Mike how did you even remotely put together that I'm ok with DPN? I'm saying exacly the opposite and Jakes data shows there is significant differences between SCHRS and DPN so I'm even more motivated to either dump DPN outright or adjust it based on the numbers used in europe. But thanks for taking the issue seriously.

Well, at least now i know what you folks at the pointy end of the fleet(s) talk about.

Back in the middle-DFL group, we ponder such questions as:

"how did that spinnaker get launched upside down (BK)"
"Why is the C-gate over there?"
"the bunny goes out the hole, around the tree, and back down?"

But, should a handicap system base their numbers on the theoretical perfect race for each design? In which case polars (both wind and sea-state) would be the only real data. Actual race data factors in human performance which varies widely.

BWHWHAHAHA

Thanks Jay.. that brought be back.

Here is a thought. Use the Multihull Committee of US Sailing as the vehicle to "validate" the multihull numbers and tell the Portsmouth committee to use them. In the meantime, the races and race committees can use the numbers develop for our races. As a race committee person I can tell you if the sailors agree to the rating used for their boats, then I would have no problem running that race.
I can tell you I have big problems with "data" selected from "races".
Here is my problem from race results. A) I have rarely raced in a sailboat race where the wind was consistent. Either direction or speed always changed. All of the rating systems make that a central assumption. This makes rating boat accurately almost impossible. In a fleet of 10 one design boats there can be a 30 minute difference between the first boat and the last boat. Is the first boat get used for the "correct" rating? Now we have one Hobie 16 racing some other boats and he gets his data uses as if he was first. Was the sailor of that H16 of the same level as the sailor of the 1st one design sailor or the last? This is how results get loaded and it leads to a lot of variance and then we are into the land of false belief.
Thoughts?

I already posted my thoughts, I like math, because math don't care about who's a better skipper, who flipped, who had weeds, who got the best start, who overstood, or any of the 100 other things that happen out on the race course, as you pointed out above.

We are trying to figure out a way to accurately compare one type of boat to another type of boat. The only 'fair' way you can do that is to take the subjective human performance factor out of the equation. Measure the boats, weigh the boats, measure the sail area, and do the math.

As I said earlier, I'm sure there are many real, educated, licensed marine engineers like Morelli/Melvin that have the secret formulas already loaded in their computers, and they can tell you exactly how fast each boat should be, once you input the numbers for weight, sail area, hull length, board depth, etc.

They probably already have formulas developed for foiling too... but they may want to tweak that one after their G4 Splash down!

Worked out fine for me.Podium finishes the ONLY two times I SAILED (not even raced) the boat.You might need to quit fabricating BS to propagate your gimme number. 3rd in the Steeplechase ,first time on the boat and 3rd in the Fl.300 in class, 2nd time on the boat.All with a rudder system that was like sailing a H-16 with the cams flipped(ask my world class crew about that) and almost whipped your butt with it like that. Either you suck or the number is suspect.
As far as JC's vs. F-20c number, who were you crying about in the Miami/KL race? Who rebutted with he didn't care what the number was?
I was just trying to make it simple for you because you seem to be MORE easily confused these days. I guess that's to be expected, with the age and all. Don't worry I'll bring you some prune juice ( and maybe some Rum) when you're in the home.I just hope you can remember me.

Kaos


Sorry, Your conclusion is wrong.
Most classes are more or less linear as the wind speed picks up. a Single number is fine... The subset of catamarans are more non linear then displacement monos. Foilers are extremely non linear.
Handicaping is possible although the Precision of handicap racing is NOT close to One design Racing in determining the best sailed boat...

The solution to handicapping increasing non linear performance is to use ratings based on the wind.... However... this adds complexity to running a race and both sailors and race committees have proven over the years to just not like using multiple handicap numbers. Point is... a solution is EASILY available in either measurement or Portsmouth type handicaping systems..

The ACCURACY of a ratings table is arguable... See my point to Mike... It is a freakin UNICORN.... See Jake's example... and the debate in the bar will close it down... AND it will be debatable forever...

So... now you need a consensus and a governing authority to end the debate.



In portsmouth... YES this is the ONLY data point used in updating the tables (IF other conditions are met as well).

The Ginormous point is.... the 9 other boats ARE sailing to a rating.... Most of the time, even the second place boat is NOT even close to sailing to their published rating.... So you are really hairsplitting when you compare Portsmouth to SCHRS.... Why is this so... Because its the nature of sailboat racing... clear air is KING! Starboard trumps PORT... so you can add 10 seconds for the tack. and so on..

Bottom line... handicap will not have the precision of one design racing. Accuracy is a unicorn.... So, We agree on a mechanism to handicap and have the system sanctioned. They win... you are second, I am third. Enjoy life!



You have identified the achilles heel of PORTSMOUTH handicaping. The foundational assumption is that the Hobie 16 first boat is as well sailed as the F18 first place boat. Large numbers of races between these two classes take care of this sailor difference... I defy you to list 100 races conducted anywhere in the country for a W/L race between a Hobie 16 and a F18.... much less finding 100 races between two evenly matched helms or as the system was designed TWO FLEETS Hobie 16s and F18s racing each other for 100 races (You don't want a Randy Smythe personal handicap rating...) This is why Portsmouth has become Portsmouth/PHRF.

There is NO TRANSPARENCY in the PN tables constructed from this years data given the facts on the water in North American Sail boat racing..

MEASUREMENT systems.. (SCHRS or TExel or HPR or IRC for big boats) Don't have this issue.... they create the formula, PUBLISH the formula, apply it to a class's measurements and then see how the rating matches actual performance results.... looking at the entire FLEET of designs..... (eg... we look at pin head mains... on Hobie 16s and Prindle 16s and compare the PIN head factor to boats that use square tops... and so on..) You adjust the factors to fit valid data sets.... and work the problem year after year.

When you get tired of racing in two boat one design fleets... Handicap racing is an alternative. (you probably can count and figure out your one design result) I make the case that SCHRS is a Fair and transparent system....

Form a consensus around one table or the other and ask for official sanction.... OA's will happily do what an organized body of sailors asks for... (they don't care... they want the max fun factor for their event) They can't listen to whinny bitches moaning abut the XXX rating....

Obviously, you're not happy. I was actually referring to Jake's post.

I was trying to add some levity. It's pretty obvious that I've been taking this seriously throughout the thread.

Kaos: We (MHC) don't get to "tell" the PN committee what to do, we can only advise/recommend.

We CAN push for a different system, just as soon as someone presents a real proposal (no Mark, none of your countless posts here equal a solid proposal worthy of presenting to the board).

Mike

Mike

You won't be getting a proposal from me either... This one is not a top down initiative...

The only people who write NORs are the Yacht Clubs and Catamaran Clubs) AND the national class associations for their sailors... (Obviously the class association is about one design.. however... they could play a role in advising their sailors.)

Once the sailors have proactively chosen... US Sailing could sanction the choice. How is a good question tho... Once upon a time... all of the Alter cup qualifiers used the officially sanctioned Portsmouth system... Most clubs followed suit..
There is no bell cow today... More the point... SCHRS is sanctioned by ISAF... Not a pissant insignificant organization so... SCHRS has all of the clout you need.

Bottom line, Sailors need to take a look and choose. Cyber would love for things to be simple... but he really should just poll his racers and see if they have paid enough attention to make an informed choice.
The PN system simply cannot work in this day and age. its done... Again... Just publish a link to race results where a N17 is racing buoys against F18's and Hobie 16s...in the last 3 years.... that is how you get a portsmouth N17 rating... You can make up numbers aka PHRF for the boat... but it will NEVER have enough data. How about links to a Marstrom 20 racing buoys... that boat has been racing in the states for 10 years... Bet you don't find 100 qualified data points. Mind you... a fleet of 2 boats is silly to speak of it as a class.

Portsmouth is done... not because of the committee... rather there is NO qualified data being generated.

Sailors just have to choose.

Bottom line looks like most agree PN is not working very well. So we either fix it or change to a different system.
The MHC can have more impact that you may think. Our biggest problem is getting this group to agree on anything. The second biggest problem is getting this group to actually get behind something and push it. As individuals we have all banged our head against US Sailing and have decided we have better things to do with our time. As a group though there are ways to get stuff accomplished.
There is a reality with US Sailing and organizations running races, it is that US Sailing can only recommend too. We as race organizers can do anything we want. Just need to have the Notice of Race properly competed to notify all of the racers of the organizers intentions. What rating system will be used, even what rates for each boat will be used. Then the racers can decide whether to race in that race or not. We can then tell the PN committee this is the way it is going to be and either they join in or go play by themselves. It they chose to be irrelevant then so be it.
So if Cyber wants to set the ratings for the Race and the sailors agree to race to those ratings, who cares what the Portsmouth committee does or does not do?
At one of our Clubs we actually did that for a regatta. We had a breakfast where all of the racers as a group decided what every boat's rating would be for the race. Those that were known to be new sailors got their ratings "helped". Experienced sailors with the better boats got their ratings lowered. The result of the race was actually the same. However, all of the sailors felt that the race was at least more fair than before. Even with playing with the ratings the results were not even close (it did not matter is the reality)
Sailing is on a very big decline. Trying to get a new sailor into a catamaran and have them "compete" is almost laughable at this point. A) they will need years of experience to catch up with ability for starters. Second if they buy the wrong boat with a poor rating they can't compete even if they became "good".
Then we ask ourselves why no one wants to get into sailing?

How about no handicap? Run what you brung?

No, I don't think most agree that PN doesn't work. It has limitations on how well/fast it can issue numbers for new designs; otherwise, it's as good (or bad) as any other system.

Most people complain when they lose a race and blame the number (doesn't matter what system is used, BTW). No one remembers their horrible start, blowing tacks, sailing on the unfavored side of the course, etc.

Sitting around coming up with personal handicaps sounds worse than regional PHRF ratings in terms of big-picture fairness and sustainability; but if it gets people on the water, and everyone is happy, I'd call that a win.

WE are US Sailing. It's been said in this thread (and others): join, show up and make a difference. Have a better idea? Propose it, but don't expect someone else to own it.

Mike

Mike its BROKEN.... facts on the ground make it so.

The system is BROKEN when it simply can't turn the crank as it did 20 years ago and generate a current table.

It is broken when the underyling assumptions are no longer valid.

Assumption...
Boats contributing to the rating are in "racing shape" with "racing sails"
All of the boats in the dead boat society probably have dead sails and are not in racing shape. Reporting the results for you 25 year old prindle 16 with sunrise sails vintage 1984 won't help! BUT... the system includes these data and the the prindle 16 gets Slower over time... Really? IT IS BROKEN!

Assumption, Boats are actively racing in ONE Design Fleets AND they race in a handicap race to contribute to the data...

Fact of life... ONLY Hobie 14s, 16s, 17s, 18s, 20s, F18s F16s, Nacra 17s, A cats and Isotopes can make this claim.... (They hold a Nationals each year)

The rest of the ratings table should be FIXED in concrete but then you would have to declare the PN system BROKEN...... because now you are using PHRF discretion to set the ratings by freezing the dead boat society.

The active one design sailors rarely if ever compete in handicap... (Dave would rather poke out his eye then race handicap) so... the assumption that the top of the class racers SAILING THE BOAT to its max contributes to the rating is not valid... The SYSTEM is broken.

You also need a fleet of boats racing handicap... So... are two boats a fleet (M20).... is one boat a fleet (CFR20)... How many Nacra carbon 20s are racing? I think of a fleet as 10 boats... So did the PN committe years and years ago.

The reason is.... you don't want to have a class rating determined by one single individual. (it is his personal rating...)

Finally, you need valid data ie WL races with enough bench mark boats racing as a fleet eg more then one ..... to compare the hot new boat performance.. which also should be sailing as a fleet.

We simply don't have that much of this kind of racing anymore.

Portsmouth is dead! the 21st century killed it. It is most certainly broken.

Now... can you make up ratings and add them to the PN table using PHRF... Absolutely... but that is not Portsmouth.... that is a PHRF table for beach cats.

The PN committe can't make up data... and they understandably don't want to go down the PHRF rabbit hole... So... they drag their feet and wait till the multihull world generates a fleet of Flying Tigers who go handicap racing against Hobie 16s.. That is known as waiting for hell to freeze over.

Kaos restates my point... Sailors tell the OA what they want to race under... If you pick SCHRS... you get a sanctioned handicap system. If you pick Portsmouth/PHRF... you get a sanctioned rating system... If you just know that the N17 rating should be XXX then you get the Portsmouth/Phrf/ Race to nowehere rating system..

The difference is transparency!

There is NOTHING for US Sailing to do here..

If US Sailing wanted to help... they could kick in some money to have USA based ISAF certified measurers get the numbers for unique USA only designs and expand the table to boats unique to the North American market... EG Hobie 20s... Supercat 22s and so on.

With a budget of zero... the MHC probably is not a player here.

I won't write that proposal to US Sailing until I have more widespread adoption of SCHRS for handicap racing in the states.

I basically disagree with all of your points except the last one.

That, and the fact that most of us would rather stay home than race under handicap, except for specific events (distance, charity, etc.).

There's an idea...

Mike

someone remind my senile brain... Handicap for most of us is a time-on-distance thing, right?

So if I have a PHRF of 87 and the boat next to me has a PHRF of 80, he has to sail more 7 seconds per mile faster than me to place ahead of me on corrected time?

And if he is sailing 6.0 knots my target speed (assuming we sail exactly the same distance) would be 5.5 knots (my PHRF is 8.75% slower so 6.0 kts x 91.25% = 5.47 kts)? And this would give us an identical corrected time?

So then, if I can achieve my target speed successfully around the course, my mad sailing skilz would focus on sailing a shorter distance and having smoother transitions (up/down) than my faster PHRF competitor?

That's pretty much it.

It sounds so easy, then. Just find a way to slow him down

This is not NASCAR.

speak for yourself... You've seen me sail, right?

It's not that I'm doing it on purpose, but the cluster-f$k around the marks has everyone scattering around me. Apparently shrimping a spin is slow? Jeeze you think I'd get THAT memo....

PHRF time on distance is the most popular version of PHRF Some areas use PHRF time on time.... which is analogous to SCHRS, TEXEL or Portsmouth. In handicap racing... you race the clock... not your opponents... slowing down one boat will lose the fleet in a heartbeat. Clearing you air is paramount versus covering an opponent.

The point about applying PHRF principals to Portsmouth ratings is the idea that a committee, makes their best guess as to a fair rating for your boat. Of course, this is always tough for a one off boat in a particular PHRF region and/or when the types of racing vary (reachy point to point versus windward leeward courses or regions with strong currents). The PHRF/Portsmouth Committee is well intentioned but by definition... not transparent. Key West Race week runs Handicap racing... and owners with million dollar boat go down and race... So, you can get a reasonable amount of buy in for a PHRF rating. At Key west... authority trumps transparency.

Pick your poison....Transparency is really important for racer buy in and support.... especially for sailors who are predisposed to "screw the man.... we are different" points of view.