[NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format

[Earl Haury]

I support Mike's proposal! While a good deal of this has been discussed from time to time, Mike's taken the time to think it through and present a concise format. Good job!

I suppose the support for a finals for Intermediate will vary - the folks taking on the Nats the first time or two are exhausted after the current Intermediate format. Probably the "pro" Intermediate folks favor a finals. Maybe an incentive to move to Advanced?

The banquet item is difficult, it's interferes with practice during the event and no one would stay after the finals if the menu was prime rib. As the whole Nats is also a big social event, maybe it isn't necessary? 

Earl
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: michael s harrison 
  To: 'General pattern discussion' 
  Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 7:29 AM
  Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format


   

   

  From: michael s harrison [mailto:drmikedds at sbcglobal.net] 
  Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 3:45 PM
  To: 'Don Ramsey'
  Subject: nats format

   

  After considerable thought and reflection, I would like to share my views of the nats and the classes flown.  I believe we have been very fortunate to have an excellent group of volunteers that work and sacrifice to make the nats happen.  That group is led by the event director Dave Guerin, who has worked tirelessly and unselfishly for years at this job.  I believe he has responded to our desires to make this the best national event possible.  With that in mind, there are some changes I believe we can make that would be a win-win for everyone and reduce the workload as well. 

   

  They are:

  1.      Have a finals for advanced

  a.      8 finalists

  b.      3 rounds

  c.      Judged by advanced or intermediate judges(qualified volunteers)

  d.      The site is open so it is not a space issue

  e.      24 flights would take app 3 hours

  f.       Do on 4th day

  g.      Count the prelims as a 1000 normalized score

  h.      Count 3 of 4 scores for the winner

  2.      Modify masters accordingly

  a.      3 round finals

  b.      Count prelims as a 1000 normalized score

  c.      Count 3 of 4 for the winner

  d.      10 finalists

  e.      30 flights about 5.5 hours

  3.      Fai

  a.      3 rounds final

  b.      F-11 flown 1 time

  c.      Each unknown(1&2) flown once

  d.      Count the semi-final F-11 scores only as a single 1000 normalized score

  e.      Count 3 of 4 for the winner

  f.       10 finalists

  g.      30 flights about 5.5 hours

   

  Rationale behind changes:

   

  Advanced 

  This would make for a very exciting and fun event for the advanced class.  It would make the 4th day a very real part of the nats for them.  This format is totally self contained with no additional personnel required.  It could be started and finished before the masters and fai is done.  

   

  Masters 

  Masters is in a real sense an endurance contest.  How many times does someone have to fly the same sequence to prove he is the best in that class.  The present system is 10 times!  The only argument is the equal exposure issue-which may have merit.   The system I propose addresses that issue and takes less time.  I raised the number of finalists to 10 to close the argument that someone is cutout of the finals because of unequal exposure.  Counting the prelim as one of the 4 scores is, in my opinion a legitimate score to keep-having been earned over a period of 3 days under a number of variables.  Assuming incorrect scoring(bias, unequal exposure, etc.), the competitor has 3 flights to erase that concern.  Any 3 flights count so the prelims score can be dropped.  

   

  FAI

  The argument for doing 2 Finals pattern is that at the world event in the semifinals, there is not equal exposure of the pilots and the pool is so large that conditions can change substantially over the course of doing the semifinals.  This rationale wouldn't apply at the nats.  The semifinals at the nats is only 2 flights with 20 pilots, using the prelim score as a 1000 normalized score.  Therefore, the 2 F patterns can be combined to be a score carried over into the finals event.  The finals then becomes a single F pattern and 2 unknowns.  Count 3 of 4 scores.   I would recommend doing the F schedule first, then the 2 unknowns.  I believe all the other pilots would love to see FAI unknown finals flown by some of the best pilots in the world. It would be a showcase event.  

   

  To conclude:

   

  I believe this is a win-win for everyone.  We would add finals to advanced; both the Masters and FAI finals would be shortened; the best pilots would be showcased; more pilots would be in the finals; fewer personnel to do the finals.  

  There is no perfect system.  I am sure there will be objections of some kind, but I believe this system has real merit and should be implemented. 

   

  Respectfully

  Mike Harrison



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


  _______________________________________________
  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/20090730/5a38fdda/attachment.html>