[NSRCA-discussion] Nats registration

Mark Atwood atwoodm at paragon-inc.com
Thu Jun 14 12:49:08 AKDT 2007 

Again, I simply have to agree to disagree.  Don¹t really want a battle over
it.  My suggestion would be to talk to someone that judges ice skating or as
I mentioned before, diving.  An inexperienced judge, even knowing all the
rules and downgrades, can do little more than judge the landing.  And that¹s
what we get...Downward 45 snaps that are judged 99% on the exit of the snap
with little attention to the centering, entry and exit radius, etc.    But
maybe more to the point, I know at least MY experience has been, if I¹m
flying in high wind in front of a masters pilot, I pay a LOT of attention to
proper wind correction, knowing that even though the maneuver looks wrong,
it¹s not, and will be judged appropriately because that person can fly that
same correction, and knows what it has to look like.  If I have an
inexperienced judge...I focus on ³smooth², with less wind correction,
worrying less about proper ŒTrack¹ 45¹s than proper attitude 45s..etc.   I
think you¹ll find a lot of flyers do the same.  Is it right??  Don¹t
know...but it¹s certainly the reality.

I know I¹m disparaging the intermediate judge...I don¹t mean to do that.
Some are extremely good.  It¹s not the class you fly as much as total
experience and exposure.  Dave Klein (father to Mike Klein, former TOC
pilot) never flew above the old Sportsman routine, but did so for MANY
years, and also watched Mike fly about 10,000 practice flights of FAI and
TOC patterns.  He knew what he was looking for.   I¹m sure there are
intermediate flyers out there with equal skills in the chair.

Judging schools are GREAT...a tremendous help.  Even the poorest ones add
value.  AND...yes, there are 15 year master¹s pilots who are probably bad
judges.    But on any given day, the odds are that the experienced pilot is
going to be a better judge than an inexperienced pilot.   Again...My
opinion.

So it goes back to Ron¹s comment...that the CD¹s job is to identify which of
the various pilots are ³qualified²...

-M


On 6/14/07 1:01 PM, "Fred Huber" <fhhuber at clearwire.net> wrote:

> there's a big difference in PLAYING a game of strategy and OBSERVING the
> RESULTS of someone performing aerobatics.
>  
> You don't even need to know all the rules to observe.
>  
> You don't need to know the weight limit, maximum length or wingspan of the
> model.
>  
> You don't have to know how to compensate for wind in order to be able to see
> if a vertical line got blown sideways and should be downgraded.
>  
> Knowing the names of the pieces (maneuvers) and the shape of the board (limits
> of the box) and the basic movements of the pieces (textbook description of
> loop, roll, spin, snap...) will get you MUCH further judging than actually
> playing.
>  
> Even a judge at a chess tournament only needs to know how to recognize an
> illegal move.  They don't have to be able to beat the worst player in the High
> School chess club.
>>  
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>  
>> From:  Mark  Atwood <mailto:atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
>>  
>> To: NSRCA Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>  
>> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 10:44  AM
>>  
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Nats  registration
>>  
>> 
>> I¹m going to simply agree to disagree.   Experience in flying, helps your
>> experience in judging,  IMHO.
>> 
>> I¹ll use a few analogies...    Chess.  I know  the rules.  I¹m even a decent
>> player.  My son is 10...also knows the  rules, and for 10, plays ok.  But
>> when he looks at the board, he sees 64  squares and a myriad of pieces.  He
>> has to evaluate each piece in turn,  taking considerable time to make his
>> move.  By contrast, my experience  allows me to set ³groups² of pieces as a
>> single formation...a master player,  sees the entire board as a single
>> position, and knows instantly the next move  to make.
>> 
>> One more quick comparison and I¹ll try and related it to  pattern
>> judging...lol
>> 
>> Diving.  How many of you have watched the  olympic diving and seen someone do
>> a blinding 3 somersault half twist  whatever, only to have the announcer
>> say...²He¹s going to have to do a better  job of keeping his knees together
>> and holding the tuck farther in the  rotation...blah blah blah² and think to
>> yourself HUH?? Did they actually SEE  that??  And sure enough, in the slow
>> mo...that¹s EXACTLY what happened.   The commentator DIDN¹T see it...but they
>> knew from the outcome WHAT MUST  HAVE OCCURRED TO GET THERE from their own
>> experience.
>> 
>> Back to flying.   Much of what we do is anticipate problems and fix them.
>> Some  may disagree, but often, judging is know what must have happened to get
>> you  into the bad place.  That takes experience...I think flying experience,
>> though I suppose significant judging experience could achieve the same.
>> Bottom line...a sportsman/intermediate pilot, unless they¹ve been flying  and
>> judging that class for many years, doesn¹t have the experience necessary  to
>> judge FAI or Masters Real Time.  You have to see too much, too fast.   You
>> can¹t evaluate all the pieces on the board...you have to see the  board as a
>> single position.
>> 
>> My .02 cents.
>> 
>> That being said...I  fully agree that Intermediate pilots should be used to
>> judge Advanced...mixed  with Masters pilots...thats the best way to learn and
>> you¹ll still get a good  judging result.
>> 
>> -Mark
>> 
>> 
>> On 6/14/07 10:57 AM, "Zapata, Lisandro  Arturo" <Lisandro.Zapata at rsandh.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>  
>>> 
>>> IMHO
>>> 
>>> Even a Sportman who barely know to fly their own sequences,  doesn't mean
>>> that can't judge even FAI pilots. If he has the knowledge and  the ability
>>> to judge correctly then you should use him to judge FAI. Is  common to think
>>> that a FAI pilot who has to know to fly with all the rules  in his mind must
>>> be a great judge but is not always the case, they can be a  terrible judge
>>> and a great flyer.
>>> I had seen FAI judges that they aren't  even pilots, but they know the
>>> rules.
>>> 
>>> Arturo
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  From:  nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]  On Behalf Of Ron Van
>>> Putte
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007  10:34 AM
>>> To: NSRCA Mailing List
>>> Subject: Re:  [NSRCA-discussion] Nats registration
>>> 
>>> My comments regarding not all  Intermediate class pilots being qualified to
>>> judge Advanced is from  experience.  A lot of Intermediate class pilots just
>>> moved up from  Sportsman and barely know how to fly their own sequences,
>>> much less judge a  class above them.  They don't have the basic knowledge of
>>> how to judge  correctly.  I've had Intermediate pilots ask to be assigned to
>>> any  other job than being a judge of Advanced pilots because they didn't
>>> feel  qualified.
>>> 
>>> Further, like all programs, our judging certification  program often leaves
>>> a lot to be desired.  Despite the efforts of a lot  of people like Don
>>> Ramsey, how many pilots just got certified by sitting in  a group with a lot
>>> of other guys who all took the "test" together?   I've seen it happen far
>>> too often.   Judge certification  classes run by Don Ramsey at the Nats take
>>> several hours.  I've watched  some local classes take less than an hour and
>>> most of that was taking the  test.  For experienced judges, just taking the
>>> test is probably enough,  because they have familiarized themselves with
>>> changes to the rules and only  need to take the test.  However, I believe
>>> that pilots who are  inexperienced judges are being shortchanged at the
>>> local level.
>>> 
>>> Ron  Van Putte
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jun 14, 2007, at 8:12 AM, John Ferrell  wrote:
>>> 
>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> I find the  lack of confidence in the Judging  Certification Program to be
>>>> an  insult to those who put forth so much effort  into  it.
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> There are still a lot of Masters/FAI pilots who  choose to  not waste their
>>>> time knowing the AMA rule book. And there are many   pilots who are new to
>>>> the Pattern Discipline that have read and  continue to  read the Rule book
>>>> like the Bible!
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> The class one flies is not a good indicator of  their  judging qualities.
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> John Ferrell    W8CCW
>>>> "Life is  easier  if you learn to plow
>>>>        around   the stumps"
>>>> http://DixieNC.US
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>  
>>>>> From:  Ron Van Putte <mailto:vanputte at cox.net>
>>>>>  
>>>>> To: NSRCA Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>>>  
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 7:44   PM
>>>>>  
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Nats   registration
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> It is true that SOME   Intermediate pilots are qualified to judge Advanced
>>>>> and are used  if they  are.  The event director's job is to discover who
>>>>> is  qualified.   That's why we pay him the big $.   <VBG>
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> Ron Van  Putte
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> On Jun 13, 2007, at 5:51 PM,  Derek Koopowitz wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>> Provided that the Intermediate pilots  aren't  qualified to judge
>>>>>> Advanced, right?  And since there  are 20  Intermediate pilots they can
>>>>>> help out with judging  Advanced as well -  since everyone has to be
>>>>>> certified.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> On 6/13/07, Ron Van  Putte  <vanputte at cox.net>  wrote:
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> As a former Nats event  director, I  must point out that the Master
>>>>>>> class pilots are  used to judge the  Advanced AND F3A pilots, thus the
>>>>>>> problem  with the number of Master  class pilots.  If you use three
>>>>>>> judges on both Advanced lines,  that's six judges each session.   Then,
>>>>>>> if there are four F3A lines,  that's another twelve  judges.  So, the
>>>>>>> first two sessions of  Advanced and F3A  requires 36 Master class
>>>>>>> judges.   Oh oh! we  run out  of Master class judges on the third day if
>>>>>>> we only have 40   Master class pilots and nobody volunteers to judge
>>>>>>> extra  sessions.   That's why Dave Guerin's hair is turning
>>>>>>> gray/falling out.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> Ron Van  Putte
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> On Jun 13,  2007, at 5:26 PM, Derek Koopowitz  wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>  

And for one year there will  actually be enough judges to judge  Masters -
we've always  struggled with not having enough F3A pilots to  fill the
Masters judging pool.
 


 
 
On  6/13/07, Jim  Woodward  <Jim.Woodward at armorholdings.com
<mailto:Jim.Woodward at armorholdings.com>  > wrote:
 

 
 

Wow ­  Awesome!   The Masters pilots will get a taste of judging a   highly
attended FAI class!  J  J  J


 
 

Jim   W.


 
 

 
 
    

 

  


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 Derek
Koopowitz
Sent:  Wednesday, June 13, 2007  12:41 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List;  dist7 at nsrca.org
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion]  Nats  registration

 

 
 
 

It looks like we have 115 total  registered  pilots for the Nats this year
(from the AMA   website)...

 

 
 
 

Intermediate -  20

 

Advanced -  16

 

Masters -  40

 

FAI - 39

 

 
 
 

Those are excellent #'s and I'm hoping  that  there will still be some late
entries that will raise  those numbers  even more.

 

 
 
 

 

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion   mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
<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
>>>>>>> <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: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.16/849 - Release Date:  6/14/2007
>> 12:44 PM
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20070614/6b3e828e/attachment-0001.html

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list