[NSRCA-discussion] Stirring up theMasters2009Sequencediscussionagain...

Mon Aug 13 18:46:12 AKDT 2007

Keep Sportsman as simple as possible, while still getting the basic
requirements ingrained, Straight flights, consistant corners, smooth
flying, good positioning.

Increase the difficulty of Int, and likewise Advance.

No matter what is done, there is going to be a big step somewhere along
the line. I thought the step from Novice to Sportsman was huge, 20 years
ago!!! Then the move to Advance seemed like a huge jump. With this year's
dumbing down of Adv, I think the Int pattern is tougher.

Having been a CD for over 25 years, I remember one of the reasons for the
elimination of the old Masters class was turnout. We were having to pay
for awards for 6 classes and sometimes has 2 or 3 go unclaimed. Another
reason was that they chose their own sequences If I recall correctly they
had to have a certain # of maneuvers, and the K-Factor had to add up to a
certain #. When we went to computerized scoring every Master's sequence
had to be hand entered. Added a lot of additional work for the tabulation
crew.

Keep the 4 AMA classes, just make each step up similar in difficulty.

Terry T.

On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:55:15 -0500 "Earl Haury" <ejhaury at comcast.net>
writes:
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070814/85c64e9d/attachment.html 