[NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?

Wed Aug 15 18:12:13 AKDT 2007

John,

Lubbock will attract more and likely the guys from the Ft Worth/Dallas
markets.  The Houston market and eastward will more and likely go to the
Larks contest in Sulfur, LA scheduled that same weekend.  Personally I will
be sipping margaritas with the wife on a cruise that weekend.

~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 6:30 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?

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 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  <mailto:jgghome at comcast.net> <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  <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
<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 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
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
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070816/0d578319/attachment.html 