<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns:o = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2719.2200" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY
style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; FONT: 10pt verdana; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none"
bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Now that we have had a little experience with the 2002-4
rules it would be a really good time for some one outside the committee to
evaluate the impact (positive & negative) of what we did. Of course I have
my own opinions. I cannot believe all of the changes rated 10's! </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Then again, would it serve any purpose?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>John Ferrell <BR>6241 Phillippi Rd<BR>Julian NC 27283<BR>Phone:
(336)685-9606 <BR>Dixie Competition Products<BR>NSRCA 479 AMA 4190
W8CCW<BR>"My Competition is Not My Enemy"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=rcaerobob@cox.net href="mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net">Bob Pastorello</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, October 23, 2002 7:49
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Masters 2005 Options</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>John, I appreciate a LOT you putting it in print. Don't think I've
seen it summarized as well or concisely...</DIV>
<DIV> There are MANY who will press that the sequences are
to be "building blocks" to some ultimate goal of complexity and par-level
competitiveness with the FAI trends. THAT I don't agree with.</DIV>
<DIV> I particuarly like the criteria about "judgeable by
available judges" - that is SO important....as Troy pointed out, the more
difficult and "new" you make maneuvers, the more "judging load" is placed on -
Guess Who? - *US*....If there's a reasonable purpose to that, I'm all for it,
but I don't read much in terms of justifiable rationale for making sequences
more difficult.</DIV>
<DIV> Anyone know the REAL answer? (this is also related to
the core question I've had - "WHY a 5kg UPPER limit??")</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Bob Pastorello<BR>NSRCA 199, AMA 46373<BR><A
href="mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net">rcaerobob@cox.net</A><BR><A
href="http://www.rcaerobats.net">www.rcaerobats.net</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>