View Full Version : Does USA need a Club Class?
Any thoughts on the idea of creating a Club Class similar to the model used
in Europe?
Mike
MC wrote:
> Any thoughts on the idea of creating a Club Class similar to the
model used
> in Europe?
>
> Mike
We got one, its called Sports Class. My God, we now have something like
8 classes, the last thing we need is ANOTHER CLASS.
JJ
Bob Fidler
April 3rd 05, 05:09 PM
Europeans are way ahead of US in competition using the Club Class Rules. If
we expect to compete with them in this class we need to score our US
regional contests using the Club Class Handicap Rules. I suggest all Sports
Class competitors be given the option to be scored using Club Class
Handicaps along with our Sports Class Handicaps.
If the US ever gets serious about expecting to compete with Europe in this
class, we will need to have competition in the US using the rule.
Bob Fidler
"MC" > wrote in message
...
> Any thoughts on the idea of creating a Club Class similar to the model
> used
> in Europe?
>
> Mike
>
>
Stewart Kissel
April 3rd 05, 05:31 PM
>
>We got one, its called Sports Class. My God, we now
>have something like
>8 classes, the last thing we need is ANOTHER CLASS.
>JJ
JJ-You took the words right out of my mouth....but
then I started thinking about this. What if classes
were created by demand? Right now how many active
Open Class racers are there? 10-20?
How many Club Class'ers might there be? On the other
hand I think Sports Class is great...but look at Parown...plenty
of guys not able to get in...you got to be rated damn
near 90.
I know this may sound sacreligous to some...but why
are we trying to limit the number of racers? Since
less the 10% of SSA'ers race, I would think one would
want to grow this niche.
Nyal Williams
April 3rd 05, 05:42 PM
At 16:00 03 April 2005, wrote:
>
>MC wrote:
>> Any thoughts on the idea of creating a Club Class
>>similar to the
>model used
>> in Europe?
>>
>> Mike
>
>We got one, its called Sports Class. My God, we now
>have something like
>8 classes, the last thing we need is ANOTHER CLASS.
>JJ
JJ,
Please enumerate these 8 or so classes; this is a surprising
number to me.
Steve Leonard
April 3rd 05, 06:31 PM
Nyal Williams wrote:
> Please enumerate these 8 or so classes; this is a surprising
> number to me.
Almost like we have become the Special Olympics of Soaring. In no
particluar order:
1) Standard
2) 15 Meter
3) 18 Meter
4) Unlimited (actually, 750 KG or less)
5) Two Place (under 20 meter span)
6) Sports (sort of like Club, but without the limited range of HCs)
7) Motorglider
8) World Class
9) Senior (Over Age 55)
10) 1-26
All these have a Nationals. So, JJ missed a few.
Steve Leonard
Marc Ramsey
April 3rd 05, 06:48 PM
Bob Fidler wrote:
> Europeans are way ahead of US in competition using the Club Class Rules. If
> we expect to compete with them in this class we need to score our US
> regional contests using the Club Class Handicap Rules. I suggest all Sports
> Class competitors be given the option to be scored using Club Class
> Handicaps along with our Sports Class Handicaps.
It is not possible to give "all Sports Class competitors" the option to
use Club Class handicap rules, as many are flying gliders that not
permitted in FAI Club Class. Of course, it seems quite sensible to
calculate a separate score for those who compete in Sports Class using
Club Class ships, and to select the US Club Class Team based only on
Club Class scores...
Marc
> I know this may sound sacreligous to some...but why
> are we trying to limit the number of racers? Since
> less the 10% of SSA'ers race, I would think one would
> want to grow this niche.
The limiting came from a 15 meter contest where something like 80
contestants were allowed and we has 4 mid-airs (1 fatality). It was
wisely decided to limit our contests to 65. Parowan is limited to 50
due to limited parking and runway crowding (landing)
The Club Class and 2-seater class works in europe because there is a
bunch of those ships available (from the neumerous clubs) In the US our
ships are 98% privately owned and one can enter sports class where you
can "fly what you brung".
JJ
John Sinclair
April 3rd 05, 07:30 PM
How about a Ex-military, over 70, class? Oops, that
would include 7V and KS. OK, how about Rerited military,
over 70? No that still leaves KS. OK, now I got it................
Retired military bomb-aimers, over 70, class? Bet I
just found a class I can win.
:>) JJ
Stewart Kissel
April 3rd 05, 09:47 PM
OOOHHH...I think you may be onto something here JJ...
A class for ras posters only? Or maybe Kennedy assassination
conspiracy believers? :) Lots of possibilities....
In response to the other parallel thread....my last
post may have been unclear...I am not suggesting more
entries allowed per contest...rather races being set
up for the most contestants...ie a 50 contestant National
Club Class vs a 15 contestant Open Class Nat...
But then I fall into the category of non-racer making
suggestions for something I don't participate in....so
I will refrain from further ideas....
At 19:00 03 April 2005, John Sinclair wrote:
>How about a Ex-military, over 70, class? Oops, that
>would include 7V and KS. OK, how about Rerited military,
>over 70? No that still leaves KS. OK, now I got it................
>>
>Retired military bomb-aimers, over 70, class? Bet I
>just found a class I can win.
>:>) JJ
>
>
>
>
Marc Ramsey
April 3rd 05, 10:16 PM
Stewart Kissel wrote:
> But then I fall into the category of non-racer making
> suggestions for something I don't participate in....so
> I will refrain from further ideas....
Of course, the key to keeping all racing viable sport in US, is to make
sure that we don't end up with a bunch of classes (or rules) that end up
killing any interest amongst those pilots who haven't tried racing. So
I, for one (a "semi-racer", as I only do one or two contests per year),
think the ideas that you and other "non-racers" (even M B ;^) come up
with are every bit as valuable as those from "racers"...
Marc
Eric Greenwell
April 4th 05, 01:33 AM
Stewart Kissel wrote:
> OOOHHH...I think you may be onto something here JJ...
>
> A class for ras posters only? Or maybe Kennedy assassination
> conspiracy believers? :) Lots of possibilities....
>
> In response to the other parallel thread....my last
> post may have been unclear...I am not suggesting more
> entries allowed per contest...rather races being set
> up for the most contestants...ie a 50 contestant National
> Club Class vs a 15 contestant Open Class Nat...
It may not be as poor a use of resources at it first seems, because
low-participation classes like Open Class Nationals are usually run
concurrently with another class; for example, this year the Open Class
Nationals will overlap the Region 8 regional contest, so the same
towplanes, facilities, contest director, etc., are used.
Way in the past, I suggested we have handicapping similar to what is now
the Club Class, but use it for the Standard and 15 meter classes so
older gliders (within, say, 10% of the newest and best) would still be
competitive. Not much interest at the time!
While I like the Club Class concept, I suspect having one would not
increase the contest participation, but would reduce the Sports Class
participation as some pilots shifted to the Club Class. It would be a
great survey question, I think!
>
> But then I fall into the category of non-racer making
> suggestions for something I don't participate in....so
> I will refrain from further ideas....
In the '80s, when I was an SSA director, I thought it was a weakness of
our contest system that it did seek out the opinions of those that WERE
NOT racing. It is still a weakness. I hope that a way will be found to
include people that might become racers so their opinions can also help
guide the rules committee. In other words, make increasing participation
a goal of the rules, not just pleasing the pilots ALREADY racing.
--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA
Wasn't Kimo single-seat ground attack? I recall him touting the
advanatages of dumb bombs on 60 Minutes (over the Maverick). That would
make him a defacto bomb aimer, no? Looks like you need one more layer
of insulation, JJ.
John Sinclair wrote:
> How about a Ex-military, over 70, class? Oops, that
> would include 7V and KS. OK, how about Rerited military,
> over 70? No that still leaves KS. OK, now I got it................
> Retired military bomb-aimers, over 70, class? Bet I
> just found a class I can win.
> :>) JJ
Owain Walters
April 4th 05, 03:46 PM
>The Club Class and 2-seater class works in europe because
>there is a
>bunch of those ships available (from the neumerous
>clubs) In the US our
>ships are 98% privately owned and one can enter sports
>class where you
>can 'fly what you brung'.
>JJ
I think that the term 'Club Class' is slightly misleading.
Certainly in the UK the vast majority of 'club class'
competing gliders are not club owned. I would say that
in the UK Club Class Nationals 85-90% of the gliders
are privately owned (if not more). Thus, it is not
popular in Europe because there are no private owners.
I rather think that it is popular because it allows
people to get into a class which can be competed in
at World level for a fraction of the cost of new gliders.
As for whether the US needs a club class, I suspect
the sports class satisfies most of the objectives.
Owain
Tim Mara
April 4th 05, 04:07 PM
we don't need another class...we just need to fix the one we have.....
I proposed years ago that we modify the Sports class "more or less" to the
very successful European Club Class (they actually have two versions there
for standard class gliders and 15 meter gliders called the "racing class)
My (and others) suggestion was to eliminate gliders from the Sports class
that already had a "competitive" class of their own....
Doing this I suggested the sports class would 'disallow" any "current
production" competition glider or variation thereof, from Sports class
competition.
Meaning..if you have a "racing" glider that is of a series currently being
produced you'd have to fly it in the respective class it was designed for
(15M, Standard, open and yes, world class) . If you have a glider that has
been surpassed by more competitive models from the manufacturer,then it
could be handicapped and allowed into sports class... The main idea with
this was to allow closer handicapping and allow older gliders (lower cost)
to fly with their pilots competitively and let them fly in called tasks
rather than having to design new scoring systems to meet the broadest array
of handicaps.
The other change to sports class I suggested was that no one would be
allowed to fly in a sports class "National" contest, that had not
participated in a Sports class regional contest within the preceding 3
years, thus keeping the class "pure" .....since it seems pilots who
otherwise snub their noses at sports class seem to rush top attend only when
there is a title at stake....and then of course as we see it today, show up
in droves to fly their latest ship...
I never got any flack from these proposals except of course from those who
were already fling the latest and greatest ships......but even most of them
admitted in the past it would be beneficial to promoting the sports class
and would allow owners on lesser budgets with older gliders a place to
compete where they could more or less evenly match themselves and their
ships and bring more into the sport or glider racing..which can't be bad for
any of us...
anyway.my 2c are there again.....
tim
--
Wings & Wheels
www.wingsandwheels.com
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> MC wrote:
>> Any thoughts on the idea of creating a Club Class similar to the
> model used
>> in Europe?
>>
>> Mike
>
> We got one, its called Sports Class. My God, we now have something like
> 8 classes, the last thing we need is ANOTHER CLASS.
> JJ
>
Tim Mara wrote:
> we don't need another class...we just need to fix the one we
have.....
>
> I proposed years ago that we modify the Sports class "more or less"
to the
> very successful European Club Class (they actually have two versions
there
> for standard class gliders and 15 meter gliders called the "racing
class)
> My (and others) suggestion was to eliminate gliders from the Sports
class
> that already had a "competitive" class of their own....
> Doing this I suggested the sports class would 'disallow" any "current
> production" competition glider or variation thereof, from Sports
class
> competition.
> Meaning..if you have a "racing" glider that is of a series currently
being
> produced you'd have to fly it in the respective class it was designed
for
> (15M, Standard, open and yes, world class) . If you have a glider
that has
> been surpassed by more competitive models from the manufacturer,then
it
> could be handicapped and allowed into sports class... The main idea
with
> this was to allow closer handicapping and allow older gliders (lower
cost)
> to fly with their pilots competitively and let them fly in called
tasks
> rather than having to design new scoring systems to meet the broadest
array
> of handicaps.
> The other change to sports class I suggested was that no one would be
> allowed to fly in a sports class "National" contest, that had not
> participated in a Sports class regional contest within the preceding
3
> years, thus keeping the class "pure" .....since it seems pilots who
> otherwise snub their noses at sports class seem to rush top attend
only when
> there is a title at stake....and then of course as we see it today,
show up
> in droves to fly their latest ship...
> I never got any flack from these proposals except of course from
those who
> were already fling the latest and greatest ships......but even most
of them
> admitted in the past it would be beneficial to promoting the sports
class
> and would allow owners on lesser budgets with older gliders a place
to
> compete where they could more or less evenly match themselves and
their
> ships and bring more into the sport or glider racing..which can't be
bad for
> any of us...
> anyway.my 2c are there again.....
> tim
>
> --
> Wings & Wheels
> www.wingsandwheels.com
>
Can't argue with any of that, Tim, but where are you going to draw the
line? The V1's and 20's are still quite potent machines. How about the
Genesis, its out of production. I do like your proposal to only allow
real sports pilots to compete, but then it wouldn't be all that hard to
log a sports regionals every 3 years just to keep ones options open.
What I see is a lot of local pilots will fly sports nats when they are
close and the other nationals when they are close. That's what I do and
kind-a like it that way.
JJ
M B
April 4th 05, 06:38 PM
I recommended that the CH handicaps simply
be squared for Sports class.
The PW-2 with 2.15 becomes 4.62
The Nimbus 3DM with .75 becomes .56
1-26 1.62 2.62
2-33 1.84 3.38
L-13 1.46 2.13
G103 1.15 1.32
ASW20 0.90 0.81
So the Nimbus would need to go 8.2 times faster (or
further or whatever) to beat the PW-2 driver.
This would favor the lower performance ships. Really,
isn't the importance of Sports Class to make it distinct?
I think squaring the handicap would make it much more
insteresting and distinct.
And the PW-2 guy doing a 30km task vs. the Nimbus guy
with
a 250km task sounds like a real race to me!
And a 2-33 vs an ASW-20 SHOULD get about a 4:1 advantage,
instead of a 2:1 advantage.
I'd like to see this scoring at our fun meet coming
up...
As far as the other classes, I'm not sure how the
'standard' class has lived so long. Also, every contest
seems to be a 'seniors' contest anyway, so dunno about
that
one :P
A 2-place contest class? Sports and open-unlimited
should be enough for this.
Finally, who cares about motorglider class? For the
flying portion of the contest, isn't it just the 'fixed
ballast' class?
These guys say 'it's just a glider' so I'd like to
see it just treated that way. I'm aware of the subtlety
of 'landouts' but I
think there is an elegant way to even the playing field
for this
(some penalty for landout, doubled for engine use).
So those are four I'm not so sure about.
Sports, 15 meter, and open-unlimited seem to be the
three
real viable ones. With the squared handicap, lowest
performers
will tend to Sports, the tilters and flappers that
qualify will
go 15-meter, and the sexy big glass in open.
I think every successful multiclass contest has at
least two of these three classes, right? The rest
seem to be very 'specialty' classes. Nothing wrong
with that, except it gets a little harder to get throngs
motivated for so many 'class' competitions :)
At 17:00 04 April 2005, wrote:
>
>Tim Mara wrote:
>> we don't need another class...we just need to fix
>>the one we
>have.....
>>
>> I proposed years ago that we modify the Sports class
>>'more or less'
>to the
>> very successful European Club Class (they actually
>>have two versions
>there
>> for standard class gliders and 15 meter gliders called
>>the 'racing
>class)
>> My (and others) suggestion was to eliminate gliders
>>from the Sports
>class
>> that already had a 'competitive' class of their own....
>> Doing this I suggested the sports class would 'disallow'
>>any 'current
>
>> production' competition glider or variation thereof,
>>from Sports
>class
>> competition.
>> Meaning..if you have a 'racing' glider that is of
>>a series currently
>being
>> produced you'd have to fly it in the respective class
>>it was designed
>for
>> (15M, Standard, open and yes, world class) . If you
>>have a glider
>that has
>> been surpassed by more competitive models from the
>>manufacturer,then
>it
>> could be handicapped and allowed into sports class...
>>The main idea
>with
>> this was to allow closer handicapping and allow older
>>gliders (lower
>cost)
>> to fly with their pilots competitively and let them
>>fly in called
>tasks
>> rather than having to design new scoring systems to
>>meet the broadest
>array
>> of handicaps.
>> The other change to sports class I suggested was that
>>no one would be
>
>> allowed to fly in a sports class 'National' contest,
>>that had not
>> participated in a Sports class regional contest within
>>the preceding
>3
>> years, thus keeping the class 'pure' .....since it
>>seems pilots who
>> otherwise snub their noses at sports class seem to
>>rush top attend
>only when
>> there is a title at stake....and then of course as
>>we see it today,
>show up
>> in droves to fly their latest ship...
>> I never got any flack from these proposals except
>>of course from
>those who
>> were already fling the latest and greatest ships......but
>>even most
>of them
>> admitted in the past it would be beneficial to promoting
>>the sports
>class
>> and would allow owners on lesser budgets with older
>>gliders a place
>to
>> compete where they could more or less evenly match
>>themselves and
>their
>> ships and bring more into the sport or glider racing..which
>>can't be
>bad for
>> any of us...
>> anyway.my 2c are there again.....
>> tim
>>
>> --
>> Wings & Wheels
>> www.wingsandwheels.com
>>
>
>Can't argue with any of that, Tim, but where are you
>going to draw the
>line? The V1's and 20's are still quite potent machines.
>How about the
>Genesis, its out of production. I do like your proposal
>to only allow
>real sports pilots to compete, but then it wouldn't
>be all that hard to
>log a sports regionals every 3 years just to keep ones
>options open.
>What I see is a lot of local pilots will fly sports
>nats when they are
>close and the other nationals when they are close.
>That's what I do and
>kind-a like it that way.
>
>JJ
>
>
Mark J. Boyd
Tim Mara
April 4th 05, 11:44 PM
> Can't argue with any of that, Tim, but where are you going to draw the
> line? The V1's and 20's are still quite potent machines. How about the
> Genesis, its out of production. I do like your proposal to only allow
> real sports pilots to compete, but then it wouldn't be all that hard to
> log a sports regionals every 3 years just to keep ones options open.
> What I see is a lot of local pilots will fly sports nats when they are
> close and the other nationals when they are close. That's what I do and
> kind-a like it that way.
>
> JJ
Obviously the rules committee could have "some" hand in this...and of course
they would have, but it've pretty obvious to anyone who watches the results
what gliders are competing in the FAI classes and which ones are no longer
showing up there....
It was justa very few seasons ago when the 15M class was filled with
ASW20's, LS6's and Ventus........but look now....if you see even one or 2
there it's a suprise......so where are they now??? sitting at a club when
the contest is nearby?? that's actually the point...in part :o)
as for flyinga regional to fly a national.that seems a no brainer to
me.....and many others
tim
>
Tim Mara
April 4th 05, 11:48 PM
the problem with this handicapping is that you still have PW5's and Nimbus's
in the same class......you can never properly handicap such a
field......and, there already is a class for the PW5 (World class) and one
for the Nimbus (Open class) and 126's have their own class too.....
a small restriction to who can fly what will go a long way towards allowing
everyone to fly a 100K, 200K or 300K on the same day....and, like the FAI
classes, even see another glider during the day. Not simply fly alone and to
wherever and have no clue how they are doing, or learn by following others
of "like" performance
tim
"M B" > wrote in message
...
>I recommended that the CH handicaps simply
> be squared for Sports class.
>
> The PW-2 with 2.15 becomes 4.62
> The Nimbus 3DM with .75 becomes .56
>
> 1-26 1.62 2.62
> 2-33 1.84 3.38
> L-13 1.46 2.13
> G103 1.15 1.32
> ASW20 0.90 0.81
>
> So the Nimbus would need to go 8.2 times faster (or
> further or whatever) to beat the PW-2 driver.
>
> This would favor the lower performance ships. Really,
> isn't the importance of Sports Class to make it distinct?
> I think squaring the handicap would make it much more
> insteresting and distinct.
>
> And the PW-2 guy doing a 30km task vs. the Nimbus guy
> with
> a 250km task sounds like a real race to me!
>
> And a 2-33 vs an ASW-20 SHOULD get about a 4:1 advantage,
> instead of a 2:1 advantage.
>
> I'd like to see this scoring at our fun meet coming
> up...
>
> As far as the other classes, I'm not sure how the
> 'standard' class has lived so long. Also, every contest
> seems to be a 'seniors' contest anyway, so dunno about
> that
> one :P
>
> A 2-place contest class? Sports and open-unlimited
> should be enough for this.
>
> Finally, who cares about motorglider class? For the
> flying portion of the contest, isn't it just the 'fixed
> ballast' class?
> These guys say 'it's just a glider' so I'd like to
> see it just treated that way. I'm aware of the subtlety
> of 'landouts' but I
> think there is an elegant way to even the playing field
> for this
> (some penalty for landout, doubled for engine use).
>
> So those are four I'm not so sure about.
>
> Sports, 15 meter, and open-unlimited seem to be the
> three
> real viable ones. With the squared handicap, lowest
> performers
> will tend to Sports, the tilters and flappers that
> qualify will
> go 15-meter, and the sexy big glass in open.
>
> I think every successful multiclass contest has at
> least two of these three classes, right? The rest
> seem to be very 'specialty' classes. Nothing wrong
> with that, except it gets a little harder to get throngs
> motivated for so many 'class' competitions :)
>
> At 17:00 04 April 2005, wrote:
>>
>>Tim Mara wrote:
>>> we don't need another class...we just need to fix
>>>the one we
>>have.....
>>>
>>> I proposed years ago that we modify the Sports class
>>>'more or less'
>>to the
>>> very successful European Club Class (they actually
>>>have two versions
>>there
>>> for standard class gliders and 15 meter gliders called
>>>the 'racing
>>class)
>>> My (and others) suggestion was to eliminate gliders
>>>from the Sports
>>class
>>> that already had a 'competitive' class of their own....
>>> Doing this I suggested the sports class would 'disallow'
>>>any 'current
>>
>>> production' competition glider or variation thereof,
>>>from Sports
>>class
>>> competition.
>>> Meaning..if you have a 'racing' glider that is of
>>>a series currently
>>being
>>> produced you'd have to fly it in the respective class
>>>it was designed
>>for
>>> (15M, Standard, open and yes, world class) . If you
>>>have a glider
>>that has
>>> been surpassed by more competitive models from the
>>>manufacturer,then
>>it
>>> could be handicapped and allowed into sports class...
>>>The main idea
>>with
>>> this was to allow closer handicapping and allow older
>>>gliders (lower
>>cost)
>>> to fly with their pilots competitively and let them
>>>fly in called
>>tasks
>>> rather than having to design new scoring systems to
>>>meet the broadest
>>array
>>> of handicaps.
>>> The other change to sports class I suggested was that
>>>no one would be
>>
>>> allowed to fly in a sports class 'National' contest,
>>>that had not
>>> participated in a Sports class regional contest within
>>>the preceding
>>3
>>> years, thus keeping the class 'pure' .....since it
>>>seems pilots who
>>> otherwise snub their noses at sports class seem to
>>>rush top attend
>>only when
>>> there is a title at stake....and then of course as
>>>we see it today,
>>show up
>>> in droves to fly their latest ship...
>>> I never got any flack from these proposals except
>>>of course from
>>those who
>>> were already fling the latest and greatest ships......but
>>>even most
>>of them
>>> admitted in the past it would be beneficial to promoting
>>>the sports
>>class
>>> and would allow owners on lesser budgets with older
>>>gliders a place
>>to
>>> compete where they could more or less evenly match
>>>themselves and
>>their
>>> ships and bring more into the sport or glider racing..which
>>>can't be
>>bad for
>>> any of us...
>>> anyway.my 2c are there again.....
>>> tim
>>>
>>> --
>>> Wings & Wheels
>>> www.wingsandwheels.com
>>>
>>
>>Can't argue with any of that, Tim, but where are you
>>going to draw the
>>line? The V1's and 20's are still quite potent machines.
>>How about the
>>Genesis, its out of production. I do like your proposal
>>to only allow
>>real sports pilots to compete, but then it wouldn't
>>be all that hard to
>>log a sports regionals every 3 years just to keep ones
>>options open.
>>What I see is a lot of local pilots will fly sports
>>nats when they are
>>close and the other nationals when they are close.
>>That's what I do and
>>kind-a like it that way.
>>
>>JJ
>>
>>
> Mark J. Boyd
>
>
John H. Campbell
April 5th 05, 02:19 AM
> 1) Standard
> ... 10) 1-26
> All these have a Nationals. So, JJ missed a few.
Technically, the 1-26 Association makes it own rules for its (international)
Championships, not SSA, let alone FAI, although I take the broader sense of
"we" and "having" a Nationals, in which case you might even go on to Vintage
(VSA), Aerobatics (IAC/EAA) or Intercollegiate (CSA -- ask me about it)...
I really only bring this up to point out that, by contrast, SSA does have an
official Nationals scheme for FAI-inspired X/C soaring classes...
11) Juniors (including Rudy Mozer Champion trophy)
12) Women
with "the" Nationals being a pseudo-contest of best scores obtained at ANY
SSA-sanctioned Nationals (past Junior Champions have done their thing in
World Class, Sports, 15m, Std...).
--JHC
Just checked the entry list for Parowan, Tim's idea would eliminate 50
pilots out of the 74 that wish to fly the sports nationals this year.
Is this what we want? Sports class has been very successful because you
come to the contest with what you have, your ship and your talents.
Over the years there has been suggestions to not allow pilots with
diamond badges or not allow certain ships. Let's leave it alone, it's
working real fine.
Haven't we plowed this ground before?
JJ
Tim
April 5th 05, 04:35 AM
Couldn't have said the way things could be better myself. If you do not
like having spent $100k+ only to get beaten by KS, 7V, etc. in whatever
"modern" class you want to fly in, then Trade-"Down" to a $30K LS-4 or
a $14K Std Cirrus, enjoy a few non-soaring vacations with the
proceeeds, and get beaten by the very talented younger crowd of racers
who drive their lowly "club class" ships. But this would only be truly
possible if there were a true or modified "club class" contests in the
U.S.A.
I would further echo Bob Fidler's comments on how we should be racing
at home like we race in international competitions. IMHO, we are
setting our teams up for overall failure if we expect "modern" glider
guiders to adapt from their ASW-Wahtever to a Std Libelle in the three
weeks of a WGC. "Club Class" flying is a particular skill that can be
gained in this country. I for one, from personal experience, would
prefer that we send pilots to world competitions that are put in the
position to excel, rather than merely compete for the honor of it.
Lucky for me, I actually was a "club class" pilot when I went to worlds
last year.
This comes from a VERY committed sports/club class pilot who owns a
$14K Std. Libelle and who would love to stay in my Libelle for many,
many years to come. I fly sports class regionals for the experience in
my class and to share my growing knowledge with other pilots. I fly
sports class nationals because that is the only thing my $14K is
sometimes competitive in.
While I may be a little above-average in my soaring and racing skills,
my win at Elmira's Sports Class Nats in 2003 was in part because I
happened to own one of the better ships for the conditions that existed
there during that contest period. Should luck, $'s, planning or the
combination of all three in choice of ship determine who wins in a
"fair" and "handicapped" contest?
The fiction that handicaps can even out performance over the wide range
of soaring conditions that US Sport Class are held in (i.e. Albert Lea,
Mifflin, Minden, Ionia, Elmira, etc.) is just that ... fiction. Ask
anyone who has flown a pure ridge day at Mifflin whether a dry ASW-27
is going to be quite a bit quicker than than a Libelle. Or how about if
that next western thermal on any particular day is always 42:1 away and
you are in a 35:1 ship? Yeah that pilot might have been competitive on
most days, but that one day just cost him or her any chance on that
particular day no matter how well they flew their fairly "handicapped"
ship.
If somebody honestly, in detail, and without privately smirking, can
explain to me how my Std Libelle is going to be equally competitive in
all expected wx conditions as a flapped ship (i.e. LS-3 to ASW-27) in
the Western thermals of Parowan this June, I would love to hear it!!!
In Europe, Sports Class AND Club Class co-exist just fine - even in
small countries like Norway, for instance. The same can be made to work
here. Somebody just has to step up and prove the concept out by holding
a few well located Club Class Events. Then of course the powers that be
have to approve it.
Oh yeah... one more thing... club class is fun!!! It is fun to try and
outperform the x-c speeds acheived by the greats of our sport who cut
their teeth in "club class" ships inthe late 60's and early 70's. And
the competition who is flying "club class" contests in Europe and at
the world level will stack up with anyone in any other "real" class -
and they fly libelles, cirri, LS-4's, etc. - Willingly!!!
Club class should at least be given a full and honest chance in the
U.S.
Flame Shield to full power...
Tim S. McAllister "EY"
U.S. Club Class Team, 2004 WGC Elverum, Norway
Tim Mara wrote: <SNIP>
Andy Blackburn
April 5th 05, 04:44 AM
At 02:30 05 April 2005, wrote:
>Just checked the entry list for Parowan, Tim's idea
>would eliminate 50
>pilots out of the 74 that wish to fly the sports nationals
>this year.
>Is this what we want?
I've been waiting for this moment...
I agree with JJ.
The last thing we need is a set of rules changes that
up the odds of contests being under-subscribed (and
uneconomic to run).
If we are worried about new pilots being excluded from
popular Regionals, or being crushed by better pilots
who are 'down-classing', we could consider doing reverse
seeding for entry in sports class for Regionals (as
was done at Parowan last year), and maybe even parallel
scoring based on an additional handicap tied to each
pilot's seeding (like golf).
9B
M B
April 5th 05, 04:51 AM
If your premise is 'you can never properly handicap
such
a field' then you needn't say any more. No handicap
system will satisfy you.
Personally, I like the handicapping system, but think
it doesn't give enough distinction to discourage those
flying higher performance aircraft. I don't see 2-33s
or L-13s or PW-2s entered in the Sports Class. They
have no class to compete in, because the handicaps
need to be further apart.
If we want to see newbies REALLY encouraged to race,
we should REALLY encourage low performance aircraft.
Something you can just barely do a silver badge in
comfortably...
The only reason the 15meter, 18meter, standard and
world class guys don't win Sports class instead is
pride.
If you cancelled all the other classes at the last
second at some contest, the Nimbus would top the Sport's
class leader board...
At 23:00 04 April 2005, Tim Mara wrote:
>the problem with this handicapping is that you still
>have PW5's and Nimbus's
>in the same class......you can never properly handicap
>such a
>field......and, there already is a class for the PW5
>(World class) and one
>for the Nimbus (Open class) and 126's have their own
>class too.....
>a small restriction to who can fly what will go a long
>way towards allowing
>everyone to fly a 100K, 200K or 300K on the same day....and,
>like the FAI
>classes, even see another glider during the day. Not
>simply fly alone and to
>wherever and have no clue how they are doing, or learn
>by following others
>of 'like' performance
>tim
>'M B' wrote in message
...
>>I recommended that the CH handicaps simply
>> be squared for Sports class.
>>
>> The PW-2 with 2.15 becomes 4.62
>> The Nimbus 3DM with .75 becomes .56
>>
>> 1-26 1.62 2.62
>> 2-33 1.84 3.38
>> L-13 1.46 2.13
>> G103 1.15 1.32
>> ASW20 0.90 0.81
>>
>> So the Nimbus would need to go 8.2 times faster (or
>> further or whatever) to beat the PW-2 driver.
>>
>> This would favor the lower performance ships. Really,
>> isn't the importance of Sports Class to make it distinct?
>> I think squaring the handicap would make it much more
>> insteresting and distinct.
>>
>> And the PW-2 guy doing a 30km task vs. the Nimbus
>>guy
>> with
>> a 250km task sounds like a real race to me!
>>
>> And a 2-33 vs an ASW-20 SHOULD get about a 4:1 advantage,
>> instead of a 2:1 advantage.
>>
>> I'd like to see this scoring at our fun meet coming
>> up...
>>
>> As far as the other classes, I'm not sure how the
>> 'standard' class has lived so long. Also, every contest
>> seems to be a 'seniors' contest anyway, so dunno about
>> that
>> one :P
>>
>> A 2-place contest class? Sports and open-unlimited
>> should be enough for this.
>>
>> Finally, who cares about motorglider class? For the
>> flying portion of the contest, isn't it just the 'fixed
>> ballast' class?
>> These guys say 'it's just a glider' so I'd like to
>> see it just treated that way. I'm aware of the subtlety
>> of 'landouts' but I
>> think there is an elegant way to even the playing
>>field
>> for this
>> (some penalty for landout, doubled for engine use).
>>
>> So those are four I'm not so sure about.
>>
>> Sports, 15 meter, and open-unlimited seem to be the
>> three
>> real viable ones. With the squared handicap, lowest
>> performers
>> will tend to Sports, the tilters and flappers that
>> qualify will
>> go 15-meter, and the sexy big glass in open.
>>
>> I think every successful multiclass contest has at
>> least two of these three classes, right? The rest
>> seem to be very 'specialty' classes. Nothing wrong
>> with that, except it gets a little harder to get throngs
>> motivated for so many 'class' competitions :)
>>
>> At 17:00 04 April 2005, wrote:
>>>
>>>Tim Mara wrote:
>>>> we don't need another class...we just need to fix
>>>>the one we
>>>have.....
>>>>
>>>> I proposed years ago that we modify the Sports class
>>>>'more or less'
>>>to the
>>>> very successful European Club Class (they actually
>>>>have two versions
>>>there
>>>> for standard class gliders and 15 meter gliders called
>>>>the 'racing
>>>class)
>>>> My (and others) suggestion was to eliminate gliders
>>>>from the Sports
>>>class
>>>> that already had a 'competitive' class of their own....
>>>> Doing this I suggested the sports class would 'disallow'
>>>>any 'current
>>>
>>>> production' competition glider or variation thereof,
>>>>from Sports
>>>class
>>>> competition.
>>>> Meaning..if you have a 'racing' glider that is of
>>>>a series currently
>>>being
>>>> produced you'd have to fly it in the respective class
>>>>it was designed
>>>for
>>>> (15M, Standard, open and yes, world class) . If you
>>>>have a glider
>>>that has
>>>> been surpassed by more competitive models from the
>>>>manufacturer,then
>>>it
>>>> could be handicapped and allowed into sports class...
>>>>The main idea
>>>with
>>>> this was to allow closer handicapping and allow older
>>>>gliders (lower
>>>cost)
>>>> to fly with their pilots competitively and let them
>>>>fly in called
>>>tasks
>>>> rather than having to design new scoring systems to
>>>>meet the broadest
>>>array
>>>> of handicaps.
>>>> The other change to sports class I suggested was that
>>>>no one would be
>>>
>>>> allowed to fly in a sports class 'National' contest,
>>>>that had not
>>>> participated in a Sports class regional contest within
>>>>the preceding
>>>3
>>>> years, thus keeping the class 'pure' .....since it
>>>>seems pilots who
>>>> otherwise snub their noses at sports class seem to
>>>>rush top attend
>>>only when
>>>> there is a title at stake....and then of course as
>>>>we see it today,
>>>show up
>>>> in droves to fly their latest ship...
>>>> I never got any flack from these proposals except
>>>>of course from
>>>those who
>>>> were already fling the latest and greatest ships......but
>>>>even most
>>>of them
>>>> admitted in the past it would be beneficial to promoting
>>>>the sports
>>>class
>>>> and would allow owners on lesser budgets with older
>>>>gliders a place
>>>to
>>>> compete where they could more or less evenly match
>>>>themselves and
>>>their
>>>> ships and bring more into the sport or glider racing..which
>>>>can't be
>>>bad for
>>>> any of us...
>>>> anyway.my 2c are there again.....
>>>> tim
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Wings & Wheels
>>>> www.wingsandwheels.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>Can't argue with any of that, Tim, but where are you
>>>going to draw the
>>>line? The V1's and 20's are still quite potent machines.
>>>How about the
>>>Genesis, its out of production. I do like your proposal
>>>to only allow
>>>real sports pilots to compete, but then it wouldn't
>>>be all that hard to
>>>log a sports regionals every 3 years just to keep ones
>>>options open.
>>>What I see is a lot of local pilots will fly sports
>>>nats when they are
>>>close and the other nationals when they are close.
>>>That's what I do and
>>>kind-a like it that way.
>>>
>>>JJ
>>>
>>>
>> Mark J. Boyd
>>
>>
>
>
>
Mark J. Boyd
Eric Greenwell
April 5th 05, 05:28 AM
M B wrote:
>
> The only reason the 15meter, 18meter, standard and
> world class guys don't win Sports class instead is
> pride.
> If you cancelled all the other classes at the last
> second at some contest, the Nimbus would top the Sport's
> class leader board...
According to a friend of mine who has flown his Nimbus in Sports class,
it would be a poor choice. I think he suggested an LS4 would be much
better. Since he is a good contest pilot and did win a Sports Class
Nationals in an LS4, I tend to believe him.
The handicaps do work reasonably well, in my experience, meaning the
winners are generally better pilots than the losers. There is more
"scatter" in the results, of course, because the weather is not always
uniform enough.
--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA
An excellent reasoned response!
Perhaps it IS time for the US to get serious and join other countries in
FAI Club Class competition.
I have yet to hear a reason not to.
Mike
"Tim" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Couldn't have said the way things could be better myself. If you do not
> like having spent $100k+ only to get beaten by KS, 7V, etc. in whatever
> "modern" class you want to fly in, then Trade-"Down" to a $30K LS-4 or
> a $14K Std Cirrus, enjoy a few non-soaring vacations with the
> proceeeds, and get beaten by the very talented younger crowd of racers
> who drive their lowly "club class" ships. But this would only be truly
> possible if there were a true or modified "club class" contests in the
> U.S.A.
>
> I would further echo Bob Fidler's comments on how we should be racing
> at home like we race in international competitions. IMHO, we are
> setting our teams up for overall failure if we expect "modern" glider
> guiders to adapt from their ASW-Wahtever to a Std Libelle in the three
> weeks of a WGC. "Club Class" flying is a particular skill that can be
> gained in this country. I for one, from personal experience, would
> prefer that we send pilots to world competitions that are put in the
> position to excel, rather than merely compete for the honor of it.
> Lucky for me, I actually was a "club class" pilot when I went to worlds
> last year.
>
> This comes from a VERY committed sports/club class pilot who owns a
> $14K Std. Libelle and who would love to stay in my Libelle for many,
> many years to come. I fly sports class regionals for the experience in
> my class and to share my growing knowledge with other pilots. I fly
> sports class nationals because that is the only thing my $14K is
> sometimes competitive in.
>
> While I may be a little above-average in my soaring and racing skills,
> my win at Elmira's Sports Class Nats in 2003 was in part because I
> happened to own one of the better ships for the conditions that existed
> there during that contest period. Should luck, $'s, planning or the
> combination of all three in choice of ship determine who wins in a
> "fair" and "handicapped" contest?
>
> The fiction that handicaps can even out performance over the wide range
> of soaring conditions that US Sport Class are held in (i.e. Albert Lea,
> Mifflin, Minden, Ionia, Elmira, etc.) is just that ... fiction. Ask
> anyone who has flown a pure ridge day at Mifflin whether a dry ASW-27
> is going to be quite a bit quicker than than a Libelle. Or how about if
> that next western thermal on any particular day is always 42:1 away and
> you are in a 35:1 ship? Yeah that pilot might have been competitive on
> most days, but that one day just cost him or her any chance on that
> particular day no matter how well they flew their fairly "handicapped"
> ship.
>
> If somebody honestly, in detail, and without privately smirking, can
> explain to me how my Std Libelle is going to be equally competitive in
> all expected wx conditions as a flapped ship (i.e. LS-3 to ASW-27) in
> the Western thermals of Parowan this June, I would love to hear it!!!
>
> In Europe, Sports Class AND Club Class co-exist just fine - even in
> small countries like Norway, for instance. The same can be made to work
> here. Somebody just has to step up and prove the concept out by holding
> a few well located Club Class Events. Then of course the powers that be
> have to approve it.
>
> Oh yeah... one more thing... club class is fun!!! It is fun to try and
> outperform the x-c speeds acheived by the greats of our sport who cut
> their teeth in "club class" ships inthe late 60's and early 70's. And
> the competition who is flying "club class" contests in Europe and at
> the world level will stack up with anyone in any other "real" class -
> and they fly libelles, cirri, LS-4's, etc. - Willingly!!!
>
> Club class should at least be given a full and honest chance in the
> U.S.
>
> Flame Shield to full power...
>
> Tim S. McAllister "EY"
> U.S. Club Class Team, 2004 WGC Elverum, Norway
>
>
> Tim Mara wrote: <SNIP>
>
Tim wrote:
> Couldn't have said the way things could be better myself. If you do
not
> like having spent $100k+ only to get beaten by KS, 7V, etc. in
whatever
> "modern" class you want to fly in, then Trade-"Down" to a $30K LS-4
or
> a $14K Std Cirrus, enjoy a few non-soaring vacations with the
> proceeeds, and get beaten by the very talented younger crowd of
racers
> who drive their lowly "club class" ships. But this would only be
truly
> possible if there were a true or modified "club class" contests in
the
> U.S.A.
>
> I would further echo Bob Fidler's comments on how we should be racing
> at home like we race in international competitions. IMHO, we are
> setting our teams up for overall failure if we expect "modern" glider
> guiders to adapt from their ASW-Wahtever to a Std Libelle in the
three
> weeks of a WGC. "Club Class" flying is a particular skill that can be
> gained in this country. I for one, from personal experience, would
> prefer that we send pilots to world competitions that are put in the
> position to excel, rather than merely compete for the honor of it.
> Lucky for me, I actually was a "club class" pilot when I went to
worlds
> last year.
>
> This comes from a VERY committed sports/club class pilot who owns a
> $14K Std. Libelle and who would love to stay in my Libelle for many,
> many years to come. I fly sports class regionals for the experience
in
> my class and to share my growing knowledge with other pilots. I fly
> sports class nationals because that is the only thing my $14K is
> sometimes competitive in.
>
> While I may be a little above-average in my soaring and racing
skills,
> my win at Elmira's Sports Class Nats in 2003 was in part because I
> happened to own one of the better ships for the conditions that
existed
> there during that contest period. Should luck, $'s, planning or the
> combination of all three in choice of ship determine who wins in a
> "fair" and "handicapped" contest?
>
> The fiction that handicaps can even out performance over the wide
range
> of soaring conditions that US Sport Class are held in (i.e. Albert
Lea,
> Mifflin, Minden, Ionia, Elmira, etc.) is just that ... fiction. Ask
> anyone who has flown a pure ridge day at Mifflin whether a dry ASW-27
> is going to be quite a bit quicker than than a Libelle. Or how about
if
> that next western thermal on any particular day is always 42:1 away
and
> you are in a 35:1 ship? Yeah that pilot might have been competitive
on
> most days, but that one day just cost him or her any chance on that
> particular day no matter how well they flew their fairly
"handicapped"
> ship.
>
> If somebody honestly, in detail, and without privately smirking, can
> explain to me how my Std Libelle is going to be equally competitive
in
> all expected wx conditions as a flapped ship (i.e. LS-3 to ASW-27) in
> the Western thermals of Parowan this June, I would love to hear it!!!
>
> In Europe, Sports Class AND Club Class co-exist just fine - even in
> small countries like Norway, for instance. The same can be made to
work
> here. Somebody just has to step up and prove the concept out by
holding
> a few well located Club Class Events. Then of course the powers that
be
> have to approve it.
>
> Oh yeah... one more thing... club class is fun!!! It is fun to try
and
> outperform the x-c speeds acheived by the greats of our sport who cut
> their teeth in "club class" ships inthe late 60's and early 70's. And
> the competition who is flying "club class" contests in Europe and at
> the world level will stack up with anyone in any other "real" class -
> and they fly libelles, cirri, LS-4's, etc. - Willingly!!!
>
> Club class should at least be given a full and honest chance in the
> U.S.
>
> Flame Shield to full power...
>
> Tim S. McAllister "EY"
> U.S. Club Class Team, 2004 WGC Elverum, Norway
>
>
> Tim Mara wrote: <SNIP>
Gotta disagree just a bit with EY. Recent history shows that you need a
LOW performance glider to excel in the Sports Class.
Why? Because it lets the guy with a 1.0 or higher handicap pick the
sweet part of the task area while the .9 guys are forced to fly out of
the best area to use up task time. Fly upwind/downwind as is usual when
you have a choice and Dave Stevenson will kill you every single day in
the KA6.
This "modern" pilot seemed to do OK when moving to Club at the Worlds.
The success that Tim has had proves, in my opinion, that what we have
works.
The sad part is that not all that many serious contenders for US Team
slots are participating at the national level. I'd estimate about 6 at
Ionia last year with a couple gone to the WGC at the time. When more
top pilots realize this is a way to the "big show",the qualitiy of the
team will improve.
Entries at the Sports Nats is more about the popularity of the site
than other issues, in my opinion. Have Iris and Karl run the contest,
with all they do to make it fun, and it will fill up anywhere, with
somebody crying cause they aren't good enough to get in.
We need to not mess up what we have which is a place for everybody to
fly. As Dick Johnson calls it- the entry and exit class. Run what you
brung works and handicapping anomolies are weeded out By the RC led by
Dave Cole.
When we get Sports to a full contest regularly with 1/2 the field
between .95 and 1.03, we should think about creating a divided class,
but not until then.
Just my opinion.
UH- RC Chair, WGC Club team '01, '02
We have a few real sports class pilots that only fly that class, but
they are definitely the minority. Those of us who are serious about
racing, have and will continue to buy the most performance we can
afford. Should we exclude the vast majority, simply because we choose
to fly newer equipment? I think, no. Parowan this year has 2/3 newer
stuff and 1/3 older stuff. I say, leave it alone.
Oh, one more thing, the numbers have been scrubbed down for over 30
years, now. They're not perfect, but they represent the best that can
be done. Truth is, the open class ship can't win unless nobody else
makes it home. The 1-26 can't fight any wind over 10 knots. Guess what?
these two extremes don't come any more.
JJ
Tim Mara
April 5th 05, 04:14 PM
not necessarily.......it may just mean that the 50 you eliminated will be
replaced with the 50 who don't waste their time and money to be fodder for
the 50 with the latest and greatest ships....
and...maybe the 50 you might eliminate will still participate, but in a true
"club (Sports) class ship..... The Europeans sure seem to be able to fill
these classes with "club class" gliders......heck, I've even offered to loan
out gliders myself for the sports class contests....JJ, I even offered one
to you when the Sports class nationals were in Elmira.....remember?
tim
> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Just checked the entry list for Parowan, Tim's idea would eliminate 50
> pilots out of the 74 that wish to fly the sports nationals this year.
> Is this what we want? Sports class has been very successful because you
> come to the contest with what you have, your ship and your talents.
> Over the years there has been suggestions to not allow pilots with
> diamond badges or not allow certain ships. Let's leave it alone, it's
> working real fine.
> Haven't we plowed this ground before?
> JJ
>
Wayne Paul
April 5th 05, 05:05 PM
I have considered entering "Sports Class" contests with my HP-14; however,
it seems like a useless effort considering the ships which I would be
competing against.
Yes, I know that entering would make me a better pilot; however, any week
dedicated to flying with other good pilots will do that.
"Tim Mara" > wrote in message
...
> not necessarily.......it may just mean that the 50 you eliminated will be
> replaced with the 50 who don't waste their time and money to be fodder for
> the 50 with the latest and greatest ships....
> and...maybe the 50 you might eliminate will still participate, but in a
true
> "club (Sports) class ship..... The Europeans sure seem to be able to fill
> these classes with "club class" gliders......heck, I've even offered to
loan
> out gliders myself for the sports class contests....JJ, I even offered one
> to you when the Sports class nationals were in Elmira.....remember?
> tim
>
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> > Just checked the entry list for Parowan, Tim's idea would eliminate 50
> > pilots out of the 74 that wish to fly the sports nationals this year.
> > Is this what we want? Sports class has been very successful because you
> > come to the contest with what you have, your ship and your talents.
> > Over the years there has been suggestions to not allow pilots with
> > diamond badges or not allow certain ships. Let's leave it alone, it's
> > working real fine.
> > Haven't we plowed this ground before?
> > JJ
> >
>
>
Tim
April 5th 05, 06:12 PM
> Gotta disagree just a bit with EY.
No problem UH - disagreement is what good debate is all about. If no
one ever shared their concerns or hopes and dreams, we would all be
poorer for it.
I just wanted to chime in with some of my thoughts as I now see how
dynamic a group of pilots has been created by the creation of the Club
Class in Europe and Australia, and I, selfishly, would like to be a
part of a community like that here in the USA.
In Sports Class, while I feel invited, I also feel like I am a little
bit of a sideshow in my 1969 Libelle. I saw someone say on this thread
that if we applied "Club Class" rules to this years entries at
Parowan, we would only have 24 Club Class ships. Unless I am seriously
confused on what a "club class" ship is, I count only 6 potential
club class type entry applications by ships of no-flaps and less than
1.03 handicap!!!
I can not help but believe that many owners of "club class" type
ships are intimidated by the field of GLIDERS at Sports Nats and at the
larger Sports Regionals, rather than the field of pilots. Forexample
look at Wayne Paul's post inthis thread. I for one have analyzed things
and can not hope to be FULLY competitive at Parowan in my Std. Libelle.
Sure I can take her and I could/would do just fine. But anyone going
racing for the national team or a national title is not content with
the expectation of doing "just fine" even before the first start
takes place. So I am going to a different ship - one with a better
(i.e. more favorable handicap for the conditions I will be flying in).
IMHO, that is not "run what you brung" but I will be doing it
because that is how the game works.
If sports class were truly "fair" then I posit that a great many
more people might be interested in "running what they brung." Maybe
I am wrong, but maybe I am right. How do we know unless we try it out?
> Recent history shows that you need a
> LOW performance glider to excel in the Sports Class.
> Why? Because it lets the guy with a 1.0 or higher handicap pick the
> sweet part of the task area while the .9 guys are forced to fly out
of
> the best area to use up task time. Fly upwind/downwind as is usual
when
> you have a choice and Dave Stevenson will kill you every single day
in
> the KA6.
No quibbling with DS as a pilot. He is a TERRIFIC pilot and great
competitor in Sports Class.
But I do quibble with a system that lets a great pilot find an
overvalued (handicap-wise) glider, and use it to bludgeon the field of
many equally talented pilots. This was seen by many of us in Sports
Class at Lubbock in 2002. I just cannot believe that DS so completely
and thoroughly outclassed the second place competitior (E9) on pilot
skills alone.
If the handicap for the Cobra was correct, then why was the handicap
immediately and greatly devalued the next year. Dave played it
correctly from the start - he worked the rules to ensure his chance
at victory. Who knows, he probably would have won with the Cobra's
handicap of 1.16 and not 1.25. But it would have been a MUCH tighter
race that I would like to have flown in.
If the general perception is out there that this can be done, then
there may also be a perception that other ships are equally
favored/disfavored. If I am an aspiring racing pilot who has any dreams
of being competitive, then I might think better of entering a contest
where I start from behind on Day1.
> This "modern" pilot seemed to do OK when moving to Club at the
Worlds.
No questioning your racing skills, UH. The better pilot, flying
whatever ship, will always tend to outclass the less good pilot. But if
your ability to purchase or obtain a relatively or perceived more
competitive ship determines who will and will not race, then all racing
pilots in this country and the pilots we send to Club Worlds out of
Sports Class are the poorer for it.
>
> The success that Tim has had proves, in my opinion, that what we have
> works.
>
Yes it works, but could it be better for a certain portion of our
membership that would love to race but are intimidated from
participating; That portion of our membership that we pay lipservice to
wanting to attract to racing, but do very little to encourage - the
young, the new, the old on more limited means, etc.
Yes adding another class to the mix could dilute things for contest
attendance. However, anyone who thinks running even a fully subscribed
contest is lucrative or even "economic" clearly has not run one. We
need to grow the size of our pie rather than restricting any growth to
within existing boundaries. Maybe adding another class would give
incentive to actually hold more co-hosted contests for those classes
without a dedicated national - say a Junior Nationals or a Women's
Nationals.
> The sad part is that not all that many serious contenders for US Team
> slots are participating at the national level. I'd estimate about 6
at
> Ionia last year with a couple gone to the WGC at the time. When more
> top pilots realize this is a way to the "big show",the qualitiy of
the
> team will improve.
Wholeheartedly agreed. The attempt to freeze out the top pilots from
the club class team a few years ago was riduculous. The rest of the
world sends its BEST pilots to club class worlds, why shouldn't we.
But I am still not convinced we truly send our best pilots to club
class when very few "sports" class pilots venture from East to West
Coast sites in search of the team spots, but rather most comepetitors
fly Sports Class as a warm-up for "their" nationals (i.e. Std, 15m,
Open, 18m) and when it is in their back yard.
> Entries at the Sports Nats is more about the popularity of the site
> than other issues, in my opinion. Have Iris and Karl run the contest,
> with all they do to make it fun, and it will fill up anywhere, with
> somebody crying cause they aren't good enough to get in.
Absolutely True. Good, Well-run contest at "friendly" sites will
always filled up, often with very talented pilots. Sorry for the less
well ranked pilots, but that is just the way things work. It is a
Nationals after all.
> We need to not mess up what we have which is a place for everybody to
> fly. As Dick Johnson calls it- the entry and exit class. Run what you
> brung works and handicapping anomolies are weeded out By the RC led
by
> Dave Cole.
I would never advocate "messing" anything up. Keep the Sports
Class! Don't change a thing. I like taking my Libelle to Sports Class
events where I really must tototally and completely maximize my flying
and the ship to get a good finish. I get challenged and I become a
better racing pilot for the experience. Both here and in Europe, this
is one of the only places in our sport where there can be the
confluence of newbies and the top names. Other countries run Sports and
Club Class championships - often countries much smaller than ours.
Why not us?
> When we get Sports to a full contest regularly with 1/2 the field
> between .95 and 1.03, we should think about creating a divided class,
> but not until then.
We have a bit of a chicken or the egg problem here. I may be wrong, but
when I look at a western contest site like Parowan, and see 27's,
V2's, etc., etc. it gives me pause to bringing my Libelle. I wonder
how many other pilots are in a similar situation? If all you own is a
PW-5 or a Russia, and/or you are of limited means, then that is what
you take or you do not go - assuming you want to be
"competitive". Pilots can't have the option of Club Class until
the participation is there, but we do not have the participation, in
part I beleive, because of the current system of Sports Class. What to
do?
One more point for possible discussion:
I have heard the argument that the Open Class is kept alive here in the
US in part because of the effect shuttering the class would have on big
winged glider values. If we are willing to protect such a relatively
minor portion of our pilot's turf, then why can't we add Club Class
and immediately bolster the glider values of many more club class type
ships? Aren't owners of club class ships like mine owed a little
protection of our hopes and dreams, not to mention our glider values?
Or must I be limited to buying into "real racing" only by getting a
"new" ship? The rest of the world seems to think differently from
us here in the USA. While the rest of the world is often wrong on many
things, they might just be right on this one...
Respectfully,
EY
> Just my opinion.
> UH- RC Chair, WGC Club team '01, '02
Tim
April 5th 05, 06:26 PM
You make one of my main points perfectly.
If we want to EDUCATE new, aspiring racing pilots, Sports Class is
terrific. Go ahead and hang your shingle out there - Even in an HP-14 -
which by the way was my first ship. You will learn more about flying
for performance and glider handling in one week of oragnized contest
flying than you will in many, many years of flying around the patch or
with friends, even if you are at the bottom of the score sheet.
If we want to teach new, aspiring racing pilots how to COMPETE and RACE
FOR A WIN, then Sports Class fails. You can only learn to compete and
race when you are in situations of rough equality - pilot skill and
equipment. Sports Class handicaps do not offer that rough equality to a
broad enough range of older gliders at present.
If aspiring Club Class pilots and those owning Club Class gliders think
the Sports Class handicaps are going to come to them are dreaming.
When the base-line Sports Class ship at your average Sports Nats
becomes a V2 - who do think will suffer when it comes time to "tweak"
the handicaps for better competition?
Keep the faith, if you really love to compete, take you HP to a sports
class contest and learn the skills for competing and soak in the
ambience; then, if you really are hooked on racing gliders to win, join
the bandwagon to get a class that encompasses the older, increasingly
dispossessed ships -we could use the support.
Tim McAllister "EY"
Std. Libelle
Tim Mara wrote:
> not necessarily.......it may just mean that the 50 you eliminated
will be
> replaced with the 50 who don't waste their time and money to be
fodder for
> the 50 with the latest and greatest ships....
That just aint so, Tim. I wish it were true, but we don't have people
wishing to race and unable to get in. Look at last years Parowan
regionals. They got only 19 total in sports and *Reverse Seeding* was
in affect, so as many as wanted could have entered, without any seeding
(not on the list = top of the entry list) Another thing, if your
proposal was in effect only 8 of the 19 would have been allowed in.
Look at Air Sailing all sports regionals, they can only gin up 5 or 6
total and they offer thermaiing camps and cross country camps ahead of
the sports contest.
It's a sign of the times, we aint getting the new blood into the sport,
much less into racing.
Thanks for the offer to fly an old wooden thing, I actually thought
about entering my Bowlus Super Albatross in Parowan, then I remembered
what it didn't have, oxygen, radio, 2- GPS's, computer. Then I
remembered the last day, last year, 100 mile final glide over hostle
territory and I asked myself, "Do you really want to do that in a
Bowlus?" Myself said, "NO".
JJ
Eric Greenwell
April 5th 05, 09:14 PM
Wayne Paul wrote:
> I have considered entering "Sports Class" contests with my HP-14; however,
> it seems like a useless effort considering the ships which I would be
> competing against.
>
> Yes, I know that entering would make me a better pilot; however, any week
> dedicated to flying with other good pilots will do that.
Wayne, an HP 14 in good condition is an excellent match for Ephrata
conditions, as is any glider near a 1.00 handicap. There are plenty of
turnpoints to choose from so can usually choose a good area. Come on up
and try it! You'll learn some contest flying, something you won't learn
just from "flying with other good pilots".
--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA
toad
April 5th 05, 10:27 PM
I would like to address the intimidation factor as it applies to new
racing pilots,ie new XC pilots who have not raced yet.
Very few pilots are being held back from entering their first contest
by not being competitive. At least not the pilots who I fly with.
They could care less about winning. They are intimidated about flying
long tasks, they don't own a GPS logger yet, they are worried about
gaggles, final glides, land-outs and complex rules.
A question, would you propose an additional club class at regionals or
a single club class national ?
Todd Smith
Grob 102
3S
Ray Lovinggood
April 5th 05, 11:23 PM
A lot of good points have been stated in this thread.
I'm sure I can't add any good points, but I can add
my 2 cents worth...
I've flown in one SSA Regional contest, a couple of
GTA (Georgia-Tennessee-Alabama series) and some 'fun
flys' that were sort of run like contests. In all
cases, I was in a 'sports class' and I think the GTA
runs their series based on the sports class rules.
I know I don't have a chance of winning. Yet. But
I want to go to contests to:
1. Improve my flying
2. Meet other people
3. Have a great vacation
The main problem holding me back: Lack of vacation
time. A regional requires more than a week of vacation
time and since I'm on a new job, it takes time to build
sufficient vacation time. Here is where the GTA series
is great: They fly weekend events with the occassional
3-day fling thrown in. Unfortunately, their races
nearest to me are about 500 miles away. That's just
an awfully long way to go, especially with gas over
$2.20/gallon, for two days of flying. (I know the
Europeans are rolling their eyes over this item.)
I am a bit intimidated when I find a lot of newer gliders
as compared to my 1970 LS1-d at these events. Sure,
there may be the occassional Libelle or 1-34, but most
of the competition I've seen at the events have been
newer than mine.
While it is a little intimidating, I'm not put off
by it. I know that is just the way it is. And besides,
it gives me a good alibi for loosing! (Handicap for
my glider is 1.019)
But I must say, it would be more interesting if all
the competitors in my class had gliders of similar
vintage (or even street value?)
Back to the GTA: They run two classes: The 'A' class
for the experienced pilots and the 'B' class for the
rest. For the two events I attended, I flew in the
'B' class. They assign shorter tasks for the 'B' pilots
and usually the route stays a little closer to the
home field. To me, these are appealing features.
It lets me fly 'in the shallow part of the pool' before
I 'jump off into the deep end.'
So, I could see where a Club Class would be interesting
and I would participate, if I can ever build enough
vacation time. But, I'll be happy in the Sports Class
just the way it is. That's because I'm not a 'real'
competitor like EY. He and others like him are out
to win. I'm just out to have a good time. And having
the structure available at a contest: The CD, the
weather guesser, and all the other pilots doing the
same thing make flying a contest a whole lot more fun
and interesting than flying at the home field where
everybody seems to do their own thing.
So, I just need more vacation time and a longer spring
season.
Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA
LS1-d, 'W8'
Tim Mara
April 5th 05, 11:51 PM
the whole point is.......if you have the ship for the competitive FAI
Class..then fly in the FAI class.No one will be taking your spot there on
the grid with their Standard Cirrus or Libelle.....
I hear no one complaining that the FAI classes are over booked with K6's or
the like....
IMHO (and many others) what Club class (Sports) was intended for and should
be for, is a place for these lesser budget racers to compete on a fair and
fun playing field....
tim
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Tim Mara wrote:
>> not necessarily.......it may just mean that the 50 you eliminated
> will be
>> replaced with the 50 who don't waste their time and money to be
> fodder for
>> the 50 with the latest and greatest ships....
>
> That just aint so, Tim. I wish it were true, but we don't have people
> wishing to race and unable to get in. Look at last years Parowan
> regionals. They got only 19 total in sports and *Reverse Seeding* was
> in affect, so as many as wanted could have entered, without any seeding
> (not on the list = top of the entry list) Another thing, if your
> proposal was in effect only 8 of the 19 would have been allowed in.
>
> Look at Air Sailing all sports regionals, they can only gin up 5 or 6
> total and they offer thermaiing camps and cross country camps ahead of
> the sports contest.
>
> It's a sign of the times, we aint getting the new blood into the sport,
> much less into racing.
>
> Thanks for the offer to fly an old wooden thing, I actually thought
> about entering my Bowlus Super Albatross in Parowan, then I remembered
> what it didn't have, oxygen, radio, 2- GPS's, computer. Then I
> remembered the last day, last year, 100 mile final glide over hostle
> territory and I asked myself, "Do you really want to do that in a
> Bowlus?" Myself said, "NO".
> JJ
>
Tim wrote:
> > Gotta disagree just a bit with EY.
>
> No problem UH - disagreement is what good debate is all about. If no
> one ever shared their concerns or hopes and dreams, we would all be
> poorer for it.
>
> I just wanted to chime in with some of my thoughts as I now see how
> dynamic a group of pilots has been created by the creation of the
Club
> Class in Europe and Australia, and I, selfishly, would like to be a
> part of a community like that here in the USA.
>
> In Sports Class, while I feel invited, I also feel like I am a little
> bit of a sideshow in my 1969 Libelle. I saw someone say on this
thread
> that if we applied "Club Class" rules to this years entries at
> Parowan, we would only have 24 Club Class ships. Unless I am
seriously
> confused on what a "club class" ship is, I count only 6 potential
> club class type entry applications by ships of no-flaps and less than
> 1.03 handicap!!!
>
> I can not help but believe that many owners of "club class" type
> ships are intimidated by the field of GLIDERS at Sports Nats and at
the
> larger Sports Regionals, rather than the field of pilots. Forexample
> look at Wayne Paul's post inthis thread. I for one have analyzed
things
> and can not hope to be FULLY competitive at Parowan in my Std.
Libelle.
>
>
> Sure I can take her and I could/would do just fine. But anyone going
> racing for the national team or a national title is not content with
> the expectation of doing "just fine" even before the first start
> takes place. So I am going to a different ship - one with a better
> (i.e. more favorable handicap for the conditions I will be flying
in).
> IMHO, that is not "run what you brung" but I will be doing it
> because that is how the game works.
>
> If sports class were truly "fair" then I posit that a great many
> more people might be interested in "running what they brung." Maybe
> I am wrong, but maybe I am right. How do we know unless we try it
out?
>
> > Recent history shows that you need a
> > LOW performance glider to excel in the Sports Class.
> > Why? Because it lets the guy with a 1.0 or higher handicap pick the
> > sweet part of the task area while the .9 guys are forced to fly out
> of
> > the best area to use up task time. Fly upwind/downwind as is usual
> when
> > you have a choice and Dave Stevenson will kill you every single day
> in
> > the KA6.
>
> No quibbling with DS as a pilot. He is a TERRIFIC pilot and great
> competitor in Sports Class.
>
> But I do quibble with a system that lets a great pilot find an
> overvalued (handicap-wise) glider, and use it to bludgeon the field
of
> many equally talented pilots. This was seen by many of us in Sports
> Class at Lubbock in 2002. I just cannot believe that DS so completely
> and thoroughly outclassed the second place competitior (E9) on pilot
> skills alone.
>
> If the handicap for the Cobra was correct, then why was the handicap
> immediately and greatly devalued the next year. Dave played it
> correctly from the start - he worked the rules to ensure his chance
> at victory. Who knows, he probably would have won with the Cobra's
> handicap of 1.16 and not 1.25. But it would have been a MUCH tighter
> race that I would like to have flown in.
>
> If the general perception is out there that this can be done, then
> there may also be a perception that other ships are equally
> favored/disfavored. If I am an aspiring racing pilot who has any
dreams
> of being competitive, then I might think better of entering a contest
> where I start from behind on Day1.
>
> > This "modern" pilot seemed to do OK when moving to Club at the
> Worlds.
>
> No questioning your racing skills, UH. The better pilot, flying
> whatever ship, will always tend to outclass the less good pilot. But
if
> your ability to purchase or obtain a relatively or perceived more
> competitive ship determines who will and will not race, then all
racing
> pilots in this country and the pilots we send to Club Worlds out of
> Sports Class are the poorer for it.
>
> >
> > The success that Tim has had proves, in my opinion, that what we
have
> > works.
> >
>
> Yes it works, but could it be better for a certain portion of our
> membership that would love to race but are intimidated from
> participating; That portion of our membership that we pay lipservice
to
> wanting to attract to racing, but do very little to encourage - the
> young, the new, the old on more limited means, etc.
>
> Yes adding another class to the mix could dilute things for contest
> attendance. However, anyone who thinks running even a fully
subscribed
> contest is lucrative or even "economic" clearly has not run one. We
> need to grow the size of our pie rather than restricting any growth
to
> within existing boundaries. Maybe adding another class would give
> incentive to actually hold more co-hosted contests for those classes
> without a dedicated national - say a Junior Nationals or a Women's
> Nationals.
>
>
> > The sad part is that not all that many serious contenders for US
Team
> > slots are participating at the national level. I'd estimate about 6
> at
> > Ionia last year with a couple gone to the WGC at the time. When
more
> > top pilots realize this is a way to the "big show",the qualitiy of
> the
> > team will improve.
>
> Wholeheartedly agreed. The attempt to freeze out the top pilots from
> the club class team a few years ago was riduculous. The rest of the
> world sends its BEST pilots to club class worlds, why shouldn't we.
> But I am still not convinced we truly send our best pilots to club
> class when very few "sports" class pilots venture from East to West
> Coast sites in search of the team spots, but rather most comepetitors
> fly Sports Class as a warm-up for "their" nationals (i.e. Std, 15m,
> Open, 18m) and when it is in their back yard.
>
> > Entries at the Sports Nats is more about the popularity of the site
> > than other issues, in my opinion. Have Iris and Karl run the
contest,
> > with all they do to make it fun, and it will fill up anywhere, with
> > somebody crying cause they aren't good enough to get in.
>
> Absolutely True. Good, Well-run contest at "friendly" sites will
> always filled up, often with very talented pilots. Sorry for the less
> well ranked pilots, but that is just the way things work. It is a
> Nationals after all.
>
> > We need to not mess up what we have which is a place for everybody
to
> > fly. As Dick Johnson calls it- the entry and exit class. Run what
you
> > brung works and handicapping anomolies are weeded out By the RC led
> by
> > Dave Cole.
>
> I would never advocate "messing" anything up. Keep the Sports
> Class! Don't change a thing. I like taking my Libelle to Sports Class
> events where I really must tototally and completely maximize my
flying
> and the ship to get a good finish. I get challenged and I become a
> better racing pilot for the experience. Both here and in Europe, this
> is one of the only places in our sport where there can be the
> confluence of newbies and the top names. Other countries run Sports
and
> Club Class championships - often countries much smaller than ours.
> Why not us?
>
> > When we get Sports to a full contest regularly with 1/2 the field
> > between .95 and 1.03, we should think about creating a divided
class,
> > but not until then.
>
> We have a bit of a chicken or the egg problem here. I may be wrong,
but
> when I look at a western contest site like Parowan, and see 27's,
> V2's, etc., etc. it gives me pause to bringing my Libelle. I wonder
> how many other pilots are in a similar situation? If all you own is a
> PW-5 or a Russia, and/or you are of limited means, then that is what
> you take or you do not go - assuming you want to be
> "competitive". Pilots can't have the option of Club Class until
> the participation is there, but we do not have the participation, in
> part I beleive, because of the current system of Sports Class. What
to
> do?
>
> One more point for possible discussion:
>
> I have heard the argument that the Open Class is kept alive here in
the
> US in part because of the effect shuttering the class would have on
big
> winged glider values. If we are willing to protect such a relatively
> minor portion of our pilot's turf, then why can't we add Club Class
> and immediately bolster the glider values of many more club class
type
> ships? Aren't owners of club class ships like mine owed a little
> protection of our hopes and dreams, not to mention our glider values?
> Or must I be limited to buying into "real racing" only by getting a
> "new" ship? The rest of the world seems to think differently from
> us here in the USA. While the rest of the world is often wrong on
many
> things, they might just be right on this one...
>
> Respectfully,
> EY
>
> > Just my opinion.
> > UH- RC Chair, WGC Club team '01, '02
A lot of good points here from a guy who has thought a lot about the
subject.
As long as we keep the Sports class open to all, the possibility of a
pilot finding a "ringer" does exist, but we have worked hard to try and
prevent this.Ringers have been identified and adjusted recently and
this will continue.
I think you are making a mistake changing from the Libelle. I can't
imagine how a '27 will beat you at Parowan with equal pilots. Your 23%
advantage in selecting the best area to go( available area is square of
handicap ratio)is a big advantage. In tricky area KS glides off into
oblivion because he has to to go far enough to use up time, and you
just turn and slide on home. Just like you did to me in Elmira. I had
to extend and you didn't. Day died, you got home and I land just short.
One possibility to encourage more Club Class handicap ships is to make
team slots only available to those flying ships in that handicap range.
RC has looked at this in the past,but not adopted.
If this is seriously worthy of revisiting, it could be added to this
years pilot poll. Interested folks, contact your rules committee
representatives and we will add if there is enough interest.
I sorta agree with 1M on guys with current ships staying in the FAI
classes in regionals. The exception would be "entry and exit" folks.
That is why I do not fly Sports in regionals. I do not agree that this
is applicable to Sports Nats. Different show.
Enough blather- good discussion with less than RAS standard of insults
and name calling.
CU UH
Tim Mara
April 6th 05, 03:19 PM
>> Respectfully,
>> EY
>>
>> > Just my opinion.
>> > UH- RC Chair, WGC Club team '01, '02
>
> A lot of good points here from a guy who has thought a lot about the
> subject.
> As long as we keep the Sports class open to all, the possibility of a
> pilot finding a "ringer" does exist, but we have worked hard to try and
> prevent this.Ringers have been identified and adjusted recently and
> this will continue.
> I think you are making a mistake changing from the Libelle. I can't
> imagine how a '27 will beat you at Parowan with equal pilots. Your 23%
> advantage in selecting the best area to go( available area is square of
> handicap ratio)is a big advantage. In tricky area KS glides off into
> oblivion because he has to to go far enough to use up time, and you
> just turn and slide on home. Just like you did to me in Elmira. I had
> to extend and you didn't. Day died, you got home and I land just short.
> One possibility to encourage more Club Class handicap ships is to make
> team slots only available to those flying ships in that handicap range.
> RC has looked at this in the past,but not adopted.
> If this is seriously worthy of revisiting, it could be added to this
> years pilot poll. Interested folks, contact your rules committee
> representatives and we will add if there is enough interest.
The one and only problem with the pilots poll is that the poll will consist
of nearly all pollers being the current crop of racing pilots registered.and
most of whom will be flying current or near current racing class ships.
There is no doubt in my mind that few of these guys are going to vote
themselves out of any opportunity to fly in any contest, which is what they
would have to do to make this change.
The Poll doesn't include, what we as an organization should be trying to
attract, that being those outside that "could be" attracted to join in and
grow the ranks of the current membership. Many of these on the outside
looking in, just don't see the value of sailplane racing as it applies to
them, because, well, many don't have or can't afford what is considered to
be a competitive ship....if the sports class was aimed more at these older
ships and newer pilots I think there would be an increase in new
participation, which can't be bad for soaring as a sport inside and outside
racing.
> I sorta agree with 1M on guys with current ships staying in the FAI
> classes in regionals. The exception would be "entry and exit" folks.
> That is why I do not fly Sports in regionals. I do not agree that this
> is applicable to Sports Nats. Different show.
Decades ago, when I was "less mature" and more nimble I raced moto cross and
hare scrambles.we had in those days a novice class which basically was the
starting (entry) class. You were basically allowed to race in this class
only as long as you didn't win it.....then you were moved to the armature
class...They also adopter a senior class (exit) that allowed anyone over a
certain age to race with others among this age group....we already do this
with the very highly successful Senior Nationals.....there could be also
regional "Senior" contest.though that may already take a very large portion
of the soaring population in the USA.....which again is IMHO why we should
be doing all that is possible to attract and keep our newest (entry) pilots
interested in moving beyond club flying...racing can be and has been the
fuse for doing this in the past.
> Enough blather- good discussion with less than RAS standard of insults
> and name calling.
> CU UH
I always enjoy friendly discussions with UH, EY and many others I consider
not only pilots with similar interests, but good friends as well...like in
any marriage, when we don't talk (argue constructively) we soon part....
tim
--
Wings & Wheels
www.wingsandwheels.com
>
The challenges of handicapping rise as the performance difference
across gliders increases. The European Club Class is more restrictive
than the U.S. Sports Class. So if the intent is to use handicapping to
equalize glider performance and allow the best pilots to win, then Club
Class is better. [Of course Standard/15M/18M/Open Classes are best
because state-of-the-art gliders in each class are virtually
indistinguishable.]
Everything else is just social re-engineering: e.g., encouraging
newbies to fly contests, creating a "home" for older gliders, providing
a non-intimidating venue for the less-experienced, providing a training
ground for the next generation of FAI-Class pilots, enhancing the value
of older gliders, etc.
At this stage of my 35+ year competitive career, I own a 13-year-old,
out-of-production Standard Class glider that I've flown in four classes
(Std./15M/Open/Sports) but which, despite, its status, would be
excluded from the current Club Class. I prefer nationals vs. regionals,
shorter commutes vs. driving across the country, good weather over
poor, Charlie Spratt as CD over anyone else :), camping over (horrors!)
paying for a motel, no conflicts with my kids' school [Parawon and
Caesar Creek: what on earth went through your minds this year????],
and--very important--flying against the best pilots so I can continue
to learn and improve...and, yes, feel like I've accomplished something
when I occasionally place well.
To me, selecting the U.S. Club Class team based on Sports Class
nationals placings was the best thing that ever happened to this
class...because it increased the quality of the competition. Now at
least some of our best pilots show up aiming to win, usually flying
their own gliders, of course.
Others obviously think this was the kiss of death to Sports Class by
making it more intimidating, more competitive, more serious and less
laid back, etc. We can choose to disagree. What this change didn't do
was make it necessary to own the latest glider.
Are the handicapping factors perfect? Obviously not. In particular,
different gliders will become more or less competitive depending on
soaring weather. One solution is site-adjusted handicaps, but then a
spell of unusually good or bad weather would have everyone crying.
The existing handicaps work well--especially in the reasonably narrow
band we see at the national level--and allow most of us to show up at
any contest knowing that glider performance will be far less important
than pilot skill. When I look at the last few Sports Nationals
adjusting for the factors that are important to me, this class is doing
at least as well as any other and better than most. So in the immortal
words of President Carter's budget director, Bert Lance, "If it ain't
broke, don't fix it."
There are plenty of other problems in soaring that need solving.
Fiddling with a class where the biggest objection seems to be that
there's too much room for everyone at the regional level but not enough
at the national level is an inappropriate effort, in my humble opinion.
Tinkering with a thriving class with appeal across a large spectrum of
pilots and gliders by making it more restrictive on the controversial
premise that this will increase the U.S. Club Class Team's performance
at World Championships strikes me as foolhardy even if it's true.
Hey, everyone else has an opinion on this subject; why not me? :)
Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
F.L. Whiteley
April 7th 05, 05:59 AM
wrote:
> The challenges of handicapping rise as the performance difference
> across gliders increases. The European Club Class is more restrictive
> than the U.S. Sports Class. So if the intent is to use handicapping to
> equalize glider performance and allow the best pilots to win, then Club
> Class is better. [Of course Standard/15M/18M/Open Classes are best
> because state-of-the-art gliders in each class are virtually
> indistinguishable.]
>
> Everything else is just social re-engineering: e.g., encouraging
> newbies to fly contests, creating a "home" for older gliders, providing
> a non-intimidating venue for the less-experienced, providing a training
> ground for the next generation of FAI-Class pilots, enhancing the value
> of older gliders, etc.
>
> At this stage of my 35+ year competitive career, I own a 13-year-old,
> out-of-production Standard Class glider that I've flown in four classes
> (Std./15M/Open/Sports) but which, despite, its status, would be
> excluded from the current Club Class. I prefer nationals vs. regionals,
> shorter commutes vs. driving across the country, good weather over
> poor, Charlie Spratt as CD over anyone else :), camping over (horrors!)
> paying for a motel, no conflicts with my kids' school [Parawon and
> Caesar Creek: what on earth went through your minds this year????],
> and--very important--flying against the best pilots so I can continue
> to learn and improve...and, yes, feel like I've accomplished something
> when I occasionally place well.
>
> To me, selecting the U.S. Club Class team based on Sports Class
> nationals placings was the best thing that ever happened to this
> class...because it increased the quality of the competition. Now at
> least some of our best pilots show up aiming to win, usually flying
> their own gliders, of course.
>
> Others obviously think this was the kiss of death to Sports Class by
> making it more intimidating, more competitive, more serious and less
> laid back, etc. We can choose to disagree. What this change didn't do
> was make it necessary to own the latest glider.
>
> Are the handicapping factors perfect? Obviously not. In particular,
> different gliders will become more or less competitive depending on
> soaring weather. One solution is site-adjusted handicaps, but then a
> spell of unusually good or bad weather would have everyone crying.
>
> The existing handicaps work well--especially in the reasonably narrow
> band we see at the national level--and allow most of us to show up at
> any contest knowing that glider performance will be far less important
> than pilot skill. When I look at the last few Sports Nationals
> adjusting for the factors that are important to me, this class is doing
> at least as well as any other and better than most. So in the immortal
> words of President Carter's budget director, Bert Lance, "If it ain't
> broke, don't fix it."
>
> There are plenty of other problems in soaring that need solving.
> Fiddling with a class where the biggest objection seems to be that
> there's too much room for everyone at the regional level but not enough
> at the national level is an inappropriate effort, in my humble opinion.
> Tinkering with a thriving class with appeal across a large spectrum of
> pilots and gliders by making it more restrictive on the controversial
> premise that this will increase the U.S. Club Class Team's performance
> at World Championships strikes me as foolhardy even if it's true.
>
> Hey, everyone else has an opinion on this subject; why not me? :)
>
> Chip Bearden
> ASW 24 "JB"
Something that was pointed out to me, the seeding points. Those flying
regional sports class contests are only getting weighted with 86 points,
while everyone else (including 1-26ers and seniors) are getting 92 or 100.
If regionals sports class drivers were getting 92 points, we might see more
club class gliders actually trying to fly at Parowan this year, and some
more new pilots. The highest a regional sports class winner can currently
place on the applicant list is 34th as of this writing. The cut off at 50
is currently above 80, so placing in the top five probably isn't good
enough. However unlikely, it possible that the entire entry list could
consist of pilots that haven't flown a sports class contest as the rules
are currently written. The site is certainly attracting many, who might
pass on this contest at other locations. Then there are those that want to
race against so and so. Kind of shuts out some of the up and comers that
the sports class is supposed to be there for.
Though this thread is largely about the club class type of glider, there are
some rules that affect entry also.
Frank Whiteley
Brian Glick
April 7th 05, 08:02 PM
Tim......well said, and you should all take note that Tim recently won
Sports Nationals in a true Sports glider........the Libelle!!!
Brian
"Tim" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> You make one of my main points perfectly.
>
> If we want to EDUCATE new, aspiring racing pilots, Sports Class is
> terrific. Go ahead and hang your shingle out there - Even in an HP-14 -
> which by the way was my first ship. You will learn more about flying
> for performance and glider handling in one week of oragnized contest
> flying than you will in many, many years of flying around the patch or
> with friends, even if you are at the bottom of the score sheet.
>
> If we want to teach new, aspiring racing pilots how to COMPETE and RACE
> FOR A WIN, then Sports Class fails. You can only learn to compete and
> race when you are in situations of rough equality - pilot skill and
> equipment. Sports Class handicaps do not offer that rough equality to a
> broad enough range of older gliders at present.
>
> If aspiring Club Class pilots and those owning Club Class gliders think
> the Sports Class handicaps are going to come to them are dreaming.
> When the base-line Sports Class ship at your average Sports Nats
> becomes a V2 - who do think will suffer when it comes time to "tweak"
> the handicaps for better competition?
>
> Keep the faith, if you really love to compete, take you HP to a sports
> class contest and learn the skills for competing and soak in the
> ambience; then, if you really are hooked on racing gliders to win, join
> the bandwagon to get a class that encompasses the older, increasingly
> dispossessed ships -we could use the support.
>
> Tim McAllister "EY"
> Std. Libelle
>
Brian Glick
April 7th 05, 08:07 PM
JJ.....
I think you will agree that it was an overall good contest though, and very
nice country. I for one was very impressed with the area, and I did not even
fly in it!!! Bye the way.....my kids loved the pictures of you motorhome
mural that I took, now they want one......Thanks a lot!!!!!!!!
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Tim Mara wrote:
> > not necessarily.......it may just mean that the 50 you eliminated
> will be
> > replaced with the 50 who don't waste their time and money to be
> fodder for
> > the 50 with the latest and greatest ships....
>
> That just aint so, Tim. I wish it were true, but we don't have people
> wishing to race and unable to get in. Look at last years Parowan
> regionals. They got only 19 total in sports and *Reverse Seeding* was
> in affect, so as many as wanted could have entered, without any seeding
> (not on the list = top of the entry list) Another thing, if your
> proposal was in effect only 8 of the 19 would have been allowed in.
>
> Look at Air Sailing all sports regionals, they can only gin up 5 or 6
> total and they offer thermaiing camps and cross country camps ahead of
> the sports contest.
>
> It's a sign of the times, we aint getting the new blood into the sport,
> much less into racing.
>
> Thanks for the offer to fly an old wooden thing, I actually thought
> about entering my Bowlus Super Albatross in Parowan, then I remembered
> what it didn't have, oxygen, radio, 2- GPS's, computer. Then I
> remembered the last day, last year, 100 mile final glide over hostle
> territory and I asked myself, "Do you really want to do that in a
> Bowlus?" Myself said, "NO".
> JJ
>
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.