ACRO E-mail Archive Thread: [Acro] Comparing Judge's Performance (was Cont ...
[International Aerobatic Club] [Communications] [Aerobatics Images]
Disclaimer: These aerobatics pages are developed by individual IAC members and do not represent official IAC policy or opinion.
Thread: [Acro] Comparing Judge's Performance (was Cont ...
Message: [Acro] Comparing Judge's Performance (was Contest Scoring Program)
Follow-Up To: ACRO Email list (for List Members only)
From: Larry Lowe <webmaster at airspacemag.com>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 18:58:13 UTC
jeffery at texas.net wrote: > > So, what would it take to get the BOD to formally look into the issue of > including JPF as a routine report for all contests? > > > Don and Ben, > > Look at this JPF thing in another light..If the JPF's were posted each > > flight/contest the host chapter could give 1st, 2nd and 3rd place trophies > > to the 3 top judges. To go a little farther, all the pilots see their annual > > National standing in SA each year..With JPF the same could be done for the > > judges....BUT..I personally do not see any of this happening. It would not > > be politically correct. 'Political correctness' (whatever that is) aside, it seems to me that one would want to be very careful about the use and distribution of JPF ratings. On one hand, if the Chief Judge were to sit down, privately, with each judge after the contest is over and review that judge's JPF rating with a goal to make that individual judge aware of the kinds of trends and errors are showing up in his/her scoring, then you MIGHT get some slow movement towards consistency of application of criteria and a greater consistency of rank order of the pilots in the contest--which, after all, is the whole point. On the other, even if you go only so far as to post the JPF's on the bulletin board after the contest, never mind in SA or on the web for the whole community to see, you will engender competition among the judges for the best JPF. Which sounds vaguely wonderful until you realize that once that competition gets going, judges will start to adjust their scores to get the best JPF rating--not to sort out the pilots in rank order. Soon they will all be entering 7.5's for every pilot for every figure and getting uniformly high JPF ratings. And we'll have no idea whatsoever who the best aerobatic pilot was because the event has been turned into a judging contest. Evaluation of Judges based on each judge's rank order of the pilots compared to the final results can help each judge figure out for themselves how they might improve their pilot comparison, even if they tend to score all the pilots say, lower than their fellow judges. A full-tilt Judge's contest, on the other hand, will distort the entire process into a means of sorting out which judge can best manipulate the TBL and JPF algorithm. Which does not translate into sorting out the best aerobatic pilot. I cannot speak to the political correctness of turning competition aerobatics into a judges contest. But doing so seems to me to be operationally the antithesis of the point of the sport. The kinds of personalities involved in aerobatics are by nature competitive. Toss out an idea on the mailing list and soon it becomes an 'idea contest' between the proponents and the detractors, with the goal to win the contest of having the idea turned into rule. Vote to maintain the status quo and you are suddenly in a 'political correctness' contest whether you like it or not. It's worth remembering what competition we are trying to foster and to measure and which sub-competitions are counterproductive to that goal. My two cents... Larry Lowe