[NSRCA-discussion] Stirring uptheMasters2009Sequencediscussionagain...

Mon Aug 13 17:06:39 AKDT 2007

Michael Wickizer <mwickizer at msn.com> wrote:    "My point was to make FAI a destination class as imho it should be. Not 
taking anything away from the Master Pilots but the guy that can fly and win 
Masters can fly and win in FAI."

Looking at the NATs results from the last few years that is not necessarily 
the case, vis a vis, A.C Glen, Cameron Smith, Ryan McGaughlin sp?, David 
Snow and many others. FAI strikes me as almost starting over, not a natural 
progression.

  That's the whole point, it shouldn't be like starting over unless you mean starting at the bottom of the pile and trying to crawl your way up. Are we to believe that FAI is the "Pros" class and everything else is less than it? What about the Master pilots that have parked themselves there for 10-15 years? What about the guys moving from Advance to Masters? Isn't this the samething as the jump from Masters to FAI? There will always be those that won't move because they think they won't win anymore. Either you want a natural progression or you don't. IMHO that progression ends in FAI. Revamp the points system possibly dropping all points at the end of the year? Or maybe drop them when the schedules change? I'm just throwing this out to get the old brain working and maybe find a solution that will better our sport. To be sure whatever we decide to do won't sit well with everyone. Do we set our sights on the World level, the National level or the local level? I don't have all
 the answers, I have plenty of questions though. And they all start with "What if".

FAI requires a great deal of time; time that many working mortals don't 
have.

  I submit all the other class can say the same thing. At one time seems Masters flew the latest discarded FAI sequence. Maybe we need to look at that possibility. 

>From: "Earl Haury" 
>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List 
>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" 
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Stirring 
>uptheMasters2009Sequencediscussionagain...
>Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:55:15 -0500
>
>Buddy
>
>What TW & I are suggesting is that a fix for the large step between 
>Advanced and Masters seems appropriate and are offering one possible 
>solution. Along with that, I agree with you and Glen that there may need to 
>be some adjustment to the points system.
>
>Consider that the point system for advancement addresses the primary issue 
>of forcing advancement upon someone who has been successful so as to 
>provide "room at the top" for other competitors. A failing with this is 
>that it assumes folks won't move voluntarily - most do, and often ill 
>advised due to boredom in a specific class. Unfortunately, the system 
>assumes everyone will eventually need to move up. That's obviously not 
>always the case and some are faced with moving up or quitting - not a good 
>choice! The ability to drop off points 4 years back helps the GOB - but 
>possibly not in areas with lots of contests with large numbers of 
>competitors. Maybe a limit on the number of points acquired in any one 
>contest would help?
>
>So - the conversation is twofold, progression of difficulty within the 
>classes being one topic and progression of competitors within the classes 
>the other.
>
>Earl
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: twtaylor
> To: 'NSRCA Mailing List'
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 4:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Stirring up 
>theMasters2009Sequencediscussionagain...
>
>
> Hi Buddy
>
>
>
> I understand your point and I agree. Given the rules, as they are now, 
>progression is a given. We can lobby to replace the advancement rules 
>easily enough. My point was to make FAI a destination class as imho it 
>should be. Not taking anything away from the Master Pilots but the guy that 
>can fly and win Masters can fly and win in FAI. Seems to me we have two 
>nearly identical classes and for what reason? What goal are we trying to 
>achieve doing this? The goal of the entire sport is to advance a flier from 
>beginner to at least national/regional contender, no? I understand the GOB 
>deal. What we did way back when was to really make FAI the top class, 
>renamed Expert to Masters and called it an evening. Do I think Arch or 
>Glenn could make the finals in FAI at our Nats? You dang skippy I do. Can I 
>win an FAI contests locally? Probably not this year but maybe next. IMHO 
>The reason we see such a large turn out in Masters and not FAI is because 
>many don't want to fly against QQ and Chip and The Animal. Here's one to 
>ponder.
>
>
>
> Jason goes to the worlds and wins the whole thing and makes us proud as 
>we can be. Guess what?
>
> IIRC the current rules allow Jason to fly masters, oh wait, If memory 
>serves me Jason didn't point out of Advance he jumped straight from Advance 
>to FAI. He could win the worlds then come home and fly his next contest in 
>Advance. Wouldn't that cause a stir! I know he won't but he could. Back 
>when I was flying Expert Turn Around and won pretty much every contest I 
>entered, Kirk Grey decided to bring me down a peg or two,(Well actually 10 
>or so) at a contest in NC he dropped back from FAI to Expert. Taught me a 
>great lesson he did. (Said in my best Yoda voice.) J
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org 
>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of 
>BUDDYonRC at aol.com
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 5:20 PM
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Stirring up the 
>Masters2009Sequencediscussionagain...
>
>
>
> TW
>
> You have missed the point. If you make FAI a destination class and apply 
>the progression rule it will definitely be a force which will in my opinion 
>reduce our ranks.
>
>
>
> I don't think you understood my analysis of the location of the problem 
>which is entirely my opinion.
>
> I think like Glen Watson that progression should be based on ability to 
>perform not on a series of events which in some cases have nothing to do 
>with ability or performance.
>
> When we force advancement on a person who is not ready to move up due to 
>what ever the case may be we are doing him an injustice and cutting off our 
>nose to spite our face.
>
> Be real we have the Pro's and those with similar ability who aspire to 
>join that group and possibly be a world champion and push products for the 
>Hobby Industry
>
> Then we have the majority, the Good Old Boys which is most of us who 
>buy the stuff that the Pro group is pushing.
>
> The Good Old Boys just want to compete with each other progress 
>according to our ability, drink a few cool ones and generally enjoy our 
>sport.
>
> The Top GOB is the one who wins Masters at the Nat's
>
> A GOB can jump the fence if he wants to and be a WC want to be and if he 
>doesn't like the territory we will let him be a GOB again
>
> But with today's rules GOB's move up when the rules tell them to and 
>that's where some of our problems lie.
>
> I don't know how to express my opinion any simpler than that.
>
> Buddy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

>_______________________________________________
>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

---------------------------------
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070814/d1138630/attachment.html 