[NSRCA-discussion] Masters Judging

mike mueller mups1953 at yahoo.com
Thu May 7 05:57:54 AKDT 2009 

 Mark that's a really great way to run the A and B group except the guys that are in 9th that think they could make it to 5th and won't have a chance will be moaning all day. I still prefer just doing the split and treat it as a seperate class. The award thing can be made easy with the color computer printouts using a simple graphic programs and a simple frame. There cheap and I like the picture awards the best. 
 The issue with the current Masters pattern length is something that we have to deal with for the next 2 years. I can't see changing the rules at this point. So we deal with what we have and go on. It's not that big of a deal.
 Question is why do so many pilots prefer flying in Masters instead of FAI?
 Again who cares it's a choice we all have and more gravitate to Masters and that's their right. Argue all you want it will not change what happens.
 I don't want to see a situation where the few have the bear the burden of judging all day. It's not fair and splitting class solves the problem.
 Proper time managemant at contests is a good problem in that it means we have a lot of flyers showing up. Nothing is worse than 15 guys at a contest and having all the time in the world to get in your flights.
 Going to the field to have a good time flying with my best friends, seems like a great concept to me. Man I love this hobby! Mike


--- On Thu, 5/7/09, Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com> wrote:

> From: Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
> Subject: RE: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Judging
> To: "mups1953 at yahoo.com" <mups1953 at yahoo.com>, "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Date: Thursday, May 7, 2009, 8:40 AM
> Mike if you recall we did that one year at the D4 Champs
> with 16 masters pilots, BUT...to get a "Champion"
> we flew 4 rounds of the A and B classes, and then took the
> top 4 from A and the top 4 from B and put them in the
> "Gold" bracket, and the rest in the
> "Silver" and flew rounds 5 and 6, with a carry
> over score from the first 4 rounds.  
> 
> It was sort of like having a finals, but everyone still got
> to fly rounds 5 and 6.  The gold bracket placed 1st through
> 8th, and the silver 9th - 16th.  It worked very well, and I
> didn't get any complaints that I recall.  
> 
> BUT...that only helped with the judging pools.  It did not
> help with the over time management of the contest.  You
> still have a VERY VERY long masters sequence to get through.
>  If we can shave 60 seconds off a flight...that saves over
> 90 minutes in a contest like that.  That's substantial.
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf
> Of mike mueller
> Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 9:33 AM
> To: General pattern discussion
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Judging
> 
> 
>  Hey Anthony. We take the masters group put all the names
> in a hat and pull them out one at a time to form the 2
> groups. Group 1 judges group 2. The pairings are all in the
> luck of the draw. The awards are best done when the CD has
> palques with pictures. Then they have placings for Masters A
> and Masters B made up at the contest. What else can we do
> when over half of the guys showing up locally are in
> masters? So far it's worked well. Mike
> 
> 
> --- On Thu, 5/7/09, Anthony Romano
> <anthonyr105 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > From: Anthony Romano <anthonyr105 at hotmail.com>
> > Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Judging
> > To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> > Date: Thursday, May 7, 2009, 7:32 AM
> > How do you work scoring with two groups in Masters?
> How do
> > all pilots get equal exposure? Two groups seems like
> the
> > best solution.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Anthony
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > > Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 09:23:55 -0700
> > > From: mups1953 at yahoo.com
> > > To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org;
> > atwoodm at paragon-inc.com
> > > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Length of 2011
> Masters
> > Sequence
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Mark we have plans for splitting Masters into 2
> groups
> > around here. Anything else is a disaster. Mike
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- On Tue, 5/5/09, Atwood, Mark
> > <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > From: Atwood, Mark
> > <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
> > > > Subject: RE: [NSRCA-discussion] Length of
> 2011
> > Masters Sequence
> > > > To: "General pattern discussion"
> > <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>,
> > "mups1953 at yahoo.com"
> <mups1953 at yahoo.com>
> > > > Date: Tuesday, May 5, 2009, 10:57 AM
> > > > Hear Hear!!
> > > > 
> > > > I love flying long sequences...hate judging
> them.
> > There
> > > > needs to be a balance. Not just for the sake
> of
> > the judges,
> > > > but also to accommodate the length of the
> > contest. 
> > > > 
> > > > At a big D4/D5 contest we'll usually
> have 5-6
> > FAI
> > > > pilots and 15 or 16 masters pilots.
> Currently the
> > masters
> > > > pattern is a MINIMUM of 10 minutes per pilot
> > (maybe not in
> > > > the air, but you have to really have people
> on
> > their toes to
> > > > even get 6 flights in an hour). With 16
> masters
> > pilots,
> > > > that's 2 hours and 40 minutes of flying
> per
> > round if
> > > > you're humpin'. Six rounds means 16
> hours
> > of
> > > > flying for JUST masters guys. Assuming you
> have 2
> > lines,
> > > > that means one of those lines is dedicated
> to
> > Masters for
> > > > the entire contest AND assume you have 16
> hours
> > to fly.
> > > > 
> > > > We never have 16 hours to fly. Rarely can we
> get
> > people to
> > > > stay until 6pm on Sunday (9am - 6pm with a
> lunch
> > break both
> > > > days) and most fields have the sun in the
> box
> > either in the
> > > > morning or afternoon which shortens the
> flying
> > day even
> > > > more.
> > > > 
> > > > Now add to those woes that you only have 5-6
> FAI
> > guys
> > > > judging. You need 32 man hours of judging,
> so
> > even if you
> > > > mix in a group of Advanced flyers it's a
> > loooong time in
> > > > the chair.
> > > > 
> > > > Bottom line, regardless of whether it's
> P-09
> > (probably
> > > > not a good choice at this point) or a home
> brewed
> > > > pattern...it needs to follow the FAI trend
> of
> > getting a
> > > > little shorter. 
> > > > 
> > > > My .02
> > > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From:
> nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> > > >
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]
> > On Behalf
> > > > Of Archie Stafford
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 11:38 AM
> > > > To: mups1953 at yahoo.com; 'General pattern
> > > > discussion'
> > > > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Length of
> 2011
> > Masters
> > > > Sequence
> > > > 
> > > > Verne,
> > > > 
> > > > This started when I suggested to the
> sequence
> > committee
> > > > that we need to
> > > > shorten the masters pattern. Flying it is
> fine,
> > but I
> > > > think we need to take
> > > > into account the guys who have to sit and
> judge
> > it. I
> > > > heard several guys in
> > > > FAI judging this weekend about how long a
> > sequence it is. 
> > > > Which wouldn't be
> > > > near as bad except for the fact Masters is
> > usually the
> > > > largest class at most
> > > > contests. I think we need to consider the
> length
> > of time
> > > > in the judges
> > > > chair for those that have to judge it as
> well.
> > > > 
> > > > Arch
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From:
> nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> > > >
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]
> > On Behalf
> > > > Of mike mueller
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 10:31 AM
> > > > To: General pattern discussion
> > > > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Length of
> 2011
> > Masters
> > > > Sequence
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > The current pattern puts E. guys at a bit of
> a
> > > > disadvantage. It pushes my
> > > > setup a little further than I prefer. It is
> a
> > great pattern
> > > > and I compliment
> > > > the designers for having a nice flow. Mike
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- On Tue, 5/5/09, verne at twmi.rr.com
> > > > <verne at twmi.rr.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > From: verne at twmi.rr.com
> > <verne at twmi.rr.com>
> > > > > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Length
> of
> > 2011 Masters
> > > > Sequence
> > > > > To: "General pattern
> discussion"
> > > > <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> > > > > Date: Tuesday, May 5, 2009, 10:24 AM
> > > > > If it sounded as though I were
> complaining
> > that the
> > > > current
> > > > > Masters schedule takes too long, I
> > wasn't. Just
> > > > > commenting that it takes a lot longer
> than
> > the
> > > > previous one.
> > > > > For me, eight minutes from takeoff to
> > landing approach
> > > > (my
> > > > > timer is started on takeoff and is
> almost
> > always
> > > > beeping
> > > > > during my landing). I fly at what I
> would
> > call a
> > > > medium
> > > > > speed most of the time. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm also against flying the FAI-P
> > schedule.
> > > > I'd
> > > > > rather fly a home-grown variant that we
> > create
> > > > ourselves.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Verne Koester
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > ---- Stuart Chale
> > <schale at optonline.net> wrote: 
> > > > > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> > > > > > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> 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
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >
> _______________________________________________
> > > > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> > > > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> > > >
> >
> 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
> > > > 
> > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> > > > Version: 8.5.285 / Virus Database:
> 270.12.17/2095
> > - Release
> > > > Date: 05/04/09 06:00:00
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> > > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> > >
> >
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> > 
> >
> _________________________________________________________________
> > Hotmail(r) goes with you. 
> >
> http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Mobile?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_Mobile1_052009_______________________________________________
> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> >
> 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
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 8.5.285 / Virus Database: 270.12.19/2099 - Release
> Date: 05/07/09 05:57:00

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list