On Jan 27, 9:29*am, John Cochrane
wrote:
*The US representative to
the Club class will have never finished higher than 7th in a US
Nationals and that was six years ago. *Are we really sending our best
pilots or should we be investing in improving or pilots to be able to
do better internationally?

I agree we need fewer classes. However, the above is due to the US
curiously shoot-self-in-foot pilot selection policy, not due to the
IGC creating too many classes. US club pilots may not have
participated in an FAI worlds, and must qualify in a "club" glider,
ruling out over 1/2 of the sports class entrants. The UK will send to
the club worlds....Andy Davis and G Dale. (The equivalent in the US
of, say, Karl Striedieck and Gary Ittner.) Good luck US, we're going
to need it!

John Cochrane

Handicapped comps in old gliders -- however much fun at the local
level -- have never made any sense to me at the World's. We know
handicaps are imperfect. We know the imperfections become more
significant as the pilots get better. I've seen with my own eyes how
the competition that's fun for tyros turns into a blowout when a good
pilot turns up with a ringer. Club class has fewer embedded problems
here than the US Sports class, largely due to accepting a narrower
performance range of gliders... but the motivations for Club or Sports
that are so compelling at the regional level simply aren't relevant at
a World comp.

Take Andy, G, Karl and Gary for instance. Does putting Andy in an
LS-1, G in a 20, Karl in an ASW-15 and Gary in a Mosquito really add
anything over watching them slug it out in modern 15m (or 18m, or
standard) class ships? It's quaint and amusing sure, but if you're
asking for my donation to support the team, I'd much rather see them
in a non-handicapped class.

The selection process we use for the US Club class team is a separate
issue and makes one wonder what's in our water supply.

-Evan Ludeman / T8