The Haught Corner
"Second place is the first loser! Why would you want a trophy for that?"
This quote is from a recent Letter to the Editor that discussed various aspects of the Nats, including the number of trophies awarded. The remark was made by the writer's 10‑year‑old son, and I was both surprised and saddened by it.
But even more surprising was the writer's comment that his son's remark "made a lot of sense."
Is this what we're coming to in competition flying? That it's an all‑or‑nothing situation? I certainly hope not.
I have flown in hundreds of contests across the country at all levels of competition. I've been fortunate to achieve a measure of success along the way. But there are many times that I have finished second or third (or "out of the money" altogether) and felt quite good about my performance.
Since the writer specifically addressed the Nats, let me remark on some of my own Nats experiences:
The first Nats I placed in was 1966, with fifth‑place finishes in two events in the Junior age class. I was proud to have won something at a Nats, regardless of whether it was a first place or fifth.
In 1970 I won a Nats event for the first time, and yes, it felt really special. I had to overcome some adversity to do so, but persistence paid off that day at Glenview.
But there were a number of other times that I turned in personal bests in various events, yet didn't win. I didn't feel like a loser because I may have placed second; I did the best I could, and someone else was just better that day.
I remember in 1974 when a group of us formed a Nats team and declared Indoor HLG as a team‑score event. We went out and had fun flying, without regard to anything except putting flights up to help the team. We were shocked to find that we placed second, third, and fourth in the event! We had a great time, and still did well. Losers? I don't think so!
Check out Bill Hager's NMPRA Championship Race report in this issue. Bill finished third in a tight battle with other competitors; yet when I talked to him recently about the contest, he said, "I still haven't come down yet." He had the contest of his life—flew some tremendous races—and was "on cloud nine" about the result. This from a guy who is a tough, intense competitor; one who usually measures results by wins, not third‑place finishes.
The level and quality of competition is a factor here, of course. I doubt that Bill would have the same reaction about placing third in a local contest, but third best in the country carries a bit more weight. And why not?
The joy Bill got from flying well—not winning, but flying well—came through loud and clear. Perhaps that's what all of us should remember: whether you fly for sport or competition, the only time you are a loser is when you are not enjoying yourself.
"The only time you are a loser is when you are not enjoying yourself."
The Sizzle or the Steak?
The SAM Champs report in this issue is a bit of an experiment. As I was reviewing my notes from the contest, it occurred to me that a publication like SAM Speaks could easily beat us to the punch with a full contest report. With planning and lead times what they are, this is almost unavoidable.
I wanted to try a report that concentrated less on the "hard news" of the contest—though we do have results in "Focus on Competition"—and use more photos than normal. I gave a bit of background on the event, hit a few high spots, and took more of a photo‑story approach.
I would appreciate feedback as to whether this is a better or worse way of contest reporting. Should we go for the nuts‑and‑bolts aspects, or try to capture the flavor of these events in photographs?
And speaking of contest reports, Bob Underwood has asked that we give special credit to his wife Rae and daughter Anne, who took the photographs that accompanied Bob's Scale World Championships report in the February issue. With his double duty as manager for both the control line and radio control teams there was little opportunity for photography, so the help was especially appreciated.
Thanks to everyone who has called or written concerning our special youth/beginner issue (January 1995). We have received many compliments on its content, along with suggestions for future topics. We appreciate everyone's input, and we are giving serious consideration to repeating this theme in the future. It's gratifying to know that, for the most part, it appears that we "did the right thing."
We Have Met the Enemy
In my last "FF Duration" column a couple of years ago, I expressed a desire to upgrade the quality of FF material presented in MA. I have contacted a number of authors capable of presenting some fine material.
But obtaining finished material has been a problem. We have commitments from at least four authors to produce what should be some excellent construction articles, but we have yet to see completed manuscripts, plans, or photos.
From time to time there have been complaints about FF coverage in the national media, but a look in the mirror might be in order here. Or perhaps (to butcher a famous quote) "we have met the enemy, and they are us."
A Year Later
This marks the completion of a year's worth of "Haught Corner" columns (and they said it would never last!). It's been an interesting trip so far. My thanks to all who have phoned or written with comment—pro or con. The praise is flattering, but the criticism is just as important.
I value the comments of those who disagree with opinions expressed in this space. We don't have to agree, though that would be nice ("everyone is entitled to my opinion!"); rational discussion of differing views can be enlightening to all.
Jim Haught Managing Editor
March 1995
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
