<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">In a message dated 5/3/03 8:03:25 AM Pacific Daylight Time, troy_newman@msn.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"><BR>
The key is it is up to you the pilot to define the roll enough so that the<BR>
judge does NOT question it.....<BR>
<BR>
You can be right as rain and present hesitations that are quick with a<BR>
slower roll rate and the judge may not see the hesitations as defined as you<BR>
think they are.....Its your job as a pilot to give him something to<BR>
judge....If you open the door for a downgrade.....You will get it from some<BR>
judge.<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
Troy, much as I hate to agree with you :-) this is the answer to most of the "judging questions" that I see come up, if you leave an element so vague that it requires too much interpretation from the judge you will draw the downgrade, sooner or later. The less you ask from the judge (interpretation) the better your scores will be. We all seem to expect the judging to be perfect (I'm guilty), we don't fly perfect, but we expect the judging to be perfect, it never will be (the flying or the judging) Remember, part of your job (my opinion anyway) is to make it easy for the judge to see/understand that you performed the maneuver correctly, <BR>
<BR>
My work here is done (flame suit on) I'm outta' here<BR>
<BR>
Bob</FONT></HTML>