ezeedad
749 posts
Aug 18, 2008
3:07 PM
|
Thanks Scott,
Your last posts just proved my point..!!
"I see how you always manage to shift the point away from the real issue... and it looks like a lot of these guys are easily distracted.
Lets not forget that the real point is about QUALITY. Scott, so far you are:
1. Against scoring more points for quality...
2. You also don't care about the birds showing the hole. 3. You say It's time to move away from the high standard that Pensom brought on from those that were before him.
4. Even when I put the proof in your face.. like at the start of this thread, you deny it. You just want things to stay the same even if it is a weak system."
Paul G
|
Scott
1091 posts
Aug 18, 2008
3:14 PM
|
Paul, you won't put them up judging for quality against me and yet you just keep talking.
The point is,you have no point, you only have an excuse not to fly, enjoy your muff project and your birds,that is all that really matters any way.
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
|
ezeedad
751 posts
Aug 18, 2008
3:29 PM
|
George. as usual you don't have a damn thing to contribute.. You only try to tear somebody down. Ever since the first post you made about my muffs.
But since you asked, some of the guys who I flew with in the CRS were Frank Lavin, Cornell Norwood, Charles Saldana, Richard Luna, Jerry Higgins, Arnold Jackson, Willie Wright, Dave Sanchez and a long list of others. We flew with similar rules to what you use now.
Then I flew with the BCRC. Cornell Norwood was president and I was vice president for a while. We agreed that the kit competition rules were bad news, and we tried to change it. I came up with the idea for the 30 point system for judging rollers, and together our club refined it and began using it in individual bird competitions.
The 30 point system has survived and is still in use. I have been told that the 30 point system is the best system yet for evaluating the Birmingham Roller.
Paul G
|
ezeedad
752 posts
Aug 18, 2008
3:34 PM
|
Scott,
I'm just not ready yet... You will have a spanking coming in the future... You don't know how much I want to kick your ass Scott...!!!
Every post you make like that pisses me off even more!!
Paul G
|
sundance
753 posts
Aug 18, 2008
3:41 PM
|
Paul, tell us more about the 30 point scoring system. I`m truly curious. I havent been at this near as long as most of you guys and will never claim to be an expert. I`m willing to learn new methods and ideas. Heck, thats why I`m here. I sometimes wish I wouldnt get caught up in this crap but I`m terrible at watching something and not knowing when to just step back and keep my mouth shut.LOL
----------
Butch @
Sundance Roller Lofts
|
sundance
754 posts
Aug 18, 2008
3:55 PM
|
Paul, You ment kick his but in the air under a kit of rollers,Right?... Man, here I go again. Paul I actually hope you can do that and prove yourself right. But ,you can bet Scott will put up a kit of butt kickin rollers too. He`s proven himself many times. I`m really not so sure anyone is wrong here. Theres Just Different Ideas.
----------
Butch @
Sundance Roller Lofts
|
ezeedad
754 posts
Aug 18, 2008
4:05 PM
|
Sundance,
True about Scott. He is fully committed to flying the big flies. He has many mature birds flying, and they are of high quality, that I probably won't be able to beat him in kit competition. But I'm talikg about quality, and so is he, so we can compete with individuals.
Paul G
|
Scott
1092 posts
Aug 18, 2008
4:12 PM
|
(Scott,
I'm just not ready yet... You will have a spanking coming in the future... You don't know how much I want to kick your ass Scott...!!!
Every post you make like that pisses me off even more!!
Paul G )
YEA BABY,THATS THE SPIRIT !!! LOL
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
|
ezeedad
755 posts
Aug 18, 2008
4:13 PM
|
Sundance,
The 30 point system evaluates rollers for three essential qualities. Speed---- up tp 10 points
Style---- up to 10 points
Frequency/depth--- up to 10 points
This can be used to judge the individual roller or the birds can be counted as they are in the current kit competition and the multipliers of 10 points for each of the three qualities can be applied.
This system is very different, and it truly focuses on quality.
Paul G
|
155
748 posts
Aug 18, 2008
4:26 PM
|
Paul
come on paul yes you can....go for it you have not think to lose it just a fly of pigeon win or lose so what by wining
is not going to make you a god of the rolller hobby it just a fly MAN
have fun with it..........................................
----------
EVILLOFT'S
|
gotspin7
1728 posts
Aug 18, 2008
4:37 PM
|
Paul, can you post the 30 point system I am interested. If you do not want to post it would you e-mail it to me at gotspin7@yahoo.com.. Thanks!
----------
Sal Ortiz
|
155
749 posts
Aug 18, 2008
4:45 PM
|
gotspin7
I think old scott got to his head...I THINK he went to cool
off if your there paul post it.............................
----------
EVILLOFT'S
Last Edited by on Aug 18, 2008 4:50 PM
|
ezeedad
756 posts
Aug 18, 2008
5:16 PM
|
Sal,
The 30 point system is actually pretty simple.
First, the bird is evaluated on a scale of 0 to 10 on their speed. A 10 is the ultimate... Birds can also be given fractions like 9 1/2 or 9.5.
Next the style is judged with 10 as the maximum. So a bird having the wings up and with tips touching --showing a hole..that would be considered a hole.... The hole must be there.
We decided that frequency and depth had to be combined because the deeper roller would be less frequent So 10 points would have to be reserved for the rarest of frequent and/or deep spinners. I don't know if anyone has ever come up with numbers to define any of these categories.
In the BCRC we did sketch out the style similar to the drawings that you posted yesterday.
The highest any bird has gotten in the BCRC, to my knowledge, has been 28 points. LaRon told me that in the ICRC, I believe, that they also had one judged at 28 points.
The system can be modified.. for example more emphasis can be put on depth for example, and the frequency could be counted... In fact, that might even be better..
Paul G
|
George R.
969 posts
Aug 18, 2008
5:21 PM
|
Paul Said
"George. as usual you don't have a damn thing to contribute.. You only try to tear somebody down. Ever since the first post you made about my muffs"
Paul all I did was ask a question... why do you get upset?
as far as your muffs go I only stated that I didnt like there type. it dont mean they dont Spin or that they are not good Birds it only meant that based on my expierence flying Birds those Birds are not the type i like..
Guess what some young birds I breed I Dont like either .
Those were some Bigtime Flyers you flew against. I hope to someday stand under a kit that you trained and bred.
anytime your in Las Vegas make sure you call me and I will set up a Fly for you with some of the local fanciers.
The Novice
George
Last Edited by on Aug 18, 2008 5:22 PM
|
gotspin7
1729 posts
Aug 18, 2008
6:02 PM
|
Paul, thanks for sharing.
George, is that available to others? I might be in your neck of the woods late next month and I would love to see some kits fly if the trip does get set for such. I have asked others to fly and had no response.
----------
Sal Ortiz
|
George R.
970 posts
Aug 18, 2008
6:18 PM
|
Sal
Come on down , It would be a Honor to meet you and Fly some Birds for you....
The Novice
George
|
Ballrollers
1396 posts
Aug 18, 2008
7:15 PM
|
Paul,
I find this sampling of the top 4 WC scores interesting, but.... It is a very small sampling, too small to really make your point. If you have the time, work up the numbers on the top 20 WC and FF as far back as the information is available, then I think, you would have more of the track record to base your assumptions on in order to make your point more efectively. Statistics have a way of fooling you. I remember a FF or WC many years ago where the tenth place finisher posted a 1.0, 1.0 D&Q. I think, it was Guil Rand I have always thought that was a strange anomaly. If we were really quality oriented, one would think that the 11 bird scoring format would a better fly to show that attribute. From the early historical writings I have read, the old English flyers were more interested in single bird events but as the fancy progressed, turn scoring became more the norm. In my opinion, the 20 bird rules are trying to address both turns and quality (D&Q). However, we all know the power of the math in the multipliers, but if you can "PROVE" this idea that, in fact, the record proves that only counting birds in the breaks is driving the separation of the top performers, then you may get some attention for your case. Whichever way this goes, it is an interesting concept..... Now PROVE IT! ;0)
Cliff
|
ezeedad
757 posts
Aug 18, 2008
7:27 PM
|
LaRon,
Do you mean that He is looking at the current kit system multipliers? Or is he comparing the 30 point system to the current kit system?
I would say that the 30 point system gives about ten times the emphasis for quality (speed and style)
Paul G
|
3757
867 posts
Aug 18, 2008
7:59 PM
|
Paul - He is looking at the current kit system multipliers.
One observation Dr. Messina has found so far is this. Here is a question he proposed. "LaRon, I am curious is not depth subjective as well as the other aspects? Please advise.
Last Edited by on Aug 18, 2008 8:39 PM
|
TimP
38 posts
Aug 18, 2008
8:21 PM
|
J.M.O., The reason quality is not rated as high as the multipliers is quality is in the eye of the judge(personal opinion) some like A style others H and so on. But when it comes to breaks whose actually seen a full turn of birds rolling. And when I say rolling A,H, or X but clean all the way through anything else ( wing switching & twizzling )is tumbling.
|
ezeedad
758 posts
Aug 18, 2008
8:33 PM
|
Cliff,
You are making a good point. A small sample is not real proof of the point. To really prove the point you need a large sample.
I only did the first 4 places because even in such a small sample there was evidence of the effect of how the simultaneous performance multipliers change the outcome.
My main point was to illustrate the non-effect of the multipliers. It takes time to "deconstruct" the data, but I will do more to prove the point if necessary.
Paul G
Last Edited by on Aug 18, 2008 8:36 PM
|
Scott
1095 posts
Aug 18, 2008
8:59 PM
|
Paul, just because you get a big break doesn't men it is scored, you compared the top for in the entire world,of coarse they had many big breaks that were scoreable, and they should be scored heavily , it is much much easier to get say a quality 8 bird break vrses a quality 16 bird break with depth, large quality hammer breaks with depth are a whole different world , in fact it blows the socks off of a few measly birds hammering.
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
|
gotspin7
1732 posts
Aug 19, 2008
4:31 AM
|
Paul, I would say we need more proof since these were the best kits in the world this year, and as far as the 30 point system it is interesting, I am going to bring it up on this side to have someone else on the side of the judge scoring a single bird this way (Steve Smith, is already doing this with his club and it is working for them very well) I can honestly say I like it. I now have one question for you and Laron how many 28 or closer to 30's have you bred?
----------
Sal Ortiz
Last Edited by on Aug 19, 2008 4:34 AM
|
ezeedad
759 posts
Aug 19, 2008
10:36 AM
|
Sal
Glad to see that Steve's club is judging individual at the same time as kit. Did you mean that he is using a 30 point system?
I would say that I've had several birds with high 20s quality... But I never got one that high in competition. You have to have a super performance the day of competition to score that high. Don Norwood had the highest score.
In the BCRC we experimented with judging too. Sometimes we even let everybody judge. We would throw out the high score and the low score and average the others.
You can easily practice judging on your own.
I'll do some more math...to prove my point. It gets to be real tedious... but I'll dig out some more examples...
Paul G
|
ezeedad
760 posts
Aug 19, 2008
12:54 PM
|
Okay Sal and Cliff
I took a look at the same competition, and worked the numbers down to 10th place. I also noticed some other interesting things which I will mention.
.................5-9....10-14....15-19...Raw Sco...#of birds
#5 Campbell.......6.......11.......3........458........225
#6 Scott...........19........8.......2........425........265
#7 Wanless......18........8.......1........334........222
#8 Kozarcanin...13........5.......3........356........200
#9 Tsoltoudis...21........5.......2........336........218
#10. Nijman.....22........7.......0........277........204
So in the top ten one competitor changed position due to quality and depth multipliers.. Wanless
But if you look at how the raw score differs from the number or birds which were scored, you will see that the raw score was influenced by the simultaneous point umltipliers and the placings of five competitors were changed by thier having the big breaks.
Below 10th place I counted only four 15 bird breaks and one 18 bird break from the remaining 50 something competitors.
Smit of Holland had 30 breaks with 178 birds scored...and 1.7 quality and 1.5 for speed, but managed only 15th place because he didn't get a break bigger than 9 birds.
Does this make what I am saying clearer?
Paul G
Last Edited by on Aug 19, 2008 1:50 PM
|
fhtfire
1459 posts
Aug 19, 2008
5:33 PM
|
Paul,
I understand what you are saying. If you focus in on one aspect of a fly...you will see that some of the other ways of scoring are not as important or are important. What I am trying to say is that you want the best of everything. The total package.
I have also found that the type of judge will dictate what is more important for a particular fly. if you have a loose judge...then you will want your birds real active with big breaks..because loose judges will judge everything that moves...while a good solid judge will not count birds that are not judgeable...like tumbling, waterfalling or just plain crap....if you have a very consistant solid judge..all the factors will play a part...and the multipliers mean more. If it is a loose judge..then they multipliers are not as meaningfull due to the fact that they usually count birds in a break that most judges would not.
That is also why one year you will see the top score be about 500-600 points and one year the top scores are 800-2000pts....get my drift...the type of judge has a HUGE impact on what is important....I tell you this...I prepare my birds based on who is judging too..if I know I have a real loose judge..>I will juice them to be more active....if it is a tight judge..I really want them on there A game so the breaks are solid.....anyway.....
My thought is that it is hard to check year after year with judges that seem to be at each end of the spectrum...
rock and ROLL
Paul
But again...The multipliers really work on kits that are close in raw..then the BEST kit wins with the best quality and depth....
|
ezeedad
762 posts
Aug 20, 2008
6:03 PM
|
"...the type of judge has a HUGE impact on what is important..."
Fireman Paul ,
This is true... I think a way of solving this would be to give bigger quality and depth multipliers.
If the multipliers were higher for quality as well as depth, the judges would not have as much of an impact.
The loose judge could count birds with low quality and the tighter judge could also count them because the multipliers would show the difference, and good quality spinners could get say 4 points, while tumblers might get only 1 point. A huge difference. This could help with alignment of the scores.
The same applies for depth.
This sounds like a good topic for another thread...
Paul G (Retired teacher)
|
Scott
1098 posts
Aug 20, 2008
6:38 PM
|
Paul,no way do we want gargage scored in any way shape or form as you are suggesting.
When I judged the Ca. State fly I decided to use a 1.5 for an average , it was a big mistake on my part as it put what I consider not scoreable on the lower end as it left just too big of window where the multipliers were concerned on the bottom end.
It was good also though as I learned something ,mainly not to do it that way again, I can't stand seeing culls scored.
In a perfect world where only decent first class birds are scored I would say a smaller window on the multipliers would be ideal.
But a perfect world it isn't and as the multiplier are now it is a good happy medium, a broader range than we have now would only invite anything that rolls to be scored which is already something that is a problem with some judges.
I know this from experiance , and have judged across the country and western Canada, so I know a little something about it, I might add that my reputaion as a judge is far from an easy one.
This system is far from broke and as I have said over and over and over again that it and any scoreing sytem is only as good as the judge.
I'm not sure what you are trying to gain by this little crusade as a non flyer and one that doesn't have any experiance judging, this system has been adopted in every country around the world except for one,you kind of remind me of that little mouse flipping a bird at the elephant as he is about to be stepped on, just put up your birds and let them do the talking.
Scott
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
Last Edited by on Aug 20, 2008 8:05 PM
|
wishiwon2
79 posts
Aug 20, 2008
8:25 PM
|
(my grandmother has been driving a car for 50 year and yet she still knows very little about cars ?
Any one that feels a need to impress others with years and nothing else to back them up just doesn't impress me ).
BWWAaaaa hahaaa
I really do appreciate wisdom that comes from experience, I do think its unfair to criticize a system inwhich you dont participate.
The question asked about, which do you feel is most important unison breaks, quality or depth. For me it is unison teamwork. Quality and depth are pre-requisites. Meaning birds must perform with quality and depth sufficient to be scorable. Of course I want my birds to roll with the highest Q I can produce. I also expect them to 'go to work' when they're up. Ive sat (and slept) under alot of stiff birds/teams. Some of these teams had some fantastic individual performers in them, absolute gold in Q. But after having seen some great teams, that broke together well and showed good Q and good D, the other teams seem dull. I like our scoring system, I think it promotes the hobby and I think it encourages ppl to breed better rollers ... what else could we need?
I suppose it makes me a damned idiot, 'cause Im still willing.
|
ezeedad
763 posts
Aug 20, 2008
8:28 PM
|
Scott,
I thought that your answer was going to stick to the subject... But,Noooo..!! You couldn't help yourself could you..?? I guess it's like the story of the scorpion and the frog.... You couldn't resist and you had to try to put me down again...
Well, Scott I noticed that you had the highest scoring big breaks in the competition I evaluated. You also had the lowest multipliers of the top ten. You were in the lowest 15% for quality and depth for the top 30 finishers. Could this be why you don't like me rocking the boat?
Paul G
|
George R.
972 posts
Aug 20, 2008
8:38 PM
|
Paul said to Scott
"You also had the lowest multipliers of the top ten. You were in the lowest 15% for quality and depth for the top 30 finishers".
Scott you think I can pinch a kit of those low quality and shallow Birds that You breed ???
The Novice
George
|
George R.
973 posts
Aug 20, 2008
8:43 PM
|
Paul when are you going to Fly some Birds in a Modern day competition ?
Give Spanky a Call and enter the Fall Fly you have had Birds for over 50 years , I would think that you would have a kit or to laying around waiting to Fly.
And by the way congradulations on the trophy you will be getting from the QSDC magazine for rollerman of the year award. Good Job.
Good Luck
George
The Novice
|
Scott
1100 posts
Aug 20, 2008
9:00 PM
|
(Scott,
I thought that your answer was going to stick to the subject... But,Noooo..!! You couldn't help yourself could you..?? I guess it's like the story of the scorpion and the frog.... You couldn't resist and you had to try to put me down again...
Well, Scott I noticed that you had the highest scoring big breaks in the competition I evaluated. You also had the lowest multipliers of the top ten. You were in the lowest 15% for quality and depth for the top 30 finishers. Could this be why you don't like me rocking the boat?
Paul G )
And yet Paul we still put them up for everyone to see regardless of you clowns in the peanut gallery.
From the looks of that "one" fly I should be a peice of cake for you to knock down then buddy ,lets fly !
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
Last Edited by on Aug 20, 2008 9:41 PM
|
gotspin7
1748 posts
Aug 21, 2008
5:08 AM
|
Paul, thanks for the research on this one fly, but when I said we needed more, I meant from a few world cups and maybe a couple of fall fly's in there as well, the reason is that we are only seeing the work of one judge. Paul, could you e-mail me the full detailed 30 point system at gotspin7@yahoo.com
----------
Sal Ortiz
|
kcfirl
475 posts
Aug 21, 2008
6:20 AM
|
Paul,
I agree with you on this one. And, I will try and simplify the example.
There is no way that a 10 bird break of 1.2 x 1.2 birds should be worth 20 x 1.44 = 28.8 pts while a 9 bird break of 1.7 x 1.7 birds is only worth 26.01 points.
That is simply ridicualous and illustrates the point that a big breaking kit of mediocre birds can beat a slightly smaller group of fantastic birds every time.
That is the legacy of turns scoring that we have adopted and that I advocate changing to a smooth progression of points awarded for # of birds in the breaks vs. the current step function.
Either that or Scott was sleeping in the trailer with Eldon! LOL
Ken
|
Scott
1101 posts
Aug 21, 2008
6:39 AM
|
(That is the legacy of turns scoring that we have adopted and that I advocate changing to a smooth progression of points awarded for # of birds in the breaks vs. the current step function.)
This has come up many times Ken, and as I said in a earlier post I agree with it, they should be awarded more but how much more is the question.
As for your example though, that is one break , flys are made up of several breaks, flip that around where the higher multiplier had the 10 bird break and what do you have.
Bottom line is that it is only as good as the judging !
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
Last Edited by on Aug 21, 2008 6:43 AM
|
Otis
130 posts
Aug 21, 2008
8:07 AM
|
Paul, What's this obsession with critiquing a system you fail to become a part of! Surely your 50 years of experience and your recent rollerman of the year award could go a long way towards remodeling the very system you claim has faults. So are we to surmise that because it has faults you've found that to be the excuse for your lack of participation. If your not part of the solution, your part of the problem. To find gnats on the only available food when that's all there is, is quite petty. Pensom was only a man, granted an astute one at that but I find it pure folly that rollermen that have been with these birds for 50 years or more haven't gained enough personal anecdotes and opinions from their own experiences to exist in the present irrespective of the past. Your birds are your most prudent educator.Here's a novel idea, why not present to the competition world a scoring system that will perfect the quality, depth, style and multiplier system that was so arduously created by my friends Doc Reiman and Brent Martindale. Otis
Last Edited by on Aug 21, 2008 8:09 AM
|
Alohazona
441 posts
Aug 21, 2008
10:58 AM
|
Otis,
Whether Paul competes or not,whether your friends developed the current system,or how long we have been flying roller pigeons is NOT the issue.Paul,has a valid quality issue with the present system.The problem with alot of clubs in general is that they distance themselves with from thoughts and issues of theirs members.When this happens the wheels start falling off,and the moral of the clubs start to go in the wrong direction.People who want change always seem to be in the smallest majority and often find themselves in a different place.This is why you hear about this old club or that old club.The old club members are not gone because everbody died therefore membership is down.Good solid clubs accept issues for change,put the issue to a vote,keep things the same based on the outcome of the vote, or move on and adhead ,through change.
If someone has years judging,thats fine,they can cast their ONE vote.We all pay the same club fees.
We hear about this rule change or that rule change in our 2008 olympics,do you think these changes are brought about by the 16 and 20 year old competitors,or the coaches and judges themselves,just an example.
Are these changes also made or kept the same,by sarcasm or facts,just an opinion......Aloha,Todd
|
Otis
131 posts
Aug 21, 2008
1:32 PM
|
Todd, I stand corrected as to the question at hand. Ok there's a problem, how do we fix it? I too have heard and agree with Monty's thought's that some judges do not award the Q & D multipliers some kits deserved. Is a judging standard needed to correct the inadequacies, would it be too much work to present one, are there enough judges, fliers and members unhappy with the current system to warrant a change? Are we to take a judging system that's purely subjective which hopes it's judges have seen the best there is and then makes every effort to grade and deliver the multipliers appropriately to each kit entered? Or do we stay with the existing system that works as long as most honest, new and experienced judges leave the region they just scored feeling that at the very least the best kit won! It's very easy to criticize something you've never attempted before! My only contention is ..then offer a solution! Aloha, Otis
|
Dave Szab
182 posts
Aug 21, 2008
2:13 PM
|
Todd,
Fly Competitions are NOT clubs. One of the competitions is sponsored by a club, but it is not a club.
Rule change suggestions and rule change votes must be done by guys that have flown in these competitions and/or judged them. The more experience you have in flying and judging in these competitions, the more weight should be given to your opinions. That is what is best for the competition, not non-flyers pushing their agendas. You know what they say about opinions, everyone has got one. The question is which opinions on the rules for a particular competition are more valued, opinions from a non-competitor or a competitor and/or judge with many years experience in the competitions?
Flyers and judges with greater experience tend to have a better chance of getting changes in rules passed that they support, because of the respect for that experience. That is the way it should be.
Dave Szabatura
Last Edited by on Aug 21, 2008 4:45 PM
|
George R.
974 posts
Aug 21, 2008
4:42 PM
|
The question is which opinions on the rules for a particular competition are more valued, opinions from a non-competitor or an competitor and/or judge with many years experience in the competitions
I agree Dave, Good luck in the Fall Fly Dave.
The Novice
George
|
ezeedad
764 posts
Aug 21, 2008
6:34 PM
|
Ken Firl,
Your example is really good because it clearly points a way that the current system is weak. You also suggest a way to improve the system with stepped multipliers for the size of breaks. This would improve the accuracy of judging breaks.
Paul G
|
Ballrollers
1402 posts
Aug 21, 2008
6:53 PM
|
Dave/Guys,
Thank you for this chuckle. With my unique sense of humor, you seem to be saying that if one did not fly in the last FF, their opinion is worth less this year. I feel sure Paul flew his share of competitions at some point in time, and as soon as he feels ready, he will enter back into competition. Ken Firl as a veteran flyer has pointed out the validity of addressing problems with the existing system, and these guys are not the first to do so, by any means. All of these opinions are worthy of discussion here. It is not about who believes who the most, or who has the most experience, or who is scoring the most points or multipliers.....it is about sharing ideas. Oh, I agree the flyers should be the ones to have the final vote on any changes to the fly rules. But Paul has made a proposal and he is entitled to do that. I don't understand this tendency to shoot down a man for using his brain a little. Now he must lay out his reasons for why he thinks it is valid. Just as good pigeons are where we find them, the same goes for good ideas, it may come from a seasoned flyer or a man with only a handful of rollers. The recent past has painfully shown how gullible some of our most experienced flyers can be. TIC!
Cliff
|
ezeedad
765 posts
Aug 21, 2008
6:55 PM
|
"..... I find it pure folly that rollermen that have been with these birds for 50 years or more haven't gained enough personal anecdotes and opinions from their own experiences to exist in the present irrespective of the past."
WHAT...???
"Here's a novel idea, why not present to the competition world a scoring system that will perfect the quality, depth, style and multiplier system that was so arduously created by my friends Doc Reiman and Brent Martindale." Otis
Otis,
Excuse me for trying, but if you notice, I am sticking my neck out, trying to be part of the solution.
Where have you been?? You must not have been reading my posts... I DID make the initial suggestion for the 30 point system of judging. I presented my idea to my club, the BCRC and we hashed out the details for what I believe is a very good system based centering on Speed, Style and Frequency/Depth. Modified versions of this system has been in use for over 20 years now.
I also have suggested repeatedly that the current syatem should be modified... Higher multipliers for quality and depth would make it a good system. The multipliers should be equal to what is currently awarded for simultaneous breaks.
Paul G
Last Edited by on Aug 21, 2008 7:14 PM
|
Scott
1102 posts
Aug 21, 2008
7:05 PM
|
Actualy Cliff I'm one of those that could care less what those that don't fly or support thinks about the rules,in this case it is purely agenda driven and it has nothing to due with bettering the fly or the rules or even flying birds,he has never flown and never will.
S. Calif has a fly called the "put up or shut up fly" what do you think inspired that name ?
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
Last Edited by on Aug 21, 2008 7:32 PM
|
Electric-man
1963 posts
Aug 21, 2008
7:14 PM
|
Good post Cliff!!!
----------
Val
|
Scott
1103 posts
Aug 21, 2008
7:16 PM
|
(The recent past has painfully shown how gullible some of our most experienced flyers can be. TIC!
Cliff)
Explain this little diddly Cliff
----------
Just my Opinion
Scott
|
Dave Szab
183 posts
Aug 21, 2008
7:17 PM
|
Cliff,
My post was a response to Todd's post, it was not meant as an attack on Paul, I have no idea what Paul's fly competition experience is, I don't know him that well. I gave Todd a serious response to the general points in his post, and that is MY opinion based on MY experience, which is extensive. I'm open to any constructive ideas, but the experience, behind the ideas and opinions, is always taken into account by me as it should be by any serious competitor.
I'm glad I gave you a "chuckle". You can be a real ass sometimes. Chuckle, chuckle.
Dave
Last Edited by on Aug 21, 2008 7:32 PM
|
ezeedad
766 posts
Aug 21, 2008
7:36 PM
|
Thanks Cliff,
For being fair and impartial. I believe that I'm trying to make an important contribution to our hobby..
This should not be a popularity contest. It should be about facts, accuracy and the truth.
Paul G
|
George R.
976 posts
Aug 21, 2008
8:43 PM
|
Regardless of what rules the Birds are being Flown in .As a flyer of birds I will Fly .
I dont have the time to be looking for excuses or theorys about why a guy should Fly or not fly.
But I do find these post intresting the way they are sometimes split along the lines .
On one Hand you got some folks who just want to Fly Birds and keep it simple and Fun .
On the other hand you got some folkss that want to make it look like it takes a Giuness or a Rocket scientist to Fly Birds.
But guess what at the end of the day there just pigeons that need to be flown and developed if a person wants to see a good kit.
And at the end of the day you got people that Fly Birds and people that dont.
The Novice
George
Last Edited by on Aug 21, 2008 8:44 PM
|