[NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?

John Gayer jgghome at comcast.net
Wed Aug 15 15:30:13 AKDT 2007


Glen,
yes I won all three contests I have entered in the past two seasons by 
narrow margins against some good competition. However, there was not 
very much of it. the three contests had a total of nine advanced entries 
and that includes me.
 From the current point method of advancement that is 4*3+3*3+2*3 = 27 
points in two years.
The Lubbock contest is coming up. Is  eastern D6 going to show?
John

Glen Watson wrote:

> According to the current rules there is no mandatory move from Masters 
> to FAI.
>
>  
>
> John, I looked up results for the western D6 contest posted on Don 
> Ramsey's web site.  Appears you're the guy in Advanced in that area 
> the other guys wish would move up...hmmmm.  Trust me I felt the same 
> way you did about Masters when I made the move from Advanced.
>
>  
>
> Wish our geography was different so we could compete together.  As 
> Arch stated in his post we all improve from pushing each other.
>
>  
>
> ~Glen
>
>  
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org 
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of *John 
> Gayer
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 15, 2007 4:35 PM
> *To:* NSRCA Mailing List
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?
>
>  
>
> Arch,
> your statement that the two patterns(FAI and Masteres) are not related 
> is unsupported. I would contend that the only difference in difficulty 
> between them is in the rolling elements.
>
> You seem to be proving my point for me.
> You are not willing to move to FAI until you win the NATS in Masters. 
> That's one hell of a promotion criteria. There certainly wouldn't be a 
> lot of movement between classes if we all took that approach.
> On the other hand, I am supposed to move up and take my lumps at sub 
> 900s in Masters?
>
> I suggest that if some of you eastern D6ers moved to FAI, you would 
> then have two hotly contested classes where a number of flyers could 
> win a round....
>
> John
> western D6
>
> rcpattern at stx.rr.com <mailto:rcpattern at stx.rr.com> wrote:
>
>I take exception to this.  FAI and Masters are not related.  I have 
>
>been flying masters several years, finishing as high as second this 
>
>year at the NATS.  Yes, I'm coming back next year in Masters.  I have 
>
>a goal of winning the nats before I move up.  I can be realistic...at 
>
>some point with enough practice I might be able to crack the finals in 
>
>FAI at the NATS, but I'm smart enough to know that realistically 
>
>winning FAI isnt going to happen.  I would also argue that the guys 
>
>that have been flying masters for years, just raise the bar.  I know 
>
>in different areas I've flown around the country, these are the guys 
>
>that make guys fly better.  Show up in District 6 sometime, and fly 
>
>Masters...you'll definitely get better.  6 of the top 10 at the NATS 
>
>were D6.  The means, guy that finished in the top 10 at the NATS in 
>
>what is probably top to bottom the most competitive class have trouble 
>
>getting wood at a local contest.  I can promise you though, the guys 
>
>that fly here have greatly 
>
>improved their flying than they would have in other parts of the 
>
>country.  Glen has set the bar here for a while, and I know the other 
>
>guys are pushing to catch him, and if you look now at local contest 
>
>scores, it is getting closer.  At any given time down here in D6, I'd 
>
>say 6 or 7 guys can take a round in masters.  Now that makes it fun. I 
>
>know when I was flying in D4 last year.  Every contest I went to, was 
>
>Verne K, and Steve Miller....I knew I'd better put up great flights 
>
>every flight and this makes you a better pilot.  I think you should 
>
>try moving up...take a year of the low 900's, and then see where you 
>
>are the following year.  I bet you start moving up and before you know 
>
>it you would be right there in the mix.  This is a competitive 
>
>activity and the only way you improve is flying against people who are 
>
>better than you.
>
> 
>
>Arch
>
>  
>
> 
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>From: John Gayer <jgghome at comcast.net> <mailto:jgghome at comcast.net>
>
>Date: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 3:41 pm
>
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?
>
>To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>
> 
>
>  
>
>>Ron,
>>
>>I take exception to those rules. There should be only one 
>>
>>destination 
>>
>>class. Why shouldn't there be a mandatory move from Masters to 
>>
>>F3A? They 
>>
>>are just two patterns with a natural progression as there is 
>>
>>between 
>>
>>Advanced and Masters.
>>
>>Parking and sandbagging is a mental state, not a rules violation.
>>
>>john
>>
>> 
>>
>>Ron Van Putte wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>The Master class is the top AMA class and there is no mandatory 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>move 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>from the Master class to F3A, so how can there be "parkers" or 
>>>
>>>"sandbaggers"?  
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>Ron Van Putte
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>On Aug 15, 2007, at 2:10 PM, John Gayer wrote:
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>how about changing the AMA advancemant rule and keep it very 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>simple?>> Your first contest of the year will determine your class 
>>
>>for the 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>year. You may go up one class at any time during the year but 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>may not 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>go back down during the year. At the start of the next year you 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>may 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>drop back one class at your option, stay where you are or go up 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>a class.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>This is simple enough that your fellow competitiors will know 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>if you 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>are following the rules. It will also be up to your fellow 
>>>>
>>>>competitiors to insure that you are not sandbagging.
>>>>
>>>>I also feel strongly that sandbagging in Masters should not be 
>>>>
>>>>allowed. If you disregard Sportsman, then half of the classes 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>allow 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>parking. Obviously, F3A has to be a parking lot but I see no 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>reason 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>to allow this behavior in Masters. As a competant advanced 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>pilot of 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>somewhat advanced years, I have very little interest in moving 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>to 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>Masters in order to spend the rest of my pattern years trying 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>to 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>break 900 against the parkers.
>>>>
>>>>I fail to see the logic in having two destination classes. 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>Shouldn't 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>we all aspire to progress to FAI? The current Masters schedule 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>is 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>designed as a stepping stone to Masters. Let's use it that way.
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>>John Gayer
>>>>
>>>>NSRCA 632
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>>BUDDYonRC at aol.com <mailto:BUDDYonRC at aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>There was a proposal on the last rules cycle that would allow 
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>a 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>>person to move up and test his ability then move back if he 
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>had not 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>>attained the skills required for the higher class.  I 
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>personally 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>>think it is a good idea and I also see no need for the point 
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>system 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>>like someone said if someone abuses the privilege we can 
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>solicit 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>>Earl and four other guys his size to take him behind the barn 
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>and 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>>splain to him why he will be moving up. I believe peer 
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>pressure is 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>>all the control we need.
>>>>>
>>>>>I think this is worth a try.
>>>>>
>>>>>For those who have the ability and desire to achieve a spot at 
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>the 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>>top I don't see that we have a problem.
>>>>>
>>>>>Buddy    
>>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>>---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>---------
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>>Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com 
>>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>><http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour/?
>>
>>    
>>
>ncid=AOLAOF00020000000982>.>>>
>
>  
>
>>>>>----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>--------
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>>>
>>>>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>>>
>>>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>>
>>>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> 
>>>>
>>>><mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>>
>>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>------
>>
>>    
>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>
>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>
>>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>
>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>_______________________________________________
>
>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>
>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto: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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070815/a1c6d840/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list