[NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format
krishlan fitzsimmons
homeremodeling2003 at yahoo.com
Thu Jul 30 19:49:47 AKDT 2009
Cool.
A huge thanks to Mellisa! She owns site 4!!!! Awesome for you to have such a cool wife Mike! I can't wait for these guys to have a finals day! They deserve it!
I was glad to be able to go down and watch as they announced the places down there this year. I think it's something we all should at least try to do. I got to judge advanced and it was fun to be able to see all the talented flyer's there!
Chris
--- On Thu, 7/30/09, Mike Hester <kerlock at comcast.net> wrote:
From: Mike Hester <kerlock at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Thursday, July 30, 2009, 8:25 PM
I agree totally, and I'm all for it.
FWIW Melissa said she'd be happy to score it, no
problem.
I really don't think it'd be that hard to do. Every
intermediate and advanced pilot I have asked said "hell yeah!" so I think it's
viable.
-Mike
----- Original Message -----
From:
Chris
Moon
To: General pattern discussion
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 7:26
PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats
format
Bill:
I agree 100% with you. Everyone pays the
same entry fee and should have a similar experience. The Intermediate or
Advanced Champion is no less excited than the Masters or FAI Champ I'm
sure. Giving them a comparable event is the right thing to do and I will
volunteer now to help judge their finals next year if they are short of
judges. I understand the logistical issues but we need to have one event
with 4 classes and not 2 events with the have and have nots.
Chris
Bill Glaze wrote:
Glad that you recognized that not everyone has
the capability or ambition to be a Master or FAI pilot. For whatever
reason. I feel that fact doesn't make their membership in
NSRCA an less valuable, nor does it make them a second-class
member. IMHO. However, my feeling is that, if you want them to
stick around, that they should be given (granted?) the same consideration as
all other classes. Not venting, or ranting; just stating a
belief.
Bill Glaze
NSRCA 2388
AMA 2221
-----
Original Message -----
From:
Atwood, Mark
To:
General pattern discussion
Sent:
Thursday, July 30, 2009 10:25 AM
Subject:
Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format
Excellent
idea.
Also,
I think we do the intermediate pilots a disservice by assuming they’re
overwhelmed. There are as many destination Intermediate pilots as
there are Masters. They’re not all beginners and would appreciate
some respect for their level of accomplishment.
Honestly
I think we currently do the same for the Masters pilots. They’re
finals is almost an afterthought compared to FAI. We
need to celebrate and respect each level somewhat equally. We all
know the top dogs are the FAI finalists… but that shouldn’t diminish
the accomplishment of the lower class victors.
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]
On Behalf Of John Konneker
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009
10:18 AM
To: Discussion List
Subject: Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format
Why not let
the NSRCA ask this year's Nats Intermediate pilots how they feel about a
finals being added?
JLK
From: drmikedds at sbcglobal.net
To:
nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Date:
Thu, 30 Jul 2009 09:09:18 -0500
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW:
nats format
I
agree with Earl that intermediate is in a big learning curve and coming to
the nats ,competing at that level, learning the ropes, taking it all in,
seeing all the other flyers, competing for 3 days,etc. should be more than
enough for these newcomers.
The
banquet can make that night sort of special for these intermediate pilots
as well. They can give out the trophies and prizes for these pilots.
There wonderfully are many young and new pilots that can celebrate at this
time. The finalists for the next day can be announced also.
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]
On Behalf Of michael s harrison
Sent: Thursday, July 30,
2009 7:30 AM
To: 'General pattern discussion'
Subject:
[NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format
From: michael s
harrison [mailto:drmikedds at sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 3:45 PM
To: 'Don
Ramsey'
Subject: nats format
After
considerable thought and reflection, I would like to share my views of the
nats and the classes flown. I believe we have been very fortunate to
have an excellent group of volunteers that work and sacrifice to make the
nats happen. That group is led by the event director Dave Guerin,
who has worked tirelessly and unselfishly for years at this job. I
believe he has responded to our desires to make this the best national
event possible. With that in mind, there are some changes I believe
we can make that would be a win-win for everyone and reduce the workload
as well.
They
are:
1. Have a finals
for advanced
a. 8
finalists
b. 3
rounds
c. Judged by
advanced or intermediate judges(qualified
volunteers)
d. The site is
open so it is not a space issue
e. 24 flights
would take app 3 hours
f. Do on
4th day
g. Count the
prelims as a 1000 normalized score
h. Count 3 of 4
scores for the winner
2. Modify
masters accordingly
a. 3 round
finals
b. Count prelims
as a 1000 normalized score
c. Count 3 of 4
for the winner
d. 10
finalists
e. 30 flights
about 5.5 hours
3. Fai
a. 3 rounds
final
b. F-11 flown 1
time
c. Each
unknown(1&2) flown once
d. Count the
semi-final F-11 scores only as a single 1000 normalized
score
e. Count 3 of 4
for the winner
f. 10
finalists
g. 30 flights
about 5.5 hours
Rationale
behind changes:
Advanced
This would
make for a very exciting and fun event for the advanced class. It
would make the 4th day a very real part of the nats for
them. This format is totally self contained with no additional
personnel required. It could be started and finished before the
masters and fai is done.
Masters
Masters is in
a real sense an endurance contest. How many times does someone have
to fly the same sequence to prove he is the best in that class. The
present system is 10 times! The only argument is the equal exposure
issue-which may have merit. The system I propose addresses
that issue and takes less time. I raised the number of finalists to
10 to close the argument that someone is cutout of the finals because of
unequal exposure. Counting the prelim as one of the 4 scores is, in
my opinion a legitimate score to keep-having been earned over a period of
3 days under a number of variables. Assuming incorrect scoring(bias,
unequal exposure, etc.), the competitor has 3 flights to erase that
concern. Any 3 flights count so the prelims score can be
dropped.
FAI
The argument
for doing 2 Finals pattern is that at the world event in the semifinals,
there is not equal exposure of the pilots and the pool is so large that
conditions can change substantially over the course of doing the
semifinals. This rationale wouldn’t apply at the nats. The
semifinals at the nats is only 2 flights with 20 pilots, using the prelim
score as a 1000 normalized score. Therefore, the 2 F patterns can be
combined to be a score carried over into the finals event. The
finals then becomes a single F pattern and 2 unknowns. Count 3 of 4
scores. I would recommend doing the F schedule first, then the
2 unknowns. I believe all the other pilots would love to see FAI
unknown finals flown by some of the best pilots in the world. It would be
a showcase event.
To
conclude:
I believe
this is a win-win for everyone. We would add finals to advanced;
both the Masters and FAI finals would be shortened; the best pilots would
be showcased; more pilots would be in the finals; fewer personnel to do
the finals.
There is no
perfect system. I am sure there will be objections of some kind, but
I believe this system has real merit and should be implemented.
Respectfully
Mike
Harrison
Checked by AVG
- www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.375 / Virus
Database: 270.13.27/2258 - Release Date: 07/30/09
05:58:00
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion
mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.37/2273 - Release Date: 07/30/09 18:09:00
E-mail
message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.1.441)
Database version:
6.12940
http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
E-mail
message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.1.441)
Database version:
6.12940
http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.0.1.441)
Database version: 6.12940
http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090731/3fb784de/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list