<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2523" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV>
<DIV>I respectfully disagree. Complexity of Masters bears little
resemblence to that in Sportsman. The two are mutually exclusive events
and arguing the semantics or politics of that, is counterproductive. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Sportsman complexity is fine as is. So is Masters, as is. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Earlier talk suggested to add something akin to a Finals schedule
series for Masters Nats competition, different than the same ol' sequence, as a
means to spark more interest. That's a decision the Masters community may want
to make. If it wishes to make the schedule more complex, great. I see
nothing wrong with the challenge of more complex maneuvers. If the community
wishes to keep the status quo, hey that's fine too. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Question in my mind is why is it that at Nats Finals, one is hard pressed
to see spectators at the Masters site? Forget about spectators for a
moment, I had a heck of a time filling 3 of 5 judges chairs. I know I
personally asked about 2 dozen folks, and Don asked a bunch also. Every one
wants to observe F3A and witness history, I suppose. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>If the event crowns a National Champ, would the event be better
attended/spectated if it were more entertaining/interesting? That's essentially
the question on the floor. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>MattK</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 1/9/2005 5:45:04 AM Eastern Standard Time,
rcaerobob@cox.net writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV>And this issue is EXACTLY why the "progression of classes" needs to be
managed, and (caps by intent)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>WE MUST STOP ESCALATING THE OVERALL COMPLEXITY OF SEQUENCES TO KEEP UP
WITH CHANGES IN FAI !!!!! The "trickle down" of FAI difficulty drives
Masters. Then that drives Advanced, then it drives Intermediate changes,
and finally Sportsman, where we lose potential entrants because it overwhelms
them.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>There are people who monitor this list who I have been coaching. If
they chime in, they will tell you of the difficulty in "finesse" needed to be
really competent NOW in Sportsman, and even moreso when they moved to
Intermediate.</DIV>
<DIV> I am NOT one of those "disconnected" Masters pilot
guys.....I "know" what's going on in other classes, and we better address it
as a society. Soon.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As a rule-proposing body, the NSRCA has the responsibility, as a society,
to Stop the Madness.</DIV>
<DIV> Masters does NOT have to be "nearly FAI".
Obvious reason; someone wants that complexity, let 'em FLY FAI.</DIV>
<DIV> Advanced would not be such a huge jump from
Intermediate IF it wasn't the stepping stone to a less-complex Masters.</DIV>
<DIV> Intermediate would not have to be so tough of a jump
from Sportsman.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Changing our very philosophy of the game is what it will take, men.
You may disagree, but you cannot deny what pitifully-small data points we have
paint a picture of the "graying" of the game.</DIV>
<DIV> Yes - there are LOTS of reasons we don't have the
'seed pipe' we used to (competing RC venues, time, money, etc.), but my point
is, and HAS BEEN, that we do NOT HAVE TO MAKE THE GAME *HARDER* to make it
challenging for Masters' pilots!!!!</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Bob Pastorello<BR>NSRCA 199 AMA 46373<BR><A
title=mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net
href="mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net">rcaerobob@cox.net</A><BR><A
title=http://www.rcaerobats.net/
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">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=mailto:Rcmaster199@aol.com
href="mailto:Rcmaster199@aol.com">Rcmaster199@aol.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=mailto:discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, January 09, 2005 1:23
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: adding interest and
complexity to Sportsman ... again and again and </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV>
<DIV>Sportsman needs to be maintained as the entry class to Pattern events
and overcomplicating it will not be a step in the right direction. I feel
same as Steve that it's about right in complexity. I would add that
it should remain unchanged for a consiiderable amount of time (pick a
period--10 years is a nice round number)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>Rationale for long time period before changes (if
ever):</STRONG> Pilots seldom stay in the class more than two years so the
ones that move on, see a fresh schedule regardless. The ones that drop,
well, it makes little difference to them. It would serve virtually no
purpose to change this schedule</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG>Rationale for keeping the sequence "simple":</STRONG> A friend
of mine has tried to get into pattern competition for a couple years now. He
is a very good sport flier, can 3D his 1/3 scale aerobats just fine and
knows some construction technique, engine maintenance and radio
diagnostics already.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>But the demands of pattern planes are different and he has had to
overcome several issues. After a couple of years of frustration
and perseverence, he has started to practice in earnest. He has
commented to me how difficult the "simple" Sportsman schedule is. I admire
his perseverence; most would have quit.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Point is, many Sportsmen face alot issues with
fundamentals that the other classes have learned to overcome.
Their learning curve is vertical already. Lets leave the complicated stuff
for the higher classes. The Sportsmen who move on, will see that soon
enough.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>MattK </DIV></DIV></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>