[NSRCA-discussion] Matrix improvements

Mon Aug 3 09:57:16 AKDT 2009

Seeding would be very critical in this just like seeding is critical in the
current matrix system as well.  I'll give you a good example... had Glen
Watson showed up wouldn't that have affected some pilots in his group?  With
Glen not being there that group became an "easy" group and the normalized
scores reflected that relative to the other groups.  I'm not trying to
diminish anyone's flying efforts here but I think the ED should adjust the
flying groups based on attendance if necessary in order to level the playing
field for everyone.

On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Mark Hunt <flyintexan at att.net> wrote:

>  I too would like to see an article on this.  No offense, but initially it
> is unclear to me how this would give any better exposure of pilots to the
> same judges/conditions than the current matrix system allows for.  Would
> seeding not become even more critical in this scenario?
> Mark
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* Anthony Romano <anthonyr105 at hotmail.com>
> *To:* nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> *Sent:* Monday, August 3, 2009 11:56:34 AM
> *Subject:* [NSRCA-discussion] Matrix improvements
>
> Maybe Jerry could detail this in a Kfactor article. Perhaps could be
> used at locals to help with an oversized Masters group.
>
> Anthony
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 15:45:19 -0700
> From: derekkoopowitz at gmail.com
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Flash Poll - Relocate the Nats in 2010?
>
> Jerry Budd had a good suggestion in running 4 mini-contests for 6 rounds
> where each pilot would fly against their group for 6 straight rounds and
> then the top 3 from each group would fly in the finals.  I'm leaning toward
> this because the current format does not work.  We also need to do something
> about FAI - because there isn't equal exposure there either.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:41 PM, John Fuqua <johnfuqua at embarqmail.com>wrote:
>
> Every Nats I went to that had all events in 2 weeks ended up screwing
> Pattern out of time or space.  It never failed.  I am against it even
> thought I liked to go see other events.  We cannot do a first rate job when
> we compete for runway space and days to fly.
>
> I thought AMA wanted to reduce Nats costs.  Moving them around does not do
> that if you look at history and read up you will find a consistent comment
> about reducing Nats costs.  NPAC was fully funded by the pilots and it cost
> more than a typical Nats so factor that in.
>
> No one has addressed the equal exposure to judges issues for the current
> format yet and Mike's proposal does not correct that situation for Masters.
> I had one person suggest to me that if we continue to use the Matrix system
> that we take the top 3 pilots from each "Group" to a 3 round finals.  At
> least then we have equal judging exposure and more or less equal weather
> exposure per round.
>
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>  [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Tony
> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 2:56 PM
> To: 'General pattern discussion'
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Flash Poll - Relocate the Nats in 2010?
>
> That is a possibility also.  AMA is thinking about returning the NATS to a
> 2
> week all-events NATS like used to be done.  If all events are together, HQ
> can put all costs into one effort.  If they are all split up, Each group
> would have more costs to deal with due to the fact that HQ can't send a
> group of people to every site.
>
>
>
> Tony Stillman, President
>
> Radio South, Inc.
>
> 139 Altama Connector, Box 322
>
> Brunswick, GA  31525
>
> 1-800-962-7802
>
> www.radiosouthrc.com
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Tim Taylor
> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 3:39 PM
> To: General pattern discussion
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Flash Poll - Relocate the Nats in 2010?
>
>
>
> It was done, It was called NPAC
>
>
>
> Tim
>
> --- On Thu, 7/30/09, Bill's Email <wemodels at cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>        From: Bill's Email <wemodels at cox.net>
>        Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Flash Poll - Relocate the Nats in
> 2010?
>        To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>        Date: Thursday, July 30, 2009, 2:06 PM
>
>        Why not allow the SIGS to do their own thing? IMAC and NSRCA do not
> need to share a site. The LSF can find a site for the soaring NATS. Pylon
> knows what venues work for them and so on. FF can do their own thing as
> well. Why tie soaring and FF together and so on??
>
>
>        Tony wrote:
>
>        Matt:
>        Yes, it is just difficult to tell if it is actually feasible.  The
> problem is that it requires a large site for Pattern/Pylon/IMAC and will
> require another large site for Soaring/Outdoor FF.  It may be very
> difficult
> to actually find places that can handle this group.
>
>
>
>
>
>        Tony Stillman, President
>
>        Radio South, Inc.
>
> 139 Altama Connector, Box 322
>
> Brunswick, GA   31525
>
>  1-800-962-7802
>
> www.radiosouthrc.com <http://www.radiosouthrc.com/>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
>
>
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> <
> http://us.mc623.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.o
> rg>
>  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
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you. Try BingT now.<http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MSHYCB_BackToSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20090803/f30050d1/attachment.html>