I feel that those low altitude finishes add nothing to the sport
except for some broken gliders (and pilots!) and some very anxious
crews. Furthermore, it encourages violation of FARs for minimum
altitude. There may be some pilots who think they may have some
competitive edge because they are willing to push it lower than the
others, and this may be the case. I say cast your vote, let democracy
function and accept the result.

Tom, that is like saying that in NASCAR (or F1, or CART, or drag
racing) fast laps add nothing to the sport except for some broken cars
(and drivers!). WE ARE TALKING ABOUT RACING! I, for one, love the
rush of a low, fast finish at the end of a nicely judged 60 mile final
glide - that's one of the reasons I race! Is there more risk than
just entering the pattern at 800 feet with all the 2-33s? Probably
(although my bet is the stats don't support that conclusion).

If you feel racing is too dangerous, then by all means don't do it,
but please don't ruin if for those of us who like it the way it is -
challenging, exciting, beautiful to watch, and yes, a little risky!

It used to be simple - CD set a task, and fastest glider around wins.
Now, you don't know how far everyone is flying, and going faster
doesn't even mean you are going to win - but by God you will do it
"safely"!

Maybe it's time to set up a separate racing series for those of us who
prefer to race than go on organized cross-countries in gaggles - Hell,
it shouldn't take too long for us to kill ourselves off with our low
finishes and pinpoint turnpoints, then everybody can go back to TATs
with 20 mile areas, 15 extra minutes and 1000 ft high speed limited
finishes.

YAWN

Kirk Stant