[SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: AMA MASTER'S unknown?

Thu Jan 6 20:31:46 AKST 2005

Well, after flying Scale Aerobatics, AKA IMAC for 7 or 8 years, from Sportsman through Unlimited, I guess I'm not very excited about introducing unknowns into Pattern.  On the one hand, it does add some interest.  On the other hand, it introduces so many variables that it can really screw up an event and adversely affect the outcome.  If the desire here is to turn Pattern into a contest of who can best memorize new sequences on the fly, who won't crack under the pressure and simply brain fart their way into a few zeros, then this is a great idea.

So if we do this, the sequences have to be well designed, there has to be a uniform standard to apply to construct the sequences and there has to be a way to get the judges ready to properly judge them.  They are unknowns for them as well.  So even if we have a flight line full of steely eyed flyers who can memorize and repeat a new sequence flawlessly, the quality of the judged outcome can really suffer if you do not assure that the judges are rehearsed for the unknowns.  Sometimes at the IMAC Nats, the judges would be treated to a demo flight before the unknowns in the finals round. Sometimes not.  BTW, they have a new unknown every day after day one.  You tend to spend your nights memorizing sequences and forgetting the previous days unknown.  It's part of the IMAC mindset, i.e., the unknowns are supposed to separate the men from the boys and if you can't deal with this idea, then don't come to play.  If you get screwed because the judges don't know what they're looking at until the 5th of 6th flyer gets in front of them, then so be it.

In general, IMAC gets things into the Scale Aerobatics rules because "that's what IAC does".  Super.  Are we to introduce unknowns because IMAC does it?  Again, what problem are we trying to solve and how does introducing unknowns solve it?

Regards
Ed
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Lance Van Nostrand 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 11:27 PM
  Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: AMA MASTER'S unknown?

  Picking 12 manuvers from a book of 20 the night before the final day is a good way to do it.  it could be done in any class and simply be the final two flights, whether prelims/finals are employed or not.  IMAC introduces unknowns way below their Unlimited class.  Its an expansion of the "box".  The only issue I see is that a change of this magnitude will blow a bunch of people's gaskets.  I see this list today thinks its a good idea (whether it makes pattern more fun, challenging, differentiating, exciting, specator friendly or what), but my informal polls show that there is asignificant group that will strongly oppose this.

  --Lance
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Archie Stafford 
    To: discussion at nsrca.org 
    Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 4:46 PM
    Subject: RE: [SPAM] Re: AMA MASTER'S unknown?

    I love the idea of an unknown.  I think it would add to the challenge and also make it more fun.  In years past where when the same schedule is flown after 3 years certain guys have a decided advantage over guys who have just moved up from Advanced due to the extra years of flying the sequence.  This year it doesn't make any difference with a new pattern.  I think the "unknown" for the finals would level the playing field in years when the sequence has been flown the previous year.  Even if Masters is not a warm up class for FAI, it should still be by far the toughest of the AMA patterns.  

    I don't think you need to change the other classes accordingly, because Masters is a destination class.  If you never move up to FAI, it should be a goal and an honor to be able to fly on Thursday at the NATS.  It should be something that you can strive for in the lower classes even if you have no intentions of ever flying FAI.

    Arch

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Rcmaster199 at aol.com
    Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 5:10 PM
    To: discussion at nsrca.org
    Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: AMA MASTER'S unknown?

    Similar to what Eric H wrote in his last column, would Masters pilots entertain the idea of Semi-Final round on the last day of Prelims at the Nats? Every one would fly the Semi-Final schedule during the last day of prelims. Then the same schedule could be flown in a Finals format, or even alternate between the picked sequence and the current Prelim schedule in Finals. 

    The schedule sequence could be picked by the CD or his representative from a list of 25-30 maneuvers as Troy N. suggests, and be given out at the Pilots meeting Sunday evening. It's sure to liven things up a bit Wed. 

    What do Masters pilots think?

    MattK

    In a message dated 1/6/2005 1:55:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, troy_newman at msn.com writes:

      Why not give the pilots a list of 25 maneuvers. Of these 25 possible only 15 will be used in the unknown. This is what the TOC used to do. These would be stuff that you have already seen and done..Just different looks. Like 4pts, 8pts, no rolling loops, circles or other circus tricks. Just stuff from older Masters sequences and Difficulty levels that are on a par with the current 404 skill level. This list would be out in the open above board and all pilots would know it. Then when the sequence was handed out it could be managed. Besides F3A...We all know what the possible maneuvers will be. There are just about 500-600 of them and the pilots pick the sequence. To manage this on a  Masters skill level, make the list only 25 possible and then the pilots can practice all 25 and be prepared.

      Then its a semi unknown. 

      Another solution if you want to walk this line is that the Finals schedule is really that its known say June 1st or maybe July 1st...Then if the pilot wants to practice he can and if he doesn't it need not.

      Just some other ideas.

      Personally I think its a neat idea...But I don't fly the Masters so its up to the people that fly it to make the call.

      I think this type of thing would be welcomed by the pilots that are flying the event. Its a challenge and is fun. One thing we always hear from the IMAC contests is that the pilots like the fact there are unknowns. I personally enjoy the Unknowns in the F3A event. I think this would elevate the Masters pilots to a new level and build their skills. 

      Tony Stillman, RVP and I discussed this in detail last year 2003. We thought it could work and that many of the Masters guys would like it and welcome it. Who knows? 

      TN

        ----- Original Message ----- 

        From: Bob Richards 

        To: discussion at nsrca.org 

        Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 11:24 AM

        Subject: Re: AMA MASTER'S unknown?

        I can see both sides. If only one pattern is ever flown, the person that has practiced the most, whether a "natural" or not, has a better chance of being rewarded for all the effort. An unknown sequence would most likely go to the person that is the overall best flyer, with a little less dependence on the amount of actual practice time.

        An unknown sequence must be known to at least one person. Keeping a sequence secret may be tough. There could always be the possibility of the secret getting out, or even some competitors being able to guess what might be in the sequence just by knowing the preferences of the person(s) in charge of developing the unknown.

        I think I would rather see a prelim/finals, with EVERYONE flying the finals. Let the finals be a different schedule, but known in advance of the contest. Would be a good time to showcase the next-year's schedule, if it exists.

        Knowing the sequence in advance would also be a good thing for the people that will have to judge as well, IMHO.

        Bob Richards.

        Rcmaster199 at aol.com wrote:

          The concept has alot of merit in respect to keeping Finals day more lively in Masters. Either a different schedule or an unknown thrown in, or both. 

          MattK

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050107/3a573c33/attachment-0001.html