ResoNix $5000 Challenge: Sound Quality Car Audio Competition Not A Valid Metric For System Accuracy

Challenge rules listed below. For those that do not like this video being public, prove me wrong with this challenge and I will send you the money and remove the video. **We’re only diving into the data from the final results of a specific large event. This doesn’t even touch on my personal, subjective opinions on how accurate many of these cars sound based on the experiences of listening to these cars at events, which would be a whole different can of worms. I see/hear it all the time - The mental gymnastics of someone who's disillusioned trying to convince themselves that their car sounds awesome (or sounds bad) purely based on their results at a sound quality car audio competition. My opinion, these results do not even come close to accurately portraying the true sound quality of a sound system, and has no real meaning on your vehicle being good or bad sounding. Anyone who's competed has a story or ten about how the results at an event they competed at didn't quite make much sense. The answer is simple: The human factor of judging, no matter how good, unbiased, and whatever the judges are allows for way too much inconsistency in scores and especially rankings. My opinion is simple: The only people who believe this are desperate for it to mean so. Could be that they need it for marketing, or its something that they so desperately need in their life for whatever reason. Or, they are a person who doesn't even understand how car audio and accurate reproduction works and sounds in the first place. Its always those who are hyper-competitive or those who I know don't have a full grasp on sound quality in vehicles as a whole that have this strong, vocal-minority beliefs that I see talking/posting about this. We only dive into the data that is the end results of a specific large event. This doesn't even get into the anecdotals of my experience listening to these cars at events, which would be a whole different can of worms. My challenge is also simple. I have provided a set of data from a large money round event that breaks down the data and shows inconsistencies. If you can prove that this, or a very similar events data is in fact somehow perfectly consistent and truly represents the ranks of properly accurate sounding cars, I will wire transfer you $5,000. You can do it with the exact set of data that I used for this video, or you can do it from any other money round event where there are at least 5 judges from at least 3 different regions, and there are at least 40 people competing in said money round. If you can show a 10% or less deviation in ranks between all judges on at least 90% of the competitors from that event, the money is yours. Example: If there are 40 competitors, 100/40=2.5. Each rank would be a step of 2.5%. This would mean in a 40-competitor event, the spread would have to be within 4 ranks from highest judge to lowest judge for 90% of the competitor list (36 competitors in this example). This is my personal standard for what I would consider accurate to the point of validity. For reference, at this particular event the deviation amount in order to fit 90% of the competitors to fit within is about 55%.... Just upload a similar video with the data and I'll eat my words and the money is yours. The reason for the challenge is also simple. The issues will always be present and we will continue losing fellow competitors if we keep being hush hush about the problems that nearly everyone is aware of and has a problem with. This is not an attack, this is an observation, a review of data, and the start of what hopefully turns into a discussion to improve things.