Minutes of Fall 2014 USA Rules Committee meeting posted on SSA website

On Monday, January 12, 2015 at 10:30:04 AM UTC-8, Jim White wrote:
I note that the rules committee felt that UK style Handicap Distance Tasks
did not give enough benefit to warrant the difficulty of scoring.

In the UK we ran handicap distance tasks in several regional contests last
season and the feedback was almost universally good. Some high handicap
(fast) gliders didn't like it as they found that that they had to work
harder to stay ahead!

To overcome the scoring difficulties, we wrote some software and worked
with Naviter to make it easy to use See You Competition to score the tasks.
This has worked well.

If you use some other software then it could be harder although the process
is simple for those that complete. In theory all gliders flown equally well
will complete in the same elapsed time. Compare the handicapped speed of
each glider to the winners' for speed points. Distance points are the
same.

The difficulty comes with determining distance points for land outs. In the
UK we accept that there are some anomalies between handicaps on the grounds
that the point is to get round.

I am keen to facilitate universal acceptance of this exciting new format as
I believe that it will attract more pilots into competition. If I can help
please give me a shout.

For more information or to download the software go to
www.boffins.co.uk/gliding

Jim

The RC continually looks at innovations in racing formats that can up the competitiveness and enjoyment of the sport and/or broaden its appeal to more pilots. We had a very interesting racing/OLC discussion the evening following this year's RC meeting. There are discussions underway to try some informal experiments at Nephi this year (thanks Bruno!).


Handicapped distance task is an interesting format. There are several questions/issues that made it challenging for use in sanctioned contests, particularly in the immediate future.

1) Scoring - there is only so much capacity to integrate new features into our scoring infrastructure. Experimental task formats that require lots of coding end up low on the priority list until/unless there is known strong demand from pilots. Conversely, manual scoring, we have learned form experience, is simply too much to ask of over-taxed contest organizers, so we don't see a lot of eagerness to try new formats that would prove out the appeal.. Catch-22.

2) One of the concerns with the format that I have heard is the requirement that lower handicap pilots have to fly farther than high handicap pilots. In non-flatland flying in particular this can mean out of good lift bands, into thunderstorms, etc. The format has a bit less courseline flexibility than an AAT or MAT, so it's a potential fairness issue.

3) We already have two variable distance tasks that don't exactly mimic this format, but serve the same basic purpose.

4) The rules are already filled with complexity - this is one more change in mindset that pilots have to get their heads around in terms of mastering strategy and tactics. We get a lot of feedback that introducing changes that don't address a part of the sport that is demonstrably broken drives pilots up the wall.

If there is a big groundswell of local contests that start using this format and/or organic pilot demand, it'll certainly get more attention.

9B