[NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection? -->Personal dilemma, what to do next season

Thu Aug 16 08:59:24 AKDT 2007

Glen

I applaud your winning masters this year, Bravo!  Given the rules as they
are, I don't have a problem with you returning to masters. 

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Glen Watson
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 12:03 PM
To: 'NSRCA Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?
-->Personal dilemma, what to do next season

Wow -- this thread and others has become very personal and packed with
emotionally based comments.

My recent success at the NATS has become bitter-sweet full of highs and lows
on what I should do next.  The rules state that I can return to the NATS and
defend my National Championship if I so desire.  I'm asking myself is that
such a bad thing.  Well a few have voiced their opinions that it would be.
I'm wondering if that is a personal feeling or are they thinking what's good
for the pattern community as a whole?

My goals for the sport are simple. First to have fun competing, this
includes giving back to the sport in some manner.  Second is to be as
competitive as I can.

Giving back falls in a couple of categories:
1) Sharing my knowledge and experience with others to help them have fun and
be competitive in this sport.
2) Work with equipment supplier/manufacture to develop and promote their
product offerings to the pattern community for us to enjoy.

The question I ask myself is can I do both if I move to FAI?  The short
answer is yes, however what influence would I have if I was a middle of the
pack FAI competitor?  IMHO top level Masters competitors should have
influence on equipments trends.  Here in the US we are fortunate to have a
large group of national level competitors who would benefit from having more
options and diversity in their equipment choices.  From my vantage point
currently only the top FAI class flyers world wide have the most influence
over the market.  

Many of us (me included) buy the exact equipment the top FAI competitors use
to win their respective National events or the Worlds.  I feel there is an
opportunity for the top US Masters competitors to have a similar effect.  A
good example of this is the collaboration between Hester and Stafford.  Many
will benefit from having an obtainable design manufactured here in the US
that's competitive against any of the foreign import designs especially at
the Masters level.

My decision on what to do next season is still pending. If I choose to
return to Masters next season I asked not to be viewed as a sandbagger but
as one who is for bettering the quality and enjoyment of the sport.

~Glen

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hester
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 9:01 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?

Well, I'm about to go out the door and do that novel thing we call "flying" 
(instead of typing). So, I'll be brief for now.

You just blatantly called Arch Stafford a "sandbagger" because he said his 
goal was to win the nats in masters. You're right that it may or may not 
ever happen, and he knows this all too well. You need practice, skill, the 
proper equipment, coaching, and good old fashioned luck. He's certainly 
capable of it.

Arch is right where he belongs, whether you like it or not, and whether you 
agree or not. Have you ever seen him fly? I have, and he's a masters pilot. 
One of the best. he got there by many many years of hard work and paying his

dues. Yep he could fly FAI if he chose to, but to fly FAI on a national 
level requires a LOT of time that most people simply don't have. You can't 
appreciate the difference until you try it yourself, in competition, not at 
the practice field. it's DIFFERENT. The scoring is different, the manuevers 
are different, etc.

Like it or not, masters IS a destination class and I am almost 100% positive

that will not change. I also believe it should stay this way. FAI is a 
choice, and I like choices. I don't hear any MASTERS pilots complaining 
about Arch or Glen or ?????? No, they like the competition, and they like 
them as people.

Arch is a friend of mine and I sponsor him. There's a reason for that. I'd 
break my back to help that guy, why? Because he'd do...and does...the same 
for me, or anybody else. Calling any masters pilot a sandbagger is 
unproductive, provocative and uncalled for. When their life and thier own 
goals dictate the decision to move into FAI, let THEM make that decision. 
You want to kill pattern for good? Make long time masters pilots have to 
move into FAI. It ain't gonna work.

-Mike

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Fred Huber" <fhhuber at clearwire.net>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?

> 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
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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