michael salus
117 posts
Jan 24, 2010
1:44 PM
|
I keep seeing people say that they have had to breed towards frequency to score more points in the competitions, has doing this affected the quality and depth of our birds and if so, is that good!! I think it has affected the depth and even the quality in some cases. Does Seeing birds breaking deep and big and with quality lead to less frequency?
MJ
|
Scott
2819 posts
Jan 24, 2010
1:57 PM
|
Good one Mike.. I would say that frequency leads birds to "not" break big and with quality..what most consider frequency is in fact nothing but activity.
I prefere the word "work rate" and if I get 20 solid legit breaks in a fly I'm happy and usualy do pretty well in any fly unless it is a super loose judge.
(Does Seeing birds breaking deep and big and with quality lead to less frequency? )
----------
Scott Campbell
" God Bless "
|
michael salus
118 posts
Jan 24, 2010
2:22 PM
|
Scott, Your right 20 breaks is a good "work rate" for a deep big breaking team. The birds seem to fully commit to the roll if they have the time to recover between breaks. That's when you notice the better quality and depth. "Most" frequent teams just don't have the time to really set up and commit to the roll and you get more loose rolling.
----------
MJ
|
nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4079 posts
Jan 24, 2010
2:30 PM
|
I don't like standing under a flock of birds waiting for a break every minute or so. Count off sixty seconds using the "one thousand one" and so forth system or even the old "One Mississippi" and so forth system and just notice how really long that is. Just to wait while your birds are doing nothing, but flying I find no joy and fun in. If I just wanted to watch birds fly I would have chosen another breed. There is no points given in competition for just flying. That is why I don't like watching baseball on TV. Way too much time between action; way too much.
You don't have to sacrifise a darn thing to increase your frequency of breaks to three or four times every two minutes and still get 30 footers plus with great form.
It is usually the guys who don't have the frequency who complain the quality and/or depth go away when frequency is increased. It is nonsense to believe you give up quality and depth whenever you increase frequency.
----------
Just My Take On Things
Nick Siders
Last Edited by on Jan 24, 2010 9:39 PM
|
Scott
2820 posts
Jan 24, 2010
2:57 PM
|
Mike.. those so called frquent teams aren't actualy breaking and is why you see these amped up scores in the regionials fall to the bottom of the sheet most the time under a quality judge.
Do the math on some of these scores.. it is imposible if you are counting real breaks... now that is not to say that a kit can't have just a super day and push the evelope... they can.. but it is a once in a blue moon day.
----------
Scott Campbell
" God Bless "
Last Edited by on Jan 24, 2010 3:00 PM
|
diamondrollers
376 posts
Jan 24, 2010
2:59 PM
|
theres no way that a team rolling with extreme frequency can have great style, depth, and speed.... This is where the multibliers should kick in and do there job but nine times out of ten they dont due to loose judging. I agrea with Scott i would rather have 20-25 great breaks then 40 ok breaks that most of the time shouldnt be scored
sal
Last Edited by on Jan 24, 2010 3:01 PM
|
michael salus
119 posts
Jan 24, 2010
3:03 PM
|
Nick, With all do respect, I disagree with you on this one. Oh, by the way I wasn't complaining, just asking a question.
----------
MJ
Last Edited by on Jan 24, 2010 3:08 PM
|
Scott
2821 posts
Jan 24, 2010
3:04 PM
|
Nick .. 30 breaks I will give you when the stars line up with the right team .. but it wasn't done in the last two major fly finals.
----------
Scott Campbell
" God Bless "
|
JMUrbon
872 posts
Jan 24, 2010
3:09 PM
|
Most old bird kits are beyong just showing activity. I too believe that birds that are too frequent are not able to set up for the bigger, deeper breaks. That is only common sence. However quality isnt alays sacraficed with frequency. I believe that the way alot of comp flyers prep their kits for a fly will bring on the frequent sloppy rolling that you speak of also. I have seen it when a " loose " judge is comming to town and guys know how he judges they will often try to prep their team to perform to that particular judges standard as well as if a judge that is "tight". A kit that will put 20 legitimate breaks with high Q and D will always stand a good chance of winning.
Nick is 20 breaks in 20 minutes not enough for you or do you require more? Joe
----------
J.M.Urbon Lofts
A Proven Family of Spinners
http://www.freewebs.com/jmurbonlofts/
|
Flipmode
404 posts
Jan 24, 2010
3:46 PM
|
Must have been some "LOOSE" judging going on here?
2008 WorldCup 1st place 46 breaks, 1.6Q 1.6D
2007 WorldCup 1st place 43 breaks, 1.4Q 1.5D
"""" """"""""""""" 2nd place 59 breaks, 1.7Q 1.6D
2005 WorldCup 1st place 44 breaks, 1.6Q 1.6D
2002 WorldCup 1st place 36 breaks, 1.6Q 1.5D
2000 WorldCup 1st place 49 breaks, 1.6Q 1.6D
Last Edited by on Jan 24, 2010 3:47 PM
|
Sound Rollers
192 posts
Jan 24, 2010
4:08 PM
|
If we all agree that Mr. William Hyla Pensom was and is, God rest his soul, the leading authority on the Birmingham Roller then this is the standard in which we should all strive for, just my honest opinion.
The standard reads as follows:
QUOTE
THE TRUE BIRMINGHAM ROLLER WHICH TURNS OVER BACKWARDS WITH INCONCEIVABLE RAPIDITY THROUGH A COSIDERABLE DISTANCE LIKE A SPINGING BALL.
UNQUOTE
To me that reads far and fast nothing more and nothing less, bottom line and I don't care what color it is.
So how do you score a kit that is making cheap shoddy breaks, you don’t. I believe a kit should be scored on total performance based on above.
John
|
nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4080 posts
Jan 24, 2010
4:38 PM
|
Joe, 20 breaks in 20 is okay, but I would rather see 30 in 20 and good birds can still show good quality and depth.
----------
Just My Take On Things
Nick Siders
|
Sound Rollers
193 posts
Jan 24, 2010
4:54 PM
|
What? "prep their team to perform to that particular judges standard" who are these judges?
John
|
Sunflower
GOLD MEMBER
605 posts
Jan 24, 2010
5:06 PM
|
John,
First of all at the risk of being branded a heretic I do not agree that WH Pensom was "the leading authority" on the Birmingham Roller. He was an excellent, knowledgeable and prolific writer and an excellent gatherer of pigeons. He was also a very fine gentleman. I believe J L Smith was a better breeder of rollers, just didn't write as much about it.
Secondly, have you ever flown in a major competition? Do you plan to in the future? Just asking.
----------
Keep em Spinning
Joe
Last Edited by on Jan 24, 2010 5:07 PM
|
Ballrollers
GOLD MEMBER
2339 posts
Jan 24, 2010
5:07 PM
|
Flipmode
From those results, I would say it is very possible to have BOTH, frequency and quality.
NIck,
I agree with you. I have seen it (30 clean breaks) many times in this region...and in my own back yard. I'd be bored to tears by 20 breaks..unless they were all 3/4 turns! LOL!
Cliff
Cliff
|
Sound Rollers
194 posts
Jan 24, 2010
5:39 PM
|
Joe, the answer is no and yes and I hope their is a standard, other wise how does a newbie like me compete. I served 20 years of active duty in the United States Coast Guard, I'm well versed in Standard Operating Procedures (SOP). Call me what you will, but a standard is and should be across the board not open to someones interpretation.
John
Last Edited by on Jan 24, 2010 5:46 PM
|
Sunflower
GOLD MEMBER
606 posts
Jan 24, 2010
5:53 PM
|
John,
What you have to understand it that competition scoring is subjective. It is all in the eye of the judge. How well he estimates the depth, his standard for scorable turns, his standard for quality and it is all subjective. There is no measurable standard. Also understand that Mr Pensom's "standard" was for individual birds not kit competition. I wish you good luck in the future flys.
----------
Keep em Spinning
Joe
|
DeepSpinLofts
1641 posts
Jan 24, 2010
5:56 PM
|
Re: "Frequency vs quality"
The overall goal should be frequent tight spinners... that perform with quality.
JMO
Marcus
Deep Spin Lofts
|
JDA
GOLD MEMBER
662 posts
Jan 24, 2010
7:30 PM
|
One break at both ends of the figure eight,Quality first.JDA
|
Scott
2822 posts
Jan 24, 2010
8:43 PM
|
The lower the standards... the more that will be called.. the math verses reality doesn't add up.
----------
Scott Campbell
" God Bless "
Last Edited by on Jan 24, 2010 8:45 PM
|
Scott
2823 posts
Jan 24, 2010
8:50 PM
|
Cliff.. I will bet you a 100 bucks right now that if you qualify for the World Cup you won't hit 20 breaks with this years finals judge.
(I'd be bored to tears by 20 breaks..unless they were all 3/4 turns! LOL!)
----------
Scott Campbell
" God Bless "
Last Edited by on Jan 24, 2010 8:56 PM
|
nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4081 posts
Jan 24, 2010
9:13 PM
|
Scott, are you saying he ain't worth a shit as a judge?
----------
Just My Take On Things
Nick Siders
|
nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4082 posts
Jan 24, 2010
9:30 PM
|
Must have been some "LOOSE" judging going on here?
2008 WorldCup 1st place 46 breaks, 1.6Q 1.6D Eldon Cheney USA
2007 WorldCup 1st place 43 breaks, 1.4Q 1.5D Brian McKenzie South Africa
"""" """"""""""""" 2nd place 59 breaks, 1.7Q 1.6D Brian McKenzie South Africa
2005 WorldCup 1st place 44 breaks, 1.6Q 1.6D Rick Schoening USA
2002 WorldCup 1st place 36 breaks, 1.6Q 1.5D Heine Bijker Holland
2000 WorldCup 1st place 49 breaks, 1.6Q 1.6D Heine Bijker Holland
According to those that agree with Scott these judges were too loose scoring that many breaks and yet look at the depth and quality scores. I think your thinking is suspect is what I think. How can so many different judges be so wrong?
----------
Just My Take On Things
Nick Siders
|
Ballrollers
GOLD MEMBER
2340 posts
Jan 25, 2010
5:17 AM
|
Scott
Keep your money 'cause I sure as heck don't need yours. As Nick and Flipmode have pointed out (as the obvious), the record speaks for itself. Let's put this another way, I hope that if you qualify for the WC this year, your kit will break 30-40 times for this year's judge. Cetainly if they are not capable of that, it would be convenient to adopt the position that only a poor judge would score more breaks...or that only a poor quality break was being scored for the teams that do so. You are entitled to your opinions of these other judges, but like NIck said, "How can so many different judges be so wrong"..... and only you be so right, I might add. LOL!
When I was taught about sportsmanship, I was taught that a part of it was that we should all support the people we compete against; hope that they will be at the best and score their best. I want that for each and every flyer regardless of who the judge is. I don't believe for a minute that if a kit breaks more than 20 breaks that the judge is slack or the performance is poor quality. I merely stated my opinion of what I want my birds to do on fly day, 30 deep quality breaks of half turns or better. You feel 20 is good enough for you. No problem, we all have our own standards in this game. You are most welcome to yours. Smile.
Cliff
Last Edited by on Jan 25, 2010 5:22 AM
|
Scott
2824 posts
Jan 25, 2010
5:31 AM
|
Post the other years..and just for giggles look at the regionials where they got goofy scores and see where they ended up under these other judges.
("How can so many different judges be so wrong"..... and only you be so right, I might add. LOL)
----------
Scott Campbell
" God Bless "
Last Edited by on Jan 25, 2010 5:43 AM
|
Scott
2825 posts
Jan 25, 2010
5:34 AM
|
No Nick.. I beleive his standard will be higher than what some will care for.
Obviously you didn't care for my judging in the finals of the nationial either.. but know this. the best teams of Quality Birmingham Rollers were on top.
(Scott, are you saying he ain't worth a shit as a judge?)
----------
Scott Campbell
" God Bless "
|
Scott
2826 posts
Jan 25, 2010
5:40 AM
|
I pray that they don't Cliff .. if they give what some might percieve as that kind of frequency it means I screwed them up..although 30 could be doable if the stars line up just right.
(your kit will break 30-40 times for this year's judge)
----------
Scott Campbell
" God Bless "
|
Scott
2827 posts
Jan 25, 2010
5:42 AM
|
Now wait a minute Cliff.. havnt you qualified a few times ? I don't think that you have gotten any where close to 20 breaks in the finals have you ?
----------
Scott Campbell
" God Bless "
|
Ballrollers
GOLD MEMBER
2343 posts
Jan 25, 2010
5:43 AM
|
"Obviously you didn't care for my judging in the finals of the nationial either.. but know this. the best teams of Quality Birmingham Rollers were on top."
I didnt' see any reference to that, Scott, by anyone. I dont't think that is relevant to the issue at all, nor do I think anyone really believes that.
Cliff
|
nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4084 posts
Jan 25, 2010
7:10 AM
|
Are there those people while judging will not declare scoreable break; will shave the bird count on a scoring break; will message the multipliers just to keep from being called a loose judge? Do you think judges will do these things to avoid going to that "dreaded" threshold of 1000 points? Do you think they are willing to do this so as to climb some imagined hiriacracy of tough judgedome.
----------
Just My Take On Things
Nick Siders
|
Ballrollers
GOLD MEMBER
2344 posts
Jan 25, 2010
7:21 AM
|
Scott
Hmmmm, now that you ask, I'm going to have go back to my records and check that out. The one that stands out in my mind, of course, is the DQ when it was 100 degrees! What "I WANT" and what "I GET" are two different things. But I keep trying, just as you do.
But I think your theory has holes in it. You are overlooking another issue regarding the difference between the regionals and the finals scores....It's not all about tougher judges and quality in the finals....There is also the factors of the difficulty keeping your birds on point between the two events, losses of first class birds to hawks and falcons between the two events, and the weather changes. (My first couple of times that I qualified, I had little experience keeping them on point). We see these things all the time. Guys work hard prepping for the regionals and some get it right. The birds come out bangin' and produce good scores. Then they lose some good birds to the hawks before the finals, the weather changes, problems with the feed can.... guys try to tweak their birds a little more or esperiment with some new additive and shoot themselves in the foot....and the next time you see the kit they look completely different....flat. So the scores go in the tank....nothing to do with the judge....and the quality sucks mainly ecause there are poorer quality substitution birds in the kit and some for the first time, the weather is hot, etc. We have seen it many, many times, and heard many, many guys complain about these problems. In fact, that seems to be the rule, not the exception, and some guys will not compete in the finals when they win the regionals because of these problems. In my opinion, it is as significant a factor in the difference between the scores, as the judge's criteria being tougher in the finals. But the guys that get the feed can right, have few BOP problems, and hit the weather right win.
And then we have the fact that with today's "NO STANDARD" rules and each judging using his OWN standard, the scores seem to be up one year, down the next but on the "AVERAGE" they seem to be going higher. I don't think we will change the subjectivity in judging without better-defining what is being judged, and setting standards for performance. If that is what the fancy wants, that is what they will get.
So based on these factors, and the evidence in the scores themselves, I must disagree with your theory that today's rollers are not capable of scoring more than 20 quality breaks in the finals, and it is mainly because the judges are tougher in the finals and judge to a higher standard. On "average," the winning kits over the past few years, with qualityjudges, are scoring 40 breaks or better. There is no valid correlation between the scores given by other judges in the two competitions becuase we have different days, different birds, different weather conditions, etc. The final WC scores posted are what they are, 40 plus breaks and high multipliers are winning major competitions. THESE ARE NOT OPINIONS OR THEORIES BUT FACT! The birds do have the quality to go with the frequency. "THEY" have raised the bar and we should raise our expectations, if "WE" expect to compete successfully.
Cliff
Last Edited by on Jan 25, 2010 7:55 AM
|
Scott Coe
35 posts
Jan 25, 2010
7:26 AM
|
WHY? WHY? must this be that all you guys must BASH on each other? Judges are selected by the peers of the group. They are only human.
Get on with more important things like flying birds and sponsoring fellowship.
|
Ballrollers
GOLD MEMBER
2345 posts
Jan 25, 2010
7:32 AM
|
Coe,
We are discussing a valid issue here. Someitmes Scott doesn't know how to argue his case without bashing his opponent....but we all this problem to some extent. It's not really personal. It just looks that way on the surface. Generally speaking, the reason one turns to personal attacks is that he has insufficient data and logic to support his position. So I consider it a moral victory when my opponent in a debate resorts to bashing and personal attacks! LOL!
Cliff
Last Edited by on Jan 25, 2010 8:39 AM
|
Ballrollers
GOLD MEMBER
2347 posts
Jan 25, 2010
8:05 AM
|
Nick
Of course there are. Some are misunderstanding the rules (which is easy to do). But I tend to think that most judges are (as a whole) doing their very best to be as fair and consistent as possible with each kit they judge. And visual accuity is always an issue. I still believe the majority of the variations are due in large part, to poorly written and poorly defined fly rules, and the resulting misunderstandings. We have "tight judges," " moderate judges" and "liberal judges" but I just believe they are all doing their best to judge as fairly as they know how. Without "INTEGRITY" in judging, we have nothing to boast about, nothing to wager about, nothing to challenge each other about? Who wants that?
Cliff
|
pigeon pete
500 posts
Jan 25, 2010
10:24 AM
|
In the main, I agree with Scott that most kits scoring 30 breaks or over have been losely judged, BUT, if like Cliff, you use the example of the best kit in the world finals in selected years, you can disprove this opinion --- not.
I would rather watch a high quality kit that does nothing for a minute or more and then drops a big quality break.
On more than one occasion during a competition fly, someone watching has said half way through the fly, "this is a quiet kit". It;s usually the guys who talk instead of watching and waiting. They then act suprised when they see the score on the sheet, and wonder why the "really good" kits came nowhere lol.
Pete
|
michael salus
120 posts
Jan 25, 2010
11:16 AM
|
I looked over some of the scores listed and a lot of the breaks were of the 5,6, and 8 birds rolling. When I'm watching a kit of birds and the fly is over, I never think of the small breaks, it's the big quality breaks that I remember. I just don't think you can get the breaks of 10 or more birds and keep up the frequency and quality. Looking at those scores and they are nice and I would have liked to seen them, but How much better would the quality have been if they took more time to set up and hit the " wall " and dumped the big one. I think Monty said it of Heine's kit that it was quite between breaks and then they just hit the wall. Can a great kit do 30 breaks of high quality and 10 or more birds.... yes, but everything has to be just right, especially the weather.
----------
MJ
|
JMUrbon
873 posts
Jan 25, 2010
11:35 AM
|
Michael your observation is 100 % correct. If you will look back at the scores in 2007 you will see kits that in a 5 minute span had 15 or more breaks and half of those were 10-18 birds. Now with a 1.5 to a 1.6 for depth between the top two flyers.
I am not sure how most look at this but I see it as impossible. A kit that is hitting say 25-30 feet on avarage and putting not just a break together every 20 seconds but up to an 18 bird break every 20 seconds is awfully hard to immagine.
----------
J.M.Urbon Lofts
A Proven Family of Spinners
http://www.freewebs.com/jmurbonlofts/
|
STUDENT 2 THE GAME
203 posts
Jan 25, 2010
11:45 AM
|
I would love to see a kit like that..Joe
Larry
Last Edited by on Jan 25, 2010 11:46 AM
|
nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4085 posts
Jan 25, 2010
12:47 PM
|
Many of you have decided that good kits are not frequent and you will never change your mind until you, yourself put together a solid frequent kit then you will change (maybe). I haven't done that, but my mind was open enough that when I finally did see one I acknowledged it. Right now, as it exist in your current attitude, the owner of a high frequency quality kit stands no chance if you are under it as the judge.
----------
Just My Take On Things
Nick Siders
|
JMUrbon
875 posts
Jan 25, 2010
1:05 PM
|
Not true Nick. However you seem to think that we have never witnessed a great kit. That my friend is BS. Just because you aknowledged a kit that you say was hitting on all cylinders does not mean that another judge has to do the same. I was not there and believe me I would have love to have been. All judges see things different and regardless of your opinion on a particular kit surely does not mean you can require another judge to do the same.
Nick I call what I see. If the breaks are clean they get scored and I dont care how often they roll. What I will not call is a bunch of action that isnt clean and decisive.
I am not sure were you would have gotten the idea that a quality kit doesnt stand a chance with me under it but I assure you Nick that you couldn't be further from the truth. Joe
----------
J.M.Urbon Lofts
A Proven Family of Spinners
http://www.freewebs.com/jmurbonlofts/
|
michael salus
121 posts
Jan 25, 2010
1:48 PM
|
Nick, You really don't believe that do you, that a "good" frequent kit would not get it's due.
----------
MJ
|
nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4086 posts
Jan 25, 2010
2:25 PM
|
Michael, from those that are talking I am getting an impression they believe quality and depth is lost with a frequent kit and I ain't buying it. I have seen the frequent kit that was all flutter and no separation, but I have also seen a frequent kit that had separation.
There would be very few people in this hobby I trust more than Joe Urban. I watched him not get his due in competition with a fairly frequent kit and he probably still remembers when that was as well (2004 or 2005). I believe what Joe is telling me and I think Joe has the balls to score a frequent kit well when the kit does well. If I am leading anyone to believe other wise I apologize to Joe.
I have only criticized a judge once and I will never do that again.....that does nothing for the hobby, but muddies it up. I wish I could have somehow retracted what I said, but once you speak it there is no going back. My complaint was unfounded and has done out of anger. The flier himself set me straight.
I am also being a little bit of a "devil's advocate" on this issue.
----------
Just My Take On Things
Nick Siders
Last Edited by on Jan 25, 2010 2:29 PM
|
JMUrbon
876 posts
Jan 25, 2010
2:46 PM
|
Nick the only time I have criticized a judge other than the fly you brought up was in the 2007 WC finals. I witnessed it at my house and my kit only stayed together for about 7 minutes. I wont say you did not witness a great kit because I believe with your passion on this subject that you did. Even under the eyes of a more critical judge that probably would have been an outstanding kit. As long as a guy is consistant the cream will still rise to the top. A great kit will always be a great kit. A high score does not make a great kit. The quality of the birds is what makes a great kit. I have seen kits that scored 600 pts that wouldnt have gotten 100 pts had I been the judge but they still won the fly and were better than the rest that day. I guess what I am trying to say is that the score will reflect the best kit for the day provided the judge is consistant on what he calls.
Nick I also would like to point out that a poor judge can put a bunch of fluttering culls on top if he doesnt know or cant tell the difference.
----------
J.M.Urbon Lofts
A Proven Family of Spinners
http://www.freewebs.com/jmurbonlofts/
|
PAUL R.
150 posts
Jan 25, 2010
2:55 PM
|
Nick, I do believe that in order to get more frequency you have to give up some speed. Its a give and take. Quality: besides having the proper wing position, also involves speed. How fast ? that I dont know. But, from my experience it takes balancing them both. So you can have freq and speed & clean spin.
|
Scott
2828 posts
Jan 25, 2010
7:02 PM
|
Good kits do have good frequency ... There is just a difference between realistic and un-realistic.. as I stated earlier and as Joe stated the math doesn't add up on some.
As for so called "tough" judges that some refer to..for myself never have I thought of myself as a tough judge nor do I go into a fly thinking I'm going to judge this tough.. my judging doesn't change... the way I judge today is no different than the way I judged 5 years ago.
When I judge I am simply looking only to score birds rolling correctly at the proper depth and breaking together... some simply don't like this style of judging... Trust me Nick you have never witnessed anything more than many of us here...
And Cliff.. never did I say that a kit can't do 20 breaks.. what I said is that is my goal.. and do you want who I picked that up from ? it was Don Oullette .. who is unmatched in this country.
And over the years I have found it to hold very true.. and anything above 20 is a bonus... as for your "no standard" there has allways been a standard .. some just have a lower standard than others.
----------
Scott Campbell
" God Bless "
Last Edited by on Jan 25, 2010 9:18 PM
|
Scott
2830 posts
Jan 25, 2010
9:26 PM
|
Pete.. you aren't saying that they cherry picked particular years to make a point are you ? I either scribed or flew every one of those years.. including the ones left out... I remember Heine telling me last time though that we need to get this thing fixed and was part of the reason that he took on his last one (judging) ...and he was a little upset with himself for starting it to begin with.
(In the main, I agree with Scott that most kits scoring 30 breaks or over have been losely judged, BUT, if like Cliff, you use the example of the best kit in the world finals in selected years, you can disprove this opinion --- not.)
----------
Scott Campbell
" God Bless "
Last Edited by on Jan 25, 2010 9:30 PM
|
nicksiders
GOLD MEMBER
4089 posts
Jan 25, 2010
10:28 PM
|
2002 WorldCup 1st place 36 breaks, 1.6Q 1.5D judged by Heine Bijker Holland
2000 WorldCup 1st place 49 breaks, 1.6Q 1.6D judged by Heine Bijker Holland.
Old Heine is not hesitant to score the frequent kits. Is Heine a "loose" judge? He seemed to be spot on or am I saying that because of his success as a competitor? Kind of a psycological thing I have locked in.
----------
Just My Take On Things
Nick Siders
Last Edited by on Jan 25, 2010 10:30 PM
|
Scott
2831 posts
Jan 26, 2010
12:36 AM
|
Nick.. yes he judged very loose and he knows it and admits it .. read my last post ..post his last one in 06 and it shows the picture.
The first time through he told me that where he comes from that normaly they don't judge the way he was judging (he was pretty loose no doubt)if you look at their regionial flys it shows reality for them... the last time through (that you didn't post)he told me that he was going to put it back in line... and that is exactly what he did.
----------
Scott Campbell
" God Bless "
Last Edited by on Jan 26, 2010 12:48 AM
|
pigeon pete
501 posts
Jan 26, 2010
1:36 AM
|
Again Nick you are using very specific examples (WC finalists) to make a general point.
It's a bit like looking at the moon landing as a good example of executive travelling.
In the real world, watching kits of rollers on a day to day basis, acheiving 30-40 quality breaks is not very common. Heine was not the only generous WC finals judge. Just because a guy judges the WC finals does not make them a good judge.
The scoring between 70 points or 700 can be a fine line if they are just about scorable by your interpretation of the rules, but just not quite good enough to score by mine.
We may actually be very close in our assesment, but the scores can be vastly different because we fall either side of a line.
Brian McKenzie from down under was a real nice guy but his idea of judging and mine were far apart.
I didn't say so to him because I don't think it's right to try and influence a judge half way round a world tour. He told me that he more or less counted everything, then seperated them with the multiplyers.
With that style of judging you are liable to get higher scores generally. The difference between a high and low score using the same judge can be something quite arbitary. Get a hawk, or a kit of racers, or a change in the weather come through during a fly and the difference can be between winning and coming last. I saw a kit fly in competition in quite a high wind. The birds did really well and won the fly, but they were out of sight for much of the fly.
Once the fly was over the wind dropped and they started to dump huge breaks at regular intervals and if they had flown a half hour later they could have doubled the score.
Pete,
Little Nick, the devils advocate,ha ha I like that one, lol
Last Edited by on Jan 26, 2010 1:48 AM
|
J_Star
2238 posts
Jan 26, 2010
5:04 AM
|
WOW…is it coming down to this to put down Heine Bijker as a loose judge so that you guys can argue your unreasonable point!! Do your homework and validate your points with reference like your opponents instead of humiliating some of the great people in this hobby!!!
Scott, I am really surprised by your last post…I can pull half of dozen posts by you where you referenced to Heine Bijker as a top notch judge who don’t score crap. What gives!!!
Jay
|