<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2873" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=MailContainerBody
style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #000000; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; PADDING-TOP: 15px; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Lucida Sans; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; TEXT-DECORATION: none; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none"
leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 acc_role="text" CanvasTabStop="true"
name="Compose message area"><!--[gte IE 5]><?xml:namespace prefix="v" /><?xml:namespace prefix="o" /><![endif]-->
<DIV>
<DIV>I'd like to throw my 2 cents worth in here.... When considering
the transition from Advanced to Masters, I think you'll find that it's not the
manuevers per say, that cause most of the problem. It's the
pilot's positioning abilities. As we progress through the
classes, the two most important things we learn are wings level and
maintaining a line. Most manuevers are pretty much the same, ie., push,
pull, and roll. Of course, there's the ocassional snap, and they are a manuever
all their own. Also, as we progress up through the ranks, more and
more pressure is put on the pilot by putting more manuevers in the
schedule. You're on the hot seat for a longer period of
time. The manuevers chosen for the schedule are put into an
order using the diabolical scheme to make sure that if you get out of
position, you will not be able to execute the next manuever. Take a look
at the current P-07 schedule. Nothing really strikes me as being horribly
hard to do as far as each manuever is concerned. But take into consideration
what happens if you screw up and make one too large or get off line.
You're going to be out of position for the next two manuevers, at least.
You'd have to be pretty crafty to get by without some serious downgrades.
Don't get too hung up on the individual manuevers. They are only one part
of the game. Being able to make everything flow together so it looks
pretty, now that's the hard part.... There has always been a pretty large
jump between Advanced and Masters, and it's the position of the manuevers
in relation to each other that makes it so much harder.</DIV>
<DIV>I'm out of change....</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Rex Lesher</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>From:</B> <A
title=mailto:jzeigenfus@comcast.net
href="mailto:jzeigenfus@comcast.net">jzeigenfus@comcast.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, May 09, 2006 3:11 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007
Advanced Schedule</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I am in the same position as you John and concur with your analysis of
the 2007 Advanced schedule. If the purpose of the Advanced schedule is to
prepare you for Masters, then the difficulty level is too low. The other 2007
option for the Advanced schedule, was a better transition to Masters but was
voted down. If the only other option is to stay with the current
schedule, then at least the difficulty level is more appropriate with an
Advanced schedule preparing you for Masters Class. Joe
Z </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">--------------
Original message -------------- <BR>From: jonlowe@aol.com <BR><BR>> I've
been looking at the 2007 advanced schedule, since it looks as <BR>>
though I will move up from Intermediate next year. One thing that <BR>>
struck me is that the new Advanced schedule has NO inverted exits in
<BR>> it, down from 4 or 5 in the existing schedule. As it stands, if the
<BR>> new schedule passes the contest board vote in June, the new
<BR>> Intermediate schedule will have one inverted exit, Advanced none,
and <BR>> Masters eight, if I counted right. I'm not sure the degree of
<BR>> difficulty change between the schedules is what was contemplated.
<BR>> <BR>> It may be that with the different options presented for
the NSRCA <BR>> survey, that we ended up with a harder intermediate
pattern, an easier <BR>> advanced, and a harder Masters, I'm not sure.
But n! ow the change from <BR>> Advanced to Masters will be huge, while
the difference between <BR>> Intermediate and Advanced is not so big
anymore. <BR>> <BR>> It appears that the only thing that could be done
now would be to <BR>> encourage the contest board to vote down the new
Advanced schedule <BR>> since it is too late to update the proposal, if
others feel the same <BR>> way I do. If it is voted down, then the old
Advanced schedule would <BR>> remain in place, as I understand it. Each
new schedule is a separate <BR>> proposal, so they are voted upon
separately. The current Advanced <BR>> schedule would appear to be a good
transition from the new intermediate <BR>> schedule, and would be hard
enough that the new Masters schedule <BR>> wouldn't be so intimidating.
<BR>> <BR>> Comments? <BR>> <BR>> Jon Lowe <BR>>
_______________________________________________ <BR>> NSRCA-discussion
mailing list <BR>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsr! ca.org <BR>>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
</BLOCKQUOTE>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BODY></HTML>