2008 USBC Finalists

[James Hoffmann]

In no particular order:

Chris Baca
Heather Perry
Nick Griffith
Kyle Glanville
Pete LIcata
Drew Cattlin

BLOG BLOG BLOG

West Coast it seems.....

[Matthew P. Williams]

Yes, 5 of 6 representing California!!!

[malachi]

wtf

when I was watching the live feed - i thought that they announced Bella from Aldo as a finalist, not Heather...

what happened?

[Jason Haeger]

wtf

when I was watching the live feed - i thought that they announced Bella from Aldo as a finalist, not Heather...

what happened?

Uh oh.. conspiracy theory?

[nick]

Sounds like the antics of CUPPERS to me!

[Matt Riddle]

before the feed cut out, they were announcing ALL of the semifinalists in alphabetical order (by last name).

The feed came back right when they started announcing the finalists (starting with Nick Griffith)

[Mike Yung]

Good show, all! Best of luck tomorrow!

[Rich Westerfield]

Those six definitely earned it. It's the toughest comp yet. Congrats to all.

[Matt Riddle]

Kyle Glanville wins!

1. Kyle Glanville
2. Pete Licata
3. Heather Perry
4. Chris Baca
5. Nick Griffith
6. Drew Catlin


Congratulations to ALL!

[Emily Oak]

Congratulations Kyle!

Emily

[Jason Haeger]

I predicted a Kyle, Pete, Baca 1, 2, and 3.

I was just barely off.

Great comp. Exceptional Job everyone.

Congrats Kyle! You rock!

[James Hoffmann]

This was an amazing competition. I think Kyle's score was 803, and the spread of points pretty small from 1st to 6th.

All the finalists were great and I think MCs around the world should carry on our new tradition of asking a finalist for espresso once the judges have left the stage because these were not shots to be missed!

So glad I got to be there and to read out those names - insane levels of talent and 6 very inspiring people.

Congrats to Kyle, Pete, Heather, Chris, Nick and Drew.

[barry]

Congratulations to all. It was an extremely good show.

Point spread from 1st to 6th was less than 40pts, iirc, and from 1st to 2nd, only 9pts. Pete and Heather tied, but because Pete had more '6's than Heather, he took second and she got third.

I never thought I'd give a '6' for spill/waste, but whatayaknow, I gave out three of them today. It *can* be done; I was stunned, honestly. Amazing.



Close. It was so close.


And, as good as it was, there's plenty of room for improvement.

[Klaus]

Congratulations Kyle!!! Way to go!
And congrats to all the finalists. Sounds like an awesome competition. And I'm thrilled to hear several 6s being given. About bloody time...
Well done all around!

[Gary McGann]

Well done Kyle (see you in Copenhagen),

Huge scores all around - anyone who was there care to comment on why the scores were so high and why the scores I guess wont be so high in Copenhagen?

The US is such a big country maybe its time to have several entrants in the WC finals from there? It could be a it like the Champions league over here (European football/scoccer club elite competition) - the better your country does in past competitions the more teams qualify to take part! The only problem with the latter is that the system is so complex (as in how they work out how many teams and what the criteria is based on) that few understand it.

Gary

[Emily Oak]

And I'm thrilled to hear several 6s being given. About bloody time...

Klaus, the tide is changing. There were a number of sixes given at our Aussie comp over the weekend....independently by judges who basically saw extraordinary performances. Finally I think the fear? stigma? attitude? is changing.

Here's hoping we can see a few next month in Copenhagen too!

Emily

[barry]

Finally I think the fear? stigma? attitude? is changing.

Perhaps the baristas are finally doing things worthy of a 6?

[Klaus]

I'm thrilled to see the 6s. I think it's a combination of both judges feeling more confident (I used to hear some judges proclaiming "I never give a 6, because that would mean it was perfect!") and baristas are definitely improving too. I think we see the bar raising each year. to me it's just delightful to see the whole range of scores being used. I can't wait to see the competitors in Copenhagen in just a month a half - so now, Kyle, the real training begins

[Emily Oak]

Perhaps the baristas are finally doing things worthy of a 6?

Too true, and the judges are confident to reward it. Copenhagen is going to rock....

[Kyle Glanville]

Thank you all for the immense show of support. I am so honored - and humbled - by the events of the past week.

I can't wait to see you all in Copenhagen. Cheers!

[Matt Milletto]

Again, huge congrats Kyle, and also the Intelli team.

- matt

[barry]

I'm thrilled to see the 6s. I think it's a combination of both judges feeling more confident (I used to hear some judges proclaiming "I never give a 6, because that would mean it was perfect!")

When looking at a potential 6, the question I always ask myself is, "could it be better?" If I can readily discern a reasonable way that particular item could be better, then it doesn't get a 6. Drew got 6s on spill/waste for espresso and capps because I didn't see any. There were no unswept grounds in the doser, and no stray grounds on the counter or grinder tray. I couldn't really find anything that could be better on Pete's setup, without getting into the truly ridiculous (and I've teetered on that edge in the past), so he got a 6; Heather had drops of coffee water on the drip tray, so she got 5.5. If you think we were nit-picking on this, then you'd be correct, but that's what it takes to differentiate competitors at this level. It was "everything looks great.... except for this." Of course, everyone's this was different.

I was quite impressed with all the startups. I think it was the first competition I'd judged where there were no fingerprints on the machines. Now if we can just eliminate the smears....

There is still plenty of room for improvement in several categories; iirc, visual appearance of espresso was the hardest hit tech category. I think the highest score was 4.5. Several folks had shots go blonde while pouring. A couple of folks got stung by incomplete purging of their steam wand (milk drop hanging from wand tip) or incomplete wiping of the wand (stripe up the side). One or two neglected to wipe the portafilter rims.

[nick]

I'm thrilled to see the 6s. I think it's a combination of both judges feeling more confident (I used to hear some judges proclaiming "I never give a 6, because that would mean it was perfect!")

When looking at a potential 6, the question I always ask myself is, "could it be better?"

A 6 doesn't mean "perfect," and it doesn't mean, "could it be better?" (though I suppose that's may be one interpretation). A 6 means "extraordinary."

It may be unwise to say too much about the competitions on a forum like this, being in the role that I'm in these days, but I believe that one of the problems with judging is that judges are too quick to say, "That's a 3" or "that's a 4." Jumping straight to the numeric score should be reserved for judges with 20+ competitions under their belts. For those without such experience, stick to the "Unacceptable, acceptable, average, good, very good, excellent, extraordinary" scale.

Too often, during judges trainings, inexperienced judges will say, "I say that's a 2.5 or 3."

"So would you say that's average, good, very good or excellent?"

"Oh, it's 'very good'!"

"Then it's a 4."

[barry]

Too often, during judges trainings, inexperienced judges will say, "I say that's a 2.5 or 3."

"So would you say that's average, good, very good or excellent?"

"Oh, it's 'very good'!"

"Then it's a 4."

I agree, and go with the words myself, although one can't be literal with "extraordinary". I have yet to see "perfect" anything, so don't use that metric for a 6.

[Mark Prince]

I never liked the "no sixes, no zeroes" unspoken (and many times spoken) rule.

My attitude towards a six is it's something that takes me to a new level - on sensory, if the barista pulled the godshot out of the hat and met the descriptions, its sixes... I've doled out a few (some competitors have my scoresheets), only to have them crossed out and given 5.5s because my head judge(s) convinced me to change the score. In the Canadians in the past, it happened, once with Sammy I particularly remember, and I was asked to rein it in.

I was just as thrilled as Klaus is to hear they're being handed out now when deserved. I also heard tell the tech judges felt that this year, they were literally seeing perfection on some quarters, from some competitors, and to give less than a six would be a crime.

Mark