If Club Class competes within Sports Class then any participation
change is net zero at worse—those that would otherwise have flown as a
Sports Class entrant would instead be earmarked Club Class. *Either
way they are participating in the same venue. *How is that a
“crippling” affect?

Not quite true. You need 5 entrants to make a class at a regional.
Many sports regionals have fewer than 10 entrants. Many more do not
have 5 entrants of each type.

You need a certain vaguer number -- 20, 30? to make a nationals
viable. We need a CD, CM, towpilots, airport, porta potties, scorer,
so on and so forth. If you split the 30 Montague entrants into the
roughly 10 club and 20 sports entries, it's not clear we have two
viable classes.

Yes, you can always run them together, but at some point, why not just
have 30 scoresheets and let everyone be a winner? If one class (let's
call it the "global" class) has 7 pilots in a nationals, does it realy
make sense to call it a separate class?

In addition, if "sports" class pulls out the middle, and conists only
of 1-26, blanik, sparrowhawk, ASH26, Nimbus 2-3-4, it becomes even
less attractive. Splitting it into three is not an option until we get
3 times as many contest pilots as we have now.

In sum, splitting is not zero cost for participation.


“I personally don’t see how it makes sense for the US
to draw its global Club Class competitors from pilots having won Sport
Class flying non-qualifying gliders.

Fact: We don't do this. We already restrict team selection to club
class gliders. One can debate the wisdom of these limitations (as an
ASW27 owner who is not about to fly some cruddy standard cirrus for my
only flying vacation of the year, I deplore them), but that's not what
we're debating here. Let's keep facts straight. We're debating taking
one further step and not letting the other gliders even fly at the
contest.


Perhaps what the rules committee should do is poll every owner of a
bona fide WGC Club Class glider to see what it is those SSA members
want to do. *After all, in the big scheme of things how this matter
may affect their racing participation is really what matters. *FWIW,
this Club Class glider owner welcomes a way to compete against truly
like aircraft whereby subjective handicapping is much less a factor on
the outcome, and thusly I would be compelled to compete more
frequently.

Facts again: That's exactly what the SSA contest poll is doing right
now, and this question is on the poll. Ok, the poll requires that you
be on the seeding list, meaning that you have participated in a sports
regional in the last 3 years. It seems reasonable to insist that one
has at least given the current system a try before being counted for
big changes. But if you're not on the seeding list and want to
contribute, just email Hank and let him know that you promise to come
out for club class even though you've never tried sports.


Opinion:

I've flown and even won a sports nationals, and I have experienced the
much larger luck factor that a large handicap spread means. One day
the KA6 creams us since he doesn't have to cross the big blue hole;
the next day the KA6 lands out because winds are 25 mph. Clearly,
restricting handicap ranges reduces this luck factor. I think this is
the major argument for club class.

On the other hand, I think we need to make sure that there is a home
for everyone. If Nimus II and Sparrowhawks end up with nowhere to go
but one sparseley attended "sports nationals" each year, we haven't
done contest soaring a favor.

Really, the question is, how many more people will turn out if we
reduce the luck factor in scoring -- how many people really care all
that much about the scores anyway -- vs. how many people will abandon
contest soaring if there are many fewer sports class events. Sports
remains extremely popular despite its somewhat greater luck factor. Is
it really broke and in need of fixin?

So, ears on. Please think hard, answer poll questions constructively,
let us know what YOU want. That's more important in my thinking than
your opinions of what will work for everybody else.

John Cochrane BB