JUDGES SCORING QUESTION

I would like to know: If a contestant completes a maneuver, enters and exits correctly and does all of the required elements of the maneuver, do you see any way that he/she would be given 10 points for that maneuver? I'm not asking you to give a score to an unseen maneuver here. But, is a maneuver as described above equal to an attempt only (no matter how poorly done), as would be the case in the event of only completing one loop of the clover? I know the "one loop of the clover" would also result in loss of pattern points and the maneuver described above would not.

Second question: If you saw a score sheet with four tens on it, would you expect to see Pattern Points added?

It seems to me that it is possible (though not likely) that somebody completes a maneuver that has all the required elements and the correct entry and exit, yet does it so badly that the judges give it a 10. It's sort of the counterpart of a "40" maneuver: theoretically possible but not often seen. If someone did four such horrid maneuvers, and did all the rest of the pattern and the laps and so forth, then yes, it's theoretically possible to get pattern points for such a flight.

John Thompson

While it is tempting, at times to award ten points to a flyer, I have never done it........I did once award a 13 at the Nats to a flyer that had flown for the Walker Cup the prior year.
The rule book indicates that the scoring starts at 10 for all maneuvers but STARTING !!!(It's in the book!), Landing, flight pattern and appearance.

I am going to submit a rules change to award pattern points if there is a score for the maneuver and it was completed in the proper sequence, within the proper time frame.

See Ya

John:
Work on your loops and we'll give you an 11 if you show improvement.

LAST EDITED ON Nov-13-04 AT 10:35 PM (CST)
 
>While it is tempting, at times to award ten points to a
>flier, I have never done it....

Simply not true. My one and only flight ever where I received a 10 for a completed maneuver was the 2003 Nationals and you were the judge. You also gave me four in a row. That is certainly your right as a judge and I would not argue with you as to whether or not that was a correct score. After all, it is your call. But to say you have never given a 10 is just not true.

>I am going to submit a rules change to award pattern points
>if there is a score for the maneuver and it was completed in
>the proper sequence, within the proper time frame.

Edit for clarity:

My understanding of the present rule book is that this is the correct paramater for awarding pattern points under the existing rules and has been for some time. Your proposal would possibly have the affect of making it clear to those judges who only have reading comprehension skills of say...... a fourth grader. I would however change the wording to "...a score for all of the maneuvers..."

>>While it is tempting, at times to award ten points to a
>>flier, I have never done it....
>
>Simply not true. My one and only flight ever where I
>received a 10 for a completed maneuver was the 2003
>Nationals and you were the judge. You also gave me four in
>a row. That is certainly your right as a judge and I would
>not argue with you as to whether or not that was a correct
>score. After all, it is your call. But to say you have
>never given a 10 is just not true.
>
>
PEABODY?!! NO WAY! Heh-heh-heh.

Al K.

Rich,

re: Pattern Points for any *completed* maneuver with a score...

Consider adding a column to the scoresheet next to the maneuver score to enter a checkmark if the maneuver WAS completed. Any absent check-mark for any scored maneuver means no pattern points.

IMHO, this could --
1) create a 'paper trail' for why a flier was docked pattern points,

2) become an unwelcome burden to our overpaid and pampered judges, who bask in posh luxury and the total trust and admiration of everyone they deign to judge... (yeah...right.)<g>

Or devise some other way the tabulators can determine, after the flight is over, whether each scored maneuver was, indeed, completed correctly, in correct order and sequence, within the time limit?

Lou...pesky stuff, indeed.
My thoughts are that a ZERO as a maneuver score might tip both the judge that awared it and a tabulator that pattern points were not earned. When a flyer runs out of time and loses landing and pattern points, an explaination to the tabulator is generally given now, but, again, the ZEROS should indicate something. The only out of normal deal would be when maneuvers are flown out of sequence...a little note could remedy this.

Out of sequence maneuvers present a problem, as the judges generally recognize that a horizontal eight is not a triangle, say, and those that I do generally award points for an eight rather than a 10 for the triangle and whatever score is earned for the eight...

Frequently flyers that have omitted a maneuver will perform it at the end of the pattern...generally, they are awarded points for the maneuver....I imagine this is wrong?

See Ya

>Frequently flyers that have omitted a maneuver will perform
>it at the end of the pattern...generally, they are awarded
>points for the maneuver....I imagine this is wrong?
>
>See Ya
>
>Peabody

Once again Mr. Peabody, your imagination has led you astray.

>I would like to know: If a contestant completes a maneuver,
>enters and exits correctly and does all of the required
>elements of the maneuver, do you see any way that he/she
>would be given 10 points for that maneuver? I'm not asking
>you to give a score to an unseen maneuver here. But, is a
>maneuver as described above equal to an attempt only (no
>matter how poorly done), as would be the case in the event
>of only completing one loop of the clover? I know the "one
>loop of the clover" would also result in loss of pattern
>points and the maneuver described above would not.

Sure, you can do it bad enough to get a 10, I suppose, and still hypothetically complete it. I've seen it lots of times with the WAM "error counting" method, actually. That's one reason error counting, taken literally, has some problems.

>Second question: If you saw a score sheet with four tens on
>it, would you expect to see Pattern Points added?

Not usually, but it's not impossible.

I think as an example, if the pilot was doing his inside square loops and did two but the bottoms were too high, the tops too high there were no discernable square corners or bumps that might be intrepeted as corners they were ovales and did not track--- I think I could see a minimum 10,
Bigiron

> I think as an example, if the pilot was doing his inside
>square loops and did two but the bottoms were too high, the
>tops too high there were no discernable square corners or
>bumps that might be intrepeted as corners they were ovales

In WAM, on a square 8, there were 2 point deductions for each "error". There are 16 corners in a square 8, and all of them exceeded 5 foot radius (since we all "know" it can't be done). Even otherwise perfect, that means -32 points. 40-32 = 8, minumum score is 10, thus even a perfect manevuer gets a 10, everytime, until someone develops a boundary layer control system, or the laws of physics are repealed. Like I say, the system had its problems.

LAST EDITED ON Nov-13-04 AT 09:45 AM (CST)
 
You could build something like Rich Porter's Ridiculous, if you were serious about making 5ft. corners.

I'd only deduct 1 pt. for missing a corner and give him a 20 or so. Seems reasonable, since shape is the primary criterion for judging maneuvers.

>You could build something like Rich Porter's Ridiculous, if
>you were serious about making 5ft. corners.

Except I'm sure even Rich (and Wild Bill) would acknowledge that even the Ridiculous can't hit the 5 feet.

>I'd only deduct 1 pt. for missing a corner and give him a 20
>or so. Seems reasonable, since shape is the primary
>criterion for judging maneuvers.

So everybody you judge starts with 24 points (40-(16*1)) on the square 8? I bet they don't ask you to judge very often!

>I'd only deduct 1 pt. for missing a corner and give him a 20
>or so. Seems reasonable, since shape is the primary
>criterion for judging maneuvers.

It is?

Smooth is listed in the manuever description several times. I do not know about sharp.

>--- since shape is the primary
>criterion for judging maneuvers.

The new judges guide that will be in the 2005 rulebook emphasizes not only shapes but sizes, intersections and bottoms.

Marvin,

I've seen and done some really bad maneuvers. What I'm trying to get across is that this thinking makes a very poorly done maneuver equal to one that was simply attempted. If the poor slob (me) makes it through, how about some credit for surviving. 11-12-14.......anything but 10!

11.2 Attempted/Incomplete Maneuvers. The model . . . The attempted/incomplete maneuver shall be awarded a minimum score of 10.

Now does that mean that the score of 10 is reserved for and restricted to attempted/incomplete maneuvers? I think it does. However, one could read the rule as saying at least 10 points, implying that an attempted/incomplete maneuver could receive more than 10 points. I hope no one agrees.

As I see it, a score of 10 points is not available for a completed maneuver, no matter how bad, so a score of 10 automatically means loss of pattern points.

According to the OTS 1951-52 rules, to be scored, a maneuver must be done in sequence on the first attempt. I don't see any statement to this effect in the present AMA rule book. Therefore I would score a maneuver done out of sequence on its merits; however, I think this point needs to be specificaly addressed.

There are still a few places in the rules where the judge has no alternative but to rule as he believes it should be. These flaws and omissions in the rules need to be identified and corrected.

I always try to keep in mind what the average score is for the maneuver, 25, except for landing, if that helps. I would say that if a competitor does an extremely good maneuver (say, Sq.8), but only one of two required, and then has the engine quit, etc., I could see reason to award more than 10 points. One thing for sure, as soon as you think you have all possible situations covered by the rule book, something weird will happen, that will prove you wrong. Steve

this is another of those "grey" areas in the rules that is subject to different interpretations, since the rules are not clear.

11.2 says that "The attempted/incomplete maneuver shall be awarded a minimum score of 10".

However, a maneuver can be so awful(some of mine maybe?) that it gets a 10 just because it is sooo bad. That means that the worst possible flight is 175 pts. plus appearance points, somewhere around 185 or so. It is pretty clear that if you do anything at the appropriate time, you get a minimum of 10 pts. Nothing in the book allows for "0" scores for maneuvers.

So a 10 does not necessarily mean loss of pattern points. It is kind of obvious to me that if the judges saw a blown maneuver that would result in no pattern points they should write zero in the pattern points score and note the maneuver, in case there are questions. But the rules don't get into that level of detail.

REWRITE THE RULES!!