Date:	Mon, 26 Jun 1995 05:01:11 -1000
From:	ajs@stairs.nw.att.com (Alan Sparling)
Message-Id: <DAsCDz.Bx1@ssbunews.ih.att.com>
Organization: AT&T Enhanced 9-1-1 Development
Subject: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter


I am posting this for Sam Ritter who can not post at this time.

----

For those of you who left the event early and had the
impression that everything was fine with scoring at the
event, you had the *wrong* impression!  

After seeing some of the scores during the event and 
being on a judging panel or two, I had the feeling that
something was wrong.  Finally, I asked to see my raw 
scores and I worked them out by hand, dropping the highs
and lows as they are supposed to be.  My calculations
were different, and correct, from the computer scores,
which did not drop the highs and lows.  During the whole
weekend, everyone that I talked to was under the impression
that the scores were being calculated as other events,
where the highs and lows are dropped.

As an attempt to cover their a**es, save money and not have
to retrieve trophies which may have been given to the wrong
person, they decided to use an obscure rule in the AKA
rule book that says "the Chief Judge may decide that due to
the mix of judging experience on the panel, all scores may
be retained."  This is not normally done, and scores ARE
influenced by this: i.e. if one of the judges on the panel
has a score that is out of line with the others, it will be
dropped when the scores are calculated by standard practice,
when all scores are kept more talking between judges should
be done, to keep scores in line with each other.

For an event like Master's Quad where the second, third,
and fourth places are separated by four tenths( 0.4 ) of
a point, dropping highs and lows will, most likely, affect
who gets a trophy!!!!  The gap between 1st and 2nd was
approximately 9 points.  Other events would probably/ most
likely be affected also.


The Scoring Program:
--------------------
Supposedly, this was obtained from the Southwest Conference,
Frank Kenisky.  If this is true, Frank strikes again, and
he wasn't even in attendance.  I suggest that any organizer
planning to use a program that Frank was involved with, 
or any other new software, check that it gives expected
results, by hand or other means that you feel comfortable
with, because your event and your reputation depends and
having a good scoring system(judges/scorekeeping) and
good organization.  The program they used did not drop
scores as claimed.



Disclaimer: 
-----------
I won MIQ at this event, my problem started with MIB where 
I was in last place with a clean routine( no crashes, 4 360's, one of
which had an axle up wind, near the judges ). 
I know that dropping highs and lows probably won't improve my finish by
much, but it *probably will*  change some of
the placings in all events.

I hope the event organizers of the Mid-American plan to 
notify everyone who participated in the event, of the 
decisions which they made.  

The purpose of their decision to keep scores as posted was
used as a way to save money.  I say this because one of the
organizers came up to me and asked what he was supposed to
do if the scores were wrong.  He did not like it when I told
him that he would either have to get trophies back from 
people that were not supposed to receive them, or have more
trophies made to give to the right people.


I hope other people have some reviews about this event, 
other than it was a normal no wind kite festival in
Kamalazoo, sorry, Kalamazoo, MI.



Good Winds,

Sam Ritter



 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Mon, 26 Jun 1995 05:01:11 -1000
From:	ajs@stairs.nw.att.com (Alan Sparling)
Message-Id: <DAsCDz.Bx1@ssbunews.ih.att.com>
Organization: AT&T Enhanced 9-1-1 Development
Subject: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter


I am posting this for Sam Ritter who can not post at this time.

----

For those of you who left the event early and had the
impression that everything was fine with scoring at the
event, you had the *wrong* impression!  

After seeing some of the scores during the event and 
being on a judging panel or two, I had the feeling that
something was wrong.  Finally, I asked to see my raw 
scores and I worked them out by hand, dropping the highs
and lows as they are supposed to be.  My calculations
were different, and correct, from the computer scores,
which did not drop the highs and lows.  During the whole
weekend, everyone that I talked to was under the impression
that the scores were being calculated as other events,
where the highs and lows are dropped.

As an attempt to cover their a**es, save money and not have
to retrieve trophies which may have been given to the wrong
person, they decided to use an obscure rule in the AKA
rule book that says "the Chief Judge may decide that due to
the mix of judging experience on the panel, all scores may
be retained."  This is not normally done, and scores ARE
influenced by this: i.e. if one of the judges on the panel
has a score that is out of line with the others, it will be
dropped when the scores are calculated by standard practice,
when all scores are kept more talking between judges should
be done, to keep scores in line with each other.

For an event like Master's Quad where the second, third,
and fourth places are separated by four tenths( 0.4 ) of
a point, dropping highs and lows will, most likely, affect
who gets a trophy!!!!  The gap between 1st and 2nd was
approximately 9 points.  Other events would probably/ most
likely be affected also.


The Scoring Program:
--------------------
Supposedly, this was obtained from the Southwest Conference,
Frank Kenisky.  If this is true, Frank strikes again, and
he wasn't even in attendance.  I suggest that any organizer
planning to use a program that Frank was involved with, 
or any other new software, check that it gives expected
results, by hand or other means that you feel comfortable
with, because your event and your reputation depends and
having a good scoring system(judges/scorekeeping) and
good organization.  The program they used did not drop
scores as claimed.



Disclaimer: 
-----------
I won MIQ at this event, my problem started with MIB where 
I was in last place with a clean routine( no crashes, 4 360's, one of
which had an axle up wind, near the judges ). 
I know that dropping highs and lows probably won't improve my finish by
much, but it *probably will*  change some of
the placings in all events.

I hope the event organizers of the Mid-American plan to 
notify everyone who participated in the event, of the 
decisions which they made.  

The purpose of their decision to keep scores as posted was
used as a way to save money.  I say this because one of the
organizers came up to me and asked what he was supposed to
do if the scores were wrong.  He did not like it when I told
him that he would either have to get trophies back from 
people that were not supposed to receive them, or have more
trophies made to give to the right people.


I hope other people have some reviews about this event, 
other than it was a normal no wind kite festival in
Kamalazoo, sorry, Kalamazoo, MI.



Good Winds,

Sam Ritter



 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Tue, 27 Jun 1995 04:50:36 -1000
From:	mr.nasty@ix.netcom.com (Frank Kenisky )
Message-Id: <3sp5rs$k2l@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter

Ken Nealy, called me to discuss this problem. The problem is the same
throughout events across the country, so far as I remember. None of the
computer scoring programs used today drop high and low scores
automatically after being input.

Most event scorekeepers usually drop high and low scores manually. The
decision to include high and low scores is not a decision of the
computer program. No program out there, that I am familiar with, can
make a decision to decide to keep the high and low scores.

Therefore, it not a problem with the program or the organization of the
event it is a problem with the contestant who would like the event to
be run like other events which have followed the same practice of
droping high and low scores. As you mentioned in the AKA Rules book,
V.2.b.(page 20) it states; "Event organizers are encouraged to use
five-judge panels when experienced judges are available. Five-judge
panels should have a minimum of three experienced judges. Larger
judging pannels should have a minimum of no less than 50 0.000000e+00xperienced
judges. Generally, if 5 or more judges are used, the high and low
scores for each component will be deleted from the final score, and if
3 judges are used, all the scores will be included. However, the Chief
Judge may decide that due to the mix of judging experience on the
panel, all scores may be retained."

It is obvious that you are also familiar with the rules. I suggest you
read them. Ken Nealy and I discussed the problems Monday, after the
event. The program is not perfect, it has some cosmetic problems, the
computation algrythem is not one of them. It does not make decisions.

High and low scores are input manually. If there is a tie using a 5
member judging panel and the high and low scores are dropped they are
put back in to break the tie. If there is still a tie then depending on
the type of event certain considerations are made by comparing the
highest score of a particular component.

If you can write that algrythem me and a few others would really
appreciate it.

>The Scoring Program:
>--------------------
>Supposedly, this was obtained from the Southwest Conference,
>Frank Kenisky.  If this is true, Frank strikes again, and
>he wasn't even in attendance.  I suggest that any organizer
>planning to use a program that Frank was involved with, 
>or any other new software, check that it gives expected
>results, by hand or other means that you feel comfortable
>with, because your event and your reputation depends and
>having a good scoring system(judges/scorekeeping) and
>good organization.  The program they used did not drop
>scores as claimed.

Are you mad at the program, me or just spouting out what you have
influenced by. You are a Masters Class competitor, and you don't know
the rules? What exactly is wrong with the program besides the fact that
it was provided *FREE* by Mr.Nasty? You really haven't touched on the
problem with the program. I would like to know what the problem is then
I could fix it. But to know that you are upset by the fact that the
event organizer decided to include the high and low scores is a
separate issue from the program.

Masters Class?

Just because one event decides to drop the high and low scores, does
not in itself make it a written and accepted rule. It may be the wrong
thing to do because the Chief Judge is not aware of the MIX of the
judging panel.

John Trennepole, has been a Chief Judge in several events I have
managed. John is very consious of what each judge is doing. Sometimes
he can get too involved. That only means he is doing his job. I have
seen events where the chief judge is only a figure head. He does
nothing, these must have been the "other events" you attended.

I expect events to run according to the *RULES*. The *RULES* are in
place for a reason. To change them because that's what everyone else
does, indicates a lack of organization. For an AKA Officer or Ex
Officer, of the AKA, to ignore the rules at an AKA Sanctioned event
only encourages this type protest.

>After seeing some of the scores during the event and 
>being on a judging panel or two, I had the feeling that
>something was wrong.

You mention that something was wrong. You were right, something which
was notice also by the Chief Judge. The Chief Judge notice that there
was something wrong and therefore decided to include all the scores. As
far as I 
can see the Chief Judge made the decision in accordance with the AKA
Rules.

>Finally, I asked to see my raw 
>scores and I worked them out by hand, dropping the highs
>and lows as they are supposed to be.  My calculations
>were different, and correct, from the computer scores,
>which did not drop the highs and lows.  During the whole
>weekend, everyone that I talked to was under the impression
>that the scores were being calculated as other events,
>where the highs and lows are dropped.

Your calculations were different, because of a simple math principle.
But that is NOT they *WAY THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE*. Again I encourage
you as a Masters Class competitor to *READ* the rules book. (it may pay
to take a course in comprehenion.) Scoring is up to the Chief Judge.
(No computer program can make that decision.)

If everyone you talked to was under the impression that the scores were
being calculated as other events then they were wrong. If they thought
that the scores were "supposed to be" computed as other events then
they also need to become familiar with the rules book. This is a
written rule, not a contrived one. READ THE BOOK.

The scoring program and the decision to keep all 5 scores are two
different issues. Stick to the point. I realize you are under some
stress, but think out your anger, what was the point of your initial
argument. (?Masters Class?)

>As an attempt to cover their a**es, save money and not have
>to retrieve trophies which may have been given to the wrong
>person, they decided to use an obscure rule in the AKA
>rule book that says "the Chief Judge may decide that due to
>the mix of judging experience on the panel, all scores may
>be retained."  This is not normally done, and scores ARE
>influenced by this: i.e. if one of the judges on the panel
>has a score that is out of line with the others, it will be
>dropped when the scores are calculated by standard practice,
>when all scores are kept more talking between judges should
>be done, to keep scores in line with each other.

Now I understand. Your definition of normal. What is normally done at
other events is what that event decides to do at the time of that event
and has no presedence over anyother event, if the decision is within
the rules. You have noted that the decision was within the right of the
event organizer.

More talking between judges should be done, to keep scores in line with
each other. Hummmmmm. Now I have read the rules book over 50 times, I
have written and re-written the book in several presentations, I don't
ever remember coming across this.

If you are refering to the Comparative Method of judging, again I ask
that you read the rules book. First of all the Comparative Method of
judging is not a rule. It is a suggested method of judging. It is also
a technique "used for new events, or for orienting new judges. It is to
be used only the the approval of the event's Head Judge, and usually
only for the firs one or two competitors in that competiton event."

No where does it suggest that this method is to be used in coordination with
scorekeeping. Two different issues. If other events you attend use this type of
judging and scoring then they are not and have not been following the rules. I
suggest you attend events which follow the rules more often, maybe you wouldn't
be placed into a class you are not ready for.

>I hope the event organizers of the Mid-American plan to 
>notify everyone who participated in the event, of the 
>decisions which they made.  

There is nothing which states that they must notify anyone. Courtesy would
dictate that, but as far as the AKA is concerned the tighter we keep it among a
few...let's keep it our little secret.

>The purpose of their decision to keep scores as posted was
>used as a way to save money.  I say this because one of the
>organizers came up to me and asked what he was supposed to
>do if the scores were wrong.  He did not like it when I told
>him that he would either have to get trophies back from 
>people that were not supposed to receive them, or have more
>trophies made to give to the right people.

The purpose of their decision was to keep scores as posted and was used to save
money. That is right.

Now you have brought up a third issue. Now you state that the scores were wrong.
Were the scores miscalculated, or were they wrong because you felt they should
have dropped the high and low scores? To make the generalization that
the scores were wrong brings up two points. You don't address the fact
that the computed scores were calculated correctly, you only bring up
the fact that the event organziers did not drop the high and low scores
like other events.

A common practice does not make it a written rule. That common practice
which is habitual, does not make it a written rule. The event
organizers spoke with you regarding the scores was an openess to share
ideas. This should be respected, as many event organizers will not.

>I hope other people have some reviews about this event, 
>other than it was a normal no wind kite festival in
>Kamalazoo, sorry, Kalamazoo, MI.

Yes, I hope other people have comments.
-- 
*************>>>>>>>>>>>>>MR.NASTY<<<<<<<<<<<<<**************
Fiesta Kite Ideas	  http://www.tmn.com/kiteweb/home.htm
8302 Tiguex		  Mr.Nasty@ix.netcom.com
Universal City, TX 78148  (210) 659-1803 or (512) 326-6221
*************************************************************


 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Tue, 27 Jun 1995 06:12:58 -1000
From:	mr.nasty@ix.netcom.com (Frank Kenisky )
Message-Id: <3spama$llr@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter

I spoke with John Trenapole a few minutes ago regarding the
Mid-American kite event. Addressing the decision to keep the high and
low scores was a decision made by the Chief Judge. John recognizes this
is a *written AKA Rule* but also recognizes that this is a decision
which can affect an individuals scores.

He informed me that Ken Nealy was recomputing the scores by dropping
the high low scores. He stated that the contestants would be notified
about the change and the scores which would be sent to the AKA would be
the changed scores.

The reason John states is that the event organizer admitted that they
"should have dropped the high and low scores". This admission overrules
the rule book, in that the admission of making a mistake should not be
corrected by a rule.

This does not preclued the fact, that a decision to include all the
scores from a 5 judge panel makes the scores invalid. There is
*NOTHING* in the AKA Rules book which states when that decision must be
made, therefore it is a decision open to the descression of the Chief
Judge. This then is a point which must be discussed with the committee
which oversees the AKA Rules.

Should there be a time frame which the Chief Judge decides to include
or exclude the scores? How will a Chief Judge know the mix of judges
until the scores are submitted?
-- 
*************>>>>>>>>>>>>>MR.NASTY<<<<<<<<<<<<<**************
Fiesta Kite Ideas	  http://www.tmn.com/kiteweb/home.htm
8302 Tiguex		  Mr.Nasty@ix.netcom.com
Universal City, TX 78148  (210) 659-1803 or (512) 326-6221
*************************************************************


 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Tue, 27 Jun 1995 10:20:26 -1000
From:	mr.nasty@ix.netcom.com (Frank Kenisky )
Message-Id: <3spp6a$eam@ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter

In <cjsigalDAuFw4.BKx@netcom.com> cjsigal@netcom.com (Chuck Sigal) writes: 
>
>In article <3sp5rs$k2l@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>, Frank Kenisky wrote:
>>                <stuff deleted>                   None of the
>>computer scoring programs used today drop high and low scores
>>automatically after being input.
>
>	Sorry to have to correct you Frank, but the above is simply not
>true. KiteFest (tm) the computerized kite festival management system I
>created provides the option of NOT dropping the high and low judge's
>scores (5 or more judges). The default is to drop high/low. In addition
>ties are automatically resolved using the procedures described in the
>American Kitefliers Association "INTERNATIONAL SPORT KITE COMPETITION
>RULES" Third Edition. 
>	Furthermore, I know of at least one other system that provides 
>this option. The problem being that the default is to not make the drop.

I stand corrected Chuck. Like I said, from what I remember. The analysis I did
was several years ago, and is not current. Since I was not the
programer of KITEFLIGHT, the event scoring program, (the programer
currently works for National Insturments) and I don't know the code.
(but have it) I am in the process of creating the algrythm to include
this without slowing down the functionality of the program.

KITEFLIGHT the event scoring program, works in RAM. It is a DOS based
program. In order to save data you must perform a save function every
so often. Not so often that it interupts or slows down the process.
This was to expedite the input of contestants. It does have it's
downfall. If someone happends to trip over your current your doomed.
Unless you have battery backup. If this happends you'd better save
quick.
-- 
*************>>>>>>>>>>>>>MR.NASTY<<<<<<<<<<<<<**************
Fiesta Kite Ideas	  http://www.tmn.com/kiteweb/home.htm
8302 Tiguex		  Mr.Nasty@ix.netcom.com
Universal City, TX 78148  (210) 659-1803 or (512) 326-6221
*************************************************************


 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Tue, 27 Jun 1995 11:10:26 -1000
From:	sasaki@netopd.harvard.edu (Marty Sasaki)
Message-Id: <3sps42$8nu@netope.harvard.edu>
Organization: Harvard University - OIT/NSD
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter


In article <cjsigalDAuFw4.BKx@netcom.com>, cjsigal@netcom.com (Chuck Sigal) writes:
|>In article <3sp5rs$k2l@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>, Frank Kenisky wrote:
|>>                <stuff deleted>                   None of the
|>>computer scoring programs used today drop high and low scores
|>>automatically after being input.
|>
|>	Sorry to have to correct you Frank, but the above is simply not
|>true. KiteFest (tm) the computerized kite festival management system I
|>created provides the option of NOT dropping the high and low judge's
|>scores (5 or more judges). The default is to drop high/low. In addition
|>ties are automatically resolved using the procedures described in the
|>American Kitefliers Association "INTERNATIONAL SPORT KITE COMPETITION
|>RULES" Third Edition. 

The system often used by the Eastern League, written and maintained by
Forrest Cary, defaults to dropping high and low as well. It can
include these scores as well.
-- 
Marty Sasaki            Harvard University           Sasaki Kite Fabrications
sasaki@noc.harvard.edu  Network Services Division    90 Melrose Street
617-496-4320            10 Ware Street               Arlington, MA 02174
                        Cambridge, MA 02138-4002     phone/fax: 617-646-1925



 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Tue, 27 Jun 1995 08:12:03 -1000
From:	cjsigal@netcom.com (Chuck Sigal)
Message-Id: <cjsigalDAuFw4.BKx@netcom.com>
Organization: Berkeley Buggy Bums
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter

In article <3sp5rs$k2l@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>, Frank Kenisky wrote:
>                <stuff deleted>                   None of the
>computer scoring programs used today drop high and low scores
>automatically after being input.

	Sorry to have to correct you Frank, but the above is simply not
true. KiteFest (tm) the computerized kite festival management system I
created provides the option of NOT dropping the high and low judge's
scores (5 or more judges). The default is to drop high/low. In addition
ties are automatically resolved using the procedures described in the
American Kitefliers Association "INTERNATIONAL SPORT KITE COMPETITION
RULES" Third Edition. 
	Furthermore, I know of at least one other system that provides 
this option. The problem being that the default is to not make the drop.
-- 
 +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 |   A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in   |
 |   human history--with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila.  |
 |                        Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review, April, 1992  |
 | Chuck Sigal                                                             |
 | Albany,CA,USA    Voice/Fax:01.510.527.3547   e-mail:cjsigal@netcom.com  |
 +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+



 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Tue, 27 Jun 1995 09:38:55 -1000
From:	ac078@detroit.freenet.org (Ken Nealey)
Message-Id: <3spmof$k5e@detroit.freenet.org>
Organization: Greater Detroit Free-Net, Detroit, MI
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter


In a previous article, ajs@stairs.nw.att.com (Alan Sparling) says:

 >I am posting this for Sam Ritter who can not post at this time.

----

>For those of you who left the event early and had the
>impression that everything was fine with scoring at the.
>event, you had the *wrong* impression!  

>After seeing some of the scores during the event and 
>being on a judging panel or two, I had the feeling that
>something was wrong.  Finally, I asked to see my raw 
>scores and I worked them out by hand, dropping the highs
>and lows as they are supposed to be.  My calculations
>were different, and correct, from the computer scores,
>which did not drop the highs and lows.  During the whole
>weekend, everyone that I talked to was under the impression
>that the scores were being calculated as other events,
>where the highs and lows are dropped.

>As an attempt to cover their a**es, save money and not have
>to retrieve trophies which may have been given to the wrong
>person, they decided to use an obscure rule in the AKA
>rule book that says "the Chief Judge may decide that due to
>the mix of judging experience on the panel, all scores may
>be retained."  This is not normally done, and scores ARE
>influenced by this: i.e. if one of the judges on the panel
>has a score that is out of line with the others, it will be
>dropped when the scores are calculated by standard practice,
>when all scores are kept more talking between judges should
>be done, to keep scores in line with each other.

In part, I agree.  All judge panels should communicate between themselves to
be sure that everyone is seeing the same things.  As a flyer, I expect an
experienced - attentive judge panel that is objective.  Further, I too served
on a judge panel... you would not believe what was happening.  The head judge
of the subject panel was more interested in playing with his wife (a co-judge
on the same panel)... dropping ice cubes down her bikini top and shorts, etc.
Needless to say, this was very disruptive to the event... how objective was
the judging when at least 2 of the judges were fooling around like this on
the competition field? I know, they were just "having fun". Consider for a
moment, not everyone has the same definition of fun... I am sure the flyers
were having fun flying their event... with the expectation that they would at
least have objective judging, after all they paid a registration fee to fly
their 3 minute precision routine.  This situation was so noticeable that some
of the few spectators who were present noticed and complained. I agree... I
thought this was supposed to be a family oriented sport. 

>For an event like Master's Quad where the second, third,
>and fourth places are separated by four tenths( 0.4 ) of
>a point, dropping highs and lows will, most likely, affect
>who gets a trophy!!!!  The gap between 1st and 2nd was
>approximately 9 points.  Other events would probably/ most
>likely be affected also.

MQB
Posted Standings (includes Hi/Low)      Revised Standings (with Hi/Low drop)

1. Sam Ritter            76.12          1.  Sam Ritter           75.60
2. Jim Wirt              67.88          2.  Jim Wirt             68.93
3. Al Hargus             67.52          3.  Al Hargus            67.46
4. Jon Trennepohl        67.48          4.  Jon Trennepohl       67.13

What is the point here Sam?  

>The Scoring Program:
--------------------
>Supposedly, this was obtained from the Southwest Conference,
>Frank Kenisky.  If this is true, Frank strikes again, and
>he wasn't even in attendance.  I suggest that any organizer
>planning to use a program that Frank was involved with, 
>or any other new software, check that it gives expected
>results, by hand or other means that you feel comfortable
>with, because your event and your reputation depends and
>having a good scoring system(judges/scorekeeping) and
>good organization.  The program they used did not drop
>scores as claimed.

Your attack on Frank Kenisky a.k.a. Mr. Nasty is completely inappropriate.
Here is what happened: one of the event organizers contacted me about 3 days
before the event and asked if I could get some information on a scorekeeping
program.  Frank Kenisky responded to my inquiry - almost instantly. The same
day, he zipped, encoded and e-mailed the program to me.  He also provided a
good deal of information to me regarding use of the scorekeeping program. 
However, having to configure the Tournament/Event information, input
contestant information and run every possible test scenario and teach people
to use the program, in less than 3 days was simply something that I could not
do.  Prompted by, a follow-up call to Frank (after the Tournament), I now
know how to be sure the scorekeeping program drops the Hi/Low score. 

Sam, I think that Frank Kenisky is due an apology.

For the reasons listed above, if anyone was remiss, it was me.  Please
redirect your anger - frustration to me or the Tournament organizers. 

The Mid-American is now in its 5th year (I think) and still making first year
event type mistakes. What do I mean? Please recall the 1994 Mid-American SKC;
As a flyer, I was put off by the total lack of organization. If there was a
posted flight order, what good was it? I observed pilots write themselves in
on the list - last (in the flight order) of course, or use the excuse that
they could not fly 5th in the order - because judged a previous event. As a
judge, I had to stand on the field for 40 minutes - with pilots staged in the
pit area, waiting for a flight order so that we could proceed and run the
event... I could go on, but what is the point? you get the idea.

Please know, it was the well meaning intent of the organizers to improve this
event that prompted their request to get scorekeeping software on such short
notice. Further, do you remember the survey that was in your registration
packet? I was apprised, by the event organizer, on Monday, June 26, 1995
that the most positive feedback that was generated from same indicated; the
flyers truly appreciated having RANDOM flight orders POSTED and scoring
results POSTED very promptly (following an event). In part, this contributed
significantly to the drastically improved continuity of this Tournament.

Not withstanding the foregoing, the following FACTS remain:

1. The Chief Judge ruled that the scores (all 5 judges) would stand as
posted, based on the above referenced rule from the AKA rulebook,

2. Sam Ritter did file a formal protest,

3. The scores have been run with the Hi/Low drop, copies of same have been
provided to the event organizer and Chief Judge,

4. Unless the determination of the AKA (prompted by Sam Ritters protest)
over- rules the Chief Judges determination, the scores will stand as posted.

>Disclaimer: 
-----------
>I won MIQ at this event, my problem started with MIB where 
>I was in last place with a clean routine( no crashes, 4 360's, one of
>which had an axle up wind, near the judges ). 
>I know that dropping highs and lows probably won't improve my finish by
>much, but it *probably will*  change some of
>the placings in all events.

In part, Sam you are correct;

MIB                                     MIB
Posted Standings (includes Hi/Low)      Revised Standings (with Hi/Low drop)

1. Jim Wirt              79.13          1. Jim Wirt              78.53
2. Jon Trennepohl        74.00          2. Jon Trennepohl        73.73
3. Al Hargus             72.00          3. Al Hargus             71.73
4. Wayne Brunjes         71.20          4. Bob Roehl             70.46
5. Bob Roehl             69.93          5. Wayne Brunjes         69.06
6. Sam Ritter            63.73          6. Sam Ritter            68.06

The point spread between first and last was reduced and positions 4 and 5
were affected here (MIB). In reality, MOST placings were not affected either
way. The most significant variance was in IIP.

Regarding your "clean routine", I watched the entire event - MIB, Prompted by
what I saw and IN MY OPINION, if I was judging MIB, your placing here was
correct. WARNING!!! A LITTLE CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM FOLLOWS: 4 360's and
upwind axles mean nothing unless the music calls for it (Mason Williams -
Classical Gas?)...it appeared as though you were merely flying with music in
the background.

>I hope the event organizers of the Mid-American plan to 
>notify everyone who participated in the event, of the 
>decisions which they made. 

Get real Sam, you know as well as I, if it is one thing the organizers of
this event do well, it is provide post event follow-up information - I am
sure you get the same mailings that I do.

>The purpose of their decision to keep scores as posted was
>used as a way to save money.  I say this because one of the
>organizers came up to me and asked what he was supposed to
>do if the scores were wrong.  He did not like it when I told
>him that he would either have to get trophies back from 
>people that were not supposed to receive them, or have more
>trophies made to give to the right people.

The purpose of their decision was, in part prompted by, the consideration
that it was very late Sunday afternoon (approximately 7:00 p.m.) some people
had a long way to drive.  At that time and point, it would have taken a
couple of hours to go back and edit out the Hi and Low scores, (the only
other thing that I could think to do at the moment).  Since MIB was the very
first event of the tournament and flown Saturday morning, and how I was not
apprised of the gravity of this matter and ALL of your observations before
about 6:00 p.m. Sunday evening is beyond me.  If I had this knowledge
earlier, I would have attempted to call Frank Kenisky and find out how to get
the Hi\Low drop.

>I hope other people have some reviews about this event, 
>other than it was a normal no wind kite festival in
>Kamalazoo, sorry, Kalamazoo, MI.

>Good Winds,

>Sam Ritter

The motto this weekend was "NO WHINING", the NO WHINING T-shirts were cool,
what happened?

On behalf of the Mid-American SKC organizers I would like to thank Frank
Kenisky for providing the scorekeeping program, the numerous sponsors,
volunteers and kite flyers who helped make this the best Mid-American SKC to-
date.

Ken Nealey



 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Tue, 27 Jun 1995 12:04:45 -1000
From:	salanne@convex.csc.FI (Simo Salanne)
Message-Id: <3spv9u$bm2@pobox.csc.fi>
Organization: STACK Finland
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter

In <3sp5rs$k2l@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> mr.nasty@ix.netcom.com (Frank Kenisky ) writes:

>Ken Nealy, called me to discuss this problem. The problem is the same
>throughout events across the country, so far as I remember. None of the
>computer scoring programs used today drop high and low scores
>automatically after being input.

[ clip ]

>The program is not perfect, it has some cosmetic problems, the
>computation algrythem is not one of them. It does not make decisions.

>High and low scores are input manually. If there is a tie using a 5
>member judging panel and the high and low scores are dropped they are
>put back in to break the tie. If there is still a tie then depending on
>the type of event certain considerations are made by comparing the
>highest score of a particular component.

>If you can write that algrythem me and a few others would really
>appreciate it.

Is this the same hacker, who volunteered to set up AKA
Web service? Designer of computation "algrythem", which
does not make decisions, just "cosmetic problems"...

:-O

Simo

--
Simo.Salanne@csc.fi                                    STACK Finland
====================================================================
Are you familiar with Kite Flyers Web Site? http://www.kfs.org/kites


 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Tue, 27 Jun 1995 23:22:56 -1000
From:	salanne@convex.csc.FI (Simo Salanne)
Message-Id: <3sr71g$lq5@pobox.csc.fi>
Organization: STACK Finland
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter

Frank Kenisky wrote:

Frank> John Trennepole, has been a Chief Judge in several events I have
Frank> managed. John is very consious of what each judge is doing. Sometimes
Frank> he can get too involved. That only means he is doing his job. I have
Frank> seen events where the chief judge is only a figure head. He does
Frank> nothing, these must have been the "other events" you attended.
Frank> 

Frank Kenisky wrote in another article:

Frank> I spoke with John Trenapole a few minutes ago regarding the
Frank> Mid-American kite event. Addressing the decision to keep the high and
Frank> low scores was a decision made by the Chief Judge. John recognizes this
Frank> is a *written AKA Rule* but also recognizes that this is a decision
Frank> which can affect an individuals scores.

Ken Nealy wrote:

Ken> MIB                                     MIB
Ken> Posted Standings (includes Hi/Low)      Revised Standings (with Hi/Low drop)
Ken>
Ken> 1. Jim Wirt              79.13          1. Jim Wirt              78.53
Ken> 2. Jon Trennepohl        74.00          2. Jon Trennepohl        73.73
Ken> 3. Al Hargus             72.00          3. Al Hargus             71.73
Ken> 4. Wayne Brunjes         71.20          4. Bob Roehl             70.46
Ken> 5. Bob Roehl             69.93          5. Wayne Brunjes         69.06
Ken> 6. Sam Ritter            63.73          6. Sam Ritter            68.06
Ken>

In these postings there's three names:

   John Trennepole 
   John Trenapole
   Jon Trennepohl

are they all meant to name the same person? 

Does this mean one of the COMPETITORS was the Chief Judge,
who "is very consious of what each judge is doing. Sometimes
he can get too involved."?!

Simo Salanne
STACK Rules & Regulations Committee

--
Simo.Salanne@csc.fi                                    STACK Finland
====================================================================
Are you familiar with Kite Flyers Web Site? http://www.kfs.org/kites


 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Wed, 28 Jun 1995 05:36:41 -1000
From:	mr.nasty@ix.netcom.com (Frank Kenisky )
Message-Id: <3srsu9$k58@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter

This is very interesting...

I am currently talking with Keith Anderson regarding this High Low
issue. He is also reading his AKA Rules book and cannot find where the
Rule book states which high low scores to drop.

He also brought up another question which involves ties. The question
involves V.B.1. Judges Criteria and Scoring (Ties), if you have a tie
the AKA rules book specifies that if a 5-judge panel was used, the high
and low scores (which were excluded from the initial tabulations) are
added back in to determine the final standing.

Here is an example for those who are waiting for David Gomberg to post
something really smart.

According to this statement, as Keith Anderson pointed out to me, it
suggests that if there is a tie in an event then *ALL* high and low
scores, which were excluded, will now be included to determine the
final standing.

In an event where 9th and 10th are tied you would have to include *ALL*
the excluded scores from *ALL* the contestants. If you were to
theoritically add back the high and low scores of all the contestants
then that would significantly change the standing. 1st may be in 5th
place and so on. According to Keith (who happends to be an Engineer) he
says that the way the rule reads, if he was the scorekeeper, he would
add back the high and low of every one in that event.

Now, how have YOU (meaning everyone) been calculating scores?

I'm not looking for what is *ASSumed* to be "common knowledge" I would
like an explaination. I would also like to know, why the AKA Sport Kite
Committee, (appointed by David Gomberg), back 4 years ago when I first
addressed this question, chose not to address the issue. I expect that
the current AKA Sport Kite Committee will at least consider it.

Now Sam Ritter, you have brought up a very interesting issue. I would
like to thank you sincerely. Maybe now you will understand why I did
not assume to know everything and program what I thought the AKA Rules
were trying to say.

I admit I do not know everything, I never have stated that, anyone who
assumes this is mislead. I am usually asking questions. I would think
that anyone who asks questions is curious.
-- 
*************>>>>>>>>>>>>>MR.NASTY<<<<<<<<<<<<<**************
Fiesta Kite Ideas	  http://www.tmn.com/kiteweb/home.htm
8302 Tiguex		  Mr.Nasty@ix.netcom.com
Universal City, TX 78148  (210) 659-1803 or (512) 326-6221
*************************************************************


 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Wed, 28 Jun 1995 03:15:24 -1000
From:	ac078@detroit.freenet.org (Ken Nealey)
Message-Id: <3srklc$evt@detroit.freenet.org>
Organization: Greater Detroit Free-Net, Detroit, MI
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter


In a previous article, salanne@convex.csc.FI (Simo Salanne) says:

---Snip...

>In these postings there's three names:
>
>   John Trennepole 
>   John Trenapole
>   Jon Trennepohl
>
>are they all meant to name the same person? 
>
>Does this mean one of the COMPETITORS was the Chief Judge,
>who "is very consious of what each judge is doing. Sometimes
>he can get too involved."?!
>

Simo,

Yes - they are all the same person. The correct spelling is: Jon Trennepohl.

NO - Jon was NOT the Chief Judge at this event... Mid-American SKC.

The Chief Judge at this event was Terry McPherson. Terry had a very 
difficult task in managing this event. Simply stated, there were not 
enough qualified - experienced judging personnel. It was sometimes a 
small miracle that Terry was even able to field a 5 judge panel for an 
event. 

In my earlier post regarding this event, I alluded to some of the 
problems with the judging panels. Historically, this event has had poor 
judging. Prompted by the monkey - business that occurs here, quality 
people (Chief Judge) e.g. Clyde King... will not have anything to do with 
this event. 

I believe that Frank was alluding to or asking why the event does not 
recruit Jon Trennepohl as the Chief Judge. I have to echo Franks earlier 
comments regarding how Jon handles an event when he is the Chief Judge. 
Before any judge panel takes the field, he will brief the panel about the 
event - if it is a precision event, he reviews the figures they will be 
judging... where you may expect to see a problem, etc. Jon does carefully 
select his judging panels, works closely with them, gives the flyers the 
bennefit of the doubt, runs the event very smoothly. I would never 
hesitate to serve as a judge for Jon, or have him judge my flying. A 
quality individual.

On the other hand, he is also a very talented - gifted flyer. I enjoy 
seeing him compete. Since I have to move up to Masters class next AKA 
season, I will have to fly against him. I look forward to this.

Bottom Line here is, if the Mid-American wants to get the other foot out 
of the grave, they must improve the quality of the judging. My 
recommendation.. recruit Jon Trennepohl as Chief Judge.

Ken Nealey 




 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Wed, 28 Jun 1995 05:36:41 -1000
From:	mr.nasty@ix.netcom.com (Frank Kenisky )
Message-Id: <3srsu9$k58@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter

This is very interesting...

I am currently talking with Keith Anderson regarding this High Low
issue. He is also reading his AKA Rules book and cannot find where the
Rule book states which high low scores to drop.

He also brought up another question which involves ties. The question
involves V.B.1. Judges Criteria and Scoring (Ties), if you have a tie
the AKA rules book specifies that if a 5-judge panel was used, the high
and low scores (which were excluded from the initial tabulations) are
added back in to determine the final standing.

Here is an example for those who are waiting for David Gomberg to post
something really smart.

According to this statement, as Keith Anderson pointed out to me, it
suggests that if there is a tie in an event then *ALL* high and low
scores, which were excluded, will now be included to determine the
final standing.

In an event where 9th and 10th are tied you would have to include *ALL*
the excluded scores from *ALL* the contestants. If you were to
theoritically add back the high and low scores of all the contestants
then that would significantly change the standing. 1st may be in 5th
place and so on. According to Keith (who happends to be an Engineer) he
says that the way the rule reads, if he was the scorekeeper, he would
add back the high and low of every one in that event.

Now, how have YOU (meaning everyone) been calculating scores?

I'm not looking for what is *ASSumed* to be "common knowledge" I would
like an explaination. I would also like to know, why the AKA Sport Kite
Committee, (appointed by David Gomberg), back 4 years ago when I first
addressed this question, chose not to address the issue. I expect that
the current AKA Sport Kite Committee will at least consider it.

Now Sam Ritter, you have brought up a very interesting issue. I would
like to thank you sincerely. Maybe now you will understand why I did
not assume to know everything and program what I thought the AKA Rules
were trying to say.

I admit I do not know everything, I never have stated that, anyone who
assumes this is mislead. I am usually asking questions. I would think
that anyone who asks questions is curious.
-- 
*************>>>>>>>>>>>>>MR.NASTY<<<<<<<<<<<<<**************
Fiesta Kite Ideas	  http://www.tmn.com/kiteweb/home.htm
8302 Tiguex		  Mr.Nasty@ix.netcom.com
Universal City, TX 78148  (210) 659-1803 or (512) 326-6221
*************************************************************


 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Wed, 28 Jun 1995 10:52:32 -1000
From:	salanne@convex.csc.FI (Simo Salanne)
Message-Id: <3ssfeg$68a@pobox.csc.fi>
Organization: STACK Finland
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter

In <3srsu9$k58@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> mr.nasty@ix.netcom.com (Frank Kenisky ) writes:

>This is very interesting...

>I am currently talking with Keith Anderson regarding this High Low
>issue. He is also reading his AKA Rules book and cannot find where the
>Rule book states which high low scores to drop.

Rule Book 3rd Ed. V.A.2.b reads (capitalizations are mine):

BEGIN QUOTE -------------------------------------------------------

... Generally, if 5 or more judges are used, the HIGH and LOW scores
for each COMPONENT will be deleted from the final score, and if 3
judges are used all the scores will be included...

END QUOTE ---------------------------------------------------------

>He also brought up another question which involves ties. The question
>involves V.B.1. Judges Criteria and Scoring (Ties), if you have a tie
>the AKA rules book specifies that if a 5-judge panel was used, the high
>and low scores (which were excluded from the initial tabulations) are
>added back in to determine the final standing.

[ clip ]

>According to this statement, as Keith Anderson pointed out to me, it
>suggests that if there is a tie in an event then *ALL* high and low
>scores, which were excluded, will now be included to determine the
>final standing.

>In an event where 9th and 10th are tied you would have to include *ALL*
>the excluded scores from *ALL* the contestants. If you were to
>theoritically add back the high and low scores of all the contestants
>then that would significantly change the standing. 1st may be in 5th
>place and so on. According to Keith (who happends to be an Engineer) he
>says that the way the rule reads, if he was the scorekeeper, he would
>add back the high and low of every one in that event.

>Now, how have YOU (meaning everyone) been calculating scores?

Rule Book 3rd Ed. V.B. reads (capitalizations are mine):

BEGIN QUOTE ------------------------------------------------------

B. Ties

WHEN TWO OR MORE COMPETITORS ARE TIED after the scorers tabulate
the final scores, the following METHODS WILL BE USED TO BREAK TIES,
in descending order:

1.	If a 5-judge panel was used, the high and low scores (which
        were excluded from the initial tabulations) are added back 
	in to determine the final standings.

2.	If at this point ....

END QUOTE --------------------------------------------------------

To me (who happens to be an engineer - but just with lower case "e":-) 
this means that tie break methods are used to break ties. 
Tie break methods are NOT used where ties doesn't exist. So, V.B.1 etc. 
is NOT applied to *ALL* standings, unless they all tie!

However, there is a minor hole in the rule book chapter V.
4,6,7, etc.. person judging panels are OK, but tie rules
only handle 3- and 5-judge panels.

Simo Salanne
STACK Rules & Regulations Committee
--
Simo.Salanne@csc.fi                                    STACK Finland
====================================================================
Are you familiar with Kite Flyers Web Site? http://www.kfs.org/kites


 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Thu, 29 Jun 1995 07:52:00 -1000
From:	cjsigal@netcom.com (Chuck Sigal)
Message-Id: <cjsigalDAy4Ao.20t@netcom.com>
Organization: Berkeley Buggy Bums
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter

In article <3ssfeg$68a@pobox.csc.fi>, Simo Salanne wrote:
> mr.nasty@ix.netcom.com (Frank Kenisky ) writes:

>>Now, how have YOU (meaning everyone) been calculating scores?

>To me (who happens to be an engineer - but just with lower case "e":-) 
>this means that tie break methods are used to break ties. 
>Tie break methods are NOT used where ties doesn't exist. So, V.B.1 etc. 
>is NOT applied to *ALL* standings, unless they all tie!

Yes, I agree with Simo. I only apply tie breaking procedures to scores
involved in a tie. I DO NOT re-sequence the results for all contestants
because two of them are tied. An interesting point though. Shows how two
people reading the same sentence can reach wildly different conclusions as
to it's meaning. 

>However, there is a minor hole in the rule book chapter V.
>4,6,7, etc.. person judging panels are OK, but tie rules
>only handle 3- and 5-judge panels.

I divide judging panels into two classes those with fewer than five 
judges and those with five or more judges.

Chuck

-- 
 +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 |   A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in   |
 |   human history--with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila.  |
 |                        Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review, April, 1992  |
 | Chuck Sigal                                                             |
 | Albany,CA,USA    Voice/Fax:01.510.527.3547   e-mail:cjsigal@netcom.com  |
 +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+



 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Thu, 29 Jun 1995 09:54:11 -1000
From:	mr.nasty@ix.netcom.com (Frank Kenisky )
Message-Id: <3sv0d3$dta@ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter

In <cjsigalDAy4Ao.20t@netcom.com> cjsigal@netcom.com (Chuck Sigal) writes: 
>In article <3ssfeg$68a@pobox.csc.fi>, Simo Salanne wrote:
>> mr.nasty@ix.netcom.com (Frank Kenisky ) writes:
>
>>>Now, how have YOU (meaning everyone) been calculating scores?
>
>>To me (who happens to be an engineer - but just with lower case "e":-) 
>>this means that tie break methods are used to break ties. 
>>Tie break methods are NOT used where ties doesn't exist. So, V.B.1 etc. 
>>is NOT applied to *ALL* standings, unless they all tie!
>
>Yes, I agree with Simo. I only apply tie breaking procedures to scores
>involved in a tie. I DO NOT re-sequence the results for all contestants
>because two of them are tied. An interesting point though. Shows how two
>people reading the same sentence can reach wildly different conclusions as
>to it's meaning. 

Exactly. Upon first glance at the rule I was under the same impression, as
was another competitor. But the rule doesn't even imply this.

>>However, there is a minor hole in the rule book chapter V.
>>4,6,7, etc.. person judging panels are OK, but tie rules
>>only handle 3- and 5-judge panels.

I have heard of events which have judging panels of 7 judges. I really
don't see anything wrong with this but it is not addressed in the rules
book, completely.

>I divide judging panels into two classes those with fewer than five 
>judges and those with five or more judges.

Please explain this in more detail. If you divide the judging panels
into two classes how does that change dropping the high lows? I think I
missed something.

Yea, I did miss something, Simo's last post. I've been searching all
over for it. Must have got lost.


Excuse my editor, I changed my fonts, phewy.


-- 
*************>>>>>>>>>>>>>MR.NASTY<<<<<<<<<<<<<**************
Fiesta Kite Ideas	  http://www.tmn.com/kiteweb/home.htm
8302 Tiguex		  Mr.Nasty@ix.netcom.com
Universal City, TX 78148  (210) 659-1803 or (512) 326-6221
*************************************************************


 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Date:	Fri, 30 Jun 1995 07:24:49 -1000
From:	cjsigal@netcom.com (Chuck Sigal)
Message-Id: <cjsigalDAzxpD.BoA@netcom.com>
Organization: AKA, NCKC, BASKL, BerkeleyBuggyBums
Subject: Re: The Highs and Lows at Mid-American . . .posted for Sam Ritter

In article <3sv0d3$dta@ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>, Frank Kenisky wrote:
>>In <cjsigalDAy4Ao.20t@netcom.com> cjsigal@netcom.com (Chuck Sigal) writes: 
>>>In article <3ssfeg$68a@pobox.csc.fi>, Simo Salanne wrote:

>>>However, there is a minor hole in the rule book chapter V.
>>>4,6,7, etc.. person judging panels are OK, but tie rules
>>>only handle 3- and 5-judge panels.

>I have heard of events which have judging panels of 7 judges. I really
>don't see anything wrong with this but it is not addressed in the rules
>book, completely.

>>I divide judging panels into two classes those with fewer than five 
>>judges and those with five or more judges.

>Please explain this in more detail. If you divide the judging panels

Just to be clear on this: By "division' I mean that during score
processing, for the purpose of deciding whether or not to drop high and
low, I first determine whether or not there are five or more judges. 

If there are, then I confirm that the user has chosen the default to drop
high and low; and if they have, then high and low are dropped. 

If the number of judges for an event is less than five, or the user has
chosen not to drop high / low, then they are not dropped

IF JUDGE_COUNT => 5 AND HIGH/LOW_FLAG = YES THEN DROP_HIGH/LOW

-- 
 +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 |   A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in   |
 |   human history--with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila.  |
 |                        Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review, April, 1992  |
 | Chuck Sigal                                                             |
 | Albany,CA,USA    Voice/Fax:01.510.527.3547   e-mail:cjsigal@netcom.com  |
 +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+



 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


