Originally Posted by Carnivorous Endeavors BBQ
I wonder how this would work out if all certified judges scores were kept and averaged over a period of time or several contests. Judges could then be assigned to tables so that all tables have near the same cumulative average for scoring. If all tables had a close to the same average in scoring, it would seemingly(on the surface) start a contest with a more level playing field. This way you shouldn't get 1 table who likes to score all 9's for practically everything. Just a thought....
I am not a statistician nor do I play one on TV. But several contest would not be enough to draw any meaningful conclusions. Most researchers consider 30 to be a minimum number of participants for a study to have any validity. 100 is better. Given the nature of this beast I think 30 or so is a good number to consider. It will then average out across the board for those times that really good or really bad food crosses the judging table.
And in my opinion the all 9's everytime judge is as much and maybe more of a problem than the lower scoring judge. keith