[NSRCA-discussion] Impression or precision judging?

[White, Chris]

I'd love to hear some feedback to the following: (or maybe not, but it
might help my understanding of what we're trying to accomplish in our
judging/flying:-))

 

Question:

Isn't clinical precision flying the only way to attempt to remove
impression judging?  Shouldn't the sequence itself if flown to precision
"be" the art form?

 

Example 1: 

I saw one pilot fly the FAI sequence at our contest last June.... To me
his flying was clinically precise without any "Style" of his own.  I
mean that very much as a compliment.  The roll rates and radiuses and
speeds to me were very consistent....his timing and flight line control
were very "Clinically precise"  It struck me at that if a computer GPS
link could have been flown with an autopilot laying out the perfectly
executed sequence he would have been close.  The nearly perfect geometry
of the sequence spoke for itself.

 

Example 2:

An example of impression that I can think of would be some of the point
rolls that I used to see in the 70's....the ones that kind of slip &
lock into each point (exaggerated lock in), but I could not score them
better than points that merely stop where they are supposed to with
minimum fanfare.....could I? (In fact since one could argue that the
roll rate changes to get that effect it could be downgraded more.....)
But I like it, its an individual preference, but to the letter of the
law its incorrect.

 

Maybe we should judge by technical merit and each judge give an overall
"Impression" rating someplace on the scoresheet???

 

(Wow I spent all this time trying to think of how to word this....Gee do
I hit the send button.......??????  I hope this strikes a positive chord
somewhere...okay my motive is to learn so I'll send it.)

Chris White

 

________________________________

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20061003/b0c5acd4/attachment.html