WGC Club Class Day 2 Scoring

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:29:20 AM UTC-6, Evan Ludeman wrote:
More FAI rules silliness: http://tinyurl.com/aasl8mg



T8

a Rule that creates an incentive for that kind of behavior is pretty silly I think, but I don't see any igc file in the club class mass landout on Day 2 that backs up the story. Perhaps it was a story of what they would've done, or had done at some time in the past.

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:12:12 AM UTC-5, Tony wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:29:20 AM UTC-6, Evan Ludeman wrote:

More FAI rules silliness: http://tinyurl.com/aasl8mg







T8



a Rule that creates an incentive for that kind of behavior is pretty silly I think, but I don't see any igc file in the club class mass landout on Day 2 that backs up the story. Perhaps it was a story of what they would've done, or had done at some time in the past.

I can't find it, either. With the finish height as low as it is, it's a pretty thin edge, even as edge cases go. Hmph. Never trust a yankee to come up with a good story that's true.

T8

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 12:22:04 PM UTC-5, Evan Ludeman wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:12:12 AM UTC-5, Tony wrote:

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:29:20 AM UTC-6, Evan Ludeman wrote:



More FAI rules silliness: http://tinyurl.com/aasl8mg










T8







a Rule that creates an incentive for that kind of behavior is pretty silly I think, but I don't see any igc file in the club class mass landout on Day 2 that backs up the story. Perhaps it was a story of what they would've done, or had done at some time in the past.



I can't find it, either. With the finish height as low as it is, it's a pretty thin edge, even as edge cases go. Hmph. Never trust a yankee to come up with a good story that's true.



T8

I'm very surprised how IGC rules are negatively presented to pilots which didn't have opportunity to fly them .
Claiming that IGC rules are responsible for gaggles and are more dangerous is not correct.

The best of the best are flying in the Worlds.
Pilots skill level is almost the same , performance of the gliders is the same, the only difference is small difference in achieved task speed or distance. The best way to gain is to outsmart opponent and to do that is to start 20 seconds later and finish at the same time or to gain just fraction of altitude or gain extra distance. Because in US contests pilots level is over the place top pilots have comfort to shake off followers and don't need to worry about 20 seconds. In addition because of different skill level US gaggles are not able to grow to the size which we see during Worlds. For some there is shock to see 150 gliders like in Szeged and blame IGC rules for gaggling. Weak and marginal condition will always attract gaggles doesn't matter what kind of rules.
We had gaggles during 2012 US 15M Nationals Mifflin, in addition we had start roulette where we were in sinking thermal before starting 1000 feet lower then possible, under US rules not IGC. For some pilots seeing more then 20 gliders in the thermal there is shock, but in Europe or during Worlds 50 gliders or more is normal as their contests attract 100 or more pilots.
Start line was presented as unsafe in comparison to start cylinder.
US start cylinder is one of the most dangerous places, because before start most pilots are trying to find strong thermal inside cylinder and start trough the top . Worse, we have gaggle flying just under deck with high speed in turn or open air brakes just to stay below start altitude for 2 minutes checking our instruments for altitude and time instead of watching other gliders. This is the most dangerous gaggle in the world and it is under US rules not IGC. US rules are putting more restrictions on the pilots then IGC rules, forcing US pilots to check instruments more often instead looking around especially before start and on the final glide.

Jerzy XG

On Jan 13, 11:32*am, Jerzy wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 12:22:04 PM UTC-5, Evan Ludeman wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:12:12 AM UTC-5, Tony wrote:

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:29:20 AM UTC-6, Evan Ludeman wrote:

More FAI rules silliness:http://tinyurl.com/aasl8mg

T8

a Rule that creates an incentive for that kind of behavior is pretty silly I think, but I don't see any igc file in the club class mass landout on Day 2 that backs up the story. Perhaps it was a story of what they would've done, or had done at some time in the past.

I can't find it, either. *With the finish height as low as it is, it's a pretty thin edge, even as edge cases go. *Hmph. *Never trust a yankee to come up with a good story that's true.

T8

I'm very surprised how IGC rules are *negatively presented to pilots which didn't have opportunity to fly them .
Claiming that IGC rules are responsible for gaggles and are more dangerous is not correct.

The best of the best are flying in the Worlds.
*Pilots skill *level is almost the same , performance of the gliders is the same, the only difference is small difference in achieved task speed or distance. The best way to gain is to outsmart opponent and to do that is to start 20 seconds later and finish at the same time or to gain just fraction of altitude or gain extra distance. Because in US contests pilots level is over the place top pilots have comfort to shake off followers and don't need to worry about 20 seconds. In addition *because of different skill level US gaggles are not able to grow to the size which we see during Worlds. For some there is shock to see *150 gliders like in Szeged and blame IGC rules for gaggling. Weak and marginal condition will always attract gaggles doesn't matter what kind of rules.
*We had gaggles during 2012 US 15M Nationals Mifflin, in addition we had *start roulette where we were in sinking thermal before starting 1000 feet lower then possible, under US rules not IGC. For some pilots seeing more then 20 gliders in the thermal there is shock, but in Europe or during Worlds 50 gliders or more is normal as their contests attract 100 or more pilots.
Start line was presented as unsafe in comparison to start cylinder.
US start cylinder is one of the most dangerous places, because before start most pilots are trying to find strong thermal inside cylinder and start trough the top . Worse, we have gaggle flying just under deck with high speed in turn or open air brakes just to stay below start altitude for 2 minutes checking our instruments for altitude and time instead of watching other gliders. This is the most dangerous gaggle in the world and it is *under US rules not IGC. US rules are putting more restrictions on the pilots then IGC rules, forcing US pilots to check instruments more often instead looking around especially before start and on the final glide.

Jerzy XG

Many of Jerzy's points are right but not all. Yes, WGC contests are
bigger. Yes, there are many more really good pilots there. And both
considerations change strategy a lot.

But there are definable places in the IGC rules which give clear
additional incentives to gaggling.

The biggest is the speed/distance and devaluation formulas. Under IGC
rules, if you are the only finisher and the gaggle lands a few miles
short, you get trivial extra points. If you're the only landout and
the gaggle finishes, you get hammered. John Good did an extensive
analysis of this for the US team. Page 6 here has a detailed example

http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john...nd_classes.pdf

US rules and devaluation formulas are not perfect by a long shot, but
they do not create quite so strong incentives to sit for an hour and
go land out with the gaggle. The lone wolf who starts first and
finishes when the gaggle plays this game gets a much bigger reward.
Yes we still have gaggles when we call assigned tasks in the blue. But
this is a matter of degree, and the direction is undeniable.

The US start cylinder, with 2 minute rule, ability to start through
the top, and the start height placed well below the top of the lift,
only requires a pilot to monitor altitude for 2 minutes, in abundant
lift. This is a lot better than spending an hour sitting at the very
top of weak thermals or thermal wave with a WGC unlimited altitude
start, gaggles going off inside the clouds, or VNE dives.

It's really not that hard. If the start is 5000', go find a decent
thermal, descend to 4900', sit on the outskirts of the thermal for 1.5
minutes, then rejoin. Climb briefly through the top and head out on
course. Or, better, descend to 4000', scout around for a great core
and blast through the top at 6 knots.

John Cochrane

Excellent post Jerzy.

Reading some of the Worlds blog posts (and definitely many RAS posts) its as if a propaganda campaign demonizing IGC rules is underway in the US. This is in apparent response to the group of US club class owners and contest pilots asking for an SSA SANCTIONED US club class for years. What was offered after years of begging is a massively morphed barely recognizable "in name only "US club class."

In my opinion (At the US nationals) the successful sports class should remain unchanged, the club class should closely resemble IGC Club Class and pilots of club level gliders SHOULD HAVE THE OPTION to fly Sports or Club.

Club Nationals IS INTENDED to qualify a US pilot for the FAI CLUB CLASS WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS after all.

Everyone has a choice, nobody is left behind.

Simple! Clean and very little risk of dissatisfaction...

55 pilots have signed the WE WANT FAI / IGC RULES SSA SANCTIONED US CLUB CLASS PETITION. Major names, etc, etc.

Sean
F2

On Monday, January 14, 2013 1:04:43 PM UTC-6, Sean F (F2) wrote:
Excellent post Jerzy.



Reading some of the Worlds blog posts (and definitely many RAS posts) its as if a propaganda campaign demonizing IGC rules is underway in the US. This is in apparent response to the group of US club class owners and contest pilots asking for an SSA SANCTIONED US club class for years. What was offered after years of begging is a massively morphed barely recognizable "in name only "US club class."



In my opinion (At the US nationals) the successful sports class should remain unchanged, the club class should closely resemble IGC Club Class and pilots of club level gliders SHOULD HAVE THE OPTION to fly Sports or Club.



Club Nationals IS INTENDED to qualify a US pilot for the FAI CLUB CLASS WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS after all.



Everyone has a choice, nobody is left behind.



Simple! Clean and very little risk of dissatisfaction...



55 pilots have signed the WE WANT FAI / IGC RULES SSA SANCTIONED US CLUB CLASS PETITION. Major names, etc, etc.



Sean

F2

Regarding propaganda campaigns: not having a horse in this race, I see valid reasoning on both sides and very little flaming although the protagonists appear to be quite opinionated. If someone would put a gun to my head and force me to choose I'd go Sports Class. Any set of rules that allows for 3km finals in near ground effect, jumping roads, risking to hit photographers standing on their cars, having to make 180 turns near the ground, low energy landings in general and the like are too much excitement for me. I'd have no qualms about IGC Rule fans holding their own contests but participation will be low IMHO.

On Monday, January 14, 2013 3:35:44 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Monday, January 14, 2013 1:04:43 PM UTC-6, Sean F (F2) wrote:

Excellent post Jerzy.







Reading some of the Worlds blog posts (and definitely many RAS posts) its as if a propaganda campaign demonizing IGC rules is underway in the US. This is in apparent response to the group of US club class owners and contest pilots asking for an SSA SANCTIONED US club class for years. What was offered after years of begging is a massively morphed barely recognizable "in name only "US club class."







In my opinion (At the US nationals) the successful sports class should remain unchanged, the club class should closely resemble IGC Club Class and pilots of club level gliders SHOULD HAVE THE OPTION to fly Sports or Club.







Club Nationals IS INTENDED to qualify a US pilot for the FAI CLUB CLASS WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS after all.







Everyone has a choice, nobody is left behind.







Simple! Clean and very little risk of dissatisfaction...







55 pilots have signed the WE WANT FAI / IGC RULES SSA SANCTIONED US CLUB CLASS PETITION. Major names, etc, etc.







Sean



F2



Regarding propaganda campaigns: not having a horse in this race, I see valid reasoning on both sides and very little flaming although the protagonists appear to be quite opinionated. If someone would put a gun to my head and force me to choose I'd go Sports Class. Any set of rules that allows for 3km finals in near ground effect, jumping roads, risking to hit photographers standing on their cars, having to make 180 turns near the ground, low energy landings in general and the like are too much excitement for me. I'd have no qualms about IGC Rule fans holding their own contests but participation will be low IMHO.

I see the propagandist have succeeded again! FAI rules allow for finish altitudes of 5000 feet AGL or more if contest management sees fit. We can all agree this is exagerated but the point is that contest management is responsible for a safe contest. Just like in the US.

Sean Franke

On Jan 14, 5:57*pm, wrote:
On Monday, January 14, 2013 3:35:44 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Monday, January 14, 2013 1:04:43 PM UTC-6, Sean F (F2) wrote:

Excellent post Jerzy.

Reading some of the Worlds blog posts (and definitely many RAS posts) its as if a propaganda campaign demonizing IGC rules is underway in the US.. *This is in apparent response to the group of US club class owners and contest pilots asking for an SSA SANCTIONED US club class for years. *What was offered after years of begging is a massively morphed barely recognizable "in name only "US club class."

In my opinion (At the US nationals) the successful sports class should remain unchanged, the club class should closely resemble IGC Club Class and pilots of club level gliders SHOULD HAVE THE OPTION to fly Sports or Club.

Club Nationals IS INTENDED to qualify a US pilot for the FAI CLUB CLASS WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS after all.

Everyone has a choice, nobody is left behind.

Simple! *Clean and very little risk of dissatisfaction...

55 pilots have signed the WE WANT FAI / IGC RULES SSA SANCTIONED US *CLUB CLASS PETITION. *Major names, etc, etc.

Sean

F2

Regarding propaganda campaigns: not having a horse in this race, I see valid reasoning on both sides and very little flaming although the protagonists appear to be quite opinionated. *If someone would put a gun to my head and force me to choose I'd go Sports Class. *Any set of rules that allows for 3km finals in near ground effect, jumping roads, risking to hit photographers standing on their cars, having to make 180 turns near the ground, low energy landings in general and the like are too much excitement for me. *I'd have no qualms about IGC Rule fans holding their own contests but participation will be low IMHO.

I see the propagandist have succeeded again! FAI rules allow for finish altitudes of 5000 feet AGL or more if contest management sees fit. We can all agree this is exagerated but the point is that contest management is responsible for a safe contest. *Just like in the US.

Sean Franke

Please, please, please let's not start up the whole "we must have pure
club class with IGC rules at Mifflin in May" all over again. We've
beat it to death. Not happening. The organizers and scorers don't want
to do it, and we don't do huge rules changes for nationals at the last
moment.

If you want this to happen, running a regional under IGC rules would
be an excellent way to show that pilots desire this format and you
know enough about the rules to make it work. Then we'll revisit the
whole business in the fall.

Last time, when we ran the pilot opinion poll, a huge majority said
they liked the structure of Mifflin, and zero -- zero -- comments said
"we must have pure club class and IGC rules." Give us a hint, during
the regular rules change season, ok? We will obviously poll the use of
IGC rules in November.

John Cochrane

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 11:42:12 PM UTC+10:30, Tony wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:29:20 AM UTC-6, Evan Ludeman wrote:

More FAI rules silliness: http://tinyurl.com/aasl8mg







T8



a Rule that creates an incentive for that kind of behavior is pretty silly I think, but I don't see any igc file in the club class mass landout on Day 2 that backs up the story. Perhaps it was a story of what they would've done, or had done at some time in the past.

Disappointing no one seems to actually read the rules these days.
Not only is there no evidence this actually happened, the penalty is 1pt/metre below finish height *NOT EXCEEDING ACHIEVED SPEED POINTS*. Of which you get none for an outlanding, so no harm in finishing below height if it's not possible otherwise. (Sporting Code 3, Annex A, 8.7 "Incorrect Finish")

On Jan 15, 5:54*am, wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 11:42:12 PM UTC+10:30, Tony wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:29:20 AM UTC-6, Evan Ludeman wrote:

More FAI rules silliness:http://tinyurl.com/aasl8mg

T8

a Rule that creates an incentive for that kind of behavior is pretty silly I think, but I don't see any igc file in the club class mass landout on Day 2 that backs up the story. Perhaps it was a story of what they would've done, or had done at some time in the past.

Disappointing no one seems to actually read the rules these days.
Not only is there no evidence this actually happened, the penalty is 1pt/metre below finish height *NOT EXCEEDING ACHIEVED SPEED POINTS*. Of which you get none for an outlanding, so no harm in finishing below height if it's not possible otherwise. (Sporting Code 3, Annex A, 8.7 "Incorrect Finish")

I recall Rick's post calling it an "unsafe flying" penalty, not a "low
finish" penalty, but I'm not sure.
A lot for a pilot to keep straight finishing a long final glide at
53.00 knots and 20 meters above a busy road.

John Cochrane