Judging questions

[Lance Van Nostrand]

Joe is correct.  this issue has come up before and was part of the pre-Nats briefing and published in KFactor.  
Don left for Lubbock yesterday so he can get there by tomorrow.
--Lance

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Joe Dunnaway 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 9:59 PM
  Subject: Re: Judging questions


  This question came up at the Judging Seminar at the 2003 Nats....  Don Ramsey said that the first radius does not set the radius of the remaining radii.   He also explained it in one of his K-Factor articles last year.  (Not sure which issue).
  Don, where are you?

  Joe

    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: David Wartel 
    To: discussion at nsrca.org 
    Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 9:48 PM
    Subject: Re: Judging questions


    Although it is counterintuitive, I accept and, if ever asked to judge, will try to apply what Dave Lockhart and Scott have explained about this. Without this topic having come up, I would have compared all radii to the initial one in all looping maneuvers. It seems more logical to me.

     I can't envision attempting a square loop and saying to myself, "Oops! I made the initial radius too sharp. I'll just make the other three larger and hope I only lose one point." But the interpretation in question allows for this.

    Where do these rule interpretations come from? Who makes them? Are they in writing somewhere? Maybe there should be rule interpretaion addendum. Do all certified judges know about these? I just attended a seminar and I didn't.

    Other than snaps and spins (let's not go there!), are there other "secret" rule interpretations we should know about?

    No intention to be sarcastic here; I just want to play the game correctly.

    Dave Wartel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20040805/2e51df2e/attachment.html