[NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format

Fri Jul 31 06:52:15 AKDT 2009

Agree for FAI - part of the reason the F-09 is flown for the semi's and the
4 rounds are flown for the finals is because this is the system that will
best prepare the FAI pilots for the WC.  The level at which the F is flown
by the top pilots often warrants a closer look for the top 8 (vs the top 20
in the semi finals).

We all pay the same entry fee, so why is it some get to fly more than
others?  Valid question, not unlike why don't Intermediate, Sportsman, and
Advanced get as much airtime per flight as Masters.  I'd point out that in
most competitive events, there are classes which are graded in experience
(skill) required, the performance level/requirements of the equipment, and
often the time needed to complete the event.  It only makes sense that
sequences get gradually more difficult, longer, and require higher
performance equipment.  F3A, being driven by the WC, has understandably
reduced the sequence length due to time considerations at the WC.  The
structure of the flying at the NATs is to pick the best, and it is not the
same for all classes because of the differences in the classes (one size
does not fit all).

Why is there a finals (and semi finals) for F3A at the US NATs?  Several
reasons -

- With the often large number of pilots, several unequal conditions do or
may exist - weather variations, site variations, and the matrix system may
be used (which does not provide equal exposure amongst competing pilots).
So the goal of the prelims is too make sure that those that have a
reasonable shot at winning are included in the group that makes it out of
the prelims (the actual placing of the pilots leaving the prelims is not the
primary goal of the prelims) into the semifinals where the unequal
conditions are eliminated/reduced (possible because of the smaller number of
pilots in the semifinals).

- the semifinals are used to ensure that all finalists are capable of flying
the F sequence (this was added several years ago, based on experience, and
as voted on by the FAI pilots - many of who realized adding the semifinals
would reduce their personal flying time).

- the finals are to pick the best of the best - the skill level in F3A at
the US NATs is high enough that it is extremely difficult to distinguish the
top pilots on the P schedule alone.

Why is there a finals for Masters at the US NATs?

- With the often large number of pilots, several unequal conditions do or
may exist - weather variations, site variations, and the matrix system may
be used (which does not provide equal exposure amongst competing pilots).
So the goal of the prelims is too make sure that those that have a
reasonable shot at winning are included in the group that makes it out of
the prelims.

- In the finals, all pilots fly within a small time window, and the chances
of unequal conditions are greatly reduced, and it is much easier for a judge
to accurately judge and rank 8 pilots.

- The finals in Masters is often very close, with the winners capable of
flying F3A P at a similar level.  I believe Masters pilots are flying
Masters, in part, because they don't want to be burdened by flying 2
schedules (F3A P and F) and unknowns.  So, the Masters finals ends up being
very close some years.

- No scores from the prelims should be carried forward to the finals.  The
matrix system does not have equal exposure and does impart a degree of bias
to the results.  This bias is best left to the prelims, and not brought
forward to the finals.

Why is there not a finals in Intermediate and Advanced?

- Because the first 6 rounds of flying occur within a relatively small
window, at the same site, so the probability of unequal conditions (poor
weather in part of a round) are greatly reduced.

- the smaller number of flyers and reduced judging time increases the
accuracy of pilot ranking for the group as a whole.

- The majority of years, the depth of flying is not enough to warrant a
finals for a "closer" look, and additional rounds are not going to change
the result (unlike Masters and F3A where placings pretty routinely change).

The added detail of the finals for Masters and semifinals/finals for F3A has
everything to do with picking the best pilot out of larger groups with more
pilot depth - in essence, a closer look is needed.  It has nothing to do
with screwing the Intermediate and Advanced pilots out of flying time,
prestige, or glory.  It has nothing to do with feeding the ego of the
Masters or F3A pilots.

So far as the banquet and awards ceremony (and announcement of semi
finalists and finalists).  It would be nice to have a large audience for the
presentation of trophies/awards to all pilots for all classes, and for the
announcement of semi finalists and finalists - BUT - the logistics just
don't support that.  In the years I've attended the NATs, I've gotten my
award at packed banquets, and in the middle of the field with a handful of
people left.  My suggestion would be hold the banquet when the largest
turnout will occur, and let the awards/announcements fall where they may.
Bias the banquet to give the crowds and glory to the Intermediate and
Advanced pilots - more people have a better shot at getting a NATs award "on
the way up" than they do in Masters or F3A (which are never attained by
some).

Regards,

Dave Lockhart

  _____  

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of J Shu
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 8:54 AM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format

I prefer to leave FAI alone and leave it as a 4 round finals. Besides, the
rules state it to be flown this way.

I do like the addition of the Advanced/Intermediate finals.

Regards,
Jason
www.shulmanaviation.com
www.composite-arf.com

----- Original Message ----- 

From: michael s <mailto:drmikedds at sbcglobal.net>  harrison 

To: 'General pattern discussion' <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>  

Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 8:29 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/20090731/cc9ebcb9/attachment.html>