----- Original Message ----- From: "John Erickson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "John & Linda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Soaring List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Tim Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 10:46 AM Subject: Re: [RCSE] Contests, Landings, etc.
> The precision part is easy, especially if it doesn't matter where you land > (assuming you're inside the field boundaries). I think that if you polled > all pilots and they listed tasks in order of difficulty it would come out > like this: > > 1) Making a 100 point landing > 2) Making your time > 3) Landing on the right time > > Why de emphasize the skill that is the hardest to do? The way it has been > set up for years still has the landing as only worth 10% of the scoring (at > maximum) and in many contests only 5%. I think it is a fair allocation of > emphasis. > > We have a game, we have rules, and the guys that are always at the top are > the best ones at playing the game. They're not complaining about how it is > set up, they're practicing as it is set up. When Russ Young won Visalia he > had shot something like 200 landings over the few weeks prior to the > contest. He worked on his skills, which is how I see everyone make the > biggest strides in improving. > > If you are not into competition this entire conversation is moot, but since > we are talking about our current format, I thought I'd chime in. > > JE > -- > Erickson Architects > John R. Erickson, AIA > John, Your comments miss the point, in my opinion. My post addresses the issue of how to adjust the emphasis of our sailplane contests toward flying rather than landing. Your response says "Why de-emphasize the skill that is the hardest to do?" Thermalling inverted is even harder, why not emphasize that? How about flying blindfolded? Yes, we have a game and it has rules, but is there a better game? Can we get there with a simple change to one of the rules? Is it your argument that what we are doing now cannot be improved? In my proposal to use the landing points for tie breakers only, pilots will not ignore the landing target. As I stated, "A perfect flight with a 100 point landing wins every time..." Competitors will be trying for the spot every flight or risk losing. I assure you that in any significant contest there will be flyers making their times and their landings. Others will not be competitive by landing anywhere else on the field. The fact that, as you so clearly state, recognizing the key skills needed for an upcoming event, someone practices those skills and wins, does not respond to the question of whether those should be the key skills. It merely proves that those are the key skills. Why should a soaring contest be based on skill in archery? Practicing archery will help one win such a contest, but why should we do that? The fact that this is what we currently do does not justify it. Could there actually be a better idea? Your comment about the traditional weighting of landing points ignores the AMA rules for Triathlon (20% max for landing) and T3 Precision Duration (12.5% max for landing). Also, it has been my experience that many regional contests (including the one I attended 9/18-19 in Tulsa, OK) weigh the landing at 100 points of 1000 or 11%. On a six minute task, which was part of that event, that represents 39.6 seconds. On a ten minute task, also part of that event, that represents 66 seconds. Note that the longer the task the more time can be made up with landing points, regardless of what weight is applied to the landing. Increasing the length of the task does not necessarily de-emphasize the landing. A flight with a 75 point landing and a 10:00 time (1075) loses to one with a 100 point landing and a time of 9:46 (1076). Which pilot flew better? Did a pilot who missed the time by more than a minute fly better than one who made the time, but flipped over due to a gust in the landing circle? I don't think so. So how do we make the contest format reflect that? If all pilots fly perfectly, or nearly so, these issues do not apply, but we hope to attract more than just those pilots to our events and offer them a basis on which to compete as well. If we do not, does our sport have a future? What I propose is not a huge change. I think it deserves consideration and should be argued based on its merits. Those that will resist change, will resist change regardless of any merits. Those seeking better solutions will address the issues. Which are you? Tim Bennett RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
