[NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in classselection?-->Personal dilemma, what to do next season
John Gayer
jgghome at comcast.net
Thu Aug 16 19:31:43 AKDT 2007
To All
If there hadn't so much time wasted on the "sandbagging in masters"
issue and a bit more time spent looking at the ideas Fred was
presenting, we might still have a member of NSRCA and the Pattern
community and some food for thought as well. Here are a few of his
recent posts. He clearly cares(cared) about the direction the NSRCA is
headed. You don't have to agree with his ideas but none of the posters
seem to be able to get over what was perceived as a personal attack on
one of your own. Fred's ideas deserved reasoned consideration, not
heaping portions of scorn.
On the sandbagging issue, all Fred did was point out the inconsistencies
in Arch's reply to me, as did I. He did not focus on it and spent most
of his posts presenting ideas that should be carefully considered.
John Gayer
NSRCA 632
AMA 75102
First Radio/Uncontrolled flight 1957
Official member AARP
Excerpts from Fred's posts
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++==
Any time that we do something to the AMA rules which conflicts with FAI
rules... all we are doing is causing the US's team competing
internationally to be at a disadvantage.
Yes... if you look at it logicly... FAI Pattern should be the
destination, and all of the "AMA classes" should be leading toward
that. So... if it is supportable to have a system that forces
advancement from lower classes to Masters... its supportable to have the
same system apply in regard to Masters being forced up to FAI
AMA made an error regarding scale competition long ago... and increased
weight and power (engine displacement) limits to where planes that could
win in AMA competitions were illegal to enter in FAI... (sometimes
bigger isn't better...)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
My idea regarding the "Pointing out" needing modification is a much more
minor change...
At least make it take a minimum of 2 contests to force advancement.
Just one win in the only contest a guy has ever flown in... can now mean
thats the only contest the guy ever bothers with.
If you want to force people to move up rather than "sandbagging"...
fine. I would hardly call a guy winning ONCE and then staying at the
same level sandbagging.
What happens if you get a "new crop" of Pattern flyers... and the whole
group flying Sportsman are at their first contest.. and there's a dozen
in the class? You want to force the top 3 in Sportsman at that contest up?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++==
Actually... we need to include non-NSRCA Pattern flyers in the
recordskeeping if there is going to be a points system forcing moving up.
No recordkeeping...then the system is meaningless.
Recordkeeping only for NSRCA members = members end up at a disadvantage
to the sandbaggers who aren't members.
NSRCA is the Special Interest Group REPREASENTING Pattern to the AMA...
but membership is not required to comnpete in Pattern.
You can petition the AMA to require membership to compete in Pattern
(lead balloon)
or
you can just deal with the paperwork involved in handling the point
system for non-paying Pattern flyers...
or
you can just drop the point system totally.
Right now... there are 2 reasons for people to join NSRCA: Support the
SIG.... or... attempt to get the District champ awards.
The old 80%/20% rule applies... 20% of the active members do all the
work so that the other 80% can enjoy the hobby.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
they don't call it competition because its easy...
But I would tend to agree that if there is a system that says people have to
move up... it should go all the way up and put FAI as the only destination.
You see the same guys in the D6 winner's circle in Masters every year for a
reeason... they never moved up.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I take offense at rules that are unfair.
I take offense at people who revise the rules to suit thier personal
agendas.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Either "FAI" is an AMA Pattern contest class... or it isn't.
It either belongs in the skill progression sequence... or it doesn't
belong at the contests.
If there is a point system for "encouraging" people to move up from
Sportsman (not considered an "official" class...) to intermediate...
then there should be a system to force the move from Masters to FAI.
Be consistant.... or be shown that you are not.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There should be 2 primary goals
Promotion of Pattern as a competitive event
Preparation of pilots for international competition.
In a nutshell...
Build the team for the F3A World championship.
You can't have a teem without competitors... so we have to attract
people to participate.
You can't prepare the team for the international event if you don't work
to teach the rules of... and skills needed for... the event.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If there is no support for the forcing move up from Master to FAI
There can be no valid argument to force anyone to ever move up from any
class.
Either the rules should have a consistant progression system... or
no system to make the guy who likes taking st place at advanced home
every contest for 30 years.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You can submit a rules change request for FAI... through the AMA.
There is a process.
AMA is the US's representative organization to the FAI
We EACH have as much say as any Pattern competitor in France, Germany,
Argentina... wherever.
We judge some things differently in AMA than in international FAI for one
reason... AMA is not being very bright. The AMA definitions should meet the
international ones.
ANY TIME THA AMA RULES DON'T AGREE WITH FAI.. all we are doing is making it
hard for US competitors to even TRY to compete internationally.
WE SHOULD have some of the premeir tems in all FAI events... Top 3 place
finishes across the board. We have the people with the skills...
But AMA goofed and has some rules that make some of our top competitor's
planes INELIGIBLE for international competition...
THAT WAS PURE STUPID
Somehow.. we managed to keep Pattern's lower class rules in line ENOUGH with
FAI that we haven't totally SCREWED our team...
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
We can either advance AMA Pattern with the rest of the world (FAI)
Or we may as well create the "SPA-II": 1980 to 2005 AMA sequences and
models only. Motto: FAI... go away.
Look up the 1959/60 Pattern rules...
There had to be a lot of screaming when they changed from THAT to doing
the centered maneuver sequences of the 70's...
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ron Van Putte wrote:
>I look on this situation as one in which a guy who was seriously
>interested in Pattern development went "off the deep end" because he
>perceived that his ideas were totally rejected. What a #$@! shame!
>I don't know him, but he obviously cared a lot about what he wrote.
>
>Ron Van Putte
>
>On Aug 16, 2007, at 7:44 PM, Gene Maurice wrote:
>
>
>
>>Somebody needs a little more fiber in their diet. :<)
>>
>>Gene Maurice
>>gene.mauirce at sgmservice.com
>>Plano, Texas
>>AMA 3408 NSRCA 877
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Fred
>>Huber
>>Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 6:41 PM
>>To: NSRCA Mailing List
>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in
>>classselection?-->Personal dilemma, what to do next season
>>
>>Be elitist
>>
>>Masters know everything
>>
>>no one else's opinions are worth a crap
>>
>>Doesn't matter that I;ve been flying RC 30 years
>>
>>Doesn't matter that I've been building with balsa since I was 7 and
>>my FIRST
>>
>>HOME DESIGNED PLANE flew just fine... when I was 10
>>
>>I know nothing
>>
>>I'm "Just a Sportsman"
>>
>>bye
>>
>>Cancel my NSRCA membership
>>
>>I won't be at the nexst contest
>>
>>I won't be helping at the next local contest (which I have been
>>doing every
>>year I have been in the local club.)
>>
>>I won't support Pattern any more in any way.
>>
>>And... I'll have my name pulled from this e-mail list before you can
>>answer... AND DON'T e-mail "back channel.
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Matthew Frederick" <mjfrederick at cox.net>
>>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 6:27 PM
>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class
>>selection?-->Personal dilemma, what to do next season
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Glen didn't write that, George did. George is an intermediate
>>>pilot. He is
>>>in no way an elitist, but he is just as offended by the sandbagging
>>>comment
>>>as everyone else who knows Arch and Glen. It has nothing to do with
>>>"political correctness" like Fred tried to say. It has more to do
>>>with how
>>>difficult it is to get your point across if you're trying to speak
>>>through
>>>
>>>
>>>a
>>>size 11 Nike. (Foot in mouth for those having trouble with that).
>>>
>>>Matt
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Pete Cosky" <pcosky at comcast.net>
>>>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 1:49 PM
>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class
>>>selection? -->Personal dilemma, what to do next season
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>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: 269.12.0/957 - Release Date:
>>>8/16/2007
>>>1:46 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
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070817/89f4497b/attachment.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list