Tim Cummings writes:

The Canungra Classic is trying to appeal to pilots new to
competition as well as to the top pilots. We run an "Alternate Launch" for new
competition pilots to launch before the main field. These pilots struggle
staying in the air for long periods of time waiting for the main start gate so
we want them to be able to fly the course early. Unfortunately recent changes to
FS mean that any pilot jumping the gun more than 5 minutes before the first
start gate are given zero points for the day. This is totally demoralising for
any new pilots and will result in them not competing again. I have even heard
from top pilots who have been caught out by this rule. Our solution is to run
earlier start gates but then these early launching pilots will take away the
lead out points from the top pilots starting later so lead out points have been
disabled. By using Arrival Time points we will reward the top pilots who are
expected to overtake the new pilots before reaching goal. By coincidence this
matches OzGap2005.

Personally, I am happy to use lead out points with early start gates. I think
that if the first start gate is the optimal start gate then it is not early
enough. However, the top pilots argue strongly that if there are lead out
points, then they need to be able to get the first start gate.

I am not a fan of Arrival Place Points, because I think they provide a
disproportionate incentive for pilots to overtake other pilots while crossing
the finish line which could lead to unsafe actions and are not a measure of any
hang gliding skill which needs to be rewarded. Arrival Time Points don't have
this problem.

Davis describes the choice of a nominal distance GAP parameter of 40km as a
sport class or weak site value. Mt Tamborine is a west facing site but due to a
coastline and airspace there is no opportunity to head east. Hence tasks from Mt
Tamborine will always have a headwind component. Using a higher nominal distance
will lead to devalued tasks on days which actually provide quite a good test of
pilots skills. The purpose of the parameters is to determine how much luck is
involved in doing well on a day compared to other pilots. I think the nominal
time parameter does this the best. If the task is too short then the winners
will easily beat the nominal time and the task will be devalued.

Hi Tim,

Good to see that you helped set up the scoring.

I, of course, agree with all that you have stated here.

First, while the default values in FS set the Jump the Gun value to 5 minutes
you can set it to 1000 seconds, 16 and 2/3 rd's minutes. Also you can set the
value of the seconds per point, say 60 seconds for one point, which really
decreases the penalty points for going early. Still you get only minimum
distance if you go way early.

Second, I don't think that this is a recent change but has been in the GAP 2002
implementation in FS for quite a while.

Third, yes, on one day at Big Spring, with lots of wind, some pilots weren't
able to stay inside the start cylinder and jumped the gun without wishing to and
the quality of the day was reduced (which James Stinnett hated) because their
distances were set to minimum.

https://airtribune.com/2015-big-spring-nationals/results/task859/day/open-class

Fourth, it is not a coincidence that it matches OzGAP 2005. It is OzGAP 2005
implemented in FS.

Fifth, I certainly agree with you regarding Arrival Position Points and Arrival
Time Points. As I pointed out this could be fixed fairly easily in FS. You would
just have to make it so if you check the check box for Leading Points, then
Arrival Time Points are only allocated the amount of points that would have gone
to Arrival Position Points, not the points allocated to the Sum of Leading
Points and Arrival Position Points.

Sixth, regarding the choice of nominal distance, check out the first day's
results.