<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body><div>I don't believe the FAI philosophy has ever said a judge could not make partial point deductions, simply that rounding to the nearest whole new number should be done....and up in the case of a half number increment.</div><div><br></div><div>And FAI has always advocated a 10 is not a maneuver without flaws, it is simply a maneuver without flaws sufficient to downgrade to a 9.</div><div><br></div><div>Seems to me FAI is trying to shift the burden of rounding to the computer instead of the judge.</div><div><br></div><div>It would be interesting to see several existing data sets tallied with and without the rounding.</div><div><br></div><div id="composer_signature"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757">Regards,</div><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757"><br></div><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757">Dave Lockhart</div><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757">DaveL322@comcast.net</div><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757"><br></div><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757">Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note5.</div></div><div><br></div><div style="font-size:100%;color:#000000"><!-- originalMessage --><div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Scott Smith via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org> </div><div>Date: 8/1/16 3:42 PM (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: Stuart Chale <schale1@outlook.com>, General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org> </div><div>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FAI 1/2 points </div><div><br></div></div><div dir="ltr">I asked that same question and was told:<div><br><div><i>"<span style="font-size:12.8px">No particular reason was given for the rounding up... They preferred it versus rounding down.</span>"</i></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Stuart Chale via NSRCA-discussion <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Some ideas and changes are just plain stupid! There I said it :)<br>
<br>
I have always hated the fact that some judging criteria and downgrades<br>
were different in FAI and AMA. Makes judging which is a tough job to do<br>
right even tougher. You have to know 2 different sets of rules and in<br>
the long run only lowers the accuracy of judging, most likely more so<br>
for the FAI fliers. But that is another can of worms.<br>
<br>
I thought that allowing 1/2 points in FAI sounded like a good idea, we<br>
are used to it in the rest of the classes. And since the FAI pilots are<br>
in most part the better fliers they are more likely to make the 1/2<br>
point errors as compared to the greater inaccuracies usually seen in the<br>
lower classes.<br>
<br>
But wait an 8.5 becomes a 9, and a 9 is still a 9 ??????<br>
<br>
So just to prove how silly this idea can be I used Scott's scoring<br>
program and ran a fictitious contest with 2 flyers and 2 rounds. I used<br>
a couple of friends as contestants so to not offend anyone. I also had<br>
to use the masters sequence as an example, as the program automatically<br>
rounds up FAI scores.<br>
<br>
Hopefully the PDF files are attached.<br>
<br>
Each flyer received identical scores in each of their 2 flights. AR<br>
received all 7.5's except one maneuver which was an 8.5, and DL all 8's<br>
. In round 1 scores were not rounded up and in round 2 the scores were<br>
rounded up as they would automatically be done in FAI.<br>
<br>
Look at the files for AR round 1 and DL round 1. It would seem pretty<br>
obvious who should win that round and without rounding up AR gets a<br>
947.75 to DL's 1000.<br>
<br>
Note that every maneuver but one was judged higher for DL.<br>
<br>
Now look at AR round 2 and DL round 2 rounded up. The same exact judges<br>
scores with only 1 maneuver scored higher for AR, but due to the<br>
rounding up AR wins the round 1000 to 989.86.<br>
<br>
Now this is the extreme and unlikely to actually happen in a contest to<br>
this extent but just the fact that it works this way makes the whole<br>
idea of rounding up ridiculous.<br>
<br>
Is there really an argument that this is a good thing?<br>
<br>
Stuart C.<br>
<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" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div>
</body></html>