US Rules change needed for devaluation of contest day

will be interesting to hear a report of what happened.

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 5:46:30 AM UTC-7, JJ Sinclair wrote:
Looks like it is happening again at Truckee. One finisher gets 850, one land-out gets 239, everyone else gets zero!

Is this fair?

JJ

Is it fair? Based on the information we have, yes. If 25 pilots finish and 25 land out, is that fair? Well, so far, we've decided yes. This is no different. Half the pilots who tried finished. Pretty good by the standards of a lot of contests!

The rule "pilots who don't try don't count" was put in long ago, in (as usual) response to a snafu. As I recall, a large number of pilots looked at the sky, didn't even assemble, it turned in to a good day but horribly devalued. After that, you only devalue the day if you actually try. (UH will remember the actual story, which I'm undoubtedly getting wrong. But you see the logic).

What we don't know is why so many pilots didn't fly. Looking forward to the story

John Cochrane

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 2:59:26 PM UTC-4, John Cochrane wrote:
On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 5:46:30 AM UTC-7, JJ Sinclair wrote:

Looks like it is happening again at Truckee. One finisher gets 850, one land-out gets 239, everyone else gets zero!



Is this fair?



JJ



Is it fair? Based on the information we have, yes. If 25 pilots finish and 25 land out, is that fair? Well, so far, we've decided yes. This is no different. Half the pilots who tried finished. Pretty good by the standards of a lot of contests!



The rule "pilots who don't try don't count" was put in long ago, in (as usual) response to a snafu. As I recall, a large number of pilots looked at the sky, didn't even assemble, it turned in to a good day but horribly devalued. After that, you only devalue the day if you actually try. (UH will remember the actual story, which I'm undoubtedly getting wrong. But you see the logic).



What we don't know is why so many pilots didn't fly. Looking forward to the story



John Cochrane

Some general history on the topic.
It is obvious(to most) that when a significant portion of the pilots attempting the task don't complete that the day should be devalued in some manner..
Originally the requirement was 25% of contestants going at least std min task.
distance.
When, on some occasions, pilots simply didn't try for whatever reason, the rule was changed to 25% of those that "tried", defined and having a scoring distance.
This led to some folks going very short distances to kill the day. That can still happen today but it is very rare, if ever anymore.
There were also time when pilots tore up their landing cards so they would not count to devalue a day and kill it. At least one contest I recall would have been a no contest if that did not happen. Today we are required to turn in flight documentation for all flights so this doesn't happen anymore.
With the implementation of GPS, pilots wanted credit for distance flown before turning around and not going on. The requirement to go at least 1/2 of std min task distance pretty much killed that.
Recently we have heard of a couple cases where it sounds like the criteria for "fair and safe" may not have been met, yet tasks were opened. CD's and task advisers have a responsibility to ensure all have a fair chance to compete.
Sometimes you have to lose a day in the interest of fairness.
We also do not want people feeling they have to go off into storms to stay in the race.
It is also worth noting that this is most easily done using hindsight.
CDs' should not feel pressured to try to make a day out of a bad situation and should not be criticized when they make the safe call, which is many times much harder to make than just throwin' the kids out the window.
FWIW
UH

On Sunday, August 10, 2014 11:10:41 AM UTC-6, Tim Taylor wrote:
After the day at Moriarty earlier this year and Nephi yesterday for the 15M/Std Combined class the rules for how a day is devalued needs to be addressed. I understand why the rule was modified a few years ago so that if pilots just didn't fly it would not devalue the day, but the criteria of what makes a valid attempt is now too high.

Why is this important? Because it makes the contest score subject to random luck rather than showing skill. If we want to attract more pilots to racing we need to ensure that they feel like they can have a fair opportunity to race.

Yesterday should have been devalued to almost nothing or have no score because too few pilots had an opportunity to compete.







Tim (TT)


Tim makes a very clear point here about 2 unfortunate situations that occurred at Moriarty and Nephi this season.
I disagree with TT that we need another rule change, I think we need to think about using Rule 11.4.6 as John Cochrane suggested, and he is one guy I very highly respect.
Here is what roughly happened in Nephi this August..
Several us [ Ron Gleason, John Cochrane, Andy Blackburn and Bruno Vassel] had a discussion about the possibility of using Rule 11.4.6 at the Region 9 North contest in Nephi Ut. a couple of weeks before the event.
Where that discussion was left, was that maybe, just maybe, it could be brought up and discussed at the mandatory 1st pilot meeting. Nothing at this point was planned or set in concrete.
It was agreed, that it would be unfair to spring this rule, even thought it is in the rule book, on pilots coming to the R9N after they had signed up and made plans to attend. It is a major change that's for sure.

OK- so we have 2 practice days and everyone is busy.
At the Mandatory pilot meeting, it moves fairly quickly and there are no pressing questions or concerns, and then Bruno asks 3 times *IF* there is anything else to discuss, looking at me. I'm totally unprepared for this moment, all I'm thinking about is going back and getting some sleep for Day 1 in the morning.
I stand up and say " Well, what would you guys think about using 11.4.6 "the drop a day rule" at this contest"?
This is what this rule is often referred to but it is not quite the case.
{ this rule needs to be fully explained in another thread by Cochrane and Blackburn to fully understand it } [ it is in the rulebook right now to read it, it is short and concise]
This was at the end of a long day and a rather quiet evening pilot meeting.
Everyone's mind was on the fact we were in for a dynamic week of moisture laden rip roaring flying. Most of us flew 8 straight days BTW.
I think over half had never heard of this rule, another 35% never really had thought about it and the way it would affect their flying attitude.
Luckily Andy Blackburn and John Good were in attendance, these guys are way smarter than me. I asked them to please speak and explain what this rule really in intended to do.
So they did and they answered a bunch of very good questions about how and why this, optional rule at the CD's discretion, got in the rulebook and what the hope for it was.
Great discussion ensued and everyone woke up and got into it. It was fantastic except for the potential to split the group. This was not desired.

After the discussion started to spiral in Bruno got up and said " Should we vote on this in the morning and I want it to be a unanimous vote in each of the three classes".
There was a vote to take a vote in the morning and that passed.

The meeting broke up and several of us stayed late to talk about it.
In the morning after all the regular stuff Bruno called for a vote to use Rule 11.4.6 It was narrowly defeated in each class, remember it had to be unanimous.
Only a a couple as I recall voted against it in each class. OK- move on to the gliders and gridding.
This rule was created to mitigate exactly what happened in New Mexico and Utah, i.e. some guys got screwed out of No fault of their own, just Lady Luck did not look their way at a moment in time.

There is a lot of luck, some good and some not so good in gliding.
Here are a few things that have happened to Pilots completely out of their control: Rope break and off field landing, Family emergency, business emergency, o2 failure, electrical failure, computer failure, Storms, Tow Pilots leave early, Allergy attack, Bee in cockpit , Ballast leak in cockpit.
Here are some brains farts we all seem to do at one time or another: Wrong task, Miss the start, miss the 1st TP, Land out on a good day, Turn off your electrical system in flight, Pull your o2 system apart,etc

This rule is intended to allow you One bad day and not be totally
out of it.
Maybe the Weather is too strong for you, and you don't want to tangle with Mr. CuNim. Maybe you think it's too windy. Your being Smart and Safe. But Mr Madman goes for it and gets 1000 points, sorry pal your done as far as the score sheet goes!

Another intention is to allow pilots too really go for it,racing hard as they can, not in weather necessarily, and not be completely out of it if you bomb, trying to go full out.
T.T. and I agree that the US pilots suffer at the World level to some degree by not being able to Go For It in a contest setting. The current rules encourage Pilots stay with the gaggle, do slightly above average everyday. This is how you place at the top of the score sheet. No bombouts. Using 11..4.6 would all pilots, to go full out, really burn.
This is the way I like to fly often times and many others do too.
At these contests pilots can really be inspired to really try hard, the bar is raised really high.
And looking at the democratic vote for using this Rule in Nephi this R9N a vast majority also feel this way.
Weather is so iffy. Very often you have Windy Blue days with hi pressure or alot of moisture and very unstable conditions. Either way we are going to fly if it is possible and it IS a contest.
So what are we really judging at these regional contests? The ability to stay with the pack with your head down and slowly grind through the days and try hard not to F up?
I kind of think so.
Contests for my close friends are all about having fun in a social setting, going XC, This is the key for me. Fun. Social. Going for it. Support.
And having this rule for a regional contest sounds like way fun to me.
Several pilots, with a cold one in hand, said to me that they would really like to try this; especially after they just took a self inflicted caning out there in the wild blue of The Wasatch Plauteu, Waynes Wonderland,Koosharem, Junction and our favorite spot Richfield/ Salina/ Gunnison valley.
A regional is a good place to try this out.
I mean what do we have to lose? Anything really? Rule changes are very carefully scrutinized and studied, and this one is in the rule book for a reason.
It was written by very smart,,caring thoughtful elected to a board,comp pilots.
Change can be good and we can always go back, like no GPS, no seeyoumobile, open distance tasks,El Mirage, Torrey Pines,etc; just kidding.

I would like to see the R9N, just for all involved to see, that's it, just to see, re scored using the above rule, as a bunch of pilots got hammered on the score sheet, for all sorts of odd reasons, some out of their control, some self inflicted [ I raise my hand, thank you very much ].
Is there anyone out there that could do this rescore? FWIW only thank you
Cheers
Nick Kennedy
T

Here's the Sports Class at Region 9 N rescored using worst day adjustment.

http:/soarbfss.org/rasp/Nephi_WDA_rescore.pdf

Did not change the winner, but compressed the scores and shuffled a few places.



On Thursday, August 21, 2014 9:51:47 PM UTC-6, Nick Kennedy wrote:
On Sunday, August 10, 2014 11:10:41 AM UTC-6, Tim Taylor wrote:

After the day at Moriarty earlier this year and Nephi yesterday for the 15M/Std Combined class the rules for how a day is devalued needs to be addressed. I understand why the rule was modified a few years ago so that if pilots just didn't fly it would not devalue the day, but the criteria of what makes a valid attempt is now too high.



Why is this important? Because it makes the contest score subject to random luck rather than showing skill. If we want to attract more pilots to racing we need to ensure that they feel like they can have a fair opportunity to race.



Yesterday should have been devalued to almost nothing or have no score because too few pilots had an opportunity to compete.















Tim (TT)





Tim makes a very clear point here about 2 unfortunate situations that occurred at Moriarty and Nephi this season.

I disagree with TT that we need another rule change, I think we need to think about using Rule 11.4.6 as John Cochrane suggested, and he is one guy I very highly respect.

Here is what roughly happened in Nephi this August..

Several us [ Ron Gleason, John Cochrane, Andy Blackburn and Bruno Vassel] had a discussion about the possibility of using Rule 11.4.6 at the Region 9 North contest in Nephi Ut. a couple of weeks before the event.

Where that discussion was left, was that maybe, just maybe, it could be brought up and discussed at the mandatory 1st pilot meeting. Nothing at this point was planned or set in concrete.

It was agreed, that it would be unfair to spring this rule, even thought it is in the rule book, on pilots coming to the R9N after they had signed up and made plans to attend. It is a major change that's for sure.



OK- so we have 2 practice days and everyone is busy.

At the Mandatory pilot meeting, it moves fairly quickly and there are no pressing questions or concerns, and then Bruno asks 3 times *IF* there is anything else to discuss, looking at me. I'm totally unprepared for this moment, all I'm thinking about is going back and getting some sleep for Day 1 in the morning.

I stand up and say " Well, what would you guys think about using 11.4.6 "the drop a day rule" at this contest"?

This is what this rule is often referred to but it is not quite the case.

{ this rule needs to be fully explained in another thread by Cochrane and Blackburn to fully understand it } [ it is in the rulebook right now to read it, it is short and concise]

This was at the end of a long day and a rather quiet evening pilot meeting.

Everyone's mind was on the fact we were in for a dynamic week of moisture laden rip roaring flying. Most of us flew 8 straight days BTW.

I think over half had never heard of this rule, another 35% never really had thought about it and the way it would affect their flying attitude.

Luckily Andy Blackburn and John Good were in attendance, these guys are way smarter than me. I asked them to please speak and explain what this rule really in intended to do.

So they did and they answered a bunch of very good questions about how and why this, optional rule at the CD's discretion, got in the rulebook and what the hope for it was.

Great discussion ensued and everyone woke up and got into it. It was fantastic except for the potential to split the group. This was not desired.



After the discussion started to spiral in Bruno got up and said " Should we vote on this in the morning and I want it to be a unanimous vote in each of the three classes".

There was a vote to take a vote in the morning and that passed.



The meeting broke up and several of us stayed late to talk about it.

In the morning after all the regular stuff Bruno called for a vote to use Rule 11.4.6 It was narrowly defeated in each class, remember it had to be unanimous.

Only a a couple as I recall voted against it in each class. OK- move on to the gliders and gridding.

This rule was created to mitigate exactly what happened in New Mexico and Utah, i.e. some guys got screwed out of No fault of their own, just Lady Luck did not look their way at a moment in time.



There is a lot of luck, some good and some not so good in gliding.

Here are a few things that have happened to Pilots completely out of their control: Rope break and off field landing, Family emergency, business emergency, o2 failure, electrical failure, computer failure, Storms, Tow Pilots leave early, Allergy attack, Bee in cockpit , Ballast leak in cockpit.

Here are some brains farts we all seem to do at one time or another: Wrong task, Miss the start, miss the 1st TP, Land out on a good day, Turn off your electrical system in flight, Pull your o2 system apart,etc



This rule is intended to allow you One bad day and not be totally

out of it.

Maybe the Weather is too strong for you, and you don't want to tangle with Mr. CuNim. Maybe you think it's too windy. Your being Smart and Safe. But Mr Madman goes for it and gets 1000 points, sorry pal your done as far as the score sheet goes!



Another intention is to allow pilots too really go for it,racing hard as they can, not in weather necessarily, and not be completely out of it if you bomb, trying to go full out.

T.T. and I agree that the US pilots suffer at the World level to some degree by not being able to Go For It in a contest setting. The current rules encourage Pilots stay with the gaggle, do slightly above average everyday.. This is how you place at the top of the score sheet. No bombouts. Using 11.4.6 would all pilots, to go full out, really burn.

This is the way I like to fly often times and many others do too.

At these contests pilots can really be inspired to really try hard, the bar is raised really high.

And looking at the democratic vote for using this Rule in Nephi this R9N a vast majority also feel this way.

Weather is so iffy. Very often you have Windy Blue days with hi pressure or alot of moisture and very unstable conditions. Either way we are going to fly if it is possible and it IS a contest.

So what are we really judging at these regional contests? The ability to stay with the pack with your head down and slowly grind through the days and try hard not to F up?

I kind of think so.

Contests for my close friends are all about having fun in a social setting, going XC, This is the key for me. Fun. Social. Going for it. Support.

And having this rule for a regional contest sounds like way fun to me.

Several pilots, with a cold one in hand, said to me that they would really like to try this; especially after they just took a self inflicted caning out there in the wild blue of The Wasatch Plauteu, Waynes Wonderland,Koosharem, Junction and our favorite spot Richfield/ Salina/ Gunnison valley.

A regional is a good place to try this out.

I mean what do we have to lose? Anything really? Rule changes are very carefully scrutinized and studied, and this one is in the rule book for a reason.

It was written by very smart,,caring thoughtful elected to a board,comp pilots.

Change can be good and we can always go back, like no GPS, no seeyoumobile, open distance tasks,El Mirage, Torrey Pines,etc; just kidding.



I would like to see the R9N, just for all involved to see, that's it, just to see, re scored using the above rule, as a bunch of pilots got hammered on the score sheet, for all sorts of odd reasons, some out of their control, some self inflicted [ I raise my hand, thank you very much ].

Is there anyone out there that could do this rescore? FWIW only thank you

Cheers

Nick Kennedy

T

Everything we've done to make racing easier has been accompanied by a drop in participation.

Evan Ludeman / T8

On Friday, August 22, 2014 6:56:57 AM UTC-6, Evan Ludeman wrote:
Everything we've done to make racing easier has been accompanied by a drop in participation.



Evan Ludeman / T8

Get rid of ALL devaluation formulas. Allow one dropped score IF there are more than three contest days. Contest soaring in America is beginning to look more and more like no child left behind.

Mike

At 12:56 22 August 2014, Evan Ludeman wrote:
Everything we've done to make racing easier has been accompanied by a
drop
in participation.

Evan Ludeman / T8


I use to have a blast at contests, bring back the finish line, it was the
best
part about completing a task.

Golf Lima

At 12:56 22 August 2014, Evan Ludeman wrote:
Everything we've done to make racing easier has been accompanied by a
drop
in participation.

Evan Ludeman / T8


I use to have a blast at contests, bring back the finish line, it was the
best
part about completing a task.

Golf Lima

On Thursday, August 21, 2014 10:12:09 PM UTC-7, Dave Leonard wrote:
Here's the Sports Class at Region 9 N rescored using worst day adjustment..



http:/soarbfss.org/rasp/Nephi_WDA_rescore.pdf



Did not change the winner, but compressed the scores and shuffled a few places.







On Thursday, August 21, 2014 9:51:47 PM UTC-6, Nick Kennedy wrote:

On Sunday, August 10, 2014 11:10:41 AM UTC-6, Tim Taylor wrote:



After the day at Moriarty earlier this year and Nephi yesterday for the 15M/Std Combined class the rules for how a day is devalued needs to be addressed. I understand why the rule was modified a few years ago so that if pilots just didn't fly it would not devalue the day, but the criteria of what makes a valid attempt is now too high.







Why is this important? Because it makes the contest score subject to random luck rather than showing skill. If we want to attract more pilots to racing we need to ensure that they feel like they can have a fair opportunity to race.







Yesterday should have been devalued to almost nothing or have no score because too few pilots had an opportunity to compete.































Tim (TT)











Tim makes a very clear point here about 2 unfortunate situations that occurred at Moriarty and Nephi this season.



I disagree with TT that we need another rule change, I think we need to think about using Rule 11.4.6 as John Cochrane suggested, and he is one guy I very highly respect.



Here is what roughly happened in Nephi this August..



Several us [ Ron Gleason, John Cochrane, Andy Blackburn and Bruno Vassel] had a discussion about the possibility of using Rule 11.4.6 at the Region 9 North contest in Nephi Ut. a couple of weeks before the event.



Where that discussion was left, was that maybe, just maybe, it could be brought up and discussed at the mandatory 1st pilot meeting. Nothing at this point was planned or set in concrete.



It was agreed, that it would be unfair to spring this rule, even thought it is in the rule book, on pilots coming to the R9N after they had signed up and made plans to attend. It is a major change that's for sure.







OK- so we have 2 practice days and everyone is busy.



At the Mandatory pilot meeting, it moves fairly quickly and there are no pressing questions or concerns, and then Bruno asks 3 times *IF* there is anything else to discuss, looking at me. I'm totally unprepared for this moment, all I'm thinking about is going back and getting some sleep for Day 1 in the morning.



I stand up and say " Well, what would you guys think about using 11.4.6 "the drop a day rule" at this contest"?



This is what this rule is often referred to but it is not quite the case.



{ this rule needs to be fully explained in another thread by Cochrane and Blackburn to fully understand it } [ it is in the rulebook right now to read it, it is short and concise]



This was at the end of a long day and a rather quiet evening pilot meeting.



Everyone's mind was on the fact we were in for a dynamic week of moisture laden rip roaring flying. Most of us flew 8 straight days BTW.



I think over half had never heard of this rule, another 35% never really had thought about it and the way it would affect their flying attitude.



Luckily Andy Blackburn and John Good were in attendance, these guys are way smarter than me. I asked them to please speak and explain what this rule really in intended to do.



So they did and they answered a bunch of very good questions about how and why this, optional rule at the CD's discretion, got in the rulebook and what the hope for it was.



Great discussion ensued and everyone woke up and got into it. It was fantastic except for the potential to split the group. This was not desired..







After the discussion started to spiral in Bruno got up and said " Should we vote on this in the morning and I want it to be a unanimous vote in each of the three classes".



There was a vote to take a vote in the morning and that passed.







The meeting broke up and several of us stayed late to talk about it.



In the morning after all the regular stuff Bruno called for a vote to use Rule 11.4.6 It was narrowly defeated in each class, remember it had to be unanimous.



Only a a couple as I recall voted against it in each class. OK- move on to the gliders and gridding.



This rule was created to mitigate exactly what happened in New Mexico and Utah, i.e. some guys got screwed out of No fault of their own, just Lady Luck did not look their way at a moment in time.







There is a lot of luck, some good and some not so good in gliding.



Here are a few things that have happened to Pilots completely out of their control: Rope break and off field landing, Family emergency, business emergency, o2 failure, electrical failure, computer failure, Storms, Tow Pilots leave early, Allergy attack, Bee in cockpit , Ballast leak in cockpit.



Here are some brains farts we all seem to do at one time or another: Wrong task, Miss the start, miss the 1st TP, Land out on a good day, Turn off your electrical system in flight, Pull your o2 system apart,etc







This rule is intended to allow you One bad day and not be totally



out of it.



Maybe the Weather is too strong for you, and you don't want to tangle with Mr. CuNim. Maybe you think it's too windy. Your being Smart and Safe. But Mr Madman goes for it and gets 1000 points, sorry pal your done as far as the score sheet goes!







Another intention is to allow pilots too really go for it,racing hard as they can, not in weather necessarily, and not be completely out of it if you bomb, trying to go full out.



T.T. and I agree that the US pilots suffer at the World level to some degree by not being able to Go For It in a contest setting. The current rules encourage Pilots stay with the gaggle, do slightly above average everyday. This is how you place at the top of the score sheet. No bombouts. Using 11.4.6 would all pilots, to go full out, really burn.



This is the way I like to fly often times and many others do too.



At these contests pilots can really be inspired to really try hard, the bar is raised really high.



And looking at the democratic vote for using this Rule in Nephi this R9N a vast majority also feel this way.



Weather is so iffy. Very often you have Windy Blue days with hi pressure or alot of moisture and very unstable conditions. Either way we are going to fly if it is possible and it IS a contest.



So what are we really judging at these regional contests? The ability to stay with the pack with your head down and slowly grind through the days and try hard not to F up?



I kind of think so.



Contests for my close friends are all about having fun in a social setting, going XC, This is the key for me. Fun. Social. Going for it. Support.



And having this rule for a regional contest sounds like way fun to me.



Several pilots, with a cold one in hand, said to me that they would really like to try this; especially after they just took a self inflicted caning out there in the wild blue of The Wasatch Plauteu, Waynes Wonderland,Koosharem, Junction and our favorite spot Richfield/ Salina/ Gunnison valley.



A regional is a good place to try this out.



I mean what do we have to lose? Anything really? Rule changes are very carefully scrutinized and studied, and this one is in the rule book for a reason.



It was written by very smart,,caring thoughtful elected to a board,comp pilots.



Change can be good and we can always go back, like no GPS, no seeyoumobile, open distance tasks,El Mirage, Torrey Pines,etc; just kidding.







I would like to see the R9N, just for all involved to see, that's it, just to see, re scored using the above rule, as a bunch of pilots got hammered on the score sheet, for all sorts of odd reasons, some out of their control, some self inflicted [ I raise my hand, thank you very much ].



Is there anyone out there that could do this rescore? FWIW only thank you



Cheers



Nick Kennedy



T

I would have to say that it did not change the winner but had quite a few changes in all the other places.

I would also say the the vote was not as close as indicated. Many did not vote as it only took 1 no vote. I would estimate that at least 8 of the sports class were not in favor and did not vote.

I would suggest that the rules committee should do a lot of evaluation of past contests and make it public and not just for the first place finishers. This should be done before it is added to the rules. You must realize that the first place finishers cannot themselves support all the contests. It takes all and the number is dwindling. It appears that not much evaluation was done on this rule.

Maybe we should mandate it for all the Nationals next year and if successful and liked let the regional use it.


Richard
www.craggyaero.com