The Oz Report

Joe Bostik on the Wallaby Open dates

It appears that things aren't quite settled.  Joe Bostik<JOSEFBOSTIK> writes:

The USHGA rules specifically state that the competition subcommittee does not have any jurisdiction over the dates of specific contests, when it comes to the question of sanctioning.  They are pushing Malcolm around once again.

I talked to him extensively on Sunday and he will either keep the original dates with no sanction from USHGA or he will run the meet the last week of March to accommodate Europeans (sanctions or not).  In both cases he will get enough ranked pilots to receive high value CIVL points, which will then qualify for US World Team selection.  In this case he is not butting heads, they are.  He announced the dates first.  Period.

(editor's note: I asked Joe how Malcolm was going to get CIVL points if the meet isn't sanctioned by the USHGA.  I can't find any provision in the CIVL sporting code that requires NAC sanctioning for WPRS points though, so maybe Malcolm can do this.  If someone knows better, please kindly, and gently inform me.

While I have an out of date USHGA rulebook (year 2000) the USHGA rules on the US national team selection process seem to preclude getting any NTSS points unless it is a USHGA Class A sanctioned meet or a foreign meet sanctioned by that country's NAC.  Of course, this year pilots did get NTSS points for a USHGA class B meet (Lone Star Championship), so we know that at least that part is wrong.  Still, it would seem difficult for Malcolm to be able to make this promise of NTSS points or CIVL points without USHGA sanctioning.  I wait to be corrected.)

Joe continues:

I am on his side on this one.  They are trying to tag onto his good thing, which is fine, but they are also trying to make him jump up and down.  At this point I do not even think Malcolm cares about any sanction.  And he has cash to offer.  That has not been around for a while.  We will see how it plays out.  I doubt people will travel to Florida twice.  They will pick one meet and guess which one it will be?

(editor's note: Maybe Malcolm can get the Brazilians' to sanction his meet.  After all the British and the Dutch hold their meets in France.  That would be pretty cool, wouldn't it? Heck, Wallaby is little Brazil, already.)

Canopies anyone?

John Borton<CompCommittee> chairman of the USHGA competition committee writes:

I am working on the report from the CC to get to you.  I would have had it by now but the power in our neighborhood has been out for almost the entire 24 hours since I got back from the BOD meeting.

You wondered aloud in Oz about canopies and Class 2...as we have historically, we will continue to mirror CIVL in our classification requirements.  This means that since canopies are allowed in CIVL category 2 comps and our Class A comps are typically sanctioned by CIVL in category 2, we will allow canopies as well.

Our decision to follow CIVL in this area for now is not a reflection of our agreement with CIVL in this matter, but rather a general recognition that keeping the requirements the same the world over is usually better for simplicity sake.

USHGA rule book and CIVL Classes

John Borton <CompCommittee> writes:

We will continue to use the CIVL classification definitions and the new rule book.  JC is typing the approved version up and will be getting it to me as soon as he can.  There is nothing in the book that will surprise you...it was simply an update to reflect the way meets are currently run (no more photo stuff etc.) and to purge a bunch of old stuff.

Just to make sure I asked John: So just so I can be clear, the new USHGA rulebook and CIVL agree on the class definitions, correct?  He said:

This is true.  The current position of the CC is that we will use their definitions and use our delegate to achieve the classification limits that we want.

David Glover<footlaunch> writes:

JC Brown and Jim Lee made many small and good changes I hear.  They should be on the web after JC fixes the small stuff.

US Nationals in Hearne, Texas

(This topic is in: 4.193 4.191 )

David Glover<footlaunch> writes:

Hearne is the Nationals in August, the dates they wanted.

(editor's note: We haven't got those dates yet, but hope to soon.)

Bill Bolosky gives us the gossip on the USHGA meeting and PG Nats

Bill Bolosky bolosky@microsoft.com writes:

As you've heard, I'm now the treasurer.  David & Gregg Lawless asked me to run, and I was unopposed.  Geoff Mumford had been the treasurer for the past few years, but he's leaving 5the BOD and so didn't run again.  David stayed on as pres & Mark Ferguson as VP, and they were both unopposed.  The fourth slot is secretary, and Russ Locke decided that he'd like to get it back.  He'd been the secretary for a very long time until this past year, when he turned the job over to Bill Bryden and also left his regional director slot (which was taken by Jamie Sheldon).

This presented a problem, because a couple of years back we amended the bylaws to include a requirement that the officers be voting directors.  So, Bill Bryden ran for secretary on the platform of waiting for Russ to be elected director-at-large, resigning the slot and then having Russ elected to fill it.  That's exactly what happened.  Unlike the other officer elections, this one was opposed.  Scott Gasparian ran against Bryden in the first round and then ran against Russ in the second, and lost both times, but according to the people who counted the ballots it was "close." Even though he lost the election, Gaspo did get invited to join the planning committee.

The director-at-large elections were also much more interesting than in the past.  For as long as I've been around the BOD, four of the five slots have been held by the same people, and the fifth one has changed hands regularly.  The four are Dennis Pagen, Dan Johnson, Jan Johnson, and Paul Rikert.  Last year Ed Pitman held the fifth slot (before that it was Paul Klemond).  The rules for electing directors-at-large are that all voting directors cast votes for at most five people, and you need to have to be named on a majority of the ballots cast to get elected.  This time, 6 people were named on a majority of the ballots.  They were Dennis Pagen, Russ Locke, Steve Kroop, Jan Johnson, Paul Rikert and Aaron Swepston (!).  Jan and Paul got fewer votes than the other four, and were tied with 12 each (out of 21 cast).  So, we had a runoff between them, and Jan won, so for the first time in about two decades Paul Rikert doesn't have a voting BOD slot, but he'll continue as the Organization & Bylaws chair.

David Glover sponsored Aaron for a director-at-large slot so that he would be in a good position to help out Gil with some of the art direction stuff in the magazines.

The other interesting news from the competition committee (well, at least interesting to me) is that at the last minute Josh Cohn put in a bid to have the paragliding nats at Chelan from July 3-8 (Tuesday-Sunday).  He asked me for my approval about 10 minutes before the committee met to consider the bid, and I told him that it was OK with me, assuming that it didn't conflict with the Classic, with the Women's/class-2 pre-worlds, and that it was OK with Larry.  The competition committee approved the bid subject to my signing off on it within 30 days, otherwise it's at Telluride.  I've since talked with Tag and he said that the Classic is going to be July 9-15, so there's no conflict there.  I've been trying to call Danny & Larry and haven't got in touch with them yet, so it's still tentative, but I expect to have an answer in a few days.

Gordon on Doping

Gordon Rigg <Rigg> writes:

Agreed there is probably nothing you can take that will improve your hang gliding performance other than a beta blocker so you can fly with a broken wrist or something daft like that.  If you were so scared you need something to calm you down then you probably wouldn't have ever made your national team - though come to think of it, it might have helped in Austria!

It might interest you to know that a while ago doping control people turned up at a PWC and asked to test various pilots.  One pilot ended up disqualified, but was I think eventually reinstated. he was unable to produce a urine sample and some hours later, when able, he couldn't find the dope testers!  They then disqualified him for seemingly avoiding the test.  The case in Europe seems to be that government drug testers can show up at any recognised sporting event and apply the official drug tests - ie the same list of banned substances they use for the Olympics.

It would seem we can guarantee being tested at the World Air Games.  At the pre world meet some of us were supposed to be tested.  They warned us that on one day of the meet the first three pilots of the previous task, plus several others chosen at random, would be required to produce urine samples.  As it happened on the chosen day only the Brits attempted the task and we got 1,2,3!  Then they drew another Brit at random!  We and the other random class 1 pilots and the appropriate class 2 guys all showed up early in the morning and after some hanging around with our legs crossed the doctors (who set off late from Saville) never showed up so we were allowed to leave.  Probably they will be more organised next year.

After the PWC incident our comps panel did some research on this (mainly done by Kathleen Rigg).  Main things to note:

There are some odd things on the list like caffeine.  About 7 cups of espresso will fail you the test.  Some air sickness pills commonly used by pilots contain enough caffeine to risk failing. Lots of Hay fever cures contain banned substances.  However you can get dispensation with a letter from your doctor for most of these if you check with the authorities.  In the UK you would contact the Sports Council to make sure you got it all correct.  Obviously since we did our research there have been lots of publicity surrounding dietary supplements, and cold cures so its best not to take anything except the odd aspirin!  I'm sure those odd toffee like sweets they had at the fair in Piedrahita are dodgy.  We all had really weird dreams...!

Proud Supporter of:

To unsubscribe or subscribe