Return-Path: owner-judge at synchro.com
Received: from srvr20.engin.umich.edu (root at srvr20.engin.umich.edu [141.212.2.26])
	by srvr5.engin.umich.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA14730
	for <spencer at srvr5.engin.umich.edu>; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 21:22:24 -0500 (EST)
Received: from redheat.rs.itd.umich.edu (0 at redheat.rs.itd.umich.edu [141.211.83.36])
	by srvr20.engin.umich.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA17621
	for <spencer at engin.umich.edu>; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 21:22:23 -0500 (EST)
Received: by redheat.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.5/2.2)
	with X.500 id VAA02454; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 21:22:23 -0500 (EST)
Received: from relay1.smtp.psi.net by redheat.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.5/2.2)
	with ESMTP id VAA02447; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 21:22:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: from uu6.psi.com by relay1.smtp.psi.net (8.8.3/SMI-5.4-PSI)
	id VAA24968; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 21:22:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: by uu6.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP;
        id AA13844 for vitt at rchland.vnet.ibm.com; Sun, 9 Mar 97 21:22:03 -0500
Received: (from majordom at localhost) by synchro.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA22910 for judge-digest-outgoing; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 20:29:43 -0500
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 20:29:43 -0500
Message-Id: <199703100129.UAA22910 at synchro.com>
From: owner-judge-digest at synchro.com
To: judge-digest at synchro.com
Subject:   judge-digest V1 #1402
Reply-To: judge at synchro.com
Errors-To: owner-judge-digest at synchro.com
Precedence: bulk


judge-digest                Sunday, 9 March 1997        Volume 01 : Number 1402

 ============================================================================
       J u d g e N e t   -   t h e   b e e r   j u d g e   d i g e s t
 ============================================================================

 Moderator:        Chuck Cox          <chuck at synchro.com>
 Archivist:        Spencer Thomas     <spencer at umich.edu>
 Publisher:        SynchroSystems     <info at synchro.com>

 Submissions:      judge at synchro.com
 Subscriptions:    judge-request at synchro.com
 Archive:          http://realbeer.com/spencer/judge
 BJCP info:        geninfo at bjcp.synchro.com

 ============================================================================
 contents:

 Scoring body
 AFCHBC correction to results
 Re: "dangerous" methods
 AFCHBC correction #2

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Paul Krebs <pkrebs at cris.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 14:45:51 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Scoring body

John DeCarlo writes:

<Or, can we say that if body is "OK" it should be 3 of 5, "good" justifies 4 of
<5, and "great" justifies 5 of 5?  

<I'm afraid I am likely to start in the middle of the range and then have to
<justify going up or down.  With that approach, seeing a 5 with just "OK" would
<be unjustified.  (And possibly attributed to "fudging the score".)

I disagree. If all I see is OK written in the body section, I assume that it
means "approriate for style" and I expect to get the full five points. If I
receive less than full points, I want to be told whether the body was too
full or too thin. The comments need to be useful.

Paul Krebs
Paul Krebs pkrebs at cris.com


------------------------------

From: hollen at vigra.com
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 97 11:58:00 PST
Subject: AFCHBC correction to results

Please excuse a bleary minded mistake on category 22 in the previous
posting.  Here are the real results.

Herb and Spice Beer 21
First   David Houseman - Beer Unlimited Zany Zymurgists
Second  Martin Frederickson
Second  Todd Fitzsimmons - Quaff
 

------------------------------

From: randy at cais.com (Randy Paul)
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 19:11:34 -0500
Subject: Re: "dangerous" methods

Gotta disagree with George De Piro where he writes:
>  About that "bottom-up" judging technique.  I agree with Francois that
>  this is a dangerous way to judge.  It is this technique that leads to
>  scores that don't match category comments.  My first impression of a
>  beer definitely gives me an idea of where it will score (within ~5
>  points), but I carefully evaluate each category before determining a
>  final result.

Top-down judging [systems analysis definition: determine the score then
allocate component points] doesn't lead to these problems.  If the scores
don't reflect the comments, then the judge made a mistake on the points or
in articulating the severity of the comment.  This can happen using either
method and when it does, it's a judge problem, not a methodology failure.
Both methods work fine for judges who do them well.  Further, any new
scoring systems need to make certain that both methods will work equally
well.

Also, I can't see why folks take offense when they see erasure marks and
then read reasons into them.  If you can't defend your numbers, don't put
them down.  If you make a mistake, or reconsider what's right, you make it
right and use your eraser.  It doesn't matter how you determined a change
was needed but only do it if you believe it.  We're scoring the beer, not
the judge.

Prosit! -- Randy



------------------------------

From: hollen at vigra.com
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 97 16:44:59 PST
Subject: AFCHBC correction #2

Really sorry about this, but I have yet another correction to the
AFCHBC competition results.  Second and Third places were switched.
The corrected category is:

Fruit and Vegetable Mead 26
First   Jerry Cox
Second  Frank Leers - Quaff
Third   Martin Fredrickson, Tom Nickel 

------------------------------

End of judge-digest V1 #1402
****************************

 Send subscription cancellations & changes to judge-request at synchro.com.
 Messages sent to the wrong address will be ignored.