[NSRCA-discussion] Fwd: Another discussion topic relating to new FAIrules
Dave Lockhart
DaveL322 at comcast.net
Tue Jan 31 17:24:55 AKST 2012
Mark,
While I follow your line of thinking...and certainly agree that the
perceived geometry is what gets scored. However, consider -
A square loop with half rolls is given a 9 because 1 roll was off by 15
degrees. No downgrades were noted for position, size, s+g, and the maneuver
did not exceed the box.
A geometrically perfect square loop is given an 8 because it was deemed to
lack sufficient s+g. Exactly why were the two points deducted? Who knows.
Might have been the artistic opportunity missed when the pilot didn't nicely
frame a cumulus cloud within the loop..might have been sound of the airplane
wasn't quite right..might have been the color contrast on white clouds was
too bold. Or.it could have been the judge and pilot have different opinions
on what the ideal radius or roll rate is.BUT..a style allowance has always
been in the rules.specific styles are not supposed to be rewarded or
downgraded.
Go fast, turn left..maybe more objective.but..do you think some pilots get a
little more leniency on cut calls? J Still a judgement being made by a
..well..judge.
Regards,
Dave
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Mark Atwood
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 10:49 AM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Fwd: Another discussion topic relating to
new FAIrules
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
<http://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 <mailto: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/20120201/2b21be3c/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list