[NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format

Thu Jul 30 05:41:46 AKDT 2009

I also like Mike's proposal.  One option on the banquet is to have it on
Opening day.  This could serve as the Pilots meeting as well.  

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 Atwood, Mark
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 9:30 AM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format

There in lies the rub.

I think MANY would stay if there was a reason to stay.   I'd love to see the
Nat's start on a Wed, and finish on Saturday (I know.the AMA dictates the
schedule), but that would take some of the job/vacation pressure off trying
to get home right away.

If day 3 scores were NOT posted ('cept to announce the finalists.and that
would just be names, not scores), and there was a serious "event" following
Finals day, I think MANY would stay as that would end the Nationals for
everyone.

The Final evening would be a party.  Dinner, awards, raffle, etc.  No one
needs to practice, everyone leaves town in the morning.  

As it stands now, we all depart over a period of 3 days.  FAI starts to
depart on day 2 if we miss the semi-finals.  Int/Adv all leave on day 3
along with FAI and Masters that miss the cut, the finalists depart either on
Day 4, or many stay the night and leave on day 5.

In addition to not having any real celebration (especially for the winners)
we also lose all of our help.  Both formal and informal.  Yes, we're low on
judges, but pilots lose their callers and helpers.  

If a LOT of people needed to stay (those involved in the finals, flying,
judging, scoring, helping with the banquet, whatever) even more people would
stay to participate.  And you would simply plan for it.  The Nats would be
thought of as a 4 day event and people would schedule that.   As it stands
now, it varies based on how well you fly.

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of John Konneker
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 8:56 AM
To: Discussion List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format

Good ideas!
I've flown both Intermediate and Advanced at the Nats and I like the idea of
a finals added for those two classes...
a lot!
I also like the idea of having the banquet at the end of the Nats.  It
really would be a party then!
;-)
To play the devil's advocate...
How many more than the final eight for those classes would stay for that
last evening?
JLK

  _____  

From: atwoodm at paragon-inc.com
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 08:39:21 -0400
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format

I'll let other chime in on the masters /FAI stuff, but I'd like to add to
Mikes comment on Advanced and say we should add both an Advanced Finals, as
well as an Intermediate Finals.  Reduce the finalists to 8, and you'll have
time to fit both in on Site 4 on Finals day.    All the same motivations,
and it keeps more people around for the last day.  

I'd really like to see ALL classes finish up on the same day.   IF that day
can be a Friday, or a Saturday.I'd like to see the Banquet CLOSE the event
rather than be in the middle.

I think it would be great if every planned to stay that last day to see
everyone fly, to help with the final judging, and have a party at the end to
celebrate everyone's success.  

As it stands now, the only consolidated social event comes on the evening
that everyone is MOST concerned about getting in a few rounds of practice.
We're forced to choose between spending quality time with friends we only
get to see once a year, or practicing to do our best in THE competition of
the year that we've spent all year prepping for.  For FAI, it's getting a
flight or two up on the F pattern.  In the other classes.it's your last
chance to make the finals. 

It's a little messed up.

Thoughts??

-Mark

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of michael s
harrison
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 8:30 AM
To: 'General pattern discussion'
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

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.375 / Virus Database: 270.13.27/2258 - Release Date: 07/29/09
18:07:00

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.375 / Virus Database: 270.13.27/2258 - Release Date: 07/29/09
18:07:00

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090730/729f1383/attachment.html>