jmpwme 0 #1 July 12, 2005 Has anybody seen the agenda - here it is!!! Here we go again!!! http://uspa.org/news/notices/CompAgenda07.05.pdf Thoughts??? Ron - I know you have to be chompin at the bit on some of these!!! Steve Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
daveb 1 #2 July 13, 2005 CompAgenda Clicky Only part within section 5 that I don't agree with is changing the name "Open" to "Pro" or "International". I am not a pro; I have a full time job (shock and surprise to those that know my recent history ;-). International teams are guests. I'm a citizen and eligible -- not a guest. Open is the correct appellation. As far as allowing teams to defend Advanced Class medals for one year, I've a few questions...Why not Intermediate also, for the same reasons? What about any new classification? What is the ruling if the results are 1-2-1? On the fourth year, do they get to stay in the same class? In other words, is the move-up rule going to be back-to-back wins or just two wins? If just two wins, is there a limit to years between wins? Does this have any effect on the rule that no more than 25% of the members can have previously gold-medaled? In other words, would a team with two former gold medalists not be able to challenge the previous year's champion in the same class? If not, why not? If so, will the rule be that you cannot have more than 25% with *two* gold medals in the same or higher class? Or 25% with two medals in the same class or one or more medals in a higher class? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jmpwme 0 #3 July 13, 2005 Dave - all good questions. The defend your title rule, while an interesting concept, is brutal to monitor and even harder to draft. I've taken a shot at it and there are too many variables. Yes - it would impact the 25% rule. The renaming of the "Open" class would only come into play if a new 4th class was added to account for teams that are between pro teams going for US team births and the advanced class teams. This would partially help with the hotly debated PC issue which has been beaten to death over the years. Steve. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
apincus 0 #4 July 13, 2005 Dave: I agree, I've never seen you work Alex Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #5 July 13, 2005 QuoteThoughts??? Ron - I know you have to be chompin at the bit on some of these!!! Not really....The USPA has ignored the competitor for so long, I have almost stopped caring. SECTION 5: FORMATION SKYDIVING Quote- Advanced Teams being able to defend their gold medals for one year. - Competitor Meeting I don't think there should be an "X" number of year anything. Either a person can compete in a lower class, or they are above that class and should not be allowed in it. This is a lame fix to a simple problem. Quote - Rename “Open” to “Pro” or “International”- Competitor Meeting. No reason for this at all. Open means "anything goes". The best team in the US should go no matter who is on the team as long as it fits the IPC rules. Quote- Team descriptions defined with scores attached- Scott from Competitors meeting - Add another category for 8 way and 4 way - Competitor Meeting 8 way is fine the way it is....Intermediate teams can compete year after year if they want. Open is just fine. 4way...Another lame fix at a simple problem. Define what a "PRO" is and then don't allow them in anything other than open. If you want to make it so the lower classes have to move up...Fine. But don't allow an OPEN medalist to compete in a lower class if you make a gold winner in Advaced move up. Its a REALLY simple problem, but they want to do anything but fix it. If Advanced did a different draw than open that would make a difference...But they do the smae draw, so it makes no sense. If they make the rule that you can't compete in a class if: a. Having won that class. b. Having medaled in a higher class. It all goes away. Two sentances. PC teams can do what Fire, Fury are doing. And what Fastrax did for the last two years. Its the same draw...They just need to prevent PROS from being in a lower class like the NBA prevents Jordan from playing for Duke again. The USPA wants FOUR classes. 1. PRO...These people go to the World Meet...Anything goes. 2. Open...Anything goes. You can stay forever in this class and most will. 3. Advanced...Kinda like it is now, but with out PC's 4. Int....Just like it is now. Classes 1 and 2 are the SAME. The only difference is one gets to win and go to the World Meet. Just make it so: A person can't compete in a class if: a. Having won that class. b. Having medaled in a higher class. OR Make it so anything goes in Advanced and you have the SAME thing. My whole issue has been why make a Gold medalist in Advanced move up if you will let a Silver medalist in open move down? What sense does that make? The whole thing is just nuts...And the fix is NOT to add ANOTHER class."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #6 July 13, 2005 My letter to the BOD My thoughts: 1. Make a rule that a competitor must: a. Not have won that class. b. Not have medaled in a higher class. Then we can keep the three classes that are pretty good. We don't need a 4th class. It will also prevent an Advanced team from staying around year after year, AND it will prevent an OPEN class medalist from moving down. PC teams can still exist. They can still do the same draw. The can still have the training benefit. But it will prevent an Open class jumper from competing against weekend warriors. Michael Jordon does not play for Duke anymore, why should an OPEN class skydiver be allowed in Advanced? 2. As for skysurfing If you eliminate it from Nationals...How will you select the team that goes to the World Meet? 3. 8way and 4way new class. If you implement the rule in #1, then this is not an issue. We have enough classes now. Two of them already do the same draw. This is unneeded."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #7 July 14, 2005 Ron, All of these issues (and potential 'fixes') were brought up by FS competitors after Nationals's RW section of the competition was over. All were invited to hear some concerns over this discipline and alot spoke up with opinions. Yes, I too believe that some of these items are out-landish. It will be interesting to hear what the BOD thinks of them. The ideas came directly from current competitors. ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #8 July 14, 2005 Well, they are on agenda for discussion, not approved yet. What's the date for the meeting? I'd still like to call my regional director and give comments. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #9 July 14, 2005 Quote1. Make a rule that a competitor must: a. Not have won that class. b. Not have medaled in a higher class. Seems like a good idea, but there should be a time limit - like "within the previous 5 years" added. If someone drops out of competition for a few years they shouldn't be forced straight back into Open on their return.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #10 July 14, 2005 QuoteWell, they are on agenda for discussion, not approved yet. What's the date for the meeting? I'd still like to call my regional director and give comments. From http://www.uspa.org/news/index.htm General Membership Meeting Called (05/24/05) USPA's annual General Membership Meeting will be held at 7:00 p.m. on Friday, July 15, 2005 at the Sheraton Pentagon South Hotel in Alexandria, Virginia. All members in good standing are invited to attend. FFI: (703) 836-3495. Click here to view the meeting agenda. Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #11 July 14, 2005 QuoteQuote1. Make a rule that a competitor must: a. Not have won that class. b. Not have medaled in a higher class. Seems like a good idea, but there should be a time limit - like "within the previous 5 years" added. If someone drops out of competition for a few years they shouldn't be forced straight back into Open on their return. I know this is very hard to administrate, but a team that scores 10's scores 10's whether they have a pro on it or not. RW is about 'team' performance, not individual performance. At some point, they will have to define the "minimum class a team is allowed to compete in" by how they perform in a qualification setting (perhaps a simple no-mirror/no-memory dive) - regardless of their lineup. If a team tanks it and is allowed to jump intermediate, they can choose to compete in the higher levels. Sandbagging the qual dive will have to be self policed, but at least it will be self evident when compared to the dives in the actual competition. Teams that choose to go open won't have to even do a qual jump because they already picked the most restrictive class. or, just eliminate the classes altogether and everybody jumps the same draw all the time - let the NSL have training classes (rookie, A, AA) for bringing teams up to speed. It already is serving as a very effective system for teams to get exposed to competition. Nationals is just the one shot deal anyway ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
colbrodie 0 #12 July 17, 2005 OMG! Ron, I love you, but I almost threw up. Seriously, I feel ill right now. Michael Jordan played for CAROLINA!!!!!!! As a rabid Tarheel basketball fan, the mere thought of Jordan ever being a "dookie" makes me sick! Sorry to hijack your thread but I couldn't resist! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #13 July 17, 2005 QuoteOMG! Ron, I love you, but I almost threw up. Seriously, I feel ill right now. Michael Jordan played for CAROLINA!!!!!!! As a rabid Tarheel basketball fan, the mere thought of Jordan ever being a "dookie" makes me sick! Sorry to hijack your thread but I couldn't resist! Oh, ah....Well so much for my Bball knowledge. I don't even know what kind of bat to use on it. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jmpwme 0 #14 July 18, 2005 Any word on the meeting? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #15 July 18, 2005 Quote Any word on the meeting? From Jan : The BOD did NOT eliminate skysurf. The BOD did pass a new Competition rule that applies to all disciplines. It says, in effect, that if a discipline has fewer than 4 teams/individuals for two consecutive years at Nationals then the discipline would be eliminated. The first year participation falls below 4 teams/individuals serves as a warning to recruit more participants for the following year. If a discpline is eliminated, then a team can qualify for a world meet in that discipline by attending any other nation's nationals. From Judy: Eloy got next years Nationals..Which I guess is the next two years. If its gonna be every two years...It REALLY should flop coasts."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jmpwme 0 #16 July 18, 2005 yep - already new about the skysurf stuff. Was more curious about all of the PC, defend your title stuff. I've heard rumor that nothing was changed. Well - I like eloy - but I understand the not wanting to travel. Neither do I. Eloy also has limited lodging, but, they run a great meet, always have. At least it will be a longer season. Eloy in September is unthinkable. For that matter - Perris in September is unthinkable. It was 107 this weekend. Steve. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jmpwme 0 #17 July 18, 2005 Straight from Comp. Comm chair - no 4-way rule changes. Steve. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dgskydive 0 #18 July 18, 2005 QuoteEloy in September is unthinkable. For that matter - Perris in September is unthinkable. It was 107 this weekend. Think October!!!!Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jmpwme 0 #19 July 18, 2005 No doubt October. Thats what they have done in the past. Anything else would be like going to Sebastian in Hurricane season. Oh, was that my outside voice???? S. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shark 0 #20 July 19, 2005 QuoteIt was 107 this weekend. Yeah, but at least it wasn't raining. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bbarnhouse 0 #21 July 19, 2005 QuoteIf its gonna be every two years...It REALLY should flop coasts The dates for US Nationals 2006 in Eloy are Oct. 21-28. The bid for nationals is NOT for 2 years. Additionally the BOD is considering a rotation schedule in the future. Another point of interest is that the winter BOD meeting will be held February 17-19 in Phoenix Arizona. A general membership meeting will be held and all are encouraged to attend. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #22 July 19, 2005 QuoteThe bid for nationals is NOT for 2 years. Then why Perris for two years? The USPA said to get exposure....But only once ever? QuoteAdditionally the BOD is considering a rotation schedule in the future. My Favorite idea is to take over a neutral site...Like the WFFC does, or how it was done in OK. years ago."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bbarnhouse 0 #23 July 19, 2005 QuoteThen why Perris for two years? The USPA said to get exposure....But only once ever? Ron you would need to direct that question to the BOD. QuoteMy Favorite idea is to take over a neutral site...Like the WFFC does, or how it was done in OK. years ago. Other sports use a rotation schedule and it works very well. There will be criteria that has to be met in order for a bid to be considered. Those details are under discussion. It is interesting to note that all the bid presenters agreed that a rotation is a good idea. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jmpwme 0 #24 July 19, 2005 I think all of the Athletes agree with a rotation as well. Taking over a neutral site could be nice but would still favor whoever is local. Chicago ran a great meet (at least for RW), Eloy is always good, Lake wales was fine. As long as the minimum criteria are thought through, this should work. Is it really any different than what we have now aside from the recent 2 year thing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #25 July 19, 2005 QuoteEloy is always good Eloy 98 winds kept some from training before the meet and 10 way went on at least one weather hold."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
