Wills Wing
Flytec

Oz Report

topic: Canungra Classic 2008 (2 articles)

Early starts

November 6, 2008, 7:30:44 PST

Early starts

I favor allowing pilots to start early, and not giving them much of a penalty

Beechmont|Canungra Classic 2008|competition|GAP 2000|OzGAP 2005|scoring

I think that it is a good idea to allow pilots to head out on course before the first start time. I figure that they are taking the chances, so let them go off by themselves. Also I know that conditions can change at launch and it is best to allow pilots to head out.

Also there is a lot of difference between the first launches and the later ones if there is a restricted launch and a lot of pilots. If you want pilots to launch in the first part of the launch window you've got to give them a reason to get off, and being allowed to start early is an incentive to launch early.

Yes, I realize that there is the argument that the pilots could be flying in different conditions, and I'm sure that this happens and happened at the 2008 Canungra Classic.

One way to get around this is to have an early start time at thirty minutes after the window opens to get those pilots who want to get going an opportunity to do so. But then pilots complain that it doesn't give everyone the opportunity to take the first start time. There is no perfect solution.

As a scorekeeper and scoring program writer (using the GAP 2000 and OzGAP 2005 algorithms) I allowed pilots to start before the first start time. But I move their start time to past the first start time. For example, if they start fourteen minutes before the first start time, I add two time fourteen minutes or twenty eight minutes to the start time and twenty eight minutes to their finish time. This works fine with OzGAP 2005 and GAP 2000, but not GAP 2002 (unless you changed all the times in the pilot's track log).

Now assuming that the start time intervals were fifteen minutes long, you would get the first start time, with a fourteen minute penalty. Of course, if you started fifteen minutes and one second early, you would get the second start time with only a one second penalty. But you would be penalized by having the second start time instead of the first.

Gerolf and Attila on the ⁢2008 Canungra Classic »

Tue, Nov 4 2008, 8:16:26 am PST

But should he have received bomb out points the first day?

Attila Bertok|Canungra Classic 2008|CIVL|Gerolf Heinrichs|Jon "Jonny" Durand jnr|Jon Durand jnr|PG

https://OzReport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13666

https://OzReport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13797

Gerolf Heinrichs «gerolfontour» writes:

The official scores of the Canungra Classic 2008 for day-1, http://www.triptera.com.au/canungra/classic2008/open_day_1.htm show Jonny Durand Jnr and three more pilots scoring 0 pts for the day - while other pilots earning 153 pts for “minimum distance”.

According to various comments on the matter (including Johnny’s own blog), Johnny was in no flying condition that day and did not fly the task at all. Therefore scoring him with 0 pts is the RIGHT ruling. You, Davis, quote the CIVL rule book and the HGFA-rule book (which actually mostly matters in this case). Both come to the same inevitable conclusion: a pilot can only score minimum distance, if he has taken off within the boundaries of the take off window (and also actually handed in a flight/landing report later on). A pilot who doesn’t fly on the day (for whatever personal reasons actually) will get a DNF and score a zero for the day.

If a significant portion of the pilots present at take off do not take off at all, the task will get devaluated by the GAP-formula. For that very reason the number of pilots at take off and the number of pilots actually taking off for the task has to be known to the scorer by the end of the day. The number of competitors in the meet is not relevant for this calculation. There is no such thing as a “show up at take off bonus”, or a score for intending to fly on the task without ever doing so. You have to fly to score points – there is no way around that, and the official day-1 result seems to reflect that understanding.

However, in the overall score sheet, http://www.triptera.com.au/canungra/classic2008/comp_result.htm, we find Johnny Durand with a score of 153pts for day-1 again – apparently a major mistake by the scorer. How this could stay unnoticed and unfixed throughout the entire competition remains a miracle to me, given the fact that Johnny and Attila were battling for win and were finally only a few points apart in the overall score.

There is no nice way to break it:

It’s a capital scoring error, one that needs to be corrected as soon as possible: With 153 pts less on the cumulative score Johnny despite winning several tasks afterwards, will end up in a respectful second place. But the rightful winner of the Canungra Classic 2008 can only be Attila Bertok. Trophies and price money (if there is any) need to be swapped and, I suppose, a decent apology to Attila will be in order.

The corrected results will then have to go to CIVL accompanied by an explanation on the matter – this seems the only way the Canungra Classic 2008 can keep its status and the results can be included into the CIVL Permanent International Ranking System (PIRS).

If the results are submitted the way they stand right now, the results and possibly the competition will have to be declared invalid!

It would be good to get an official comment from the meet organizers on the matter before addressing CIVL. At this point I am still willing to imagine the situation just being a result of a terrible mistake in conducting the scores on the final day. If, however, it turns out the comp organizers at the Canungra Hang and Paragliding Club would back the current result and support the idea of sticking with Johnny Durand as the rightful winner of their event, we would certainly have to consider sanctions.

Attila's very extensive comments can be found on the Oz Report forum.

Discuss "Gerolf and Attila on the ⁢2008 Canungra Classic" at the Oz Report forum   link»