A fair opportunity to compete?

On Jul 17, 6:24*am, JJ Sinclair wrote:
Ok, I'm the CD. Two minutes before I open the gate, I call the last
launcher and ask how's he doing. He replies he's on a dead glide back
to the airport. I then call my sports advisor. He replies that he's at
12000 feet along with half the class, waiting for the gate to open.
What do I do?

I realize the late launchers are struggling and hold the gate opening
for 5 minutes.

Now, its 20 minutes after the last launcher
rolled........................what do I do? *Do I scrub the day
because the last 3 launchers aren't getting a fair shot? NO, I realize
that this sport will never be 100% fair and equal. There is a luck-of-
the-draw issue with launch position and that is just part of the game.
I open the gate and the race is on!

Next day when I get 2 protests, I deny them!

JJ Sinclair, who has CD'd 3 national competitions without a single
protest.


Why wait the extra 5 minutes in that case? If it's clear the day has
shut down for any late launchers, why not declare them SOL right away
so you don't risk the starts for the rest of the class by waiting?

9B

Andy wrote:

Why wait the extra 5 minutes in that case?

Not all is known at gate opening time, just that half the fleet is OK
and a few are struggling.

Lets take the same scenario, but this time we'll make it the last day
and we need one more day to make it a contest. Any question as to
opening the gate now? Does anybody think a sane CD would scrub the
day?
JJ

On Jul 16, 2:26*pm, Rick Culbertson wrote:
SNIP
So really other than producing a list of silly "what if" situations
what’s the harm in giving it a go, I’ll attend that contest, we just
need a CM/CD who's willing to give it a go.
21-

I agree with 21 that we should actually try some of the rather
innovative ways the RC has offfered CD's and us racers to make things
more fair. Does anyone remember the option to "windicap" sports class
contests? No, I did not think so because it was never tried and then
faded out of the rules. I, myself, hope that drop-a-day is tried
somewhere soon. If I can, I would gladly fly that contest.

The trouble is that the RC rules options (i.e. windicapping, drop-a-
day, etc.) are never made mandatory. Given the rather entrenched
attitiudes of CD's/CM's out there, it is no wonder that no contests
have made use of the drop-a-day rule this year. Given that it was not
used this year, then what are the chances it will be used next year?
Can the RC ever mandate a rules use? I don't have the answer, but I
would like to see some way that innovations in the rules are trial-ed
so that we all may see the real world positives and negatives.

EY

Good points JJ. Let me go back to some of my suggestions:
1) have more task advisors for a large contest spread through the
launch order to provide the CD more data on how the day is going. This
won't solve everything, but will give the CD more info to work with.

2) A 2500 tow will take longer, but this also may mean you can start
the launch earlier and the effective search area is increased
substantially (considering searching below 1000' agl is seldom
fruitful). I've noticed that they wait till the first pilot is ensured
good lift, but if the last pilot finds bad conditions then that is the
luck of the launch order. Why such a disparate attitude toward the
first and last in line? A higher tow, if deemed necessary, means less
less relights and airport congestion, greater terrain clearance (the
red hills of Parowan and Craggy at Montague are 1500' above the
field). My larger complaint is that sub 40:1 ships have a safety
complaint with 5+ mile drop points at 2000' above field elevation,
which may be 500' AGL. In the case of the three pilots at the end of
the line, with a 2500' tow available to them, and the option to tow to
a DIFFERENT drop spot, they have another and possibly reasonable
chance to start. I'm trying to find reasons why NOT to disqualify a
day and why to DENY a protest. Over-optimizing a launch so there is no
room for the vaguaries of nature, errors of the CD, or possible
unfairness in the launch is ENCOURAGING protests. You can always get
more towplanes, limit the participants, split into two contest groups,
or kick some contestants up to FAI classes.

I agree that luck will always play a factor, but we need to make
allowances in the rules and procedures for everyone in the grid to
have a "fighting chance."

Let me put these questions back to the group: 30 sailplanes in a
class, 27 launch into good conditions and get away, the last three get
rained on and land out. Open the gate or not?

Now, what if one of the last to launch is the point leader,
substantially altering the outcome. Should this matter?

What if a firebomber landed at the airport and delayed the last three
contestants. Should the reason for the lengthened launch matter?

What if 20% of the field couldn't contact lift at all? What if 50%?

Does the contest committee have the option to implement other
reparations beside throwing out a day?

There is a lot contained in rule 10.8.1.2 that needs further
illumination:
After the announcement of task opening time, the CD should
consult with the task advisors as to whether the selected task is
fair
and safe. If a delay or a task change is deemed necessary, this
should be announced 10 minutes or more before task opening time; task
changes later than this should be avoided when possible.

The rules and the guidance will not help with every circumstance, and
there will occasionally be unique circumstances where we have to rely
on the human judgement, flawed or not, of the CD. But this has
happened before, and it will happen again. And people will be upset,
probably rightly so, thus my urging that contest community figures
this out.

This has been a very interesting thread with many facets that warrent
further review. I'd like to throw in support for a concern that Chad
(4Z) raised. There was a case two years ago at Parowan where, in the
fervor to complete the launch, the launch point was steadily moved
away from the airport until the lower performance gliders had to find
lift or land out. While raising the release height was one proposal, I
believe that launch planning should occur such that release points
cannot be approved outside of safe glide distance from the launch
field. For simplicity, the distance should be based on the contest's
poorest glide ratio with a safety factor applied.

I was one of the few that pushed back that day because I was closely
watching the day and knew I had the lowest performing glider on the
air patch. In retrospect I'm very happy with the choice because I
would have joined Chad for a land out and risked damaging my ship had
I put caution behind me. My concern is for less experienced pilots
that might allow them selves to be suckered into launching into just
such a situation.

Competing is a fun hobby, but it should remain safe.

Horst
L33; Gear Down and Welded

I am not saying it's perfect but you might see something of interest in
these:
http://www.gliding.co.uk/forms/competitionrules2009.pdf

You will note if significant numbers of competitors fail to complete the
task the day is devalued.

On Jul 17, 5:15*pm, Don Johnstone wrote:
I am not saying it's perfect but you might see something of interest in
these:http://www.gliding.co.uk/forms/competitionrules2009.pdf

You will note if significant numbers of competitors fail to complete the
task the day is devalued.

US tasks are devalued based on number of finishers / number of
starters. If you never start, you are never included in that equation.

At 21:22 17 July 2009, Tim wrote:

Does anyone remember the option to "windicap" sports class
contests? No, I did not think so because it was never tried and then
faded out of the rules. I, myself, hope that drop-a-day is tried
somewhere soon. If I can, I would gladly fly that contest.

EY


Ah, but Windicapping was used, Tim. Back in the days of start gates,
Start Time Intervals, etc. I know someone that got a speed task converted
to Distance because the windicap changed his handicap enough that his first
turnpoint wasn't far enough away based on the elapsed time between his
launch and his start (he only started once that day). Remember that
complex formula? STI in minutes was 1.5 times distance to your first turn
times your handicap. Which, in the case of windicapping, was another thing
you didn't know until after the day was complete, so you really didn't
know what your start time interval was until the scores were computed.

And guess what? It was at another Region 9 contest! Those guys must just
love controversy!

All kidding aside, in an ideal world, the contestants that launched last
should have spoken up, and maybe the CD would have listened. Or, he could
say "If I'da wanted to hear from an..." But I do believe as others have
posted, once a task is open, it is a Go.

I was at a Regionals some years ago when Spratt was the CD. He opened the
task for us Open Class guys. One of the big names said "Are you sure you
want to do that? It is nothing but rain down the first leg." His reply
was "I openned the task, so it is Open." I had almost always been the
first out on course, and I almost said "Charlie, I am still here, so you
can call us back and change the task if you like" but I didn't.
Everyone but me finished that day in Open Class.

We can second guess the decisions at Parowan forever. Fact is, there is
human judgement that goes on during this sport. In the air and on the
ground. And there is some luck. The decisions have been made, and people
have been learning. Hopefully, we won't have a repeat of that situation.
Please keep competing, JJ. We aren't ready for you to stop coming out to
play with the rest of us crazies!

Steve Leonard

Chad and I have had this conversation before. The CD must make
decisions based primarily on the best course of action for the most
competitors. When the ridge has been in cloud shadow for 30 minutes,
the best (and only) course of action is to move the drop zone to the
sunlight (dry lake). If the low performance ships don't like it,
don't accept a tow, but the CD is doing the best thing for the
majority of the contestants. Same rational applies to opening the
gate, if 12 ships are in a position to take a start, open the gate.
The decisions on day 3 were in accordance with this philosophy. The
decision to throw out day 3 was not in accordance with best course of
action for the most competitors. It is gratifying to see the big hot-
shot protestor didn't reap his ill-gotten gains, finishing well below
the 3rd place "score guessing" the protest committee allwed he'd have
gotten if he only had found lift on day 3.
JJ

Chad wrote:
Good points JJ. Let me go back to some of my suggestions:
1) have more task advisors for a large contest spread through the
launch order to provide the CD more data on how the day is going. This
won't solve everything, but will give the CD more info to work with.

2) A 2500 tow will take longer, but this also may mean you can start
the launch earlier and the effective search area is increased
substantially (considering searching below 1000' agl is seldom
fruitful). I've noticed that they wait till the first pilot is ensured
good lift, but if the last pilot finds bad conditions then that is the
luck of the launch order. Why such a disparate attitude toward the
first and last in line? A higher tow, if deemed necessary, means less
less relights and airport congestion, greater terrain clearance (the
red hills of Parowan and Craggy at Montague are 1500' above the
field). My larger complaint is that sub 40:1 ships have a safety
complaint with 5+ mile drop points at 2000' above field elevation,
which may be 500' AGL. In the case of the three pilots at the end of
the line, with a 2500' tow available to them, and the option to tow to
a DIFFERENT drop spot, they have another and possibly reasonable
chance to start. I'm trying to find reasons why NOT to disqualify a
day and why to DENY a protest. Over-optimizing a launch so there is no
room for the vaguaries of nature, errors of the CD, or possible
unfairness in the launch is ENCOURAGING protests. You can always get
more towplanes, limit the participants, split into two contest groups,
or kick some contestants up to FAI classes.

I agree that luck will always play a factor, but we need to make
allowances in the rules and procedures for everyone in the grid to
have a "fighting chance."

Let me put these questions back to the group: 30 sailplanes in a
class, 27 launch into good conditions and get away, the last three get
rained on and land out. Open the gate or not?

Now, what if one of the last to launch is the point leader,
substantially altering the outcome. Should this matter?

What if a firebomber landed at the airport and delayed the last three
contestants. Should the reason for the lengthened launch matter?

What if 20% of the field couldn't contact lift at all? What if 50%?

Does the contest committee have the option to implement other
reparations beside throwing out a day?

There is a lot contained in rule 10.8.1.2 that needs further
illumination:
After the announcement of task opening time, the CD should
consult with the task advisors as to whether the selected task is
fair
and safe. If a delay or a task change is deemed necessary, this
should be announced 10 minutes or more before task opening time; task
changes later than this should be avoided when possible.

The rules and the guidance will not help with every circumstance, and
there will occasionally be unique circumstances where we have to rely
on the human judgement, flawed or not, of the CD. But this has
happened before, and it will happen again. And people will be upset,
probably rightly so, thus my urging that contest community figures
this out.

On Jul 17, 7:10*pm, JJ Sinclair wrote:
Chad and I have had this conversation before. The CD must make
decisions based primarily on the best course of action for the most
competitors. When the ridge has been in cloud shadow for 30 minutes,
the best (and only) course of action is to move the drop zone to the
sunlight *(dry lake). If the low performance ships don't like it,
don't accept a tow, but the CD is doing the best thing for the
majority of the contestants. Same rational applies to opening the
gate, if 12 ships are in a position to take a start, *open the gate.
The decisions on day 3 were in accordance with this philosophy. The
decision to throw out day 3 was not in accordance with best course of
action for the most competitors. It is gratifying to see the big hot-
shot protestor didn't reap his ill-gotten gains, finishing well below
the 3rd place "score guessing" the protest committee allwed he'd have
gotten if he only had found lift on day 3.
JJ



Chad wrote:
Good points JJ. Let me go back to some of my suggestions:
1) have more task advisors for a large contest spread through the
launch order to provide the CD more data on how the day is going. This
won't solve everything, but will give the CD more info to work with.

2) A 2500 tow will take longer, but this also may mean you can start
the launch earlier and the effective search area is increased
substantially (considering searching below 1000' agl is seldom
fruitful). I've noticed that they wait till the first pilot is ensured
good lift, but if the last pilot finds bad conditions then that is the
luck of the launch order. Why such a disparate attitude toward the
first and last in line? A higher tow, if deemed necessary, means less
less relights and airport congestion, greater terrain clearance (the
red hills of Parowan and Craggy at Montague are 1500' above the
field). My larger complaint is that sub 40:1 ships have a safety
complaint with 5+ mile drop points at 2000' above field elevation,
which may be 500' AGL. In the case of the three pilots at the end of
the line, with a 2500' tow available to them, and the option to tow to
a DIFFERENT drop spot, they have another and possibly reasonable
chance to start. I'm trying to find reasons why NOT to disqualify a
day and why to DENY a protest. Over-optimizing a launch so there is no
room for the vaguaries of nature, errors of the CD, or possible
unfairness in the launch is ENCOURAGING protests. You can always get
more towplanes, limit the participants, split into two contest groups,
or kick some contestants up to FAI classes.

I agree that luck will always play a factor, but we need to make
allowances in the rules and procedures for everyone in the grid to
have a "fighting chance."

Let me put these questions back to the group: 30 sailplanes in a
class, 27 launch into good conditions and get away, the last three get
rained on and land out. Open the gate or not?

Now, what if one of the last to launch is the point leader,
substantially altering the outcome. Should this matter?

What if a firebomber landed at the airport and delayed the last three
contestants. Should the reason for the lengthened launch matter?

What if 20% of the field couldn't contact lift at all? What if 50%?

Does the contest committee have the option to implement other
reparations beside throwing out a day?

There is a lot contained in rule 10.8.1.2 that needs further
illumination:
After the announcement of task opening time, the CD should
consult with the task advisors as to whether the selected task is
fair
and safe. *If a delay or a task change is deemed necessary, this
should be announced 10 minutes or more before task opening time; task
changes later than this should be avoided when possible.

The rules and the guidance will not help with every circumstance, and
there will occasionally be unique circumstances where we have to rely
on the human judgement, flawed or not, of the CD. But this has
happened before, and it will happen again. And people will be upset,
probably rightly so, thus my urging that contest community figures
this out.

Yes there are always tradeoffs. I do think a provision in the rules
that the CD can move/raise the release point to give each contestant
an opportunity to compete would be justified. It's often a tough call
as information isn't perfect and conditions change in unpredictable
ways. In Parowan this year the Sports class was large enough that
circumstances were often quite different between the beginning and the
end of the launch, but getting an entire class up with at least a
chance to take a start can require some creative measures.

Good discussion.

9B