Rules Changes----Advancement

[Tim Taylor]

I've done this in the past at our contest. We asked the judges when, they completed a round, to judge 1-2 fliers from the class below the one they were judging to give the guys a clue how well or badly they stacked up against the current crop of fliers in the class above them. Worked well for us.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: BUDDYonRC at aol.com 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 8:34 AM
  Subject: Re: Rules Changes----Advancement




  What about letting him start in any class he feels comfortable in with the stipulation that his first year back he will not be eligible and will not accumulate points for the DC in that class if it is a class that is a lower class than the one he left. 

   I think there is also merit in letting someone move up for a contest to test their skills without loosing the option of moving back down, If they have gained the skill required for the higher class they will most likely stay there but if they havent and are forced to stay in the higher class they may become discouraged and quit.
  Buddy
    Mark, although most people don't park in a class, I have experienced a couple instances where a guy actually wins the DC in his class one year, takes the next year off for whatever reason, then he returns back in his old class. I appreciate the fact that he returned and like the added attendance, but some of his fellow competitors may not agree.

    What I am saying is a Checks and Balances system needs to be in place such that this type of situation is controlled. I admit it doesn't happen often and may not be viewed as a big deal by the higher class pilots, but it raises the eyebrows of the guys it affects. At present the policing is supposed to be done by the DVP. As a past DVP, I didn't care for the idea of telling someone when to move. 

    The DVPs need a better tool. At the same time, the tool needs to be flexible enough so that that the guys without enough skill aren't forced up. I've seen this situation also. 

    Careful schedule design and more frequent change may alleviate some of the concern. The parkers could, in effect, start fresh every year, just as the new guys entering a class. That places different burden on the group designing schedules and on the AMA CB approving them. 

    regards
    MattK


    In a message dated 3/8/2005 8:38:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, DaveL322 at comcast.net writes:
      Mark,

      It is rare and an exception - I guess I don't see the harm in keeping a rule
      around that would give "us" some teeth to prevent a trophy hog.

      I am a little concerned (as MattK) that if we totally deleted the point
      system, we might encourage a trophy hog.

      I'm thinking we have room to adjust the point system without deleting it.

      Dave


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Atwood, Mark" <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
      To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
      Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 8:07 PM
      Subject: RE: Rules Changes----Advancement


      Dave,

      Have you actually experienced any "trophy hogs"?  Maybe I'm naïve, but I
      haven't really experienced this.  We've on rare occasion had someone "hang"
      in a class for an extra half season in hopes of doing well at the Nats
      before moving up, but even that's been rare.

      We always talk/worry about the trophy hog, but I guess I see that as a
      hollow fear from my end.  Just curious what you've actually experienced in
      the sandbagging ranks.

      Mark

      -----Original Message-----
      From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On
      Behalf Of David Lockhart
      Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 7:42 PM
      To: discussion at nsrca.org
      Subject: Fw: Rules Changes----Advancement

      I agree with Matt that changes in this area should be made with caution.

      I like the idea that a pilot could fly a higher class for fun and to test
      the waters, and then drop back to their regular class.

      I like the idea that somebody having an off year (reduced time or equipment
      in a given year) can drop back a class to make it easier for them to compete
      and have fun.

      I have no problem with a pilot "demoting" themselves to stay in the event
      and have fun (so long as they don't end up perpetually at the top of their
      new chosen class).

      I think very few people are interested in forcing a pilot to "move up"
      simply because they accumulated enough points - pilots should move up when
      they have aquired the skills to fly in the next class, and when they are
      clearly superior to others in their class - ie, they are sand-baggers /
      trophy hogs which I don't think are good for the event.

      The point system is rarely used - but I think it would be easy enough to
      enforce - most NSRCA Districts track points for the annual District Champs
      using some kind of system.  It wouldn't be too hard to use data captured in
      the District Champs tracking to figure out AMA advancement points.  I think
      we are fortunate that most pilots do move up at appropriate times, but
      having a mechanism in place to pressure a few exceptions is a nice option to
      have.  I would absolutely support using the AMA advancement point system to
      force a pilot to move up who clearly belonged in a higher class, but stayed
      put to be a trophy hog.

      To that end, I think the point system should remain on the books - and maybe
      we could modify it such that it would be more likely to force trophy hogs to
      move up, and less likely to ever push a career guy out of his class.  There
      are a number of ways that could be done.

      Dave

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Rcmaster199 at aol.com
      To: discussion at nsrca.org
      Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 5:08 PM
      Subject: Re: Rules Changes----Advancement


      I believe that this may open a different can of worms. It's true that some
      guys attend contests simply for the fun and camaraderie of the flying, but
      there is a whole nother set of troops that attends to compete. In my
      opinion, this is the largest of the two, by wide margin. These folks want to

      win, place or show and really try hard to do their best. The former group
      may not care as much about doing its best; just being there is good enough.
      But it is still an extremely important group nontheless.

      It seems to me that there are a bunch of guys, (Masters in D3 is a good
      example) that are very good in their present class(most of us are quite
      evenly matched), and some of these may decide to drop down a class and park
      for a while. Taking that skill level down to Advanced could demoralize the
      Advanced level guys that want to really compete, and could actually have the
      exact opposite effect from that desired. I wouldn't want any Advanced
      competitor to leave the sport because of an infusion of Masters class guys
      re-entering the class

      We agree on the fact that the points system is silly and unenforceable.

      Having said all that, I wouldn't be aversed to a trial run of such a rule.
      Reconvene after the trial period was over and make a decision on its
      success--failure. Then make a final decision and have buy-in from the CB up
      front to either make a change, or not. Having CB buy-in up front will
      alleviate some of the acremonious debate we have seen in past issues.

      I recommend caution either way. This indeed is unchartered territory, at
      least in my 27 years, and demands careful thought. I like the fact that the
      committee is thinking in different and challenging ways to improve the sport
      for everyone, eventhough THIS committee's charter is to build schedules and
      not rules.


      MattK

      PS- one more thought on this: it may turn out that no self respecting
      Masters competitor will move down to Advanced, or Advanced down to
      Intermediate. Then this suggested approach could work. Convincing the AMA CB
      will be the trick



      In a message dated 3/8/2005 4:20:51 PM Eastern Standard Time,
      patternrules at earthlink.net writes:
      From: Troy A. Newman
      To: discussion at nsrca.org
      Sent: 3/8/2005 2:18:31 PM
      Subject: [SPAM] Rules changes Advancement


      Buddy,
      I have been really quiet lately. I don't think the changes you are looking
      at are going to increase pattern participation. The weight and box limits
      in my opinion are good and don't need jacking with......

      I know you and Don are working hard at it. We on the sequence committee are
      as well. I don't think changing the box is going to help us. I really don't
      think changes to the weights or sizes is going to help us....

      I want to weigh in here so to speak on something that I feel will help
      pattern grow in changes to the rule book. I feel most changes to the rule
      book are going to make us more elite or a more secret way you have to do
      things. Guys that are even in our ranks don't read the rules so why make
      them even more specialized..and so on.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050309/3b5b8d9f/attachment-0001.html