[NSRCA-dist8] Contest Scores

[Patrick Harris]

"Judging is harder than flying!"

You are right about that.



On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 9:27 AM, James Hiller <jnhiller at earthlink.net>
wrote:

> Yes I'm here. Nice discussion. I can't add much.
>
> I was going to comment on the implementation of normalized scoring this
> morning but the discussion has moved on.
>
>
>
> Being guilty of both hiding and missing zeros I totally understand the
> concern.
>
> Judging the complex compound maneuvers flown in the upper classes are
> becoming more difficult and more than familiarity is needed to correctly
> identify roll reversals and upright and inverted flight. One almost has to
> fly the sequence to readily identify these relatively simple defects
> calling for a zero, that is, if you see it and are paying close enough
> attention to actually identify it in real time.
>
> Many times I ask myself "did I really see what I thought I saw" or "was it
> really a reversal - was it suppose to be" or "was there a hesitation" and
> on top of that there's a list of defects with mandatory zeros that need to
> be remembered and applied".
>
> In most cases the pilot receives the benefit of doubt and a score is
> awarded - no instant replay.
>
>
>
> Judging is harder than flying!
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* NSRCA-dist8 [mailto:nsrca-dist8-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Patrick Harris via NSRCA-dist8
> *Sent:* Monday, June 29, 2015 8:33 AM
>
> *To:* Gordon Anderson
> *Cc:* AK, ID, MT, OR, WA, WY
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-dist8] Contest Scores
>
>
>
> Good idea. Alan I agree that it's really hard to pick that stuff up, but
> in the case I am addressing, the error was so obvious it should have been a
> zero...no questions asked. Just looking over the sequence before the flight
> will certainly help. We all have down time at a contest and it doesn't take
> a lot to stand behind the judges and watch other sequences a time or two.
> We owe it to the pilots we are judging. In the end we are still just flying
> toy airplanes and it should be about fun.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Gordon Anderson <gaa at owt.com> wrote:
>
> One thing that judes could do is use Peter Vogel’s calling smart phone
> application. If you used this and headphones then you could have it call
> each maneuver for you without bothering anyone else. Most everyone has a
> smart phone so this is a good option plus Peter gives all the funds to the
> US worlds team. I have this app on my phone and it works great.
>
>
>
> —Gordon
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 29, 2015, at 5:35 AM, alan wellentin via NSRCA-dist8 <
> nsrca-dist8 at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> I disagree, I don't believe a cursory overview would have eliminated the
> error, it might have, but I'm not convinced.  It's too difficult to
> remember 3/4 roll or 1/4 roll, push or pull, inverted or upright.  If a
> judge is looking at more than one sequence, especially if it's masters and
> FAI, remembering which maneuver came in and what is should be is not very
> likely.  I've spent a bit of time in the chair this year and decided that a
> scribe is almost mandatory for me, and asking the caller to sound off like
> he has a pair, helps.  At the end of the day, it comes down to imperfect
> humans trying to impartially judge a multi-segment maneuver that takes just
> a couple of seconds to complete and then on to the next maneuver.  With
> that in mind, I'm really loving the slower pace of play that todays models
> exhibit compared to some of the early turn-around models.
>
> Alan
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sunday, June 28, 2015 10:01 PM, Patrick Harris via NSRCA-dist8 <
> nsrca-dist8 at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> I agree....that's why I didn't point out who or when it was. In this
> particular case, the error was so blatant, if the judges had a cursory
> overview of the schedule, they would have seen it easily.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 9:50 PM, trexlesh at msn.com <trexlesh at msn.com>
> wrote:
>
> I feel "touched"....  :-)
>
>
>
> Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Tablet
>
>
>
> ------ Original message------
>
> *From: *Patrick Harris
>
> *Date: *Sun, Jun 28, 2015 9:40 PM
>
> *To: *Gordon Anderson;
>
> *Cc: *R LESHER;AK, ID, MT, OR, WA, WY;
>
> *Subject:*Re: [NSRCA-dist8] Contest Scores
>
>
>
> Speaking of scores....This is a bit of a touchy subject, but I think it
> needs to be voiced. I really feel it is vitally important we be familiar
> with the sequences we are judging. Here is an example that I was able to
> garner from the results Gordon posted.
>
>
>
> At one of our contest, I witnessed a maneuver (I was not judging) that was
> flown totally wrong that it should have been a no question zero, yet the
> pilot received a 7 and an 8 from the judges.I won't name the pilot or the
> contest, but had the judges been familiar with the sequence, they would
> have known it immediately. It wasn't something like an a judgment call on a
> snap or a spin.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 9:29 PM, Patrick Harris <harris7148 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Gordon,
>
>
>
> No problem  I agree, I stayed inside and cut and buffed wings and stabs.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Gordon Anderson <gaa at owt.com> wrote:
>
> Sorry I was so far behind! I will try to keep up with things the rest of
> the season…. it was too hot here today to anything outside so it was a good
> day to spend behind the keyboard!
>
>
>
> —Gordon
>
>
>
> On Jun 28, 2015, at 9:22 PM, Patrick Harris <harris7148 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Gordon,
>
>
>
> Thanks for getting the results up and running!
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 9:13 PM, trexlesh at msn.com <
> nsrca-dist8 at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
>
> Looking at the raw scores can tell you where you are lacking or winning in
> comparing pilot scores.  To me, the best thing about Gordon's scoring
> sheets is the running summary of the average scores and points cost of
> individual maneuvers.  That will instantly tell me where I need to improve.
>
>
> Comparing normalized scores between you and the other pilots is a quick
> way to see if you are gaining or not, but you have to see where in the
> sequence that is happening.  The only way to do that is to see the other
> pilot raw scores in each maneuver.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Tablet
>
>
>
> ------ Original message------
>
> *From: *Karl Watts via NSRCA-dist8
>
> *Date: *Sun, Jun 28, 2015 6:46 PM
>
> *To: *Gordon Anderson;
>
> *Cc: *AK, ID, MT, OR, WA, WY;
>
> *Subject:*Re: [NSRCA-dist8] Contest Scores
>
>
>
> Oh, I did not know I could see raw scores.  This helps as I try to compare
> my flights to others from another contest.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
> On Jun 28, 2015, at 6:22 PM, Gordon Anderson <gaa at owt.com> wrote:
>
> Karl,
>
>
>
> It is kind of hard to do, you can see all the scores on the web site even
> each pilot's raw scores. I think the best comparison would be the
> normalized scores but this is not perfect. There has been a lot of debate
> over normalization. You can at least get a pretty good idea.
>
>
>
> You can learn a lot looking at the scores and seeing how consistent the
> pilots are etc. There is a lot to be said for consistency.
>
>
>
> --Gordon
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 28, 2015, at 5:15 PM, Karl Watts <karlwatt at sarmc.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> Yes, this makes sense.  So I really cannot compare my scores in Redmond
> contest to how pilots did in the Boise contest?
>
>
>
> Karl
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
> On Jun 28, 2015, at 6:11 PM, Gordon Anderson <gaa at owt.com> wrote:
>
> Ok the web site 2015 contest results are posted. I still have to update
> the district champ rules as per the new rules and post the current results.
> I will do this later this week I hope. Please check out the site and make
> sure I have this correct, let me know if you find any errors.
>
>
>
> Karl,
>
>
>
> Please reference this link from Redmond:
> http://www.nsrca.us/contest_results/2015/D8/Redmond/contestResults.XML
>
> It shows the standings and has detail you don't see on your score sheets.
> So here is how the scoring works:
>
> 1.) We generally fly 6 rounds and you take your top 4 rounds and sum them
> to get your final score.
>
> 2.) Your score sheets show your raw scores that have had the Kfactors
> applies.
>
> 3.) Your raw scores are normalized to the highest scoring pilot in each
> round. The highest scoring pilots gets 1000 points and all the other pilots
> are normalized to this highest score. So if you received a raw score that
> was 90% of the highest scoring pilot you would get 900 points.
>
> 4.) Your four highest rounds are then summed to get your final score. If
> you look at the link you will see lines through your rounds that were
> thrown out.
>
> 5.) The highest possible total score is 4000 if you win 4 rounds.
>
>
>
> I hope this makes sense??
>
>
>
> --Gordon
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 28, 2015, at 4:47 PM, Patrick Harris <harris7148 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Outstanding...thank you.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Gordon Anderson <gaa at owt.com> wrote:
>
> i will as soon as I finish posted all the web updates, should finish in 10
> to 15 mins....
>
>
>
> --g
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 28, 2015, at 4:45 PM, Patrick Harris via NSRCA-dist8 <
> nsrca-dist8 at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> Gordon or Rex....you want to explain "Normalization"?
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Karl Watts <karlwatt at sarmc.org> wrote:
>
> So what is the connection between the scores I get handed to me after each
> round and the ones that determine the places?
>
> Karl
>
> Confidentiality Notice:
> This e-mail, including any attachments is the property of Trinity Health
> and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). It may
> contain information that is privileged and confidential.  Any unauthorized
> review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please delete this message, and reply to the sender
> regarding the error in a separate email.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-dist8 mailing list
> NSRCA-dist8 at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist8
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Notice:
> This e-mail, including any attachments is the property of Trinity Health
> and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). It may
> contain information that is privileged and confidential.  Any unauthorized
> review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please delete this message, and reply to the sender
> regarding the error in a separate email.
>
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Notice:
> This e-mail, including any attachments is the property of Trinity Health
> and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). It may
> contain information that is privileged and confidential.  Any unauthorized
> review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please delete this message, and reply to the sender
> regarding the error in a separate email.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-dist8 mailing list
> NSRCA-dist8 at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist8
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-dist8 mailing list
> NSRCA-dist8 at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist8
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-dist8 mailing list
> NSRCA-dist8 at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist8
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-dist8/attachments/20150629/1b0c20c4/attachment-0001.html>