[NSRCA-discussion] Nats registration

Thu Jun 14 18:49:22 AKDT 2007

Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Nats registrationI agree with Keith and Mark.

Matt. L
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Archie Stafford 
  To: 'NSRCA Mailing List' 
  Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 7:56 PM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Nats registration

  I will agree with Keith and Mark.best analogy I can give is like in sports, guys say the "game slows down" after they figure things out..Same as in pattern.  Things happen so quickly in the upper classes you have to be watching at all times, and don't have time to think "did I just see that?"  on a nasty windy day I've watched my scores get hit because of wind correction. One judge sees it correctly, but more times than not the one with less experience notices the plane rather than and track and their brain says "that can't be right.  You can sit through all the judging seminars in the world, but until the knowledge is applied, it doesn't matter.  Doesn't matter what class they fly.  I know guys that are average pilots that are incredible judges, because they've done it before.  No one is as good a judge as the first flight they see as their 500th.  Just doesn't happen.  If that was the case, then why worry about which judges we send to the world team trials..why not just give everyone a written test and who ever scores the highest must be the best..you guys know that isn't true, that is why we have the software that evaluates judges.  I would be interested to see the results of that software with guys who are judging their first nats and see where they rank among judges.

  Arch

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Keith Black
  Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 7:01 PM
  To: NSRCA Mailing List
  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

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.15/848 - Release Date: 6/13/2007 12:50 PM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070615/8880a6a2/attachment.html 