DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Roller Pigeons
HTML https://rollerpigeon.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Flying and Breeding Ruby Rollers
*****************************************************
#Post#: 7642--------------------------------------------------
Re: Considering Competition: Another View
DIR By: 2y4life
Date: June 11, 2011, 11:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: joeb link ---
>
>
> Okay Scott, I'll bite, who is the Fall Fly judge.
> Keep em spinning
> Joe B
>
--- End Quote ---
I believe the judge for the NCF is Joe Emberton. Correct me if
I'm wrong guys.
#Post#: 7643--------------------------------------------------
Re: Considering Competition: Another View
DIR By: joeb
Date: June 12, 2011, 7:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: 2y4life link ---
>
> [quote author=joeb link=topic=587.msg7637#msg7637
date=1307839485]
>
> Okay Scott, I'll bite, who is the Fall Fly judge.
> Keep em spinning
> Joe B
>
--- End Quote ---
I believe the judge for the NCF is Joe Emberton. Correct me if
I'm wrong guys.
[/quote]
Man, I sure hope I have my birds settled in Texas in time for
the NCF, I would really like to meet Joe Emberton. Of course I
don't even know what region I will be in down there with the
recent split of regions in Texas. I was kind of hoping Abilene
would be in the West Texas area but I am not sure. Think I may
be in no-mans land as I am not sure there are any other
competitive flyers around Abilene.
Keep em spinning
Joe B
#Post#: 7644--------------------------------------------------
Re: Considering Competition: Another View
DIR By: Cliff Ball
Date: June 12, 2011, 10:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Scott
I don't see how the good teams are cheated because minimum
standard birds get scored if the judges are doing their job
correctly.. That's the point of the multipliers. A minimum
scoreable, average kit should be receiving 1.0 or 1.1 Q&D.
Better than average kits should be recieving 1.2-1.5. The good
kits should be scoring 1.5-1.8 Q & D. That would separate the
difference in the quality of the performance of the two kits.
The problem lies in that some judges want to get a reputation of
being "tough to score under"....of having "high standards".
That's what hurts us..... when they award the better than
average kits 1.1 multipliers. Well, in that case, yes, the good
kits get cheated "when and if" a questionalbe performance gets
scored. Perhaps you are now able to see the positive arguments
made for a written standard, especially for the awarding of
multipliers, so that the wheat can be separated from the chaff.
If you are going to say the "JUDGES ARE CHEATING OTHER KITS" ,
it may be time to require a judging standard be written into the
fly rules. If we get all the judges on the same page, then this
controversy will end. If we allow every judge to judge to"HIS
STANDARD", then we all need to accept that fact, and accept the
scores that the judges hand out....and they will continue to be
all over the board. The "RULES"........the Written FLY
RULES....... are also responsible for these major fluctuations
seen in our scores, not just the judges. Before we start
questioning our judges integrity, MAYBE we need to address the
rules of this game under which they are judging. Your
assumptions may be correct; but I bet you that even a loose
judge would award higher D&Q to the better kits.
HOW many times has the WC judge NOT scored the best kits that
won?
HOW many times has the NCF judge NOT scored the best Kits that
won?
If a "majority of the time " you agree with who won, then your
argument has very little, if any validity.
Cliff
--- Quote from: MOTHERLODELOFTS link ---
>
>
> Cliff .. that standard starts at low or nonexistant to on up
.. those that score everything cheat the good teams on every
break that they give.
>
>
>
> [quote author=Cliff Ball link=topic=587.msg7639#msg7639
date=1307845340]
>
> Scott
> As I look at the scores from 20-30 years ago, they started out
LOW, then got way too high, and now it seems the pendulum may be
swinging back to the low side again. It could be a combination
of reasons; tinkering with the rules, ideas on judging changing,
more BOP, what have you.....Simple evolution of the sport , the
ebb and flow of changing ideas.
> High scores or low scores, the contests are to designed to
evaluate the flyers and their birds, who wins, and whether the
kits getting better or worse, and whether we are making
progress. Makes little difference to me if the winning score is
150 or 950 or 2000, it is just a number. It represents a judges
overall opinion and evaluation of the performance, he observed.
We all know it is an extremely SUBJECTIVE estimation and we
accept it as such. The judge who socres kits low are of no
greater value than the ones who score them high.
> We all look forward to the judge coming to score the birds, be
he tight , loose, or just right. Besides, ther's not a whole lot
we can do about it as long as the rules require the judge to
score kits according to his own standard.
> Cliff
>
--- End Quote ---
[/quote]
#Post#: 7645--------------------------------------------------
Re: Considering Competition: Another View
DIR By: MOTHERLODELOFTS
Date: June 12, 2011, 11:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Cliff, any judge that goes in "trying" to be tough usualy cheats
kits by shutting down when finaly does get a under a hard
working kit.
Myself I work hard at seperating the wheat from the chaff within
the breaks and I never go into judging thinking I'm going to do
anything, I just do . I'm long set in what I will score vrses
what I won't.
This score everything and use the multipliers mentality to
seperate it is a danger to the breed and why we have issues with
many flyers thinking they are being cheated as it sets
mediocrity as the standard. And under that standard it makes
competition a liability to the breed in which case I will have
to agree with the case against competition
It gives birds that don't represent the breed an opportunity to
take the day. Which cannot be done.
Every time a substandard break is scored it just stole a break
from a team that gave a rock solid break, it is really that
simple.
As for how many times the best kit hasn't won in a a major fly
my answer is this .. there have been some years where the best
kits may or may not have won due to low standards and trying to
use the multipliers to seperate it.
There are others where I know the best kit won due to what they
WOULDN"T score. This coming year in the nationials I know for a
fact the best kit that represents the breed will win.
#Post#: 7646--------------------------------------------------
Re: Considering Competition: Another View
DIR By: 2y4life
Date: June 12, 2011, 11:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I must say as a novice it's weird to see that, in the ultimate
competition for this sport of roller pigeons, most guys are only
scoring with the bare minimum standard in terms of depth and
quality. To me, this doesn't make sense, how kits can make it to
the finals of the World Cup yet still get a 1.0 (the lowest
possible scoring in Q & D)? By that standard, the depth and
quality of the roll was barely good enough to score...in other
words, the kit's quality and depth in the roll were so bad it
almost didn't qualify to score at all.
Again, I have yet to compete and am just thinking outloud here
looking to broaden my horizons and understanding of the sport of
roller pigeons.
#Post#: 7647--------------------------------------------------
Re: Considering Competition: Another View
DIR By: MOTHERLODELOFTS
Date: June 12, 2011, 4:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Tou .. it depends on where the judges benchmark for good is ..
for me it at about the 1.3 mark .
For Eric it looks to be at the 1.1 mark.
For others it may be 1.5 mark. I tried useing the 1.5 mark when
I judged the Ca state one year, I painted myself into a corner
though as 1.0 to 1.2 meant scoreing birds that did not represent
the breed on that day. It was a lesson learned on that fly.
I say on that day becuase a kit can look like dog crap if they
are off , doesn't make them a bad team. just a bad day.
Myself I have only given a handfull of 1.6 s and they were well
deserved . I almost pulled the trigger on a 1.7 once but the
last couple of breaks scored before the time knocked it down.
--- Quote from: 2y4life link ---
>
> I must say as a novice it's weird to see that, in the ultimate
competition for this sport of roller pigeons, most guys are only
scoring with the bare minimum standard in terms of depth and
quality. To me, this doesn't make sense, how kits can make it to
the finals of the World Cup yet still get a 1.0 (the lowest
possible scoring in Q & D)? By that standard, the depth and
quality of the roll was barely good enough to score...in other
words, the kit's quality and depth in the roll were so bad it
almost didn't qualify to score at all.
>
> Again, I have yet to compete and am just thinking outloud here
looking to broaden my horizons and understanding of the sport of
roller pigeons.
>
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 7649--------------------------------------------------
Re: Considering Competition: Another View
DIR By: 2y4life
Date: June 12, 2011, 4:37 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Appreciate the thorough and well thought out post Scott.
#Post#: 7650--------------------------------------------------
Re: Considering Competition: Another View
DIR By: Cliff Ball
Date: June 12, 2011, 5:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Scott
I can't say that I agree with much of anything that you posted
here. Your line of reasoning is just not logical. Tou is making
more sense! LOL!
So are you willing to agree, to a written judging standard, to
help right the wrongs you are addressing?
So a "MAJORITY " of the time the judge got it right and the
best kit won?
You act like every time a break is scored , there is no room
for a mistake on the judges part? My goodness, suddenly, we go
from "ESTIMATE THE NUMBER OF BIRD PERFORMING INUNISON" to 100%
correct and positive the number of birds that performed in
unison and that they performed perfectly.
I tell you what, not scoring birds that are so far away, the
wings can not be seen..... Is a good thing in my book. But I
think that is a different issue. The competition allows for GOOD
birds to be scored, for BETTER birds to be scored higher and for
the BEST birds to score even higher. We have a RANGE of birds
that can score ....NOT JUST THE BEST. When we AVERAGE D&Q out ,
we get a more concise picture of our kits performance.
Setting a minimum standard is used in many competitions and the
Roller fancy needs to work it out some way so we all know what
it is. As YOU SAY THE CREAM WILL RISE TO THE TOP. Mediocrity
will not change that.
Cliff
--- Quote from: MOTHERLODELOFTS link ---
>
>
> Tou .. it depends on where the judges benchmark for good is ..
for me it at about the 1.3 mark .
> For Eric it looks to be at the 1.1 mark.
> For others it may be 1.5 mark. I tried useing the 1.5 mark
when I judged the Ca state one year, I painted myself into a
corner though as 1.0 to 1.2 meant scoreing birds that did not
represent the breed on that day. It was a lesson learned on that
fly.
> I say on that day becuase a kit can look like dog crap if they
are off , doesn't make them a bad team. just a bad day.
> Myself I have only given a handfull of 1.6 s and they were
well deserved . I almost pulled the trigger on a 1.7 once but
the last couple of breaks scored before the time knocked it
down.
>
>
>
>
>
> [quote author=2y4life link=topic=587.msg7646#msg7646
date=1307897445]
> I must say as a novice it's weird to see that, in the ultimate
competition for this sport of roller pigeons, most guys are only
scoring with the bare minimum standard in terms of depth and
quality. To me, this doesn't make sense, how kits can make it to
the finals of the World Cup yet still get a 1.0 (the lowest
possible scoring in Q & D)? By that standard, the depth and
quality of the roll was barely good enough to score...in other
words, the kit's quality and depth in the roll were so bad it
almost didn't qualify to score at all.
>
> Again, I have yet to compete and am just thinking outloud here
looking to broaden my horizons and understanding of the sport of
roller pigeons.
>
--- End Quote ---
[/quote]
#Post#: 7652--------------------------------------------------
Re: Considering Competition: Another View
DIR By: Cliff Ball
Date: June 12, 2011, 5:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Tou
Yep! That is what it looks like. But I think we need to reserve
any judgement till the WC is over , then we can compare other
countries scores and see how the USA ranks.
If the USA had a 3 tier system where only the highest ranking
kits qualified to fly in the WC finals..... We might see a
better picture.
A regional qualifier may not have any serious competition or a
very loose judge or both and a three tier system would probably
weed out these non competitive kits...... Could be a bad time of
the year to fly the USA kits..... Could be that the years of BOP
predation has taken its toll.
After years of loose judging due to a poorly written fly rules,
we have a very inflated opinion of our birds?
Better than average rollers are few and far between, Better
than average kits, are even fewer and farther between, then try
to fly in NON optimal conditions and things can look real bad
real quick!
Cliff
--- Quote from: 2y4life link ---
>
> I must say as a novice it's weird to see that, in the ultimate
competition for this sport of roller pigeons, most guys are only
scoring with the bare minimum standard in terms of depth and
quality. To me, this doesn't make sense, how kits can make it to
the finals of the World Cup yet still get a 1.0 (the lowest
possible scoring in Q & D)? By that standard, the depth and
quality of the roll was barely good enough to score...in other
words, the kit's quality and depth in the roll were so bad it
almost didn't qualify to score at all.
>
> Again, I have yet to compete and am just thinking outloud here
looking to broaden my horizons and understanding of the sport of
roller pigeons.
>
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 7653--------------------------------------------------
Re: Considering Competition: Another View
DIR By: Cliff Ball
Date: June 12, 2011, 5:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Scott
......an interesting topic: a judges benchmark.
If all judges used a 1.0 D as 10 feet and 1.0 Q as just fast
enough not to be able to count the revolutions and high X style.
Why would you need to adjust that? All scoring starts at 1.0,
1.0 D&Q Simple , direct ?
Or are we talking about different things? The Fly rules should
be the judges benchmark, not his personal opinion or the way
they do things in THEIR country, or THEIR state, or THEIR club
flies!
Cliff
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 8
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page