I'd like to throw out for discussion,

Should Pattern adopt an advancement system based on raw scores over a season compared to the national average?

Should, or can we, adopt the IMAC system in total for our use?

Who will be charged with gathering the data?

Who will be charged with maintaining the data?

How would we use the data once posted?

I think this subject deserves a separate thread to gather opinions and ideas.

Tim

I don't have any answers to the questions asked but I'll give my opinions on the subject.

I think the current AMA guidelines for advancement are useless, unenforceable and not a very good way to force advancement because it doesn't use skill as a judge. It uses happenstance at best.


AMA rules would have a flier "point out" of a class simply because he happen to beat other guys in his class regardless of skill. What happens if your contest trail has a bunch of guys that fly so-so or have just moved into that class? You could end up pointing out simply due to numbers.

Reverse that and you're in a district that has a bunch of really great fliers, you could be an excellent flier and never point out.

Case in point. Our district now has nearly 1/3 of the Masters finalist from the last few years. If masters were a point out class the guys flying to 3rd-4th in contests, while having excellent skills, would never point out.

The same can be said for all other classes.

The by product of this system can also be used to see how you rank among the pilots in all other districts in your class. It might enhance attendance at the Nats.

I think this system, while open for everyone to see, would also be a driving force to try and improve ones skill set.

Tim

There is a rules proposal on advancement on the AMA website. I think it passed. From what I read into, the proposal makes it no longer mandatory to move up but states I pilot should consider moving up based on points accumulated and whether that pilot feels he is ready. Below is a copy and paste of the proposal:




Brief summary of the proposed change.
This proposal modifies the wording of the class advancement rule in order to make the advancement process flexible so that the competitor can choose to move to the next class if they feel that they are ready for the move to a more advanced sequence.
Exact wording proposed for the rule book. (List paragraph numbers where applicable. Example: Change “quote present rule book wording� to “exact wording required�.
Page RCA-4
Current wording:

8. Contestant classification: At his first Pattern contest a contestant may enter any one Pattern class at his own option. (This decision should be made with care as no one at any time, except as noted in 8.1.2. and 8.2.5., will be permitted to change to a lower class.) Once committed to a certain class a contestant will be allowed to move only to a higher skill class. This move will come about in one of two ways: (1) voluntary, (2) mandatory.
8.2: A contestant will be mandatorily advanced through the classes as follows: A flier must move out of Sportsman class at the end of the calendar year of his/her second or subsequent year of participation if he/she places first or second and above at least 4 other fliers (having recorded an official flight) in any sanctioned pattern contest. For Intermediate and Advanced fliers, advancement takes place through the accumulation of points. In these classes, contestants receive points according to their finishing place in every contest they compete in. For fliers finishing third or below in a given contest, they will receive points equal to the number of official (having recorded an official flight) fliers they beat. The second place winner will receive points equal to twice the number of official fliers he beats, and the first place winner will receive points equal to three times the number of official fliers he beats. The points each contestant receives go into his cumulative record.
8.2.1: A flier accumulating or exceeding 100 points and at least 2 years in Intermediate or Advanced class will automatically be advanced.
8.2.2: A contestant may voluntarily move to the next higher class upon attaining the goals itemized in 8.2.1 but will not be required to do so until the end of the calendar year.
8.2.3: The accumulated points for required class advancement will be based on a sliding scale of 4 years time. Advancement points acquired before the fourth (4) year will not count towards advancement. In other words, a contestant’s point accumulation is based on the total accumulation for his/her previous four (4) years of competition. 8.2.4: When a contestant enters a new class, either higher or lower (as permitted by 8.1.2.) he begins with zero (0) points. Note: A contestant who flies in a higher class under the Exception Rule (8.1.1.) above still acquires classification points in accordance with 8.2. above.
8.2.5: There is no mandatory advancement into FAI from the Masters class. Contestants may enter their current AMA class or the FAI class at any contest but not both.
Examples:
1. The contestant is one (1) of eight (8) who flies officially in a given class, except Sportsman, and places first. He acquires three (3) times seven (7) (the number he beat) or 21 classification points.
2. The contestant is one (1) of 16 and places fifth. He receives 11 points.
3. The contestant accumulates 95 points in 1990 and thus remains in his declared class into 1991. At the first 1991 contest, he picks up 12 points. He may fly the rest of 1991 in his declared class but will be advanced to the next higher class starting January 1, 1992. (He may move up sooner if he so desires.)
8.3: Each Pattern contestant is responsible for maintaining an accurate record of his own classification points. Handy wallet size Classification Advancement Record forms are available upon request from AMA HQ; please include a preaddressed and stamped return envelope. CDs of meets having RC Pattern events are also provided with a small supply of such forms.


Proposed wording:

8. Contestant classification: At his/her first Pattern contest a contestant may enter any one Pattern class at his/her own option (this decision should be made with care as no one at any time, except as noted in 8.1.2. and 8.2.5., will be permitted to change to a lower class). Once committed to a certain class a contestant will be allowed to move only to a higher skill class.
8.2: A contestant should advance through the classes as follows: A flier should move out of the Sportsman class at the end of the calendar year of his/her second or subsequent year of participation if he/she places first or second and above at least 4 other fliers (having recorded an official flight) in any sanctioned pattern contest. For Intermediate and Advanced fliers, advancement takes place through the accumulation of points. In these classes, contestants receive points according to their finishing place in every contest they compete in. For fliers finishing third or below in a given contest, he/she will receive points equal to the number of official (having recorded an official flight) fliers he/she beats. The second place winner will receive points equal to twice the number of official fliers he/she beats, and the first place winner will receive points equal to three times the number of official fliers he/she beats. The points each contestant receives go into his/her cumulative record.
8.2.1: A flier accumulating or exceeding 100 points and at least 2 years in Intermediate or Advanced class should automatically be advanced.
8.2.2: A contestant may voluntarily move to the next higher class at any time. He/she may also move to the next higher class upon attaining the goals itemized in 8.2.1 at any time during the year but will not be required to do. Any advancement by the contestant should only be made if the contestant feels that they are qualified to do so and they will not be a safety concern to their fellow contestants and contest management.
8.2.3: The accumulated points for required class advancement will be based on a sliding scale of 4 years time. Advancement points acquired before the fourth year will not count towards advancement. In other words, a contestant’s point accumulation is based on the total accumulation for his/her previous four (4) years of competition. 8.2.4: When a contestant enters a new class, either higher or lower (as permitted by 8.1.2.) he/she begins with zero (0) points. Note: A contestant who flies in a higher class under the Exception Rule (8.1.1.) above still acquires classification points in accordance with 8.2. above.
8.2.5: There is no mandatory advancement into FAI from the Masters class. Contestants may enter their current AMA class or the FAI class at any contest but not both.
8.3: Each Pattern contestant is responsible for maintaining an accurate record of his/her own classification points.
Examples:
1. The contestant is one (1) of eight (8) who flies officially in a given class, except Sportsman, and places first. He/she acquires three (3) times seven (7) (the number he/she beats) or 21 classification points.
2. The contestant is one (1) of 16 and places fifth. He/she receives 11 points.
3. The contestant accumulates 95 points in 2009 and thus remains in his/her declared class into 2010. At the first 2010 contest, he/she picks up 12 points. He/she may fly the rest of 2010 in his/her declared class and may choose to advance to the next higher class starting January 1, 2011 (he/she may move up sooner if he/she so desires) if he/she feels that he/she is qualified to fly in the next higher class without creating any safety issues.


Logic behind proposed change, including alleged shortcomings of the present rules. State intent for future reference.

The current class advancement rule is mandatory based on an accumulation of points for all pilots in classes Sportsman through Advanced. This does not take into account whether the pilot has the necessary skills needed to fly the next level of class sequence and could potentially drive the pilot out of pattern competition if they are forced to compete in a class where his/her flying skills aren’t appropriate. This is also becomes a safety issue if the rules force a pilot to fly in a class that his/her skills are not appropriate and could potentially lead to unsafe flying conditions by the pilot and affect everyone at the contest.

Reading that, I find the word "Should" to be an out for anyone being advanced by the rules. If this rule change passes it could end the entire advancement process.

There is no "Cut and dry" method of forced advancement.

For years now we've basically used the "peer pressure" method. It has worked ok I suppose, we still have a few sand baggers but I admit only a few.

I still believe that if you place 1-3 at the Nats you should automatically be advanced to the next class at the EOY.

Tim

I'm glad to see I'm not the only one that sees the error of using the word "should" in a rulebook. Sort of nullifies the whole section doesn't it....we may as well call it a suggestion book...

Richard

Tim,


I disagree about forced advancement, and also that we currently use peer pressure.

I pointed out of advanced. I am capable of flying masters, although poorly I do not fear at any time I will crash my plane. That being said I could fly FAI and not crash. BUT.

I did place 3rd at Nats in advanced, moved into masters at the beginning of the next season because I pointed out and such as happens, life has changed significantly and I no longer can devote the time it takes to prepare and compete in masters and challenge others to do their best. Yes, I fly to win and to compare myself to those who are at the top of our Masters group here in D6. I am not a threat.

I wish I could go back to advanced and learn a few things that I never paid attention to so that I could be competitive again. Am I a sore loser, I dont think so and I hope that D6 masters pilots dont feel I run around sulking at my consistent below 900 normalized score. i go to have fun now, and I miss being in the thick of it but there is no way I can without burning fuel and putting in the time. At this point, that is not an option for me.

So.... I would favor a system that would allow me to compete again in Advanced, and gather the skills I need to be competitive and move back to Masters when I feel that I am capable of competeing.

I will be honest, but I know the logic and arguments and truth about Masters and some pilots not going to FAI. It is discouraging to know that there are masters pilots who even on a bad day will still make the finals at NATS and be top 3, but wont move to FAI cause for the same reasons I want to move back to Advanced. I want to be competitive and not just a place taker at the bottom of a contest. Is it fair for them to make this choice and not someone in a lower class?

Please, dont misunderstand, I will follow the guidelines and not complain however they may shake out in the future, but sure wish I could step back to advanced just as masters pilots choose not to go to FAI.

Fire away everyone.

Chuck Hochhalter

I don't mind if people remain in lower classes, makes it more challenging for us that are now coming up.

but thats just me..

Adam<br type="_moz" />

Chuck,

This "National Point System" could also be used to justify moving back a class as well. No longer would one have to "Be out" of the sport for a number of years to do so.

What we have now is basically useless, There is no tracking or enforcement available other than the honor system.
I agree the honor system should work but we live in the real world not the one we wish for.

If the word "should" is adopted then the entire process becomes a moot point.

I flew 4 Masters contests back in the early 90's then took ten years off from the sport to raise a family and start a business.

When I came back to the sport it had changed so much I got my hat handed to me quite often and still do even though I dropped back to Advance.

I believe we need something other than what we have now. The IMAC system seems to be "Doable" for us, I don't think we need to reinvent the wheel to do so. We might add a clause that a flier must attend (enter a small number here) contests each year to be ranked.

Let's at least explore the possabilities.

Tim

Don't forget there is a system in place through the AMA that allows one to request a move back in class. Bob Noll did this recently. It's not that difficult from what I've been told. He moved from Masters to Advanced.

IMAC system probably has its flaws. Be careful of what you wish for.<g>

Everything has flaws, I would expect a trial run of any system for a year or two before we pass it into law.

I fail to see much difference between this and the current Judges rating system.

Then again I might be tilting at windmills.

Tim

Name three. . .
.
.

Tim,

In all of the districts I've flown in over the last couple of years. I really haven't seen anyone I would call a sandbagger. I've seen guys win local contests repeatedly, but that doensn't necessarily mean they are ready to move up and shouldnt just because they beat people who may really be bad. I bet if you go back over the last 4 or 5 years you wont find anyone in Intermediate or Advanced that finished that high at the NATS that didn't move up. Those guys have always moved up without any issues at all. Masters is a destination class and no one has to move. It looks like Masters could really be getting fun with Mark Radcliff moving up and Bill Cunningham talking about flying Masters among others.

Arch

I agree Masters is getting interesting. Especially in D2.

Don't think for a second I'm advocating making Masters a point out class. I'm not.

I think the system we have now is no system at all. With the current rule change, if passed, will make it even more so.

Wouldn't it be neat to go on line and see where you rank in the country?

Isn't the idea of advancing because of your skill rather than the amount of people you happen to beat?

Tim

Make it easy, just name one.
In the almost 40 years since I started flying in pattern contest I can't think of anyone I'd consider sand bagging.

It is impossible to truely rank people across the country without having exposure to the same pool of judges and contestants.

The only place it can be done is at a Nationals and that ain't perfect either.

After giving this some more thought over night I've come to a realization that this idea is most likely a boondoggle.

The idea is sound, the implementation could be a nightmare I suppose. It would take someone (Or three) to monitor this and ensure it is done in a timely manner. AMA would likely not take on the responsibility, the NSRCA doesn't likely have the funds to pay someone to do it. I think IMAC does pay someone to do it and it's costly or so I've heard.

I just think the current points system doesn't work at all. I think we need a newer system, I was just trying to throw out ideas to get the discussion started and maybe we could come to a workable plan.

My intent was never to use a system to identify "sand baggers", some here fixated on that part of the OP. I'm sorry that point was so prevalent in the responses. Has sand bagging happened? Yes. Is it wide spread? Not hardly.

I do not have an "Agenda" I'm trying to fulfill either, please don't think I do.

What I was hoping for was a system to help fliers decide when they should move up and give those that got in over their heads an easier way to move down. The AMA had to make up a form for the last guy I know that asked for it to follow the rule book to move down a class.

Yes the system could be used to force guys into the next class if they raw scored an average of 8.5 or higher over a two year period. Looking at the system I envisioned would it would help both ends of our spectrum.

I still believe we need a system that is open and transparent and easy to use for everyone. Self monitoring of accumulating points isn't the answer in my opinion.

But I've been known to have silly ideas from time to time. I'm sure it won't be the last one either.

Tim

I don't know about other nsrca districts, but I keep AMA points for reference on the same spreadsheet as the district points...
It can be viewed here - http://www.nsrca.us/districts/d6.html

The current advancement rule is here - page RCA-4 http://www.modelaircraft.org/UserFil...Aerobatics.pdf


-mark

What might be helpful and simple is a spreadsheet with all the formula's set up already for each district. Then when the VP or whoever inputs the information, it does all the work for them. If each district had the same one, this would make it very easy to consolidate everything.

Arch

I'm NOT a pc guy at all.

But..............

I'd think it could be part of the scoring system reports that could be batch filed to a server using the fliers AMA number. Email the file to the server and it would update from there. The CD would be responsible to forward the file just like the reports the AMA requires after the contest. Not being a PC guy I don't know how that would work.

I'd think it would need every round counted and every raw score. I doubt it would need every score per maneuver but the total raw score for the flight.

Tim

A website could be created to allow the CD's to upload a file in CSV (easily created by Excel) that would tie to a simple MySQL database and update each participant's points.  Reports can then be generated via the website to list everyone's points and status, etc.  It's rather easy to do.

I'm willing to host and create this website/database but it does take some work.  If it's agreed on by the powers that be, I'll do it.  I'll pay for the site and the hosting myself if that helps the cause.  I already support, maintain, and host a multitude of sites.  It would be easy to create another.

Scott

I've been in intermediate for more than 5 years. I've won our district twice and finished second twice in the last 5 years. I always finish in the top 3 and placed 12th in 2009 at the NATS. I still need more practice with the intermediate maneuvers. I can do the advanced sequence but it isn't pretty. I don't keep track of my points but I'm sure I have pointed out in the last 3 years. I have been told by several top level flyers not to rush moving up. I know of several intermediate pilots that are significantly better than me. I will likely fly advanced in 2011 but that depends on how I adjust to flying electric.

Any advancement system you come up would make it more difficult to advance than the current point system. That might be a good thing or a bad thing depending on your perspective. I think peer pressure works. Sure there are a few sand baggers (some may say I'm one of them) but not enough to worry about. Any advancement system you come up with will drive some away either because they are bored or because they don't want to move up. I think that is counter productive.

Obviously much smaller numbers of pattern flyers here,but the following used to work quite well in the UK:
Anyone scoring more than 60% of the marks possible,in any class, at two comps in one season,was required to go up one class.
The "promoted" pilot had the option to delay going up to the next class, until the beginning of the following season.

I think the "System" we come up with will likely preclude the guy that flies maybe 1-2 contests a year. I think it should be based on performance against the total K factor for a given class and not how many guys you beat.

The guys that consistently in the middle of the pact will not point out and the guys that always score low should be given the option of moving back a class. If a guy doesn't show up and fly a contest for several years he could move back one class at will.

There are guys that have fangs hanging out all the time, they'll be the ones that want their name at the top of the list. They'll practice everyday to improve their standing.

There are guys that just fly to have a good time and don't care where they place.

This system can handle all comers I'd think.

Tim

Before the "New" advancement/rating systems gets too far ahead of the horse, remember there is still an issue of the AMA rule book to consider. It will be at least 2013 before a system could be implemented assuming the AMA rules changes necessary were in place to support it.
(Or, just ignore the present AMA rules like we mostly already do!)

I agree whatever we do would have to pass a vote, however IMHO we need to develop the system and run it for a bit for everyone to see how it works.

We need to "see what's in the bill before we can pass the bill"

Sorry I couldn't resist.