On Monday, August 12, 2013 10:28:36 AM UTC-6, Sean F (F2) wrote:
Both of these rule "schemes" have issues. If the IGC scoring "loopholes" which are pointed out above are true, they are pretty silly. But I doubt the severity of this threads initial "loophole" interpretation and it appears not to have been a deciding factor in determining the champion of this event.



The only truths I see about the IGC rules (95% of the world) and the US rules (5% of the world) a



1) The more rules you have, the less fun it becomes. KISS (Keep it simple stupid). And this is not the case with either, especially US rules which are 2x longer than IGC rules.



2) The WORLD uses IGC rules. Internationally, the US (with the exception of a few young pilots who strongly advocate using IGC rules for major US contests) has been completely left behind in World Championship results because our top pilots are entirely unfamiliar with the technical side of the IGC rules. Like it or not, IGC rules are required reading and "doing" if we want to be competitive at the World Championships again one day!



Meanwhile, the US has become very focused on satisfying the needs of a certain segment of our pilots who tend to not like to even risk landing out anymore...the US rules support that concept desire nicely. I personally find the US rules to be good from a scoring perspective, but would prefer to race vastly more challenging tasks: AT's & long MAT's and hate 10 mile circles in AAT's. 5 mile would be better. Tasking is the main US rule problem in my opinion.



I also think there should be a maximum of a 10 mile circle in US tasking. If a task requires greater than 10 mile circles it should be shelved in favor of a long MAT close into the airport. Seriously, tasks with 20 mile circles should be formally referred to as OLC tasks!



Because the US rules seem to favor (and often result in) AAT's with very large circles, these tasks are highly influenced by luck (unless it is a 15/18 meter contest with smaller circle AAT, MAT and AT tasking). This makes them boring and less valued by competitive pilots. I would be much more excited about winning an AT task that an AAT with 25 mile circles for example. You?



I cannot wait for the Florida Grand Prix. It will be the most fun I have had in soaring, by far.



Sean

F2

Interesting metric, rules length. Current (2012) IGC Sporting Code Annex A for world and continental soaring championships is a 47 page pdf file. SSA contest rules for "FAI Class Nationals" is a 40 page pdf file. Sort of almost twice as long? Try rescoring the last day at the JWGC using both scoring formulas and see which is simpler, "more transparent", and which leads to more unusual tactics, ie not flying for the best absolute performance.

Both sets of rules are very flexible in terms of tasking as well as starting and finishing procedures. Very much left up to the organizer. No denying most US organizers have low tolerance for landout risk. But that's not rule driven.

The last AST only contest I flew in was Tonopah 2003. The other current task options were available, but not used by the CD. He called a task in the morning and that was it, no changes. Memorable, but not on the top of my fun list.

I wonder how the Florida GP will handle landouts since they are using a 1000 pt scoring system. No mention at all in the rules.