A fair opportunity to compete?

People might also be less inclined to protest if there was a financial
risk in doing so.

Protests should be accompanied by a $50 protest fee. (That figure is
taken from another FAI/NAA sport.) If the protest is upheld, the
protester gets the fee returned. Otherwise, it goes to the SSA.

ted/2NO

Tuno wrote:

Protests should be accompanied by a $50 protest fee. (That figure is
taken from another FAI/NAA sport.) If the protest is upheld, the
protester gets the fee returned. Otherwise, it goes to the SSA.

ted/2NO

I like your suggestion, Ted. That might just do the job. Right now I'm
concerned that we might be headed into a quagmire of protesting, then
protesting the protest. Luck of the draw is part of the sport and
sometimes we luck out when its our turn at the end of the line and
other times we get clobbered. Protesting isn't the way we should be
headed. A $50 fee with your protest and a firm statement in the rules
that expunging a days results will only be considered under
extraordinary circunstances would keep old JJ in the game for a few
more 'senior' years.
JJ

On Jul 15, 8:09Â*am, John Cochrane
wrote:
It's worth reiterating that 15 minutes is not carved in stone. Charlie
Spratt had what I thought an excellent habit. About 2 minutes before
the announced gate open time, he would ask the task advisers "do we
have a fair start?" meaning, did the last guys off tow have a decent
chance to climb to start altitude. If not, he would delay start
opening a bit. Now, advisers can't see everyone, and they might well
have missed the developing situation at Parowan since to stay up they
would have to have been in a totally different piece of sky. Nothing's
perfect. But it does help, and to the point here, it is entirely
within the rules. (He would also ask, "is the task doable?" another
commendable question before sending us off.)



11.4.4 â€* Worst Day Score Adjustment
If this is declared to be in effect, an adjustment is calculated and
added to the cumulative score of each entrant..

If you think the scoring formulas are complicated now, read the rest
of the rule.

QT

Don't give up on drop a day just because the wording of the rule is of
necessity a little complex. This is a great idea, and I hope somebody
tries it! Contests might be a lot more fun if a landout or one slow
low save did not doom you for the rest of the week.

John Cochrane

How's about we give up on drop a day because it's a lousy idea,
instead? Nothin' personal, but a lot of us *really* hate this idea.
It smacks of "competition lite". We've got outlets for that
already.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

-Evan Ludeman / T8

On Jul 15, 8:09Â*am, John Cochrane
wrote:
It's worth reiterating that 15 minutes is not carved in stone. Charlie
Spratt had what I thought an excellent habit. About 2 minutes before
the announced gate open time, he would ask the task advisers "do we
have a fair start?" meaning, did the last guys off tow have a decent
chance to climb to start altitude. If not, he would delay start
opening a bit. Now, advisers can't see everyone, and they might well
have missed the developing situation at Parowan since to stay up they
would have to have been in a totally different piece of sky. Nothing's
perfect. But it does help, and to the point here, it is entirely
within the rules. (He would also ask, "is the task doable?" another
commendable question before sending us off.)



11.4.4 â€* Worst Day Score Adjustment
If this is declared to be in effect, an adjustment is calculated and
added to the cumulative score of each entrant..

If you think the scoring formulas are complicated now, read the rest
of the rule.

QT

Don't give up on drop a day just because the wording of the rule is of
necessity a little complex. This is a great idea, and I hope somebody
tries it! Contests might be a lot more fun if a landout or one slow
low save did not doom you for the rest of the week.

John Cochrane

I second T8. Please forget about “drop a day�. To win one should fly
well everyday. If one screws up one pays the price. That is fair and
simple competition. We already decreased penalties for land outs. I
personally don’t feel like flying in any competition with “drop a day�
rule in force. “Drop a day� can well result in drop in participation.

Where are we heading with this rule, for sure not in the direction of
fair and simple? I know the rule is there. I only hope it stays
dormant since this rule if implemented will **** off many more people
than the Parowan issue.

AK

People might be less inclined to protest if they could drop a day and
the competition committee might be less inclined to expunge a day for
95% of the class if the one affected pilot could drop the day.

It creates other issues, but is worth a try.

9B

This is a good point that I hadn't thought of.

Also, our next protest controversy is going to come the next time we
are tasked through a line of thunderstorms, as with the protest in 15
m at Tonopah. Some pilots will protest because having to fly through a
squall line is obviously neither "safe" nor "fair." Others will argue
that tasks should never be canceled, and point out that they dodged
the lightning and survived. The whole business will be an order of
magnitude messier than what happened at Parowan.

Drop a day can make that protest less likely, less necessary, and
convince a lot more pilots to turn around before the dangerous
weather, knowing they can simply drop this day.

John Cochrane BB

On Jul 15, 7:37*pm, AK wrote:
On Jul 15, 8:09*am, John Cochrane
wrote:
Where are we heading with this rule, for sure not in the direction of
fair and simple? I know the rule is there. I only hope it stays
dormant since this rule if implemented will **** off many more people
than the Parowan issue.

AK

The simplest thing to do regarding this topic is disallow all
protests.

The other way to dramatically simplify the rules is to eliminate
distance points - if you don't finish, you get zero. MPH and miles are
apples and oranges, much of the complication in the rules come from
trying to mix the two. This offers a harsher variation on "drop a day"
- you can take a zero any day you don't feel like finishing the course
as called. You can do it under the rules today, but this makes it much
simpler and clearer - finish the whole course every day or likely be
done for the contest.

Not my preferred solution - but it's hard to argue with if you like
simplified wording in the rules - it takes out whole sections of
formulas and provisions. And it's totally fair since everyone flies
knowing that a landout ends their contest.

We could also eliminate all the restrictions around opening and
closing of start/finish gates - just leave the gates open from
midnight to midnight and make launch grid first-come fist-served. Get
rid of all the complex rules about rotating classes and grid
positions. If you want an early start get up earlier - simple! It
would be like the old start for the 24 Hours of Le Mans where the
drivers run to their cars.

Other simplification ideas out there?

;-)

9B

On Jul 16, 10:31*am, John Cochrane
wrote:
People might be less inclined to protest if they could drop a day and
the competition committee might be less inclined to expunge a day for
95% of the class if the one affected pilot could drop the day.

It creates other issues, but is worth a try.

9B

This is a good point that I hadn't thought of.

Also, our next protest controversy is going to come the next time we
are tasked through a line of thunderstorms, as with the protest in 15
m at Tonopah. Some pilots will protest because having to fly through a
squall line is obviously neither "safe" nor "fair." Others will argue
that tasks should never be canceled, and point out that they dodged
the lightning and survived. The whole business will be an order of
magnitude messier than what happened at Parowan.

Drop a day can make that protest less likely, less necessary, and
convince a lot more pilots to turn around before the dangerous
weather, knowing they can simply drop this day.

John Cochrane BB

John, in regards to "drop a day", please correct me if I am wrong but
from my example it looks like “drop a day” is a terrible idea and here
it is why:

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day
5 Total

Pilot 1 950 950 1000 1000 1000 4900
Pilot 2 1000 1000 1000 955 500 4455

Pilot 1 is the winner. Clearly Pilot 1 deserves to win.

Now if you introduce drop a day then Pilot 2 is the winner. Does Pilot
2 deserve to win?

Absolutely NOT!

On Jul 16, 10:58*am, AK wrote:
On Jul 16, 10:31*am, John Cochrane
wrote:





People might be less inclined to protest if they could drop a day and
the competition committee might be less inclined to expunge a day for
95% of the class if the one affected pilot could drop the day.

It creates other issues, but is worth a try.

9B

This is a good point that I hadn't thought of.

Also, our next protest controversy is going to come the next time we
are tasked through a line of thunderstorms, as with the protest in 15
m at Tonopah. Some pilots will protest because having to fly through a
squall line is obviously neither "safe" nor "fair." Others will argue
that tasks should never be canceled, and point out that they dodged
the lightning and survived. The whole business will be an order of
magnitude messier than what happened at Parowan.

Drop a day can make that protest less likely, less necessary, and
convince a lot more pilots to turn around before the dangerous
weather, knowing they can simply drop this day.

John Cochrane BB

John, in regards to "drop a day", please correct me if I am wrong but
from my example it looks like “drop a day” is a terrible idea and here
it is why:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Day 1 * Day 2 * Day 3 * Day 4 * Day
5 * * * Total

Pilot 1 * * * * 950 * * 950 * * 1000 * *1000 * *1000 * *4900
Pilot 2 * * * * 1000 * *1000 * *1000 * *955 * * 500 * * 4455

Pilot 1 is the winner. Clearly Pilot 1 deserves to win.

Now if you introduce drop a day then Pilot 2 is the winner. Does Pilot
2 deserve to win?

Absolutely NOT!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Can we please stop using the term "drop a day" That is not what the
rule does.

Andy

from my example it looks like “drop a day” is a terrible idea and here
it is why:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Day 1 * Day 2 * Day 3 * Day 4 * Day
5 * * * Total

Pilot 1 * * * * 950 * * 950 * * 1000 * *1000 * *1000 * *4900
Pilot 2 * * * * 1000 * *1000 * *1000 * *955 * * 500 * * 4455

Pilot 1 is the winner. Clearly Pilot 1 deserves to win.

Now if you introduce drop a day then Pilot 2 is the winner. Does Pilot
2 deserve to win?

Absolutely NOT!

There are lots of scenarios to think about here. Many of our top
pilots have lost nationals to mediocre people like me by one unlucky
landout. If Pilot 1 were BB, slow but steady, and Pilot 2 were DJ or
P7, who got a lot of sink on final glide and landed 1/2 mile out
despite a blistering speed, would you feel the same way? Would BB
really deserve to go on to the worlds on this basis? (Not far from the
truth, incidentally) A lot of motivation for "drop a day" comes from
people feeling that yes, in many practical situations like this, pilot
2 did deserve to win and was the best pilot.

"Deserve" is pretty nebulous, and rules like this need to consider
lots and lots of cases, and which kinds really do happen in practice.
They also need to consider fun and incentives.

If we're going to go on to "drop a day" we should start a different
thread, separating it from Parowan and protests. I'd just as soon let
it sit for a while personally

John Cochrane BB

On 5 July, 19:40, John Cochrane
wrote:
Charlie's report on the ssa website says it was the last three pilots
to launch who could not stay up, which seems a significant detail. If
the first to launch can find lift, get away from the airport, and wait
to start, but there really is zero lift in the airport area when the
back half of the grid launches, then the decision seems reasonable --
from this very far distance.

Maybe use towplanes to get the gliders to lift, then, rather than
using winches?

Ian