I'll admit that all the statistics stuff is over my head, but I don't understand how random is better than applying what we know about a judges history? I look at it this way -
1) if it gives me more information about why my stuff scored the way it did, thats a good thing (perfect? no, but I believe more is better).
2) I believe some people arent qualified to be KCBS CBJ's - If this can help indentify them for re-training/elimination, then I support it. This isn't about all judges giving everyone a 9, its about the few judges who consistenly score 3-4 full points under everyone else. There arent millions of them, but they do exist
I understand point 2 might not be popular and could get a little scary with the wrong implemention, but I think its necessary for the continued growth of KCBS.
TippyCanoe BBQ Crew