<HTML><BODY style="word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; ">Poorly educated/trained judges will always be a problem. Judges are predominantly pilots and most are at a contest because they want to fly, not judge. Judging is a "payment" for being judged. It's a question of priorities. <DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>There are a few, like Don Ramsey, Earl Haury and Matt Kebabjian, who set good examples for the rest of us by balancing their priorities as a pilot/judge to the benefit of the rest of us. We need more like them.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>Ron Van Putte </DIV><DIV><BR><DIV><DIV>On Oct 21, 2007, at 2:01 PM, chris moon wrote:</DIV><BR class="Apple-interchange-newline"><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"> Jon and John are correct in their comments. <BR>To add something - I think the problem is that many of us "cater" to the <BR>judges who do not judge these maneuvers correctly. There is no <BR>requirement to over exaggerate the break in order to do the maneuver, <BR>however many do just that as a defensive tactic against the judge who <BR>refuses to judge correctly. The problem is the JUDGE - not the pilot. <BR>I don't advocate changing the schedules or K factors as a work around <BR>for poorly informed judges. We are much too politically correct and <BR>accept the zeros from them if we don't do it "their" way. If you <BR>compete regularly, you know who they are and cater your maneuver to <BR>accommodate their lack of ability in the chair. Sorry for the rant, but <BR>we are talking about fixing things the wrong way for the wrong reasons. <BR> <BR>Chris <BR> <BR> <BR>John Ford wrote: <BR>> Jon, <BR>> Hear, hear. <BR>> Couldn't have said it better! <BR>> I also share the opinion that in the case of the snap (or the spin <BR>> entry for that matter), our judging standards don't judge actual <BR>> flight characteristics of the particular plane, and we are asking <BR>> pilots to exagerate the break because that is what we agreed we wanted <BR>> to see all the time, not because every plane should show it naturally. <BR>> Maybe we are sitting on this bed of nails because for many people, the <BR>> mystery and controversy of the break is more attractive than <BR>> aerodynamic reality? <BR>> I've done lots of snaps in full-sized planes and there are as many <BR>> break styles as there are airplane designs. Some older/larger planes <BR>> require that you slow up and reef back almost to the buffet before <BR>> mashing the rudder, others are so touchy that a modest tap on the <BR>> rudder with only a hint of pitchup will send the beast thru 150 <BR>> degrees of autorotation before you can think about it. In both cases, <BR>> believe me, it was a true snap roll, but in the first case, you may <BR>> have seen some break, but in the latter, it would have looked like <BR>> everything happened at the same time around all 3 axes. I'm sitting in <BR>> the thing, and I can't tell! <BR>> Essentially the same comments for spin entry, in agreement with Jon's <BR>> comments. <BR>> I'll judge by the rules of the CD, but I do it with a bit of a <BR>> shoulder shrug, I suppose. <BR>> John <BR>> <BR>> */<A href="mailto:JonLowe@aol.com">JonLowe@aol.com</A>/* wrote: <BR>> <BR>> The age old problem of what a "break" is in a snap was solved at <BR>> the Don Lowe Masters a couple of years ago. They defined it as a <BR>> "simultaneous departure in all three axis". There you saw graceful <BR>> snap entries, clearly defineable as a snap. At the IMAC Tuscon <BR>> shootout, they had had the pitch departure requirement, and most <BR>> were pitching what looked like 45 degrees (was probably 25 <BR>> degrees), before they entered the snap. Break, pause, enter snap. <BR>> Ugly as hell. At a pattern judging seminar I went to this year, we <BR>> sat around for half an our trying to decide what a "pitch break" <BR>> was. We finally decided that if you saw anything at all, it was <BR>> ok. But beware of IMAC judges crossing over, unless they have been <BR>> retrained. I got some 5's this year this year, because they didn't <BR>> see a large break. <BR>> As regards spin entries, there are too many spin entry nazis IMHO. <BR>> The rule book clearly defines downgrades for entries. In my book, <BR>> if they don't break any of those rules, (wing coming over before <BR>> the nose passes thru horizontal, not stalled, weathervaning, <BR>> etc.), I don't downgrade for the entry. Too many people want to <BR>> add their own definition to the rules about how an entry "should" <BR>> look, and tell you they downgraded or zeroed you. When you ask <BR>> them what specific rule you violated, they say it "didn't look <BR>> right". Some of these same people will coach you to "cheat" at the <BR>> entry to get a pretty one, dumping up elevator to get the nose to <BR>> fall thru, which really breaks the stall. Unfortunately, all <BR>> airplanes do not enter the same way, and some entries are not <BR>> pretty, but they don't break the rules. Maybe, as well as teaching <BR>> what isn't correct, we ought to teach what ISN'T downgradeable in <BR>> some of these manuevers. <BR>> Jon <BR>> In a message dated 10/21/2007 8:50:52 AM Central Daylight Time, <BR>> <A href="mailto:patterndude@tx.rr.com">patterndude@tx.rr.com</A> writes: <BR>> <BR>> Ron, <BR>> Your idea caused me to stop and think. I'm wondering if it <BR>> would really help, however. If a pilot "in the hunt" screws <BR>> the landing (K=1) he's now "out of the hunt" on that round. <BR>> Scores are often very compressed at local contests so even if <BR>> we reduce the KF, a bad score on any manuver is usually enough <BR>> to do mortal damage. <BR>> --Lance <BR>> <BR>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> *From:* Ron Lockhart <BR>> *To:* NSRCA Mailing List <BR>> <BR>> *Sent:* Saturday, October 20, 2007 11:34 AM <BR>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging-snap & spin <BR>> <BR>> Eliminating is one solution - a price that comes with that <BR>> solution is lack of practice doing and judging snaps- <BR>> which is desirable for some in AMA classes, and for sure <BR>> for those looking ahead to F3A. <BR>> An in between thought - reduce the K factor considerable <BR>> for snap and spin maneuvers. <BR>> That leaves them in the schedules, provides flying and <BR>> judging practice on them, but reduces the <BR>> impact of the imperfect judging of them on round scores. <BR>> Ron Lockhart <BR>> <BR>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> *From:* <A href="mailto:BUDDYonRC@aol.com">BUDDYonRC@aol.com</A> <BR>> *To:* <A href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A> <BR>> <BR>> *Sent:* Saturday, October 20, 2007 11:44 AM <BR>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging <BR>> <BR>> My cents worth on the subject. <BR>> Snaps and Spin entry seem to cause much of the problem. <BR>> Why do we continue to repeat trying to solve a problem <BR>> that most agree is controversial at best and <BR>> impossible to judge consistently on an equal basis? <BR>> Seems that the best solution is to eliminate these <BR>> from the schedules and pick maneuvers that more suit <BR>> Precision Aerobatics and their ability to be judged <BR>> correctly by everyone not just those who have advanced <BR>> to the top of the super judge platform. <BR>> <BR>> Buddy <BR>> <BR>> Jon Lowe <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ <BR>> See what's new at AOL.com <BR>> and Make AOL Your <BR>> Homepage . <BR>> _______________________________________________ <BR>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list <BR>> <A href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A> <BR>> <A href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> __________________________________________________ <BR>> Do You Yahoo!? <BR>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around <BR>> <A href="http://mail.yahoo.com">http://mail.yahoo.com</A> <BR>> <BR>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ <BR>> <BR>> _______________________________________________ <BR>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list <BR>> <A href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A> <BR>> <A href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A> <BR> <BR><BR><HR>Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Café. <A href="http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline" target="_new">Stop by today!</A><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">_______________________________________________</DIV><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">NSRCA-discussion mailing list</DIV><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><A href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A></DIV><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><A href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A></DIV> </BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>