what I am saying is that the average numerical values cannot be used for comparison across contests.
For example, notice that kevin in 2002 was given a 7 in round 4 (which is a first place average).
Ronnie in 1999 was given a 5 in round 4.
Because we do not know the actual values used to make up the average (with highs and lows dropped don't forget) - we cannot say that Ronnie's 5 was better than Levrone's 7.
A first place average vote is a first place average vote, regardless of the numerical value it ends up being.
and, note that a "5" given by one judge represents a "perfect" score, and leads to a first place vote.
Notice that a 7 could just as easily mean exactly the same thing because if 7 was the lowest score given by a judge, it would also lead to a first place vote given the competition on that day.
Comparing interger values across different contests is like comparing apples to oranges - different lineups lead to different values, but the values themselves lead to the same placement vote. Therefore you can compare placement votes but not the actual numbers themselves.
what it boils down to is this:
The average placement value (eg first, second or third) is relevant, the actual numbers that lead to this placement are not relevant when you are comparing different contest scores.
Why?
The lowest average score in one contest (that leads to a first place vote) is NOT always the lowest average score in ANOTHER contest that also leads to a first place vote. This principle applys to all scores.
