Judges Position and Limit on Moving.

[Trostle]

The judges guide which was incorporated into our AMA rulebook in 2005 was based on the FAI Judges Guide which was in the FAI rules at that time.  When the proposal was made to adopt the new judges guide, effort was made to eliminate the peculiar FAI rules that really did not apply to our AMA rules.  Unfortunately, there were several things that slipped through this review.  One was the limit in the FAI rules that restrict the judges from moving more than 1/8 of a lap after they have been positioned by the pilot.  The wording in our current guide, Paragraph 14.17, needs to be changed and I plan to submit a change proposal in the new rules change cycle to correct this.

The rules change cycle for the 2009 rulebook started as of January 1.

The judges guide in our rulebook is just that - it is a guide or an aid to judging.  Specifically, the "...document is an aid to judging and marking Control Line Precision Aerobatics competitions."  As the document is a guide or an aid, I think it would be fair that a judge can use his discretion to move more than 1/8 of a lap during an official flight to better view what is being flown.  There is nothing in our basic rules that dictates the 1/8 lap restriction.  Again, this was an artifact from the FAI rules that should never have been incorporated into our AMA rulebook.  I will work to get it fixed, but unfortunately, it officially cannot be corrected until 2009.

Keith Trostle

[john e. holliday]

Thanks Keith,  did not see this before my post on the subject.  DOC Holliday

[Richard Oliver]

Keith, I am not sure I agree totally. The rule book used to have the section marked 'Guide'. It no longer has this and only has reference in some parts being discussed as being a 'Guide' relative to the part being discussed. The term 'should' is also used and never 'shall'. This leaves me to believe that if one is to follow a legal terminology of these words that a judge is free to do as he/she pleases in almost everything related to his/her job. The teachers of the rules in the clinics use hard 'shall' rules but this is not rule book. This leads me to believe they are also teaching contrary to the rules that say, quote: 'individual interpretation of the intent of  and/or meaning of the AMA rules is strongly discouraged- the purpose of these Judging Instructions is to eliminate any need for such "interpretations" by individuals'. Is this to say that in these clinics we are being given the 'individuals interpretation' of the rules? Gets confusing and many times it seems the rules are trying to have it both ways.

I disagree however that the judges are to assume that they can follow this rule or not in moving 1/8 lap. I think the rules are specific and I can not find your reference to this being a guide. Nothing in the rules anywhere has a heading of 'Guide". One can assume this but it is not in the rules. In the quote above the term 'Instructions' is used but not 'Guide'. I find it disturbing that if 'Guide' is correct and as you say the Judge can follow these 'Guides' or not if he/she so chooses then there are no 'rules'.
Not an argument just a debate.
RO

After reading more of the fine print in the rules it uses the terminology "Judges Instuctions" when refering to itself.
RO

[Trostle]

Hi Richard,

You make some valid points.  Actually, you poinit out yet another problem with the "Judges' Instructions document" that was incorporated in the 2005-06 rulebook "as an aid to judging"  that replaced the previous judges guide.  The intent was to replace the previous guide with the FAI "Judges instructions document" which was also to be used as a guide just as the previous guide was to be used, not an adjunct to our basic rules that required different interpretation of our basic AMA rules.  For the record, the previous guide was basically written by a single individual who had his own biases and preferences of how the pattern was to be judged.  Though it was helpfull in certain areas, there were errors in what was contained in that guide.

I see a simple fix to this which is to make a proposal in this cycle to retitle the current Paragraph 14 "Judging Procedures" as Paragraph 14 "Judges Guide" and then adjust the wording in the introductory paragraphs of that section accordingly.

In the same token, another change proposal needs to be made regarding the 1/8 lap restriction on the movement of judges during an official flight.  As explained in my previous post, this was an artifact from the FAI judges guide that should have been removed in the original proposal to adopt that "aid" or "guide" in our rulebook.  There was no intention to introduce any particular unique FAI process into our rulebook by the introduction of that "aid".

There were changes in the FAI "aid" prior to its incorporation into our rulebook to remove/change certain items that were unique to the FAI rules to make the "aid" (which is still intended to be a guide). compatible with our AMA rulebook.  Unfortunately, there are still  several other areas where the new "aid" is contrary to how our AMA maneuver descriptions are written.  These will be reviewed in this change cycle and proposals, as appropriate, will be made.  I intend to work on this and will be working with the entire AMA Control Line Aerobatics Contest Board as well as PAMPA officials/committees to coordinate this process.  There will be more on explaining how this process will progress in the near future.

Keith Trostle

[peabody]

Makes me wonder how it got into the AMA Rule Book in the first place...
"NO Builder of the Model Rule will Apply" is easily interpreted...and wise.

[Richard Oliver]

Keith, I agree it should come out but for now it is the rule and unless advertised ahead of time it should be followed. Not sure if there is any other choice. If not followed this is what gives grounds for disputes and protests.
RO

[rustler]

I have always felt uneasy about this business of the judges moving. I can't help asking myself if there isn't something to be said for the attitude "you take the air as you find it".
During a contest you have to take what nature gives you in relation to calm or gusty conditions. Sure it sometimes gives a flier an advantage over other competitors, but that's always accepted. It's your job to fly the best pattern you can in the conditions you find. Why should this not apply to changes in wind direction?
When it comes to judges, the're hard enough to find anyway. As for being lazy, some of them even limp around with a stick. I'd rather they sit comfortably concentrating on my flying than scamper round the circle, trying unsuccessfully to reach a new position before I start the next manoevre!

[Shultzie]

SEE WHAT I MEAN???  AGAIN...SAME OL WHINE

What really amazes me soooooooooooooo, is why would any flyer not choose to USE THE WIND to his advantage?  As a flyer I THINK IT IS FAR AND AWAY WORSE..to attempt to fly your best pattern...without taking advantage of the wind.  For any full scale pilot....if he chooses to ignor the changes in wind directions..etc. THAT IS NOT ONLY A POUND FOOLISH BUT DOWN RIGHT STUPID AND DANGEROUS.
With that in mind...why do we see world ICONs of stunt....as soon as the wind starts to really blow, they will surely start moving their rounds into the wind window to keep the model speed from winding their loops into egg shapes...and cutting the reverse wing overs etc...precisely place straight into or down wind...(UNLESS U THINK THE JUDGES...WILL SCORE U BIG TIME..FOR A MODEL THAT WOBBLES AND CRAPS OUT OF FLIGHT ALIGNMENT...AS THE PILOT TRY TO KEEP THE ALIGNMENT GOING? DAAAA?
So if you decide to fly in front of judges who refuse to move...GO FOR IT...BUT KISS OFF and forget about placing in the top half during these windy no wind  or wind varibles that really can undo any flyer as they try in VAIN to present their best pattern.

BOTH FLYERS AND JUDGES WHO REFUSE TO WORK WITH THE WIND.....
Sounds like from that last post...it would be great if both the flyer and the judges both NEED LAZYBOY CHAIRS TO SIT IN WHILE FLYING THE PATTERN.

[bill marvel]

Don
You have a point!  My chair would have had to be mounted on a swivel and with racing tires.  During the 2006 Nats where the winds were sometimes brutal, my judging crew frequently moved more than 360 degrees during a flight.  There were judges at the Nats who were physically unable to move very far and there were judges who refused to move.  But most of the judging crew hustled around the circle and did the best they could.

With only two laps or roughly 10 seconds to record a score and move to the next position, I am not sure I scored some fliers as well as they deserved.  But, I did the best I could and I think most of the other judges did the same.

Keith:
While you are looking at Rule Book changes, would you mind clarifying the rule about tip overs during a landing.  Those grass circles at the Nats were in awful condition.  We all know the reasons.  What matters is that there be a decision during the pilot's meeting as to how the rule will be enforced.  I watched some very fine fliers struggle to get their plane on the ground and keep it upright.  Many were simply not able to.

Just some thoughts.

regards
bill marvel

[Trostle]

(clop)

Keith:
While you are looking at Rule Book changes, would you mind clarifying the rule about tip overs during a landing.  Those grass circles at the Nats were in awful condition.  We all know the reasons.  What matters is that there be a decision during the pilot's meeting as to how the rule will be enforced.  I watched some very fine fliers struggle to get their plane on the ground and keep it upright.  Many were simply not able to.

Just some thoughts.

regards
bill marvel

This subject has been covered recently in another forum and has been discussed any number of time on that and other forums.  The matter is really quite clear.  People just need to READ THE RULEBOOK.

In the General section for Sanctioned Events of the AMA rulebook, Paragraph 14, Terrain:  "...Flight areas for CL events shall be smooth, to facilitate take-offs and landings."

Now go to the Control Line Precision Aerobatics rules for Landing, Paragraph 13.15.  The section that describes errors states that a flip over "receives no marks" as in no landing points.  The paragraph goes on to state:  Any unusual circumstances outside the pilot's control, which may have caused one of the above mentioned errors will be taken into consideration by the judges."  So when there is a tip over, or a flip over or the model bounces back in the air when landing on a grass surface, we have the unusual, extremely rare situation where the judge must make a subjective decision (tongue firmly planted in cheek).

Even well manicured grass fields can have irregularities in texture or divits that are barely detectable, if at all that can cause a model that has otherwise executed a good landing on the grass surface, is slowing down and settling its weight into the grass.  Then, any number of things can happen.  The model tips over on its nose, which under normal circumstances is grounds for point deduction, or the model flips over which would be grounds for a zero point landing, or the model bounces back in the air.  (Ask Rob Gruber and Paul Walker about that one when they were flying some of the qualification flights in Valladolid.)  If the model has executed an otherwise respectable landing that in itself would not give cause to expect a tip over, or a flip over or a bounce back into the air except for the grass surface, the judge can and should award the points otherwise warranted by the performance of that landing up to that point.  In other words, if the tip over, or the flip over or the bounce was deemed solely as the result of the grass surface, no points should be deducted for that tip over, or that flip over or that bounce.

During a contest, some may argue that other models have executed completely acceptable landings on that grass field with the tip over of the flip over or the bounce.  That does not negate the requirement that a smooth surface should be provided.  And a grass surface does not present itself as a smooth surface that would "facilitate ... landings."

Others may argue that the landing gear configuration can be changed to reduce the possibility of a tip over of a flip over when landing on grass.  This can be done by moving the wheels further forward and/or using larger wheels.  Again, if a model is equipped to land properly on a smooth surface, it is not incumbent on the contestant to change the gear if only a less than smooth surface is provided at the contest.

So, the judge must make a decision if the grass caused the error or if it was a  problem inherently caused by the model/pilot and award or penalize points accordingly.  At judging clinics that I have conducted, I suggest decide in favor of the pilot unless it is obvious that the landing sequence would have caused further reduction of points even on a smooth surface.

I do not think that a change in the rules on this matter is really necessary.  I think in the minds of many, that the current wording in the rulebook covers the situation.  (It seems unfortunate that those at the Nats, including the officials, the judges AND the 100 or so pilots and observers did not call for the proper interpretation of the existing rules.)  Or we could adopt the FAI rules regarding this which really result in the same findings.  In either case, there is no substitute for knowing and understanding the rules.  Unfortunately, even the judges in Valladolid did not understand the FAI rules regarding problems with landing on grass until after the qualification rounds were completed which used a grass field.  Some low landing scores were recorded, completely inappropriately, by experienced FAI judges and with a rulebook that is quite clear on the matter during the qualification rounds on that grass circle.

Keith Trostle

[Howard Rush]

I had one flight at the 2006 Nats where the wind was shifting.  I kept trying different places for the maneuvers and ran the poor judges all around the circle.  I got a fair score.  Richard Oliver flew in the same mess.   He stood his ground and ignored the wind.  His clover was dead upwind, and the wind was noticeable.  It was an excellent clover. Everybody watching was very impressed.

[bill marvel]

This subject has been covered recently in another forum and has been discussed any number of time on that and other forums.  The matter is really quite clear.  People just need to READ THE RULEBOOK.

(Clipped for brevity)

(Clipped for brevity)
 
Even well manicured grass fields can have irregularities in texture or divits that are barely detectable, if at all that can cause a model that has otherwise executed a good landing on the grass surface, is slowing down and settling its weight into the grass.  Then, any number of things can happen.  The model tips over on its nose, which under normal circumstances is grounds for point deduction, or the model flips over which would be grounds for a zero point landing, or the model bounces back in the air. (Clipped for brevity

Keith Trostle

Thank you, Keith, for a clear reply.  As a new judge, I have been reading the Rule Book like a lawyer.  There is something new to learn everytime I pick up the Rule Book again.  I regret being unclear about my concern.  I was referring to Rule 14.10, Consideration of external factors, "So,it is not permitted for judge's marks to allow for gusty winds in marking any phase of any maneuver, except during the ground rollout phase of the Landing maneuver-for example, if a sudden fierce gust of wind coming behind the model aircraft causes it to flip over or tip onto its nose during the last part of the ground rollout."  (Emphasis is from the Rule Book)

After reading your reply, I realized that model aircraft landing on poorly maintained grass, a putting green or smooth concrete are all subject to flipping over or nosing over with a "fierce gust of wind" from behind.  The same is true of a full scale Cessna or Piper Cub.  I guess my question should have been, "What constitutes 'the last part of the rollout'?"

I look forward to the opportunity to attend one of your Judge Training Sessions.
regards
bill marvel

[RandySmith]

Thank you, Keith, for a clear reply.  As a new judge, I have been reading the Rule Book like a lawyer.  There is something new to learn everytime I pick up the Rule Book again.  I regret being unclear about my concern.  I was referring to Rule 14.10, Consideration of external factors, "So,it is not permitted for judge's marks to allow for gusty winds in marking any phase of any maneuver, except during the ground rollout phase of the Landing maneuver-for example, if a sudden fierce gust of wind coming behind the model aircraft causes it to flip over or tip onto its nose during the last part of the ground rollout."  (Emphasis is from the Rule Book)

After reading your reply, I realized that model aircraft landing on poorly maintained grass, a putting green or smooth concrete are all subject to flipping over or nosing over with a "fierce gust of wind" from behind.  The same is true of a full scale Cessna or Piper Cub.  I guess my question should have been, "What constitutes 'the last part of the rollout'?"

I look forward to the opportunity to attend one of your Judge Training Sessions.
regards
bill marvel


Hello Bill and  everyone else

The landing has already been dealt with on other occasions, last one I remenber was the Lawrenceville NATs, The CDs  just gave everyone a generic "25" points  for landing  due to the poor site.
I was  very surprised they did not do the same  at  the grass  fields  last  year.
In my opinion  that would have been appropriate.

Regards
Randy

[Steve Helmick]

I just copied and pasted the following from the AMA's website, and my printer is now busily printing the '07/'08 Stunt rulz. What I think is interesting here, is that the Judges are actually allowed to range over a full 1/4 lap, as the rule states "plus or minus 1/8 of a lap". This is not the same as 1/8 of a lap, in my view!

"14.17. Judges’ position. The panel of judges should be placed in a position defined by each
competitor prior to starting his/her official flight. If no change to the judges’ position for the previous official flight is requested by the pilot of the next official flight, then the position of the panel of judges at the time of starting the next official flight is assumed to be correct. Judges may however, at their own discretion, move from the positions originally taken at the start of an official flight by up to plus or minus 1/8 of a lap during an official flight."  Bold is my addition, by right of html.

My point is not that this is good, but what the rulebook actually says, and what I think it actually means. If you think "plus or minus 1/8 lap means 1/8 lap, you're welcome to clarify your understanding. I'm a machinist. If the tolerance is +/- .010",  then that would give you a .020" range of acceptability. Sometimes, tolerances are only plus, or only negative. If +/- isn't what you can use, you don't state it in those terms.

I have also been looking for the publicity time limit of 30 days ref'd to by Richard Oliver. I have not found that. But there is a 45 day callout for a cancellation of a contest for 'low entries', and my recollection is that any deviation from the rules is required to be publicisized 45 days in advance of the event. The reasoning is that deviations from the rules needs to be looked at by HQ, to determine if it is safe and insurance might be a problem. If anybody can quote where the 30 (or 45) day rule is called out, I'm interested. It should be under "General Information All Catagories".

Meanwhile, I'm still puzzled by Shultzie's continued criticisms. I've never judged Don, nor has he ever seen me judging, so I don't see justification. I don't claim to be perfect, but I try my best, and I'm always happy to stand down, if there are others willing. If that's the case, I'll usually hobble score sheets.  I'd like the pilots to use their right to signal the judges where they should position themselves. I once flew F1A Nordic Glider in a FF contest where the wind direction was steady from one direction, and 180 deg. opposite above about 50'. It was interesting. If this was to happen at a Stunt contest, just how would the Judges know? The pilots would be their only source of edjumication, and that only if the pilots figured it out. I don't like being in the wrong position. I'd like the pilot's input, that's all.  Steve
 

[Richard Oliver]

It is good to see someone is actually reading the rules. My point here and on SSW is so many people that are actually running events and judging have not read the rules. The Rule you quote does say that any change to an official AMA event(regulations) has to be advertised in advance. I think the key word is advertised. AMA in the past has stated that they feel that 30 days is good enough to be considered as advertised in advance. There is also a phone number you can call AMA headquarters and ask.  I hope this is still it, 765-287-1256.
As a CD in the past I always knew that the only way to run an event that can not be questioned by any competitor is to run it 'by the book'. If the Book says 1/8 lap then it is 1/8 lap. I do not feel it is open for a vote by the pilots. The rules say by the book unless advertised in advance. Having said that if you have 100% vote on a rule change you might have some ground to stand on but it is still shaky. I know you said 1/8 plus or minus but it is still only 1/8 of a lap to my way of thinking. If I move 1/8 of a lap right and then 1/4 from there left I still have not moved more than 1/8 from my spot of origin. If you need it to be stated 1/8 +- OK but it is semantics. If I had said 1/8 total you might have a point but I didn't. We are both saying the same thing and if my way was misleading then I stand corrected, and boy have I been corrected a few times in my life.
In the past before this 1/8+- rule signaling was good for a pilot to do but till this new rule is changed all a pilot or judge can do is move this small amount right or left. Putting it into context it is the width of a rule book loop. Many pilots bias more than this.
I once flew 7 laps at VSC trying to signal the judges to move and never got them to. I could not continue signaling for fear of running out of fuel. I moved my pattern into the wind and 5 maneuver later they moved. It was about 90° to their original spot at takeoff.
Also at this years Nats I tried to place the judges on several occasions before my flight and got blank stares or in one of my flights one of the judges told me by the time I got airborne they would be where they needed to be. After take off I noticed they never moved to where I tried to place them but stayed right where they were. I thought I was following the rules you state above. I flew my pattern based on where they were, not where I wanted to.
RO

[Shultzie]

I just Meanwhile, I'm still puzzled by Shultzie's continued criticisms. I've never judged Don, nor has he ever seen me judging, so I don't see justification. I don't claim to be perfect, but I try my best, and I'm always happy to stand down, if there are others willing. If that's the case, I'll usually hobble score sheets.  I'd like the pilots to use their right to signal the judges where they should position themselves. I once flew F1A Nordic Glider in a FF contest where the wind direction was steady from one direction, and 180 deg. opposite above about 50'. It was interesting. If this was to happen at a Stunt contest, just how would the Judges know? The pilots would be their only source of edjumication, and that only if the pilots figured it out. I don't like being in the wrong position. I'd like the pilot's input, that's all.  Steve 

Steve, Steve, Steve.....CRITICISMS?
It sounds like to me, Steve..... If you choose to stand in one place...and you think that is the best place to observe a pattern and you actually believe that you can see all varible angles as EZ as another judge who tries to keep his position in accordance with the wind. I HAVE NO ISSUES WHAT SO EVER..YOU ARE THE JUDGE!
At the end of the competition...hopefully, the best flyers with CONSISTANT judges...the best flyers will usually prevail.
NO! I haven't seen you judge...Perhaps you are an excellent and caring judge and that  is truly all that anyone can ask?
Like you have said..we have all seen flyers who perform their maneuvers...all over the place, as if they have no idea which way the wind is comin' or going.
For  a fact, often it truly is difficult or even impossible for either the judges or the flyers to know the wind direction, especially on those days, when the wind are virtually calm, can be a real test.

As you know...usually this is not a problem, as most  quality flyers and judges, usually WORK TOGETHER in combination with each other.
STEVE...I still applaud and appreciate your willingness and caring attitude to continue that often thankless and down right humanly impossible task by taking on such responsibilites.

Without folks like you and others...with the same passion for stunt flying and with that Steve, I truly do not mean to be mean or have any disrespect.
Just the opposite!
Again Steve, My deepest apologies...if you feel that I have been unusually harsh on you...put my life long PET-PEEEV' has been that over the years that I  have seen and worked with sooooooooooooo many folks that refuse to take that job of judging seriously enough, without ever devoting enough of their time and energy to  learn this most difficult job.

HANG IN THERE...KEEP ON, KEEPIN ON!!!

 

[Steve Helmick]

RO...I didn't add the +/- to the rule about 1/8 lap, I just did a little html work to make it bold. If 1/8 + 1/8 doesn't equal 1/4 lap, I'd like to know what it does add up to! I've had my problems, getting judges to move, too. Nothing to do but walk over and tell them that you intend to do your tricks over in front of that landmark, over there. I'd feel just fine with waiting for them to move. Might even start the watch on them.  I'm a CD, have been since sometime in the early '70's, except for about 7 years, from about '88 to '95. I have always said that if you don't go exactly by the rules, then there is no chance that everybody will get the same deal. That's my #1 priority.

Shultzie...I still don't see where I said I was standing in one place. I can't read the pilot's mind, I am not in the same place he is, or his airplane is, so I'd like as much input as possible. It's in the rules, or at least it was in the rules, so I'm encouraging pilots to signal where they'd like to do their next trick.  If you had problems with Judges that wouldn't move, I'm sorry. I move around the circle quite willingly, if not all that fast. Until judges start getting younger, this is likely to be the trend.  Steve

[peabody]

With study, the Keith Renecle (sp) file provides potential judges with the opportunity to "see" properly flown maneuvers from virtually any perspective.

[Richard Oliver]

Steve , sorry if I mislead you in how I responded. I was not implying that you added it. I know the rule book says +- and you absolutely quoted it correctly but so did I. The judges are allowed to move 1/8 of a lap. As I said it is semantics but it is also not correct to say it is a 1/4, again semantics. I would rather say 1/8 either direction from point of origin in trying to explain how much a judge can move.  When I said 1/8 lap I would think no one thought I was saying 1/16 with a total of 1/8. Most people would think they could move 1/8 either way. You assumed something else? The exact wording of the rule was not my point to begin with but that the judges (and I think yourself as well) were not aware of this rule. The person that put in the rule thinks it is an option describing it as a guide not a rule. While this does not bother me because I, like Keith, think the rule(he says guide) is not a good one but I do not want judges to have the alternative of choosing which ones to follow or not. I would much rather  the rules be specific and not open for interpretation. Even though the rules also say that they are not, open for interpretation, in the rules.
I think you started out quoting old rules yourself and a couple of your own interpretations in another thread which are not in the rule book now. This again is my point and I applaud you for going to the rules and trying to find out what they actually say. Too many people on both forums are quoting rules of their own making that are not in the rule book. All I am asking is for anyone that judges or is thinking of judging to read the rules, please. I have heard way more than my share of 'this is my ____ rule when I judge' statements.
I know some are going to take this as a stab at judges but it is not. It is a stab at the job of judging. My thanks go out to all of the people that spend their time and money to stand out in the weather and work for us. What I would like and most of the judges that I know (and yes I am a judge from time to time) is a comprehensive training system and rules that are not so illusive to an explanation or understanding. I can name a dozen places that are always hot topics with no definitive answers, only opinions. Why some organization has not taken this as a mandate to work on is beyond me. There is nothing personal in anything I am saying and anyone who takes it that way I apologize. This is about the event and it's elements. I am working on a training video with a few others and hope to help this situation. Since I have been in stunt I have heard so many personal rules from flyer's and judges that it makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up. This will always happen when there is no organized way of training and or dissemination of information. People are left to their own devises. This, in part, is what Peabody keeps referring to as 'regional differences'.
RO

[peabody]

The "wind" arrow has been in the rule section of the Rule Book for over a decade...is a judge supposed to dock points for maneuvers not flown dead downwind? It seems like there are diametric instructions in the Rule Book.

[Ted Fancher]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record...

This is yet another area where the adage about the pilots' job and the judges' job comes into play for me.  I think my approach is worth considering by others.

Once I take off I do whatever is necessary for me to present the best possible display of the maneuvers to me -- emphasis on "to me".  That's my job, to fly the airplane.

Once in the air I pay literally no attention to the judges -- to do so would be a distraction from my job (see above).

Because I trust the integrity of the judges and their desire to do the best job they can I simply assume that they are doing so.  That's their job, to judge my maneuvers.  I'm not often disappointed (although a few have ridden me pretty hard for making them get out their skate boards!)

The very few times I've attempted to "reposition" the judges it has been a dismal failure.  Almost by definition, the conditions under which this sort of adjustment is necessary is weather in which what wind there is is so transient that by the time you get the judges repositioned not only has the wind shifted yet again (usually thermal activity which guarantees that'll happen) but also I've used precious fuel that makes it possible (likely if this goes on too long) that I could run out of gas prior to completing the pattern.

Hardly a good trade off, IMHO.

By the way, in my looooong "career" flying stunt I've seen a number of patterns flown by very good flyers who have flown maneuvers all over the circle to utilize what wind there was to their advantage (Most clearly was Bob Baron who flew in atrocious conditions at the Reno nats in '84 -- one judge was usually in sort of the right position because they were more or less scattered 360 degrees around the circle ... and panting heavily).  

With no exception that comes quickly to mind the scores for such flight have been competitive.  Indicating -- at least to me -- that not only do the judges  NOT "whack" the pilot for chasing the wind but that they are still pretty much able to make a reasonable assessment of what they are watching regardless of their position relative to the maneuver (or, for that matter, never having been trained by Keith's very valuable simulator).

Once again, I encourage stunt flyers who want to do well competitively to concentrate their efforts on things they can not only
control but thatwill result in better figures at the end of the lines.  Worrying about the judges' job isn't one of those things.

Ted Fancher

Edited for a very important "not" left out ... indicated by all caps and bold italic print in the body of the message.

Ted

[Richard Oliver]

When I step into the circle as a flyer I have only one job, to fly.  When I leave the circle that is not the case. It is my opinion that it is incumbent on all of us that compete and spend our valuable free time and money to see that each and every one of use receives fair and unbiased as well as by the book value. If an event is not being run by the rules then it is not only detrimental to the event but is like stealing my free time and money. For me to be passive and just accept that there is nothing I can do because it is 'not my job' would run contray to my nature as a fair minded person and human being. When I see an injustice I can not help but speak up, for myself and my fellow flyers. Unlike those, who would turn away, I jump into the fight. I would argue, even if it was not in my favor, if it was the right thing to do. Some can say it is 'not my job' but when you are the one on the wrong end of the deal count me in to help and not turn away. When you show up and spend your time and money and you want it done right then I will stand with you.
Consider this just a difference of opinion and or personality, nothing more.
RO

[Dick Fowler]

With some reluctance I'll make a few comments.

My take on these types discussions is that they are being generated more from frustration and confusion than malice. It OK to speak of fliers and judge’s responsibilities but I think the very first job of any competitor is to have complete and thorough understanding of the rules under which he or she will be competing.  That’s what I see happening in these threads. People are asking for a single and universally understood meaning for each rule. Seem reasonable. Problem is there is no consensus.

The key here is for the judges and competitors to share that exact same understanding of those rules. There must be common, identical and absolute understanding by both sides as to what the “expectations” and intent of the rules are or there will be frustration and conflicts. The rules define the expectations. If they are written in a manner that leads to multiple interpretations of the meaning then they are inadequate for the job. They should be interpreted on the bases of what they say… not what “we meant to say”!

 I play a lot of competitive golf and the best part is that I know that at every event I’ll be playing governed by the same set of rules that were used last week and every guy on the course will be using these same rules and more importantly, every guy on the course interprets and applies these rules exactly in the same manner as do I. Wow, what a concept.

Think about the often-questioned 5 ft corner. Everyone acknowledges that it’s impossible to perform but instead of changing the rule it gets a  (Wink..Wink) “You know what we want” sort of treatment.  Gee! I wonder why people get upset!

Hmm… maybe I’ll go listen to some square eights now.

[john e. holliday]

Well Ted I think you have hit the nail on the head.  The judges are volunteers that are trying to do a job to the best of their ability.  It's just we have a few individuals that keep beating a dead horse to death.  DOC Holliday

[Dick Fowler]

Well Ted I think you have hit the nail on the head.  The judges are volunteers that are trying to do a job to the best of their ability.  It's just we have a few individuals that keep beating a dead horse to death.  DOC Holliday

With a few exceptions, the lion share of the flack is directed at the rules not the judges.

This event is for the fliers. The fliers should be getting primary consideration not the judges. Seems that this gets lost in translation.

[Richard Oliver]

Doc, please do not take this the wrong way but which dead horse are you referring to. I can only assume you do not mean that wanting judges to read and know the rules or that when the wrong rules are being used that we should just say thank you? Help me out here! My problem is not with the hard working judges that are trying to do a good job but with the attitude that judges can judge any way they see fit based on each judge's personal likes and dislikes and interpretations of the rules, if they read them. Is it so much to ask for them to read the rules. Is there a judge out there that can say to me they are insulted to be asked to read the rules? Is there a judge that would be insulted by being asked to go to the clinics at the Nats?  Now is it wrong to ask these judges to follow these rules in the rule book?
I am not sure what you mean.
If I showed up at a contest to judge your flying and also told you I had never read the rules does this mean I get a pat on the back from you and a 'Do the best you can'.

Just the fact that we need judges does not mean we need bad judges or judges that will not take the time to read the rules first. Next time you guys need a doctor pick someone on the street and tell them to do the best they can and you will rest easy.
Who knows you might actually get lucky.
RO

[john e. holliday]

I guess what I am referring to is the constant complaints about our judges.   The book does state what the judges should do.  Anybody that volunteers to judge should be trained and know the rules.  I have been to contests as well as other pilots in which telling the judges where to be is a chance you take.  It has happened to me at the NATS, VSC, St Louis and mainly in Kansas the wind will shift quite a bit.  I have tried to get judges to move several times.  I even flew extra laps hoping they would move.  I don't worry about it anymore as a mild breeze does not seem to affect the two planes I really like flying.  But, as an alturnative, it should be brought up at the start of a contest on where they will be positioned.  Or let the pilot position the judges before signal to start flight and take his/her chances.  Maybe someone will get together  with several people to come up with a decent proposal to correct the situation.  Guess I am good at offending people.  DOC Holliday