[NSRCA-discussion] quiet

[Peter Vogel]

That applies to the score an individual judge gives a maneuver, not the
score calculated when an NO is scored by one judge (note that the average
score of the 2 judges becomes the average score of all 3 judges in the case
you cite, which is as it should be).  The rule could be stated more easily
as the score for the maneuver shall be the average of all other judges who
score the maneuver in that round since in the base case of there being only
two judges the average of one score (the other judge) is the other judge's
score.

Peter+

On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Scott Smith <js.smith at verizon.net> wrote:

> Agreed that option C would fit the rule.  I was hung up on ****
>
> ** **
>
> *Each maneuver is to be scored individually on a basis of 10 to zero (0)
> points, in half point increments*
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:
> nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of *Jon Lowe
> *Sent:* Friday, December 30, 2011 6:08 PM
> *To:* nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] quiet****
>
> ** **
>
> Option c.  The average of 8 and 8.5 is 8.25.  No problem since scores are
> normalized and Kfactors are present anyway.****
>
> Jon****
>
> ** **
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Smith <js.smith at verizon.net>
> To: 'General pattern discussion' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Fri, Dec 30, 2011 5:04 pm
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] quiet****
>
> Since it’s so quiet…****
>
> * *****
>
> *When a judge fails to fully observe the maneuver in progress that
> maneuver score must be a “NO” for “Not Observed”.  That judge’s score will
> then be given the average of the scores of the other judge’s scores when
> more than 2 judges are present or the score of the other judge when there
> are only 2 judges.*****
>
>  ****
>
> So 3 judges record: NO, 8.5, 8.0****
>
>  ****
>
> What does NO get changed to?  8 or 8.5?****
>
>  ****
>
> *From:* *nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org*<nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>[
> *mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org*<nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org?>]
> *On Behalf Of *Keith Hoard
> *Sent:* Friday, December 30, 2011 2:57 PM
> *To:* General pattern discussion
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] quiet****
>
>  ****
>
> Working in the garage building a new shop.  Kinda nice to start over from
> scratch once in a while. . .
>
> Temps in the low 60's today, kinda windy.
>
> Keith Hoard
> Collierville, TN
> *khoard at gmail.com* <khoard at gmail.com>
>
>
> ****
>
> On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Gordon Seeling <*gseeling at q.com*<gseeling at q.com>>
> wrote:****
>
> any one home???
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> *NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org* <NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> *http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion*<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion>
> ****
>
>  ****
>
> _______________________________________________****
>
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list****
>
> *NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org* <NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>****
>
> *http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion* <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
>



-- 
Director, Fixed Wing Flight Training
Santa Clara County Model Aircraft Skypark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20111231/64af686c/attachment.html>