Judging guide? Is there one? Where?

[Rudy Taube]

Is there such a thing in CLPA? I have looked everywhere for one and can't find it.

Being a retread, old combat flier trying to enter CLPA, I am trying to find out all I can about scoring, judging, etc.

I have the excellent drawings made by Dave Cook 12/15/03. These, with his notations, have been a great help to me in learning the full pattern. He makes it very clear "exactly" what it takes to get a PERFECT score. Unfortunately I have not found anything that tells me how to judge a less than perfect flight, (a flight like mine for example! ;-)

At our club meeting this week I asked a group of very experienced fliers (average years in CLPA 20+) a simple judging question:

If I do the entry and 1st wingover perfectly BUT pull out of my reverse wingover at 15', and remain there for the 1/2 lap, and do the 2nd wingover part PERFECTLY and pull out upright at  5' .... what would be my score?

I was shocked to hear scores ranging from 32 points down to 10 points!!!!! Then, when I asked what they all based their scores on, the answers varied from "thats the way I see it" to "well, it is up to each judge to use his own criteria for downgrades". ..... NO-ONE quoted any rule, guideline, etc. I thought they were pulling my leg, and someone would pull out the "CL JUDGES GUIDE" to show me -X points for each foot above or below the 4' to 6' perfect range, etc. etc, etc. ..... Then I was told that they were not aware of such a guide.

I come from Full size IAC Aerobatics, R/C pattern and IMAC Scale Aerobatics. All three have very clear, and easily understandable judging guidelines. With very specific point deductions for X degrees off angle, roll, symmetry, etc. This makes it easier on the pilot so he knows what the penalties will be for each error, and he can focus his practice accordingly. To say nothing of how much easier it is to train new judges! ........  Do we have one, and people just don't know about it?

BTW: It would be interesting to hear how YOU guys would score the above wingover maneuver? Please give a score, and WHY. It may be helpful to us all.

TIA for any help on this.  

[Rudy Taube]

Hi Rudy. Yes, there is a Judges Guide. It is available from PAMPA Products for $5.00.  It is listed as NATS Judging Guide.  I believe it has been updated in the last year.

Thanks Ty. That is great news, I will order one. I'm surprised my club members did not use one?

BTW, after reviewing the AMA CLPA rules, I interput the correct score for my example to be 31.   ( -1 point for each 1' above the allowable range of 6', 15-6=9,  40-9=31) Is this correct using the Judges Guide you recommend? TIA.

[Clint Ormosen]

Actually, you would hard pressed to find a judge that would score your wingover that high. I'm sure there are some, but I'm not one of them. I would see that the pullout was high, no return to 5 ft for the half lap, and entry to the second climb not the same as the first. Assuming the over the tops were laid EXACTLY over each other, I'd probably score it 27 or so.
The PAMPA guide is just that. A guide. Judging is very subjective. But, as long as I'm consistant with each pilot, it's a fair contest. Some may not get as high of a score as they think they deserve while others will get more than they expect. That's the way it goes. I've probably judged more flights than I've flown and I have yet to have anybody come and complain that I didn't treat them fairly. Yet, anyway.

[Bill Little]

Hi Rudy,

Well, Dude, welcome to the "subject world" of CLPA judging!   There are NO set rules as to points reductions......  we have to trust that the Judges are competent with no pre-concieved notions about the individual flyers.

You have described a maneuver with three major errors.  If, all else is perfect as you say: 
1. pullout inverted; 2. inverted 1/2 lap way too high; 3. inverted pull up too high.  3-5 points each depending on how good the corners are for both turns.  25-29 points here.

[captcurt]

Agree with Bill on the score range for that one.

THe Judging Guide  we have is WRITTEN by Dave Cook--surprised he didn't tell you about it.  It does depart into opinion at points but is very good.  That and current AMA rules are the best we have right now.

There is also a good one available as part of the FAI F2B rules.

There is no system (yet) for systematic point deductions for errors.  Not even agreement on what constitutes major or minor errors.

How about scores for a single manuever I flew that ranged from 34 to 12--at the NATS no less!

I believe ithis along with the fact that there is no common training process and certification of judges that created the problem we now have of non-normalized scores depending on where you flew and who judged.  It is also the root cause of the defined transition process through the skill classes.

Only time and/or money can fix it--I think the other sports in aerobatics have antyed up and created the standard processes to implement these practices.

Curt

[Clint Ormosen]

Hi Rudy,

Well, Dude, welcome to the "subject world" of CLPA judging!   There are NO set rules as to points reductions......  we have to trust that the Judges are competent with no pre-concieved notions about the individual flyers.

You have described a maneuver with three major errors.  If, all else is perfect as you say: 
1. pullout inverted; 2. inverted 1/2 lap way too high; 3. inverted pull up too high.  3-5 points each depending on how good the corners are for both turns.  25-29 points here.

Which is right in the zone I scored it at 27. So we're all on the same page here.

[Bill Little]

Which is right in the zone I scored it at 27. So we're all on the same page here.

Yep, Clint, I would say we are pretty much in agreement!   Since he asked for scores, and why, I put my 2 cents in.  I have seen plenty of score cars that make you wonder, though! LOL!!

[bill marvel]

I have the excellent drawings made by Dave Cook 12/15/03. These, with his notations, have been a great help to me in learning the full pattern. He makes it very clear "exactly" what it takes to get a PERFECT score. Unfortunately I have not found anything that tells me how to judge a less than perfect flight, (a flight like mine for example! ;-)

At our club meeting this week I asked a group of very experienced fliers (average years in CLPA 20+) a simple judging question:

If I do the entry and 1st wingover perfectly BUT pull out of my reverse wingover at 15', and remain there for the 1/2 lap, and do the 2nd wingover part PERFECTLY and pull out upright at  5' .... what would be my score?

Hi, Rudy

I'll take a shot at your question.  About scoring your RW, I'd score your hypothetical RW very high if I saw the maneuver as you described it (Mid to upper 30's).  My rationale is that you described your RW as perfect with the exception of the bottom of the first pull out (a single major error).  So how much would you deduct for one error in an otherwise perfect (admittedly hypothetical) maneuver?

Remember, the Reverse Wingover and every other maneuver in the pattern consists of a number of elements such as the segments you described plus radii of the turns, straight lines, path and others that are all judged.  Were they each perfect?  If not, what was the quality of the error?  Was it a minor deviation from perfection... a medium deviation or a major deviation?

Dave Cook's fine work, "The Stunt Book" has been an excellent source for me to establish a base line for maneuvers.  The AMA Rule Book has a section called "Judging Procedures" (AMA Rules, Control Line Precision Aerobatics, Section 11, Page 56) that describes the judging standards that are used.  Section 14.9.2 (Principles of Marking) describes a deduction process similar to what you referred to in the RC aerobatics judging.

I was taught by my mentor, Randi Gifford, that everybody has 40 points before they begin a maneuver (Yes, even Beginners and Intermediates!!!).  As the flight through the maneuver progresses, the judge deducts points for errors (described in "Judging  Procedures" as deviations from the maneuver Rule requirements).  If you flew a perfect maneuver with one error, you earned an excellent score.

We all need to be constantly reminded that judges are fallible human beings (We all know that intellectually but may forget a bit in the heat of competition).  Some are simply more generous or more strict than others.  Some have good days and bad.  Some have good flights and bad.  Most of the judges I have met and worked with are honest, honorable people who do the best they can.

If you accept that, then I urge you to read the rule book, volunteer to judge and I believe your flying and scores will benefit from the experience.

Hope this was helpful.
regards,
bill marvel

[Clint Ormosen]

Bill, you can judge my flights anytime!
Seriously though, Rudy described a Wingover that had more than one flaw. Check Bill's post. I would make point deductions for each of the errors. After pulling out too high, a few points can be saved by getting back to the 5 ft level for the second entry climb. It doesn't do any good to fly the half lap to high anyway, so might as well correct when you can. Entering the 2nd climb in the right spot might have got him 30-33 points, all else being perfect as described. The errors would be cut from 3 to 2.

[phil c]

The rulebook now includes judging instructions as part of the rules, para. 14 and following.   These were adapted from F2B and include some pretty specific deductions for minor(-1), medium(-2) and major(-3) errors in para. 14.6  Take a look at: http://www.modelaircraft.org/comp/0708rulebook/CLPA.pdf

By your description, you have three major errors- a 15 ft pullout, the inverted half lap at 15 ft, and the third turn at 15 ft, so you could get in the low 30's, say 29-31, or even less.  15 ft. is 10 ft off the spec. height, and off by 10 times the tolerance.    The book says minus 3 for being off 3 ft, so a judge could easily justify taking another 6-7 pts.  Then, of course, the turns are unlikely to be anywhere near the 5 ft. radius, so take off another 12 pts and you get down to 10 or 11.

[john e. holliday]

Rudy, as stated welcome to the stunt world.  As you described the RW anything in the 20 point range is generous.  It still amazes me to see my score sheet and know that I have maneuvers that were bad, that scored better than maneuvers that I thought were good.  If you travel very much you will find a big disparagy of scoring the pattern.  I have even seen it at the NATS that a top competitor did a bad maneuver, but, it didn't show on the score sheet.  I fly for myself and have quit worrying about the judges since last years Polk City contest in Iowa.  Even at VSC this year we had some judges that were very hard and some that were very lenient.  Just remember most of all, we do it for fun.  DOC Holliday

PS:Once in awhile I need an attitude adjustment.  jeh

[RandySmith]

The rulebook now includes judging instructions as part of the rules, para. 14 and following.   These were adapted from F2B and include some pretty specific deductions for minor(-1), medium(-2) and major(-3) errors in para. 14.6  Take a look at: http://www.modelaircraft.org/comp/0708rulebook/CLPA.pdf

By your description, you have three major errors- a 15 ft pullout, the inverted half lap at 15 ft, and the third turn at 15 ft, so you could get in the low 30's, say 29-31, or even less.  15 ft. is 10 ft off the spec. height, and off by 10 times the tolerance.    The book says minus 3 for being off 3 ft, so a judge could easily justify taking another 6-7 pts.  Then, of course, the turns are unlikely to be anywhere near the 5 ft. radius, so take off another 12 pts and you get down to 10 or 11.

Hi Phil

Scoring is in a range from 10 being the lowest and  40 the highest..are you saying the manouver her described gets a 10..the lowest possible score you can give for anything remotely resembling a manouver?

Regards
Randy

[Steve Helmick]

When I was a Judge Trainee, Bob Parker happened to mention that 25pts is the average (of 10 and 40, the min and max for all maneuvers....except the landing, OBTW). What was described at the start of this thread sounds pretty average. Oh, except the tracks over the top were much better than average! Then, even if the tracks are exactly the same, is the model crabbing during those tracks, because the placement relative to wind direction wasn't exactly right? I hate that... 

I gotta admit that I need to download the new rules, print them out, and study them, this weekend. The one thing I noticed...and don't agree with...is that the vertical strokes are supposed to be square to the ground, not the "waterline" (level flight in a 1:1 scale airplane isn't defined as parallel to the ground, is it?). Some folks must have flatter flying fields than we have used. Examples: Albany, Roseburg, Christopher Columbus Park in Tucson... It needed to be addressed in the rules, but I didn't expect this 'solution'.  Suppose it came from the FAI Rules.  I guess the Europeans must only fly on those fancy dedicated flying sites, that are all level and all surrounded by trees and fences?  Steve

[phil c]

Randy, I just read the rules and try to apply them.  The new rules are pretty clear that a major objective error(over 3x the tolerance) is at least a minus 3 pts.  You could reasonably read that section that if 3x the tolerance is -3, then 10x the tolerance is -10pts.  Even if you stick with -3, 4 corners way oversize and three other major errors brings you down to a max of 19pts.

[Bill Little]

Hey, Phil, how about three inside loops which are the correct height for tops and bottoms, but each consecutive one walks 6 feet to the right?

[john e. holliday]

In reply to reply #12, I have seen and witnessed 10 points given for people just breaking level flight for the intended maneuver in a sequence.  To me if it does not look even close to the prescribed maneuver it should be a 0.  Also I would not hesitate to give a 10 if it is deserved.  Have yet to see a maneuver worth giving a 40 for.  Even tho I have seen Billy W. put in some really fantastics flights over all.  DOC Holliday

[captcurt]

In reply to reply #12, I have seen and witnessed 10 points given for people just breaking level flight for the intended maneuver in a sequence.  To me if it does not look even close to the prescribed maneuver it should be a 0.

Hi Doc:

Well. I haven't seen that done yet, but feel pretty much the same.  I think it needs to be something more than  a little break in level flight--after all we're talking about the manuever PLUS the pattern points in some cases for an attempt.

Curt

[Jim Thomerson]

It seems to me that if an attempt is worth 10 points, then a completed maneuver is worth no less than 11. 

[phil c]

Hey Big Bear,  6 ft on a loop is about -3 to -5, so you're talking -6 to -10 pts.  Say 30-35pts.   Only the second and third loops have an error.

[Bill Little]

Hey Big Bear,  6 ft on a loop is about -3 to -5, so you're talking -6 to -10 pts.  Say 30-35pts.   Only the second and third loops have an error.

That would be my thinking, also.  But I have seen them hammered down to about a 25.  I was not involved, but found it interesting.

[Paul Smith]

I gotta admit that I need to download the new rules, print them out, and study them, this weekend. The one thing I noticed...and don't agree with...is that the vertical strokes are supposed to be square to the ground, not the "waterline" (level flight in a 1:1 scale airplane isn't defined as parallel to the ground, is it?). Some folks must have flatter flying fields than we have used. Examples: Albany, Roseburg, Christopher Columbus Park in Tucson... It needed to be addressed in the rules, but I didn't expect this 'solution'.  Suppose it came from the FAI Rules.  I guess the Europeans must only fly on those fancy dedicated flying sites, that are all level and all surrounded by trees and fences?  Steve

Good point !!! 

I practice on a footie pitch with about 2 feet of crown. 
If I fly Level & Inverted "laser-flat", there's 2' variance vis-a-vis the surface. 
A terrain-following 5-foot AGL would take a lot of control work.

[Clint Ormosen]

Good point !!! 

I practice on a footie pitch with about 2 feet of crown. 
If I fly Level & Inverted "laser-flat", there's 2' variance vis-a-vis the surface. 
A terrain-following 5-foot AGL would take a lot of control work.

I wouldn't worry too much about that rule. Most judges (including me) are going to judge square from the "waterline" anyway.

[captcurt]

Hey Big Bear,  6 ft on a loop is about -3 to -5, so you're talking -6 to -10 pts.  Say 30-35pts.   Only the second and third loops have an error.

Well..I don't know Phil..

THe second and third ( and probably the first) loop CANNOT be round if they walk to the right. 

Curt