[NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?
Matthew Frederick
mjfrederick at cox.net
Thu Aug 16 14:53:24 AKDT 2007
-The Lubbock contest is coming up. Is eastern D6 going to show?
-John
No, we're going to LARKS.
----- Original Message -----
From: John Gayer
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 6:30 PM
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 <jgghome at comcast.net>Date: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 3:41 pmSubject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?To: NSRCA Mailing List <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 GayerNSRCA 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 listNSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.orghttp://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion _______________________________________________NSRCA-discussion mailing listNSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ _______________________________________________NSRCA-discussion mailing listNSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.orghttp://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion _______________________________________________NSRCA-discussion mailing listNSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.orghttp://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/20070816/7ac4ba6c/attachment-0001.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list