Date: Fri, 18 Mar 1994 08:43:30 -1000 From: uspehmev@ibmmail.COM Message-Id: Organization: Division of Applied Sciences, Harvard University Subject: RE:AKA Standings ----------------------- Mail item text follows --------------- TO: I1044027 IBMMAIL IBM Mail Exchange FROM: MVIRGILI PALL400 Mark Virgilio at Pall East Hills DATE: MARCH 18, 1994 SUBJECT: RE:AKA Standings On checking the AKA Standings, I was surprised to find that the results from Norwalk, a small regional event, were counted. I thought we were originally told that points earned there would not count. Maybe they mean't in the Eastern League. Maybe I misunderstood. I don't really care either way, just curious. Who can ever figure out the points system anyway? And why does the AKA give an extra point for each event competed in? To encourage more participation I guess but it tends to favor whomever can attend the most events. I saw cases last year where a competitor or team beat their opposition at every event they were at, but at year end fell short because they didn't attend as many events. I believe last year the AKA based points on the top 3 or 4 events a flyer competed in. I still don't understand the point for each event. Dazed & Confused, Mark = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Date: Sat, 19 Mar 1994 12:18:01 -1000 From: normac4101@aol.com (NorMac4101) Message-Id: <2mftmp$el8@search01.news.aol.com> Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Subject: Re: AKA Standings I would like a copy, please - how do I get one? Norm = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Date: Sat, 19 Mar 1994 08:22:51 -1000 From: kyteman@aol.com Message-Id: <9403191322.tn151246@aol.com> Organization: Division of Applied Sciences, Harvard University Subject: Re: AKA Standings The history and rationale for 1993-4 revisions to AKA conference scoring was thoroughly (we thought) discussed in KITING, September 93, pp 8-9; and in the November 1993 issue, pp 13-14. (AKA Conference Rankings are not to be confused with Eastern League, SW League, PNW League, STACK, or AKM circuit rankings.) Mark, I am snailing to you the info sheet we send to event organizers which summarizes current policy, but doesn't go into the detail that the newsletter stories did. If after reading all that you're still confused, call your conference commisioner or Genny Forsberg or Darrin Skinner and discuss. Anybody else who wants this summary sheet has but to ask. chin UP brooks leffler kyteman@aol.com = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Date: Tue, 22 Mar 1994 19:55:44 -1000 From: Darrin.Skinner@ebay.sun.com (Darrin Skinner) Message-Id: <9403232155.AA13267@stuntkite.EBay.Sun.COM> Organization: Division of Applied Sciences, Harvard University Subject: RE:AKA Standings -] Date: Fri, 18 Mar 1994 18:43:30 GMT -] From: uspehmev@ibmmail.COM -] Subject: RE:AKA Standings -] -] -] On checking the AKA Standings, I was surprised to find that the -] results from Norwalk, a small regional event, were counted. I thought -] we were originally told that points earned there would not count. I don't know what the history on this event is. The results were sent to me by the conference commissioner for the Norwalk event. If the event *said* that their results would *not* be part of the AKA conference standings then we'll remove it from the standings... ...it's not fair to competitors that may have skipped the event because they were told they would not get points for it! -] Maybe they mean't in the Eastern League. Maybe I misunderstood. I -] don't really care either way, just curious. Who can ever figure out -] the points system anyway? And why does the AKA give an extra point -] for each event competed in? To encourage more participation I guess You are correct. It is intended to promote participation, primarily of smaller events within the fliers conference. -] but it tends to favor whomever can attend the most events. I saw -] cases last year where a competitor or team beat their opposition at -] every event they were at, but at year end fell short because they This problem was mostly seen in the smaller attended categories such as Team. There was some instances of this with fliers (in more well attended categories) that only attended 1 or 2 events. In reality though, the attendence points usually served to break ties, not create problems. -] didn't attend as many events. I believe last year the AKA based -] points on the top 3 or 4 events a flyer competed in. I still don't -] understand the point for each event. -] -] Dazed & Confused, -] -] Mark The bottom line is that the scoring process tries to walk a fine line between competitors that don't have the budget to travel to the larger (further away) events, competitors that choose to spend their entire budget to go to 1 or 2 large events, and those competitors that can afford to go to many events (anywhere). It also tries to provide a comparative score for every flier -- from 1st to last place. From experience I can say that this aspect of the AKA's scoring system (recognizing the *less successfull competitor*) is the most difficult part of the system. It's much easier to devise a *fair* system for just the top X number of fliers than it is to devise a *fair* system for all fliers. The AKA feels that every member has the right to earn points (however unsuccessfull a competitor :-( they may be) at any event. The scoring process: Gives 1 point for each event attended within the flyers conference to: - support local/small events, - support/recognize competitors that don't have the budget to travel. Allows inclusion of up to 2 out of conference competitions to: - support/recognize competitors that choose to spend their money traveling. Limits the results points to 5 competitions to: - reward the frequent competitor, while also, - not permitting someone with lots of money (or sponsorship) to win by simply going to more events than the next guy can afford to go to. The averaging part of the score used last year, was dropped because it created a dis-incentive to attend smaller events. Hope this helps, Darrin Skinner AKA Pacific Conference Commissioner AKA Sport Kite Rules Committee member = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =