________________________NSRCA-discussion mailing listNSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.orghttp://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging. You IM, we give. Learn more. <http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join> 

_______________________________________________NSRCA-discussion mailing listNSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.orghttp://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

_________________________________________________________________
Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser!
http://biggestloser.msn.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20080201/44652822/attachment.html 