Team of the Year Idea - What do you think?

[ThomEmery]

I will hold off on the idea of making Turducken a required meat


JK

 

[Red Valley BBQ]

What about using an average of the best 5 (or whatever number is decided on)overall scores for each team? The overall score is more of an indicator of how good a team is than is position of finish. Since the total possible overall score is a constant 720 points that would level the playing field for all teams. Using a certain number of comps to qualify for TOY would allow more teams to be eligible

For example:

Team A cooks 8 comps and the average of the best 5 scores is 654.1368
Team B cooks 18 comps and the average of the best 5 scores is 648.4724

Team A, while cooking fewer comps, should be considered for TOY because they have performed to a higher level then Team B.

Just my two cents.

 

[Smokedelic]

What about using an average of the best 5 (or whatever number is decided on)overall scores for each team? The overall score is more of an indicator of how good a team is than is position of finish. Since the total possible overall score is a constant 720 points that would level the playing field for all teams. Using a certain number of comps to qualify for TOY would allow more teams to be eligible

For example:

Team A cooks 8 comps and the average of the best 5 scores is 654.1368
Team B cooks 18 comps and the average of the best 5 scores is 648.4724

Team A, while cooking fewer comps, should be considered for TOY because they have performed to a higher level then Team B.

Just my two cents.

I don't think that judging, across the country, is consistent enough to make that work. It penalizes teams that might cook in an area where scores are traditionally low, or benefit teams in areas where scores are traditionally high. If every team was judged by the same set of judges then you might be on to something.

...just my 2 cents.

 

[HoDeDo]

I agree Mike, When I went out to NY to cook, many were lower than scores here. B Hills won with a 666. At Oink, We essentially had a 680... which Linda thought was the highest score they had seen in NY at a contest. Here in the midwest, a 680 can take 5th to a 702 on occasion, for example.... Going by judging scores alone, would definitely skew the ToY to places that have higher scores. The competition was every bit as good, and food was killer, just as a region the judges score lower... I think using team placement is the way to go... it normalizes the scoring -- 1st place is 1st place if it is a 640 or a 700.

 

[tmcmaster]

I don't think that judging, across the country, is consistent enough to make that work. It penalizes teams that might cook in an area where scores are traditionally low, or benefit teams in areas where scores are traditionally high. If every team was judged by the same set of judges then you might be on to something.

...just my 2 cents.

I don't think you can get consistent judges across one TABLE sometimes...:doh:

 

[JayAre]

The current system is pretty good. I wasnt suggesting that a team that cooks 7 contests should be able to win (although winning 4 out of 7 should place you at lot higher than the current system does). I was suggesting that the "top score" type awards be expanded.

Yes it would be nice to have winning % as an element of the scoring. The team that wins 7 out of 15 should place higher than the team that wins 7 out of 30.

I think this is kinda what Ive been saying...the current system works, I would'nt change a thing about it, but i would like to see it expanded to "sub catagories" to give the lesser teams some insentive to do more contests and compete on the same level as the high end teams.