[NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?

Wed Aug 15 18:19:51 AKDT 2007

Well...

He is the one who proclaimed that he was going to stay in the class until he 
won a particular event... which how many people have EVER won?  Out of how 
many who have competed?

Sorry... the world does not owe anyone any particular trophy.

You say he's second best... maybe thats the best he ever gets.

Every other competitor who goes to the NATS and flys in Masters wants to be 
the best too.  Most will NEVER make it.

Most would be damn glad to be called second best in this sport...

Reality is not politically correct.

This is not the special olympics where everyone gets the same trophy: 
"Participant"

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Matthew Frederick" <mjfrederick at cox.net>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 8:17 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?

> Fred,
> The person who made the comment about not moving up until winning the Nats
> was Arch Stafford. He's a very nice guy, and according to the Nats finish
> this year, he's probably the second-best Masters pilot in the nation. He
> wants to be the best before he moves up to F3A, it's a personal goal he 
> has
> set and well within the bounds of the rules. Having met Arch, and knowing
> what a decent guy he is, I frankly take offense at you blatantly calling 
> him
> out as a sandbagger. I don't know one person who flys Masters in D6 who
> would call him that, and those are the people he competes with on a 
> regular
> basis... There is currently no relevant points accumulation in Masters 
> other
> than for district championships as it is the highest level of AMA Pattern. 
> I
> completely agree with the point someone else made that stated we should 
> not
> force someone to a level of competition that is out of the control of the
> AMA Competition Regs. If I were ever in a situation that forced me to move
> into F3A competition, I'd probably stop flying pattern. Full turnaround
> patterns was a hard enough pill to swallow. F3A has too many maneuvers 
> that,
> while very beautiful when performed well, I don't personally consider to 
> be
> precision aerobatics. Snaps and spins are enough of a stretch.
>
> Matt
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Fred Huber" <fhhuber at clearwire.net>
> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 6:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?
>
>
>> No sour grapes here about not being able to win...  I don't ever expect 
>> to
>> accumulate the points needed to force advancement from Sportsman.  The
>> hand-eye coordination just isn't there.
>>
>> The only way I'll take 3rd place in Sportsman is if there's only 2 others
>> flying.  I'm just in Pattern for the flight discipline... and to be 
>> around
>> people who can help me quit breaking airplanes.
>>
>> I will probably move to Intermediate next year.. becaue I have learned
>> almost as much as I can from the Sportman sequence.... I'll place DEAD
>> LAST
>> FOREVER.  I'll fly at the NATS in about 3 or 4 years too.
>>
>> I do see the hypocracy of people complaining about not being competitive
>> if
>> they move up... and sitting firmly in the lower class for years so they
>> can
>> always win...
>>
>> "I won't move up until I WIN the NATS" is why they came up with the point
>> system to force people to move up... sandbagger.  (not even bothering to
>> look up who made the referenced post...)
>>
>> The only way I'll take 3rd place in Sportsman is if there's only 2 others
>> flying.
>>
>> I take offense at rules that are unfair.
>>
>> I take offense at people who revise the rules to suit thier personal
>> agendas.
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: <seefo at san.rr.com>
>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 5:40 PM
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?
>>
>>
>>>I know Glen.
>>>
>>> My question was more rhetorical than anything else, and I really just
>>> put it out there to try to clarify the issue. There seems to be a
>>> division amongst people who want Masters to be that stepping stone
>>> class verses those who want Masters to be a destination all by itself
>>> (which it currently is).
>>>
>>> I do think the idea of a progression rule whereby a pilot who does not
>>> meet a given criteria has the option of moving down. I personally like
>>> the 'qualification' bar idea. For example, a pilot moves up to Masters
>>> from Advanced. In their 1st contest, if they are unable to achieve an
>>> AVERAGE normalized score of at least 800, they are given the option of
>>> moving back to Advanced. The 800 number is arbitrary and used for
>>> example only.
>>>
>>> I guess my biggest problem with these threads, is they give me a big
>>> sense of sour grapes from people as I read them talk continually about
>>> not being able to win. Last I checked this was competition, and if you
>>> want to win, you perfect your own flying until you can do it better
>>> than everyone else. You don't tell the guy beating you to go play
>>> somewhere else so you can feel good about yourself.
>>>
>>> Of course I could be completely wrong. It wouldn't be the 1st time.
>>> (just ask my wife)
>>>
>>> -Doug
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Glen Watson <gwatson11 at houston.rr.com>
>>> Date: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 3:24 pm
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?
>>> To: 'NSRCA Mailing List' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>
>>>> There is no mandatory advancement from Masters...
>>>>
>>>> The following was copied from the current AMA rulebook...
>>>>
>>>> 8.2.5. There is no mandatory advancement into FAI from the Masters
>>>> class.Contestants may enter their current AMA class or the FAI
>>>> class at any
>>>> contest but not both.
>>>>
>>>> ~Glen
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of
>>>> seefo at san.rr.com
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 4:51 PM
>>>> To: NSRCA Mailing List
>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It seems to me the real question that must be answered (yet again)
>>> is:
>>>>
>>>> Is Masters a destination class or not?
>>>>
>>>> -Doug
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
> 