[NSRCA-discussion] Food for thought

John Gayer jgghome at comcast.net
Thu Aug 30 11:43:54 AKDT 2007


Lance,

I certainly appreciate the recent growth in the SW with the addition of 
the El Paso contest. However, I still remeber when there were at least 5 
contests in Colorado, two or three in Kansas and two in New Mexico. 
There was also a contest in Montana(Billings) and Casper in Wyoming.
Those days appear to be long gone and the few remaining contests 
struggle to come up with 17 contestants. I believe the sole remaining 
contest in Colorado had 11 contestants.
BTW, the Roadrunner contest in Albuquerque will be putting on its 24th 
edition next summer.

Sorry you couldn't make it to Lubbock. Ed put on a great contest.
John

Lance Van Nostrand wrote:

> John,
> Even though your contests are small, they are extraordinary feats.  El 
> Paso is new, Alb is new within the last few years.  Growth in the SW 
> is apparent and excellent for the population density.  Keep going!!
>  
> --Lance
>  
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* John Gayer <mailto:jgghome at comcast.net>
>     *To:* NSRCA Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>     *Sent:* Tuesday, August 28, 2007 11:06 AM
>     *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Food for thought
>
>     At Lubbock last weekend there were 2 Sportsman, 3 Intermediate, 2
>     advanced, 5 Masters and 4 FAI as i recall.. All threeof the
>     contests in this area that I have attended have had about 17
>     contestants. El Paso had a total of 13 in Spotsman and
>     Intermediate.which is a good sign for the future.
>     John
>
>     Claude Weimer wrote:
>
>>     How many Masters Flyers are generally in the contests you fly in?
>>     We may have 4 or 5 Advanced and 10 to 15 Masters.
>>
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>     *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>     [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of
>>     *John Gayer
>>     *Sent:* Monday, August 27, 2007 10:53 PM
>>     *To:* NSRCA Mailing List
>>     *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Food for thought
>>
>>     Western district 6. I live in Albuquerque and fly Advanced. Jeff
>>     Hill and I have competed against a total of one other contestant
>>     in three contests(Albuquerque, El Paso and Lubbock).
>>     John Gayer
>>     NSRCA 632
>>
>>     Claude Weimer wrote:
>>
>>     What part of the country are you in?
>>
>>     Claude
>>
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>     *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>     <mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
>>     [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of
>>     *John Gayer
>>     *Sent:* Monday, August 27, 2007 10:17 PM
>>     *To:* NSRCA Mailing List
>>     *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Food for thought
>>
>>     This sounds good to me as a compromise. >From what I've seen, we
>>     are currently having difficulty getting enough competitiors for
>>     the classes we have now without adding another class.
>>     John
>>
>>     vicenterc at comcast.net <mailto:vicenterc at comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>     Claude,
>>
>>     Suggestion:  Why we don't call Expert = F3A and fly the P
>>     schedule only in local contests?  The only change we will need to
>>     make is that  Expert = F3A becomes the last AMA class.  In other
>>     worlds, Master should not be the terminal AMA class.  Adding
>>     another class will add cost to the contest and probably will be
>>     longer to run. 
>>
>>     Regards,
>>
>>     --
>>     Vicente "Vince" Bortone
>>
>>         -------------- Original message --------------
>>         From: "Claude Weimer" <cweimer at tconl.com>
>>         <mailto:cweimer at tconl.com>
>>
>>
>>         I have been thinking, it might be time to bring back the
>>         Expert class.  The reason I say this is because the Masters
>>         class is becoming rather large and is going to grow in the
>>         coming years. The problems I see are the difficulty judging
>>         at local contests.  At the St Louis contest it took an hour
>>         and a half to judge Masters.  Because Masters is the largest
>>         class compared the Advanced and Intermediate and only three
>>         FAI, it can be difficult to organize Judges for Masters.  I'm
>>         not singling out the St Louis contest, the Omaha contest was
>>         the same as most contests I have been to.  If Masters was
>>         split in two classes it would inc! rease t he available
>>         people to judge.
>>
>>         Masters could be a little easier and Expert could be harder.
>>          Expert could even be the last FAI P schedule.  The reason
>>         some don't wish to move to FAI is the time to learn two
>>         schedules.  It looks like the Masters class is going to get
>>         larger and I think it would be good to break it split it up.
>>
>>         Claude Weimer
>>
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>     Subject:
>>
>>     [NSRCA-discussion] Food for thought
>>
>>     From:
>>
>>     "Claude Weimer" <cweimer at tconl.com> <mailto:cweimer at tconl.com>
>>
>>     Date:
>>
>>     Mon, 27 Aug 2007 22:33:59 +0000
>>
>>     To:
>>
>>     "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>     <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>
>>     To:
>>
>>     "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>     <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>
>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>
>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>> 
>>
>> 
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> 
>>
>> 
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>
>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>
>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>
>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto: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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070830/0d8b0dc2/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list