>>I was just using the box rule as apointer to the fact the boats evolve and so that they get faster, so making a moving target the focal point does not appear correct to me.
I do understand that however, there are other factors as that keeping adding points to the F18 choice. It is like choicing a car. It is wrong to only look at the retail price. Before deciding to buy one you also look at things like fuel efficiency, availability of spare parts, and the cost of them, Ensurreance cost, the amount that particular drops in value each year, etc. One particular care beat all others in one aspect BUT fail to convince in the others. Such a car will not be bought often.
It is the same with the reference benchmark. You look at only one issue not at the framework of several different issues. I invited you to do the last and determine how you think the Dart 18, Dart 15 and H5.9 classes stake up to the F18 class ?
In addition to that ; there is one very important thing in choicing a reference class. It must provide a large basis from which the take data and gain insight. We all know and race agains F18's. Currently there is not a single design that doens't race against F18's in a handicapped fleet in the world. If we were to choice the Dart 15 than how would we gether data on the Taipan 4.9 for example. I have never seen a Dart 15 ever race against a Taipan 4.9. Actually same applies to the Dart 18 and H5.9. This single issue alone makes a choice for these classes as a reference class unattractive. More strongly I think the original 100 rating class, the Tornado, is to thinly spread to act as a good reference class. There is simply not enough dependendable tornado crews around to gether data on all other design. Again how to rate US designed boats like the Isotope when it is rare to see tornado's racing in US events. And if they do than the comparison of the Tornado crew can not be averaged out of the Tornado fleet making comparions very dependent on the particular ability of that single crew. THIS caused larger errors than say a benchmark fleet of 5 to 10 F18's where the average F18 performance can easily be determined by averaging the F18 results of the first halve. Sure their will be differences between the individual F18's but these are quickly reduced to neglectable amounts by grouping their data. Then we are only left to investigate the crew ability of the crew sailing the rare, Isotope, Taipan, F18HT or other boat.
Again there are more considerations like discarting the need to do corrected time math on arguable the largest fleet in all handicap fleets (F18's) but the above reason alone itself places he D15, D18 and H5.9 low on the list.
Dart 18, Dart 15 and H5.9 are simply to small as a class to act as reference classes. Furthermore only the Dart 18 has some international presence but only in Europe. Then of course the Dart 18 production will be discontinued in 2005 and it is badly situated in relation to other classes. Why use dart 18 as a reference when this design makes up less than 5 % of the fleet in all European regatta's with the possible exception of UK events. You will only get very very limited comparison data this way.
>>Does it matter that there are only 8000 Dart 18's and 2000 Dart 15's (approx) in the country. OK, if you don't like the Dart, use the Nacra 5.0, 5.5, 5.8 and 6 ?
No it does not matter. And the same counterarguments can be had against the N5.0, n5.5 and others. There are simply not enough of them racing internationally. Also the skill included in these classes is way below the level in the F18 class at this time. over 100.000 were build of the Hobie 16 but even that is not a good benchmark when looking at all considerations. It's participation on open class handicap racing is declining and the setup is too much dissimilar to the modern designs that you will hand yourself an awkward benchmark. It is more and more becoming a class for recreational sailors and it is not even the largest class anymore in events like Texel. Well, at least not in the way the F18 class is. I know this can be a hard pill to swallow down, but this is not a contest of which class has the most tradition or deserves to become the reference class for reasons of history. This is a contest of which class satisfies the most demands that are linked to being a reference class and does so for at least the next 10 years.
>>The dart 18 is not being discontinued and neither is the Dart 15. The Dart 15 Class association in the UK now 'own' the designa and the boat is being re-named as the laser centre no longer have involvement. The D15 will be made in Sought Africa starting sometine in 2005.
Okay, I have my info and without being disrespectful I find signs that the Dart 18 class is being reduced in importance. Prindle 16 classes and others like the Nacra 5.5 and Nacra 6.0 already went down that route and there classes have been disbanded. In effect there are no active Dart 18 classes in the USA, Aus and Asia while there are active F18 classes there. If this is to be an international rating system than surely we must find a reference class with an international presence.
Again I wish to underline that I mean nothing disrespectful by any of these comments, it is just that in a broad spectrum a choice for the F18 seems to be strongly favored over the named alternatives. Thank you for your comments.
Wouter
