P
pharp
Guest
I am sure this idea will probably not go over well, but I wonder why a diagnostic scoring system would not make more sense. It seems this would really benefit cooks (especially when they are first starting out) and it might solve some judging problems as well (by default they would be identifying what they didn't like). There may be a better way to do it than described below, but this was just the way I visualized it.
Appearance- There may be criteria to incorporate, but this category may not benefit from any change.
Taste:
1-Bland 5-Perfect 9-Over seasoned
Tenderness:
1-Under cooked 5-Perfect 9-Over cooked
Obviously these descriptions would need to be more complete and incorporate the current language, but just to get the general idea.
The math would be a little more complicated (break out the absolute values) but overall the weighting/scoring would not have to be affected. This would essentially have a "built-in" scorecard from every judge for every meat.
Just and idea after a few years of competing. I don't usually get upset with the judging, it seems like the best teams usually win at the comps I go to. I just think for those head-scratching contests, having these type of scores would help me get better or understand how the judges perceived my food.
I am sure some people will argue this would not be helpful because you would get scores of 933 and 977, so the information would be useless. This could be true, but I think overall the cooks could see a clearer scoring pattern over a couple of contests and improve their product.
Here is a link to a sample spreadsheet so you can play with how the scores would work. When building it I realized that this particular model would effectively make the lowest score a 5. That might be problematic for some but with some more advanced math I think we could fix it, but in reality given the current state of scoring I do not think this an actual issue.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LmsafnHkpalBFoULw9ik8SIBol6-uRuzHL6EYiV_Y-g/edit?usp=sharing
Appearance- There may be criteria to incorporate, but this category may not benefit from any change.
Taste:
1-Bland 5-Perfect 9-Over seasoned
Tenderness:
1-Under cooked 5-Perfect 9-Over cooked
Obviously these descriptions would need to be more complete and incorporate the current language, but just to get the general idea.
The math would be a little more complicated (break out the absolute values) but overall the weighting/scoring would not have to be affected. This would essentially have a "built-in" scorecard from every judge for every meat.
Just and idea after a few years of competing. I don't usually get upset with the judging, it seems like the best teams usually win at the comps I go to. I just think for those head-scratching contests, having these type of scores would help me get better or understand how the judges perceived my food.
I am sure some people will argue this would not be helpful because you would get scores of 933 and 977, so the information would be useless. This could be true, but I think overall the cooks could see a clearer scoring pattern over a couple of contests and improve their product.
Here is a link to a sample spreadsheet so you can play with how the scores would work. When building it I realized that this particular model would effectively make the lowest score a 5. That might be problematic for some but with some more advanced math I think we could fix it, but in reality given the current state of scoring I do not think this an actual issue.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LmsafnHkpalBFoULw9ik8SIBol6-uRuzHL6EYiV_Y-g/edit?usp=sharing
Last edited by a moderator: