[NSRCA-discussion] new rules proposals

Fri Jan 18 15:51:27 AKST 2019

Okay.    Then tell me what is the motivation for a newcomer to enter a
contest when he knows he probably does not have a chance to win/place.    I
thought the idea was to attract newbie's to pattern.   If all the
perceptions we have discussed and cussed have any semblance of truth then
just allowing smaller planes to fly will not get them interested.    We have
that paradigm now.    I guess I do not understand what all the discussion
was about.    

From: Monte Richard [mailto:mrichard at compassengineering.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2019 6:19 PM
To: tjpritchett at aol.com; General pattern discussion
Cc: underdw at gmail.com; johnfuqua at embarqmail.com
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] new rules proposals

We had a pilot at the Cajun Nats finish second place with a PHOENIX 7
against at least 5 other 2 meter planes. With the 10% no one could even have
a chance against him.  

It certainly isn't right to give a lesser pilot the win over a better pilot
like John suggested, just because he flies a smaller plane. That certainly
isn't what our sport or competition is about. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 18, 2019, at 6:07 PM, tim pritchett via NSRCA-discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

Keep in mind, for analysis below, no consideration is being given to whether
pilot 1 and pilot 2's planes were different.  What we don't know is how much
'better' a pilot flies a 2M vs. a 1.75 or smaller airplane to critique the
10%.  We'd be hard pressed, I think, to get a firm, accurate number to
represent that difference.  We'd have to have a single pilot fly both sized
planes in front of a set of judges, probably multiple times, to know if
there was any real difference at all.   

That said, it's a penalty - something a pilot must choose to work with or
around.  If we want to discourage 2M, then pick a high number.  If it's to
level the field, pick a lower one.

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Underkofler via NSRCA-discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
To: John Fuqua <johnfuqua at embarqmail.com>; General pattern discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2019 5:38 pm
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] new rules proposals

I was thinking that 10% was a bit high.  Could also do a lower % or Int than
Sportsman. 

John, I hope the idea of any of these rules proposals is NOT to allow the
lesser pilot to win!

We just are talking about leveling the playing field to account for
equipment.

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 3:32 PM John Fuqua via NSRCA-discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

Monte

I sort of arbitrarily picked 10%.    Do the math and suggest a better
number.   Although I think the idea is that the newcomer should have a good
chance of placing/winning even though he/she may not be the best pilot.

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of Monte Richard via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2019 3:18 PM
To: Monte Richard; General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] new rules proposals

I just went into one of last years contests in intermediate. Pilot one's
first round scored a raw score of 350 and 331, his average raw score was
340.5 (he won the round). Pilot two's raw score for round one was 338 and
324.5, his average raw score was 331.25, add in the 10% handicap and it
becomes 364.375. This moves him to first place in the round by a high
margin. Totally changes the results. Add to that the normalizing and it
becomes almost insurmountable, considering pilot one outflew pilot two.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 18, 2019, at 2:58 PM, Monte Richard <mrichard at compassengineering.com>
wrote:

Add in the Kfactors and in Sportsman the total raw score can be 250 making
the 10% handicap 25 points. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 18, 2019, at 2:28 PM, Monte Richard via NSRCA-discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

10% is a lot. sportsman has 18 maneuvers so a perfect flight has a
possibility of 180 points in raw score, 10% of that is 18 points. A flight
with all 9's would be a raw score of 162, 10% is 16.2 points. That pretty
much means a pilot without the 10% advantage has to beat the pilot with the
advantage by 1 point per maneuver on all the maneuvers to beat him, if they
tie more than 2 maneuvers, then the handicap beats him. 10% is a high factor
to overcome.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 18, 2019, at 2:15 PM, Daniel Underkofler via NSRCA-discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

John, 

 I think you've got a wording problem in your -05 proposal.

You say: 10% when "length/width DOES exceed 71in"

I think you meant: 10% when" length AND width DO NOT exceed 71in"

Dan

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 6:46 AM John Fuqua via NSRCA-discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

FYI for all.

There are 3 new rules proposals on the AMA website.    Suggest folks take a
look.

John Fuqua

cell 850-974-6655

_______________________________________________
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

(c) 2019 Compass Engineering & Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. This
electronic transmission, and any attachments hereto, is intended only for
the use of each individual recipient named above and may contain information
belonging to the sender that is confidential, proprietary, is subject to
copyright, constitutes a trade secret or is legally privileged. If you are
not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the
contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this transmission in error, please immediately (i) notify the sender, (ii)
permanently delete the original and all copies of this electronic
transmission and all attachments hereto, and (iii) destroy all printouts of
this electronic transmission and all attachments hereto. Please note that
electronic transmissions to and from the sender may be monitored by the
sender's employer. Thank you for your cooperation.  --   

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

(c) 2019 Compass Engineering & Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. This
electronic transmission, and any attachments hereto, is intended only for
the use of each individual recipient named above and may contain information
belonging to the sender that is confidential, proprietary, is subject to
copyright, constitutes a trade secret or is legally privileged. If you are
not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the
contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this transmission in error, please immediately (i) notify the sender, (ii)
permanently delete the original and all copies of this electronic
transmission and all attachments hereto, and (iii) destroy all printouts of
this electronic transmission and all attachments hereto. Please note that
electronic transmissions to and from the sender may be monitored by the
sender's employer. Thank you for your cooperation.  --  

_______________________________________________
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

(c) 2019 Compass Engineering & Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. This
electronic transmission, and any attachments hereto, is intended only for
the use of each individual recipient named above and may contain information
belonging to the sender that is confidential, proprietary, is subject to
copyright, constitutes a trade secret or is legally privileged. If you are
not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the
contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this transmission in error, please immediately (i) notify the sender, (ii)
permanently delete the original and all copies of this electronic
transmission and all attachments hereto, and (iii) destroy all printouts of
this electronic transmission and all attachments hereto. Please note that
electronic transmissions to and from the sender may be monitored by the
sender's employer. Thank you for your cooperation.  --  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20190119/58efbb4d/attachment.html>