Tony Chavarria
Site Publisher
1222 posts
Mar 12, 2007
11:10 AM
|
Just want to compliment all you guys for a great thread! Thanks for having the gonads to discuss this stuff. Some real knowledge being shared people!
----------
FLY ON! Tony Chavarria
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
1060 posts
Mar 12, 2007
11:47 AM
|
Yes Tony I have really enjoyed this thread.I was hoping for some views from some of the other Judges that judge a lot.Like Knaylor and Firl and I think Urban judges a lot too.And any others that Judge.LOL. David
|
longarm
92 posts
Mar 12, 2007
3:26 PM
|
I had an interesting experiance with a kit last year. I had a good trigger bird who would set up and break and his set up cued the rest of the kit. I had more full kit breaks with that bird in there than I had ever seen from my loft ever !! I pull that bird out to see if it was him or the kit. What I got was a new trigger bird that never set up and would break regardless of the wind direction. This changed two things in my kit one I never agian had a full kit break because the other birds would be a half second behind him in the break but I did incress my breaks by 30% or better most days. I did not get to finish playing with this kit before lock down and of course I lost them late last year but prior to that I was torn as to whether I wanted to put the other bird back in a full kit break is magnificent and scores well but since I couldnt count on that I thought a bird that triggered that many breaks would do my points better. Any opinions? c.j.
|
Ballrollers
718 posts
Mar 12, 2007
4:15 PM
|
I've enjoyed it, too fellas. CJ, Clay did the same thing with his kit. The next time he flew it, we noticed the chemistry wasn't there. It looked like a different kit, completely. I asked if they were the same birds. He said that they were, minus one or two that hawks got, but he had removed the three birds that flew above the kit because he believed they were taking his kit up too high. The entire dynamics and chemistry of the kit changed. A few birds were pulled to breed and that fabulous performance will probably not be repeated by those particular birds again....That's rollers for ya, I guess....an ever changing ebb and flow of birds and their performances...
YITS,
Cliff
Last Edited by on Mar 12, 2007 4:23 PM
|
motherlodelofts
1554 posts
Mar 12, 2007
6:53 PM
|
Man you got that right Cliff , losses,stocking, any number of things throw you back.
When you stock you are pulling the cream , and yet the stock loft has to come first , which is something I have been focusing hard on for the last couple of years , it has hurt me but at the same time I can see that the pay off putting me much further ahead in the long run.
Scott
Last Edited by on Mar 12, 2007 6:54 PM
|
nicksiders
1470 posts
Mar 12, 2007
7:18 PM
|
The last few birds I pulled to stock from my kit boxes completely desolved the leadership in my kitbox; the trigger birds are gone. I have yet to see other remaining birds step into leadership rolls; this along with a disastorist overfly I am looking sorry.....just sorry. My 2007 birds are going to have a load to carry....a good part of that load is my reputation such as it is(LOL)
Nick
----------
Snicker Rollers
|
Dave Szab
72 posts
Mar 12, 2007
7:46 PM
|
Hey Scott,
Man, give me a warning before you blurt out something like: "Man you got that right Cliff", I just woke up on the floor, with the dog licking my face, from passing out after reading the beginning of your post. I thought I was out for an hour, but it was just my wife setting the clock ahead an hour, for the early daylight savings time this year, while I was on the floor. LOL. Is this what we can look forward to hearing from the new non-ball busting Scott? Please stop the insanity!!! LMAO.
Seriously though, I agree with you on hurting your kit by building your stock loft, becuase I have been doing the same the last couple years. There were 2 hens in particular, that I took out of the kit a year apart. Both were trigger birds, that I covet to breed out of, and as soon as I took each hen out of the kit they were in , the kits looked like totally different kits, frequency and teamwork went to hell.
Dave
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
1061 posts
Mar 13, 2007
4:07 AM
|
I was one that always asked why someone winning a big fly could not come back the next year with the same kit and win again.
Well after flying a couple competition flys I soon realized why.LOL.
You only need to remove a few of the best in the kit and you might as well start over building another kit.I think it was Scott that said the breeding Loft comes first.I had been flying a little reduced hen in what Comp flys I have flown.I kept saying I should pull her and put her in the breeding loft.But she was one I could depend on every day to put on a good showing even when the others were having a bad day.A couple weeks ago after a lockdown I had an overfly with this kit due to several hawk attacks.4 came back and I kept hoping all day that if I could just get her back I could stand the loss of the others a lot better.About an hour before dark they all came flying in to the kit box except one.She was with the ones returning.She also went straight to the Breeding Loft.I don't really need her at this time but I can't risk losing her in case I do.
I really need her in my comp kit to build around so now I am asking myself where I need her the most.LOL.
As this thread has shown you gamble and lose and realize the mistake or gamble and win and think we done the right thing.
Now to get back to the Depth of the roll.Scott I think you said that depth didn't mean anything to you.I know we talked about the multipliers before and we determined that the Depth and Quality multipliers make a big difference in weither you win or not.So I will ask you Judges to explain how these multipliers work and how you determine depth when scoring a 20 bird Kit.David
|
bman
254 posts
Mar 13, 2007
10:43 AM
|
Great question Dave!
I also would like to here a description on how the multipliers are awarded.What constitutes a 1.5 in depth and quality and so on.Best thread I have read in a year.
----------
Ron
|
knaylor
462 posts
Mar 13, 2007
8:06 PM
|
Guys, my views on this subject it that the kits that have seperation will allways stand out. I have seen both many times but I also have judged kits where the flyer will not get a turn when there are a few sloppy birds in the break and I cant count atleast five that were doing iyt right. Myself as a judge I will not guess. The one aspect that I am real picky about is timing. To me I dont want to see a difference in the start of the roll in the birds. If i can see a difference I wont count the later starting birds. Also when I judge frenquency will not play into the quality score I give the flyer. I have seen judges do that. I have judged plenty and have seen plenty of judges. To me I really think it is important to line the kits up properly. I really could care less about points. I do believe that the high scores does through some doubt into the mix. Personally I would rather win a fly with 60 points than 1600. Just my thoughts on this, Kevin
|
JMUrbon
234 posts
Mar 13, 2007
9:13 PM
|
To me in order to get in the 1.5 range you need to have the birds breaking in the 25 foot range consistantly. as for quality myself I look for the tight A style roll and that is as good as it comes ( IMHO ). You show me an entire kit that has that style and I will give you upwards of 1.7 or higher but I have not seen an entire kit that could do it consistantly. I also feel that sometimes birds that are too deep will end up hurting you if they cant hold it together past 20 feet. If they roll great for 20 then fall apart then the entire roll might as well not have happened. Joe
----------
J.M.Urbon Lofts
A Proven Family of Spinners
http://www.freewebs.com/jmurbonlofts/
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
1062 posts
Mar 14, 2007
5:26 AM
|
Joe.Thanks for responding but: You said: as for quality myself I look for the tight A style roll and that is as good as it comes ( IMHO ). You show me an entire kit that has that style and I will give you upwards of 1.7 or higher but I have not seen an entire kit that could do it consistantly.
Do you know what you just said? If the entire kit consistantly shows you an A style roll you would consider giving them a 1.7? My God what would it take to get a 2.0? And you wonder why some complain about your type of judging.I believe in being hard but I also believe in being realistic too.This is my Honest Opinion. David
|
bman
255 posts
Mar 14, 2007
6:55 AM
|
Joe & Kevin,
Thanks,if you'll bear with me a second.So you have a kit averaging 25' (1.5 D) and lets say better than just scoreable quality on avearge 1.5Q ?
Will one or two birds of lesser quality say just scoreable.
How big affect will that have on your scores.Or would you pull them and fly less than 20.
----------
Ron
|
longarm
93 posts
Mar 14, 2007
7:42 AM
|
David
I agree that a full A wing kit is not going to be seen often but also understand that a 2.0 multiplier would denote either a sloppy judge or a perfect kit. I have never seen a perfect kit !! c.j.
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
1063 posts
Mar 14, 2007
8:28 AM
|
C.J. I understand that but a 1.7 for a kit that does full turns everytime they break and top it off with being all A Style.Come on.Who's kiddin who. How many has seen a full kit of 20 rollers that are A Style?David
|
J_Star
818 posts
Mar 14, 2007
10:36 AM
|
Let me sum it up for David. If you have a name established in this sport, you will get 2.0, otherwise, settle with 1.7(lol).
Jay
|
W@yne
305 posts
Mar 14, 2007
10:44 AM
|
J star
Hope you are not suggesting some of the judges are corrupt over there and judge on names instead of on kits tut tut tut.(sucking air throug my teeth and shaking my head side to side)) Lol.
w@yne uk
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
1064 posts
Mar 14, 2007
11:48 AM
|
Jay.I would never expect a 2.0 but if a Judge was here for the WC and judged me and gave me a 1.3 for Depth and 1.2 for Quality I would expect him to tell me how he arrived at those numbers.Not that all my birds was'nt doing 25 foot everytime they broke to get a 1.5 or I had some H style rollers in the bunch along with a couple High X's and unless all 20 were doing A Style would I maybe get a 1.7 or higher.As I asked before if all 20 were A Style and only a 1.7 what type would it take to get to 2.0.
Maybe there will be some more realistic post from some of the other Judges.LOL. David
|
Ballrollers
719 posts
Mar 14, 2007
1:25 PM
|
I agree completely, David. If I have said it once, I have said it a thousand times. We need to set some standards for more consistant scoring. I, too, believe we should set our standards high, but let's be realistic! Let's base our system of scoring on reality! Joe's post is a perfect example. If 1.7 is a perfect A style performance, where the heck do we go from there! Like Jay said...I'm afraid it is a built-in fudge factor. But we have to also bear in mind that there are other quality factors besides wing position that come into play....straightness of the spin, smoothness of the spin, exit from the spin, etc. So all these would have to be perfect, as I see it, to get the 2.0. A-style rollers that weren't quite as smooth or blipped a little on exit could bring about a lesser score, David.
But if we define a perfect performance as an A-style spin, smooth, straight, and a clean exit in the direction of the flight, then let's have the courage to define it as such, and award it when we see it, without any fear of a kit scoring some points, or not gaining a reputation of being a tough judge for doing so. Judges who score that kind of performance with a 1.7 (and I'm not referring to you, Joe) are not doing the flyer or the sport any good. Look at the Olympics. They are not afraid to award a "10" when the performance is done right! Then we work backward from there so that performance scores can really mean something, and not be all over the place depending on the judge. I also recognize that the judge also must average the performance of all the birds in the kit,which really compounds the problem even more for a judge who is trying to do his best...On the other hand, I'm not talking about throwing points at crap performance just to be a nice guy, which I think Scott and some others are so adamant about. That does nobody any good either. As we have said before....throw out the highs and lows....give me that middle of the road judge every time!
YITS,
Cliff
Last Edited by on Mar 14, 2007 2:24 PM
|
dave
297 posts
Mar 14, 2007
3:26 PM
|
I don't believe Joe meant he would give 1.7 for a full turn of A style birds. I believe he meant if all were A style birds and when when they rolled correctly he would give 1.7 or higher. This could be 5 birds up to 20 birds. I would also like to add that 1.7 is pretty high up there already. Haven't seen a kit with that high of a quality and I don't think I will ever see a kit of 2.0 for quality.
|
George Ruiz
204 posts
Mar 14, 2007
3:47 PM
|
Dave And Cliff
If you think you can do a better job of judgeing
I invite you two to step up to the plate.
try it then you'lle be qualified to critisize someone else
that is asked to judge and sacrafice thier time and money to do so .
when I ask a someone to judge I am greatfull when they say yes considering all the sacrafices that come with the job.
The reason some folks told me no was that someone always complains about the score they get, so they dont want to hear whinnin.
without judges we got no competetion's just remember that.
George
Last Edited by on Mar 14, 2007 7:59 PM
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
1065 posts
Mar 14, 2007
3:53 PM
|
Dave.Here is what Joe said:
You show me an entire kit that has that style and I will give you upwards of 1.7 or higher but I have not seen an entire kit that could do it consistantly.
What I am saying if such a kit did exist the 1.7 should not even be in the equation.It would automatically be a 2.0.
So if you havn't seen many 1.7 quality kits how did you judge them. What are you looking for from 1.0 to 2.0? No one seems to want to explain how they score from 1.0 and up.
We know 10 foot is the least in depth so this would be 1.0.
In Quality an X Style would be a 1.0. Now what is going on from there?
Scott must be fishing.LOL. David
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
1066 posts
Mar 14, 2007
3:58 PM
|
George.No one is critizing anyone.What I am trying to learn is how they do it.If they judge it shouldn't be hard to explain how they judge.You can bet when a Judge walks in my yard and I pay 35.00 to be able to fly a kit of rollers then I am going to be asking questions on what he seen and how he scored them.I have not met a judge yet that hasn't explained exactly that of any kits I have flown for them.David
|
fhtfire
830 posts
Mar 14, 2007
4:07 PM
|
My question is why have a 2.0 if nobody could ever obtain it. They have a perfect 10 in gymnastics, Diving and so on....Do think that they ever said...nobody would get a perfect 10 on the high dive, or the ring or uneven bars...how about the floor exercise...NOBODY is perfect..LOL...but you have seen perfect 10's in sports...and it the routines were not flawless...they just earned a perfect mark.
I truly believe that there are some judges that would never give a 2.0 or even a 1.8 for that matter if the quality hit them right in the face....LOL!!
The whole thing about rules..is the word "intent" what was the intent of a 2.0 by the originators of the rule...A and H patters a majority of the time...or every single roll....or damn near every single roll with just a few hear and there that moved the wings so slightly..or wing switched one time...what was the intent of the rule when it was written.
I know the word "intent" is used a lot in our union contracts...when there is disagreement or a question on a word or sentence in a contract...it falls back to what was the "intent" when it was written...because three year after a contract is ratified...you can get 10 different perceptions on how a rule was written....so that is why there are ADEDM>>>>to certain "gray" areas with an example so the intent of the rule is explained...or notes taken at the session are used to determained what the intent is. The intent can change years later..LOL!! but it all falls back to what was the ORIGINAL INTENT WHEN THE RULE WAS WRITTEN>>>WHAT DICTATES A PERFECT 2.0
To be honest ...There is no such thing as a kit that will roll perfect every time...just like there is not a diver or gymnast that will be flawless....you could find a flaw in everything....it is a matter of common sense and intent.
We have a DMV instuctor that tests our new fire truck drivers..and says that nobody will get a 100% on his driving course..even if you are perfect..you can always find something wrong...which is true...but that is not the intent of the test....I am sure there is a second here or there that i may not look in my mirror..or not come to a perfect stop..etc.
I think that there needs to be a review of the "intent" of the 1-2 rule...what truly dictates a 2.0....if a couple birds wingswitch in the last couple of minutes of the fly from fatigue..but have done it in every way up to that point....will that make it a 1.9....how hard are we going to be with animals that in no way possible can be totally flawless..maybe one or two birds but not the whole kit.....is a 2.0 not obtainable...then say so..LOL!!
Just my two cents...
I am not by any means saying that judges should be loose..but they should be able to use common sense and realize a 2.0 is not a PERFECT kit but a kit that deserves a 2.0 with the way if performed overall.
Rock and ROLL
Paul
|
knaylor
463 posts
Mar 14, 2007
5:35 PM
|
WOW there are alot of things I totally disagree with in the last couple of posts. To me if a judge gives a higher score just because of who ownes the kit, that judge should never be judging anything!!! On the multipliers I dont ever see me giving out a 2.0... why to me a 2.0 would be the best there is and that it cant get any better. There isnt a higher scale. to give a 2.0 to a kit that doesnt deserve it would be wrong too. You give aq kit 2.0 and then the next house the birds are better then what do you do????? LOL run and hide???
Now on Rons question?? If I thought those two birds would hurt my team and my score then you bet I would pull them. Thanks, Kevin
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
1067 posts
Mar 14, 2007
5:38 PM
|
Now we are getting somewhere.LOL.Thanks Paul for a great post with questions many have but never get an answer.I am one that if I have a question I will ask it.Only way anyone will ever learn.If no one can explain how to score a 20 bird fly I see little sense in flying one.The little details could be the difference in winning a fly or losing it.David
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
1068 posts
Mar 14, 2007
5:45 PM
|
Kevin. If 5 birds roll at once they can be scored.Cut and dried.If David Strait has a kit of 20 birds in the air and they break twice a minute for 20 minutes and only 5 birds rolled each time then the raw score should be 200.Correct me if I am wrong.
Now the fly is over and the judge needs to add the multipliers. So is he going to give me depth on just the 5 birds that rolled 40 times or is he going to judge the whole kit?The whole kit never scored any points just the 5 that rolled.
Same with the quality multiplier. David
P.S. In answer to your question you give that man a 2.0 also.Not hard to figure out. 2.0 is as high as it goes.
Last Edited by on Mar 14, 2007 5:49 PM
|
Missouri-Flyer
353 posts
Mar 14, 2007
7:00 PM
|
I have been a participant in this thread by just reading..After reading Brian Mid.. statement, I had to put my 3 cents in..This is the type of person/judge that makes this sport great. Bluesman has asked several times how a judge scores, and most have beat around the bush in answering his questions...Brian did a wonderful job explaining how HE does it.As he stated, it takes a lot of time and energy, time spent away from family to judge, and for those that make the comments that they were unhappy with the judge chosen just goes to show that their birds weren't scored as they would have liked.I believe that MOST judges look out of different eyes, meaning that if there were 4 judges judging the same kit at the same time, there would be 4 different scores, and reasons why they scored how they did...That is what makes us individuals, and keeps us coming back....To all of those that have laid their self on the line by accepting the task of judging, I personally want to say Thank You!....Brian Mid.,Great explination....your friend, jerry
----------
Jerry
Home of "Whispering Wings Loft"
|
fhtfire
831 posts
Mar 14, 2007
7:48 PM
|
Brian...
EXCELLENT POST!!! One question I have and it is just a question...if a bird comes out backwards in the roll but drops 15'...shouldn't you still count that bird in the raw score...and just make a mental note and remember some come out backwards birds when you do the quality multiplier. I was under the assumption that to count the bird it has to roll a minimum of 10'..not tumble but roll and weather the bird wing switches in the roll, X or axle roll, turn the wrong way or not it gets the raw score because it met the 10'...I thought all the other "stuff" you would take under consideration for the depth and quality. I mean..if you have 8 birds break together....2 are fast and snap out...2 are a little sloppy..a couple of wing switches and 2 turn the wrong way and the last 2 kind of tail it and don't snap clean...but they all went about 15-18' or so.....I am under the assumption that you would still count 8 in the raw..but when it comes time for the Q points...that is were they will get a 1.0 or a 1.1 because the quality sucks.....does it say in the rules that they have to roll 10'....come out the right way.....to get scored...or does it say 10' and that is it...I really do not know...because I have never read the rules real close..LOL.....Let me know what your understanding is...I am asking because I really do not know....I thought that it did not matter what the bird did as long as it rolls 10'...the other issues is what give you the Multiplier scores.
So...I will also ask...how do you come up with the multipliers...or what ranges...
again Brian..take nothing what I said as an attack..you know me better then that...I am just asking...becuase I really do not know..LOL
rock and ROLL
Paul
|
JMUrbon
235 posts
Mar 14, 2007
7:54 PM
|
David I said 1.7 and up. If a kit hits the style I am looking for every break then yes they will get a 2.0 but I have yet to see that to date. YOU? Also Jay I dont judge a man I judge his birds and that is it. If you have not seen me judge then you really cant say that I would favor a guy because of a name.I judge the birds and nothing else and I really dont care if they are blue with giant crests. I only judge what I see them do in air. Joe
----------
J.M.Urbon Lofts
A Proven Family of Spinners
http://www.freewebs.com/jmurbonlofts/
|
fhtfire
832 posts
Mar 14, 2007
8:01 PM
|
Jay,
Joe judges the birds and not the person..if the kit deserves it...it will get the points.....Joe is a very good judge.
Hey Joe....Pulled that Black cock out..kit looks alot better with out him...LOL....The cock was a superstar about a month ago...now he sucks...he has 2 more months to the one year mark...he better hope it is just a phase...or I will have an extra perch in the B-team///LOL
rock and ROLL
Paul
Last Edited by on Mar 14, 2007 9:52 PM
|
Alohazona
254 posts
Mar 14, 2007
8:02 PM
|
I agree with you Jerry,Brian did come up with a good explanation on how he goes about judging...Aloha,Todd
|
JMUrbon
236 posts
Mar 14, 2007
8:05 PM
|
Thanks Paul, Hey I thought your kit look pretty darn good. Just my addition sucked that day. LOL. Should be a nice team come WC time. Joe
----------
J.M.Urbon Lofts
A Proven Family of Spinners
http://www.freewebs.com/jmurbonlofts/
|
JMUrbon
237 posts
Mar 14, 2007
8:24 PM
|
I will attempt to give you an idea on how I figure a birds depth. I use 2 methods. The first being a stop watch but if one is not available I figure that the avarage birds wingspan is approximately 23" and a kit is usually 10 - 14 birds accross which would figure out to approximately 20-28 feet accross not including the spaces between the birds. Now if a bird can't clear the kit it is too shallow otherwise as best as my eyes will allow me to I try to determine to the best of my ability how far they separated from the kit.There is no really definite answer as to how to determine the depth but rather just different ways we as judges percieve the depth. Joe Urbon
----------
J.M.Urbon Lofts
A Proven Family of Spinners
http://www.freewebs.com/jmurbonlofts/
|
knaylor
464 posts
Mar 14, 2007
8:30 PM
|
David, I only put the multipliers on the birds that score the raw. Thats all that counts.. So if you give both kits of different quality the same quality multiplier??
Paul, if a bird wing switches or comes out wrong I dont count them. On you 8 bird break i would not score that one. To me the bird has to do it right from start to finish. Kevin
|
motherlodelofts
1555 posts
Mar 14, 2007
9:38 PM
|
"And what gets me after all the time you take off to judge and spend away from the family you have people sitting on their duff making statements about being in a click and your score will show it. This stuff makes me sick, Last fall alone I lost more than what most people make in two month to judge birds. Spending 2 to 3 weeks away from home getting little sleep and then to come home and read stuff like this. "
Well aint that the world of judging Brian , lets not forget getting passed on down the line like a cheap woman LOL.
On this 2.0 thing , imagine a bird that flawlessly wraps it up like a hard ball, snaps out clean as a whistle.
Ok lets call that a 2.0 , in order for that bird to remain a 2.0 is to do it eactly the same as that each time, it goes for the entire time the kit is on the clock.
Pretty rare for any bird, now lets put a team of 15 - 20 in the mix, that means every bird must hold the same qaulity as that bird each and every time they go, pretty doubtful, and I will venture to say impossible.
Multipliers are done on an average of every bird scored within a break through out the fly, not a just handful of exceptional birds , even if every bird within the team is exceptional , the odds of everyone of them holding it in every break during the whole fly is doubtful to say the least.
And the same hold with depth, the multipliers are averaged of all birds scored through the entire fly.
Scott
Last Edited by on Mar 15, 2007 12:12 AM
|
motherlodelofts
1556 posts
Mar 14, 2007
9:51 PM
|
" One question I have and it is just a question...if a bird comes out backwards in the roll but drops 15'...shouldn't you still count that bird in the raw score...and just make a mental note and remember some come out backwards birds when you do the quality multiplier. I was under the assumption that to count the bird it has to roll a minimum of 10'..not tumble but roll and weather the bird wing switches in the roll, X or axle roll, turn the wrong way or not it gets the raw score because it met the 10'..."
HELL NO , not in my world , and the rules say nothing about having these score culls , plus the ten ft is "suggested", birds that consistantly come out wrong , axel rollers, wingswitcher are culls , why would you score culls ?
It is a crime when such birds beat out a kit of birds doing it right ,and with poor judges it can and will happen.
I don't care if the kit that did it right only had one 5 bird break.
Just so that there is no confusion, even good birds can roll like culls if out of condition,and also youngbirds can get a little funky, but that doesn't mean that they should be scored.
Paul , we all breed birds like you described , but they never ever go in the A team, even if it is a loose judge that judges by no standard that is coming through.
Such birds are culled , I won't even give such birds away.
Scott
Last Edited by on Mar 15, 2007 12:16 AM
|
fhtfire
833 posts
Mar 14, 2007
9:52 PM
|
Thanks Joe...for the info and the compliment...I fly at 8am this Sunday if you can make it.
Kevin and Scott...thanks for the input....makes sense to me....
rock and ROLL
Paul
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
1069 posts
Mar 15, 2007
3:55 AM
|
Man some good stuff here.Starting to grasp things a little.LOL.
Joe. I think I know what you are meaning more than what you said.One more question before we move on.You said that you only score the birds that made it in the raw score for quality and depth.
O.K. If a kit only had one break of 5 birds the entire fly and all 5 birds done a 25 foot flawless roll and were A Style what would there Quality and Depth Multipliers be and what would be the score for that kit in the fly?
Scott and others.Please explain how you rate a roller from 1.0 to 2.0.
Brian Middaugh.Man you know we love you.You still have us talking about when you judged our region last Fall.I wish I could have traveled to the East and watched you score the 20 bird kits.I wouldn't be asking all these questions now. LOL.
You have the fellows in my local area all running around with Stop Watches.If every judge was on the same page as you in judging I don't see how anyone could complain.You taught me a lot with the 11 bird kits.
Yes I would appreciate you posting how you do the depth and quality multipliers. David
|
J_Star
820 posts
Mar 15, 2007
5:08 AM
|
Joe,
No offence. Nothing was intended but to spark a conversation back between the participants. I know my comment was provocative but got the job done by stimulating the performance of the topic. Thanks.
Jay
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
1070 posts
Mar 15, 2007
5:15 AM
|
Jay. I don't agree with your tactic.There is no need to take a cheap shot at anyone just to get things going.I think everyone is doing there best to participate without the negative stuff. My opinion,David
|
J_Star
821 posts
Mar 15, 2007
5:54 AM
|
I don't agree with you David. I didn't take a cheap shot at anybody. Never used a name or pointed at anybody. Just a remark about the 2.0 vs 1.7. It is a cheap shot from you to get a browny points(lol).
Besids, remember couple years back, somebody with a well known name achieved over 2000 points while everybody under the sun was hovering around 500 points!!! How do you explain that?
Jay
Last Edited by on Mar 15, 2007 5:59 AM
|
Bluesman
Pigeon Fancier
1071 posts
Mar 15, 2007
7:20 AM
|
Jay. Yes I remember a couple years back.So you did have a motive when you made the post.It was a cheap shot at the Judges.Weither you mentioned anybody's name or not.
Trying to get Browny points.From who? I say what I have to say to whoever I have to say it to.
You are a moderator on this board and I think you ought to act like one.
If it wasn't a cheap shot then you shouldn't have posted it to get some reaction from the other posters.
Do you even fly in Competition? David
|
Ballrollers
721 posts
Mar 15, 2007
7:51 AM
|
Paul, Scott, David, good posts with good information and good opinions expressed. Like Tony said, I appreciate your willingness to ask the difficult questions (for some) and attempt to answer them (for others). George...c'mon man...you know this is not a personal criticism of judges! Don't go wearin' your feelings out on your shirtsleeve on us! Without these men (judges)who are willing to step up and take it on, we would have no competitions. And their sacrifice of personal resources is a most honorable committment that they make. But, if we are going to continue to improve THE SYSTEM, then we have to be willing to ask diffcult questions and get answers to them, which we are doing on this thread.
Brian M. , everytime you post I gain a little more respect for you, buddy. Like Jerry said, confidence in what you do and why you do it; and not afraid to disucss it without the need to rain on somebody else's parade! Guys like you are the backbone of our competitions.
This discussion goes to the very heart of my agenda, which I freely admit to. There is no reason that a competitior like Paul, at his level of experience, should have any question at this point, whether a bird that exits a roll opposite his direction of flight, is scoreable. Clearer definitions of our standards for scoreable performance are essential!!! And I submit that there are dozens of other gray areas that are currently left up to the discretion of the individual judge. THAT'S what breeds much of the whining and complaining from some of the flyers and competitors; the not-knowing; the not-understanding; and the inconsistency!
YITS,
Cliff
Last Edited by on Mar 15, 2007 8:16 AM
|
tapp
206 posts
Mar 15, 2007
7:51 AM
|
This has been a great topic. Good post all. My hats off to all the Judges that posted. And all Judges that keep Judging with all the criticism they take. Think how thick there skin must be. Armor piercing proof!
----------
Tapp
|
bman
256 posts
Mar 15, 2007
7:54 AM
|
Kevin,Brian,Scott,Joe
I have yet to fly comp. but hopefully soon
Could you describe what it takes to get,
1.0 in Q&D
1.5 in Q&D
2.0 in Q&D
Example; 10ft clean high x........something like that?
I realize nothing is written in stone but basic idea of what to look for as a "rookie"
Thanks
Thanks this thread has been very helpfull.
Brian Middaugh;Flew three days straight in the afternoon
no preds.Starting to look up.
----------
Ron
|
motherlodelofts
1558 posts
Mar 15, 2007
8:20 AM
|
Alright this is my min for 1.0
The bird must roll at least 10ft with low X wing with no glitching or wingswitching, and must roll just fast enough for the revolutions not to be counted with the naked eye ,and the bird must come out the right direction and faily clean, win.
But remember we are talking about a team , some will go min and some much better , so it is an over all average. Plus you can't get exact with it as it is something that is in motion , so you work on doing the best you can, and in doing such you will move the cleaner kits forward of the one's that weren't (qaulity wise).
The qaulity multipliers should only be used on what was scored , but the overall impression of the entire kit will come into play, just human nature.
As for the upper end qaulifiers , the better the qaulity looks over all the higher the muliplier , the highest I have given is a 1.6, and it was a kit that did only one 6 bird break the entire fly.
Scott
Last Edited by on Mar 15, 2007 8:20 AM
|
motherlodelofts
1559 posts
Mar 15, 2007
8:28 AM
|
Jay , when it come's to the major flys including the regionals for such , I have seen nothing but integrity.
Most judges take the job very very serious, I know I do and personalities never ever play in, when I am honed in on the kit , there is nothing else but me and that kit , and I mean nothing.
Now granted some judges aren't very good, but for the vast majority I can assure you that they are doing the best that they know how.
And if they aren't very good, it isn't thier fault as it was the region that asked them in , and it is thier job to do thier home work on who they are asking.
Now some local flys can get funny , and I have seen it here , panel judging pretty much takes care of that.
Scott
|
J_Star
822 posts
Mar 15, 2007
8:48 AM
|
Dave,
I really don’t want to get into a pissing match with you but whether I fly in competition or not is none of your concern. I am as a moderator not jut to stop people complaining and getting into scuffle because their point of view is not accepted, but also to make sure a good post like this not falter but continues. Whatever method I use is not for you to judge. If anybody should take an offence to my post it is Joe and I explained it to him. So stop your whining and move on.
If you make the money that I make at my full time consulting job and working 65+ hrs a week, then competition will take a back seat for now until there is such a time for it.
Calling a cheap shot at the judges, I stand up and tell a judge that is not worth judging if he is biased toward his friends or a certain people. Don't you guys make this entire claim about the scoring crap and asking why judges do this and that and the end you salute the judges for their time and effort just to make it sound that you support them. To me, this is called being hypocrite. Then accept what they give you and move on. Don't question their scoring practices. If a judge uses his scoring practice across the board and no matter how bad, then it is acceptable because no few groups are selected to be in favor. The bottom line, what is fair is fair.
There are some of my friends here on the forums who are judges and each one has his own method of judging. All are good but why there are no standard or guide lines of how the judge should judge to eliminate all the whining?
Jay
|
motherlodelofts
1561 posts
Mar 15, 2007
9:09 AM
|
Actually Jay , you are way off base and until you have some time in the trenches ,your opinions are baseless and don't mean sqaut.
As for not flying , excuses and nothing more , most of us work our asses off, we just do what we can.
Scott
Last Edited by on Mar 15, 2007 9:35 AM
|