Mike,

Yep, that sounds about what I was thinking, but I'm certain the "K" factor was used for the explanation.

What whaturi just described I have seen myself and can easily be seen on the raw score sheets taken into account a few things but I was fairly consistent this weekend but witnessed the difference in judges by two judges describing how to do the Immelman in the basic class properly, one judge said one thing to a previous pilot in one of the rounds on Sat, so I mentioned this to the pilot I was calling for and another judge on Sunday said to do it differently to another previous pilot and I mentioned that once again to the person I was calling for so both pilots actually did score pretty well. All part of being a good caller and catching things like that. The person I called for on Sunday had questioned that when he saw his raw scores and though I answered it I could see he did not understand it.

I do understand that people see things and interpret things differently and these things are gonna happen, in my eyes, I just want to be the best judge I can be which is to be fair and consistent with a good degree of confidence that I am doing it correctly and that is what I need to work on.

Originally Posted by whaturi

when the higher class judges judged me, I got lower scores overall. It seems they were better at picking out multiple deductions per manuever and some of the lower class guys that judged me may have miss a couple deductions here and there.

Yep, you kinda figured it out. Couple things. In most cases, the higher class guys may have been flying Imac longer than the lower class judges. They know what to look for and quite frankly, know how to hide things, so they know when you're trying to hide them to!

If you were to poll the higher class guys, I'd estimate that all or at the very least a huge majority of them have been through one or more judging seminars. Also, it's more of an effect of how long you've been flying Imac more so than what class. There are a lot of really good, fair, consistent, judges that fly in the lower classes.

Another thing is that the higher class judges always know how to read aresti and can do it quite fast. This means they are watching the pilot for mistakes instead of trying to read what the pilot is supposed to do next.

I agree with Mark completey. I think the more experienced guys tend to be a little more harsh on the scores, because they are more familiar with the rule book, points given for deductions, and what exactly to look for. I know that I am constantly looking for line corrections, heading corrections, over rotations, etc. If you pull a shallow line, then correct it to a 45, thats 2 points right there. Then if you have a 4 of 4 up, and and two of 4 down as in the lay down humpty in Intermediate, that shallow line and correction are killing you, because you then have all those points and the pull and another line from which you could make a mistake. Say you are off 10 degrees on two of the points, and you pull through to a to steep 45 (by 10 degrees for example), you now have a total of 5 points in deductions.

I know when I was somewhat new to IMAC, i did not feel comfortable judging classes that were above what I flew. I felt that I didnt know ARESTI well enough, that I wasnt familiar with the rule book enough, and that had never been to a judging seminar, nor really sat down with someone that knew and went over rules and questions. As time progressed, and I learned more and more. I finally felt comfortable judging the advanced and unlimited classes. I think if I had judged the upper classes when I knew I wasn't ready, I would have been doing a major dis-service to the guys flying in that class. I know when I ran both of my contests this year. I targeted the Intermediate and unlimited guys to judge advanced, the advanced and unlimited guys to judge intermediate, and the advanced and some intermediate guys to judge unlimited. I used all people in classes sportsman and above to judge Basic and sportsman. I think it keeps it even this way, balanced, and more importantly, fair for the guys flying those classes.

Mark and Chris, great idea. Justin and I will try and make that on Friday as well. Won't be able to get there until scholl lets out at 3pm. Should get there at about 3:30 or so
Dave

Originally Posted by TheTank

I know when I was somewhat new to IMAC, i did not feel comfortable judging classes that were above what I flew.

Great point John. Exactly what I did as well. Get your feet wet with the lower classes or maybe one class above your own and get some experience in the judging chair. Also, grab a scribe so you can concentrate on judging and not looking down to write. If you can't find a scribe, ask the contest director to find one for you.

No problem Dave, we won't start till later in the evening.

You guys are all making really good points. Like John said, line corrections, Heading corrections, and over rotations are the key things to look at while judging. Here's somthing a lot of people forget about. Say someone over rotates a snap say... 20deg. Okay so thats a 2 point deduction, then the pilot corrects for his mistake by rolling back to level. Thats another 2 points. Say this snaps is on Goldfish (like in sportsman) you already have a 6 and you havnt even done the loop and half roll yet.

I think this will be neat, im excited

I never took out for the correction of over-rotations. Next time I will.

Originally Posted by hovermaster

I think this will be neat, im excited

I reasemble that statement.

I'm looking forward to it this is defenitley gonna be well worth it as we have a couple of excellent guys that are gonna do a brain dump for us. I think a bottle of their favorite drink or dinner is something we should consider for them

Originally Posted by whaturi

I never took out for the correction of over-rotations. Next time I will.

I'm pretty sure you're not supposed to. I believe it's call double jeopardy. You deduct for the over/under rotation, but not the correction. I'm away camping but I'll check the rules when I get home. (Wifi at the campsite.......we're roughing it. )

.

Originally Posted by OnTheEdge

(Wifi at the campsite.......we're roughing it. )

That's called roughing it in style

Yeah I just looked at it, I didnt find that there actually is a downgrade for rotation correction...but i think there is? But I was thinking of the downgrading for roll rate change - where as if you start the roll fast then slow it down to insure that you stop wings level, its 1 point per roll rate change. So in a rolling circle you deduct 1 point per roll rate change, weather they speed up or slow down.. or both. I actually got caught at the NATS this year for doing "show-points" Where you start the roll fast, then slow down to hit your point - like in a 4 point roll or something. Dont do that ,lol

Chris, you were doing them that way at the CAPI. Did you get popped?

Originally Posted by whaturi

Chris, you were doing them that way at the CAPI. Did you get popped?

Pete said he downgrades for them. I'm not sure if he did or not.

In my opinion, depending on how fast the initial "bump" in the aileron is, I don't think it should be a down grade.

Let's say you do your roll rate at 90 degrees per second. If you take one of our current Imac set-up airplanes (You know, the ones with the huge oversize barn door ailerons), the pilot usually runs a decent amount of aileron expo, therefore as he moves the stick from 0% to the throw required to give a 90 degree per second rollrate, the roll rate will naturally start out slow (becasue of the initial movement of the stick from center, the softness of the stick due to the expo, and the fact that the plane was at rest in the roll axis). In other words, the roll rate starts out slow and then travels up to the mantained roll rate (90 degrees per sec.). If a pilot bumps in an "extra" amount of initial quick aileron to get the plane up to that 90 degree per sec roll rate, then I feel it should not be a deduction.

Just my $.02