On Sep 21, 1:21*pm, John Cochrane
wrote:
On Sep 21, 10:56*am, "noel.wade" wrote:

Thanks, Ken! *Lots

Wow, the TAT/MAT proposal is a tough one! *

Well, you can probably guess who came up with that one! I did my best
to write a poll question that explained the issue sufficiently, but
yet was somewhere near short enough to put on the poll. I'm happy to
answer questions directly or via r.a.s. *I know it's a complex issue,
but if we do what is, I think, the right answer, we need to all
understand that means a 60 mile, one hour "finish" might score less
than a 250 mile landout.

It does apply mostly to MAT, *but can apply to turn area tasks. Some
CDs love 30 mile circles, so it is possible to nick the circles, fly
60 miles and "finish" in one hour, while the "real" task flies 250
miles in 3.5 hours. Current rules guarantee you 600 points (i.e. give
you the same as the winner's distance points) for this little gambit;
the proposal will not. *That's especially a problem in sports class;
the circles have to be set large enough so a short course is available
for the 1-26; but then the nimbus 4 gets the "nick the circle and
finish" option.

John Cochrane

Hmm, is this an unintended side-effect of an earlier rule change to
give long landouts more points (from 400 to 600 IIRC)? Before that
change, scores for finishers were spread over 600 pts. The larger
spread meant that a 'short finisher' was more heavily punished,
relative to the day winner.

If the two rule changes are viewed together, they represent a very
significant change away from the philosophy that it is more important
to finish than it is to rack up distance.

I'm not sure that's all bad, but it is a significant change

TA