View Single Post
Unread 09-06-2012, 12:32 PM   #33
Jorge
somebody shut me the fark up.
 
Jorge's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-23-04
Location: DFW, San AntonioTx
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake Dogs View Post
You're right, but the "good" tables and the "bad" tables are shuffled. The odds increase that any 1 judge sees your Q does go up, but the odds are 0 that the same group of judges judges it. It's about mixing up the grouping and minimizing the effect of good/bad tables. It does this. It doesn't prevent one of the same judges judging your Q again.

Mind you, I applaud the new scoring results posting.
That can be accomplished by sending boxes to different tables, and retaining the opportunity for each team to land on good/bad tables.

I want each team to have the same opportunity to land on the SAME table. Otherwise you just penalized the six teams that landed on a 'bad" table for chicken if you change the makeup for ribs. If you are randomly moving people from table to table there doesn't appear to be any safeguard to prevent the formation of another bad table, which one or more teams from the first category may land on again further hurting their chances. The converse is also true. You may create a judging pool where one or more teams gain an advantage in the event they land on more than one high scoring table.
__________________
You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airline - it helps if you have some kind of a football team, or some nuclear weapons, but at the very least you need a beer. --Frank Zappa

BOOGITY, BOOGITY, BOOGITY!!!

Recipient of a Huggies box!

Shut up, and cook!!!!
Jorge is offline   Reply With Quote


Thanks from: --->