<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Thanks, Del. BG<br>
<br>
Del Rykert wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid002a01c4f4b5$551df0e0$e50d3045@delo75dpdxfkai"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2523" name="GENERATOR">
<style></style>
<div><strong><font face="MS Sans Serif">I am wondering with all this
talk about the masters schedule and possibility of changes nothing has
been addressed about the lower classes that have been brought up. What
is the message that is given to the fliers in other classes. They get
the scrapes and are third rate fliers? Some issues were brought up but
I never saw any replies to their concerns. </font></strong></div>
<div><strong><font face="MS Sans Serif"> </font></strong></div>
<div><strong><font face="MS Sans Serif"> del</font></strong></div>
<div><strong></strong> </div>
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;"
dir="ltr">
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;">-----
Original Message ----- </div>
<div
style="background: rgb(228, 228, 228) none repeat scroll 0%; -moz-background-clip: initial; -moz-background-origin: initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: initial; font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><b>From:</b>
<a title="Rcmaster199@aol.com" href="mailto:Rcmaster199@aol.com">Rcmaster199@aol.com</a>
</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><b>To:</b>
<a title="discussion@nsrca.org" href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</a>
</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><b>Sent:</b>
Friday, January 07, 2005 2:47 AM</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><b>Subject:</b>
Re: AMA MASTER'S unknown?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<font id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2">
<div>
<div>A couple more thoughts on the subject: </div>
<div> </div>
<div><strong>First,</strong> the issue of judging Finals (knowns
and unknowns alike): Having judged Masters Nats and F3A Nats and Team
Selection Finals, I found it was easier for we judges to have a
competent caller amongst us, calling the maneuver to us. This was a
person separate from the pilots' caller, speaking softly as to not
distract the pilot. But when we didn't have a caller, it wasn't that
bad. The demo flights before the round started served as good
refreshers as to what the shapes looked like. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Some of us had not seen the F knowns flown before, let alone
the unknowns. As an F3A Finals judge, you do what you can to
familiarize yourself with the sequence. If you're chosen to judge, you
already know how (elements, presentation, positioning, distance, S and
G, etc, not belaboring the obvious).</div>
<div> </div>
<div><strong>Second</strong>, regarding Masters unknowns: Judging
will be a little trickier because our pool of competent judges is still
rather small, and F3A uses 10 already. Less are needed for Masters
which is a good thing. With a demo flight, this shouldn't be that bad
for pilots and judges alike. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Finalist F3Aers can do the F sequences and unknowns sequences
(of their choosing) and I believe Masters Finalists can also. Do they
need to? NO THEY DON"T. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>But, it wasn't that long ago that Masters was not only able,
they were REQUIRED to choose their own schedules from the Masters list
of maneuvers. There was a maximum K Factor, and that was the only guide
line. Not only that, but they could change their schedules from round
to round if they chose. After all they were MASTERS PILOTS AND IT WAS <strong><em>THE
TOP CLASS</em></strong>. The ability to choose was the rite of
passage, and some moved there with that mind set. Was it interesting?
Yup, without a doubt. This was before TA and scoring programs and the
like. Should we retuurn to that way of doing business? It would be much
harder to do it administratively, so, NO, probably not! </div>
<div> </div>
<div>However, I do find it strange that MASTERS pilots in general,
appear to be saying that it would be too complicated so lets not even
bother. </div>
<div> </div>
<div><strong>Third</strong>, does it have to be an unknown? NO. It
could just be a Finals known sequence that is different than the Prelim
schedule. I favor this actually over an unknown. The Final sequence in
my view, would be reduced in maneuver number but increased in
complexity. Putting snaps aside for a minute, I see nothing wrong with
loop-roll combinations for example. Same thing for a rolling circle,
(but not crazy as in the F05 schedule). One roll circles or two roll
circles are very pretty maneuvers and a great deal of fun to do, and
don't use up half the county. These maneuver types are hard to do with
precision, but that's the whole point. They are separator maneuvers.
Again, what becomes harder is the administration.</div>
<div> </div>
<div><strong>Fourth</strong>, what problem would be solved? I'll
answer it with a question: are we (Masters pilots)happy with status
quo? Same ol' same old is a good thing? If yes, then the whole
discussion is moot. If no, then lets change it.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>MattK</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>In a message dated 1/7/2005 12:31:51 AM Eastern Standard Time,
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Ed_Alt@hotmail.com">Ed_Alt@hotmail.com</a> writes:</div>
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid blue; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px;"><font
style="background-color: transparent;" color="#000000" face="Arial"
size="2">
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Well, after flying Scale
Aerobatics, AKA IMAC for 7 or 8 years, from Sportsman through
Unlimited, I guess I'm not very excited about introducing unknowns into
Pattern. On the one hand, it does add some interest. On the other
hand, it introduces so many variables that it can really screw up an
event and adversely affect the outcome. If the desire here is to turn
Pattern into a contest of who can best memorize new sequences on the
fly, who won't crack under the pressure and simply brain fart their way
into a few zeros, then this is a great idea.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">So if we do this, the sequences
have to be well </font></div>
</font></blockquote>
</div>
</font></blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>