I could go on but I do not want to be thought of as a bitcher. I highlight this to emphasize the fact that the WBC needs to take control of the regionals or run the risk of loosing the faith of the public. There are a lot of great things about the competitions, but this will be the last time that I participate in the fun. I am looking forward to the time I can support a “blind” competition. I think this will be the future of Barista (espresso) comps. That is my two bits, anyone have any great ideas for the next generation of competitions?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I’m going to leave the rules in peace for now, though I do think they should be changed, and talk about blank score sheets.

From my experience of judging both regionals and national competitions, the sad truth is that the baristas just don’t care to listen. I happen to be one of those judges who take meticulous notes to explain my scores, and I’ve written extensively about the experience of judging and my perception of how baristas should approach a competition to improve their performance. Sadly, there’s nobody out there. In the U.S., for the past two years, they have introduced a post competition debriefing in which judges are available to go over the score sheet with the baristas. It is a great opportunity not only to explain the score, but to point out where improvement is needed, and how to do better next time. I could count on one hand with a few fingers to spare, the number of baristas that stay for the debriefing.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

The training was an all day affair with a fair amount of time spent with three different baristas pulling shot after shot/capp and us tasting according the the competition sheets. It even included a mock competition (minus Sig drink) in real time.

I tasted several drinks that I liked, but had to score lower according to the rules. The reverse was also true.

As much as humanly possible, the rules for scoring remove the personal preference bias. All competitors have access to the score sheets that will be used on them in competition. Some choose to push/break the rules in one area because they feel they can make it up in other areas. That is their choice.

What the seasoned judges kept telling us was to concentrate on the words next to the numbers we were to use for scoring, NOT the numbers themselves.

A couple of times I wanted to give a high number on a Sig drink. I had some that were really enjoyable, but the coffee part of the equation got lost in everything that was put in it. That, and the fact that so many competitors forgot to connect the ingredients in their Sig drink to the COFFEE.

I know after going through the Judges Training I am going to be much more critical of my performance in the shop. I know that getting a “3″ (means GOOD) is not a bad thing, but I don’t want to serve just ‘GOOD’ to my customers. I want to serve better than that.

Right now I don’t know if anything does need to be done to change the scoring format. Things may need to be “tweaked” from time to time, but it seems pretty good to me. As long as people can commit to judging by the score sheets, and their rules, instead of personal bias for drink taste, or the person competing, then it should be fine. But as small as the coffee world is getting here in the States, the only way to try and avoid this would be to fly people in from completely different regions for judging. But I don’t see that happening any time soon unless someone extreeeeeemely wealthy sets up an endowment for air fair and hotels.

I like the challenge of judging and hope to do it again as soon as I can get the time away from the shop.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I’m not a competitor nor a Judge, but I’ve been watching this Championships the last 3 years and got very disappointed with it..

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I would also like to see the score revealed after the competitors’ performance. Currently, scores are held until after the competition – effectively eliminating a teams’ chance to challenge or contest a ruling. This creates a severe problem when a competitor may have access to insider information – a problem that seemed to have occured during the 2006 USBC.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Scoring: I don’t think that there is a problem with the score system, provided that the judges apply it fairly to everyone. Competitors can just add four in their head to get to a score out of ten. That way, “average” works out to be 5/10, which is probably more intuitively satisfying. I guess it’s sort of like cupping on the traditional scale where 50 points are always added and cuppers use the cuppers correction to take away points for anything that they want to score below 50. So we could do something like re-writing the scoresheets with the /6 scores as /10 scores, then just subtract 4 before multiplying each so that the numbers used remain the same. Frankly, though, seeing as this doesn’t change the information that the numbers convey, I don’t really see that it’s a big issue.

Feedback: I agree 100% that judges need to give as much feedback as is humanly possible. Even if a competitor comes dead last, that competitor should have a positive experience that sets him or her on the path to improvement. Given that the comments fields on the score sheets are so tiny, it’s not unreasonable to expect that they are filled for every competitor. Justin Metcalf also sets the expectation that all judges stay back after the event until every competitor has had a chance to talk with them. That way, everyone gets to ask “what more did you want?”

Transparency, insider information and consistency: It’s so true that everyone feels that they have to have insider information and, imho, that’s by far the worst part of the current competition format. I don’t think that anyone expects that judges will automatically know everything. It’s perfectly reasonable that they might need to confer to decide how to interpret something, given that people are always trying new things at competitions. Once that happens, everyone needs to judge consistently, though. It is utterly ludicrous, for example, for one judge to be permitted to dock points from a signature drink for it not having a spoon with it, whilst the other three judges don’t. It’s either one or the other. It’s ridiculous for some judges to dock points for knowledge of grinder because someone chooses to use a Mahlkoenig (thanks for eliminating that problem, James ;P) or a grinder with a timer. If these sorts of inconsistencies exist, the head judge is not doing their job.

Basically, what I would like to see is a competition culture where competitors are able to contact the head judge to ask questions before the competition, when it would be too late to change anything. Once a ruling is given, that should be binding for that particular competition and the ruling should be published on the relevant specialty coffee association’s webpage – a similar idea to the wiki, I guess. To prevent last minute problems, there should be a cutoff for questions a few weeks before each competition – after that, it’s fair enough to let competitors take their chances.

Judging the judges: Comparing each judge’s scores with each other judge’s scores isn’t novel, nor is it particularly difficult. I think that each specialty coffee association should maintain a register and use the information to decide which people judge the finals. They might not give the same absolute scores as one might get at the worlds, but at least it would remove some of the random variation to help to make sure that the finalists feel that the final ranking is right.

Cheers,

Luca

Like or Dislike: 0  0

You could argue the words used could be better somehow, but judges learn what they mean and apply them consistently.

A problem could be that the competitors aren’t trained in the meanings in the same way the judges are, and this leads to confusion and disappointment when they don’t share the “judges definition”.

Judges should be giving good feedback on the scores regardless if they are below a certain number or not.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Granted, it is a one way conversation. I think that what I am trying to do, and what I’ve seen other do well, Jim especially, is put the judges in an frame of mind where it is easy for them to award good points scores. There is definatly a leeway there to take advantage of.

Like or Dislike: 0  0