[NSRCA-discussion] D3 Championship

[McLaughlin, Ryan (FRS.JAX)]

I didn't want you to stand alone in this...it's too important.

	-----Original Message-----
	From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Woodward,
Jim
	Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 1:31 PM
	To: NSRCA Mailing List
	Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] D3 Championship
	
	
	

	Ryan M.,

	

	I think this takes the cake as a first time nsrca-list email.
Thank you for the support.

	Jim W.

	

	
	 
	CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any
attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and proprietary information.  Any unauthorized
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not
the intended recipient(s), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy all copies of the original message. 
	
	 
	
	
  _____  

	
	

	From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of
McLaughlin, Ryan (FRS.JAX)
	Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 1:19 PM
	To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
	Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] D3 Championship

	

	This is my first post to the NSRCA list as I am a bit 'internet
shy', but I thought I might be able to add some value to the FAI judging
discussion Jim W started.  Although I tend to err on the side of
diplomacy : ), I believe the feelings Jim expressed are legitimate and
shared by many FAI competitors throughout the country.  As a long time
participant, I realize that bias is not a new problem but I do not think
we should accept this is as a "fact of life" and move on.  I think we
have an excellent opportunity here and we should make the most of it.

	The primary issue to address in my opinion is not disparity in
judging standards between judges, though as Earl points out, this is
important.  Rather, it is the different standard applied to pilots
within one score set--i.e.. scoring a pilot lower or higher based on who
he is.  Our penchant for creating "superstars" is the most discouraging
aspect of FAI competition.  To remedy this, we must all make a conscious
decision to change a long established tradition in our sport.  Are we
ready to take this on?

	Complaining isn't the answer and neither is staying quiet, a
mistake that has made the FAI competitors as responsible as anyone else
for the situation.  To this end, I submit for your review the following
ideas to specifically target the FAI bias issue:

	

	1. Sacrifice one FAI round per contest to serve as an "open"
round for all contestants expected to judge FAI during the event.  Allow
everyone to compare notes and use this as a coaching opportunity.

	2.  Drop one FAI pilot to Masters at each contest to serve as a
judge for all rounds and use volunteers from other classes to serve as
the others.  This would have to be an agreement made among FAI pilots.

	3.  Extend the pilots meeting to go over specific issues, maybe
a new one or two every meet rather than just pointing out the landing
zone, etc.  Make a "mini" judging seminar mandatory each contest.

	4.  Certify judges for FAI on a volunteer basis and only use
"certified" judges in the contest. 

	5.  Utilize peer judging, in other words, have FAI pilots judge
themselves.  If a pilot is not flying, he is judging his fellow
competitors.

	

	Some of this may seem radical, but I believe there is room for a
bit of this.  Pattern belongs to us right?  I welcome any ideas or
critique anyone can offer.  I will clarify any of the above upon
request.

	Thank you for your consideration. 

	

	Ryan McLaughlin 
	Eustis, Florida 

	

	
  _____  


	This message w/attachments (message) may be privileged,
confidential or proprietary, and if you are not an intended recipient,
please notify the sender, do not use or share it and delete it. Unless
specifically indicated, this message is not an offer to sell or a
solicitation of any investment products or other financial product or
service, an official confirmation of any transaction, or an official
statement of Merrill Lynch. Subject to applicable law, Merrill Lynch may
monitor, review and retain e-communications (EC) traveling through its
networks/systems. The laws of the country of each sender/recipient may
impact the handling of EC, and EC may be archived, supervised and
produced in countries other than the country in which you are located.
This message cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. This
message is subject to terms available at the following link:
http://www.ml.com/e-communications_terms/. By messaging with Merrill
Lynch you consent to the foregoing.

	
  _____  


	

	

	

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20071017/1832e8af/attachment.html