<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns:eXclaimer = "http://www.exclaimer.co.uk" xmlns:msxsl =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:xslt" xmlns:exc =
"http://www.exclaimer.co.uk/rtf"><HEAD><TITLE>[NSRCA-discussion] D3 Championship</TITLE>
<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 size=2>We've talked about other ideas to improve the
education and consistency in the past. It wouldn't be a bad start for FAI
to start following the existing rules and to post the raw scores for each
round. Here's a new idea that seems to combine several below and from past
conversations:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Designate the last flight of the first round in FAI
as a training session. All the judges for the upcoming rounds would silently
judge that round for the class. The regular judge scores would be used for
the contest of course, but immediately following the flight the group would have
a team review of the manuvers/downgrades. Some would learn from others (eg
"Oh yeah, I forgot to watch the exit line") and others might learn from the
group as when someone applies a harsh downgrade but then changes his/her mind
when the group discusses the infraction and penalty and all agrees on a
smaller downgrade. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Since usually Masters judge FAI this team review
would not affect the start of the next round. Also, if raw scores are
posted as the rules state, the group concensus can be compared to the actual
scores. This is not to promote that all judges should strive for the
concensus, but remember even the TBL scoring system is based on deviation from
the concensus. Our biggest TBL complaint is that it may penalize the one
judge that "saw the zero" but this would not be the problem with my proposal
because all the "judges in training" would be free and encouraged to discuss
what they saw and botched manuvers would be weeded out.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Wouldn't be a bad idea to do this in other classes,
but it would take agreement to post raw scores and might impact the pace of the
contest.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>--Lance</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </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=ryan_mclaughlin@ml.com
href="mailto:ryan_mclaughlin@ml.com">McLaughlin, Ryan (FRS.JAX)</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-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, October 17, 2007 12:18
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [NSRCA-discussion] D3
Championship</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><!-- Converted from text/rtf format -->
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>This is my first post to the NSRCA list as I am a
bit 'internet shy', but I thought I might be able to add some value to the FAI
judging discussion Jim W started. Although I tend to err on the side of
diplomacy : ), I believe the feelings Jim expressed are legitimate and shared
by many FAI competitors throughout the country. As a long time
participant, I realize that bias is not a new problem but I do not think we
should accept this is as a "fact of life" and move on. I think we have
an excellent opportunity here and we should make the most of it.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>The primary issue to address in my opinion is not
disparity in judging standards between judges, though as Earl points out, this
is important. Rather, it is the different standard applied to pilots
within one score set--i.e.. scoring a pilot lower or higher based on who he
is. Our penchant for creating "superstars" is the most discouraging
aspect of FAI competition. To remedy this, we must all make a conscious
decision to change a long established tradition in our sport. Are we
ready to take this on?</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>Complaining isn't the answer and neither is staying
quiet, a mistake that has made the FAI competitors as responsible as anyone
else for the situation. To this end, I submit for your review the
following ideas to specifically target the FAI bias issue:</FONT></P><BR>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>1. Sacrifice one FAI round per contest to serve as
an "open" round for all contestants expected to judge FAI during the
event. Allow everyone to compare notes and use this as a coaching
opportunity.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. Drop one FAI pilot to Masters at each
contest to serve as a judge for all rounds and use volunteers from other
classes to serve as the others. This would have to be an agreement made
among FAI pilots.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>3. Extend the pilots meeting to go over
specific issues, maybe a new one or two every meet rather than just pointing
out the landing zone, etc. Make a "mini" judging seminar mandatory each
contest.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>4. Certify judges for FAI on a volunteer
basis and only use "certified" judges in the contest.</FONT> </P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>5. Utilize peer judging, in other words, have
FAI pilots judge themselves. If a pilot is not flying, he is judging his
fellow competitors.</FONT></P><BR><BR>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>Some of this may seem radical, but I believe there
is room for a bit of this. Pattern belongs to us right? I welcome
any ideas or critique anyone can offer. I will clarify any of the above
upon request.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>Thank you for your consideration.</FONT> </P><BR>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>Ryan McLaughlin</FONT> <BR><FONT face=Arial
size=2>Eustis, Florida</FONT> </P><BR><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<HR color=gray>
</DIV>
<DIV>This message w/attachments (message) may be privileged, confidential or
proprietary, and if you are not an intended recipient, please notify the
sender, do not use or share it and delete it. Unless specifically indicated,
this message is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of any investment
products or other financial product or service, an official confirmation of
any transaction, or an official statement of Merrill Lynch. Subject to
applicable law, Merrill Lynch may monitor, review and retain e-communications
(EC) traveling through its networks/systems. The laws of the country of each
sender/recipient may impact the handling of EC, and EC may be archived,
supervised and produced in countries other than the country in which you are
located. This message cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. This
message is subject to terms available at the following link: <A
href="http://www.ml.com/e-communications_terms/">http://www.ml.com/e-communications_terms/</A>.
By messaging with Merrill Lynch you consent to the foregoing.</DIV>
<DIV>
<HR color=gray>
</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#008000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<P><FONT color=#008000></FONT> </P>
<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>