[F3A-Discussion] Modifications toproposed maneuverexecution guide and to F schedules

[Mark Hunt]

Without a doubt, #2 sucks....we need to get it the hell out of the AMA rulebook too!




________________________________
From: Dave <DaveL322 at comcast.net>
To: f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us
Sent: Wed, June 30, 2010 11:38:25 AM
Subject: Re: [F3A-Discussion] Modifications toproposed maneuverexecution guide and to F schedules


Ok…..my “rant”
 
The proposed judging principles –
1. precision
2. S+G
3. Positioning
4. Size
 
1 is clear enough, and examples of errors and appropriate downgrades are given.  This is an objective type of criteria, and suitable for a PRECISION event.
 
2 has never been clearly defined, and examples of errors and downgrades have never been given.  This is a wholly subjective criteria, and suitable for an ARTISTIC event.
 
3 is clear enough, and examples of errors and appropriate downgrades are given.  This is an objective type of criteria, and suitable for a PRECISION event.
 
4 is not clearly defined, and examples of errors and downgrades have never been given.  As currently presented in the rules, this is a wholly subjective criteria, and suitable for an ARTISTIC event.
 
If specific downgrades that are objective and not subjective can not be defined, they should not be in the rulebook.
 
If F3A is really about precision flying, #2 and #4 should be deleted from the book as they are either 100% subjective, or close to it, and have nothing to do with precision.
 
If F3A is not really about precision flying, lets add criteria for rhythm, flow, style, originality, “zen” factor, and maybe even spectator appeal?  I hope the intent of S+G and Size is to promote “beautiful” flying in addition to precision flying, but I challenge anyone to fly precise maneuvers with proper positioning without being “beautiful”.
 
With the World Cup ongoing at the present……I think most can agree the game is more appealing when it is “beautiful”……but the winner is determined by the score, which is objective, and not subjective.
 
Regards,
 
Dave
 

________________________________

From:f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us [mailto:f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us] On Behalf Of Derek Koopowitz
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 12:23 PM
To: f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us
Subject: Re: [F3A-Discussion] Modifications toproposed maneuverexecution guide and to F schedules
 
I agree.
 
I've asked for clarification on how this scoring is applied.  Is it to be done at the end of the sequence like the old noise score?  What is the deduction?  This rule just doesn't make any sense to me.
 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave" <DaveL322 at comcast.net>
To: f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 9:09:24 AM
Subject: Re: [F3A-Discussion] Modifications to proposed        maneuverexecution        guide and to F schedules
Keeping maneuver size relatively the same as the box can’t practically happen with the current P11….unless the Figure M is very narrow and short in height….draw it out graphically……by the time you make the Figure M and following ½ reverse Cuban 8 fit in the box, neither come anywhere near close to the top of the box.
 
Regards,
 
Dave
 

________________________________

From:f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us [mailto:f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us] On Behalf Of Derek Koopowitz
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 11:58 AM
To: f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us
Subject: Re: [F3A-Discussion] Modifications to proposed maneuverexecution guide and to F schedules
 
Meaning that the expectation is that the maneuvers should try to be the same size and relative to the box?
 
Good question - that one will generate a lot of discussion in the F3A community as well.
 

----- Original Message -----
From: "john fuqua" <johnfuqua at embarqmail.com>
To: f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 8:53:00 AM
Subject: Re: [F3A-Discussion] Modifications to proposed maneuver execution        guide and to F schedules
Derek
What is with the criteria on size of maneuvers.  That will create a lot of discussion list arguments.
 
From:f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us [mailto:f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us] On Behalf Of Derek Koopowitz
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 10:27 AM
To: f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us
Subject: [F3A-Discussion] Modifications to proposed maneuver execution guide and to F schedules
 
Please review the attached documents and provide feedback if you have any...
 
The Maneuver Execution Guide was formally the "Judge's Guide"... it has been cleaned up and hopefully enhanced.  Some changes have been made to the proposed F schedules for F13 and F15 - changes are in blue.
 
 

_______________________________________________
F3A-Discussion mailing list
F3A-Discussion at lists.f3a.us
http://lists.f3a.us/mailman/listinfo/f3a-discussion

_______________________________________________
F3A-Discussion mailing list
F3A-Discussion at lists.f3a.us
http://lists.f3a.us/mailman/listinfo/f3a-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/f3a-discussion/attachments/20100630/1fae9c06/attachment.html>