Windjammer Loft
384 posts
Aug 17, 2008
7:47 AM
|
George.... Iam not saying the system is broken. But its quite evident that the competition fliers are maintaining a high level of quality, but the scoring doesn't encourage them to do so. Like Paul G. states "Its just the scoring system. If you don't see what I have been trying to say you probably won't. Pensom tried very hard to explain this. He did not succeed. So who am I to think that I have a chance".
And if you are referring to me as one who doesn't compete. You are absolutely right..First of all,I don't have enough "now how" to get a kit in competition form. I haven't had my birds long enough. Secondely,I personelly don't think that MY birds are of competition QUALITY. Thirdly, competition is not my style. I just want to learn from the best on "HOW TO" raise the best quality birds possible.
Fly High and Roll On
Paul
Last Edited by on Aug 17, 2008 4:41 PM
|
ezeedad
740 posts
Aug 17, 2008
2:59 PM
|
Windjammer Paul,
You are open minded towards what I am saying because you are impartial. Thanks at looking at this objectively. It seems to me that some pretty good fliers have seem that there are problems in the scoring system. Bill Pensom, Monty Neible, Rick Mee...
P. Gomez
|
Windjammer Loft
385 posts
Aug 17, 2008
4:40 PM
|
ezeedad......It's hard to be humble with a first name of Paul......lol. But,thanks for the compliment. Iam just trying to look at this whole roller "hobby-sport" issue with an open mind. Iam trying to learn as much as possible from the modern day rollermen.
----------
Fly High and Roll On
Paul
|
ezeedad
742 posts
Aug 17, 2008
8:30 PM
|
Tony,
Thanks for changing the name or this thread... It is more in the spirit of what I was trying to get across.
Paul G
|
Scott
1085 posts
Aug 17, 2008
8:59 PM
|
(It seems to me that some pretty good fliers have seem that there are problems in the scoring system. Bill Pensom, Monty Neible, Rick Mee... )
P. Gomez
Paul, Who said Monty had a problem with it ? Monty was an advocate of useing the higher end of the multipliers which means poor quality is scored on the bottom end,nothing more and nothing less ,Monty was a flyer of 20 bird teams and was a master at kit mechanics.
Never have I ever heard Rick Mee say that he had a problem,he is a also a to the bone flyer of 20 birds kits, although Rick Mee advocates only quality be scored.
As for Bill Pensom,he was long gone when these rules were developed strictly for Birmingham Rollers, so he doesn't factor in at all.
These rules are for TEAMS of Birmingham Rollers, these teams are made up of individules, no it isn't for everyone,it takes a lot of dedication and work.
Basicly what you wrote above was,well,dead wrong
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
Last Edited by on Aug 18, 2008 1:15 AM
|
ezeedad
747 posts
Aug 18, 2008
11:31 AM
|
Scott,
Tony wrote this..
"Would not this mean then that quality and depth are less a factor than what we normally tell ourselves and each other? Rick Mee's "Concert Performance" article starts to carry more weight if this bears true."
Ken Firl wrote this..
"When we start seeing multiplier spreads of 1.0 - 1.8 awarded to frequent kits, we will see the multipliers making a difference.
PS. this was Monty's mantra and he was often criticised for it by the "hard cores".
Pensom was not "long gone" before they started judging Birmingham Rollers the way they are currently doing it. The emphasis of scoring has unfortunately always been on concert performance with little reward for quality.
Paul G
Last Edited by on Aug 18, 2008 11:40 AM
|
ezeedad
748 posts
Aug 18, 2008
11:52 AM
|
Another thought...(maybe I should start this as a new thread)
If the multiplier for quality was increased to 5, then kits with poor quality could at least be given a score for their performance. With a decent multiplier for quality you wouldn't have to protect the other scores by not scoring the lower quality birds. Then the fliers who put up poor quality could as least get a score..and they wouldn't feel cheated.
The depth multiplier should be increased too. Especially since it takes a long time for the extra deep spinner to catch back up to the kit. The provision for out birds might need to be looked at if we want to encourage the deep spinner.
Paul G
Last Edited by on Aug 18, 2008 11:53 AM
|
Scott
1087 posts
Aug 18, 2008
12:22 PM
|
Paul, this scoreing system wasn't created until the early 90s , no Pensom was not around.
As for lesser quality being scored I say no way, it is already a problem with too many judges,my opinion is that anything that doesn't represent the breed should NOT be scored, it seems like you are all over the board on this.
I think that the larger the spread in the multipliers the more junk will be scored on the bottom end, which is one reason that when I judge I use basicly a 1.3 for average and up to a 1.6 to 1.7 for exceptional.
As for Mee and his artical on concernt performance, Rick is very quality minded, without quality there is no such thing as concert performance where he is concerned as it shouldn't be scored.
Now as far as hard solid breaks , the best will always show their best in a hammering kit as they are much likely to commit to the roll with their peers, that is if it is a good team to begin with , to fly the highest quality teams it takes mature teams of birds,kits of youngsters don't cut it.
Now lets talk about an individule type fly, my stratigy wouldn't be my best mature birds as to get them hammering they need peers of birds near or equal.
Instead I would opt for slightly over the edge young birds that are in the stage of being a little controled by the roll,and to be honest such a fly would be like amature day and certainly doesn't have the thrill for me of a solid mature team of quality birds hammering large breaks.
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
Last Edited by on Aug 18, 2008 12:24 PM
|
ezeedad
753 posts
Aug 18, 2008
3:55 PM
|
Scott,
When you talk about rollers I agree with you very much. Mature reliable birds are the real deal. Youngsters can put on a hell of a show sometimes, but they are not reliable, and the show most likely won't last.
But when you talk about the scoring system I don;t agree. True, the system has changed. We used to just call quarter turns, half turns, three quarter and full turns. Only birds with acceptable style were suposed to be counted.
The current system is more accurate but has almost as much of an emphasis on big breaks as the other ststem did. Both systems don't really JUDGE the QUALITY.
Paul G
|
Scott
1094 posts
Aug 18, 2008
8:14 PM
|
Paul, make no mistake, kit flying is a team effort , the ultimate is huge breaks of quality spinners, it also just doesn't get any harder.
Regardless of any scoreing system , it is only as good as the judge judging it.
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
|
