[NSRCA-discussion] Fwd: Another discussion topic relating to new FAIrules

Tue Jan 31 06:49:16 AKST 2012

Dave, the answer, by your own math, is that a geometrically perfect maneuver can't be beaten purely by other criteria.   With geometry making up 50% of the score, no amount of smoothness can be valued MORE than precision. 

I could also argue that a geometrically "perfect" maneuver would always have at least some level of gracefulness based on that perfect geometry.  They're not completely independent.  

Unfortunately S&G is completely subjective, and as analytical people, we're not too keen on subjectivity.  But that's the nature of the sport.  It's perceived precision, not measured.    Vertical lines at the end of the box don't need to BE vertical, they need to LOOK vertical, etc.   

If we want purely objective scoring... look to racing.  Go fast, bank left, pull.   

Mark Atwood
Paragon Consulting, Inc.  |  President
5885 Landerbrook Drive Suite 130, Cleveland Ohio, 44124 
Phone: 440.684.3101 x102  |  Fax: 440.684.3102
mark.atwood at paragon-inc.com  |  www.paragon-inc.com

On Jan 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, DaveL322 at comcast.net wrote:

There has never been guidance for s+g downgrades in AMA or FAI.....which is why I have always advocated s+g should be eliminated from the judging criteria.  Of course if I am mistaken about the goal of pattern being precision aerobatics, then maybe s+g should be the only criteria.

I've never gotten an answer to this question.  How can a geometrically perfect maneuver be outscored by a geometrically flawed maneuver?  Of course with the new FAI scoring.....it would seem that geometrically perfect maneuver might only be scored a 5.

Regards,

Dave

Sent from my HTC on the Now Network from Sprint!

----- Reply message -----
From: "Ronald Van Putte" <vanputte at cox.net>
Date: Tue, Jan 31, 2012 09:49
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Fwd: Another discussion topic relating to new	FAIrules
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>

After thinking about this further, I wonder how the change in  ranking affects anything.  Positioning has specific downgrades (2 point downgrade for each 1/4 of the maneuver off center).  However, I am unaware of any specific downgrades for smoothness and gracefulness.

Ron Van Putte

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Ronald Van Putte <vanputte at cox.net>
> Date: January 31, 2012 8:24:56 AM CST
> To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Another discussion topic relating to new FAIrules
> Reply-To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> 
> That's interesting.  I know #2. and #3. were in reverse order before.  I don't remember a rules change vote on this.
> 
> Ron Van Putte
> 
> On Jan 31, 2012, at 8:19 AM, Bob Kane wrote:
> 
>> FWIW, this is identical to to the ranking in the AMA Competition regulations:
>>  
>> From the current AMA document (RCA-12):
>>  
>> 1. Precision of the maneuver.
>> 2. Smoothness and gracefulness of the maneuver.
>> 3. Positioning or display of the maneuver.
>> 4. Size or dimensions of the maneuver relative to the maneuvering area, distance from the judges, and other maneuvers in the flight.
>>  
>> The above criteria are listed in order of importance; however, all of them must be met for a maneuver to be rated perfect.
>>  
>> Bob Kane getterflash at yahoo.com
>> From: J N Hiller <jnhiller at earthlink.net>
>> To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> 
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 3:51 AM
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Another discussion topic relating to new FAIrules
>> 
>> I would have thought positioning rated a higher precision aerobatics. Smoothness and gracefulness is polish.
>> Jim
>>  
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of tocdon at netscape.net
>> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 6:06 PM
>> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Another discussion topic relating to new FAIrules
>>  
>> This will keep the list going (and the discussions too).  I recall Michael Ramel clearly discussing the future of the rules during the judges training at the World Championships at Muncie.  This was relating to smoothness and gracefulness being directly related to constant speed.  The following reflects what he discussed, as cited on page 35, and effect the way a score is awarded:
>>  
>> Geometry:  50%
>> Smoothness and Gracefulness: 25%
>> Position of maneuver: 12.5%
>> Size of maneuver: 12.5%
>> Proportion of the maneuver outside the (box) in addition to above.
>>  
>> The specific, objective criteria used to judge smoothness and gracefulness includes, "maintaining constant speed throughout various maneuver components, like climbing and decending sections..."
>>  
>> Also the sentence about radii being very loose or very tight, even if equal size within a maneuver, are grounds for downgrade of smoothness and gracefulness.
>>  
>> Cheers,
>> Don
>>  
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20120131/e2e98314/attachment.html>