Sports class tasking

The competition director has his hands full when tasking sports class
because of the vast differences in sailplane types in the class. If he
gives the Nimbus driver a challenging task, the 1-26 driver will have
no chance of completing the task. For this reason Assigned Task is not
allowed. At first glance the turn Area Task appears to solve the
problem, call a couple of 25 mile circles and let the pilots fly the
distance that their ships performance dictates. Problem is; its too
easy. Day after day we drive into the first turn area while keeping an
eye on the second turn area. Go as deep as good conditions allow and
then head for the second turn area as we follow the clouds and/or other
sailplanes. The only real challenge is deciding when to quit and head
for home. Our computers do a real good job of making this decision for
us. I feel the TAT should only be called on days that the weather is
predicted to blow-up, but we just don't know exactly where or when.

That leaves us with the Modified assigned task. This is the best task
to call when weather conditions are fairly predictable. Assign several
turn points and the higher performance ships can continue on to several
other turn points. The low performance ship can quit any time after the
first turn and head for home. Sounds good, but is it challenging and is
it always fair? I have seen the first called turn, 60 miles down-wind
(20 knots), the K-6 didn't make it home that day. Another problem with
11 turn points available, is the desirability of running close-in
triangles, maybe several times, no real challenge there. I suppose a
clever CD could call a MAT with NO turn points specified and a MAXIMUM
of 2 turn points allowed and say, 3 hour minimum time. Each contestant
would be forced to fly an out-&-return or triangle that used up the
alloted 3 hours. It would bring back the Non-WUSS tasking of
yesteryear. One would be forced to choose the best direction and a turn
point or two that was far enough to use up the allotted time (3 hrs).
We would be forced to actually go all the way to our chosen turn point
and not be allowad to turn short when conditions didn't look ideal
ahead.

Thirty years ago sports class started with a book of selected triangles
and each contestant was required to fly one of them (at least as far as
his minimum distance). The CD would announce the scratch distance (the
distance he thought the Standard Cirrus should be able to fly that
day). Each contestant would divide his handicap factor into the scratch
distance and come up with his minimum distance. It was a real
challenge, first off, what direction to go? Then choose a triangle that
looked good to you. One could keep ones options open with several
triangles that could be used in the chosen direction. The minimum
distance has been replaced with a minimum time, but the concept can be
used again. I think challenging tasks are still available. We could
call it the Non-WUSS-MAT.

Whe wants to give it a try?
JJ

wrote:

The competition director has his hands full when tasking sports class
because of the vast differences in sailplane types in the class. If he
gives the Nimbus driver a challenging task, the 1-26 driver will have
no chance of completing the task. For this reason Assigned Task is not
allowed. At first glance the turn Area Task appears to solve the
problem, call a couple of 25 mile circles and let the pilots fly the
distance that their ships performance dictates. Problem is; its too
easy. Day after day we drive into the first turn area while keeping an
eye on the second turn area. Go as deep as good conditions allow and
then head for the second turn area as we follow the clouds and/or other
sailplanes. The only real challenge is deciding when to quit and head
for home. Our computers do a real good job of making this decision for
us. I feel the TAT should only be called on days that the weather is
predicted to blow-up, but we just don't know exactly where or when.

That leaves us with the Modified assigned task. This is the best task
to call when weather conditions are fairly predictable. Assign several
turn points and the higher performance ships can continue on to several
other turn points. The low performance ship can quit any time after the
first turn and head for home. Sounds good, but is it challenging and is
it always fair? I have seen the first called turn, 60 miles down-wind
(20 knots), the K-6 didn't make it home that day. Another problem with
11 turn points available, is the desirability of running close-in
triangles, maybe several times, no real challenge there. I suppose a
clever CD could call a MAT with NO turn points specified and a MAXIMUM
of 2 turn points allowed and say, 3 hour minimum time. Each contestant
would be forced to fly an out-&-return or triangle that used up the
alloted 3 hours. It would bring back the Non-WUSS tasking of
yesteryear. One would be forced to choose the best direction and a turn
point or two that was far enough to use up the allotted time (3 hrs).
We would be forced to actually go all the way to our chosen turn point
and not be allowad to turn short when conditions didn't look ideal
ahead.

Thirty years ago sports class started with a book of selected triangles
and each contestant was required to fly one of them (at least as far as
his minimum distance). The CD would announce the scratch distance (the
distance he thought the Standard Cirrus should be able to fly that
day). Each contestant would divide his handicap factor into the scratch
distance and come up with his minimum distance. It was a real
challenge, first off, what direction to go? Then choose a triangle that
looked good to you. One could keep ones options open with several
triangles that could be used in the chosen direction. The minimum
distance has been replaced with a minimum time, but the concept can be
used again. I think challenging tasks are still available. We could
call it the Non-WUSS-MAT.

Whe wants to give it a try?
JJ
Getting conceptually better.

Frank Whiteley

In my opinion, it is simply not possible to have fair competition in a
single task group with Nimbuses at one end and K6s at the other.

I have done a lot of task setting in British Regionals and Nationals.
UK Nationals are OK from the point of view of spread of glider
performance because they are run as Open, 15m and Standard. Gliders of
low performance within these classes are generally not entered
(although they could be, of course, as long as the pilot is eligible to
enter at Nationals level in accordance with BGA rules).

BGA-approved Regionals are handicapped and so you could say that they
are run to the equivalent of Club Class rules. It has always been
acknowledged that handicapping only works fairly over a reasonably
narrow band of glider performance. The question is, "what is a
resonable band of handicaps". My own view is, certainly 10%, possibly
20%, but no more than this. The greater the handicap spread in a
single task group, the more anomalies will arise. Glider handicaps
should reflect average theoretical cross-country speeds (Sporting Code
para 7.4), and perhaps a better name for them would be "speed indexes".

However, with a large number of entries in a competition, you can split
the gliders into two (or more) task groups based on handicap. Each
group has a different task for the day, generally the higher
performance group being sent further (unless they had an enormous task
the previous day). This is what we have done at Lasham for many years
and is not only fairer to the pilots but also makes the job of the Task
Setter more straightforward. The Task Setter can optimise different
tasks for the glider performance and pilot ability that he knows he is
dealing with. In my experience this works well, certainly a lot better
than trying to set one task for a huge diversity of glider performance
and pilot ability.

For instance, on one of my task setting days at Lasham I sent the UK
Open Class nationals (38 gliders) on a 450 km task, Regionals Group A
(16 gliders) 400km and Regionals Group B (20 gliders) 325km. Start
lines for these three task groups were separated for safety reasons but
the finish directions were similar to prevent crossing tracks.
Regionals "A" was the high-performance group with gliders from Nimbus
to Discus. Regionals "B" had gliders from DG300 to Astir. The split
between A and B at BGA Speed Index 104% was made by the organisers when
the glider entries were in and the handicap range could be seen.

Finally, some quotes from the Sporting Code for Gliding:

"7.4 HANDICAPPING. If handicapping is to be used, its purpose shall be
to equalise the performance of gliders as far as possible. The handicap
figures used shall be directly proportional to the
expected cross-country speeds of gliders in typical soaring conditions
for the competition concerned. The handicap shall be applied directly
to the speed or distance achieved, for finishers to the speed only, for
non-finishers to the distance only. Competitors completing the task
shall not be given less than full distance points, and competitors not
completing the task shall not be given more than full distance points."

"7.7.6 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 only limitation on
entry of a glider into a Club Class competition is that it is within
the range of handicap factors agreed for the competition .... A Club
Class championship shall be scored using formulas which include
handicap factors.

Ian Strachan

this is exactly what I've been saying for years....and why.if you have a
glider that can compete fairly in the FAI Classes you should fly it
there......and not in sports class (USA)
tim

wrote in message
oups.com...
In my opinion, it is simply not possible to have fair competition in a
single task group with Nimbuses at one end and K6s at the other.

I have done a lot of task setting in British Regionals and Nationals.
UK Nationals are OK from the point of view of spread of glider
performance because they are run as Open, 15m and Standard. Gliders of
low performance within these classes are generally not entered
(although they could be, of course, as long as the pilot is eligible to
enter at Nationals level in accordance with BGA rules).

BGA-approved Regionals are handicapped and so you could say that they
are run to the equivalent of Club Class rules. It has always been
acknowledged that handicapping only works fairly over a reasonably
narrow band of glider performance. The question is, "what is a
resonable band of handicaps". My own view is, certainly 10%, possibly
20%, but no more than this. The greater the handicap spread in a
single task group, the more anomalies will arise. Glider handicaps
should reflect average theoretical cross-country speeds (Sporting Code
para 7.4), and perhaps a better name for them would be "speed indexes".

However, with a large number of entries in a competition, you can split
the gliders into two (or more) task groups based on handicap. Each
group has a different task for the day, generally the higher
performance group being sent further (unless they had an enormous task
the previous day). This is what we have done at Lasham for many years
and is not only fairer to the pilots but also makes the job of the Task
Setter more straightforward. The Task Setter can optimise different
tasks for the glider performance and pilot ability that he knows he is
dealing with. In my experience this works well, certainly a lot better
than trying to set one task for a huge diversity of glider performance
and pilot ability.

For instance, on one of my task setting days at Lasham I sent the UK
Open Class nationals (38 gliders) on a 450 km task, Regionals Group A
(16 gliders) 400km and Regionals Group B (20 gliders) 325km. Start
lines for these three task groups were separated for safety reasons but
the finish directions were similar to prevent crossing tracks.
Regionals "A" was the high-performance group with gliders from Nimbus
to Discus. Regionals "B" had gliders from DG300 to Astir. The split
between A and B at BGA Speed Index 104% was made by the organisers when
the glider entries were in and the handicap range could be seen.

Finally, some quotes from the Sporting Code for Gliding:

"7.4 HANDICAPPING. If handicapping is to be used, its purpose shall be
to equalise the performance of gliders as far as possible. The handicap
figures used shall be directly proportional to the
expected cross-country speeds of gliders in typical soaring conditions
for the competition concerned. The handicap shall be applied directly
to the speed or distance achieved, for finishers to the speed only, for
non-finishers to the distance only. Competitors completing the task
shall not be given less than full distance points, and competitors not
completing the task shall not be given more than full distance points."

"7.7.6 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 only limitation on
entry of a glider into a Club Class competition is that it is within
the range of handicap factors agreed for the competition .... A Club
Class championship shall be scored using formulas which include
handicap factors.

Ian Strachan

Ian wrote
In my opinion, it is simply not possible to have fair
competition in a
single task group with Nimbuses at one end and K6s
at the other.

It is possible, Ian. We have done it for 30 years over
here in the Colonies. We do it by not sending everyone
on the same task. My post was an attempt to make our
tasking a bit more challenging. Sports class draws
more contestants than any of the other FAI classes.
At the national level most contestants will be flying
modern ships. This is to be expected with pilots that
have made a life-long commitment to racing. Why should
they be denied the opertunity to compete? At the regional
level, all shorts of older ships can be seen competing
in sports class. This is as it should be and is working
quite well, thank you very much.
JJ

JJ said: It is possible, Ian. We have done it for 30 years over here
in the Colonies. We do it by not sending everyone on the same task.

Dear JJ,
You seem to confirm my main point by admitting that you do not send
everyone on the same task! I stick to my opinion that: "it is simply
not possible to have fair competition in a single task group with
Nimbuses at one end and K6s at the other". But perhaps your
definition of a "single task group" is different to mine.

Anyway, as long as the people in the task group(s) enjoy their soaring,
get back to base regularly from the tasks that are set and indulge in
the usual "line-shooting" in the bar afterwards, that's what it is all
about, isn't it?

I believe it was Bob Hope that said, 'The US and UK
are two countries separated by a common language. We
send all sports class on a task where each pilot selects
his own turn points. We call the thing, sports class.


Now lets talk about the meaning of, 'spanner and torch'.
A few years back I was complying with a Slingsby airworthiness
directive which said, 'with a torch in one hand and
a spanner in the other, loosen the jam-nut..................'
Had no idea what I was being told to do, but I knew
I wasn't about to climb in this wooden glider with
a lit acetylene torch in one hand. Years later, I found
out a 'torch' was what we call a flash-light and a
'spanner' is an adjustable wrench.
Anyone want to give the meaning of, 'knock me up' some
time. I believe it means to give me a call, over there.
Over here that means to impregnate me.
Wish this rain would stop, maybe Monday,
JJ

Dear JJ,
You seem to confirm my main point by admitting that
you do not send
everyone on the same task! I stick to my opinion that:
'it is simply
not possible to have fair competition in a single task
group with
Nimbuses at one end and K6s at the other'. But perhaps
your
definition of a 'single task group' is different to
mine.

At 23:30 22 April 2005, wrote:
We could call it the Non-WUSS-MAT.

Gee JJ, you just took all the fun out of finishes in
the name of safety, now you want to increase landouts
with 2-turn MATs in the name of 'challenge'. Or are
you just yanking our chains?

I thought just the ASA pilots were 'AST-only' Neanderthals.
Forcing all the sports-class newbies in PW-5s to roam
far from home by limiting the turns seems like asking
for mayhem.

;-)

9B

Morning Andy,
My remarks were aimed at the forthcoming sports nationals
at Parowan. I don't see any 'newbies' at or below the
cut-off entry point of 50. We need to force pilots
out of sight of home plate or some will just run their
close in triangle until there is a trough worn in the
ground. This is all up to the CD and I would expect
WUSS tasking in sports class regionals where newbies
may feel intimidated by getting out of sight of home.
Thirty years ago I drove my Duster around a selected
triangle in the early days of sports class. Think we
have lost something with our modern tasking. At Parowan
one only needs to drive say, north for an hour and
a half, then head home. If it is anything like last
year, that's a snap + a lot of fun also.
:) JJ

At 23:00 23 April 2005, Andy Blackburn wrote:
At 23:30 22 April 2005, wrote:
We could call it the Non-WUSS-MAT.

Gee JJ, you just took all the fun out of finishes in
the name of safety, now you want to increase landouts
with 2-turn MATs in the name of 'challenge'. Or are
you just yanking our chains?

I thought just the ASA pilots were 'AST-only' Neanderthals.
Forcing all the sports-class newbies in PW-5s to roam
far from home by limiting the turns seems like asking
for mayhem.

;-)

9B

Me again Andy,
Just got out of the hot-tub and came up with the proper
reply.........................There's a difference
between an unnecessary risk in the finish gate and
a necessary challenge in picking a champion.
:) JJ

At 23:00 23 April 2005, Andy Blackburn wrote:
At 23:30 22 April 2005, wrote:
We could call it the Non-WUSS-MAT.

Gee JJ, you just took all the fun out of finishes in
the name of safety, now you want to increase landouts
with 2-turn MATs in the name of 'challenge'. Or are
you just yanking our chains?

I thought just the ASA pilots were 'AST-only' Neanderthals.
Forcing all the sports-class newbies in PW-5s to roam
far from home by limiting the turns seems like asking
for mayhem.

;-)

9B