A fair opportunity to compete?

On Jul 16, 12:08*pm, John Cochrane
wrote:
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

All,
Briefly, yes, rule tweaking can be over done but I'm all for trying
something new now and then, especially if it’s already a useable rule.
I recall the "Super Regional" concept stirred up a hornet’s nest of
RAS comments but nary a peep of complaint or comment about it since it
was applied at Parowan this year. Mainly because it was a non-event,
generally if you wanted in, you got in.

I suspect the drop/dump/toss/relinquish/ do over or gratefully dispose
of a day concept may have substantially more impact but really, why
not try it? Here's my point and the reason for keeping it in this
thread; I'm fairly certain it would have addressed and legitimized the
Parowan sports class day in question mentioned here. And this rule
would have been likely welcomed by most of the 15m class on the last
day when all but two failed to get around due to substantial
widespread t-storms and rain dramatically affecting the late starters.
So really other than producing a list of silly "what if" situations
what’s the harm in giving it a go, I’ll attend that contest, we just
need a CM/CD who's willing to give it a go.
21

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.

Something I do not understand here, why was the fact that 3 pilots could
not stay up a problem, that frequently happens in comps in the UK and the
competitors relight. There surely is not restriction on starting once the
gate is open. Our rules specify that once the gate is open and the
competition has started competitors may take a launch until 1800hrs so
they have ample opportunity to compete if they do not suceed at first. Any
CD in the UK who allowed the cancellation of a comp day that had been
completed by the majority of the competitors because 3 pilots could not
stay up would very likely suffer total humiliation not to mention serious
abuse, both of which would be richly deserved.

While a CD in the UK will listen to what competitors are saying they DO
NOT take formal advice on conditions from competitors. We do have a non
competitor sniffer who relays back the conditions and of course we listen
to comments on safety matters. Competitors should not be used as advisors
in a formal sense, except on matters of safety, there is a huge conflict
of interest and the system is open to allegations of abuse.

Something I do not understand here, why was the fact that 3 pilots could
not stay up a problem, that frequently happens in comps in the UK and the
competitors relight. There surely is not restriction on starting once the
gate is open.

The question is not about relights. The problem, especially with
Parowan, is that sometimes the lift is a long way from the airport.
You can get off aerotow and find yourself scratching into a hole only
to land out. As the thermal heights increase, the thermal spacings
increases more or less proportionally. Using the same 2000' tow height
that works well in a humid landscape at sea level as at 6000'
elevation with high base thunderstorms around is not exactly "working
with nature." At a past Parowan contest, two pilots I know, one a good
one, choose not to launch because the drop point was beyond a safe
glide back to the airport. They didn't protest. From my perspective,
this problem has been growing with little attention from the "big
boys" until this year when someone protests and screws up a bunch of
people's scores. I'm neither supporting or criticizing the protest,
only saying that Sport Class was this course and heading for a while,
so it is no surprise. After learning of more of the facts here, I am
inclined to be less critical of the contest staff, and more critical
of the rules (and the Guidelines for Competition Director).

4-Zulu
Chad

On Jul 16, 5:15*pm, Don Johnstone wrote:
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.

Something I do not understand here, why was the fact that 3 pilots could
not stay up a problem, that frequently happens in comps in the UK and the
competitors relight. There surely is not restriction on starting once the
gate is open. Our rules specify that once the gate is open and the
competition has started competitors may take a launch until 1800hrs so
they have ample opportunity to compete if they do not suceed at first. Any
CD in the UK who allowed the cancellation of a comp day that had been
completed by the majority of the competitors because 3 pilots could not
stay up would very likely suffer total humiliation not to mention serious
abuse, both of which would be richly deserved.

While a CD in the UK will listen to what competitors are saying they DO
NOT take formal advice on conditions from competitors. We do have a non
competitor sniffer who relays back the conditions and of course we listen
to comments on safety matters. Competitors should not be used as advisors
in a formal sense, except on matters of safety, there is a huge conflict
of interest and the system is open to allegations of abuse.



I wasn't there but I think I understand the problem. This issue is
where does a CD draw the line.

Should the CD Open the Gate if a storm settles over the airport and
the last 3 competitors can not be launched?

How about if they can be launched but it is pouring rain in the drop
zone, with obviously no chance for them to climb out?

OK lets remove the rain but still obviously no chance to climb out.

The issue is even more of an issue at Parowan due to the distance of
the drop zone from the airport. If you can't climb immediately you
will land out. Even those that tried to move away from the bad weather
still ended up landing out.

On the day in question the conditions were obviously deteriorating as
they opted to cancel the launching of the following classes because
they were have a 100% relights/landouts. I wasn't there but I would
have to admit I would be seriously ticked off if I were leading the
contest and then were one of the last 3 to launch into conditions that
I obviously had no opportunity to climb out in. But I can also see
the point of the large number of contestants that were able to get
away in better conditions but then have the day scrubbed because only
a few gliders were not given the opportunity to get away. It is
unfortunate but in this particular situation I think scrubbing the day
was the appropriate thing to do. Of course not opening the gate to
begin with would have probably been the best thing, but I can see that
this might have been hard to see from any direction other than
hindsight. The CD probably didn't realize that all the glider
launching after a certain time were going to landout/relight until he
had already opened the gate.

Brian

Ok, I'm the CD. Two minutes before I open the gate, I call the last
launcher and ask how's he doing. He replies he's on a dead glide back
to the airport. I then call my sports advisor. He replies that he's at
12000 feet along with half the class, waiting for the gate to open.
What do I do?

I realize the late launchers are struggling and hold the gate opening
for 5 minutes.

Now, its 20 minutes after the last launcher
rolled........................what do I do? Do I scrub the day
because the last 3 launchers aren't getting a fair shot? NO, I realize
that this sport will never be 100% fair and equal. There is a luck-of-
the-draw issue with launch position and that is just part of the game.
I open the gate and the race is on!

Next day when I get 2 protests, I deny them!

JJ Sinclair, who has CD'd 3 national competitions without a single
protest.

Brian wrote:
On Jul 16, 5:15*pm, Don Johnstone wrote:
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.

Something I do not understand here, why was the fact that 3 pilots could
not stay up a problem, that frequently happens in comps in the UK and the
competitors relight. There surely is not restriction on starting once the
gate is open. Our rules specify that once the gate is open and the
competition has started competitors may take a launch until 1800hrs so
they have ample opportunity to compete if they do not suceed at first. Any
CD in the UK who allowed the cancellation of a comp day that had been
completed by the majority of the competitors because 3 pilots could not
stay up would very likely suffer total humiliation not to mention serious
abuse, both of which would be richly deserved.

While a CD in the UK will listen to what competitors are saying they DO
NOT take formal advice on conditions from competitors. We do have a non
competitor sniffer who relays back the conditions and of course we listen
to comments on safety matters. Competitors should not be used as advisors
in a formal sense, except on matters of safety, there is a huge conflict
of interest and the system is open to allegations of abuse.



I wasn't there but I think I understand the problem. This issue is
where does a CD draw the line.

Should the CD Open the Gate if a storm settles over the airport and
the last 3 competitors can not be launched?

How about if they can be launched but it is pouring rain in the drop
zone, with obviously no chance for them to climb out?

OK lets remove the rain but still obviously no chance to climb out.

The issue is even more of an issue at Parowan due to the distance of
the drop zone from the airport. If you can't climb immediately you
will land out. Even those that tried to move away from the bad weather
still ended up landing out.

On the day in question the conditions were obviously deteriorating as
they opted to cancel the launching of the following classes because
they were have a 100% relights/landouts. I wasn't there but I would
have to admit I would be seriously ticked off if I were leading the
contest and then were one of the last 3 to launch into conditions that
I obviously had no opportunity to climb out in. But I can also see
the point of the large number of contestants that were able to get
away in better conditions but then have the day scrubbed because only
a few gliders were not given the opportunity to get away. It is
unfortunate but in this particular situation I think scrubbing the day
was the appropriate thing to do. Of course not opening the gate to
begin with would have probably been the best thing, but I can see that
this might have been hard to see from any direction other than
hindsight. The CD probably didn't realize that all the glider
launching after a certain time were going to landout/relight until he
had already opened the gate.

Brian

At 17:58 16 July 2009, AK wrote:
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

Interesting example. It looks like both pilots scored 1000 on Day 3. How
often does that happen? I inquire purely out of ignorance.
Fix that little item, and your example doesn't work so well.

Jim Beckman

On Jul 17, 10:00*am, Jim Beckman wrote:
At 17:58 16 July 2009, AK wrote:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *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

Interesting example. *It looks like both pilots scored 1000 on Day 3. How
often does that happen? *I inquire purely out of ignorance.
Fix that little item, and your example doesn't work so well.

Jim Beckman

Straw man answers straw man?

The point -- which AK and I agree on -- is that in any Eastern venue
you'd be strung up by your toes for suggesting BBs devaluation
scheme. We don't get enough racing weather as it is. When we get 5
or 6 days in a regional, we're doing hand springs, not looking for
excuses to devalue....

-Evan Ludeman / T8

Good input Chad, but the issue at Parowan is one of timing. When a
storm forms over the mountain east of the airport, it covers the drop
zone in shadow. If the drop zone is moved west to the dry lake, its a
race to get a class up before the shadow covers the new drop zone. If
tow heights are raised to 2500 feet, that takes longer and the launch
goes even slower which makes the problem worse for the last few on the
grid.
JJ

Chad wrote:
Something I do not understand here, why was the fact that 3 pilots could
not stay up a problem, that frequently happens in comps in the UK and the
competitors relight. There surely is not restriction on starting once the
gate is open.

The question is not about relights. The problem, especially with
Parowan, is that sometimes the lift is a long way from the airport.
You can get off aerotow and find yourself scratching into a hole only
to land out. As the thermal heights increase, the thermal spacings
increases more or less proportionally. Using the same 2000' tow height
that works well in a humid landscape at sea level as at 6000'
elevation with high base thunderstorms around is not exactly "working
with nature." At a past Parowan contest, two pilots I know, one a good
one, choose not to launch because the drop point was beyond a safe
glide back to the airport. They didn't protest. From my perspective,
this problem has been growing with little attention from the "big
boys" until this year when someone protests and screws up a bunch of
people's scores. I'm neither supporting or criticizing the protest,
only saying that Sport Class was this course and heading for a while,
so it is no surprise. After learning of more of the facts here, I am
inclined to be less critical of the contest staff, and more critical
of the rules (and the Guidelines for Competition Director).

4-Zulu
Chad

On Jul 17, 10:00*am, Jim Beckman wrote:
At 17:58 16 July 2009, AK wrote:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *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

Interesting example. *It looks like both pilots scored 1000 on Day 3. How
often does that happen? *I inquire purely out of ignorance.
Fix that little item, and your example doesn't work so well.

Jim Beckman

Jim, I can provide you with many more examples without having even
scores. You can do so yourself. You will be surprised how bad things
can get. Since this is a little of topic here let's finish this
conversation. I am sure we will have another opportunity to discus
this because John keeps bringing it up. By the way, DJ does not need
“drop a day” (or gift day) to qualify.

On Jul 17, 12:21*am, Brian wrote:
On Jul 16, 5:15*pm, Don Johnstone wrote:



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.

Something I do not understand here, why was the fact that 3 pilots could
not stay up a problem, that frequently happens in comps in the UK and the
competitors relight. There surely is not restriction on starting once the
gate is open. Our rules specify that once the gate is open and the
competition has started competitors may take a launch until 1800hrs so
they have ample opportunity to compete if they do not suceed at first. Any
CD in the UK who allowed the cancellation of a comp day that had been
completed by the majority of the competitors because 3 pilots could not
stay up would very likely suffer total humiliation not to mention serious
abuse, both of which would be richly deserved.

While a CD in the UK will listen to what competitors are saying they DO
NOT take formal advice on conditions from competitors. We do have a non
competitor sniffer who relays back the conditions and of course we listen
to comments on safety matters. Competitors should not be used as advisors
in a formal sense, except on matters of safety, there is a huge conflict
of interest and the system is open to allegations of abuse.

I wasn't there but I think I understand the problem. This issue is
where does a CD draw the line.

Should the CD Open the Gate if a storm settles over the airport and
the last 3 competitors can not be launched?

How about if they can be launched but it is pouring rain in the drop
zone, with obviously no chance for them to climb out?

OK lets remove the rain but still obviously no chance to climb out.

The issue is even more of an issue at Parowan due to the distance of
the drop zone from the airport. If you can't climb immediately you
will land out. Even those that tried to move away from the bad weather
still ended up landing out.

On the day in question the conditions were obviously deteriorating as
they opted to cancel the launching of the following classes because
they were have a 100% relights/landouts. *I wasn't there but I would
have to admit I would be seriously ticked off if I were leading the
contest and then were one of the last 3 to launch into conditions that
I obviously had *no opportunity to climb out in. *But I can also see
the point of the large number of contestants that were able to get
away in better conditions but then have the day scrubbed because only
a few gliders were not given the opportunity to get away. It is
unfortunate but in this particular situation I think scrubbing the day
was the appropriate thing to do. Of course not opening the gate to
begin with would have probably been the best thing, but I can see that
this might have been hard to see from any direction other than
hindsight. The CD probably didn't realize that all the glider
launching after a certain time were going to landout/relight until he
had already opened the gate.

Brian

Brian,

Well said. I was taught that it is best to win when your opponents
have done there best, not to wish them bad luck. The sign of a true
sportsman would be to say that it was best to cancel the day if some
of the pilots did not have a fair chance to compete.