[NSRCA-discussion] Nats registration
Ron Van Putte
vanputte at cox.net
Thu Jun 14 18:35:27 AKDT 2007
Pete makes just the point I was alluding to. There are a lot of
lower class pilots who are perfectly capable of judging one or more
classes above the one in which they fly. However there are others
who are not as honest as Pete, who are not qualified, but swallow
hard and sit in the judge's chair, hoping they don't screw up.
Then there are individuals who never flew a pattern flight in their
lives, who are great judges. Dorothy Speights comes to mind. I'd be
pleased to judge on a line with her any day.
I think it's up to a pilot to be honest with the event director and
tell him/her what classes they feel comfortable and qualified to judge.
Ron Van Putte
On Jun 14, 2007, at 9:17 PM, Pete Cosky wrote:
> Keith and Mark,
>
> I am with you guys. I would never put myself in a position to judge
> higher classes than I have flown at this time. There are so many
> nuances in each maneuver, especially with windy conditions, that
> asking someone in Intermediate to judge a higher class would not
> only be a disservice to the competitor but also those asked to
> judge. I think being judged by those who have "been there" is the
> only fair course of action for all involved.
>
> If this rubs some the wrong way I am sorry but let us be honest in
> this. I decided to move up to Intermediate and have yet to make a
> meet in that class. Who does it serve for me to judge Advanced at
> my first contest as a freshly minted Intermediate pilot? Not me and
> not those I would have to judge.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Keith Black
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 8:00
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Nats registration
>
> Since no one else will stick out their neck, I will. Mark is 100%
> correct.
>
> The problem has nothing to do with class, intelligence or ability,
> just experience. Not all, but most, intermediate pilots are simply
> so new to pattern that they don't know everything to look for. This
> is why in most cases FAI judges give out lower scores than
> intermediate judges. Not because FAI judges are meaner or more
> conceited, but because they notice more. One could argue that it
> doesn't matter as long as scores are consistent, but this just
> isn't the case. When judges notice fewer things, like Mark's
> example of the snap below, scores begin to rise and it's more
> difficult for pilots to distinguish themselves. For example, pilot
> A and B both fly the 45 degree down snap centering and stopping it
> perfectly, but pilot A didn't match the entry and exit radius (very
> easy to miss for pilot and judge). If a judge does not notice this
> then pilot B is penalized and though he performed better on paper
> he wasn't able to distinguish himself. As a contestant this can be
> extremely frustrating.
>
> Frankly, there's so much going on in our flights that it's pretty
> much impossible to catch every altitude difference, centering
> difference, radius difference, wind correction, etc. To expect they
> guy that's just moved from Sportsman to do so is really unreasonable.
>
> So, am I against Intermediate or Sportsman judges at local
> contests? No, they need the experience and judging can teach a
> pilot so much! It's well worth the occasional round that may not be
> spot on in judging to get these guys experience because in a few
> years THEY will be writing this email.
>
> If your an Intermediate or Sportsman pilot that's competed in fewer
> than about 15 to 20 contests and this pisses you off all I can say
> what every parent tells their kids, in a few years you'll
> understand, there's really nothing to argue about. And though it
> seems so, I'm not trying to be condescending.
>
> Keith
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mark Atwood
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 3:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Nats registration
>
> Again, I simply have to agree to disagree. Don’t 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 that’s 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 I’m 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, it’s 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 “smooth”, with less wind correction, worrying
> less about proper ‘Track’ 45’s than proper attitude 45s..etc. I
> think you’ll find a lot of flyers do the same. Is it right??
> Don’t know...but it’s certainly the reality.
>
> I know I’m disparaging the intermediate judge...I don’t mean to do
> that. Some are extremely good. It’s 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. I’m 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 master’s 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 Ron’s comment...that the CD’s job is to identify
> which of the various pilots are “qualified”...
>
> -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
>
>
> I’m going to simply agree to disagree. Experience in flying,
> helps your experience in judging, IMHO.
>
> I’ll use a few analogies... Chess. I know the rules. I’m 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 “groups” 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 I’ll 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...”He’s going to have to do a better job of
> keeping his knees together and holding the tuck farther in the
> rotation...blah blah blah” and think to yourself HUH?? Did they
> actually SEE that?? And sure enough, in the slow mo...that’s
> EXACTLY what happened. The commentator DIDN’T 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 they’ve been flying
> and judging that class for many years, doesn’t have the experience
> necessary to judge FAI or Masters Real Time. You have to see too
> much, too fast. You can’t 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 you’ll 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20070615/6a82286a/attachment.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list