Noel,

How about this for an idea? Let's write a point-counterpoint article together on AT/TAT. It would be fun article to write and better to read and hear the feedback on.

For the record, my goal is not to "kill" the TAT. Again, I get it. The TAT is a worthwhile tool for handicap events or when the weather is risky. That said, I believe that the TAT is used WAY TOO MUCH and for the wrong reasons. In fact it is almost the only task used in the US! We are only testing "that" skill. A big reason we struggle at the world championships as a country (US) for sure.

Most importantly, I believe that the TAT is a very complex, intimidating task type for beginner contest pilots. This is something I believe that many here don't fully understand, and that concerns me. Keep in mind I have only been sailplane racing for a few years now, so I have a different perspective. 3 years ago I flew my first contest (all TATs)! In addition to its strategic and functional complexity, I also strongly believe that the TAT introduces high degree of luck into the game.

My goal is to revitalize the use of PURE AT TASK and therefore increase the percentage of PURE AT TASKS flown in US contests. By PURE I mean no "ticky tacky" adding distance in the turns (US rules). More on that later...

If you run a statistical analysis of how many ATs vs TAT (and MAT) were flown in the US in 2013, I think we would all be shocked. Do we have this data out there? If not, I'm going to work on building this data point tonight on the beach with a beer! I will post it here as soon as I'm done.

Personally, I would like to see "roughly" 33% ATs at regionals and 50% ATs at nationals. That's my goal. Well to be perfectly honest, I would like to see 50-70% at regionals and 70-100% at nationals. This is because (as you now know) I believe that ATs are better measures of pilot skill. But, I know that will never happen in the US anytime soon so I will just be happy with any marginal improvement ;-).

Think about this for a moment. Should our sport be known as "sailplane racing" or as "sailplane time/distance calculator & weather guessing competition?" Talk about lining up those spectators! ;-). We need, at least, more balance in our tasking.

In regards to time/4th dimension, I fully agree with you Noel. That is probably why the US RC is working on introducing/experimenting with limited start (time) windows (say 30 minutes MAX). If we keep the starting rules "as is" we will be assured of continuing the VERY silly practice of allowing competitors to start hours apart (ensuring different conditions) and still calling it a fair race (no luck here)! My hope is that Grand Prix "like" starts will become the "norm" soon (say a 10 minute "window").

FYI: The reason that I don't like MATs that much either is that MATs are also quite complex (perhaps more complex that TATs when additional turns are required to fill in the allotted "time limit"). Again this task is a huge intimidation to new contest pilots or any pilot not familiar (knows them by heart) with the local turn points! Bring out those maps! Get those heads down in the cockpit pecking away on that fancy computer, guesstimating various time/distance/turn point/average speed scenarios... Not all that safe really and the task itself makes fancy computers pretty darn useful to have.

DISCLAIMER: I wrote my posts yesterday from an iPhone in a cab. I'm writing this one from the "gaggle" about to board a plane. I'm sure these are both pretty poor. I'll write some more this weekend from a laptop when I get a few minutes so sit down and focus.

Finally, I enjoy the debate here. It's a lot of fun and I think very good points are being made from many perspectives! Keep it coming. Your (no contest experience, little contest experience, lots of contest experience, spectator, etc) is valuable to this discussion! I think this a very healthy and worthwhile debate. Nobody is "wrong." Nobody is "right." Both tasks are useful. The question is only what is the right "mix!"

Sincerely,

Sean