<!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 6.00.2900.2523" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Very well stated, Ed. That issue of the SIG
not "owning the rules" is one that I've tried to reinforce over recent years,
also. I agree that we must be careful, and remember the AMA Contest Board
makes votes for ALL Pattern pilots' rules to follow, and not just NSRCA
members.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Thanks for sharing.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Guess neither of us sleep anymore.</FONT></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
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=Ed_Alt@hotmail.com href="mailto:Ed_Alt@hotmail.com">Ed Alt</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, December 15, 2004 3:34
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Election questions</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Regarding the idea of NSRCA controlling our own rules ala what
IMAC has<BR>done, let's be a little careful here. They are our AMA rules
and NSRCA is<BR>just an interested SIG, same as IMAC. What has happened
in IMAC recently is<BR>that the Board of Directors has exerted alot of
influence in driving rules<BR>changes through, often for the better, although
sometimes not. There have <BR>been<BR>several reversals of rules put
through that IMAC drove through within a<BR>relatively short time of their
taking effect, or in one case, before even<BR>officially taking effect.
The most remarkable example of this is one of the<BR>most recent changes where
they decided that implementing a zoneless<BR>aerobatic box , along with adding
a presentation score would be helpful to<BR>reducing the overall footprint
when flying the sequence, while<BR>simultaneously eliminating the "unfair
center zone centering score bias".<BR>This can be a fun topic to debate the
logic of. Been there, done that, got<BR>the Tee shirt, tired of arguing
and joined Pattern in '04 as a result.<BR>Having a lot of fun since making
that decision BTW - should have done this<BR>years ago!<BR><BR>Without getting
into all the arguments pro and con, the end result is that<BR>the presentation
score rule which will officially go into effect in 2005 and<BR>which the IMAC
BOD insisted be applied in 2004, even before it was a rule,<BR>is now going to
be recommended for removal by IMAC, according to several<BR>well placed
sources. Ofcourse the problem is that it's a 3 year rule cycle<BR>and
everyone has to live with it until 2008, unless some emergency
rules<BR>proposal gets through or unless IMAC dictates through their
regional<BR>directors that championship points systems require that
participating<BR>contests now do NOT use the rule they pushed through.
Confusing at best.<BR><BR>The point here is that no SIG "owns" the AMA
rules. Should they be<BR>influential? Yes, within reason.
Technically any AMA member can make a<BR>rules proposal, but the SIGs can
carry great weight in driving rules. With<BR>that ability to influence
comes great responsibility, so what I would want<BR>to see is just exactly how
NSRCA is going to come to it's decisions on rules<BR>proposals before driving
them through. I believe that is the key question.<BR><BR>Similar
concerns exists for how sequences would get modified, especially if<BR>they
are destined to begin changing annually. Again, I think that the
SIG<BR>ought to be influential, but I'm not sure that they should own the
process <BR>completely.<BR>IMAC has tried several approaches, including member
votes, BOD fiat and more<BR>recently, what looks like a reasonably structured
method of getting member<BR>feedback through the Regional Directors, winnowing
the candidate sequences<BR>down, modifying them per suggestions, winnowing
some more and finally doing<BR>a BOD vote. That might be a good way, who
knows? The challenge for IMAC is<BR>that they do change them every year,
because the IAC which they model<BR>themselves after does this. Having
new sequences every year can be fun and<BR>interesting. It can also be
frustrating when poor sequences are designed or<BR>selected. The faster
you try to remake them, the better organized you had<BR>better be in deciding
on the new ones. There should be well defined<BR>criteria for sequence
design before any of this is attempted. And you need<BR>some dedicated
members who know how to design a good sequence.<BR><BR>Lastly, regarding the
success of IMAC, it hasn't all been a bed of roses.<BR>Their membership
dropped off drastically in recent years and is making a<BR>recovery lately
from what I hear. I don't know all the reasons why, but I<BR>would
simply suggest that we not look to IMAC as the guiding beacon for<BR>change to
Pattern. Many in IMAC have an entirely different mindset,<BR>especially of
late, where precision aerobatics is not the key ingredient to<BR>designing
sequences, setting rules or running contests, rather, it is how<BR>closely
they can copy the IAC. Look at their 2005 sequences and study
the<BR>rules and judging guide and it should tell you everything you need to
know.<BR>My first year in Pattern has been the most rewarding in my years
of<BR>aerobatic competition, I think because I learned more about getting back
to<BR>basics and correctly applying them than I did in my previous 7 years of
IMAC<BR>flying. In my opinion at least, you guys are doing alot of
things right,<BR>not perfectly, but you don't have to go about reinventing
yourselves<BR>overnight.<BR>Regards,<BR>Ed
Alt<BR>=================================================<BR>To access the
email archives for this list, go to<BR><A
href="http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/">http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/</A><BR>To
be removed from this list, go to <A
href="http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm">http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm</A><BR>and
follow the instructions.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>