<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
RCA-20 and FAI 5B.4.4.3 both say 5 <b>or more</b> points as a
downgrade for missing a point. How do you judge anything with such a
vague criteria? "Or more?" Using this method, if the rest of the
maneuver was flown perfectly, both a 5 and a 0 would be correct!<br>
<br>
-Doug<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Dave Reaville wrote:
<blockquote cite="midd11c8a06570.4687f97b@shaw.ca" type="cite">
<div>Interesting... I just happen to be doing the judging exam and
this is one of the questions they ask to see if you know how to apply
the downgrades correctly :-)</div>
<div> </div>
<div>In the example given, the pilot missed a point so it's a 5 (or
more) point downgrade as per the AMA rule book (RCA-20) and also the
FAI rule book (pg 28 5B.4.3.3). </div>
<div> </div>
<div>If your suggesting it's a zero because the manouver is flown
"incorrectly" then why do they have this 5 point downgrade at all? </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Let's go a little further... If I was judging you at the Nats (I
just might be BTW) and gave you a zero for a missed point would you
actually accept that as being a correct score? I wouldn't... so you
guys are going to just have to get used to the 5 (or
more) downgrade from me..... unless of course you don't miss the
"point" to begin with.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Dave </div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>