WGC Uvalde: US Team... What Happened????

Come on Sean,
You completely miss many of the great points that John made about how important it is to keep contests fun. They are not all about selection for the world's!!! You didn't acknowledge his arguments about how the US rules help to make contests more appealing to barely enough contestants to have contests at all. Were any of these ideas valid?

I also agree that if USA contests started becoming consistent land-out fests that you would see participation drop. Fine, so we aren't grooming winners for the world's but we are at least still racing. You are arguing for changing the way we try to swim here and in reality we are just trying to stay afloat!

In my mind the biggest difference is that due to the USA being so large, it takes these kinds of rules changes to attract enough glider pilots to attend any particular contest. How many of the Europeans drive 1000,2000, even 3000km to attend a contest? You see that all the time here in the USA. Again, were any of John's points valid?

Thanks Dave for working on the flight analysis. Can't wait to start reviewing!

Bruno - B4

On Sep 19, 8:28*pm, wrote:
Come on Sean,
You completely miss many of the great points that John made about how important it is to keep contests fun. *They are not all about selection for the world's!!! *You didn't acknowledge his arguments about how the US rules help to make contests more appealing to barely enough contestants to have contests at all. *Were any of these ideas valid?

I also agree that if USA contests started becoming consistent land-out fests that you would see participation drop. *Fine, so we aren't grooming winners for the world's but we are at least still racing. *You are arguing for changing the way we try to swim here and in reality we are just trying to stay afloat!

In my mind the biggest difference is that due to the USA being so large, it takes these kinds of rules changes to attract enough glider pilots to attend any particular contest. *How many of the Europeans drive 1000,2000, even 3000km to attend a contest? You see that all the time here in the USA. *Again, were any of John's points valid?

Thanks Dave for working on the flight analysis. *Can't wait to start reviewing!

Bruno - B4

Right on Sean!

Agree with Sean.
And have big problem with Johns thinking.
It is no fun to fly MAT with one or no TP !
It is no fun to fly TAT with huge circles.
It is not safe to be forced to land at the airport ,
after good finish.
It is no fun to fly without the water.(like would be no fun to fly without ruder)
It is no fun if task is changed 3 times (including after first launch)
It is no fun if task was called in the air by one of competitors.
Those some of our " Better rules" John.
Ryszard Krolikowski

On Sep 19, 11:01*pm, RW wrote:
Agree with Sean.
And have big problem with Johns thinking.
It is no fun to fly MAT with one or no TP !
It is no fun to fly TAT with huge circles.
It is not safe to be forced to land at the airport ,
after good finish.
It is no fun to fly without the water.(like would be no fun to fly without ruder)
It is no fun if task is changed 3 times (including after first launch)
It is no fun if task was called in the air by one of competitors.
Those some of *our " Better rules" John.
Ryszard Krolikowski

None of these are rules. They are CD / task adviser decisions, I
happen to agree on most -- I hate one turn MATs, huge circles and no
water as well. The rules allow long mats, assigned tasks, many small
circles, and water ballast. Tell your CD and task advisers. We can't
ban these things, as there are occasions in which on turn MATs, huge
circles and dry are appropriate. But not nearly as often as they are
called.
I support the ability to change tasks in the air, especially to a
preprinted B task. I'd rather leave the start gaggle go off and do a
it of programming than lose a day, or head off into a thunderstorm
just because we said so. Dave Leonard's report from Uvalde makes it
clear that not beling able to change tasks in the air was the cause of
at least one flight right into a terrible quadrant.
John Cochrane

None of these are rules. They are CD / task adviser decisions,

Our rules allow for all I mentioned.
None of this by IGC rules!
Try to explain to Andreas how we allow total task change in the prestart
gaggle, when we have to program new task from scratch, flying 200ft apart.
Try to make sense when you explain how we fly at(like at Fairfield) contest task with no TPs.
Our rules allow it, IGC dont !
Tell him how you promote safety with our rules setting MAT with few TPs and letting 60 gliders doing laps 100kts heads on just under 50km street for minimum 3 lapses.
Our rules allow it, IGC dont!
Ryszard Krolikowski

On Wednesday, 19 September 2012 20:28:19 UTC-6, wrote:
Come on Sean,

You completely miss many of the great points that John made about how important it is to keep contests fun. They are not all about selection for the world's!!! You didn't acknowledge his arguments about how the US rules help to make contests more appealing to barely enough contestants to have contests at all. Were any of these ideas valid?



I also agree that if USA contests started becoming consistent land-out fests that you would see participation drop. Fine, so we aren't grooming winners for the world's but we are at least still racing. You are arguing for changing the way we try to swim here and in reality we are just trying to stay afloat!



In my mind the biggest difference is that due to the USA being so large, it takes these kinds of rules changes to attract enough glider pilots to attend any particular contest. How many of the Europeans drive 1000,2000, even 3000km to attend a contest? You see that all the time here in the USA. Again, were any of John's points valid?



Thanks Dave for working on the flight analysis. Can't wait to start reviewing!



Bruno - B4

From the 2012 Rulebooks

USA FAI Competition-Class Competition Rulebook.

1.0 GENERAL
1.1 The purpose of a National FAI Class Soaring Championship is to determine a National FAI Class Champion and to measure the performance of all entrants. Performance in Nationals will be used to provide a basis for pilots to qualify for entry into future soaring Championships and to select pilots for the U.S. Team in International Competition.

U.S. National Sport-Class Competition Rules
February 27, 2012
1.0 GENERAL
1.1 â€* The purpose of a National Sport Class Soaring Championship is to determine a National Sport Class Champion and to measure the performance of all entrants. Performance in Nationals will be used to provide a basis for pilots to qualify for entry into future soaring Championships and to select pilots for the U.S. Team in International Club Class Competition. Handicapping will be applied to minimize score differences due to performance differences between sailplanes.

U.S. Regional FAI-Class Competition Rules
February 27, 2012
1.0 GENERAL
1.1 â€* The purpose of a Regional FAI Soaring Championship is to determine a Regional Champion and to measure the performance of all
entrants within each class. Performance in Regionals will be used to provide a basis for pilots to qualify for entry into future soaring
Championships.

U.S. Regional Sport-Class Competition Rules
February 27, 2012
1.0 GENERAL
1.1 â€* The purpose of a Regional Sport Class Soaring Championship is to determine a Regional Sport Class Champion, to measure the
performance of all entrants, and to provide an entry level for pilots new to competitive sailplane racing to learn the skills and procedures
used in competition. Performance in Regionals will be used to provide a basis for pilots to qualify for entry into future soaring
Championships. Handicapping will be applied to minimize score differences due to performance differences between sailplanes.

I agree with many points made by folks but lets not forget that the secondary Objective, as defined by the rules committee, of Nationals competitions is to select members for the world team.

I fully understand the complex nature of holding, organizing and delivering contests but lets keep in mind that they must fulfill the objective(s) set forth by the SSA and FAI. If the objective continues for Nationals continues to be to select a world team then the CD's and CM's must deliver on that. The challenge is of course that if you have a checkbook, time off, soaring/contest experience you can participate. There is no more hierarchy to qualify.

Yes John makes excellent points, they must be tempered with the stated objectives of the rules committee.

Ron Gleason

Bruno (nice to hear from you),

I hear the points John made clearly. I understand the vision. I simply don't accept them as fact.

Where is this data supporting claims of “mass land outs” if a contest is run under FAI rules vs. US Rules? Where is the data that shows higher levels of appeal for US rule contests vs. FAI? To who? What choice do “they” have? Safety doesn’t appear to improve under US rules although I respect that in many ways that is the intent.

Bottom line: the whole "World" seems to be doing as well as the US in attendance and safety, and better in many cases in World Championship or FAI contest performance.

Yet, the US insists on going down a completely different contest rules program. I am starting to wonder how this different path ever began frankly. It’s a bummer. Here we are with clear change resistance issues even though the conversation (me) is simply suggesting that we do the same as the rest of the world and flying FAI. A suggestion that we adopt for the US what appears to be the "gold standard" around the world. It appears we are saying the rest of the world is "wrong" and we are "right."

I honestly don't think this change effort would be a big of a deal (the way we swim, drowning, etc). Although I fear many who are “emotionally invested” in the US rules would cry doom and gloom if a real debate about adopting FAI rules was started. Changing to FAI would be fairly simple IMO. It would aslo have some clear benefits.

The rest of the world flies FAI rules. They appear to be pretty darn healthy when compared to US attendance. Pilots all over the world appear to be very happy with FAI soaring competition.
I think we somehow assume alot about the effectiveness of the US rules on attendance. And clearly we as a country provide no weight to the Worlds competitiveness issue.

I don’t mean to be calling someone’s baby ugly here. But I will say that we are hindering baby's potential. Baby's growth. Baby is behind. I think being the only country in the world that supports a completely different set of rules than the rest of the world is a mistake. I think being the only country in the world to support its own A-Z sports class and blocks Club class is a big mistake. 15/18/Standard are the classes with attendance issues. Club level ships are a very dense area of US contest participation. They complain about being forced to compete level with ASG29 and Arcus. Giving them their own class would, IMO, improve their enthusiasm and attendance.

We should allow Club class (FAI) and then call Sports the high end ships until we figure out the new classes. This is my recommendation.

I hate having another different point of view here, but I do. I believe it is good thing to have these conversations and let others weigh in.

F2

On Wednesday, September 19, 2012 10:28:19 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Come on Sean,

You completely miss many of the great points that John made about how important it is to keep contests fun. They are not all about selection for the world's!!! You didn't acknowledge his arguments about how the US rules help to make contests more appealing to barely enough contestants to have contests at all. Were any of these ideas valid?



I also agree that if USA contests started becoming consistent land-out fests that you would see participation drop. Fine, so we aren't grooming winners for the world's but we are at least still racing. You are arguing for changing the way we try to swim here and in reality we are just trying to stay afloat!



In my mind the biggest difference is that due to the USA being so large, it takes these kinds of rules changes to attract enough glider pilots to attend any particular contest. How many of the Europeans drive 1000,2000, even 3000km to attend a contest? You see that all the time here in the USA. Again, were any of John's points valid?



Thanks Dave for working on the flight analysis. Can't wait to start reviewing!



Bruno - B4

I hear the points John made clearly. *I understand the vision. *I simply don't accept them as fact.

Where is this data supporting claims of “mass land outs” if a contest is run under FAI rules vs. US Rules? *Where is the data that shows higher levels of appeal for US rule contests vs. FAI? *To who? *What choice do “they” have? Safety doesn’t appear to improve under US rules although I respect that in many ways that is the intent.

Bottom line: *the whole "World" seems to be doing as well as the US in attendance and safety, and better in many cases in World Championship or FAI contest performance.

Yet, the US insists on going down a completely different contest rules program. *I am starting to wonder how this different path ever began frankly. *It’s a bummer. *Here we are with clear change resistance issues even though the conversation (me) is simply suggesting that we do the same as the rest of the world and flying FAI. *A suggestion that we adopt for the US what appears to be the "gold standard" around the world. *It appears we are saying the rest of the world is "wrong" and we are "right."

I honestly don't think this change effort would be a big of a deal (the way we swim, drowning, etc). *Although I fear many who are “emotionally invested” in the US rules would cry doom and gloom if a real debate about adopting FAI rules was started. *Changing to FAI would be fairly simple IMO. *It would aslo have some clear benefits.

The rest of the world flies FAI rules. *They appear to be pretty darn healthy when compared to US attendance. *Pilots all over the world appear to be very happy with FAI soaring competition.
I think we somehow assume alot about the effectiveness of the US rules on attendance. *And clearly we as a country provide no weight to the Worlds competitiveness issue.

I don’t mean to be calling someone’s baby ugly here. *But I will say that we are hindering baby's potential. *Baby's growth. *Baby is behind. *I think being the only country in the world that supports a completely different set of rules than the rest of the world is a mistake. *I think being the only country in the world to support its own A-Z sports class and blocks Club class is a big mistake. *15/18/Standard are the classes with attendance issues. *Club level ships are a very dense area of US contest participation. *They complain about being forced to compete level with ASG29 and Arcus. *Giving them their own class would, IMO, improve their enthusiasm and attendance.

We should allow Club class (FAI) and then call Sports the high end ships until we figure out the new classes. *This is my recommendation.

I hate having another different point of view here, but I do. *I believe it is good thing to have these conversations and let others weigh in.


Put in a bid for Ionia super-regional to be flown under IGC rules with
club class. If 50 pilots show up, your case will be made. Heck, put in
a bid to run a continental championship under IGC rules. Ditto.

John Cochrane

Will do. But are damn weather. I might not even show up. :-). Probably will need to be late July/August.

I guess if you want to have one of your pilots be World Champion (or at
least stand somewhere on the podium) and are disappointed that with home
advantage it wasn't achieved, you can either shrug you shoulders and say
'all the other pilots were even better', or look for some structural reason
why.

The argument, 'we have a small glider pilot population density, and are
geographically isolated', doesn't stack up when you see how pilots from
South Africa and New Zealand perform.

Regularly flying with a different set of rules is (IMHO) a much more
plausible reason. A Worlds is a learning environment - but not if you
expect to win.

Encouraging a proper Club Class (limited handicap range) is one step
towards getting a wider range of pilots interested in a serious top-level
comp., at affordable cost (if any form of soaring can be categorised as
affordable). And educate your CDs into task setting that causes pilots to
develop the kind of tactical thinking that wins FAI rules competitions.
The US MAT is a cop-out. In UK we manage to use FAI rules in weather that
is just as demanding, without mass landouts except on the days when no sane
pilot would rig if it weren't for the fact some sadistic CD has called
'launch the grid' (I confess, it has been me in the past, but I have also
been a victim)..

And changing tasks in the air is insanity.