The Bradshaw Scale

There seems to be agreement that the Bradshaw formula captures the elements that should be used to rate/rank a caber.  

We also seem to agree that the formula does not give enough weight to those with longer cabers or to much weight with those with shorter cabers, so I suggested in the earlier post a simple way to adjust the Bradshaw formula.  As it was pointed out, the parameter or factor I used is probably not correct (since I pulled it out of the air).   As a trained statistician, I would love to have data to fit a model to. The problem is what data should I be using?

Wayne Hill wrote: People who really want to help should do the following: Rate your cabers using the Bradshaw scale, but keep track of the particulars (length, weight, balance point). Compare cabers of similar ratings that have different lengths and weights.  Figure out which one is easier for people to turn.

I will take Waynes idea one step further:

• Keep track of the parameters of each of your cabers (weight, length, distance to center of gravity),
• Note what people think is harder and easier to turn
• the class the caber is used in
• keep track of the number of attempts made to turn the caber and the number of successes though out the year. (should success be a turn or a 12:00 turn?) 

Either do this retroactively from last year's score sheets or make an effort to do it in the up coming season. 

At the end of the season, use this information to rank the cabers from easiest to hardest to turn in each class by a measure  = successes divided by attempts. 

From this point, we modify the Bradshaw formula in a manner that produces a score that with luck will closely reflect the rankings.