Tie breaking

DawgPhan said:
Are you saying that the judges would still only use a small portion of the scale?
Click to expand...

Yep, It would go from "C'mon, you know a 7 (or 6) kills any chance they have" to "C'mon, you know an 8.7 (or 8.6) kills any chance they have".

I had an interesting conversation at the Royal this year with a group of judges. The question was "How do you quantify a 1 point difference in scoring, What's the difference between an 8 & a 9 ? A 7 and an 8?".
 
Slamdunkpro said:
Yep, It would go from "C'mon, you know a 7 (or 6) kills any chance they have" to "C'mon, you know an 8.7 (or 8.6) kills any chance they have".

I had an interesting conversation at the Royal this year with a group of judges. The question was "How do you quantify a 1 point difference in scoring, What's the difference between an 8 & a 9 ? A 7 and an 8?".
Click to expand...


using the 1/10th still provides more different scores and would result in less ties.

I would imagine that a lot of the ties are result of rounding up and if they had the another option between two scores there would be more unique scores.

You could also provide more guidance as to what it means to be a 9 in taste.
 
Slamdunkpro said:
Yep, It would go from "C'mon, you know a 7 (or 6) kills any chance they have" to "C'mon, you know an 8.7 (or 8.6) kills any chance they have".
Click to expand...

That certainly true in MBN on site judging, where a 9.9 out of 10 makes a team unhappy.
 
djqualls said:
How many super tables were at the contest last year since they had two TOD's last year out there.
Click to expand...

David, here's a look at the tables for the contest this year...

* There were 14 tables used for this 79 team event.
* No table had less than 5 entries per category and no table had more then 6 entries per category.
* Over the course of the event, tables received between 22 - 24 total entries to judge.

In analyzing the table breakdown, I tracked the finishing place of each entry by table and then created an average placing for that table over the entire contest. While it is very possible that a single table could be hit with all excellent, average or subpar entries in a single category, it is unlikely for that to be the case over the entire contest. Here is how each table averaged out over all four categories. (Keep in mind that the midpoint or balance point is 39.50th place for this 79 team event. Number were rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.)

Table 124 - Average Finishing Place - 18
Table 311 - Average Finishing Place - 40
Table 315 - Average Finishing Place - 39
Table 327 - Average Finishing Place - 29
Table 449 - Average Finishing Place - 60
Table 526 - Average Finishing Place - 50
Table 642 - Average Finishing Place - 27
Table 646 - Average Finishing Place - 25
Table 650 - Average Finishing Place - 50
Table 661 - Average Finishing Place - 36
Table 724 - Average Finishing Place - 43
Table 849 - Average Finishing Place - 44
Table 977 - Average Finishing Place - 54
Table 981 - Average Finishing Place - 44


For the next section, I think it fair to say that a variance of +/- 5 places from the midpoint is still fair to call a balanced table. So, using that criteria, here are Hot, Average and Cold tables:

Hot Tables
124 (Best at the contest)
327
642
646

Average Tables
311
315
661
724
849
981

Cold Tables
449 (Worst at the contest)
526
650
977


This section will show how many Top 20's and Bottom 20's came from each table and what percentage of this entries that represented.

Top 20's by Table
Table 124 - 18 - 22.50%
Table 311 - 03 - 03.75%
Table 315 - 05 - 06.25%
Table 327 - 09 - 11.25%
Table 449 - 01 - 01.25%
Table 526 - 03 - 03.75%
Table 642 - 11 - 13.75%
Table 646 - 09 - 11.25%
Table 650 - 03 - 03.75%
Table 661 - 06 - 07.50%
Table 724 - 04 - 05.00%
Table 849 - 03 - 03.75%
Table 977 - 01 - 01.25%
Table 981 - 04 - 05.00%

Of the 80 entries that fell within the Top 20 in each category, 47 of them (58.75%) came from just 4 tables, #'s 124, 327, 642 & 646. Those just happen to be all 4 of the "Hot" tables listed above.

Bottom 20's by Table
Table 124 - 01 - 01.25%
Table 311 - 03 - 03.75%
Table 315 - 06 - 07.50%
Table 327 - 02 - 02.50%
Table 449 - 14 - 17.50%
Table 526 - 09 - 11.25%
Table 642 - 03 - 03.75%
Table 646 - 01 - 01.25%
Table 650 - 12 - 15.00%
Table 661 - 05 - 06.25%
Table 724 - 06 - 07.50%
Table 849 - 04 - 05.00%
Table 977 - 09 - 11.25%
Table 981 - 05 - 06.25%

Of the 80 entries that fell within the Bottom 20 in each category, 44 of them (55.00%) came from just 4 tables, #'s 449, 526, 650 & 977. Those just happen to be all 4 of the "Cold" tables listed above.


Clearly hitting Table 124 was a boost for any team that happened to land there and the Overall results support that. Here are the Overall places from the Top 30 that landed there:

1st - 2nd - 3rd - 4th - 8th - 11th - 14th - 21st - 24th - 26th - 27th - 29th

That's 12 of the Top 30 or 40% all coming from one table.


Finally, here is a breakdown of the Tables that the Top 10 Overall teams hit in terms of Hot, Average & Cold:

1st - 1 Hot, 2 Average, 1 Cold
2nd - 3 Hot, 1 Average, 0 Cold
3rd - 2 Hot, 1 Average, 1 Cold
4th - 2 Hot, 1 Average, 1 Cold
5th - 2 Hot, 1 Average, 1 Cold
6th - 1 Hot, 2 Average, 1 Cold
7th - 1 Hot, 2 Average, 1 Cold
8th - 3 Hot, 1 Average, 0 Cold
9th - 1 Hot, 1 Average, 2 Cold
10th - 2 Hot, 2 Average, 0 Cold


Numbers always tell an interesting story. Take from these numbers what you will.
 
big brother smoke said:
I have learned to not worry about this stuff and just cook. My comp life is much better this way! :p
Click to expand...

On a fundamental level, I agree. I try to focus my attention on the things that I can control, like the quality of our cooking. I also like to crunch numbers and see what comes of it. Hence my table breakdown. I just find it interesting to see what it yields.

However, there are things within the competition world that have gotten way out of balance and need to be addressed.

Ignoring a scoring issue, such as the appropriate way to break a tie, isn't going to fix the problem. KCBS monetized Team of the Year and this 3 way tie now has impact on the Brisket category and the money involved. They need to fix the problem.
 
Thanks Vince.

As far as T.O.Y. points go, I think the tied teams should all get points for the place they originally tied for. i.e. all three teams should get 300 points for brisket.

I also think the total prize pool for the places affected should be evenly split. Even if there is a 6 way tie and advertised money only paid to 5th.

It would be nice for KCBS to include a sheet that listed every table used in the contest with the individual judge average as well.

I do believe there is a lot of room for improvement and equalizing the scoring/judging system that will help the teams and the judges who are trying to do it right.

I don't think that 6 guys get together and decide to be the high or low table, but it happens too often by assimilation and there lies the problem.
 
djqualls said:
It would be nice for KCBS to include a sheet that listed every table used in the contest with the individual judge average as well.
Click to expand...

If anyone who was at that contest would like to share the information on their score sheet regarding the Judge's Average Score for the tables they hit, I would be happy to crunch a few more numbers.

I currently have the data for Tables 311, 642, 661 & 981 as those were the tables we hit.

That would leave Tables 124, 315, 327, 449, 526, 646, 650, 724, 849 & 977.

Just give me the table # and the data from the Judge Average Score line for each table you send. My PM box is small so send it via e-mail to:

vince @ rhythmnque dot com.
 
Vince RnQ said:
David, here's a look at the tables for the contest this year...

* There were 14 tables used for this 79 team event.
* No table had less than 5 entries per category and no table had more then 6 entries per category.
* Over the course of the event, tables received between 22 - 24 total entries to judge.

In analyzing the table breakdown, I tracked the finishing place of each entry by table and then created an average placing for that table over the entire contest. While it is very possible that a single table could be hit with all excellent, average or subpar entries in a single category, it is unlikely for that to be the case over the entire contest. Here is how each table averaged out over all four categories. (Keep in mind that the midpoint or balance point is 39.50th place for this 79 team event. Number were rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.)

Table 124 - Average Finishing Place - 18
Table 311 - Average Finishing Place - 40
Table 315 - Average Finishing Place - 39
Table 327 - Average Finishing Place - 29
Table 449 - Average Finishing Place - 60
Table 526 - Average Finishing Place - 50
Table 642 - Average Finishing Place - 27
Table 646 - Average Finishing Place - 25
Table 650 - Average Finishing Place - 50
Table 661 - Average Finishing Place - 36
Table 724 - Average Finishing Place - 43
Table 849 - Average Finishing Place - 44
Table 977 - Average Finishing Place - 54
Table 981 - Average Finishing Place - 44


For the next section, I think it fair to say that a variance of +/- 5 places from the midpoint is still fair to call a balanced table. So, using that criteria, here are Hot, Average and Cold tables:

Hot Tables
124 (Best at the contest)
327
642
646

Average Tables
311
315
661
724
849
981

Cold Tables
449 (Worst at the contest)
526
650
977


This section will show how many Top 20's and Bottom 20's came from each table and what percentage of this entries that represented.

Top 20's by Table
Table 124 - 18 - 22.50%
Table 311 - 03 - 03.75%
Table 315 - 05 - 06.25%
Table 327 - 09 - 11.25%
Table 449 - 01 - 01.25%
Table 526 - 03 - 03.75%
Table 642 - 11 - 13.75%
Table 646 - 09 - 11.25%
Table 650 - 03 - 03.75%
Table 661 - 06 - 07.50%
Table 724 - 04 - 05.00%
Table 849 - 03 - 03.75%
Table 977 - 01 - 01.25%
Table 981 - 04 - 05.00%

Of the 80 entries that fell within the Top 20 in each category, 47 of them (58.75%) came from just 4 tables, #'s 124, 327, 642 & 646. Those just happen to be all 4 of the "Hot" tables listed above.

Bottom 20's by Table
Table 124 - 01 - 01.25%
Table 311 - 03 - 03.75%
Table 315 - 06 - 07.50%
Table 327 - 02 - 02.50%
Table 449 - 14 - 17.50%
Table 526 - 09 - 11.25%
Table 642 - 03 - 03.75%
Table 646 - 01 - 01.25%
Table 650 - 12 - 15.00%
Table 661 - 05 - 06.25%
Table 724 - 06 - 07.50%
Table 849 - 04 - 05.00%
Table 977 - 09 - 11.25%
Table 981 - 05 - 06.25%

Of the 80 entries that fell within the Bottom 20 in each category, 44 of them (55.00%) came from just 4 tables, #'s 449, 526, 650 & 977. Those just happen to be all 4 of the "Cold" tables listed above.


Clearly hitting Table 124 was a boost for any team that happened to land there and the Overall results support that. Here are the Overall places from the Top 30 that landed there:

1st - 2nd - 3rd - 4th - 8th - 11th - 14th - 21st - 24th - 26th - 27th - 29th

That's 12 of the Top 30 or 40% all coming from one table.


Finally, here is a breakdown of the Tables that the Top 10 Overall teams hit in terms of Hot, Average & Cold:

1st - 1 Hot, 2 Average, 1 Cold
2nd - 3 Hot, 1 Average, 0 Cold
3rd - 2 Hot, 1 Average, 1 Cold
4th - 2 Hot, 1 Average, 1 Cold
5th - 2 Hot, 1 Average, 1 Cold
6th - 1 Hot, 2 Average, 1 Cold
7th - 1 Hot, 2 Average, 1 Cold
8th - 3 Hot, 1 Average, 0 Cold
9th - 1 Hot, 1 Average, 2 Cold
10th - 2 Hot, 2 Average, 0 Cold


Numbers always tell an interesting story. Take from these numbers what you will.
Click to expand...


after all that though, doesnt that seem to be a pretty standard distribution? Some tables are going to score high, some score low, and most score right in the middle.
 
Tables that are running 20+ places higher and lower than the midpoint, such as Tables 124 & 449, are totally unacceptable and that kind of thing happens all the time at contests. There has to be a way to minimize that from happening and allow the quality of the food to dictate the outcome as opposed to a table of judges that are all scoring everything super high or super low.
 
with the increase in high scores and the pesky tod's the spread can just kill you.

in 2012 there were 30 700's and 86 180's with 7,572 teams competing
in 2013 there were 102 700's and 130 180's 7,816 teams competing
through 9-15 there were 80 700's and 159 180's with 5,832 teams competing. I dont believe we will hit 7,000 teams competing this year

there are 100 more contests in 2014 than there were in 2012 and there is a decline in cooks this year. Judging and costs of competing vs return are key issues affecting bbq.
 
Big Poppa said:
with the increase in high scores and the pesky tod's the spread can just kill you.

in 2012 there were 30 700's and 86 180's with 7,572 teams competing
in 2013 there were 102 700's and 130 180's 7,816 teams competing
through 9-15 there were 80 700's and 159 180's with 5,832 teams competing. I dont believe we will hit 7,000 teams competing this year

there are 100 more contests in 2014 than there were in 2012 and there is a decline in cooks this year. Judging and costs of competing vs return are key issues affecting bbq.
Click to expand...

I could be wrong (it certainly wouldn't be the first time), but I think this year they are only tracking KCBS members.

I agree with you that the lack of consistent judging and high costs are holding down or even stifling growth. We need to lower the barrier to entry. A rising tide floats all boats.
 
Vince Thanks for doing this....

I finished 20th at this comp. Felt that I had a pretty good cook....three meats for sure. Thought I had nailed at least my chicken and brisket very happy with my ribs and probably overcooked my pork

all four tables were classified as bottom 20's

Chicken table 650 First on the table Cold Table 10th overall
Ribs table 849 third on the table Average Table 32nd overall
Pork Table 311 second on the table Average Table 28th overall
Brisket table 526 First on the table Cold table 26th overall.

What has been unusual the last two comps (and they were in the same area) Bullhead City and Laughlin is that both contests had two 180s from the same table in brisket...I am not saying that the teams that got those brisket scores didnt deserve them...it was just odd to have it happen back to back...the top three briskets in bullhead came from the same table.
 
Vince RnQ said:
Tables that are running 20+ places higher and lower than the midpoint, such as Tables 124 & 449, are totally unacceptable and that kind of thing happens all the time at contests. There has to be a way to minimize that from happening and allow the quality of the food to dictate the outcome as opposed to a table of judges that are all scoring everything super high or super low.
Click to expand...


Why is one table scoring higher or lower than another table a problem?

I think that you are reading things from the data that the data simply doesnt support.

The tables might be scoring high or low, but that is going to happen and it doesnt mean that anything wrong has happened. Every table isnt going to have a perfect distribution where they all get 1 really good box, 1 really bad box and 4 middle of the road boxes.

Could the judging be improved, sure, but that doesnt mean that the best isnt still winning.

The best teams are still winning. The best BBQ is still winning.
 
DawgPhan said:
Why is one table scoring higher or lower than another table a problem?

I think that you are reading things from the data that the data simply doesnt support.

The tables might be scoring high or low, but that is going to happen and it doesnt mean that anything wrong has happened. Every table isnt going to have a perfect distribution where they all get 1 really good box, 1 really bad box and 4 middle of the road boxes.

Could the judging be improved, sure, but that doesnt mean that the best isnt still winning.

The best teams are still winning. The best BBQ is still winning.
Click to expand...

With the group of fine cooks in this contest, yes a good team was gonna be at the top...with that said, it's pretty apparent to me that if you didn't hit a hot table, you had no chance at all in being in the top 10. That is just a fact any way you want to read the statistics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
American Royal Open Contest - Incorrect Results
Replies
6
Views
4K
Bill-Chicago
Bill-Chicago
M
Texas Pilgrimage-Lockhart, Snows
Replies
8
Views
299
stickman
S
S
Vlad's last meal
Replies
11
Views
402
Smoked&Baked
S
J
My Annual Deer Grind.......
Replies
18
Views
831
SmokeOCD
S
B
Shrimp Tempura on the Blackstone
Replies
6
Views
891
Juggy D Beerman
J
Back
Top