[NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?

[Fred Huber]

And what would the people flying Masters say if Todd Blose or Chip Hyde moved back to Masters?

The screams of "SANDBAGGER" would be heard from coast to coast.

Be realistic.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Matthew Frederick 
  To: NSRCA Mailing List 
  Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 5:40 PM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?


  F3A isn't a parking lot, they can always fly Masters again
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: John Gayer 
    To: NSRCA Mailing List 
    Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 2:10 PM
    Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?


    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 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.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.19/953 - Release Date: 8/14/2007 5:19 PM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070815/c9e09652/attachment.html