On Wednesday, December 12, 2018 at 8:14:27 AM UTC-5, John Godfrey (QT) wrote:
On Tuesday, December 11, 2018 at 6:48:28 PM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
On Tuesday, December 11, 2018 at 5:07:03 AM UTC-6, krasw wrote:
On Tuesday, December 11, 2018 at 7:24:50 AM UTC+2, wrote:
Has anyone asked if we could add some of the (missing) US centric glider models to the FAI handicap list?
That might make it easier to switch to their system.
Chris

Latest FAI Handicap list turned into fiasco because it took a political stance that all old club class gliders should be replaced by newer ones instead of objectively handicapping performance differences. No fair competitions are possible with these handicaps. Do yourself a favour: do not adopt FIA handicaps as a basis for wider handicap list. SC3 does not allow handicaps to any class other than club class so you have a freedom to do whatever you like in national level, though sending teams to Club class WGC without underhandicapped glider ('55, 304 etc.) would be a huge waist of money.

______________

Handicapping is an issue that seems to have been compounded by recent moves as described above (I haven't seen the final results - we just got done doing a comparison with what I believe were last year's handicaps). I tend to agree that handicapping ought be a best estimate for equalizing performance (understanding that no single number can be a perfect adjustment under all conditions), not a tool for preferentially advantaging certain gliders. In the US if we want to retain Sports Class and FAI Handicapped Classes, we may need to include some sort of wing loading adjustment formula. That might be layered on top of international handicaps, or adjustments made to that list and/or gaps for missing gliders filled. All of that is TBD.

Andy Blackburn

It's a bit challenging to talk about "European" or "FAI' handicaps as there are multiple systems in use e.g.:

- Sporting Code https://www.fai.org/sites/default/files/sc3ah_2018a.pdf
Club and Double seater only. Carries handicaps to 3 decimal places.
Provides for weight adjustments up and down
Colored by non-aerodynamic considerations mentioned earlier

- DMSt (German) - no weight adjustments https://www.daec.de/fileadmin/user_u...-WO_2018ki.pdf

- OLC - no weight adjustments. Can't figure a way to download this list

- SeeYou - no weight adjustment likely the same as OLC,
but again can't download or compare easily

Rest of the world have more mixed classes than we in US, and water is a pilot problem, not a score guy.
Ryszard