posted Jan 31st, 2008 - The NSL News posted several previews of this year's IPC meeting (International Parachuting Commission) in Paris, France, beginning with an overview on 19 December 2007 (Archives > 2007 > News > search for "IPC"). The first story explained the plans of a slight modification for Block 13 (Hammer - Hammer). The follow-up story next day introduced the topic of half-speed judging.

The meeting was held last week and was concluded on Sunday, January 27. The NSL News received a few live updates during the meeting, which indicated that there was a controversial discussion as of both topics. Result of this discussion is the fact that nothing has been changed. Block 13 remains exactly the way it is, and half-speed judging will not be introduced and applied in 2008.

A document with the changes that were made in Paris last week has already been sent out and shows just a few modifications of the current set of IPC rules. The dive pool remains exactly the same, and the basics of the judging procedure are also unchanged.

The meet directors of future FAI competitions will have a more precise definition how to deal with bad weather and how to change jump altitude and working time. They will also have on hand a better definition of the tie-breaking round.

The updated IPC rules will also include a clarification "how freeze frame and centrepoints are assessed". In both cases (3.3.5 Performance Requirements and 5.5 Judging), the IPC Committee for Formation Skydiving introduced new language: "two dimensional video evidence".

Freeze frame and centrepoints "will be assessed using only the two dimensional video evidence". The reason why the new language has been introduced at the IPC meeting and the actual meaning of "two dimensional video evidence" is unknown to the NSL News. The final version of the official 2008 rules may provide more insights.

Block 13 (Hammer - Hammer) and half-speed judging were discussed in length. Block 13 became subject of a possible adjustment due to the special attention that judging of the maneuver requires. Both single flyers have to turn in opposite directions, determined by the direction of the point, who has to turn away from the center of the formation. The tail has to turn the opposite direction, while the 2-way cat can turn either direction.

It is somehow challenging to check the correct execution of the block maneuver, especially if the formation is built mirror-imaged. Mistakes were made in the past and remained undetected in some occasions. There was an easy solution to the problem that was suggested by committee members prior to the meeting.

Only the arrow of the tail's 270' maneuver needed to be removed or changed into an arrow indicating either turning direction. The tail would still have to complete a 270' turn, and the judges would not have to check the direction of the turn any longer. The point of the second Hammer would then face either direction.

The FS Committee did not like this solution, as it may interfere with the traditional understanding and definition of mirror-imaged formations and maneuvers (3.3.3 Performance Requirements). Block 13 remains unchanged, and the judges have to give this block the same special attention.

The discussion of half-speed judging has been very controversial ever since it was brought up officially by the French IPC delegation, as the NSL News reported on 20 December 2007. The discussion continued in Paris last week and was as controversial as before. The result was similar as with Block 13 - no changes - and the discussion will continue.

The 2008 season will show how the heightened awareness of this issue will effect the scoreboards. The 4-way teams had changed their strategies how to deal with flaws when the penalty for an infringement was reduced from 2-point busts to 1-point deductions.

There has been no turning back and correcting flaws any longer on the top level of 4-way competition ever since the penalty reduction. It became more efficient for teams to move on without interruption and hope for the best or simply accept the 1-point deduction, compared to spending precious time to communicate the mistake and correct it.

Many undetected infringements were the positive results for the lucky teams, while experienced competitors were often wondering why these flaws were not punished. Half-speed judging was supposed to bring the official scores closer to the absolute truth and make it easier to find previously undetected infringements, as many teams and competitors had hoped for.

However, the opposition to half-speed judging was stronger than expected in Paris, and the judging rules remain unchanged. IPC delegates and members of the committee will probably collect more experiences and feedback throughout the 2008 season. The topic may come back to the IPC table at a later time.