<!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 6.00.2900.2604" 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>In pattern there is a hard rule that has been passed by the CB. It's called
the "1 pt per 15 degree " rule, and pattern judges apply the rule fairly well to
center maneuvers at least. Most of the top judges in pattern try hard NOT
to judge " by impression", but rather by the Downgrade Guidelines that have
been established. The downgrades are often discussed at judging seminars and
a handout of downgrades is given to attendees. Also a list of mandatory
zeroes is given to same. To return back to impression judging would be to take a
step backwards to 20 years ago.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>MattK</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 3/10/2005 1:06:32 AM Eastern Standard Time,
joddino@socal.rr.com 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><FONT face=Arial size=2>It seems to me that the guy who puts the airplane
where the judges can see it should score better than the guys that fly out in
the next county. And it is no more difficult to judge the ends of a
square box than it is to judge the backline of the vee. And who doesn't
judge by impression? The rules don't specify that things like roll
rates, altitudes. and radii need to be the same on all maneuvers but we
are not impressed if they vary all over the map from maneuver to
maneuver. I say forget the box but downgrade like mad for someone that
is out of control on positioning and that includes being too high, too low,
too far up wind or down wind, in too close or out too far.
Amen.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Jim O</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=mailto:vanputte@cox.net href="mailto:vanputte@cox.net">Ron Van
Putte</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> Tuesday, March 08, 2005 7:17
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Another box rule
(discussion)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><BR>On Mar 8, 2005, at 8:52 PM, Lance Van Nostrand
wrote:<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><?fontfamily><?param Arial><?x-tad-bigger>The concept of a
rectangular box, instead of one that is a "vee", is intriguing. It's
hard to judge, but it would allow closer in flight without detriment.<?/x-tad-bigger><?/fontfamily><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>And we could
say, "Gee, now we're flying just like IMAC." I think they call it a
"zoneless box", or something like that and they award "style points", or
something like that. Just what we need, no box and impression judging. Back
to the dark ages of judging! : (<BR><BR>Ron Van
Putte</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>