At 12:06 AM 15/09/04 +1000, you wrote:
>>From: Robert Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>>On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 08:23, Mike Borgelt wrote:
>> > The Dalby Nationals are being run under the same handicapping rules as
>>last
>> > year at Gulgong which got 20 entries. I think the larger entry has more
>>to
>> > do with location and time than any special efforts by the GFA, which is
>>not
>> > to deny the organisational effort of those putting on Dalby.
>>
>>I am not sure what effort the GFA has put behind this year's nationals,
>>apart from 'giving' it to the Dalby organisation.
>
>Robert, the value and uses of the GFA is clearly shown by Mike and Emilis's
>letters. Mike was scathing about the stupidity of handicapped Nationals.
>Contrarily, Emilis was silkily sarcastic about those who disapproved of
>handicapped competitions. Their only point of organisational agreement (as
>always) is that the GFA is useless, USELESS!
>
>The GFA's role is that of the patient parent, stepping between the
>squabbling children to try to make something actually happen and to stop the
>gliding movement following its natural path into anarchic dissent. I think
>two of the GFA's noisiest opponents have demonstrated beautifully a major
>reason for its existence.
>
>Graeme Cant
On the contrary, I have no problem with a handicapped Nationals and we
already had one which was and is being reasonably supported and I certainly
wish it well. Handicapping is perfectly possible but all that happens is
that the "best" glider is no longer the latest and most expensive one. It
becomes the one with the least appropriate handicap in its pilot's favour.
You then need a way of rectifying this in future. Appropriate handicaps
also vary depending on the weather as shown by the TSA/Lattimore system
where the handicaps vary on the day.
My objection is that ALL the Nationals should not be handicapped because of
the long term effect on the modernisation of the glider fleet.
We now have the situation where the FAI gliding reps in Australia (the GFA)
don't run FAI rule national contests. The exec stepping on the sports
committee who were doing their job and certainly weren't in dereliction of
duty was bloody rude if nothing else and did nothing to convince anyone
that the exec didn't run the GFA to the exclusion of any other views and
surely had a bad effect on any future volunteers for these jobs.
Emilis was referring to an earlier time when the League 2 of the Nationals
(for older gliders)was abolished in favour of the unhandicapped FAI Classes
and the GFA heavies discouraged any older gliders from being entered. There
were then no contests for these people which is the case now for those
wanting to fly unhandicapped FAI national level contests.
So it would seem to me that Emilis and I were actually talking about the
same thing - an overbearing GFA attitude restricting choice.
BTW we aren't children and don't need parental supervision to make things
happen, least of all supervision by those whose historical record of poor
decision making speaks for itself.
A lot less *control* and a lot more encouragement would go a long way to
improving matters.
Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
Int'l + 61 429 355784
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
