[NSRCA-discussion] Northern D5's answer to the glut in Masters

[Derek Koopowitz]

A 9th place guy may move up to 1st if he had flamed out his 1st 2 rounds and
those could be considered throw-aways... and then wins the other 2 rounds -
and could conceivably win the final 2 rounds if he is normally a top 3
pilot.  One needs to be careful about this... ;-)

On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>wrote:

>  A slight variant of this was used at the D4 finals a few years back and I
> actually think it works better.
>
>
>
> We have Group A and Group B as Mike suggests.  For the first 4 rounds, they
> flew independently, judging each other.  For the last two rounds, we
> rearranged the groups so that Group A was the top half from each group, and
> group B was the bottom half.  That meant that the winners were coming out of
> group A, but lets face it, in a group of 16 (which is what we had) the 9thplace guy is not likely to move up to 3
> rd with 2 rounds to go.
>
>
>
> This effectively gave us a “finals” format, and yet every got to fly 6
> rounds, and we had a full standing 1-16.
>
>
>
> The downside was that someone with 2 flame outs might miss the cut…but
> again, that’s no different from a finals format.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:
> nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of *Chris
> *Sent:* Monday, May 18, 2009 11:25 AM
> *To:* General pattern discussion
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Northern D5's answer to the glut in
> Masters
>
>
>
> Why not just normalize the two groups together after the last round.  It
> would be like each round would have 2 with 1000's just like they tied and
> crunch it all together and see.  You can't use raw scores as that would
> defeat the normalizaion process and favor the line with the possibly
> "easier" judges.  In the end you have a complete Masters result as one
> class.  Perfectly fair, no but seems like a workable solution without the
> need for 2 sets of awards that you may or may not need depending on the
> turnout that day.
>
> Chris
>
> mike mueller wrote:
>
>  Yes Brian we will mix it up as the contest needs warrant. Like the beer deal. Ask Bobby I'd win that one. Mike
>
>
>
> --- On Mon, 5/18/09, brian young <brian_w_young at yahoo.com> <brian_w_young at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> From: brian young <brian_w_young at yahoo.com> <brian_w_young at yahoo.com>
>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Northern D5's answer to the glut in Masters
>
> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>
> Date: Monday, May 18, 2009, 9:58 AM
>
> I
>
> think this would be fine.
>
>
>
> Instead of flipping a coin whoever can shotgun a beer
>
> the fastest gets the "trophy."
>
>
>
> One thing that happens when masters judge masters is
>
> you lose the judge training, do you go ahead and mix in some
>
> other classes as judges as well?
>
>
>
> Brian
>
>
>
> --- On Mon, 5/18/09, mike mueller
>
> <mups1953 at yahoo.com> <mups1953 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> From: mike mueller <mups1953 at yahoo.com> <mups1953 at yahoo.com>
>
> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Northern D5's answer to the
>
> glut in Masters
>
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>
> Date: Monday, May 18, 2009, 8:55 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> After a discussion at our Pattern seminar here on Saturday
>
> we have come up with what we think is a workable solution to
>
> this problem.
>
> First we will wait to see how the classes form on the
>
> morning of our contests. If we have bad numbers in that the
>
> Masters class dominates the ranks we will then split the
>
> class into 2 groups by picking the names out of a hat. Group
>
> A will judge Group B. This remains the situation throughout
>
> the contest. Since this doesn't give the contests
>
> organizers a chance to have 2 sets of awards the trophys
>
> will be awarded by a flip of a coin. So say they announce
>
> the winners of 3rd place both guys come up and flip the
>
> coin. Ideally the awards are not trophy's but paper in
>
> which case the award problem is solved.
>
> As far as District points we just add up the numbers for
>
> each group seperatly.
>
> Does anyone see a problem with this? Thanks, Mike Mueller
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.285 / Virus Database: 270.12.27/2112 - Release Date: 05/13/09
> 07:04:00
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20090518/1b695c00/attachment.html>