Seeding III

We've had four days of rain, maybe I should seed the lawn before it snows.

Seeding is one of those good ideas that got implemented at the NATS. the intent is great, make sure that a significant number of top competitors don't get knocked out by having to qualify against each other, which could theoretically happen in a random draw. Problem is it is only one way to do the job, it's not easy to do "fairly" since it can't handle relatively unknown flyers, and the methods and procedures haven't been published.

Instead of trying to decide beforehand who should be seeded, do the selection on the qualifying circles. Don't select a fixed number of flyers from each circle, select flyers base on their % of the top score on the circle. Once all the scores are in it would take just a couple of minutes to calculate a percentage of score, applied to both circles, that would select 20 pilots. If 90% gives only 18 flyers, then go to 89% and maybe pick up one. Then 88% and pickup another, etc. If somehow there is a tie, then give 'em a break and qualify 21 or 22, as needed.

It wouldn't matter if one circle was loaded with talent. If they are good, they will all get relatively high scores, and more flyers will advance from that circle. If a circle is loaded with mediocrity, the few top pilots on that circle will qualify and the also-rans will still be wishing for just a couple more points on their scores.

Easy and open for all to see- they'll be calculating their chances after every score is posted.
no Sekrit Kabals or arcane procedures.
No blasted record keeping, trying to keep track of every flyer at every contest in the country, in order to do seeding right.
If the scores mean anything at all, this is more fair than picking 10 flyers from each of two seeded circles.

We run an entire years stunt series like this, seems to work well. The series winner is determined by the combined %'s from 6 meets with a flyers best three results counting, using countback to break ties. Winner of an individual event is awarded 1000 points, the rest scaled off his/her raw score. Highest possible score for the series being 3000.
Been doing it for several years, no gripes yet (famous last words)

Won't work. (OK, we're back to that again. Negative thingking, etc.)

But the problem is we are working with different judges. Some judges work with a wide range of scores, some give you a number and then go one better for a better maneuver or one worse for a lesser number and you stick with it. 34, 35, 33, 35,3 4, etc. You get the idea, though.

That is the whole reason for seeding.

And now I am going to ask the stupid question. Why are you guys so against getting the 20 best flyers to qualify? You say it is so the best guys don't knock each other off. Well, that is fine. If you put the top 20 flyers in one circle and only ten qualify then you have the 1-10 and 21-30 place flyers flying on "top 20" day.

Frankly I don't care if I don't understand how the seeding works, or if you don't understand how the seeding works. All I care is if the person who does the seeding understand how the seeding works. He does. He does a good job. It's not broke. We don't have to fix it.

Next topic.

I will agree with Phil, in that 1) if the birds have gone south for the winter, it may be a good time to plant grass seed down at the ol' flying field (or lawn) and 2) it's a good idea to have stuff in the book, so that when the somebody who knows how to do it can't be there, the unfortunate few who are then stuck with the dirty work can carry on after a short study period, with cool heads, and at least a small amount of confidence. Steve

2) it's a
>good idea to have stuff in the book, so that when the
>somebody who knows how to do it can't be there, the
>unfortunate few who are then stuck with the dirty work
>can carry on after a short study period, with cool heads,
>and at least a small amount of confidence. Steve

<golf clap>

Darn!!! I swore that I wouldn't get into these types of brouhahas, but here I am, going to make someone hate me.

First, what is wrong with the present seeding system we use today at the Nats? I have not heard of many gripes (although I haven't made the Nats lately)
Second, is it is because the system isn't written out as to how it is supposed to be done, why isn't it?
Third, If it isn't written out, then it should be, if for no other reason, it should be so those that wish to question things will have to find other grounds on which to base their gripes. Also so that continuity can be maintained throughout the years for such cases as might arise i.e. the event director becomes ill at a last moment or some other such type emergency.
Fourth. I do not think that it should be in the "Competition Regulations" (Rule Book) but in a contest director's guide and also it need not be finely detailed down to the last dotted I or crossed T but laid out in a general manner such that if weather, low or extraordinarily large turn-outs occur, the seeding can be expanded or contracted as necessary for those conditions.
I think I have expounded too much on something I have little or no vested interest in.

Sorry bout that

Bigiron aka Marvin Denny

>Frankly I don't care if I don't understand how the seeding
>works, or if you don't understand how the seeding works.
>All I care is if the person who does the seeding understand
>how the seeding works. He does. He does a good job. It's
>not broke. We don't have to fix it.
>
>Next topic.

I dont understand this attitude. We are simply discussing how contests could be run. Isnt that what this board is for? Discussion? No one is proposing anything. No one said it was broke. Just thinking outloud about things and possibilities. You are the only one who has said anything about how the seeding is done. I dont know why the people who actually DO KNOW HOW IT IS DONE wont set the record straight. Can you tell me why.

>I dont understand this attitude. We are simply discussing
>how contests could be run. Isnt that what this board is
>for? Discussion? No one is proposing anything. No one
>said it was broke. Just thinking outloud about things and
>possibilities. You are the only one who has said anything
>about how the seeding is done. I dont know why the people
>who actually DO KNOW HOW IT IS DONE wont set the record
>straight. Can you tell me why.

What I stated was how it was stated to me. But what I see here is a constant search for doing things differently than what they are presently being done. "We could seed them this way" or "We could seed them that way" or "We don't need seeding at all" or "bunch all the best guys in one circle so some of the people in the other circle get a chance to make the top 20" or...

You say you don't understand the seeding process. Well, why don't you ask Warren or maybe Shareen or someone who is involved. Then if you understand it, you won't feel so much the need to question it. And I am sure that there are a number of people who know how it is done so it is not going to get lost in some dark alley somewhere if someone decides he is no longer going to do the job he is doing today.

But when you keep saying, "I don't understand it" or "Why doesn't somnebody tell me..." it is like you feel there is some deep, dark secret here that somebody does't want out. Ask those involved. It is that simple. And the seeding process is needed for one simple reason, we use two circles with two sets of judges. And we then have to make it as fair as possible for everybody to place to the best (or worst) of his ability.

Hi Leonard,
(snip)
>And now I am going to ask the stupid question. Why are you
>guys so against getting the 20 best flyers to qualify? You
>say it is so the best guys don't knock each other off.
>Well, that is fine. If you put the top 20 flyers in one
>circle and only ten qualify then you have the 1-10 and 21-30
>place flyers flying on "top 20" day.

I am not against that at all. I don't remember anyone saying they don't want the BEST 20 fliers on top 20 day. In fact, IIRC, the rudimentary study that Mr. Rush posted seems to show that there is very little difference as to seeding, in regards to the lower level of said top 20. Once you drop below about 10, or so, fliers who are really in the hunt for the Walker Trophy, there is easily more than 10 more that could fill the remainder of qualifying.

>Frankly I don't care if I don't understand how the seeding
>works, or if you don't understand how the seeding works.

>All I care is if the person who does the seeding understand
>how the seeding works. He does. He does a good job. It's
>not broke. We don't have to fix it.

EDIT That's the point here, Leonard. Who else knows how "He" does it? What if "he" gets ill and has to miss? I can only suppose you are referring to Warren since you use the singular "he". I like Warren, but he can't keep on with this forever just like the rest of us can't.

You are the forum owner, so your say goes. But you are only stating your opinion on this like everyone else, nothing concrete.

Some people really want to know just how "it" is decided. It appears to be the opinions of a select few as to just how the seeds are actually selected. I know Warren, not REAL well, but I do know and have talked with him on several occasions both on the phone and in person. My opinion of Warren is that he's a good man, but that doesn't satisfy many people engaged in this event. They want to know, and IMHO have a right to know, what the process actually is and how it's done. That is not an unreasonable request for anyone directly involved in the event.
>
>Next topic.

Throw out this post, but I don't see where asking for information that should be readily available upsets you so. The original post about this whole series of posts was to put the "process" in the book. I don't care if it's there or not, but in the interest of the event I know it should be written somewhere where it is accessible for all. Otherwise we just keep on flaming the fires of the perceived "secrecy" that seems to worry a lot of fliers, whether they are willing to come out and say it or not.

Respectfully,
Bill Little <><

>I am not against that at all. I don't remember anyone
>saying they don't want the BEST 20 fliers on top 20 day. In
>fact, IIRC, the rudimentary study that Mr. Rush posted seems
>to show that there is very little difference as to seeding,
>in regards to the lower level of said top 20. Once you drop
>below about 10, or so, fliers who are really in the hunt for
>the Walker Trophy, there is easily more than 10 more that
>could fill the remainder of qualifying.

There are many people who are close to that "bubble" at any Nats who could have made it but didn't that year. The whole point, however, is to insure as much as possible that the 20 best flyers in qualifying make the top 20. And that is the purpose of seeding.

As to what method Howard used with is computer simulations, I don't know, but they were flawed. If the seeding process is accurate and if the 20th best flyer was the 20th best flyer, then he should make the top 20. He should not be placed 28th, and he should not be placed 14th. In his circle he should be number 10. Maybe, because you don't know who is going to get hot, and so on, maybe he will end up 11th. But then that circle ended up beyond the capability of seeding. Seeding is not done to determine who the top 20 will be. Seeding is done to allow those who fly the best to make the top 20.

>(snip)Some people really want to know just how "it" is decided.
>It appears to be the opinions of a select few as to just how
>the seeds are actually selected. I know Warren, not REAL
>well, but I do know and have talked with him on several
>occasions both on the phone and in person. My opinion of
>Warren is that he's a good man, but that doesn't satisfy
>many people engaged in this event. They want to know, and
>IMHO have a right to know, what the process actually is and
>how it's done. That is not an unreasonable request for
>anyone directly involved in the event.(snip)
>Respectfully,
>Bill Little <><

Bill, I will say the same thing to you that I said to Doug. I get the opinion from some of you that you think this is being kept as a dark secret. Just ask those who are involved in the seeding process and they will tell you exactly how it is done. There are a lot of things we don't need to know, but will readily be explained to us if we want to know. I feel the seeding process is one of them. If you have a burning desire to find out how you were seeded, just ask. Don't put a challenge on the board saying, "Why won't somebody tell me?" Just ask those involved. Simple as that. Matter of fact, I was curious one year, so I did ask. You can, too.

>When the character of a man is not clear to you, check the characters around him. After that, you will want to go make other friends.
>nota Proverb

>When the character of a man is not clear to you, check the characters around him. After that, you will want to go make other friends.
>nota Proverb
Leonard Neumann

REALLY didn't expect a cheap shot like this from you. Changing and ridiculing my signature. What's that supposed to mean?

Hey, I was being civil and speaking for some others. If you read what I said, I stated that IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME whether seeding is used or not. But here are some who do care, and strongly. PAMPA is made up of these "lesser" competition fliers who will carry on the event with your son as we drop out. Maybe there will not be Shareen and Warren around then. I can see that you are closed minded about this and that is your perogative.

If a reasonable discussion can't be carried on around here what can?

EDIT: oh, yeah, I forgot...... you didn't tell Marvin (bigiron) Denny this, too. He is saying the same thing I am, just with less words. I guess I just say too much.

"Second, is it is because the system isn't written out as to how it is supposed to be done, why isn't it?
Third, If it isn't written out, then it should be, if for no other reason, it should be so those that wish to question things will have to find other grounds on which to base their gripes. Also so that continuity can be maintained throughout the years for such cases as might arise i.e. the event director becomes ill at a last moment or some other such type emergency." Post #4, above

Bill <><

>>When the character of a man is not clear to you, check the characters around him. After that, you will want to go make other friends.
>>nota Proverb
>Leonard Neumann
>
>REALLY didn't expect a cheap shot like this from you.
>Changing and ridiculing my signature. What's that supposed
>to mean?

Nothing malicious intended, here, Bill. Just trying to add some humor and apparently it didn't work for you. I am sorry if it offended you. I was just responding to the saying sorta like a church sign. They are interesting reading when they are changed every few days. They get rather boring when the same sign stays up for months at a time.

>Hey, I was being civil and speaking for some others. If you
>read what I said, I stated that IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME
>whether seeding is used or not. But here are some who do
>care, and strongly.

It is interesting that this is the first I have ever heard of any "problems" with the process of seeding. Oh, there are times when you go to the competition and it seems your circle is tougher than the other (it always seems that way). That will happen even with seeding. A flyer who continues to practice and continues to improve, or who just happens to be "on" that week, will move up in the standing. Another who was flying better the year before may move down. That is why we use seeding, but still hold the competition before awarding the trophies. Even Tiger Woods fell out of his top seed position this year. It happens. And a new one will take his place. Maybe he will regain the spot. Maybe not. Time moves on.

But where's the problem?

>PAMPA is made up of these "lesser" competition fliers who
>will carry on the event with your son as we drop out.
>Maybe there will not be Shareen and Warren around then.
>I can see that you are closed minded about this and that
>is your perogative.
>
>If a reasonable discussion can't be carried on around here
>what can?

A "reasonable" discussion is fine. Asking questions is fine. But for some there doesn't seem to be discussion or even give and take. They suddenly (and this was sudden) come up with an idea that the system is broke and they have the solution to "fix" it. (The first suggestion was that seeding was not needed because it only favored the top flyers. Then it was to seed only those who made the top 5. Then it was...)

The seeding process in place is probably the most reasonable and the most "fair to all" system on the planet. We could argue the number of years, I suppose, and argue if someone won the Nats this year and someone else won last year, who gets first seed and who gets second ad finitum. (I like Latin terms. I took three years of Latin in college, so I guess I outta use it.) But the point is, the system works.

You don't always have to know how something works to be able to use it or to know that it does. Take television, for instance. Do you know how it works? Do you know how the color system works, but doesn't affect black and white sets? Or the stereo signal. Do you really care? Most people just push the buttons and use it. They don't need to know and the TV manufacturers don't tell them.

I happen to have an inquisitive mind. I was reading all the books on radio and Television that I could get a hold of at the library while all the rest of the kids my age were reading comic books. I got my first job as a bench repair man in a TV repair shop the summer before my Junior year in High School. (I was salutatorian. I got a "C" in history. History isn't logical. I love logic).

I say all this only to say, I, too, have an inquisitive mind (as apparently others share on this forum.) So, when I was curious about how the seeding process took place (not complaining--I had nothing to complain about. I was just curious) I asked. And a short explaination was readily given to me which was all that I asked for or needed.

This isn't something devious or detrimental or favoring one person or group. It is done to offer as fair a system to all as is possible. If there is a better system, offer your suggestion to those who do the seeding.

The real point is, it is a lot more important to know how bottoms, shapes, and intersections are going to affect your score and whether one is seen to be given preference over the other by the judges and then to fly accordingly, than it is to know how you are seeded in the circle.

When the flight orders are posted, I look at what is posted. I notice that "these guys are over here" and "those guys are over there". You don't worry at the moment about "those guys". Your only concern is "these guys" and putting in a flight to the best of your ability. Matt's goal is always to pass the guy in front of him. you will never get to the top until you pass the first guy in front of you. And then the next. And then the next. The problem is not with the seeding.

>EDIT: oh, yeah, I forgot...... you didn't tell Marvin
>(bigiron) Denny this, too. He is saying the same thing I
>am, just with less words. I guess I just say too much.

Check Marvin's reply in reply number 4. Aside from the fact that he says the procedure should be written out so people won't have grounds to complain (which I don't think they have any way) He is saying pretty much what I am. The system isn't broke. What's the problem? And if you don't understand it, ask the people who do it.

Just remember, this is a forum, and NOBODY is obligated to respond to any question you ask. They do it out of courtesy. It rather irritates me when people say, "Why doesn't somebody answer my question?" Maybe it is because you didn't ask the right person directly. I did, and I got a quick, simple, and civil answer to my question.

>Frankly I don't care if I don't understand how the seeding
>works, or if you don't understand how the seeding works.

Who should understand it then Leonard????!!!!!! My Gosh. That is crazy talk.

>All I care is if the person who does the seeding understand
>how the seeding works. He does. He does a good job. It's
>not broke. We don't have to fix it.
>
>Next topic.

Nice....

>Instead of trying to decide beforehand who should be seeded,
>do the selection on the qualifying circles. Don't select a
>fixed number of flyers from each circle, select flyers base
>on their % of the top score on the circle. Once all the
>scores are in it would take just a couple of minutes to
>calculate a percentage of score, applied to both circles,
>that would select 20 pilots. If 90% gives only 18 flyers,
>then go to 89% and maybe pick up one. Then 88% and pickup
>another, etc. If somehow there is a tie, then give 'em a
>break and qualify 21 or 22, as needed.

To be fair you would do it per circle looking for a % from each circle. % would be the same for each circle but you use the top score from each circle to work your way down. You have to use both circles because there are differences in the judging tactics. If all the pilots flew in front of all the judges at one time or another then you wouldnt have to seperate it.

>
>It wouldn't matter if one circle was loaded with talent. If
>they are good, they will all get relatively high scores, and
>more flyers will advance from that circle. If a circle is
>loaded with mediocrity, the few top pilots on that circle
>will qualify and the also-rans will still be wishing for
>just a couple more points on their scores.

I like this idea kind of cool.

>
>Easy and open for all to see- they'll be calculating their
>chances after every score is posted.
>no Sekrit Kabals or arcane procedures.
>No blasted record keeping, trying to keep track of every
>flyer at every contest in the country, in order to do
>seeding right.
>If the scores mean anything at all, this is more fair than
>picking 10 flyers from each of two seeded circles.

Cool, outside of the box thinking.

Phil's idea is all that he suggests...workable and simple....

I believe that Brad and Doug are raising this question to remove the "voo doo" from our event....and I applaud them.

Current procedures may be 100% correct....but they should be clearly outlined and defined.

There is a wave of younger folks (not YOUNG, but not AARP members, either) that are pursuing this event. I believe that they are 100% within their rights to know how the event is run, from top to bottom...this isn't being "flip", but rather it is sound thinking and should be applauded.

CLPA in America shouldn't be a reunion of PAMPA founders...go to VSC for that...in stead it should be a contest with an even playing field that will determine a National Champion....

Those administering the Nationals should not take offense at suggestions ..... most are genuine and proposed to IMPROVE the event!

See Ya

So far most have said and asked what are the procedures for seeding. When is it going to get written out so it can be torn apart and responses make????????? -DOC

>So far most have said and asked what are the procedures for
>seeding. When is it going to get written out so it can be
>torn apart and responses make????????? -DOC

This is not the place to ask that. It is as simple as it can be. It is as good as it can get. If people are just going to nit pic because nobody told them when they registered how they were seeded, then they should stay home.

If you want to know, ask the people who do it. They will gladly tell you. Apparently nobody cares that I have responded. I, therefore do not care to discuss this any further.

Gentleman, Leonard has it right. If you want an answer to a question, go to the source. I also dislike anyone that wants to change something that they do not participate in and maybe never will. Again, if we all flew in front of the same set of judges seeding would not be needed. This is not brain surgery. Those that want the lesser fliers to make it into the semis' are the same ones that need to fly better. If you can't handle it, feel free to fly in the Advanced class at the Nat's. This way you won't feel intimidated and could possibly trophy just for entering. Why don't the ones that want/need rules for everything do it by the rules? Submit the changes thru the proper channels and see what happens. Are you afraid of the work or afraid that it will get shot down? And what makes anyone think that the seeding process wouldn't happen just because Warren or Shareen weren't there? Again, you want answers, go to the people that know. Not a real mind-bender to figure out. Oh, did I say that maybe flying better might be something to consider? Later, RJ