If the idea is to discourage low saves because of the potential for stall/spin at a low altitude and not wanting to encourage risk for points. Fine we are trying to save lives. After the scored landout the pilot figures to dig out and fly home. While trying the glider augurs in, ship destroyed and pilot dead. How is this different than taking the same risk for points is on the contest and if after the scored landout the pilot decides to take the same risk to get home but this is okay because they died trying to avoid inconvenience and not gather a few points. The death is not on the contest but the PIC's poor decision? Taking risks is always relative and even with data the number of deaths from botching a low save are so few compared to other aspects of the flight (starts and finishes) trying to regulate for such low probability is a waste of effort.

It seems like the pilots were injured screwing up the landings. If we want safer contests we should stop debating rules to stop minuscule aspects of the sport and put real effort into teaching pilots how to safely land the glider in unfamiliar territory.

Too often pilots land at home and roll up to the trailer for convenience. Maybe landing in such a way to simulate an off field landing and suffer the inconvenience of having to get the ship with a golf cart might help. A club mate trying to save time decided to land long and roll back to the departure. Glidervended up across the raid in a ditch. No damage or injury but prevenatable and stupid.

Every time we fly we are training ourselves how to act in a situation. Convenience should NEVER enter into our decision making process but when pilots routinely land at home with convenience in mind it becomes part of the equation.

We, the Soaring community, need more and better training much more then rules.