[NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement

Wed May 13 13:36:19 AKDT 2009

Anthony,

You could earn 15-20 points a year, every year of your life and never point out.

Here's the rule:

8.2.3: The accumulated points for required class advancement will be based on a sliding scale of 4 years time. Advancement points acquired before the fourth (4) year will not count towards advancement. In other words, a contestant’s point accumulation is based on the total accumulation for his/her previous four (4) years of competition. 

Hope that helps!

:-)

JLK

Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 14:18:01 -0700
From: aabdu at sbcglobal.net
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement

Just for clarification, my point wasn't that I want to move back to intermediate. it was to illustrate a scenario where forced advancement would be an issue. 
For example; if I earned 5 to 10 points a year finishing fourth or fifth or worse while going to grad school or or changing jobs or whatever life circumstances get in the way of living, I could potentially accumulate enough points over they years to point out of advanced. Being forced to move up to masters at that point would effectively put me out of pattern.

Here is the irony of the current system; during most of my hiatus/partial retirement from pattern, I have had a reasonably competitive pattern plane at my disposal but no time for serious practice, all the while someone on this list, (who shall remain nameless) was busting my chops about not going to contests for the sheer joy of coming in near the bottom but enjoying the atmosphere. Part of the reason I didn't go was for fear of being just good enough to earn enough points over my grad school years to point out of advanced without ever having mastered any of the techniques necessary to safely move to masters. So it can reasonably be said that forced advancement kept me from competing.

Of the chop busting list member, his name rhymes with Ark Matwood!

I wonder how many points Tom Weedon has? If he comes to the shoot out this year we will have to make sure we register him for masters :o)

--- On Wed, 5/13/09, Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com> wrote:

From: Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Wednesday, May 13, 2009, 3:33 PM

I’m not really arguing with you on that point.  There’s little need to change more than once a season.  Like I said, there’s little need to change period.  This only happens once in a while.  So seldom in fact, I just feel that there’s no need for a rule at all.  Rather than try to anticipate all the likely scenarios that may or may not occur, just let people fly what they want to fly, and see what happens.  I think you’ll find that the VAST VAST majority do nothing different than today, a few will do as you suggest…change the class they’re in for the season.  But there could be some odd circumstance that warrants something different.    Is this “Sport” so critical to anyone that we need to legislate against it??  

Like I said earlier…it’s working well for FAI/Masters.  Fewer rules are better in my opinion and this is one that’s just not needed.  

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Richard Lewis
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 3:23 PM
To: aabdu at sbcglobal.net; General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement

You're supposed to go from winning Intermediate to bringing up the rear in Advanced, that's the basic idea of moving up.  If everyone stayed in Intermediate until they could win Advanced, then we'd be arguing to keep forced advancement......Do you want/need to go back to Intermediate?  If the rule was that you had to fly a declared class or higher for a season, how would circumstances of life changes over "5 or 6 seasons" come into play.....Without forced advancement, you could start the season in Sporstman every year if you need to.....I'm still not sure what scenarios could occur within a single 5 or 6 month contest season that would necessitate someone moving from Advanced to back to Sportsman in the middle of that season.

If you've practiced all winter 3-4 times a week in Advanced, flown two contests, and then change jobs, or lose an airplane mid-season and can no longer practice regulary, is anyone going to move back to Intermediate?  Sequences only change in the off-season, not sure why that would cause anyone to have to move down during a single season?  If I flew Masters last year, and was scared to fly a new Masters sequence for some reason, then I could declare for Advanced in the upcoming season....

Richard

From: Anthony Abdullah <aabdu at sbcglobal.net>
To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 1:40:34 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement

Gotta agree with Mark on that one. I went from winning the district championship in Intermediate to bringing up the rear in Advanced. Other than being a hack of a pilot it was a matter of circumstance. I started and finished graduate school, we lost my primary and conveniently located flying field, I changed jobs, and then when I thought I was all set for a great come back year, I lost my primary competition plane early in the spring. This was all over the course of 5 or 6 seasons and the sequence changed at least once during that time. 

Mind you, I have not quite pointed out of advanced but I can certainly understand how a change in circumstances can change a person's ability to be competitive in a certain class.

Anthony

NSRCA #759

--- On Wed, 5/13/09, Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com> wrote:

From: Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement
To: "'nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Wednesday, May 13, 2009, 12:27 PM
Has this caused a problem beteen FAI and Masters?  People are free to move aboutthere and it works well.  I doubt there would be constant movement.   Regarding moving back, it has less to do ith ability or age (though those areboth factors) than situation.  Simply changing jobs can take you from being ableto practice 3-4 times a week, to 3-4 time a summer. Add a new sequence to thatmix and suddenly your ability to participate in the higher class is gone.   I just don't see the problems with movement. There's so little inFAI/Masters that's its
 hard to believe there would be a lot in lowerclasses. --------------------------Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld    ----- Original Message -----From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org<nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>Sent: Wed May 13 12:12:56 2009Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement  I disagree that we should make it so that people can move from class-to-classon a contest-by-contest basis.  If we remove forced advancement, then weelimitate the problem of people being forced into a class they feel they are notready for.  That, by itself, solves the problem that may cause someone to"need" or "want" to move back a class
 after"trying" it out and finding they are not "ready" (meaningthey cannot win it on the first try????).  Folks will know if they are ready tofly the next level, the sequences are not secret and can be practiced/flown byanyone on their own time.  In order to cause them to consider their decisioncarefully, they should be required to stay a minimum of a season in their chosenclass (move up if they like, not down)...If after that seaon, they want toswallow their pride and move back, so be it....a season, even in the southerndistricts is only 5 or 6 contests at most for most pilots. Now if we are considering an older flyer who may not have the skills/ability tocompete in Masters any longer, that's a different story, and what I'veread and heard from MAsters pilots, once a person flies for some time as
 aMasters pilot, they are just not gonna swallow their pride and move back toIntermediate, no matter how easy it may be... If we are considering the flier who tops out at Advanced and want to stay therepermanently.  No forcred advancment solve that one too....     _____    From: "Atwood, Mark" <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 9:26:50 AMSubject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement      I’m in favor of it being a guideline, but I don’t think that verbiagebelongs in the rule book.  That’s best left for the NSRCA web site or someother medium to describe.     As for moving down, that’s sort of the whole point.  To allow people tochoose where they want to fly, up or down the classes as their time, skill, etcallows.   By nature you have to be competitive to enjoy this facet of the hobby. If you find yourself in a situation where you are no longer competitive,(again, lack of time, money, skill, etc) then most will simply get frustratedand quit.  I’d much prefer to see someone take a step backward, and continueto have a rewarding experience, than to lose them from the sport.           From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ron HansenSent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 7:01 AMTo: 'General pattern
 discussion'Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement     I’m in favor of making advancement a guideline.  Perhaps we need to coveradvancement as part of good sportsmanship and maybe include the ability for thedistrict to vote on whether someone is abusing the absence of a mandatoryadvancement rule.  For example, leave it to the discretion of the District VP ora majority vote of the district members.  If the district decides someone needsto move up the competitor would have the option to stay where he or she is andnot qualify for prizes and district points or move up at the end of the year.     What about the ability to move down?  For example, someone tries Masters forone or two contests and then decides they are still not
 ready and wants to moveback down.  Do the current rules properly address this?     Ron     -----Original Message-----From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Ofronlock at comcast.netSent: Monday, May 11, 2009 8:12 PMTo: General pattern discussionSubject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement     Years ago when the Sportsman sequence was rather short, some CD's weredoing the sequence twice.   A rule was written to codify the practice, andprovide suggested procedures on exit/entry between the sequences, and handlescoring of one take off & landing, but two sequences.  It's still in
 thebook,  para 14.8.   Given current length of Sportsman sequence, it's rarelyused.  Ron Lockhart  ----- Original Message -----From: "Bill's Email" <wemodels at cox.net>To: "General pattern discussion"<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 7:37:29 PM (GMT-0500) Auto-DetectedSubject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement  Snaproll4 at aol.com wrote:   CD's used to have the ability to have Sportsman fly twice which isn'tin the rule book.  They now can have an Expert class which isn't in the rulebook.  Can CD's suspend the advancement rule?  Just thinking out loud.     Steve   Interesting question. The AMA
 gives CDs broad powers to waive rules as they seefit, but those usually pertain to the safe operation of a contest. The caveat isthat the CD must publish any variations within 30 days of the event and it isbest to list them in the sanction application. Changes can be made on the spotdue to weather, etc., but it would be hard to see how advancement fits intothat. So I suspect taht it would be difficult for a CD to do waht you suggest.What a CD could do I suppose is to allow a certain individual to fly a lowerclass, but again, that might be a stretch.        _______________________________________________ NSRCA-discussion mailing listNSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.orghttp://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion      __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signaturedatabase 4065 (20090511) __________  The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.  http://www.eset.com  No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> Version: 8.5.285 / Virus Database: 270.12.27/2112 - Release Date: 05/13/0907:04:00  No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.285 / Virus Database: 270.12.27/2112 - Release Date: 05/13/0907:04:00    _______________________________________________NSRCA-discussion mailing
 listNSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.orghttp://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: 270.12.27/2112 - Release Date: 05/13/09 07:04:00

_______________________________________________
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/20090513/81d61598/attachment.html>