Palm scoring discussion

[XRe]

Moderator Note: This looks like a good discussion topic on it's own, and was split from the main match thread, found here: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=84882&st=390&gopid=1178989entry1178989

For those of you who decide to leave a match early... (Please turn in your score-sheets and/or inform the stats people)

There were no score sheets to turn in. Palm only. And... therefore... the "missing scoresheet" feature in the software does absolutely no good for anyone...

Edited March 22, 2010 by Flexmoney

[XRe]

Palms and thermal printers do work in the 30 degree snowing weather pretty darn good.

(this is meant to be constructive, and not any kind of a personal attack... please read it that way... )

Define "work" and "pretty darn good"... Cause I think a number of us would beg to differ. Palms with low battery (battery performance drops in the cold) and balky printers resulted in several shooters not getting verifications sheets on our squad at different times, or led to delays while another printer was retrieved, etc - all of this delayed shooting. Lack of RO experience with them led to several (sometimes long... like half an hour on Sunday long) delays, as well.

Palm scoring does work well, when the whole system works well. I've shot a number of matches with it, now, and they were used in different ways with differing degrees of success. At this point, I can safely say that they work smoothest when a hand written verification sheet is used instead of a thermal printout - and would likely work even faster if the score is initially input onto a score sheet and then entered into the palm (though I've not seen a match do this, yet - but it would make the next comment a lot easier...). Having an RO staff that is intimately familiar with the scoring app and handling all of the various hurdles that come up mid-match would make things go a lot smoother... The folks at the NM Sectional had both of these things last year, and the scoring and operation of the palms in that match was so seamless, it was silly - it's a no-brainer when it's run like that.

So, while the match staff in the stat shack may think the system worked pretty well, a large number of ROs hate the things, and a large number of the shooters in the match are in that boat with the ROs. I didn't hear a single person utter anything similar to "gee, I'm glad we're using these palms for scoring"... I heard a large number of comments to the opposite effect. I'm offering this up because you might want to consider the experience the ROs and shooters had with these things in addition to how things appeared from a stats perspective - because all of those things determine the success of the system.... A lot of that angst could be overcome by greater RO education on the app - not sure the best way to get them that, though, since most of the local clubs aren't using that system, yet...

For the record - I like Palm scoring, but so far, I prefer that the verification sheet be hand written - it cuts the technology issue in half... Yes, there can be transcription errors, and shooters must verify their sheet against the palm. But in practice, that is consistently faster than waiting on a printout.

Just FWIW

[dcbfluff]

I was one of the RO's (stage 11) at the match using Palm Scoring for the first time. Although I am not ready to say that they should be completely abandoned, I am also not yet a big fan. I strongly agree that the problems were a combination of equipment and training (perhaps more the latter, although the other RO on my stage actually working the Palm was pretty proficient with it). Waiting for the printer was probably the biggest issue, and we really had more printer issues on Friday with the bright sunshine (IR port) than on Sat/Sun with the cold. Saturday was going to have been a mess whatever we did (managing paper scoresheets in that wind/snow would have been sporty). Having said that, a bunch of scores from the RO's that shot on Thursday got lost due to a combination of training/equipment issues: that would not have happened with paper scoresheets.

I think that Palm Scoring can potentially be very effective, but that there is a big training, experience and sustainment piece that needs to be accepted in order to make it work. I am not ready to recommend to my club that we invest in the system for our matches.

Dan

[mlmiller1]

I'm with Dave on this. I would have preferred paper.

The match was great overall, the shooters & stages were awesome (& pretty bullet proof from wind). The prize table was very nice, thank you Steve!!!!!

To all the R.O.s that suffered through with all the problems, I thank each one of you very much. Not one had a bad attitude or sour outlook. Even with all the things they put up with, they were still cheery & did a great job. Especially the Broken Collarbone lady. It takes an ER room nurse to be that tough!!!!

MLM

[Shawn Knight]

We use a score sheet with a carbon free style double page. It is very minimal and quicker to write the basic score on. It is similar to the design that Stagescore has on their website as a back-up scoring method. It still takes time to write down the score but it is a little better than relying on technology alone.

http://www.stagescore.com/executables/Scoresheet.doc

[lneel]

Well, there are good and bad with both methods of scoring. At this match though I think you would have to agree writing anything on paper in 30 degree weather with 30+ mph winds and rain/snow/ice pelts would have not been any better.

Better training....hum.....ALL the RO's were providing ALL I could do from a far....3 detailed videos on the use on the Palms and Printers, links to the documentation, and a whole day (at the least) to use the setup during the RO shoots. ALL of the RO's that I heard/saw having printer issues were those who would/did not have the printers in a box which provided sheilding from the sun light. Those who did have them in a box or somehow sheilded had many less problems. Also, as far as the speed...it takes 30 seconds to print 2 copies. No more, no less (save the occasion blip and those printers not in a box).....writing out the scores manually, having the RO and Shooter (which has most likely wandered off anyway) sign the sheet is not any quicker overall.

While I am sure there are some scoring issues that were not corrected at the range, we only had 10 scores that were manually corrected. Out of the 3000+ scores, that is 0.003%. NO hand written scoring method is that accurate.

But, to each his own. My last comment on this thread is, if you haven't scored a Major (200+ shooter 10+ stage) match yourself, you have no idea of the amount of work savings and accuracy increase to be had.

Despite the weather, I had a fantastic time and I am glad to volunteer my time and equipment to help put on such an event.

To Robert, Steve, David, and all the other local crew that helped setup the match, THANK YOU! Those were some of the best stages I have ever shot!

Lee

[CHA-LEE]

The printers were slow, but I don’t think they were any slower than hand writing it down off of what is displayed on the palm. You would also need a 3rd RO on each stage to make the writing it down process work efficiently. I think it’s a matter of impression. When you are standing there looking at the printer waiting for it to print, it seems like forever. In reality you would probably be waiting longer as you watched the RO’s write down your score and double check it before handing it over to you.

I think that the RO’s did a good job of making what they had work. The thing that a LOT of people are missing here is the great reduction of score keeper work on the back end. Not having to manually input scores for each shooter saves a ton of tedious work that can be error prone due to its nature.

As a competitor I liked them using the Palms. It allowed me to confirm my time, hits and penalties quickly by looking at the summery page and then know my hit factor instantly without having to bust out a calculator and figure it all out for 30 minutes after the match. Maybe I am biased to liking the palms because that’s what all of the clubs have been using all along the Colorado front range. I can see how it would be a technology culture shock to some that have not used it before. Give it a chance and I would be shocked to see anyone who does not like it.

Edited March 22, 2010 by CHA-LEE

[paul0731]

The only issues I noticed with the palm scoring was when new people were added to a squad and a printer that couldn't get a connection from a palm (printer wasn't in a box if that matters).

I could care less if Double Tap falls on easter or not. If that day means something to someone, they will probably have the option to shoot on Friday.

[ninefan]

As a shooter, I prefer the palms. Two palms per stage would be ideal while we're still having the use IR printers (one printing while the other is being used to score the next person).

[Steven Cline]

The problem with ROing (I was on stage 4 with Curtis) is you don't have a clue as to how things are going on other stages or what methods the other ROs are using to overcome obstacles they encounter.

I may have inadvertently lead to belief that the thermal printers didn't work in the freeezing temperatures, but it turned out that the printer we started saturday with was belly-up. When I visited stage 3 it printed the shooting order just fine.

One shooter told me that another stage was printing all of the scores at the end. I tried this. But it was a six in one, half dozen in the other. The squad waits 40 sec (that was a more accurate assessment of what it took) on each shooter between shooters for the previous shooter's score to print or they wait 40 sec on each shooter for the scores to print all have shot. The former worked well for small squads (5), it did not work well for large squads (16). 3.3 minutes wasn't a long time to wait to print 5 scores at the end, 10 minutes seemed to aggitate the squad.

I think the process would meld better if the new shooter took a last walk through while the score printed. Would at least feel like less waiting time. I am sure standing there with the coat off in 20-30 deg with driving wind made the wait seem longer.

The Palms worked great for us when they worked. We started the day with a Palm we ran 6 squads with then started acting up. Called for a replacedment which froze up. Called for another which worked well and we cooked it.

It was nice to have the scores tabulated so quickly and (in my more limited experience with large matches (only been to 4)) accurately.

[CocoBolo]

I've done the add to 31 hundreds of times and the palm. I prefer the palm. Working the kinks out in the process takes a little brain work but it can be done. Double Tap is one of the matches where you have exactly 3 minutes start to finish per shooter so you have to be very efficient regardless of the scoring method.

Shooters as a group can assist in this process in a number of ways. First get organized and have a shooting order and present that to the RO when your squad arrives. Next everybody works tapeing a resetting except the shooter on deck and the shooter that just finished. For a big squad the in the hole can be getting ready. Squads of less than 8 are generally inefficient.

With the palm the scoring is complete when the ro has called the shots, don't make the ro hunt you down to get the screen signed, once signed the assistant prints the score while the primary ro is doing the Load and Make Ready and starting the shooter, this can only happen with a squad that works, and one that is organized as the shooter is waiting for the ro in the box ready to go. This takes away some of the benefit of having the assistant watch things but certainly by the end of the run the assistant is done and entering the score for the shooter. It worked that way last time I used the palms.

Being organized saves a lot of time, most of it not answering the question when do I shoot, my anwer is always, you are up make ready, the ro doesn't have the time to look that up without out making your whole squad wait while he looks for the answer.

To often the squad selects random order and you would be amazed at how many times and individual can be randomly selected to go first, as a programmer I understand how random works and it is what it says it is random so everyone has an equal chance of going first every time the random is kicked off.

[paul0731]

To often the squad selects random order and you would be amazed at how many times and individual can be randomly selected to go first, as a programmer I understand how random works and it is what it says it is random so everyone has an equal chance of going first every time the random is kicked off.

I'm a programmer too, so I know there is no such thing as truly random when it comes to computers.

I guess the thing to do would be to just rotate the start order by 1 ever stage, instead of trying random.

[Rob D]

I really liked the palms. Sure, they have their issues, but they save a ton of work on the back end. I got to use them when I RO'd at Area 4, and besides the printer failing to read the palm every now and then, they worked great. No paper to blow around, no score sheets to have to hand in and keep track of. I love them, and I think moving to palm's is taking the sport in the right direction(towards the 21st century)

I think they main problem with the palms is that they use IR instead of a newer transfer method. If they ran on Bluetooth, or even WiFi, the RO scoring could be transmitting the scores to the printer from down range instead of having to walk back up range, set down the palm, and wait for it to print. This would be ideal, and will hopefully happen sometime way down the road when the technology gets cheaper. I remember asking Lee about bluetooth at A4, and he mentioned that, at this point, switching to anything besides IR would be ridiculously expensive in addition to the significant amount of dough he has already put into the palm system.

I like the Palms. I'm all for letting technology do as much of the work as we can. Of course there are some drawbacks, but I think they're a step in the right direction and have the potential to work really well as long as shooters and RO's do their parts.

[XRe]

writing out the scores manually, having the RO and Shooter (which has most likely wandered off anyway) sign the sheet is not any quicker overall.

This might be true if things went as easily as you imply... However, in practice, it takes about 15-20 seconds to be done with a manual sheet (as witnessed at a couple of major matches using palms), during which time the next shooter is being allowed to make ready. Contrast with something more like an average of 45 seconds plus to receive a printed sheet, during which the ROs were not starting the next shooter moving because of concerns about finding the wrong shooter, or not having a palm ready to score with by the time the shooter had shot (due to some other technical complication).

So, where on a normal, paper only arrangement, the 2nd RO is finishing housekeeping while the 1st RO goes through Make Ready with the shooter, we're instead waiting for about a minute - sometimes significantly more - between these operations. That adds 15 minutes per squad, worst case.

And, no, CHA-LEE, it doesn't require a third RO to make a written verification sheet work....

But, to each his own. My last comment on this thread is, if you haven't scored a Major (200+ shooter 10+ stage) match yourself, you have no idea of the amount of work savings and accuracy increase to be had.

Again, from the STATS perspective!

Like I said before, I like Palm scoring - I would just highly suggest looking at something other than the printers, and finding some way to get at least one RO per squad a little more familiar with the app (which might mean re-arranging ROs, or something).

BTW - the answer to writing in the rain is to have gallon size zip-locs for each clipboard. You write inside the bag. Has worked perfectly at many a major match through history...

[JThompson]

I'd like to hear more about the pros and cons of the Palms... They are being considered for Area 5. I have my reservations, so it would be nice to put all the data in one place.

Could one of the Mods, split these posts off to their own thread? I don't want to take away from this match by turning the thread into the Palm Show.

Best,

JT

PS I watched videos of the match and my hats off to whomever did all that prop work! Very sweet looking props there people. I have a job for you! Call me, we'll do lunch.

Edited March 22, 2010 by JThompson

[Rob D]

Ok, I think most guys who have used them will agree. Here's my .02(From the RO and shooter perspective only, never done stats)

Electronic Scoring - Good

Waiting and relying on Infra-red printers to get printouts - Bad

IR is outdated unless you want to change the volume on your TV. Most mobile devices released in the last 2-3 years don't even have IR ports. It requires the devices to be very close together, have a clean line of sight between the transmitting and receiving ports, and it's slow as molasses even when it's working perfectly.

The Palm/IR combo is probably better than paper, but not by a whole heck of a lot. I would really like to see a scoring app developed for Blackberry, Iphone, Android, Windows Mobile, or any of the other modern platforms that could take advantage of a better connectivity method than Infra-red. THAT would give the reliability and accuracy of electronic scoring AND would get rid of all the headaches people are complaining about.

Edited to Add***

I think an RO with pen and paper could probably scratch down a second copy of a scoresheet on most stages faster than the palms can transmit to the printers even when they're working(40-50 seconds?). That should say something in itself.

Edited March 22, 2010 by Rob D

[The Antichrome]

Ok, I think most guys who have used them will agree. Here's my .02(From the RO and shooter perspective only, never done stats)

Electronic Scoring - Good

Waiting and relying on Infra-red printers to get printouts - Bad

IR is outdated unless you want to change the volume on your TV. Most mobile devices released in the last 2-3 years don't even have IR ports. It requires the devices to be very close together, have a clean line of sight between the transmitting and receiving ports, and it's slow as molasses even when it's working perfectly.

The Palm/IR combo is probably better than paper, but not by a whole heck of a lot. I would really like to see a scoring app developed for Blackberry, Iphone, Android, Windows Mobile, or any of the other modern platforms that could take advantage of a better connectivity method than Infra-red. THAT would give the reliability and accuracy of electronic scoring AND would get rid of all the headaches people are complaining about.

Edited to Add***

I think an RO with pen and paper could probably scratch down a second copy of a scoresheet on most stages faster than the palms can transmit to the printers even when they're working(40-50 seconds?). That should say something in itself.

Can you imagine an iphone app for this? Palms are old tech.

This thread reminds me of the story about the space race in the 1950's;

The US spent millions developing a pen that would write in space...

The Soviets used pencils.

[JThompson]

As an MD it's one thing I have total control over and I'm gun shy, not with the technology, because my day job is repairing printers!

The weak link in tech is almost always the human factor. Getting the people up to speed is the problem. Most of the people ROing are coming from afar and we have asked them if they know Palms.

I think we need to send out the videos and have ALL the ROs and CROs work with the online app. For those of you who have been there and done it... if you have a training pack already to go, I could use it.

I think we need to have something like adding a walk an other possible problem areas. Let us know all the sticky areas and what we should do to prevent it, or teach to prevent it.

Best,

JT

PS As to printing WiFi would be the easy way to go, also for getting results to masters... hell, you could write a "push" program that goes out every 5-10 minutes and syncs. It's not that hard to do....

Edited March 22, 2010 by JThompson

[Rob D]

The weak link in tech is almost always the human factor. Getting the people up to speed is the problem. Most of the people ROing are coming from afar and we have asked them if they know Palms.

I can say that as far as technology and software goes, the palm scoring app is about as easy as it gets. I know that Lee sent out demo software to everyone who was using them before A4 so RO's could learn how to use the program on their PC before ever getting to the match. I had never used a palm before, but I picked it up and had no problems whatsoever after using the demo. I would say that as long as your RO's aren't technologically challenged, the human factor won't be much problem.

[dcbfluff]

Agree with Rob D: the issue isn't the advantage of electronic scoring (be it Palm or some less archaic device), but the delay caused by the IR printer (or anything else that makes scoring slower on the stage than it is with paper scoresheets). I work on advanced technology projects, and have seen repeatedly that there should be a "first do no harm" rule applied to introducing new technology. New technology will not be embraced if it adds a burden (in this case, latency) to the users (RO's/shooters) at the pointy end of the operation no matter how useful it is at the back end of the operation (stats). I don't think the issue is whether or not it takes 30 seconds or 40 seconds to print, the issue is that it is slower and more cumbersome than the current (paper) system. The RO should be able to give the Make Ready command as soon as everyone gets back up range, and should also be able to start calling out scores as soon as he gives the Range is Clear command. The situation we had this weekend did not permit that. Granted, my stage was quick and had an easy reset (4 steel, 9 paper, no moving parts), but the slowest thing on the stage was the printer, which then kept the other RO from being able to enter the next shooter's scores. It's hard to keep squads moving to re-set when they know that once they get downrange to tape they may be asked to wait, or that once called to the line to shoot (and have removed their coat/gloves) they may not be given the Make Ready command punctually. I had shooters hesitate and look past me to make sure the scorekeeper was ready after having been given the Make Ready command: I've never had that happen before and did not like it.

I think that while this all may be fixable, inconveniencing shooters and RO's in order to speed things along in stats is not likely to be a popular notion. Assuming that it can get fixed (using two Palms/printers per stage, replacing the IR link with something more robust, etc), I think electronic scoring is absolutely the way to go. I've spent enough time trying to decide if someone's "0" is a "6" and wondering why people have so much trouble adding a simple column of numbers to embrace the idea of electronic scoring, but as I said in my initial post, I'm not a big fan of Palm Scoring...yet.

[Flexmoney]

JT, I think I posted comments after using the Palms at last years A5. It seems like there is always a thread on them after they are used at a Major. (PM me your phone # if you want and I'll give you a call, if you'd like some feedback beyond what I've posted before.)

[JThompson]

JT, I think I posted comments after using the Palms at last years A5. It seems like there is always a thread on them after they are used at a Major. (PM me your phone # if you want and I'll give you a call, if you'd like some feedback beyond what I've posted before.)

I'll do that Flex... I have to head out now, but either later tonight or tomorrow. I'd like to get a conference call going with the CO-MD.

Thanks for the offer..

JT

[moverfive]

Having scored with the Palms now for several years and having used the Palms as the stats guy for major matches - most of the issues with the Palms comes from RO lack of experience and the 'fear' of messing something up. This is why when you bring the Palms to a match where a lot of your RO's have little to no actual experience with the Palms, there will probably be a lot of issues....as with anything 'new.' We have been very fortunate in this area to have several folks that have worked with the Palms for a long time.

As to the backup scoresheets - I personally am not a fan of these thermal printouts or the slither of papers like we once got from the nationals.....that is why we use typical sized scoresheet we are all used to (the carbonless white top with yellow undersheet). On the sheet are blocks for the summary information (time, hits by scoring zone, procedure, hit factor, and etc.) and then a place for both the RO and shooter to initial (I attached one of my versions). Adding to the benefit of using these generic scoresheets, I can use them for multiple matches.

As with every match I have done with the Palms, there are always a few hiccups at the very first of the match - someone changing squads, someone showing up late, and etc. and then because these changes usually happen after the Palms are prepared and put on stages, I will just have to update each Palm on the fly. And all of that usually takes about an hour or so.

At the end of each day and especially as the match is winding down, Palm control is critical. So usually a couple of us are personally collecting the Palms and bringing them back to where I am set up in order to get the data combined, check for any missing scoresheets, and etc. So assuming we don't have a lot of reshoots (which I had at one match), I can get final stage results posted very soon after the last shot is fired.....actually, the slowest part of that process could be the actual printing, depending on your printer.

But the bottom line - the time saved on the back-end is beyond enormous! The longest part of the scoring process is just determining and verifying all of the winners. Now I have written something that would do that for me......I just haven't put it through the 'beta' process needed to utilize it at a major match.

In the hands of folks that know and understand how the Palms work (which is more of a product of getting them into your local club matches), they are faster, more accurate, and an absolute dream for the stats folks (well, Linda Chico excluded).

Stage_Scoresheets.doc

[dcbfluff]

Moverfive-

So what you are saying is that you use a paper scoresheet AND Palm scoring? This is a technological advancement? Am I missing something?

[Jim Norman]

I did not read all of the posts above so some of this might be redundant.

PALMS WORK. When the operators have the training they need, (usually a couple club matches) they are excellent. They eliminate the problems with paper score sheets; too many hits, too few hits, no time, illegible writing, missing sheets. They WILL NOT eliminate scores being written on the wrong shooter, wrong time, wrong hits, (2 A's instead of 2 C's etc.) They completely eliminate input error in the stats shack.

IF and it is a BIG IF you have runners, multiple input stations and stats people and double entry you can do the scores as fast in clock time with paper but not in man hours. Palms are faster and more accurate.

The printers can be problematic. MAYBE a written confirmation sheet would be faster, but it might also require a third person at each stage. What is probably better, if you can find the Palms, is to have two Palms at each stage, Score Shooter one, start the printer and score shooter two while shooter one is being printed out.

What we really need is a new version of EzWinScore that is easier to load and maybe a hand held device that is more robust and has longer battery life.

We use Palm and we like it.

Jim

Edited March 23, 2010 by Jim Norman