ezeedad
506 posts
May 10, 2008
3:51 PM
|
I am writing this... There are quite a few opinionated and knowledgeable people on this site... Anyone care to voice an opinion?
Current Judging Systems Need Improvement
Competition within a breed should be designed to determine the best of that breed. The best of the breed is defined by that breed’s standard.
The standard of the Birmingham roller is the “bird, which turns over backwards with inconceivable rapidity through a considerable distance like a spinning ball.” The defining characteristics of this breed, therefore, are speed and depth of performance.
Most knowledgeable breeders of the Birmingham Roller would also agree, I believe, that the style and frequency of these birds is nearly, if not just as important as are speed and depth. But current kit competitions emphasize simultaneous performance above all other characteristics.
Kit competition of the Birmingham Roller dominates the current flying activities of most clubs today. However, the scoring systems of practically all kit competitions reward the most points for the large breaks. A full turn is the ultimate of this type of competition, and is scored very heavily. Consideration for style and depth are given in the form of multipliers, but this does little to offset the emphasis on simultaneous performance rather than the defining characteristics of the breed.
To correct this, the judging systems should be designed to give speed, depth and style at least an equal importance as they do simultaneous performance.
|
Scott
511 posts
May 10, 2008
6:23 PM
|
Good topic Paul , I will give you my opinion in upper case point by point.
Current Judging Systems Need Improvement
Competition within a breed should be designed to determine the best of that breed. The best of the breed is defined by that breed’s standard.
(PAUL, I AGREE WITH THIS 100 0/0)
The standard of the Birmingham roller is the “bird, which turns over backwards with inconceivable rapidity through a considerable distance like a spinning ball.” The defining characteristics of this breed, therefore, are speed and depth of performance.
(I AGREE WITH THIS A 100 0/0 ALSO ALTHOUGH THERE ARE ALSO DEFINING DETAILS TO QUALITY SUCH AS BALANCE, BIRDS THAT WINGSWITCH, DON'T COME OUT OF THE ROLL CLEANLY ECT.)
Most knowledgeable breeders of the Birmingham Roller would also agree, I believe, that the style and frequency of these birds is nearly, if not just as important as are speed and depth.
(WE ARE CLOSE ON THIS ON ALTHOUGH I PUT STYLE ABOVE JUST SPEED,THAT IS AS LONG AS THEY AREN'T DOGS)
But current kit competitions emphasize simultaneous performance above all other characteristics.
(THE QUALTY SHOULD COME FIRST AND FOREMOST IN ORDER FOR SIMULTANEOS TO COUNT,NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND,IT IS LIKE DEPTH,DEPTH IS MEANINGLESS IF THE QUALITY ISN'T THERE)
Kit competition of the Birmingham Roller dominates the current flying activities of most clubs today. However, the scoring systems of practically all kit competitions reward the most points for the large breaks.
(PAUL THIS IS WHERE I GET CONFUSED, THE HIGHEST QUALITY BIRDS THAT I SEE HERE OR ANY WHERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN IN KITS THAT WERE SPOT ON SIMULTANIOUS, SUCH BIRDS ARE FAR MORE APT TO FULLY COMMIT TO THE ROLL,BIRDS NOT IN SINC TEND TO RESIST AND NOT FULLY COMMIT, IT ISTHE NATURE OF THE BREED)
A full turn is the ultimate of this type of competition, and is scored very heavily. Consideration for style and depth are given in the form of multipliers, but this does little to offset the emphasis on simultaneous performance rather than the defining characteristics of the breed.
( ONLY IF THE JUDGE IS WEAK,FIND A BETTER JUDGE)
To correct this, the judging systems should be designed to give speed, depth and style at least an equal importance as they do simultaneous performance.
(I ALREADY ANSWERED THIS ABOVE, AGAIN I AM CONFUSED AS I FIND MOST JUDGES PAY LITTLE OR SO ATTENTION TO SIMULTANEOS BREAKS,AT LEAST IN RECENT YEARS,IF THEY DID YOU WOULD SEE MUCH LOWER SCORES , PUAL , THE PROBLEM ISN'T THE RULES, IT IS THE JUDGING,IF IT ISN'T REPRESENTIVE OF THE BREED IT SHOULDN'T BE SCORED,AND LIKE I STATED EARLIER THE HIGHEST "CONSISTANT" QUALITY IS ALWAYS IN SIMULTANEOUS BREAKS,THAT IS AS LONG AS THE BIRDS IN THE KIT HAVE THE GOODS )
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
Last Edited by on May 10, 2008 6:26 PM
|
smoke747
1081 posts
May 10, 2008
7:51 PM
|
Scott, good post.
Paul, not all judges score birds that don't perform correctly. Some judges do score anything that moves. If the birds break and 10 birds go initially, 1 rolls 8', 2roll 20'but sloppy, and 7 roll correctly with good style and speed for about 25',you only have a 7bird break with about a 1.5 for Q x 1.4 for D. Steve Russell and I had this discussion earlier today. I specificly said,"this is what gives kit competition a bad name, Gomez always says this".
smoke747----------
Keith London
ICRC
|
katyroller
170 posts
May 10, 2008
9:31 PM
|
The problem I have with the current system is that it leaves too much room for personal interpretation as to what to score. Trying to score a hot 20 bird kit is a royal pain in the ass! I like the 3 judge format for the simple fact that if all 3 judges are scoring a kit about the same you can safely say the kit earned the final score. If there is a major difference in the scoring you tend to point out who or what the problem is.
|
warpspeed
36 posts
May 10, 2008
9:38 PM
|
great answers scott i agree 100 % could not have been put any better
abel
|
Scott
516 posts
May 10, 2008
9:38 PM
|
Kat, if it is a good team they are easy to judge , as for interpitation, a good bird is universal , some just have low standards while others have high standards.
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
|
Scott
520 posts
May 10, 2008
10:14 PM
|
Honestly kat I'm not sure what the answer is, one well known in the sport claims that educating the flyers is the key,which is a good point.
Too many just want points and too many new guys only know that kind of judging , when a good judge blows through so many scream "cheated".
As for panel judging, I haver had a problem with it and it brings balance it at least two are decent judges,even one decent judge helps if it is averaged.
Personaly I think a suggested standard would help, I think the old 11 bird standard is a great start, problem is many won't truely like being scored by a standard that represents the breed.
We have always been pretty picky about our judges, or at least in my old region,our regional scores always reflected such.
If I am flying a good team the last thing I want to see is a loose judge, with such judges it really boils down to what they "won't" score rather than what they will score.
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
|
ezeedad
508 posts
May 11, 2008
10:08 AM
|
Scott, Keith...
I think a lot would be solved if there were big multipliers for speed, style and depth... like up to 5 points...maybe even more..
Now the judges have to defend the standards of "decency" by not scoring the poor performing birds, and the flyer of these birds feels like he's getting a bad deal, but if there were larger multipliers, they could still score, but their score would be very low. But the fast, stylish, deep birds would score a lot higher..and the qualities of the breed would be rewarded.
I know we have good judges.. I should have made a better title for this. A good judge can still make the current system work by simply not scoring the substandard performers, but if there was a heavier emphasis on speed, style and depth through the scoring system a less experienced judge wouldn't affect to outcome as much by calling the heavily weighted big breaks.
Paul G
Last Edited by on May 11, 2008 10:19 AM
|
Scott
528 posts
May 11, 2008
10:48 AM
|
Paul, if substandard birds weren't scored it would be a non issue and the quality multipler would and does work extreamly well,honestly I think the current rules are about as good as it gets when used properly by a good judge.
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
Last Edited by on May 11, 2008 10:50 AM
|
katyroller
174 posts
May 11, 2008
12:09 PM
|
I agree 100% with the idea of better educated fliers. I have also seen and don't agree with fliers and spectators cowding around a judge during a fly. I think once the birds are released and called in, the flier should have no more conversation with the judge unless asked a question by the judge. This would eliminate any actual or perceived pressure on a judge to inflate any scores.
|
ezeedad
509 posts
May 11, 2008
12:15 PM
|
Scott,
It suppose if all judges judged the way you do, this would be a non-issue. But unfortunately they all don't judge the same. If the system was to bring more of a focus on quality, less discriminating judges would be made to.
Keep up the good work.
Paul G
|
Scott
533 posts
May 11, 2008
10:40 PM
|
Many don't like by judging Paul,that is a fact.
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
|
Scott
534 posts
May 11, 2008
10:49 PM
|
Kate, it depends on the judge, I have done enough of it where there the peanut gallery has no effect on me what so-ever,some guys can be dictated if unsure of themselfs at judging no doubt though.
I knew one guy that liked to play games and "test" judges by sayng things like "nice" after a questionable break just to see if the pencil would move.
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
|
JMUrbon
441 posts
May 12, 2008
3:16 PM
|
Jugding is subjective and will never be precise because we are asking for a mans OPINION. if we were asking somebody to judge by a written set of standaerds and not allowing him the ability to judge by his standard than it would be very difficult to fill the judges seat. I believe that there are alot ov elevated scores due to inconsistancies and having been an advocate for the panel system for a long time I see the only down side is that it is difficult enough to get one judge let alone 3. All eyes see things differently and if you dont believe that then just give the panel a try at one of your local club flies. Have all of the fliers judge and you will no doubt see a rediculous difference. Especially if you place them were they cant see if somebody else scored a break. seen it and done it and it is scary. The system works as it is because it is the really only logical way. Joe
----------
J.M.Urbon Lofts
A Proven Family of Spinners
http://www.freewebs.com/jmurbonlofts/
|
ezeedad
511 posts
May 12, 2008
4:17 PM
|
Scott,
I hear that same thing from the judges who care about quality rollers.... that there aren't many happy campers after they have judged the birds. Loose judges may think this is largely a social event, and that good manners oblige them to score the birds. This, or maybe they want to be liked, I guess.. I sure hope they know the differences between qualities of roll.
But again, I think that having big multipliers could solve this because the poorer quality birds could still get some kind of score, and this would make those flyers happy, while a quality spinner could score 3, 4 or even 5 times the points for one quality roll.
Of course a bad judge can ruin any system.
Paul G
|
ezeedad
512 posts
May 12, 2008
4:29 PM
|
JM,
I agree that lots of guys see depth as well as quality very differently.. I have had the same experience that you describe. As long as we have to depend on someones judgement we are going to have this problem. Maybe it is time to develop some technology that could help solve this problem.
But until then, maybe scoring more for quality could help giving the best rollers a fair shake.
Paul G
|
smoke747
1107 posts
May 12, 2008
5:05 PM
|
Paul are we still talking about breaks or individual performance?
I once judged a kit and the qualifiers were Q-1.7, D-1.2. I was asked how could birds so short get 1.7 in quality and only 1.2 in depth. I said qUality has nothing to do with depth as long as they meet the minimum rolling distance of ten feet. The birds were very fast and snappy with good style but short.
smoke747----------
Keith London
ICRC
Last Edited by on May 12, 2008 11:11 PM
|
Scott
537 posts
May 12, 2008
5:49 PM
|
Keith,when I judged the state, the highest multiplier I gave was to a kit that gave me only one break, it was a nice high quality one LOL
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
Last Edited by on May 12, 2008 5:50 PM
|
JMUrbon
444 posts
May 13, 2008
11:19 AM
|
Paul, I truly believe that all of the judges out there today try their best to sort out the best kit to the best of their ability. As for the Quality and Depth multipliers, I feel that usually they are able to distinguish between a 1.0 kit and say a 1.5 kit. Any judge worth their salt can and will know the difference in these two . The depth is were a judge can get into trouble because an active kit of 10 footers can and does beat a great kit of 30 footers if the judge cant determine the proper depths and award the proper multipliers. I personally feel far to many judges are afraid to give a 1.0 and also afraid to give anything over a 1.6. These numbers need to be utilizes better and explained just as they are. Minimum depth is just that 1.0 not 1.1 or 1.2 but just 1.0. Joe Urbon
----------
J.M.Urbon Lofts
A Proven Family of Spinners
http://www.freewebs.com/jmurbonlofts/
|