Integrity of USPA Records in Question!

[Buried 0]

The USPA Competition Committee recently ruled that the recent IL 27 way wingsuit record shall remain a record after numerous facts were demonstrated, proving the submitted formation photo did not meet USPA SCM (Skydiver’s Competition Manual) criteria for wingsuit records.

This issue now extends outside of the wingsuit community as the integrity of USPA records, the USPA Competition Committee, and USPA Competitions in general is now in question. The committee has disregarded and has generated new interpretations of SCM rules; therefore this becomes an issue for all of the USPA membership.

SCM rule 2.4.23.7 states "The height of the base flyer,measured from head to feet, must equal or exceed 27 percent of the height of the designated flying space (as indicated on the standard grid)."

Reviewing the "SubmittedFormation" picture attached, it is apparent that the formation does not meet this guideline. The scaling of the grid (to the base flyer) does not meet the 27% criteria as set forth in the SCM.

It is common knowledge that the base's purpose in wingsuiting is to set the forward/downward speed, flyer levels and is a "go-to point" for all other flyers in the formation to build upon.

The tallest flyer in the formation has been used to scale the grid to meet the 27% scaling requirement, but the tallest flyer does not conform to the definition of wingsuit base. Multiple participants in this formation have indicated that they believed the base to be the front flyer (as commonly accepted). No announcement was made and no or documentation was provided to the USPA or USPA Judge to specify a different base from what is commonly accepted and there is nothing to suggest otherwise. All dirt dives point the front flyer as base. It is likely that tallest flyer was declared the base for the purposes of the grid scaling after the picture was judged.

Still yet, if one were to consider this taller flyer as "the base", the formation still yet falls short of the 27% requirement. Scaling the tallest flyer from head to foot (TickmartCompare1.jpg) does not match the 27% requirement unless the GoPro camera is included in the measurement. The rules were specifically amended in February of 2010 to exclude wingsuit size and camera equipment by stating precise “head to foot” scaling when the 27% rule was adopted.

The only way to replicate the submitted formation is to
1) Declare a flyer other than the true "base" as the base after the jump took place.
2) Include the GoPro in the head to foot scaling.

The Competition Committee and specifically Scott Smith asked several experienced wingsuiters at the February 2010 board meeting, to meet as a team and generate rules. We did so with everyone present, including Taya Weiss, the organizer of this incomplete formation. All wingsuit flyers at the table and around the world shared a common understanding of the rules and the definition of a "base flyer". Now Competition Committee has now opted to not only ignore those same very experienced wingsuiters and flyers on this formation, but have elected to misinterpret the rules.

Please review the attached photos. This is an issue of integrity, honor, and an issue of holding trust in the people we elect to represent us and our achievements in skydiving. The USPA judge(s) of this formation was not trained and had no prior experience with wingsuit flying. The USPA does not offer a standard guideline to which judges are trained for this fairly new record category.

I encourage the USPA membership to review the facts and weigh in.
If you do not want to post your opinions here in public, please let them be known by emailing CompetitionCommittee@uspa.org.

Thank You.

Where is my fizzy-lifting drink?

[mccordia 74]

I see a formation with Purple Mike leading, and people are now saying this is a record because the guy in row 2 is leading the flock?
Everyone is flying based on the speed and angle that guy is flying...not at all flying with Mike leading, because it doesnt fit 'the grid'?

Dont know how you call it, but I call it cheating...sad to see this is what its coming to.

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[fencebuster 7]

I am not a WS flier but I am a DZO and I expect the USPA to have integrity. I see a problem here, and I hope someone at USPA HQ will tell me why I should not question the integrity of this decision. I have students and fun jumpers who rely on the integrity of USPA. Please?

Charlie Gittins, 540-327-2208
AFF-I, Sigma TI, IAD-I
MEI, CFI-I, Senior Rigger
Former DZO, Blue Ridge Skydiving Adventures

[DSE 5]

  Quote

I see a formation with Purple Mike leading, and people are now saying this is a record because the guy in row 2 is leading the flock?
Everyone is flying based on the speed and angle that guy is flying...not at all flying with Mike leading, because it doesnt fit 'the grid'?

Dont know how you call it, but I call it cheating...sad to see this is what its coming to.

I's a cheat because of how it came to the judges, but...

It's the judges fault. An organizer's job is to try to get the judges to ratify. Judges are supposed to be there as the buffer between the organizer's zeal and the reality of the rules. In this case, the organizer was part and parcel in creating and proposing the rules; there can be no cry of "It was an honest mistake." I was there alongside Zach and others when these rules were implemented at the USPA Comp Committee meeting.

I don't understand how a judge could ratify a formation without;
-Seeing evidence of a pre-jump declaration of the formation (that's what happens at record events). This is *supposed* to occur between the judge and organizer before the load goes up.

-Seeing evidence of a pre-jump declaration of the "base being changed from what is common-man knowledge" and standard (a change in "standard" means the judge and formation participants are notified in advance, that there is a change in the standard).

-ratify a pre-gridded jump without scaling it themselves to test the measurement. This is where the lack of training has had its worst effect. None of the judges except perhaps Jan Meyer and Randy Connell (who have made it a point to understand wingsuit formations) are trained to understand formations as simple, yet complex as they are. Technology is required to measure wingsuit formations.

IMO, Comp Committee could do the right thing and train the judges, then have the formation re-examined. It's the honorable thing to do.
Otherwise, the participants are cheated of the honor of their accomplishment. It's tainted.


However, having been copied by USPA on a weeks worth of email exchanges related to this subject, it's apparent that being cute, having a sh**-ton of money, and a very loud voice is more important than integrity and honor.
Various wingsuiters have pleaded with USPA Comp Committee to be reasonable and take the high road. They have rejected those pleas.
Several participants knew that day, that the formation was not successful. Several FB postings prior to the ratification had comments about it being unsuccessful.

Where is Larry Bagley when we need a stand-up guy like him?

[monkycndo 0]

I am impressed. Purple Mike is so bad ass he is flying in front of the base. That either takes mad skilz or a rear facing parascope.

All hail Purple Mike.

Either that or he is actually flying his usual rock solid base and this is something to be looked into.

50 donations so far. Give it a try.

You know you want to spank it
Jump an Infinity

[fencebuster 7]

DSE:

Is it a record or not? Tell me what you say, because I don't believe I can trust the USPA in this circumstance given the previous posts. I see what i see and I see that it does not appear to meet the criteria for a record. I am not a WS, so I rely on experts in the WS field. Why is it not a record. What is USPA selling that I should not buy?

I need to be able to sell USPA to my students and fun jumpers. If there is a lack of integrity at USPA, that makes it a hard sell.

Charlie Gittins, 540-327-2208
AFF-I, Sigma TI, IAD-I
MEI, CFI-I, Senior Rigger
Former DZO, Blue Ridge Skydiving Adventures

[DSE 5]

  Quote

DSE:

Is it a record or not? Tell me what you say, because I don't believe I can trust the USPA in this circumstance given the previous posts. I see what i see and I see that it does not appear to meet the criteria for a record. I am not a WS, so I rely on experts in the WS field. Why is it not a record. What is USPA selling that I should not buy?

I need to be able to sell USPA to my students and fun jumpers. If there is a lack of integrity at USPA, that makes it a hard sell.

Not being a USPA judge, it is not my place to declare it is/is not a record.
I cannot make it scale.
No one else can make it scale without violating the rules both in spirit and letter. That's why this was brought to the attention of the USPA Director of Competitions and the USPA Competition Committee last week.

Record events are not competitions; they are achievements. "Creative strategy" should never enter the conversation.

[kallend 2,106]

Perhaps there is a need for a method of verifying a formation that does not constrain the formation design to having 90 degree corners, and is not dependent on the height of just one person.

I know just such a method.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[piisfish 140]

it is a pretty nice formation, grid or not grid.

I would prefer it to be tighter. I find it more difficult to fly with such big distances between people

could this thread be also discussed in the wingsuit forum ?

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[mccordia 74]

  Quote

Perhaps there is a need for a method of verifying a formation that does not constrain the formation design to having 90 degree corners, and is not dependent on the height of just one person.

I know just such a method.

+1, like, kuddos and all of that

Single point measurement (no body size)

Round radius...a square one doesnt make sense

Here is a write up for IPC: http://flylikebrick.com/images/ipc_presentation/IPC_circle_system.pdf

Jonathan Taggle was also in favour of this system
Within IPC. Hope stuff like this shows that there are more honest, less interpative ways of judging.

And we'll ignore the fact that the position and lens of the cameraman is what really makes or breaks a formation as a record

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[kallend 2,106]

  Quote

  Quote

Perhaps there is a need for a method of verifying a formation that does not constrain the formation design to having 90 degree corners, and is not dependent on the height of just one person.

I know just such a method.

+1, like, kuddos and all of that

Single point measurement (no body size)

Round radius...a square one doesnt make sense

Here is a write up for IPC: http://flylikebrick.com/images/ipc_presentation/IPC_circle_system.pdf

Jonathan Taggle was also in favour of this system
Within IPC. Hope stuff like this shows that there are more honest, less interpative ways of judging.

And we'll ignore the fact that the position and lens of the cameraman is what really makes or breaks a formation as a record

Hey, I recognize a lot of that

Lens correction is easy. Position correction less easy but do-able.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[SuperGirl 0]

  Quote

it is a pretty nice formation, grid or not grid.

fully agreed, a lot of the summerfest formations looked totally beautiful and the spirit of the whole group was great as well.
the grid may or may not be the greatest solution... oh, here comes the debate again... last time we tried, it was a ton of horseshit flying around... if only we could be civil about it :)

and Kallend does hit the nail on the head with there being great alternative systems of measuring this

  Quote

I would prefer it to be tighter. I find it more difficult to fly with such big distances between people

totally with you on that, bro!
though... it's interesting... some claim that more spread out dampens out the waves in the formation and allows for better alignment. I think that's more a question of the skill level involved, and that really good flyers can do this fine with tight spacing anyway.

  Quote

could this thread be also discussed in the wingsuit forum ?

the wingsuit forum these days is just a dumping ground for political bullshit and snide remarks.
it is not just a question for wingsuiters, it is addressed to the whole skydiving community, because the USPA's actions are being called into question, and the USPA is not just a wingsuiters' organization.

and as someone who was at summerfest... sadly I did not get to jump on this one cause it was during the weekdays when I was working and being a dork the whole time... but pretty sure Purple Mike (who is well known as the most solid base flyer in the whole world) was flying base on all the attempts... I know everyone was putting in a lot of effort and a lot of great teamwork was involved, and a beautiful formation resulted that felt worthy of being called a record... and it's nice to inspire people and get them to celebrate an achievement and all that... but.. fuck! if you're gonna push for rules being official, you gotta then stick by the rules! This is perfect proof of why we are still not matured enough as a discipline, and have plenty of research left to do before we should be calling anything official and pushing for worldwide acceptance. While all of that is great and the efforts are deeply appreciated, it is things like these that show how far we still are from, say, what the freeflyers are doing...

As usual, there's too much drama in wingsuiting and most people (in this case even some at the uspa level) want to shove the dirt under the rug and pretend nothing's happening... cause it does become really tiring to deal with it all... still no excuse though.

[popsjumper 2]

"... it's apparent that being cute, having a sh**-ton of money, and a very loud voice is more important than integrity and honor. "


As if that has never happened before.


Integrity is a lost art these days and USPA, in some cases, is no exception.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[5.samadhi 0]

why not fly the no-contact formations for fun and fly the contact formations (docked) for fun+record.

problem solved...man up.

[DSE 5]

  Quote

Perhaps there is a need for a method of verifying a formation that does not constrain the formation design to having 90 degree corners, and is not dependent on the height of just one person.

I know just such a method.

You amongst others saw this coming at some level. I'm not surenanyone expected to be packaged in a cheat. The "snowflake" method via software was used to measure the most amazing Russian record, as the grid was too large and the formation flown too skillfully to be measured by USPA standards.

This issue goes far beyond wingsuit drama; it illustrates the Comp Committee's willingness and intention to creatively interpret rules. IF the Committee will do it once, they'll find it easier the next time. This is one aspect of skydiving where absolute trust is necessary. If a hjudge isn't current and hasn't been trained, they should not have the opportunity to judge an event.
If they do judge an event in error, then it is incumbent on the committee that oversees judges, to send the error back to either a trained judge or train the judge in question, then revisit the questioned record.
My exact words to committee earlier this week; "I implore you to revisit this."
Perhaps they thought I meant "ignore." This wouldn't likely be public had USPA Comp not sent an email saying "there is nothing wrong here."

I can accept that USPA will ignore superior, more flexible, more simple methods of judging. Can the membership accept them allowing creative interpretations of SCM rules?

[mccordia 74]

  Quote

why not fly the no-contact formations for fun and fly the contact formations (docked) for fun+record.

problem solved...man up.

+1

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[NWFlyer 2]

  Quote

it illustrates the Comp Committee's willingness and intention to creatively interpret rules.

Of course, at the very same event, there was a very strict interpretation of the rules for the head-down record (thus the 142-way Guinness record and the 138-way US/IL record). So the question becomes; is it the judges? Is it the clarity of the criteria (and potentially related, the training of judges on applying that criteria)? Is it a vast conspiracy on the part of the comp committee? I don't actually know the answer but seeing how strict the head-down judging was shows that judging can and does go both ways; sometimes in favor of the organizers, sometimes against them.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[MakeItHappen 15]

  Quote

If they do judge an event in error, then it is incumbent on the committee that oversees judges, to send the error back to either a trained judge or train the judge in question, then revisit the questioned record.

Actually, the proper way to oversee this is with a jury system.
There is an already existing jury system in place.

I have contacted the USPA President, among others, about this.
I hope to hear by the end of today that an impartial jury will be convened to re-assess the validity of the record in question.

Oh and BTW, if anyone is interested in participating in a prototype WS judge rating program on Sept 15 & 16 at Perris, please let me know. This would be based on the current grid rules of USPA.
Email me at Aerosoftware_AT_MakeItHappen.com for details and required equipment and experience.

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[kallend 2,106]

  Quote

Oh and BTW, if anyone is interested in participating in a prototype WS judge rating program on Sept 15 & 16 at Perris, please let me know. This would be based on the current grid rules of USPA.
Email me at Aerosoftware_AT_MakeItHappen.com for details and required equipment and experience.

.

Thank you for the effort, Jan, but I view this as training people how to arrange deck chairs on a ship heading for an iceberg. There is a fundamental flaw in the current judging protocol that has nothing to do with the way judges interpret it; the reasons have been discussed at length already.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,106]

  Quote

  Quote

it illustrates the Comp Committee's willingness and intention to creatively interpret rules.

Of course, at the very same event, there was a very strict interpretation of the rules for the head-down record (thus the 142-way Guinness record and the 138-way US/IL record). So the question becomes; is it the judges? Is it the clarity of the criteria (and potentially related, the training of judges on applying that criteria)? Is it a vast conspiracy on the part of the comp committee? I don't actually know the answer but seeing how strict the head-down judging was shows that judging can and does go both ways; sometimes in favor of the organizers, sometimes against them.

And I would expect a Formula 1 car race to be officiated rather more strictly than a local soap box derby.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[pms07 3]

  Quote

I see a formation with Purple Mike leading, and people are now saying this is a record because the guy in row 2 is leading the flock?
Everyone is flying based on the speed and angle that guy is flying...not at all flying with Mike leading, because it doesnt fit 'the grid'?

Dont know how you call it, but I call it cheating...sad to see this is what its coming to.

First, if something submitted to USPA for a record was not correct or follow the standards, it needs to be corrected. If there are concerns then JM's idea about using the jury system like we do at Nationals seems a reasonable suggestion.

Second, who said "the guy in row 2 is leading the flock"? There is only one "guy" in row 2 and he doesn''t recall anything other than PM leading...

[kallend 2,106]

  Quote

  Quote

I see a formation with Purple Mike leading, and people are now saying this is a record because the guy in row 2 is leading the flock?
Everyone is flying based on the speed and angle that guy is flying...not at all flying with Mike leading, because it doesnt fit 'the grid'?

Dont know how you call it, but I call it cheating...sad to see this is what its coming to.

First, if something submitted to USPA for a record was not correct or follow the standards, it needs to be corrected. If there are concerns then JM's idea about using the jury system like we do at Nationals seems a reasonable suggestion.

Second, who said "the guy in row 2 is leading the flock"? There is only one "guy" in row 2 and he doesn''t recall anything other than PM leading...

All that is being done is to repeatedly point out shortcomings of the USPA's judging system. Where is "base" defined in the rules? As far as I can see, it isn't defined at all.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mccordia 74]

  Quote

Where is "base" defined in the rules? As far as I can see, it isn't defined at all.

From https://wingsuitworldrecord.com/faq/how

There are many mentions of the base in the 'how to' section.
All of them include pointing to the person in front leading (and people in rows further back defined as secondairy etc base), as well as talking about the person who sets the attitude, speed and pace in a flock.

This is not about showing shortcomings in the system. Its about formations being judged according to a system, measured on the base. And suddenly afterward saying the front person wasnt leading, but the person in row two was.

Regardless of where it's defined who has to be the base (again, it CAN be the person in row 2). But its about pre-defining that person. And not changing it after the jump.

You honestly believe Mike was flying IN FRONT of the person leading, and he was not base for that flock? Answer that one question, instead of juggling around the answer with one liners and diffusion.

Its not about defining who the base is via the rules, anyone can be base. We have done formations like these where there was a more complex structure in who flew where.

But the key in ALL formations is, the base has to be selected beforehand. And if you REALLY want to pretend to be a total idiot and act like you dont know who is leading the formation in that photo as a base...than you're as big a liar/cheater as the person who dared submit that formation as a record.

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[usedtajump 1]

God, life must be pure Hell for anybody that this is a big deal to. Believe me, there are much more profound, life changing/threatening issues happening to people right fucking now, in the real world, to care about this minutia.

The older I get the less I care who I piss off.

[mccordia 74]

  Quote

God, life must be pure Hell for anybody that this is a big deal to. Believe me, there are much more profound, life changing/threatening issues happening to people right fucking now, in the real world, to care about this minutia.

yea..damn that honesty thing...
Are you also stealing cars because elsewhere people have cancer and thats a much more worrying thing?

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?