The REAL world's results!

FlexThis · Post by **FlexThis** » 06 Mar 2009 13:16

Props to Stanford for trying to logically conclude a result.

jeffmudd6 · Post by **jeffmudd6** » 06 Mar 2009 14:57

Thanks Damon!

We didn't mean to cause so much controversy over the whole thing. Our goal was just to offer a comparison of the results that are, and the results that would've been with the formula-based system. Of course, every judging system has its flaws!

FlexThis · Post by **FlexThis** » 06 Mar 2009 16:54

As I am getting older (34) I am focusing more and more on the technicality of the sport itself. While routines are always going to be somewhat subjective to an extent, the tricks, combos, and links themselves have some form of measurable logic to them.

In this day and age we have so much technology available to us to explore the possibilities of fair and accurate judging. I feel we are just slower to accept it due to the sport's small size.

I am sure that when the Bones Brigade started out skateboarding, certain tricks had more weight than others, and form was probably looked at just as much for them as it is for us. The top pros most likely made the rules and traditions of what skateboarding is. Then with the X-games and various other skate comps, the rules had to change to accomodate style and the pure sickness that was to follow.

One day I hope to see our sport grow to accomodate all the possibilities that are limited to the human mind, and expanded to included ALL that footbag has yet to see.

Who knows we may even grow to realize that our current mindset is flawed even in the top players' minds, egos will cease to exist and technology will guide us toward a measurable and logical future that others outside the sport will understand and appreciate.

Sorry to ramble, but I feel the steps that Stanford has taken to even try to analyze the logical technicality of the 08 routines, is a step in the right direction for the sport.

Webslinger · Post by **Webslinger** » 07 Mar 2009 14:02

Jeremy wrote:Rather than having some kind of pissing contest, how about you explain in detail, in the context of the definitions in the judging system, exactly why you think the judges interpreted the system correctly and why Damien's routine is better technically and "artistically" to Vasek's. Perhaps you could also explain exactly what constitutes "artistic merit" as I feel this is one of the most misunderstood and poorly named aspects of the judging system.

NO, I already explained my opinion in at least 2 topics recently after Worlds.
The artistic merit content was well described in a topic after Worlds 05 started by Jan Z. Also I am sure you know it well and so it would only make this kinda pointless conversation longer.
I agree that people just talk and don`t do much, but it is not about having precisely defined judging system, it is about having precisely judging people, which is (and always has been) the problem.

Slowsis · Post by **Slowsis** » 07 Mar 2009 16:55

This entire discussion is based on opinion and can therefore never be resolved. Obviously routine judging is based on technical elements, as well as the opinion of the judges, and instead of arguing with eachother about who would have won in YOUR opinion, or under your definition of what constitutes artistic merit or timing, prove yourself worthy to be a worlds judge in the future, and you can make the decision yourself.

I know I'm being a little trite, but honestly, the decision has been made by a group of very experienced and talented footbag players, and their decision will stand. Train up and win routines at worlds yourself if you are so scandalized by the results!

One last thing, and I know I am definently not the voice of the footbag nation, but honestly, the world champ IMO is not the winner of routines. Its the winner of Circle Comp. What better way to judge footbag than in the way it is played...in circles!!!!

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 07 Mar 2009 18:18

The argument from authority falls down as soon as you analyse the results more carefully.

Remove the scores of the three least experienced judges (based on how many times they've judged at worlds) and Vasek wins. Remove the two Polish judges (and the Czech one if you like, although it's irrelevant since he ranked them equal) and it's a draw.

Slowsis · Post by **Slowsis** » 08 Mar 2009 11:18

Jeremy wrote:Remove the scores of the three least experienced judges (based on how many times they've judged at worlds) and Vasek wins. Remove the two Polish judges (and the Czech one if you like, although it's irrelevant since he ranked them equal) and it's a draw.

So what is the selection process for worlds judges?

Webslinger · Post by **Webslinger** » 08 Mar 2009 13:07

Depends on the country where it takes place, but usually the least drunk people judge..

Outsider · Post by **Outsider** » 08 Mar 2009 17:09

Depends on the country where it takes place, but usually the least drunk people judge..

Well, actually... At worlds '04 I made a point of bringing a gin-and-tonic along with me to my finals judging assignment. Finals was in a large bar, after all. After finishing my drink I wished I was able to get another. In any case, I think we did a pretty good job of judging that day, with very few potential controversial outcomes. You did pretty well that day too, Honza, as I recall it. It was very tough to call between you and Flash, but, in the end, I think we arrived at the right decisions with regard to the top 3 places.

RawSko · Post by **RawSko** » 13 Mar 2009 20:37

Webslinger wrote:Depends on the country where it takes place, but usually the least drunk people judge..

I was so smashed when I judged the Berlin Afterparty final round of circles... Phil clearly pwned though.

TheLast · Post by **TheLast** » 10 Apr 2009 19:39

You Can't Change Results
You Can't say that vasek played well in worlds 2008 routine(no as good as always)
You Can keep this topic up
But
You Can't say that this is not pointless

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 12 Apr 2009 02:04

If judges make mistakes, or there is a difference of opinion within the community as to what is expected in routines and what the standards should be, how can this problem be addressed without talking about it?

We can either pretend that all judging of all footbag events is entirely perfect, or we can accept that it isn't perfect, and every time we disagree we can start a conversation about it, even if it turns out we're wrong.

If we take the former approach then nothing will ever change. If we take the latter approach and the judging is not always perfect then it's the only way we can improve it.

If you think trying to improve judging is pointless or you think the judging is always perfect and so discussion disagreeing is pointless then I have to strongly disagree.

It's obviously far easier to discuss specific events that have already happened than to debate about results that haven't yet occurred or hypothetical results. We can't all get on the same page without discussion.

crazylegs32 · Post by **crazylegs32** » 29 Jun 2009 19:35

I was a worlds judge before. And my co judge on presentation stepped out for a smoke between routines and never returned. Ted...?