<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16544" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial> <<<<<<<Various wording in both
AMA & F3A rules have prohibited judging "aids".
>>>>>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>It would be very helpful to me if someone could point me
to this reference in the rulebook as I have never been able to find
it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Georgie</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=ejhaury@comcast.net href="mailto:ejhaury@comcast.net">Earl Haury</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, October 17, 2007 12:25
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Judging</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Some thoughts that might help unburden judges and
improve accuracy. These are outside the box a bit - process box, not
flight box. As some have mentioned, replacing human judges with some form of
computer scoring system is the ultimate answer. I hope I live long enough to
see that work, not that it's impossible now - just no one with the interest /
skills / finances has approached it. Much time has been spent discussing ways
to transfer the score from the judges mind to paper - but, guess what, a
pencil and paper works just fine! (It's not even too hard to process scores
with a calculator!)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>F3A rules preclude the use of means to define box
violations other than the judge's observation. Various wording in both AMA
& F3A rules have prohibited judging "aids". This seems contradictory to
the purpose! A pilot is supposed to demonstrate skill in flying an aircraft
within the constraints of the box with perfection being the goal - while being
judged by a bunch of ill-positioned folks who vary in being able to determine
distance +- 50 meters? In the days of interrogated circuits, dual conversation
RX, and giggle Hertz freq we still choose to rely on guesstimates for
distance! Nonsense. Very little effort would be required to provide accurate
excessive distance and box excursion information. Take this burden from the
judge and apply any distance / box downgrades post flight. Sure - I don't know
just what these machines are at the moment (could be just properly placed
people in major meets) - but asking the question may get somebody
thinking.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>If the pilot is expected to display perfection in flight
- we should move into the 21st century in devising ways of accurately judging
whether or not that perfection is present. Of course it might cost some of us
judges a job - darn, I would hate to lose the income!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Earl</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=ejhaury@comcast.net href="mailto:ejhaury@comcast.net">Earl
Haury</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">Discussion List, NSRCA</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, October 17, 2007 10:29
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [NSRCA-discussion]
Judging</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Allow me to start a new thread for the purpose of
analyzing the issues Jim and others highlighted in the D3 thread. Most
of us have been frustrated over the years by inaccurate scoring, both
high and low. Forget the notion that it doesn't matter if an inaccurate
judge is consistent - that person is just consistently wrong and it does
matter, the rules require both accurate and consistent scoring. I also don't
believe that judging ability depends entirely on class flown, masters
and FAI folks aren't inherently smarter than others. Experience does improve
accuracy and it's important to know what maneuvers / schedule that will be
judged (called preparation). However, it's not important what class is
flying the maneuver - a half loop or immelman or stall turn is the same in
intermediate as F3A. The NSRCA Judge Cert program has improved the quality
of judging immensely! So - now that I've gotten these generalities out of my
system, let's take a look at why F3A scores may vary a lot by judge /
region.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>I've heard the opinion expressed that the whole point
scoring in F3A dictates that no downgrade is applied until an error of 15
deg or more is observed. Conversely, others feel that any error in F3A
requires, at least, a one point downgrade. Hmmmm - that'll make a
difference! F3A adopted whole point scoring in an effort to force
judges to use the entire 10 - 0 range of scores, rather than the upper 3 or
so as was typical. This is probably where the 1pt for any error notion comes
from. But it was difficult to quantify how much to downgrade many
errors, and a wide variation occurred between judges of equal skill, some
saw a 5 deg error worthy of a point deduction - others would see a 30 deg
error as worthy of only a point. Probably the most useful metric available
to judges is the 1/15 rule! </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>However, the 1/15 rule fails to define just what
should be done for errors of less than 15 deg. Honest differences of opinion
exist and these become more important the better a maneuver is flown. I
suspect that some evaluation of the wording of the rules might help. F3A
requires "marking" (scoring) in whole points, but uses the word "downgrade"
regarding the judges assessment of the "mark". While examples of egregious
errors are noted in whole points, there is no exclusion forbidding the judge
to use smaller downgrade increments to arrive at the whole point score. So
why is the downgrade for errors smaller than 15 deg undefined? Well -
pattern folks are certainly smart (or we wouldn't be doing this - right?)
and have no problem recognizing the downgrade applicable to 30, 45, etc.
errors basis the 1/15 metric, there shouldn't be any difficulty in the other
direction either as 5 deg = 1/3 pt, 7.5 = 1/2 pt, etc.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>A problem arises when a judge is between whole points
with the proper downgrades. (Things would be a lot easier if F3A adopted 1/2
pt scoring - I've made the arguments and some are listening - but don't
expect a change any time soon.) The scenario might be a simple turnaround
maneuver with a slight 5 deg error of some sort which deserves a 1/3 pt
downgrade. Some will score this a 10, others a 9. The F3A rules dwell on
major defects and leave these situations nearly unaddressed. Consider that a
9 is unfair - might as well make a 15 deg error. Some will say a 10 is
unfair as the maneuver is imperfect and we are striving for perfection. OK -
the F3A rules state "<SPAN lang=EN-GB
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: FR; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA"><FONT
size=3>A high score should be given only if no major defects are found and
the maneuver is well positioned." <FONT face=Arial>You decide - I would
probably go with a 10, as there's no "major" defect, and feel comfortable
rounding to the nearest whole number. Unfortunately, unintentional bias
(basis pilot reputation, quality of current flight, etc.) can slip in here
and result in like maneuvers being rounded up and down for different pilots
- here's a place where judge consistency must be applied.
</FONT></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: FR; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA"><FONT
size=3><FONT face=Arial></FONT></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: FR; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA"><FONT
size=+0><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=3>Centering is another area where
downgrades often vary in that some focus on a center "key point" of a
maneuver and downgrade heavily if that point is missed. F3A rules state
"<SPAN lang=EN-GB><FONT face="Times New Roman">This may be in the range of 1
to 4 points subtracted" </FONT><FONT face=Arial>with regards to
centering errors, without defining a metric. Most assume 1 pt / 25%. OK -
the middle of the inverted portion of a 4 pt roll is way off - the 90 deg
roll ends at the pole - most would ding this a couple of points. But, a 4 pt
roll may be 1000 ft long, so a 2 pt downgrade would be appropriate for a 500
ft error, the example is probably less than 200 feet - so a 1pt downgrade
would be more appropriate. If the overall length of a maneuver is
considered, centering downgrades are often less than scored. This concept is
even more important for "narrow" center
maneuvers.</FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: FR; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA"><FONT
size=+0><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=3><SPAN
lang=EN-GB></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: FR; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA"><FONT
size=+0><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=3><SPAN lang=EN-GB>So - there are a
couple of places where judges can disagree in scoring and these will
generate large differences in scores by flight and, possibly, by region. Our
NSRCA judging program has done and is doing a good job of ensuring we all
recognize errors. The 1/15 rule provides a good metric and works well with
the AMA 1/2 point scoring system. This same 1/15 metric leaves us
hanging a bit in F3A when used with whole point scoring. Maybe a solution is
for us to use 1/2 pt. scoring in F3A events in AMA contests. Certainly we
might include direction in our judging program to ensure folks judging F3A
handle this issue
consistently.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: FR; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA"><FONT
size=+0><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=3><SPAN
lang=EN-GB></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: FR; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA"><FONT
size=+0><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=3><SPAN
lang=EN-GB>Earl</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>