Andrzej, I wasn't claiming inclusion of the Ventus/LS-6 in the previous post. The point I was trying to make is that quite a few countries adjust their national Club class to national circumstances by including additional gliders (incl. UL & two seaters), adjust the permitted range in general (no lower limit e.g. in the UK, two options for including low performance gliders in France) etc. The near universal pure implementation of the IGC Club Class on the national level around the world is a myth, sorry. As far as I know Germany and Italy do have it, UK and France do not.

What is important is the club class concept and I fully agree that you need a limited handicap range (or not have to worry about too low/high handicaps when tasking) to allow e.g. for coherent speed tasking (and with it tasking more in line with FAI Worlds/Continentals). But the purists that claim you have to do it 100% the IGC way like the rest of the world or it's not going to work are missing the point IMHO (and this is coming from an IGC delegate ;-).

How far you can deviate e.g. from the IGC handicap range without putting the Club Class concept in jeopardy is of course open for debate. I personally don't see much of an issue to slightly extend the upper range to include the Ventus/LS-6 crowd, see the statistics I posted from the last 4 World/European Club Class Championships with the World's best Club Class pilots battling it out.

IMHO if an early ASW 20 is apparently not the most competitive glider for top level Club class competitions a Ventus or LS-6 will not suddenly turn out to be a game changer that will consistently smoke the lower performance part of the field because of their assumed superior performance in extreme conditions. Tasking of course plays a role, any CD who's hell bent on sending the lower performance ships into the mud will find a way of doing it, be the top dog an early ASW 20 or a LS-6.

For lack of equipment and pilots more and more countries do purely handicapped racing with sensible ranges to allow for good tasking. Even the IGC has started doing it out of necessity for the South American Continental Championships as mentioned earlier (three handicapped classes in that case). The trick is (and with it the debate) how far you can spread the handicap range for one class without making good and challenging tasking too difficult. E.g. at what point would it be sensible to split a handicapped competiton class in two to limit the handicap range to ensure good tasking. That's the basic idea behind the Club/Sports Class approach the US RC is now trying to implement.

The equipment available is a key consideration a can vary widely between countries, hence IMHO there is no point in insisting on a one fits all approach, even the IGC doesn't do it. The other big variable are the CDs and their ability to task sensibly for what's available.

Stepping back a for a moment and moving away from the narrow focus on the current implementation of the club class, consider that the FAI Sporting Code states the following intention/purpose:

6.5.8 Club Class
The purpose of the Club Class is to preserve the value of older high
performance gliders, to provide inexpensive but high quality international
championships, and to enable pilots who do not have access to gliders of the
highest standard of performance to take part in contests at the highest
levels.

The actual implementation of this noble & worthy goal at FAI level through the current IGC Club Class definition is, IMHO, pretty far away from what is outlined in 6.5.8. A Nimbus 2 or Kestrel is inexpensive (less than e.g. an ASW 20) but they are definitely high performance and would allow for high quality international championships yet they have no place to go on the FAI Cat 1 comp level...

The UK e.g. does allow Mini Nimbuses and 17m Kestrels but the IGC implementation of the Club Class concept is in practical terms a competition class for earlier generation standard/15m class gliders that are not competitive anymore in these classes. To use a US analogy you might call it IGC affirmative action for early generation standard/15m class gliders triggered by the European glider demographics of the turn of the century, a demographic that has continued to change considerably over the last decade or so (the FAI Club Class was introduced in 2001).

I have been pushing for developing a long term vision in the IGC for where we will be heading with the design and handicapped classes since it will only get worse. The developments on the national level are already making this clear and the US situation is a prime example. No luck so far though, the IGC unfortunately often tends to move at glacial speed...

Anyway, lots of food for thought, my 2 cents worth for this very important debate.

Markus