Benalla

Yeah sorry guys, blew it yesterday. Long story. Was almost at 133kph, needed a 3 knot climb to maintain that for 1500 feet. Anything higher would have increased speed so a 900 day was close but...no cigar. These guys here are incredible. Just happy to be here and experience the pace they set.

My point on rules is that we need to be careful. Our rules in this environment would not diffuse gaggles much (IMO). That said, I agree with John C, John G and Rick Scheppe that our rule system is more inviting to not flying in gaggles.

My example yesterday (only land out) was a great example of why FAI scoring rewards reducing risk by staying in touch with the gaggle or others. I flew almost entirely alone and was isolated at the end of the flight. Even though I made it to the mountains which are the best late day lift source, they were. It working and I was doomed. Also, now behind, few points scenarios allow a major catch up.

So I want US scoring to make it into FAI. But not the tasking!

On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 at 4:51:07 PM UTC-8, wrote:
Yeah sorry guys, blew it yesterday. Long story. Was almost at 133kph, needed a 3 knot climb to maintain that for 1500 feet. Anything higher would have increased speed so a 900 day was close but...no cigar. These guys here are incredible. Just happy to be here and experience the pace they set.

My point on rules is that we need to be careful. Our rules in this environment would not diffuse gaggles much (IMO). That said, I agree with John C, John G and Rick Scheppe that our rule system is more inviting to not flying in gaggles.

My example yesterday (only land out) was a great example of why FAI scoring rewards reducing risk by staying in touch with the gaggle or others. I flew almost entirely alone and was isolated at the end of the flight. Even though I made it to the mountains which are the best late day lift source, they were. It working and I was doomed. Also, now behind, few points scenarios allow a major catch up.

So I want US scoring to make it into FAI. But not the tasking!


Sean, I was watching you on the tracker yesterday. Why did you go so deep in the last turn area? Doubtless I am missing something, but it appeared you could have just touched the west edge of that area and had enough altitude to get to the finish. I believe you would have been over 5 hours if you had?

7T: I'm sorry to hear of your heartbreaking landout, especially from such a good position. Time to show great sports psychology and go win tomorrow!

It's a great example of the IGC rules issue: Only landout, a few km short: 330 points. Only finisher, everyone else a few km short: they get 999 points. Now you know why "stick with the gaggle" is so vital in IGC scoring. Better to land out with the gaggle than to take any risk in order to be the only finisher.

US scoring isn't perfect either. It also switches from speed to distance points in a complex way depending on landouts.

Heres my current best suggestion:

points = (day devaluation factor) max ( 1000 x speed / winner's speed, 750 x distance / winner distance)

the day devaluation factor doesn't matter here. What matters is speed vs. distance points. And the key -- they are fixed, irrespective of the number of landouts.

So, only finisher gets 1000, 1 km landout gets 750. Only landout gets 750. The incentive to be lone wolf goes way up.

It works as now if you're really slow. If you are below 75% of the winner's speed, you get 750 points for finishing. You always get the better of speed and distance.

And real simple too. People might (gasp) actually understand their score! And strategy. No more need for team captains to report landouts to tell you if it's a speed day or distance day.

it gets rid of some other IGC idiosyncrasies too, like the occasional incentive to deliberately land out.

John Cochrane

At 01:12 18 January 2017, John Cochrane wrote:
7T: I'm sorry to hear of your heartbreaking landout, especially from such
a=
good position. Time to show great sports psychology and go win
tomorrow!=
=20

It's a great example of the IGC rules issue: Only landout, a few km
short:=
330 points. Only finisher, everyone else a few km short: they get 999
poin=
ts. Now you know why "stick with the gaggle" is so vital in IGC scoring.
Be=
tter to land out with the gaggle than to take any risk in order to be the
o=
nly finisher.=20

US scoring isn't perfect either. It also switches from speed to distance
po=
ints in a complex way depending on landouts.=20

Heres my current best suggestion:=20

points =3D (day devaluation factor) max ( 1000 x speed / winner's speed,
75=
0 x distance / winner distance)=20

the day devaluation factor doesn't matter here. What matters is speed vs.
d=
istance points. And the key -- they are fixed, irrespective of the number
o=
f landouts.=20

So, only finisher gets 1000, 1 km landout gets 750. Only landout gets
750.
=
The incentive to be lone wolf goes way up.=20

It works as now if you're really slow. If you are below 75% of the
winner's=
speed, you get 750 points for finishing. You always get the better of
spee=
d and distance.=20

And real simple too. People might (gasp) actually understand their score!

=
And strategy. No more need for team captains to report landouts to tell
you=
if it's a speed day or distance day.=20

it gets rid of some other IGC idiosyncrasies too, like the occasional
incen=
tive to deliberately land out.=20

John Cochrane

Why only get speed points if you finish. I do not see why you shouldn't
earn speed points for going to ground quickly. 100 point finish bonus 500
distance 400 speed

On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 at 8:12:30 PM UTC-5, John Cochrane wrote:

Heres my current best suggestion:

points = (day devaluation factor) max ( 1000 x speed / winner's speed, 750 x distance / winner distance)

the day devaluation factor doesn't matter here. What matters is speed vs. distance points. And the key -- they are fixed, irrespective of the number of landouts.

So, only finisher gets 1000, 1 km landout gets 750. Only landout gets 750. The incentive to be lone wolf goes way up.

It works as now if you're really slow. If you are below 75% of the winner's speed, you get 750 points for finishing. You always get the better of speed and distance.

And real simple too. People might (gasp) actually understand their score! And strategy. No more need for team captains to report landouts to tell you if it's a speed day or distance day.

it gets rid of some other IGC idiosyncrasies too, like the occasional incentive to deliberately land out.

John Cochrane

I like it. Even better: devalue based on task for short tasks, not stats that develop only after the fact.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

On Wednesday, 18 January 2017 03:12:30 UTC+2, John Cochrane wrote:

Heres my current best suggestion:

points = (day devaluation factor) max ( 1000 x speed / winner's speed, 750 x distance / winner distance)

the day devaluation factor doesn't matter here. What matters is speed vs. distance points. And the key -- they are fixed, irrespective of the number of landouts.

So, only finisher gets 1000, 1 km landout gets 750. Only landout gets 750.. The incentive to be lone wolf goes way up.

It works as now if you're really slow. If you are below 75% of the winner's speed, you get 750 points for finishing. You always get the better of speed and distance.

And real simple too. People might (gasp) actually understand their score! And strategy. No more need for team captains to report landouts to tell you if it's a speed day or distance day.

it gets rid of some other IGC idiosyncrasies too, like the occasional incentive to deliberately land out.

John Cochrane

I remember outright several competition days where your formula would give exactly same points to many pilots that do not manage to fly over 75% of winners speed, but come home anyway (at different speeds). With 66% speed limit for speed points this is not an issue.

Flying again today?
Jim

At 18:02 18 January 2017, JS wrote:
Flying again today?
Jim


Yep!

On Wednesday, January 18, 2017 at 4:30:06 PM UTC-6, Tom Claffey wrote:
At 18:02 18 January 2017, JS wrote:
Flying again today?
Jim


Grid time and prelim tasks for all 3 classes set for 1/19/17
https://www.facebook.com/ussoaringte...34720150264868

ENOUGH scoring BS. Let's keep the thread focused on what's happening in Benalla.

If you want to discuss/argue FAI vrs USA scoring then start another thread.

Go Team USA!