<div style="FONT-FAMILY: arial; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><FONT color=black face=arial></FONT><SPAN style="DISPLAY: inline-block" contentEditable=false></SPAN>Jon,</div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: arial; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> </div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: arial; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">That is correct...each of the scores for each judge represents how that judge performed the job (of judging) compared to the other judges. You can read the explenation of how the system works in the NSRCA website under the Judging section.</div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: arial; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> </div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: arial; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Scoring a 900 or higher is a big deal in this system. It means that these judges placed each of the pilots very close to where the pilots ended up PLUS scored each of the pilots with minimal deviation from the pilots average score, ie- the score the pilot received for his round. Often, a judge scores well in one of the two categories but very seldon does a judge score well in both. </div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: arial; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> </div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: arial; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">The program does not look at each individual maneuver score; it looks at the total raw score. Formulas could be created to look at each maneuver but we decided (the Judge Ranking team) not to do it that way. In our view it would have been unecessarily complex. I seriously doubt that a more sophisticated program would produce a more accurate result.</div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: arial; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> </div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: arial; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">The "throwaways" Ron is talking about are Judge scores that are not high enough to be counted in overall rankings. Only the best 8 scores over a span of 5 years I believe, count in ranking the Judges</div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: arial; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> </div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: arial; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">regards</div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: arial; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> </div>
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: arial; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">MattK</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Ron Van Putte <vanputte@cox.net><br>
To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><br>
Sent: Sat, Sep 18, 2010 9:13 am<br>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judge Rank, 2009 Masters Final<br>
<br>
<div style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fff; MARGIN: 0px; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, Sans-Serif; COLOR: #000; FONT-SIZE: 12px" id=AOLMsgPart_0_39e9d280-33a4-4c90-aefa-bb7eaeb326b0>The ranking system is not perfect. <br>
<br>
Sure we'd like a larger sample size, but I don't know anywhere that has more than five judges. <br>
<br>
Second, a judge's score is dependent on the other judges. If a judge does a good job in a group of good judges, his scores will be high. However, if a judge does just as well in a group of less qualified judges, his scores will be lower. That's why judges have "throwaways" in the overall judge rankings. <br>
<br>
Ron <br>
<br>
On Sep 18, 2010, at 9:01 AM, Jon Lowe wrote: <br>
<br>
> Thanks Ron. I guess the two columns are from the two rounds we > judged in 2009. I think the inconsistency shown is representative > of the conditions in which my group was judging. 20-25 mph winds, > colder than a .... And not to be disrespectful to the flyers that > day under very difficult conditions, but the flying was also all > over the map; I remember seeing some 8.5's or 9's, followed by a > series of 5's and 6's. Clearly shows the need for a larger sample > size, but I'm not sure we will get it, using only judging from Nats > finals. I did not judge Masters finals this year (was supposed to > do FAI, but got rained out). <br>
> <br>
> Jon Lowe <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> -----Original Message----- <br>
> From: Ron Van Putte <<A href="mailto:vanputte@cox.net">vanputte@cox.net</A>> <br>
> To: General pattern discussion <<A href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A>> <br>
> Sent: Sat, Sep 18, 2010 8:32 am <br>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judge Rank, 2009 Masters Final <br>
> <br>
> Perhaps it's time to reprint an explanation of the NSRCA judge > ranking system. Judges are ranked based on how they compared in > scoring pilots relative to the judging group they were in and in > their relative placing of all pilots, also compared to the judging > group they were in. A perfect score of 1000 means that a judge > agreed with the scores and placins of the judging group. <br>
> <br>
> Ron Van Putte <br>
> <br>
> On Sep 17, 2010, at 11:07 PM, Jon Lowe wrote: <br>
> <br>
> > I have no clue what is being presented here. What does this mean? <br>
> > <br>
> > Jon Lowe <br>
> > <br>
> > <br>
> > -----Original Message----- <br>
> > From: <A href="mailto:rcmaster199@aol.com">rcmaster199@aol.com</A> <br>
> > To: <A href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A> <br>
> > Sent: Fri, Sep 17, 2010 10:45 pm <br>
> > Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Judge Rank, 2009 Masters Final <br>
> > <br>
> > Judge Rankings from 2009 Masters Final. Belated information for > > inquiring minds; This will be on the NSRCA website at some point, > > as I complete the assessment: <br>
> > <br>
> > Judge: Scores <br>
> > R Lewis 879.0 875.2 <br>
> > G Miller 824.3 804.2 <br>
> > J Lowe 720.8 861.4 <br>
> > T Romano 778.9 946.0 <br>
> > M Hunt 757.1 769.8 <br>
> > B Clemmons 903.8 785.1 <br>
> > J Dunnaway 783.7 816.8 <br>
> > J Lechowski 787.3 843.1 <br>
> > RVP 877.2 781.3 <br>
> > T Terrenoiser 884.6 866.9 <br>
> > <br>
> > Note: First 5 judges judged rounds 1 and 2; the last 5, rounds 3 > and 4 <br>
> > <br>
> > Regards, <br>
> > <br>
> > MattK <br>
> > <br>
> > = <br>
> > _______________________________________________ NSRCA-discussion > > mailing list <A href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A> http://> > lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion <br>
> > _______________________________________________ <br>
> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list <br>
> > <A href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A> <br>
> > <A href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target=_blank>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A> <br>
> <br>
> _______________________________________________ <br>
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list <br>
> <A href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A> <br>
> <A href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target=_blank>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A> <br>
> _______________________________________________ <br>
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list <br>
> <A href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A> <br>
> <A href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target=_blank>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A> <br>
<br>
_______________________________________________ <br>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list <br>
<A href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A> <br>
<A href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target=_blank>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A> <br>
</div>