<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns:o = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.5450.4" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Ok, there will be a new judging course next year and it
appears S&G should be discussed in more detail. So, my thoughts
are; it is generally not a upgrade to a score but may be downgraded if not
present. How should this be taught in the judging
classes?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Don</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </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="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=tkeithb@comcast.net href="mailto:tkeithb@comcast.net">Keith Black</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=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, October 03, 2006 10:31
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Impression or precision judging?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Is the issue for those who are against scoring
S&G that you don't feel S&G should be rewarded, or is it that we have
not adequately defined how the S&G score should be
applied? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I'm a logical guy and can't determine how S&G
should be applied, this bothers me. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>HOWEVER, there's an innate sense in me that says
if a pilot has enough control over his plane to stretch a slow roll from
horizon to horizon, or to slowly and cleanly draw out his 4 of 8 in a Cuban
Eight then that pilot should prevail over one that does the minimum
length slow roll and four quick, jerky (but accurate) points in the
Cuban.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Some pilots clearly have more control over their
planes and open themselves to more exposure by making nice slow rolls and
radii and therefore if each pilot flew a maneuver with 1/2 point geometry
downgrade it seems to go against what we're all striving for NOT to reward the
one that demonstrated more control (skill).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The problem is that we haven't defined
specifically how this should be applied. Perhaps that was intentional to allow
flexibility in rewarding what was inherently understand, I'm not
sure.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Keith Black</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </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="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=geobet@gis.net href="mailto:geobet@gis.net">george w. kennie</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=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, October 03, 2006 10:06
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Impression or precision judging?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Even if the S&G criteria were removed from
the rulebook, it would remain in the subconcious. There is just something in
the depths of the human psyche that cries out for a way to award the
performance accomplished with polish in a way that separates it from the one
executed with mediocrity. That has to be IMPRESSION guys..........I
think.................</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>G.</FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </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="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=patterndude@comcast.net
href="mailto:patterndude@comcast.net">Lance Van Nostrand</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=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, October 03, 2006 10:07
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Impression or precision judging?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I'm a ditto head to Dave on this one. I
can't imagine a situation where someone could fly perfect precision
- I mean really perfect with all lines straight, radiuses
matched, etc that should not get scored all 10s. How would the
pattern be flown differently to introduct S&G and maintain 10s?
Should a very smooth and graceful sequence flown with a bunch of 9.5
precision scores (actual defects that cause a .5 point downgrade) be given
10s? If we were to eliminate S&G and have only downgrades
for precision errors then judges must interpret S&G critically in that
S&G flair can hurt but not help a manuver. truth is, pilots will
use S&G to mask precision errors, or to mask difficult timing and
centering issues. I watch pilots much better than me get away with
murder but do it so purposefully and smooth that judges don't seem to even
see it. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Eliminating S&G from the judging criteria
would not eliminate S&G from flying nor from judging, but it would
weaken it as a reason to downgrade. If all you can say is that the
manuver seemed technically correct but there was "something" wrong, then
what you are really saying is that it was not technically correct and you
saw the downgrade but you just can't put your finger on it in your
conscious mind. I would be OK with admitting that was my limitation
as a human judge and I will not penalize the pilot for it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>--Lance</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </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="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=DaveL322@comcast.net
href="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net">DaveL322@comcast.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=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, October 03, 2006
10:04 AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Impression or precision judging?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>Technically perfect is well understood and can be objectively
assessed. Specific judging criteria and downgrades are well
defined/documented in our judges guide. Yes, gray areas do exist
in which it is difficult to extract an exact point value downgrade from
the rulebook, but guidance/basis is there, and it is the job of a judge
to make judgements (and in my experience 90% of the time the answer to
the gray areas is apply 1 point per 15 degrees).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Smooth and graceful (S+G) is subjective, and to date has never had
a point value or downgrades associated with it. The S+G criteria
allows an impression judge to score a technically flawed maneuver
higher than a technically perfect maneuver.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Should a sequence that is flown technically perfect be awarded the
highest score? </DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Should it be possible to outscore a technically perfect sequence
with a technically flawed one that is "more smooth" or "more
graceful"?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I don't think we should include (S+G) or pursue (Impression score)
criteria which are ill-defined or purely subjective - pattern is about
precision aerobatics which can be (is) well defined, and is a thing of
beauty (to the select few that appreciate it) without the need for S+G,
style, or impression points.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Dave Lockhart</DIV>
<DIV><A
href="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net">DaveL322@comcast.net</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">--------------
Original message -------------- <BR>From: "White, Chris"
<chris@ssd.fsi.com> <BR>
<META content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)" name=Generator>
<STYLE>v\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
o\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
w\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
.shape {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
</STYLE>
<STYLE>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAutoSig, li.MsoAutoSig, div.MsoAutoSig
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</STYLE>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">I’d love to
hear some feedback to the following: (or maybe not, but it might help
my understanding of what we’re trying to accomplish in our
judging/flying</SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Wingdings color=navy
size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings">J</SPAN></FONT><FONT
face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">)<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Question:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Isn’t
clinical precision flying the only way to attempt to remove impression
judging? Shouldn’t the sequence itself if flown to precision
“be” the art form?<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Example 1:
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">I saw one
pilot fly the FAI sequence at our contest last June…. To me his flying
was clinically precise without any “Style” of his own. I mean
that very much as a compliment. The roll rates and radiuses and
speeds to me were very consistent….his timing and flight line control
were very “Clinically precise” It struck me at that if a
computer GPS link could have been flown with an autopilot laying out
the perfectly executed sequence he would have been close. The
nearly perfect geometry of the sequence spoke for
itself.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Example
2:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">An example of
impression that I can think of would be some of the point rolls that I
used to see in the 70’s….the ones that kind of slip & lock into
each point (exaggerated lock in), but I could not score them better
than points that merely stop where they are supposed to with minimum
fanfare…..could I? (In fact since one could argue that the roll rate
changes to get that effect it could be downgraded more…..) But I
like it, its an individual preference, but to the letter of the law
its incorrect.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Maybe we
should judge by technical merit and each judge give an overall
“Impression” rating someplace on the
scoresheet???<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">(Wow I spent
all this time trying to think of how to word this….Gee do I hit the
send button…….?????? I hope this strikes a positive chord
somewhere…okay my motive is to learn so I’ll send
it.)<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Chris
White<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align=center><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<HR tabIndex=-1 align=center width="100%" SIZE=2>
</SPAN></FONT></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>