Let's be honest. If soaring were a zero-risk activity, like video games,
it wouldn't have the same appeal.

I cannot agree with this. I have skipped a lot of competitions because
increased risk level, and making that risk smaller would increase appeal of
these events greatly, at least for me. Competition flight is always a great
adventure, feeling that this might not end well does nothing to me expect
decision that I do not let this same situation to happen ever again.

Random post selection in action here - not intending to pick a bone with any
individual, but since the excerpted top post/point has been singled out by
several as a point of disagreement, here's a take from a slightly different
perspective.

I don't DISagree with the top post's assertion...which is far from saying that
I AGREE with an assertion that it's risk that attracted/attracts me to
soaring. However, few would argue that it's easier to summon forth personal
focus from inside a cockpit in the atmosphere than (say) from inside "the
average soaring simulator" (aka - w. wry humor - "video game proxy"). Point
being that - for me - there's no question that one of the (very, very, many)
personal satisfactions and enjoyments I derive from soaring is the
rarely-verbalized one of the *knowledge* that the activity requires unceasing
"acceptable mastery" of the risks involved in flight. That fact - while hardly
qualifying me as an adrenaline junkie - is personally undeniable, and in that
sense IS part of soaring's appeal for me. The activity unavoidably demands -
and provides positive feedback about - good judgment and one of its real-world
benefits. I find that appealing.

So while the risk didn't attract me, successfully managing it IS a continuing
attraction. Life...full of paradoxes...

Perhaps pedantically,
Bob W.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com