<!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>Terry,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Thanks for the comments. You're dating both of us here.
That set of schedules I proposed was when I was the D4 VP about ten years ago.
The radical concept I had then which would be viewed as even more radical now
would be to have no turnarounds in Sportsman. The idea was to have newbies come
out and do a judged set of maneuvers like loops, cubans, rolls and so on with
box exits on every pass. The whole concept was to get everyday sport fliers that
are doing this stuff anyway to come out and give it a try. The schedules that
followed were built on that first one and introduced turnaround in phases.
Anyway, I was shot down in flames. I think that today, you wouldn't even see any
smoke - it'd just go poof...........</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Verne</FONT></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=amad2terry@juno.com href="mailto:amad2terry@juno.com">Terry
Terrenoire</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>Cc:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, January 10, 2005 5:54
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Class Structure</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I value Vern's commentsbecause several years ago he alone came up with a
VERY good set of schedules for all AMA classes that truely did build on one
another. Sure wish we had adopted the entire program back then. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I would love to see Vern on our rules committee. maybe he could come up
with another series for us to consider, but at least leave the avalanche in
the Advance schedule.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Terry T.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 18:58:24 -0500 "Verne Koester" <<A
href="mailto:verne@twmi.rr.com">verne@twmi.rr.com</A>> writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT face="Times New Roman">Georgie,<BR>Here's a
novel idea. Leave Intermediate alone and take the snaps out of <BR>Advanced.
A pilot coming out of Intermediate into Advanced already has to <BR>learn
Slow Rolls, 4 Point Rolls, and a longer schedule with more crosswind
<BR>exposure maneuvers which is plenty.<BR><BR>The step from Advanced to
Masters is minimal at best. The step from <BR>Intermediate to Advanced is
monumental. The end result is a bunch of pilots <BR>in Intermediate that are
getting bored with their schedule but still not <BR>ready for Advanced so
they want to add snaps to it. Only problem is that <BR>someone coming out of
Sportsman will likely be scared away if Intermediate <BR>is made any
tougher.<BR><BR>It's no surprise to me that the number of Masters pilots at
any given <BR>contest are far greater than the classes that precede it. Most
of us who are <BR>there came up through a balanced system of steps. We're
all out of whack <BR>right now. Unfortunately, I seem to be one of only a
handful of Masters and <BR>higher pilots that still remembers how hard it
was to learn slow and 4 point <BR>rolls which gets introduced at the
Advanced level. Take the snaps and spins <BR>out of Advanced and introduce
them at the Masters level, put some box exits <BR>back where they need to
be, and you'll have a logical, balanced, and <BR>transitional set of
schedules that takes a pilot from Sportsman to however <BR>high he or she
wants to go.<BR><BR>Verne Koester<BR><BR><BR>----- Original Message -----
<BR>From: "George Kennie" <</FONT><A href=""><FONT
face="Times New Roman">geobet@gis.net</FONT></A><FONT
face="Times New Roman">><BR>To: <</FONT><A href=""><FONT
face="Times New Roman">discussion@nsrca.org</FONT></A><FONT
face="Times New Roman">><BR>Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2005 2:28
PM<BR>Subject: Re: adding interest and complexity to Sportsman ... again and
again <BR>and<BR><BR><BR>> <<I'm not flying masters, I'm flying
advanced, the reason is<BR>> Masters is<BR>> more difficult than I
think I can reasonably fly at this time, so<BR>> I'll work my way up.
>><BR>><BR>> I respectfully disagree with your assessment of
schedule difficulty.<BR>> I get the feeling that you haven't taken the
time to sit down and<BR>> really study the current Master's sequence. I
commend your attitude<BR>> of working your way up!!!IMHO, I find the
current Master's much less<BR>> threatening than the Advanced
sequence.<BR>><BR>> Somebody mentioned "going to contests without
practicing", and<BR>> indeed I can remember, back in the 60's going to a
contest myself<BR>> having never performed the required routine and doing
quite well at<BR>> the time.However those were significantly different
times and I<BR>> myself would not desire to return to the mindset of that
period.It<BR>> was called a "Pattern Contest" and the attendance was
probably a<BR>> couple of hundred guys, but the mindset was more like a
current day<BR>> "Fun- Fly". Nobody really took it all that seriously.
Somewhere<BR>> along the line, the few individuals that did have a more
serious<BR>> approach organized and brought a more serious aspect to the
sport<BR>> realizing that the basis for guys going out and flying a
routine<BR>> that was in fact JUDGED meant that the concept must<BR>>
be"COMPETITION". I think that this is probably the reason you
still<BR>> find the most heavily attended events to be "Fun-Fly's". When
it<BR>> gets too serious there are a lot of guys that start to
feel<BR>> threatened regarding their status within the group structure
and<BR>> when the pressure becomes, in their estimation, greater than
feels<BR>> comfortable to them, they gravitate to a different venue
that<BR>> restores the level of comfort they deem appropriate.<BR>>
The same thing seems to happen, in my judgement, with schedule<BR>>
complexity.Some of us realize that if the schedules become more and<BR>>
more complex, at some point the difficulty factor will become<BR>>
significant enough to threaten our currently hard won achievement<BR>>
status, and indeed this is true.The decision that probably needs to<BR>>
be reasoned through is,in light of this truth, should the pursuit of<BR>>
excellence be sacrificed to satisfy the inadequacies of those of us<BR>>
who are clammoring to maintain their elevation?<BR>> I consider myself a
part of this equation and recognize my own<BR>> inadequacies, however
I also realize that this same pursuit of<BR>> excellence will not
be enhanced by any concession to tilt the<BR>> playing field in my favor.
Noone will be served by that tack. Least<BR>> of all ME! My flying
prowess ranks somewhere between Sportsman and<BR>> Intermediate(my
assessment), and though I find a couple of the FAI<BR>> maneuvers really
tough to execute in a graceful manner, I still feel<BR>> that there is no
maneuver that I could not learn to do and given<BR>> another 50 years of
practice I might even be in a position to<BR>> challenge Jason.<BR>>
It's about STRIVING guys. That's what COMPETITION is! And it's<BR>>
purpose is to determine the most skilled individual, with the rest<BR>>
of us rated in descending order beneath the rating of the BEST! So,<BR>>
as you can see, I'm not in favor of wussing out to make things<BR>>
easier for anybody who finds their position at the pinnacle<BR>>
precarious(and that includes ME).<BR>> Now, all that being said, I do
feel that we may have a void at the<BR>> bottom and should probably go
back again and reconsider a pre-novice<BR>> class for the guy who has
only been involved in the sport for 2<BR>> weeks and has never practiced
flying a straight line.This shouldn't<BR>> take much additional time as
the number of guys showing up to<BR>> participate in this class will
indeed be very few (which begs the<BR>> question, how far do we have to
concede in order to grow the<BR>> ranks?).<BR>> The Sportsman sequence
I proposed a couple of days ago DOES appear<BR>> to be too difficult for
some of the respondants(but not all) and<BR>> maybe the old Novice
schedule should be made available for anybody<BR>> showing up to try (as
a pre-novice event).I also think that the<BR>> Intermediate should
introduce it's participant to the 45 downline<BR>> snap or at least a
center snap on a horizontal baseline as<BR>> preparation for
Advanced.<BR>> Only a bunch of opinions, guys! Don't mean I'm
right!<BR>> G.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
=================================================<BR>> To access the
email archives for this list, go to<BR>> </FONT><A href=""><FONT
face="Times New Roman">http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/</FONT></A><BR><FONT
face="Times New Roman">> To be removed from this list, go to </FONT><A
href=""><FONT
face="Times New Roman">http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm</FONT></A><BR><FONT
face="Times New Roman">> and follow the
instructions.</FONT><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>