My personal view is that these benefits [i.e., of retasking in the
air] far out weigh the issues
related to task entry/ change in the air.

I agree with Hank. It is safer. Moreover there are days where only a
task change after some or all of the field has launched permits a
scorable day at all.

That said, one would still expect some difference in behavior between
two similarly qualified CDs where one must set an achievable task
before launch and the other has a chance to revise it at the last
minute owing to the different risk/reward profiles.

Two differences that might be expected are longer tasks and/or fewer
landouts for the same weather in the U.S. because the task can be
"tuned" to the conditions nearer the start time. Those differences
might get lost in the noise from other effects--e.g., the tendency in
the U.S. in recent years to set shorter tasks to reduce landouts rather
than tasking to promote using more of the day as is apparently the
practice in Europe. Both of these metrics could be tracked
quantitatively using task length in time (not distance) and completion
percentage (perhaps adjusted for experience and/or skill).

Along these lines, one might also expect less dispersion in U.S.
scores, with late task changes reducing the "luck" factor. Has anyone
explored this? (BB, this cries out for your analytical approach!)

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"