<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6001.18226" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Lots of good observations and comments that are on topic.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Also, adjusting the sequences / classes may be a fix to
the root cause of poor skill fits in a given class that would dictate moving up
or down.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>IMHO, I believe the immediate focus should be on changing
the advancement system so that folks who find themselves in a class way beyond
their skill level have a mechanism to move to a class better fitting their
skills. I'm not proposing that the focused competitor who moves up and then
finds themselves not competitive for a few years should move back. I do believe
that the casual competitor who finds that age / career / family / increased
sequence difficulty should be able to easily move to a class where they're
comfortable. As the discussions regarding sequence content indicate, the
consummate competitor wants (needs) an increasing level of difficulty to
maintain challenge & interest. This increase in difficulty can (and
apparently does) overwhelm some casual competitors who then leave pattern.
Possibly they can be retained if it were easy for them to drop back a
class.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>I don't perceive that this discussion has reached a
consensus on how best to handle the current advancement system, previous
discussions have ended similarly and nothing much has changed. The options seem
to be:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>1. Leave the current system alone & adjust sequences /
classes. (Appears to concede to the lowest skill pilots per class.)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>2. No official advancement system, peer pressure is
adequate. (Might actually work, most pattern folks are honorable.)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>3. Variant of current system with provisions for casual
competitors to move back basis their comfort / performance. (Probably OK and
would seem to have a good chance with the CB.)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>4. Performance based system where folks float between
classes basis performance. (Actually my favorite as it would both satisfy
providing comfort to the casual and prestige to the consummate. Unfortunately
logistically most difficult, someone would need to manage the data and assign
classes.)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>So - the trick is to reach some sort of consensus and move
it to a rules proposal. Discussion alone won't get the job done.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Earl</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>