Date:	Fri, 28 Oct 1994 06:24:02 -1000
From:	Mr.Nasty@ix.netcom.com (Frank Kenisky)
Message-Id: <38r8j2$3iu@ixnews1.ix.netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom
Subject: My Opinion about the AKA Ranked/Qualifying System for 1995

Mr.Nasty here again with a few more comments on the AKA Ranked/Qualifying System for the 1995 season.

Darrin Skinner wrote to tell us some important things about the new and improved trial basis AKA 
Ranked/Qualifying System.

This statement address 2 different issues

>	1) The AKA Convention competition is supposed to be a best-of-the-best 
>		competition.  The best we've been able to do along these lines
>		is a best-of-the-conferences competition.  Now, this probably
>		represents 900f the best-of-the-best...

The past AKA Ranked/Qualifying system was supposed to do the same thing. The problem is that the AKA is 
trying to compare apples to oranges. And just what does Darrin mean that 900f the individuals represented 
the best-of-the-best, just who were, and I'd like names, the other 10who did show up.

And just what is wrong with the best of the best conferences competition? What you mean to say is that this 
did not in fact represent the best of the best within the conferences. Isn't that right.

Didn't the system, something I remember indicating, have a serious flaw?

Don't you have the results of the competitions from last year?

>	2) if we can identify 
>		individuals that consistently win on a national basis then we
>		can invite them to compete as well.

On a national basis... You mean like the American Kite Circuit? Oh, you only want to see the contestants at 
the convention who have the money to travel to all the events.

Just what does this have to do with AKA competition and ranking? Are you trying to tell us that kiting is 
going to the Olympics?

And what's the problem, the system set up last year ranked it's competitors. And why now is there so much 
emphasis on the "Ranked/Qualifying" system when just a few months ago no one wanted to exert the energy 
except to send flames about syntax?

>	 (2)The International Olympic committee has a specific list of requirements
>		for a sport being considered in the Olympic games.  One of these
>		requirements is that there be a national ranking system administered
>		by a non-profit organization.

Yea, great idea, what's the formula? Care to share it with us?

>	(3)It would be nice to have a system that could determine that (for example) 
>		Dodd Gross is a better flier than (oh, lets say) David Gomberg even though
>		these two have never flown at the same event.

Now this is very interesting. How does Marty or anyone else for that matter intend to choose who will be able 
to compete at the convention in 95?

I mean let's just say that Darrin's idea is a flop, which it could very well be. Then what. Hey, I've got a great 
idea, why doesn't Darrin use last years results and input those variables into the secret formula? Wouldn't this 
be better that subjecting the AKA to more turmoil next year? Or do you like the idea of chasing your tail?

>As Marty mentioned, the AKA wants to have a national scoring system in place this
>year on a trial basis.  They have directed the Festival and Competitions Committee
>(i.e. it's chairman (i.e. me)) to do this.  

Great segue. Put the idea in the hands of someone else. (He did say you all.)

>So far, all of the above is just information to you all... 
>here's where I put YOU to work.  

Do you really, or are you just looking for acceptance?

>I want your opinions (please keep to 500 words or less :-) ).

I think your HO (IMHO) is humbling at best. I don't think the AKA Automated Information System is up to 
the standards you would like us to believe.

>If the AKA had no way of publishing the results quickly, I'd say the 
>system MUST be self determining (i.e. each individual should be able to determine their
>own score and ranking).  However, the AKA Automated Information System (IMHO) >takes care of this 
problem.  The results can/will be updated on the system as soon as new >event information is received.

What I would prefer is the formula you intend to use before I or anyone should make a decision. And have you 
tested the formula against last years results? If not WHY?

>My real question for rec.kites is, what would you prefer?  A system where you can
>figure your own score; a system where you can't figure your own score; a less 
>accurate system; a more accurate system; etc...?  

You are very right, it is a basic assumption you make.

>A basic assumption I make in all the above is that a less complicated system is
>also less accurate (and vice versa).  I have formed this opinion after examining
>over 20 different scoring systems (some in use, some not).  If anyone can show me
>a accurate system (for national scoring, where most competitors *never* compete
>head-to-head) that is not complex...

Wrong. Richard Dermer has already spoke with me about a problem which occurred in the database which you 
were keeping. He stated that it was something which needed to be addressed. You apparently told him there 
was no problem.

Just exactly what is it you'll endorse?

>, I'll be the first to endorse it.

I personally think this is the last we will hear from Darrin.

>P.S.  I have a handfull of alternative ideas for the AKA's national ranking system.
	I'll post these ideas later this week (hopefully).

Just being the inquisitive individual I am I have a few questions. For those of you who are also interested but 
don't want to get directly involved in a heated flame over this issue please feel free to re-post this message on 
rec.kites, maybe someone will respond.

First of all, Darrin speaks of a new system which will allow an individual to "say they are the best within the 
AKA circuit" or something of that nature. What confuses me is that I thought that's what they already were. If 
so then what exactly did YOU change?

If not then what do the individual contestants who won this year get to say they are?

Just asking.

Darrin, as well as a few others (Marty) goes on to say that the NEW system is going to be something like the 
one used in tennis. Another post in my e-mail box was from a concerned individual who brought up a very 
good point.

Tennis is a computation of one individual against another. How is the new system going to rank a number of 
individuals who compete at one event as opposed to the numerous events throughout the country?

Is there a formula which is available for the rest of us to look at or is it one of those closely held secrets?

Just asking.

Also, Darrin and Marty state that the system is on a trial basis. Very good BUT why?

The question is why do they have to expose the AKA members (contestants) to another year of what may very 
well be another fiasco?

If Darrin kept the results, and Marty has already stated in a prior posting to me that he has, from all the events 
>From last year then why not experiment on that results to determine what the outcome would have been?

They are trying to obtain the same end results, who will be able to compete at the AKA Convention. Why not 
use the data to test the experiment?

If the data is bad and Darrin kept it then why is Darrin the one in charge of changing it?

That is assuming the data is bad.
I know, I know when you ass ume you make an ass out of you and me. Well that's public knowledge, so leave 
that one alone.

Now in a sly political attempt Darrin asks for survey information, (he's going to use this on the family feud). 
Do we want a system which is inaccurate but easy to understand or one which is accurate which no one except 
him will understand?

Yea, I vote for inaccuracy.

Is this an attempt at getting acceptance?

Yes.

You see my fine feathered friends, Darrin wants you to accept his system before you even know what it is. By 
saying yea I want a system which is accurate you immediately lend credence to something you have never seen 
or understand.

I've got some private stock in "Cloud 9" Airlines want some cheap.

I say we need more information.

Provide us with the formula. Test the formula against lasts years results. What is the outcome? Did it in fact 
work? Why are we interested in going to the Olympics? Who is that masked man?

Mr.Nasty

P.S. This happens to be my opinion.


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