Hi Matt,

I was responsible for all of the events run at the SCCMAS club for 2 or 3 years (I forget which), and during all that time I think we sanctioned precisely two events.

There are a number of reasons to have an AMA sanction for an event, but almost none of them are worth it in our case.

Amongst other things, a sanction gets you an ad in the AMA's magazine, assuming that they get many months notice. We've asked attendees at our events how they heard about the event - the result is usually our flyers, website, word of mouth, our TV or radio spots, etc. .. but I've never had anyone tell me they came because they saw the MA ad.

Next, a sanction gets you a guarantee that no other *sanctioned* event of the same type will be allowed within a certain geographical area. Here in NORCAL we go one better - in January ever year the contest co-orindators from all of the clubs for hundreds of miles around get together with their intended event schedules, and spend half a day hashing out a schedule that ensures no clashes of any events, whether sanctioned or not.

IIRC, a sanction also brings site-holder insurance for the location at which the event is held; for an AMA chartered club, there is no gain, due to the insurance already provided by the charter.

For highly competitive events, a sanction also guarantees adherence to the appropriate rules and judging standards, plus defined methods of lodging protests about outcomes etc. Most of our events are more "relaxed" events in which we avoid the high-stess scenarios that have modelers wanting to sue each other & the CD !

About the only thing we did ever use a sanction for, was "pattern", because there is some kind of national points system in which contestants can accumulate points from various events towards regional / national titles, or something like that. (Tony F could no doubt expound on this).

Last but not least, the AMA rules for turbine flying were at one point worded in such a way that they were significantly more restrictive for a sanctioned event than for a non-sanctioned event (e.g. the fence-line rule, before it got reworded).

All of the above (and more) hopefully show that while there are some valid reasons for applying for sanctions for some events, they simply don't apply in most cases.

In summary - the decision not to sanction does not in any way indicate that the event is less safe, less fun, or less attractive than a sanctioned event - it simply reflects our belief that we have nothing to gain by applying for a sanction.

Sorry for the length of the reply,

Gordon