Should we get something from scoring?

[Merl]

Aren't the score's double counted when entered into the computer for accuracy by two different people ?
Where I thought you were asking was for the judges to get to see the scores from the other judges at their table so they can evaluate their measurements compared to their peers who judged the same food.
Pens might help, but it can be crossed out. What is the exact rule about a judge fully erasing a score or crossing out.

Vinny,
Unfortunately the scores are not double counted. You are relying upon the accuracy of the person who is entering the scores. Most of the time this is done very well and the system works. However there have been those times when people do not do their work, and allow mistakes. Not all mistakes can be caught, but many common data entry failures and mistakes can be identified, if you take the time to review your work product.

I agree it would be great to have judges see how they judged compared to the table. We encourage judges to discuss entries after they turn in their score cards. Currently the software will not track judges for us. Their is a program that might, but is not in use, and has not been beta tested. We are looking for programers and Don Harwell had a request for bid to write a new program for KCBS.

Judges are not to change a score once written. We take pens to our contest to discourage changes. If a mistake has been made, we require, (not mandated by KCBS) that the judge initial the change and the table captain initial the change. This also protects us as Reps, as to why a score card has a change upon it. Then the table captain has to explain to the us why the change was made. This does, in my opinion discourage the temptation to change scores. Most changes of scores are as a result of comparing entries which is forbidden.

Yours in Q
Merl

 

[slat]

I don't want to keep even with the other judges. I score what I think it deserves. The point is just like the teams see where they are it would be nice if a judge could see where they are at. That way if a judge notices that they are always in the lower half then maybe they need to think about how they are judging. Maybe they are getting stuff that is that bad, but if they judge 5 or 6 contest and are always on the lower half then it's time for them to evaluate what they are doing. Maybe competition BBQ isn't to there liking or maybe it's just a chore to go and judge. Who knows? I just think that it could be used as a tool to help.

 

[Bentley]

Merl,

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I am not a KCBS hater, but I am not there biggest fan either. I appreciate you pointing out some of the changes that may occour. You appear to be a rep that takes their position seriously, there are a few in CA like that, but a few on the oppisite end of that spectrum as well!

 

[Muzzlebrake]

I think what we really need is instant replay

:twisted:

:biggrin:

 

[rbinms33]

I personally don't care to see what the other judges at my table scored an entry. When we're done with a category, we generally discuss what we liked and didn't like. Generally, we all agree on the bad one if there is one and there's always one or two that everyone thought was better than the rest. Also, about halfway through judging someone will always ask the Table Captain about our scoring consistency. The response I got today while judging at Ashland was "I can tell which ones ya'll like and don't like". Of course, I'm sure it doesn't always happen like that.

I'd like to add my .02 cents to the whole judging thing. I still consider myself a newbie judge (3 contests) but when I'm consistent with everyone else without knowing how they scored, that tells me everyone is on the same page and is using the same "start at 6 average" when rating the entries. That "average" is sooooo subjective though. And if a judge's "average" is too high, somebody gets low scores. On the flip side, if a judge's "average" is too low, then somebody gets high scores. Either way, somebody is getting scores they don't deserve.

I listened to one of the BBQ Forum podcasts a while back and Ray was interviewing Ed Roith. Ed was talking about a program that would "track" judges and their scoring habits so those that had screwed up "averages" could be identified. I think this is what Merl is referring to in his earlier post. I think this is an awesome idea and would go a long way in helping to better train those judges that just don't know any better and identifying those that know better but think their own way is better.

Something else that I thought was a great idea was something I read in the Jun '07 issue of the Bull Sheet (Merl, I think your name was on this one too) about putting keywords next to the scoring numbers. For newbie judges, this would be like a legend on a map and a truly good thing. It went something like this: 9 - Excellent, 8 - Very Good, 7 - Above Average, 6 - Average, 5 - Below Average, etc. It would also give the judges the ability to comment on any 9, 4, 3 or 2 score they gave to give the cooks constructive feedback.

Just looking at these two ideas, I like the direction that judging is headed. I think both of them would greatly improve our judging system.

 

[Rookie'48]

I think that the #/keyword system is being tested along with the feedback cards by a few reps this year at each of the contests that they do. KCBS is then supposed to figure out weather to expand or scrap the project. At least that's what I remember hearing.
Dave