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

R. LIPRIE RLIPRIE at centurytel.net
Thu Aug 16 12:31:08 AKDT 2007 

lol, One right answer want stop half the population from having an opinion. 
lol

Matt
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <glmiller3 at suddenlink.net>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 3:23 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection? --> 
Personal dilemma, what to do next season


> Pete,
>
> That was ME not Glen.  I apologize to you and anyone else that thinks that 
> statement was elitist.  I only fly intermediate and I've tried to stay out 
> of this conversation because I don't see a problem with Masters and FAI as 
> it stands and I won't have a "dog in the hunt"  for many years, if ever. 
> I do know Glen, and I've met Arch and several other D6 Masters and FAI 
> pilots and I take umbridge when someone who apparently doesn't know them, 
> doesn't fly against them and has little experience in Pattern competition 
> in general impunes their character and motives.
>
> Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but I personally don't think 
> everyone's opinion is equally informed or valid.   As I said, I'd love to 
> see Glen defend his Masters Championship, but if he decides that he has 
> the time and desire to change to FAI, I'll enjoy watching just as much 
> flying P0X as I do watching him fly Masters.
>
> Lets talk about something else that I can voice a completely uninformed 
> and strongly held opinion about<G>!
>
> George
>
> ---- Pete Cosky <pcosky at comcast.net> wrote:
>> >I don't fly masters but I'll be pissed if you let some newbie 
>> >Sportsman's
>> >comments keep you from defending your Masters National Championship. <
>>
>> Glen,
>>
>> I am sure you didn't mean anything by it, but comments like that cause
>> people to think that pattern pilots are elitists. I don't care who a 
>> person
>> is or if they even fly pattern at all; everyone is entitled to their
>> opinion. I do not agree with Fred, but I sure will let him express his
>> opinion without casting dispersions on him or his current class.
>>
>> We want to not only keep the people we have, including sportsman, but
>> attract new blood and in my opinion making comments like the one above 
>> does
>> nothing to help the sport.
>>
>> Just my opinion.
>>
>> Pete
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: <glmiller3 at suddenlink.net>
>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 2:00
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection? -->
>> Personal dilemma, what to do next season
>>
>>
>> > Glen,
>> >
>> > I don't fly masters but I'll be pissed if you let some newbie 
>> > Sportsman's
>> > comments keep you from defending your Masters National Championship.  I
>> > love watching you fly and frankly, I hope that you'll still be in 
>> > Masters
>> > when and/or if I ever get there to fly against you.
>> >
>> > I've deleted several messages before I sent them to this thread because 
>> > I
>> > didn't want to add fuel to the fire, but I'm really tired of people 
>> > trying
>> > to fix a problem that doesn't exist.  Masters is the top of the AMA
>> > pyramid and FAI is the international competition.  There isn't a real
>> > problem with people sandbagging - at least none that I've seen in D6 
>> > this
>> > year.  So lets get over this and get on with having fun!
>> >
>> > I don't see any of the guys that you are actually competing against 
>> > that
>> > have a problem with you defending your title!  If you want to go FAI, 
>> > then
>> > please do, but make it your decision and of course you can always fly
>> > Masters AND FAI at different contests.
>> >
>> > On a different note, if your cruise gets rained out by the storms 
>> > headed
>> > for the Gulf- I hope that you'll make it over to our contest<G>!
>> >
>> > George
>> >
>> > ---- Glen Watson <gwatson11 at houston.rr.com> wrote:
>> >> 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
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.11.19/956 - Release Date: 8/16/2007 
> 9:48 AM
>
>

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list