An open letter to IMAC

[KrisW]

Gentlemen,

I will be forwarding this post to as many mailing lists and on-line forums as possible, as well as to my Regional Director, Regional Judging instructor, and the entire Executive Committe of IMAC.

I competed at an IMAC meet this weekend. The location is unimportant.

Having competed in IMAC for some 7 years now, I have noted the trends concerning judging criteria, and the average judging ability of most contestants. What I witnessed this weekend, first hand, had to be the most abyssmal example of judging competency I have had the misfortune to observe since joining this organization. To say the least I am appalled .. to be more emphatic, I am righteously angry that our implimentation of judging criteria, and training of qualified judges, is so lacking.

I will give several examples to show the point.

Being asked to judge Basic, I was seated next to a fledgling judge who had NEVER attended a judging seminar, and was attempting his second stint in the judging chair. EVERY score that I heavily downgraded due to proper IMAC guidelines, received a high number from this person. There were many times when I would give a 2 or 3 to his 8 or 9. This gross disparity shows the lack of proper training, and even basic understanding, for the downgrade criteria outlined in the F&JG. Being that the class was Basic, how could this "Judge", who could not even score downgrades, hope to instruct the flyers in how to improve their flying and scores?

Concerning scores I received for my own flights. . I'll just use the Unknown round as a proper example. For certain, I had at least 3-4 manuvers that merited scores of less than 5, and in my opinion should have received no more than an 8 on any manuver due to prop downgrades. To the contrary, the lowest score I received was a 6.5, with the majority in the 7-9 range. At least 2 manuvers of my opponent (2 flyers in the class) should have been HARD Zeroes, yet were scored as 4 and 7 by the judges. My opponent concurred on this lack of downgrading for OBVIOUS hard zeroes, or for more blatant mistakes that rated heavy downgrades for both of us (he was also my Caller), and which neither of us received.

This pattern of lack of proper downgrades, as well as zero-ing manuvers due to lack of understanding about the manuvers dynamics and requirements, held true for all 5 rounds flown, from almost every judge that we encountered. It was obvious that not only did no one know how to attach proper downgrades of 1 point/10 degrees deviation on basic things such as angles and flight path, but nuances such as rolling out of or into snaps, spin entries and exits, radius curvature requirement and centered manuvers on lines were all but ignored by the majority of those sitting in the judging chair.

How do I know? I stood behind the judges and watched the manuvers, for a number of flyers, then noted the scores given. Obvious low scores, due to accumulated downgrades, were regularly given high marks.

Concerning the nuances of downgrades for spins, snaps, and accumulative downgrades to zero on manuvers, a grand total of 4 people at the event (the two Advanced pilots, and two Unlimited pilots) had the ability to properly judge and apply the judging criteria for downgrades.

In effect, what I witnessed was a weekend full of "Impressionistic" judging. This, 4-5 years after IMAC started an intense program of Judging Seminars, training sessions, and on-line activites to help "educate" judges.

I will agree that this is a HOBBY. . I will agree that not everyone applies judging criteria as as closely as some people may. But, there comes a time to step forward and ask. . . WHAT are we doing, if we cannot even get an accurate judgement of how our members are performing, and cannot even apply proper judging criteria except in rare occasions? WHAT is to be done do solve this problem. . How is the IMAC BOD going to address this issue, which is STILL the most glaring shortcoming of our SIG?

There comes a time when you look at the people with the highest scores in a class. . .and wonder. . is that tight 5-flyer group "tight" in scores because they are of equal skill. . or is it because the judges don't know how to give out anything except 7's and 8's?

I'll be happy to show you my score sheets from the event. .they are a JOKE. And if they are a joke. . what's that say about IMAC as a whole. I know how screwed up my flying can be . if the score sheets do not reflect the downgrades, what good are they? And if they do not reflect properly flown manuevers. . again. . what good are they?

Thank you for your attention to this letter. Hopefully, others will see it, and put forth their own inputs on this subject. Perhaps, just perhaps, something will. . finally. .. get done to straighten out our judging problems.

[iflyrc3Dstyle]

I totally agree Kris,


Possibly more judging seminars and possibly a judging seminar attendance card or maybe even a license. I don't know, just a thought.

[vsnap]

As long as they were consistant what are you truely complaining about. In all of judging (I agree it should be accurate) the most important thing is that from competitor to competitor it is a consistant trend. You cannot fault a judge for not knowing the actual deductions if in fact he is new and or has never attended a judges seminar. You look at history and you will see (this includes our full scale counterparts) a lack of judges at most events. It is the hardest position to fill and at a local contest you must rely on the contestants. I have seen this in Pattern, IAC, and IMAC...
I remember following a judges seminar for IAC when we did some practice judging, maneuvers were flown and we judged them according to what we saw...Some maneuvers had obvious mistakes such as over rotations, egg shaped loops and such. Yet some looked like a 10 to me..One judge always found errors and even the Instructor "Brian Howard" didn't see them. His statement was this:
" you judge what you see, if you did not see any downgrade you don't give the downgrade. If it looked like a 10 you score it that way. There are no hidden downgrades because nobody is perfect." He finished with the fact the the judges need not be perfect either, just close and more importantly you must be consistant from contestant to contestant.

[Anna Wood]

Kris,

Have you called Stan to let him know you will be organizing and hosting a judge's seminar in your area? I am sure there are a few judging instructors that will be very happy to teach a school in your area.

We are the solution and if we want to have better judging we have to make the effort to make that happen. At the moment it falls on a precious handfull of individuals who work to make events, like judging seminars happen.

The solution is in our hands if we choose to do something other then a few e-mails scattered around the internet.

Regards,

Anna Wood

Coordinator
2004 Tucson Judges School
2005 Chandler Advanced School
2005 Las Vegas Judges School
2007 Phoenix Judges School

[3dubya]

We Just had a major Comp in Australia where CD did a very good job in metering out experience to cover all classes. I fly Unlimited

Unlimited flyers judged advanced, and advanced judged unlimited, because the schedules have similar complexity & the best judges usually can fly your schedule to a reasonable level (by this I mean you can pre-empt problems usually with similar flight experience) and have also done some time in the chair to get up to those classes by going to comps and earning rankings. Then to keep experience level as high as we could but to give advanced and unlimited a break, being semi focused we acted as pencilers for the rest of the guys who judged themselves. We had time to help judge because the maneuvers were less complex with mini discussions for each manuver..

This I thought worked well, we can never forget people get tired, cold or hot in chair, as much as people are taught well, some of it will go out window when uncomfortable. You cant scrutinise objective sports to an infinite level because of this but yes a reasonable standard should be maintained.


Solution is deck chairs for Judges with shade and oscillating fans and ice cold cordial in summer, and electric sleeping bags and hot cups of coffee in winter..

[Toro]

Thats why Im flying helis now... TO many hard zeros for me....

[50%plane]

Hmm, this thread is very interesting. As a pilot interested in flying IMAC, it may not be in the best interest of IMAC for this kind of stuff to be posted. Right or wrong, I don't doubt that this goes on in any major form of competition. Kris, when's your judging seminar? I'd love to attend if at all possible. I hope to join IMAC next year if I'm not to busy.


50%

[Xipp]

Kris, I find your whole complaint to be a mirrior image of how you judged at the 2004 nats, Remember where you were running around blowing your hole that you were and i quote"I AM THE IRON JUDGE" and how messed up the scoring got? Do you remeber how flying had to stop to fix the unreal scores you were giving to pilots you did not care for?..Remember Kris i scribed for you and i saw all this with my own 2 eyes.....I am not trying to start a fight with you just a solid reminder that you my friend are not infalable yourself.
I would think that a proper course of action would be to educate some of these people and not waste the time or effort to whine about it.
Kris you seem to have a way of starting BS on these online chats that is why you have been banned from RCU Twice so now the crying comes to the giants.
It happens at all IMAC events i myself have been on the end of bad judging but never have i gotten so upset as to come on a internet flying site and whine about it I think if you are quilified to hold a judging school which i personaly do not think you are then you should take anna's advice and do it and use your time in a more productive manner..Bottomline is if IMAC is so bad stop flying it and move on or learn to deal with it Mr Perfect...

Sorry for the pissed off nature of this post but Kris needs to learn how to use the net for more productive things then to cry about the same things he has been guilty of

[Downhumpty]

Please don't let this thread discourage anyone from becoming a part of a great organization. The Southeast region has poured a lot of time and effort into educating judges. I can speak only for the Southeast as I have only attended SE seminars. I am sure IMAC as a whole has grown with knowledge in the judging department for the past five years. It is the SE IMAC pilots responsibility to help educate new and upcoming pilots. I urge everyone to visit the IMAC web site @ www.mini-iac.com and go to the rules section an self educate there self. There is plenty of information there. Enjoy! I encourage all IMAC pilots to attend a Flying and Judging seminar near you!


1.1.4. Adherence To The Rules
Adherence to the rules is probably the most significant of all the ele­ments required to make a good judge. A good judge has developed a sense of fair playing and knows that a good contest is one in which everyone plays by the same rules. Anyone sitting in a judging chair must adhere to the rules existing at that time, or disqualify him or herself.
1.1.5. Technical Knowledge
Technical knowledge employs the use of an organized system of downgrading as well as the need to be consistent and accurate. The downgrading or deficit grading system assumes that the contestant is going to fly a perfect maneuver that starts with a ten (10), and then downgrade it based on the mistakes observed as they occur, rather than falling into the trap of scoring on overall by impression. It should be assumed by a judge that a contestant is going to fly a well-formed maneuver, so he/she should start with the grade of ten (10). As he/she watches the maneuver, he/she then begins to find fault with what he/she sees and starts downgrading as it progresses. This system is preferable to waiting until the maneuver is finished, and try to as­sign a grade on overall impression. The later can be erratic and incon­sistent, and also confines grading into a too narrow range. However, as a final check, the score should be consistent with the figure overall quality.
The most important aspect ofEvery judge should strive for a high degree of consistency and accuracy. consistent judging is for each judge to establish his or her standard and then maintain that standard throughout the contest.
The judges will independently assess the quality of each figure and its components as performed in the sequences, grading with numbers from ten (10) to zero (0) in increments of one-half (1/2) point. A grade of ten (10) represents a perfect figure in which the judge saw no deviations from prescribed criteria.
Remember, it is the judge’s job to find fault: be a nitpicker. On the other hand, give a grade of 10 if you see a perfect figure – but if you are really being critical, you won’t see too many. Don’t get in a rut. Guard against confining your grades in too narrow a range. If you watch carefully and grade consistently, you will find yourself giving an occasional 2, 3, or 4 on some sloppy figures that are not quite bad enough for a zero. You will also be giving an occasional 9 or 10 for the superlative figure which you can find little or no fault.
As a judge, you are expected to grade only against one standard, and that is perfection. The performance of the aircraft, the difficulty in performing a figure (on the basis of your personal experience or per­ception), the weather condition or the pilot’s name and reputation should not be considered in formulating your grade.
Two (2) judges should be used to judge each sequence. There should be enough judges available to establish a rotational procedure that will average out variations in judging. Sets of judges shall judge all con­testants an equal number of times and all contestants shall have an equal opportunity to fly before all judges. Substitution of judges, which precludes equal exposure by all contestants, shall be avoided.

Always give the competitor the benefit of the doubt when not sure.


Kent Porter
AMA 6724
IMAC 3730
IMAA 28804

[sweetpea]

I can see some of his point and others as well.

While the judging can be off......I don't agree with......if its consistent than its ok.

That might work in adv or Unl.......but in Basic/sportsman if your not getting the proper score on downgrades than you may think your ready to move up too soon!

And lets not even get started on the kid scoring syndrome or the old person syndrome etc......sometimes it would be better if the judge just judged on the flying and not the pilot.

I know the SW has an excellent judge school in the early part of the year.

[Redneck Shaun]

Ya know, here in the SC region we have one judging seminar a year. If you miss out, you miss out. I wanted to go to the one last year but at the last minute I was called to work. I'm sure it happens all the time. If there could be at least two a year I'm sure that would help. I'm new to IMAC this year and just flew my first IMAC in basic last weekend.Next year I'm going to be all in the middle of it .

If I was asked to judge right now I would refuse because of the above mentioned problems.

	Quote:
	possibly a judging seminar attendance card or maybe even a license. I don't know, just a thought.

This is not a bad idea to start with.Maybe the "newbies" to IMAC should have to go to a judging seminar before they are allowed to judge.

I think the Contest Director needs to be able to fill the judging seats with people that are capable of making the right call.I understand that basic is just to get your feet wet. But Kris was right by saying " How could this judge, who could even score downgrades,hope to instruct the flyers in how to improve their flying and score?

I want to improve my scores, and I want someone there to point out my goof ups so that I'll be able to grow in IMAC.And score better the next contest.

Shaun

[excelpoint]

As 3Dubya pointed out. Over here in Aus we tend to sit the experienced judges as pencilers with the less experienced judges to help guide them through the proper judging criteria. One of the points I tend to make clear to all new judges in the chair is consistency through out the whole round. What I then do is after the round I will talk to the new judges and see why they gave certain scores and explain some of the downgrade critirea.
Kris, the NEW judge you saw handing out wrong scores, did you then spend the time to explain to him certain mistakes he was making? If you didnt then you have nothing at all to complain about. If you did then good on ya, you are making a worthwhile contribution to the world of IMAC.
We dont have Judging schools over here in Australia yet so we take on the responsibility ourselves of educating the newer guys and ourselves at every comp we go to. Remember bitching about the good scores other pilots got in public really isnt cool.