MATs

On Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 5:47:52 AM UTC-8, John Carlyle wrote:
John Cochrane's point about what skill ATs test is excellent. Pilots should seriously consider if understanding gaggle dynamics is a skill that they want. For myself I'd rather develop a better ability to read the weather, read the terrain, and soar the air, as that's what I'll be doing during non-contest flying. Therefore, I'll be asking the task advisers to continue calling TATs and MATs and to skip the ATs.

-John, Q3


On Tuesday, January 27, 2015 at 10:54:15 PM UTC-5, John Cochrane wrote:
Let's talk about the real issue. The assigned task is tactical. The key skill it tests is being able to sniff out gaggle dynamics. Ideally you start 5 minutes after the gaggle, cacth them, move through the guys waiting for the gaggle and lead out just in time to flinal glide home. Or sometimes move ahead, jump from smaller gaggle to smaller gaggle, or whatever. But everyone else is trying to do the same thing.

This is not easy. Gaggle / start dynamics and tactics are a huge subject. We could write books about them. The top pilots at this are masters of an incredibly complex game. But make no mistake, that game is what assigned tasks are about.

The MAT and TAT don't allow many gaggles and markers to form. They end up valuing much more your ability to read the weather, read the terrain, and soar the air.

This is not a judgment. Decide what you like to do with your precious two weeks of vacation. I happen to like the latter kind of task. AT advocates are really saying they want the former. Doing well at IGC contests requires a lot more of that tactical skill than is typically used at US contests.

But, once again. Talk to the CD. Talk to the task advisers.

John Cochrane

I enjoy all task types, but I agree they do test different skills.

To summarize:

1) MAT = follow the macro-scale weather
2) TAT = follow the micro-scale weather
3) AST = follow the glider in front of you

They are all available - CDs generally have an ear out or what the pilots want to do.

9B

John Cochrane's point about what skill ATs test is excellent. Pilots should seriously consider if understanding gaggle dynamics is a skill that they want. For myself I'd rather develop a better ability to read the weather, read the terrain, and soar the air, as that's what I'll be doing during non-contest flying. Therefore, I'll be asking the task advisers to continue calling TATs and MATs and to skip the ATs.

-John, Q3

Thank you for demonstrating the flawed logic that poisons US contest flying so perfectly!

To be specific, your key statement was this. "For myself I'd rather develop a better ability to read the weather..." Let's talk about that, and Cochrane's...

The first point is "be careful what you wish for!" You already have what you want. You are already being "tested" :-) (lol) ONLY on "reading" the weather in US tasks. That is almost like saying you wish to only be tested on reading my palm! To say you only want to develop the skill of reading weather is like saying you don't want to learn how to land the plane in flight school! The tasks we run in the US are already highly free form and "un-objective." Pilots are flying such widely varying routes. It is not a test anymore, it's a crap shoot! Again, it's almost all we do in US tasks.

Soaring weather develops (or overdevelops) in minutes. It is PURE LUCK if you fly for one hour in one direction and get better weather than another who flies an hour in another direction. There is absolutely no way you can consistently "read the weather" better than another skilled pilot in that common scenario of wildly different routing. LUCK is therefore ABSOLUTELY a big part of the US competition soaring format. a format that is already so incredibly SUBJECTIVE and variable!!!!!! We almost NEVER fly the same race track. We fly almost pure OLC in the US today. We say go wherever you want and show me that you can "read (aka guess) the weather" better than your "competitor." Competitors who are perhaps 40-50-60 or even hundreds of miles away from your us in the same task! How unsatisfying! How subjective. How disappointing.

In 2014, 98% of SSAtasks were TAT or MAT. Half of the MATs were zero or one turn. Most of the rest were 3 or 4 (average 2.9). So, John, I ask why are you are complaining? Did you fly an "evil" AT in 2014? I doubt it, there were only 4! Did you fly an AT in 2013? I doubt it, there were only 7! The chances of you flying an AT in the US is almost zero in 2015. You are probably dancing on your desk right now, aren't you? All you do is guess the weather "just as you do at home." --- my point about US pilots not challenging themselves. Hey, look at that cloud, let's go over there! What a minute "I'm reading the weather!" Wait a minute, it looks better over there! Amazing.

ATs require a pilot to read the weather as well. It is even more important.. That is the point. Just missing one key cloud (better climb) or choosing one better ridge actually has an objective, measurable value. Every meter counts. Reading the weather is not an hour ahead however (impossible). In ATs it's about consistently making the best decisions about the weather 5-15 minutes ahead. Consistently making choices not only about which cloud is better ahead but what "part" of that cloud is better! Skill here means gains! This is FAR more objective that flying two hours away from your competitors and saying "I won!" What did you win exactly? A guessing contest!

The assumption that ATs are ONLY about gaggle flying skills is both wrong and ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous as they "cause" more landouts than a long MAT or any other challenging, well called task for that matter. First of all, ATs allow for pilots to start anytime they wish. That variable will naturally spread the pilots out significantly. Just as in any other task, the best pilots cannot be simply followed. This is actually the surest way to lose In my experience. The best pilots are constantly pulling ahead. Soon, if you only follow, you are pulling into thermals minutes later and are not getting the same air. This assures that the lead pilot will leave you eventually. But be my guest gentleman. Go ahead and keep assuming that leeching is the way to manage ATs. If you study them carefully, you'll see the real best pilots do not follow that strategy much at all and the tactics are quite amazing.

These far higher skill level pilots (and their strategies) are probably why these same pilots win the world championships. They flow over to all tasks and all flying and make then 2-5% better on all flying days. Yep, PLEASE keep thinking this way!!!

Disgusted,

Sean

It's amazing that when flying so many tasks that apparently depend purely on luck, are subjective, and highly variable, that the same people win day after day...

Got your attention, did I Sean? Good!

The fact is your opinions on "what US soaring needs" are outliers. Perhaps that's because you're inexperienced with contest flying. So am I, but unlike you I'm willing to listen to experienced soaring contest pilots and CDs, and give weight to their opinions.

It's clear you don't like US soaring. OK. It's also clear that many US pilots do like it, and aren't anxious to adopt your "vision". Either man up, accept that your ideas have lost (with as much grace as you can muster), or move to Europe so you can fly in a manner that you'd prefer.

-John, Q3

On Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 10:31:09 AM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
Thank you for demonstrating the flawed logic that poisons US contest flying so perfectly!

To be specific, your key statement was this. "For myself I'd rather develop a better ability to read the weather..." Let's talk about that, and Cochrane's...

The first point is "be careful what you wish for!" You already have what you want. You are already being "tested" :-) (lol) ONLY on "reading" the weather in US tasks. That is almost like saying you wish to only be tested on reading my palm! To say you only want to develop the skill of reading weather is like saying you don't want to learn how to land the plane in flight school! The tasks we run in the US are already highly free form and "un-objective." Pilots are flying such widely varying routes. It is not a test anymore, it's a crap shoot! Again, it's almost all we do in US tasks.

Soaring weather develops (or overdevelops) in minutes. It is PURE LUCK if you fly for one hour in one direction and get better weather than another who flies an hour in another direction. There is absolutely no way you can consistently "read the weather" better than another skilled pilot in that common scenario of wildly different routing. LUCK is therefore ABSOLUTELY a big part of the US competition soaring format. a format that is already so incredibly SUBJECTIVE and variable!!!!!! We almost NEVER fly the same race track. We fly almost pure OLC in the US today. We say go wherever you want and show me that you can "read (aka guess) the weather" better than your "competitor." Competitors who are perhaps 40-50-60 or even hundreds of miles away from your us in the same task! How unsatisfying! How subjective. How disappointing.

In 2014, 98% of SSAtasks were TAT or MAT. Half of the MATs were zero or one turn. Most of the rest were 3 or 4 (average 2.9). So, John, I ask why are you are complaining? Did you fly an "evil" AT in 2014? I doubt it, there were only 4! Did you fly an AT in 2013? I doubt it, there were only 7! The chances of you flying an AT in the US is almost zero in 2015. You are probably dancing on your desk right now, aren't you? All you do is guess the weather "just as you do at home." --- my point about US pilots not challenging themselves. Hey, look at that cloud, let's go over there! What a minute "I'm reading the weather!" Wait a minute, it looks better over there! Amazing.

ATs require a pilot to read the weather as well. It is even more important. That is the point. Just missing one key cloud (better climb) or choosing one better ridge actually has an objective, measurable value. Every meter counts. Reading the weather is not an hour ahead however (impossible). In ATs it's about consistently making the best decisions about the weather 5-15 minutes ahead. Consistently making choices not only about which cloud is better ahead but what "part" of that cloud is better! Skill here means gains! This is FAR more objective that flying two hours away from your competitors and saying "I won!" What did you win exactly? A guessing contest!

The assumption that ATs are ONLY about gaggle flying skills is both wrong and ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous as they "cause" more landouts than a long MAT or any other challenging, well called task for that matter. First of all, ATs allow for pilots to start anytime they wish. That variable will naturally spread the pilots out significantly. Just as in any other task, the best pilots cannot be simply followed. This is actually the surest way to lose In my experience. The best pilots are constantly pulling ahead. Soon, if you only follow, you are pulling into thermals minutes later and are not getting the same air. This assures that the lead pilot will leave you eventually. But be my guest gentleman. Go ahead and keep assuming that leeching is the way to manage ATs. If you study them carefully, you'll see the real best pilots do not follow that strategy much at all and the tactics are quite amazing.

These far higher skill level pilots (and their strategies) are probably why these same pilots win the world championships. They flow over to all tasks and all flying and make then 2-5% better on all flying days. Yep, PLEASE keep thinking this way!!!

Disgusted,

Sean

On Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 7:31:09 AM UTC-8, Sean Fidler wrote:
John Cochrane's point about what skill ATs test is excellent. Pilots should seriously consider if understanding gaggle dynamics is a skill that they want. For myself I'd rather develop a better ability to read the weather, read the terrain, and soar the air, as that's what I'll be doing during non-contest flying. Therefore, I'll be asking the task advisers to continue calling TATs and MATs and to skip the ATs.

-John, Q3

Thank you for demonstrating the flawed logic that poisons US contest flying so perfectly!

To be specific, your key statement was this. "For myself I'd rather develop a better ability to read the weather..." Let's talk about that, and Cochrane's...

The first point is "be careful what you wish for!" You already have what you want. You are already being "tested" :-) (lol) ONLY on "reading" the weather in US tasks. That is almost like saying you wish to only be tested on reading my palm! To say you only want to develop the skill of reading weather is like saying you don't want to learn how to land the plane in flight school! The tasks we run in the US are already highly free form and "un-objective." Pilots are flying such widely varying routes. It is not a test anymore, it's a crap shoot! Again, it's almost all we do in US tasks.

Soaring weather develops (or overdevelops) in minutes. It is PURE LUCK if you fly for one hour in one direction and get better weather than another who flies an hour in another direction. There is absolutely no way you can consistently "read the weather" better than another skilled pilot in that common scenario of wildly different routing. LUCK is therefore ABSOLUTELY a big part of the US competition soaring format. a format that is already so incredibly SUBJECTIVE and variable!!!!!! We almost NEVER fly the same race track. We fly almost pure OLC in the US today. We say go wherever you want and show me that you can "read (aka guess) the weather" better than your "competitor." Competitors who are perhaps 40-50-60 or even hundreds of miles away from your us in the same task! How unsatisfying! How subjective. How disappointing.

In 2014, 98% of SSAtasks were TAT or MAT. Half of the MATs were zero or one turn. Most of the rest were 3 or 4 (average 2.9). So, John, I ask why are you are complaining? Did you fly an "evil" AT in 2014? I doubt it, there were only 4! Did you fly an AT in 2013? I doubt it, there were only 7! The chances of you flying an AT in the US is almost zero in 2015. You are probably dancing on your desk right now, aren't you? All you do is guess the weather "just as you do at home." --- my point about US pilots not challenging themselves. Hey, look at that cloud, let's go over there! What a minute "I'm reading the weather!" Wait a minute, it looks better over there! Amazing.

ATs require a pilot to read the weather as well. It is even more important. That is the point. Just missing one key cloud (better climb) or choosing one better ridge actually has an objective, measurable value. Every meter counts. Reading the weather is not an hour ahead however (impossible). In ATs it's about consistently making the best decisions about the weather 5-15 minutes ahead. Consistently making choices not only about which cloud is better ahead but what "part" of that cloud is better! Skill here means gains! This is FAR more objective that flying two hours away from your competitors and saying "I won!" What did you win exactly? A guessing contest!

The assumption that ATs are ONLY about gaggle flying skills is both wrong and ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous as they "cause" more landouts than a long MAT or any other challenging, well called task for that matter. First of all, ATs allow for pilots to start anytime they wish. That variable will naturally spread the pilots out significantly. Just as in any other task, the best pilots cannot be simply followed. This is actually the surest way to lose In my experience. The best pilots are constantly pulling ahead. Soon, if you only follow, you are pulling into thermals minutes later and are not getting the same air. This assures that the lead pilot will leave you eventually. But be my guest gentleman. Go ahead and keep assuming that leeching is the way to manage ATs. If you study them carefully, you'll see the real best pilots do not follow that strategy much at all and the tactics are quite amazing.

These far higher skill level pilots (and their strategies) are probably why these same pilots win the world championships. They flow over to all tasks and all flying and make then 2-5% better on all flying days. Yep, PLEASE keep thinking this way!!!

Disgusted,

Sean


My TV starts to look a little funny when I set the contrast to maximum, but it gives a different view of things for sure.

AST's are not all about leeching and gaggle flying - true. They are more that way than the other formats as everyone would admit. In a world with Flarm they are a bit more that way than they used to be. More "head to head racing" means more using other gliders as samples of lift conditions around, and particularly ahead, of you. It's axiomatic. It's the thing that the AST proponents describe as a virtue. Embrace it. It's not necessarily bad or good. I quite enjoy flying with other gliders around - and I'm getting better at using Flarm in those opportunities where you can sit back with 3 or 4 gliders out in front of you and take a slightly different course to sample they air they are not in. You get to see 3 to 4 time as much air. If you find a great thermal the guys in front of you a few miles won't turn around and if they find a better one you can roll right in. It's good for picking up a couple of minutes here and there when it works. It's kind of fun - but it's a very different thought process.

If you think weather is either 1) random or 2) mostly local knowledge. I'd encourage you to look at recent contest results. As has been mentioned, you see that the winners on MAT days tend to be not very different from the ones who win on other days and not necessarily the local pilots. Heck, the 1-turn MAT day at Montague was won by a talented pilot from...(wait for it)....Brooklyn. Why? Superior strategy and flawless execution of that strategy. It wasn't random - after the race a lot of pilots were saying "wish I'd thought of that!"

I find I have to exercise very different neurons on MAT days. On days where thunderstorms pop up my experience is that it is far more "random" to be the late guy into a 1-mile turn with a building CB over it on an AST day than the guy who has to pick a different route on a MAT day.

I'd also welcome an analysis of the point spread (points standard deviation) for less-specified versus more specified tasks. My general observation is that greater spread most of the time means that the task better separated out the pilots' total ability to get speed out of the day regardless of the task format.

Only in extreme cases where pilots can get cut off, stuck or landed out, do I think of the outcome of a single day as "random". Being forced under an overcast might be a test of scratching skills, or the luck of hitting the one thermal you need to get in and out, or your willingness to push over bad terrain - all happen and different task formats get pilots into these different situations in different proportions. Randomness or luck is more a function of the weather, not as much the format, though certainly there is some interaction between the two and plusses and minuses for any format.

My high school Physics teacher used to refer to tests with large point spreads as "separators" in that they separated the men from the boys. Maybe that's what we need at least a couple of days in every contest with a bigger points spread based on pilot decisions rather than luck, so that the overall results aren't as subject to a single day with dicey weather. If you have one of those early in a contest (kind of like Moriarty 2014, but not necessarily that extreme) and the rest of the contests with all ASTs where the total spread is narrow there is no prayer for anyone to move up.

Some musings for your consideration.

9B

If you think weather is either 1) random or 2) mostly local knowledge. Heck, the 1-turn MAT day at Montague was won by a talented pilot from...(wait for it)...Brooklyn. Why? Superior strategy and flawless execution of that strategy. It wasn't random - after the race a lot of pilots were saying "wish I'd thought of that!"

AS UH has already stated, theirs NO AST's in the USA

10.3.2 Task Types
10.3.2.1 Assigned Task (AT)- Speed over a course of one or more designated turnpoints, with a finish at the contest site.
10.3.2.2 Modified Assigned Task (MAT) - Speed over a course of one or more turnpoints, with a finish at the contest site.

Their are "conditions" to meet on both task's. Some CD's(which we are not overflowing with in numbers) including me, have called 8 plus turnpoints for a MAT with a min time. When I called this task at R9, most had a "wow" factor. But at the end of the day, every(yes, everyone, as I rode around on my motorcycle and asked) entrant that flew this task gave me a "thumbs up". Numerous entrants said it was the best task and most fun they had ever had on a contest day task.
This long turn MAT was even done by "Charlie S" as it allows "windows" where if your slower you can still get home. It is a speed task. A zero turn or one turn MAT does NOT favor anyone. The winner is the one who made the best decisions on that particular day.

Fact. The top guys even "screw up" and make bad decisions. They win by making better decisions with fewer bad decisions. Everything, yes, everything happens for a reason. Some "reason" happens because we are stupid and make bad decisions. This post shows I am still capable of making bad decisions.

The next statement is also a bad decision. BUT 9B get your "****" straight, as their were two (2) one turn MAT's days at Montague 15M's. The first one was won by a "Old, grumpy man from New Mexico"....and he enjoyed every minute of it!

CD's, with their advisers, along with the weatherman, really know their stuff. Second guessing them, after the fact, not even being their is IMHO....(I'll stop here and show I still can make good decisions)...but its what your thinking.

Best. #711.

Tom,

The "winner?" in an OLC, HAT (one or zero turn MAT) is the one who made the best weather guess (while flying well) about where the soaring conditions will be best for that afternoon. This is a fact. Luck and weather forecasting "skill" is a major, major part of that result. US Tasks have clearly become much more about "weather guessing" while managing expensive flight computers to manage numerous FREE turn point combinations and minimum time finish requirements.

AST, AT. I think people get it. Give me a break!

Finally, there are no FAI classes in the USA. Except for 15/18 (pure) our classes are basically all flavors of US Sports class with a slightly narrowed handicap range. Sadly, this also includes the US "Club?" class now that the glider list (and handicap range) has been modified from the FAI prescribed glider list against the wishes of many US Club Class pilots. Look at the recently "renamed" FAI HANDICAP CLASS at the Pan American Championship coming up this April in Benton. That was originally named the FAI Pam Am CLUB CLASS. But "US insistence" on changing the allowed gliders, handicap range (and other rules) from standard FAI ultimately resulted in FAI requiring the word FAI CLUB be removed and replaced with the name FAI HANDICAP! That isn't really even an FAI event either! This is a classic example of US thinking.

The US rules (and tasks) are entirely different than FAI in almost every conceivable way. Why do we even call any of the US classed FAI? FAI 15? FAI 18? In the US? Please! Why is that word FAI inserted? Its laughable. There is nothing FAI about US soaring or the classes or the tasks we complete in. Who are we trying to kid?

Now there is a lot of OLC (weather guessing) in US tasking. Ill give you that.

Only 4 AT's in 2014, trending to zero.................

Sorry Tom I missed that - but the fact that you won a MAT HATter day doesn't surprise me either. In neither case did the mysteries of weather guessing benefit low-seeded and/or local pilots as has been suggested ought to be the case.

Is it three threads or four that have been hijacked into a discussion of MAT tasking?

On Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 8:29:47 PM UTC-7, Andy Blackburn wrote:
Is it three threads or four that have been hijacked into a discussion of MAT tasking?

The current rant is over the tp circle diameter. When he finds out it was done for safety reasons, I expect an entirely new road to be paved.

Us old folks need to claim fame(flame) when ever possible.........you know I was messin with ya.

Best, not gusting, #711.