Scott,

Other than not really seeing a major reasoning for doing it, I just don't think it makes a lot of sense logistically, particularly at the NATS. You say it is the guys at the top of masters who are against it. I beg to differ. In this thread Joe Lachowski, and in the other thread Dennis Bodary, are two guys that this would affect, and both of them are against changing it. The changes made in the masters sequence were very minor. Repositioned a few things and made a square with 1/2 rolls, a square on corner. My guess is this will be published in the next couple days. For a short time, it might show some benefit, but after 2-3 years the guys you are talking about benefitting from it are the guys who are going to be moving out and into masters and will be in the same boat. You may have just prolonged it a couple of years if that. When I was one of the guys who would've fit that description, I would've rather just kept flying what I was and getting better. I realize it sounds very easy to do, but the way the NATS are configured, I really think this would be a LOT more difficult than it sounds, and adding extra days really isn't an option. Even the guys who were near the top in Advanced last year and moved up this year obviously had the skill level needed. Chris Odom made the finals, but Gary Courtney finished 14th. Marcio Jorge made the finals this year after a year of getting his feet wet in Masters. The skills needed are currently learned in Advanced, but when you are flying against guys who have been flying it for years, its not going to be easy to crack the top 10. Adding another class isn't going to change that.

Arch