<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judgeing by commitee?</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'>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. <BR>
<BR>
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.<BR>
<BR>
-Mark<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 1/31/08 3:49 PM, "Anthony Romano" <anthonyr105@hotmail.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><BR>
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<BR>
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. <BR>
<BR>
Anthony<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="3" WIDTH="100%">Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:14:15 -0500<BR>
From: atwoodm@paragon-inc.com<BR>
To: nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org; nsrca-discussion@lists.f3a.us<BR>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judgeing by commitee?<BR>
<BR>
Anthony,<BR>
<BR>
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.<BR>
<BR>
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.<BR>
<BR>
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.<BR>
<BR>
It worked...but it was messy. I would only do it again if we were presented with the same grossly offset numbers of entries. <BR>
<BR>
On a related note... A better solution was tried a few years later when we had similar numbers (16 masters pilots)<BR>
<BR>
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.)<BR>
<BR>
This was MUCH more workable, and I think netted a fairer event in the long run.<BR>
<BR>
-Mark<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 1/31/08 2:46 PM, "Woodward, Jim" <jim.woodward@baesystems.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT COLOR="#000080"><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>Hey Anthony,<BR>
<BR>
**** Attempting a 50 words or less approach without too much regard for political correctness *****<BR>
<BR>
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). <BR>
<BR>
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. <BR>
<BR>
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. <BR>
<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><BR>
</SPAN></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000080"><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>Jim W.<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><FONT FACE="Arial">CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:</FONT></SPAN><FONT FACE="Arial"><FONT SIZE="5"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'> 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. <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'>
</SPAN></FONT>
<P ALIGN=CENTER>
<FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'><HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="2" WIDTH="100%"></SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Tahoma"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'><B>From:</B> nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.f3a.us [<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.f3a.us]">mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.f3a.us]</a> <B>On Behalf Of </B>Anthony Romano<BR>
<B>Sent:</B> Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:44 PM<BR>
<B>To:</B> nsrca-discussion@lists.f3a.us<BR>
<B>Subject:</B> [NSRCA-discussion] Judgeing by commitee?<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'><BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Tahoma"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>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.<BR>
Could this be a solution for the oversized Masters class? Obvious drawbacks too, but trying to inspire some thought.<BR>
<BR>
Anthony<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><BR>
</SPAN></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Tahoma"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'><HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="2" WIDTH="100%"></SPAN></FONT></FONT>
<P>
<FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'><BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Tahoma"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging. You IM, we give. Learn more. <a href="http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join"><http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join></a> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><BR>
<HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="3" WIDTH="95%"></SPAN></FONT><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Monaco, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:10.0px'>_______________________________________________<BR>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>
<a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Monaco, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:10.0px'><BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><BR>
<HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="3" WIDTH="100%">Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging. You IM, we give. Learn more. <a href="http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join"><http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join></a> <BR>
<HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="3" WIDTH="95%"></SPAN></FONT><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Monaco, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:10.0px'>_______________________________________________<BR>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>
<a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Monaco, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:10.0px'><BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>