Drop a day option for US regionals

Wait a minute John. Did you just say that after a bad day, some
pilots just pack up and go home without finishing the contest? They
must be retired and not have anything better to do. I'm gonna have a
lot of "bad" days, according to the score sheet, but I'll be danged if
I'm gonna quit and go back to the office! Heck, IT'S A VACATION! I
don't have to think about "well, my score sucks and I might as well
quit." Heck no, I don't want to go back to work! It's a contest and
I'm staying till the bloody end (unless the weather forecasts show
you'll never get to the end...)

And I agree with Romeo.


Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

For the most part the US rules are excellent but we are slowly
diverging from how the rest of the world flies and that I do not think
is good.

I think people were wise not to try this rule in the past because the
rule amounts to nothing but score manipulation. Some gain some loose
depending on the worst day score. Why don’t we take responsibility for
our actions, including flying in weak conditions? As we do or should
do now.

Let’s talk about other issues.

Most contests on the east coast are “No water” contests, presumably
because of safety or so people say.

Nationals can now declare a “No water” day without all pilots
agreeing. Why don’t we leave these decisions to pilots? If one pilot
in a class wants to fly with water then let him fly with water
provided a tow plane can safely take off with a heavy glider.

In case of “No water” day in a contest a motor glider or a heavy
glider could have a considerable edge especially on a better than
expected day.

Here is another example, imagine Diana 2 (420 lb empty) competing with
ASG-29 15 m (622 lb empty). A no water day was called. Conditions were
better than predicted. The Diana 2 pilot is a big looser at no fault
of his own.

Imagine the same Diana 2 pilot flying in a 15 m class in “No water”
contest.

In my opinion “No water” contests and “No water” days should be
eliminated allowing pilots to adjust wing loading to be competitive
with other heavier gliders.

I brought this up because the more rules we create the more unfair the
sport becomes. It should not be that way. It should be entirely up to
pilot’s performance and not up to rules to decide who is the winner
and who is the looser. We will never be able to create perfect rules.
It is best to avoid creating them unless absolutely necessary.

AK

But can we make it retroactive? I have a couple of days I would really
like to drop from 2002.

A8

I think this is what practice days are for.

Applying this rule isn’t as simple as another sport like sailing. Our
tasking and scoring system varies greatly. At Hobbs for example, you
can be racing along with average speeds near 100 mph. The next day
you’ll be struggling to make it around the course. One person may do
well on the first scenario while another pilot scores well with the
second scenario. If one day is 1000 points and the other is devalued
from landouts how does dropping a day work?

The way I read the rule the "Worst Day Score Differential" is the one
with the greatest difference on any contest day between the entrant's
score and the highest score of a competitor.

11.4.4.1 † Worst Day Score Differential
For each entrant, WDSD is the greatest difference on any contest day
between the entrant's score
(before application of a Contest penalty) and the highest score
achieved by any regular entrant in
the class on that day.

What if someone's worst score difference is on the 1000 point day.
They only get 850 points.

During the same contest there’s a day where no one finishes. There
were at least two national contests that this occurred at in 2008. The
winner gets 400 points. The pilot who was in the lead with a bad day
of 850 points previously scores 350 points. He has to drop 850 points
to keep the 350 points because the difference is 50 vs 150 points?

On Jan 22, 11:55*am, wrote:
I think this is what practice days are for.

That's an excellent point.

On a related note, I think we already post-process the scores too much
-- i.e. through devaluation. The case for day devaluation in my mind
is best made when the winner comes in under minimum time. That's
reasonable. A too short task deserves adjustment. However, it also
happens -- too often -- that the winner gets 700 points solely
because 2/3 of the field got cold feet on a tough day and came home
way early. Why on earth should the losers' scores affect the
winners? Why compress the scores because some participants willingly
abandoned the task? Grumble.

The motivation that led to day devaluation based on the bottom of the
scoresheet has been better answered by changing the proportions of
distance and speed points (which I support).

-T8

I don't particularly like the drop score idea, it can be annoying when
I have dealt with it in sailboat racing. I do think adopting the
international rules that don't penalize a landout as badly are a good
step.

On a side note, could the rules committe leave the rules alone for a
few years !!! Just let us have 2 to 4 years in a row with the same
rules. This constant experimenting annoys the rats.

Todd Smith
3S

On Jan 22, 7:54*am, wrote:
I don't particularly like the drop score idea, it can be annoying when
I have dealt with it in sailboat racing. *I do think adopting the
international rules that don't penalize a landout as badly are a good
step.

On a side note, *could the rules committe leave the rules alone for a
few years !!! *Just let us have 2 to 4 years in a row with the same
rules. *This constant experimenting annoys the rats.

Todd Smith
3S

I was just curious. How to you assume the programmer(s) who do
Winscore are going to automatically incorporate all the new
combinations and permutations of the never ceasing rule changes each
year? Isn't it an uncompensated job to keep the scoring program up to
date? I used to score the Region 12 with a program written in BASIC.
It used to drive me nuts when they'd change a rule. How do the new
programmers cope with constant rule changes and the variations in
rules between regionals/nationals, Sports, Club class etc etc.?

On Jan 22, 2:31*pm, wrote:
On Jan 22, 7:54*am, wrote:

I don't particularly like the drop score idea, it can be annoying when
I have dealt with it in sailboat racing. *I do think adopting the
international rules that don't penalize a landout as badly are a good
step.

On a side note, *could the rules committe leave the rules alone for a
few years !!! *Just let us have 2 to 4 years in a row with the same
rules. *This constant experimenting annoys the rats.

Todd Smith
3S

I was just curious. How to you assume the programmer(s) who do
Winscore are going to automatically incorporate all the new
combinations and permutations of the never ceasing rule changes each
year? *Isn't it an uncompensated job to keep the scoring program up to
date? I used to score the Region 12 with a program written in BASIC.
It used to drive me nuts when they'd change a rule. How do the new
programmers cope with constant rule changes and the variations in
rules between regionals/nationals, Sports, Club class etc etc.?

I'm with the guy who says just leave the rules alone for a few years.
If you want to "try something out" let's try doing nothing for a
while. It seems there is a constant quest for solutions in search of a
problem. Maybe we should have a rules committee every 2 or 4 years.
Pilots analyze their flights in contests in the off season and figure
out how the rules unfairly impacted their scores under certain
situations. Then they come up with "solutions" that in turn have all
sorts of unintended ramifications, which in turn require more rules to
remedy. And away we go. I've been "screwed" many times by the rules
but I lived with it. The rules will never be perfect and constant
tweaking seems to favor those who want to study some arcane
permutations rather than just go fly as well as you can to beat the
other guy. I appreciate the RC's efforts but hey guys, take a break!
I'd rather have John spend his time saving the economy or barring
that, lying on the beach somewhere warm. Just Chill!! OK, I'll take
my grumpy pants off now. 4Z

On a side note, could the rules committe leave the rules alone for a
few years !!! Just let us have 2 to 4 years in a row with the same
rules. This constant experimenting annoys the rats.

Todd Smith
3S

I'll second THAT!!!

J4

On Jan 21, 7:52 am, wrote:
Pilots all:

The US rules have for several years had the option of "drop your worst
day" scoring. So far noone has used it, but I for one would like to
give it a try.

I believe Johns point is simply to try it in a Regional, see if it
works! A reasonable statement, I just don't really see the harm and
certainly not something to get one knickers in a twist, we do this for
the challenge, fun and entertainment right?

R-9 Parowan is "trying" a Super Regional this year, it may just prove
or perhaps disprove the concept, but if you don't "try it" how would
you really know?, we'll soon find out.

Legitimate US Rules / Safety / Tradition etc. Pros and Cons aside,
nothing ventured is nothing gained; I'll volunteer to fly in that "see
if it works" contest, no problem.

Rick - 21

p.s. I would have been happy to drop one of my days at R-9 2008, would
it have made a positive difference? perhaps John can run the #s ļ