<img src=
alt=
/> <img src=
alt=
/>
Works for me.
We will be 2up at Juanas.
Who knows, I wouldn't be surprised to maybe see at
least 1 more F16 at Juanas to make 5.
Portsmouth - Open Fleet uni-67.1 2up-65.2
Elasped time - 5 or more F16's in either configuration.
When do you plan to arrive?
Leaving early Friday September,7 around 5:00 or 6:00 am.
Want to get there early enough to rig, then PARTY. <img src=
alt=
/>
See you there. <img src=
alt=
/>
This discussion about ratings is very interesting. I am a volunteer on the PN committee and have been following your threads for quite some time. As y'all continue to ponder your fate, I still come to one conclusion: your ratings search will come to an end only when a true rock-star sailor is sailing the boat in the US. Right now, your class does not have a sailor of that caliber and expertise sailing the boat. While it is good to show up to events with a
class
, it will hurt your PN numbers in the long run. I suggest you guys sail in events for a year with the intent to give the PN committee data points. Oh, and I'll see some of you at Juana's
My view from the outside,
Bob <img src=
alt=
/>
Bob, you recommend sailing with the given PN (2-up or 1-up) and always sail in the Portsmouth class regardless of the number of F16 that attend ... to establish datapoints for the committee?
Common thread: use the F16U rating when appropriate, gather some data and let the system work.
Works for me. See you at 67.1.
It's a Friday night and I've probably had a couple too many. I also promised not to post under the influence but what the hell.
The U.S handicap system does appear to be favourable towards the F16 compared only to F18's but we had to start somewhere!! When more sailors start to understand that the F16 is a serious bit of kit and is competitive in all conditions you'll be lucky to catch a glimpse of our transomes. As you might be aware as you follow our posts Graham Goodall has invested a lot of money in the development of a slightly smaller F18 Capricorn (F16 Viper) so the ROCK STARS do appear to be jumping on the band wagon.
Also, having raced against Matt M I have witnessed at first hand how fast an F16 can be sailed. Therefore, whilst I'm still awake, why don't you compare your ratings with the other scoring ratings the world.
From a personal point of view I believe the Australians have the most accurate PY rating system.
Thank you Mark. I think Matt and Gina can sail with the best. Unfortunately, Team McDonald won't be there next weekend (Juana's) to exhibit their skill to Mr. Curry. Maybe Performance Race week (or whatever they call it now) in Oct.
This is my problem with the current rating system regarding F16:
The US Sailing Portsmouth Handicap rating system applies to boats that meet a SET list of CLASS RULES. If you race N20's, you'd better have all the supplied Performance Cat equipment or else you are
out of class
and take a
hit
. The F16 CLASS RULES stipulate 1-up = 2-up. Why do we have two ratings when it is one set of class rules???
That being said, if the Portsmouth rating committee determines there should be two ratings, well great. Just let us know and we WILL support it, register as separate classes and swap trophies afterward. Whatever. I just wish they would tell us something... don't leave us hanging.
Kill the F16U or tell us that it will always be there. We can adjust and support whatever they decide, but we need to know their decision. Make sense?
I am tired of this one up two up debate...
This thing is a just red herring issue.
if the race results correctly describe the configuration AND you sail the same course... The boats could be in two starts seperated by 5 minutes and it won't matter. (both ratings are off)
You need to get elapsed times for the first F18, the N20, the first F17 in the race...as well as your two F16 configurations. You can't depend on the RC to send in results that matter to you. That is your responsiblity as a new class. The last class to handle this issue was the F18HT rating.... Intiatlly given a slow rating... the class leaders collected the data, turned it in and showed that the accurate rating was quite fast. They did not depend on the RC for this or sit passivley by for years. (PS Wouter can't do it from Holland either... Lord Knows he tried)
Bob's point is that when you sail as a one design fleet and the RC is lazy... no times are taken... Net result no data.
You have to Ask, Plead, Pay off in beer... whatever to get the data collected.
Bob's other point is that you have to sail the boat to it's rating. He could ask... What current F16 sailors have ever sailed any cat to it's rating... (evidence... success in an established one design fleet where the PN rating for that class is really solid.)
Remember.. the US System is DESIGNED to adjust slowly. Even if 5 rock stars joined the fleet tommorow... the rating would adjust by 25% of the new rating. and the following year... it will adjust downward by another 25%.
YOur class has inherited a situation. The solution is to RESET the rating.
This situation is similar to the Supercat 20 TR rating. Over the years... old sails on poorly prepped boats, novice racers, generated an adjusment of rating upwards... relative to when the boat was actively raced. Eventually, The PN committe reset the rating to the accurate historical rating.
Your problem is the reverse...
My view from the outside,
Bob <img src=
alt=
/>
Interesting point. I think that is what gave the HT such a fast rating - a bunch of rock stars sailed it in the beginning.
I have thought about whether any rock stars will move to the F16 class. For some reason I think there won't be many. We have our rock stars though, but not national
rock stars.
In our races the RC takes times on everyone-fleet or not. Also, we have been enjoying the current number that way we have time to learn the boat and get good at it. (It is nice to be at top or close.) Whereas the current number does help us out quite a bit we are still in front of most if not all of the F18's without a correction. So I would say let the numbers be and in time they will be changed. Just enjoy the correction and become proficient enough to win boat for boat. Then no one can complain we beat them because of our number. As for one/two we have found the boats to be almost perfectly matched so as for the 2 numbers--enjoy. The uni guys have a lot more work by themselves and a lot can go wrong. We are stuck with the rating system we have, good or bad and the statistics just have to work through the system. Be patient and enjoy sailing a GREAT boat.
Todd,
We will be at Juanas. I plan to bring the boat over on Thursday evening and sail uni on Friday. I will be 2 up with Nicole for the race.
Chris
this makes a class eh?
Would be great if the F16s were the only class there! Maybe the N20s will have a class but probably no others. Not a lot of F18s around there for the most part unless Kirk loans a couple out.
I can see the headlines
Blades invade Juana's!!! No one is safe!
can I mention, yet again, how dissappointed I am that I won't be there?
BTW.. after this whole discussion, I am fairly certain that Juanas will not be sending any of the info to the portsmouth committee (which I guess they wouldn't now that there will be a class anyway).
I know the race committee and should be able to obtain the results/numbers for the US PN committee. This race is normally a numbers race without class breakdown.
See ya there!
Bob <img src=
alt=
/>
I personally think that having handicap numbers that are peachy is not in the interest of the class. It is also not fair to the other racing crews outthere. Afterall how do you tell A top F18 crew that they have to give over 4 minutes time to a singlehanded F16 in light winds ?
It is also bad to the sailors in the F16 class. Our goal should be to improve our own sailing skills and not dependent on a peachy rating to propel a mediocre sailor to first spot corrected. Because again, F16 crews in Europe win races on a rating that is over 4 minutes per race faster ! THAT is a HUGE difference. In an F16 class race this will put you back in the tail end of the fleet.
I also believe that we must be careful to not become the new SC20, a design everybody hates because of its ludicrously favourable handicap. I really do believe that we as the F16 class have a responsibility to other racers (Corinthian spirit and all) to make sure that our handicap is realistic. Right now it simply isn't. Handicap racing should not be about who can hustle up the most favourable handicap but rather who is the best sailor.
When we founded the F16 class we never intented it to be a handicap racer. We intended it to be a
first to the line wins
racer. I know that parts of this intent have just been removed from the F16 class rules but the fact remains that this class was never founded as anything other then that. I think it to be shameful
to hide
behind an obviously wrong handicap number for the 1-up version. That is not what I busted my butt over for 5 years, when I was creating this class.
I strongly believe that we as F16 sailors must remain a group with a
Can do
mentality. These US PN handicap numbers are a direct contradication of that. We earn respect and grow our class by doing what we set out to do, win by crossing the finishline first. At the NAM-REM race some of the leading boats commended the first F16 sailors and admitted to being impressed with the speed of these small boats. THAT grows a class in the long run. An F16 that comes in an hour later and then corrects out to 1st will impress no-one and will mostly likely only grow resentment. The latter is very bad for the class.
After having put our trust in the US PN system for 6 years already I think we must understand that doing more of the same and expecting different results is indeed a pretty accurate definition of insanity.
Peachy handicaps breeds complacement F16 sailors and discontent (disrespect) in other sailors. The wise course of action is to prevent this situation from continueing.
Wouter
quote][
Interesting point. I think that is what gave the HT such a fast rating - a bunch of rock stars sailed it in the beginning.
NO... The rock stars did NOT make the boat fast... No more then You could make a pig fly...
The F18HT is a fast boat.... Some sailors with experience were able to PROVE this point.
Fact… You PTP were not able to sail the boat to its rating.
So you finished races in the middle of the pack or worse... That’s life..
You are saying... well... I like to compete so long as my competitors carry a monkey on their back... and I have a good chance to win...
Enjoying your current Rating …. Experiencing some wins... while you learn the boat...
This is more complete crap.... You can learn the boat in your one design racing circuit. Nobody will care... they will be glad that you have a great time with your boat in your class.
However, the cruel fact is that you have no integrity if you are content to race with a rating that you in fact AGREE is off.... (not to mention the fact that the rating is 7% off the ratings used in the rest of the world)
Look...Sailboat racing is a Corinthian sport…. You call fouls on yourself… You can ask the race committee to use the F18 ratings for your F16 boat.... Just like you can ask them to use the fastest F16 rating in the table for that regatta...
the playing field will be even. You will have satisfaction of playing the Portsmouth racing game with integrity.
For determining Portsmouth ratings in the future... it won't matter!...
Your elapsed time relative to the other classes won’t change.
Send in the configuration of the boat., the elapsed times of all the first in class and a windspeed independently of the RC,
NOTE… The other recent example of a rating that was RESET is the F18 class. Initially... the F18 rating was almost the SAME as a Hobie 20... Rob Jerry who was among the first sailors campaigning the Hobie Tiger… did NOT say… wow… great rating…lets keep it there…. He did everything possible to get the rating adjusted properly.
This thing is a just red herring issue.
This is EXACTLY the point. The numbers will fix themselves over time. By rating the configurations differently, you take away the one of the best things about the F16 class - versatility.
I have not seen separate ratings for the F18 large sail plan and the F18 small sail plan - why?
Interesting point. I think that is what gave the HT such a fast rating - a bunch of rock stars sailed it in the beginning.
NO... The rock stars did NOT make the boat fast... No more then You could make a pig fly...
The F18HT is a fast boat.... Some sailors with experience were able to PROVE this point.
Fact… You PTP were not able to sail the boat to its rating.
So you finished races in the middle of the pack or worse... That’s life..
You are saying... well... I like to compete so long as my competitors carry a monkey on their back... and I have a good chance to win...
Enjoying your current Rating …. Experiencing some wins... while you learn the boat...
This is more complete crap.... You can learn the boat in your one design racing circuit. Nobody will care... they will be glad that you have a great time with your boat in your class.
However, the cruel fact is that you have no integrity if you are content to race with a rating that you in fact AGREE is off.... (not to mention the fact that the rating is 7% off the ratings used in the rest of the world)
Look...Sailboat racing is a Corinthian sport…. You call fouls on yourself… You can ask the race committee to use the F18 ratings for your F16 boat.... Just like you can ask them to use the fastest F16 rating in the table for that regatta...
the playing field will be even. You will have satisfaction of playing the Portsmouth racing game with integrity.
For determining Portsmouth ratings in the future... it won't matter!...
Your elapsed time relative to the other classes won’t change.
Send in the configuration of the boat., the elapsed times of all the first in class and a windspeed independently of the RC,
NOTE… The other recent example of a rating that was RESET is the F18 class. Initially... the F18 rating was almost the SAME as a Hobie 20... Rob Jerry who was among the first sailors campaigning the Hobie Tiger… did NOT say… wow… great rating…lets keep it there…. He did everything possible to get the rating adjusted properly.
#1] off regarding your comment about me not sailing the HT to its rating. I know that you [censored] but I sail with someone else who is a rock star on the boat. I never claimed I was sailing the boat to its max, [censored].
#3: everything else you said is exaclty our point, don't know why you are getting on our case for making our point exactly like you say.
However, the cruel fact is that you have no integrity if you are content to race with a rating that you in fact AGREE is off....
If you were paying attention, this is what we have been saying. Learn to read and all will be well.
How did the F18 sailors
reset
their number? I believe that is what we are trying to do you [censored].
Look I will say it again....
Fix themselves over time
...demonstrates your lack of integrity.
7% differences is not a small adjustment... Volunteer to race on the level playing field... report the data.
FYI,
The one up and two up rating designations are historical and the purpoe is to make life easy for the community.
The Dart 18 is the example to look at.
The class rules...state that the uni... one up and the sloop 2 up are equivalent.n (sound familiar)
Fact of the matter is... nobody sailing in light winds of the USA believe this.... So... the class rules were ignored and the PN committe for the benefit of the sailors... added the one up and two up rating. The Uni rating is very slow..
Then the Hobie 17.... added a jib... (sport)
Then the nacra 5.5 became a sloop and a uni... (with a larger stick).
So... the tradition has been to list the same boat twice when it has a signficant confiuration change. It simply makes life easy on the scorekeeper.
Currently,
EG... the Hobie FX1... is EXACTLY the same as the F16.
three configurations.
When one was dropped from the table... the ONLY US Sailor complained to have it added back....
The Taipan had SEVERAL ratings.
Uni (main only
Sloop (
Spin (all three)
F16 (all three)
F16 uni (main and spin)
REMEMBER... the Tables list the boats so that it is EASY for the RC to score a race... Its a pain in the butt to calculate corrections
So Mark, do you suggest racing uni at the two up rating of 65.2 and reporting that to Portsmouth?
What we are trying to do is just get rid of the UNI rating all together. So we can just have ONE rating of 65.2. Once this issue is resolved as a local class we can then tackle the
slow
rating. I myself cannot sail the boat to its rating, but I want to be as fair as possible to everyone else on the line.
I do believe the discussion has gone off the tangent. We want to resolved the one up and two up rating differences and only use one rating.
Some say use the UNI rating, report it, and it will get changed.
You say sail with the faster rating report it and it will be the only one to be used.
Now I am confused, how can I (Robi) help Tom Shannon (US Class rep) to get rid of the UNI rating all together? What can I do when I race, with the numbers, in order to be scored with the 65.2 rating and it gets reported to Portsmouth?
Other than asking the RC to score me with the faster rating, what can I do?
Maybe this will help shed some light.....
Someone will have to sail uni and sail the boat consistently to the 65.2 number(and wind numbers) in order for the uni number to be dropped. IMO, these 2 numbers (sloop, uni) will exist for the next 2-4 years. Only results will bring about change, not lobbying.
Bob <img src=
alt=
/>
Hey Mark, I'd appreciate it if you could address some of my questions regarding your last post. I apologize for this one being so long. I really believe we are trying to work this out to everyone's satisfaction.
Fix themselves over time
...demonstrates your lack of integrity.
Whoa dude. I am trying to get the ratings more realistic - how does that show a lack of integrity? The system works by data being fed to it - that takes time. Could you elaborate?
Race on a level playing field with who? F18, CFR20, N20, H16?? Not sure what this means either. If you mean just go out an race in a bunch of Open regattas and turn in the numbers, then I get you. Otherwise, I'd like to understand what you mean.
The one up and two up rating designations are historical and the purpoe is to make life easy for the community.
Wouldn't one rating be simpler?
The class rules...state that the uni... one up and the sloop 2 up are equivalent.n (sound familiar)
Fact of the matter is... nobody sailing in light winds of the USA believe this.... So... the class rules were ignored and the PN committe for the benefit of the sailors... added the one up and two up rating. The Uni rating is very slow..
Was the Dart 18 Class Association included on the discussion, for the benefit of the sailors - of course?
Then the nacra 5.5 became a sloop and a uni... (with a larger stick).
So... the tradition has been to list the same boat twice when it has a signficant confiuration change. It simply makes life easy on the scorekeeper.
Each one of these changes altered these boats out of the original class rules. A new rating HAD to be established because the corrections would have been too time consuming to calculate.
EG... the Hobie FX1... is EXACTLY the same as the F16.
three configurations.
Do all three FX1 configuration's race head to head at class events? or are they separate classes? This is an important distinction, imo.
If there are enough scores being submitted for that rating on a yearly basis, then he has the right to know why it was dropped. Again, my opinion.
Uni (main only
Sloop (
Spin (all three)
F16 (all three)
F16 uni (main and spin)
The Taipan is also a one design class outside of the F16 rule set. The F16 assoc does not want to make any changes to the Taipan OD ratings. This is a great example of how complicated the committee has made the ratings.
Then let's make it REALLY simple for F16. Have one rating for F16. It doesn't get any easier than that.
Mark: Hey Tom, what you racing?
Tom: I am sailing F16.
Mark: Which one?
Tom: The one that says....F16.
Mark: Oh, ok - I got it.
Nice and simple.
I hear ya Bob - but here is the rub....
No one is using the Uni #'s b/c they are so out of whack. The Uni number will NOT change - ever - as it is getting very little data.
Even the F16s in Mark's neighborhood are posting scores at 65.2 while sailing in 1-up mode (does that show a lack of integrity?? or circumventing the sysytem??). BTW, they took 1-2-3 finshes in their latest series (not a single regatta, but a seasonal series) - indicating that 65.2 is even too high; nevermind the laughable 67.1 for 1-up. See http:/
The F16 group wants one number and then hammer that number down as quickly as possible. Having two numbers will split the data, cause confusion and ultimately hinder the process of getting to a more accurate handicap rating.
You are of the opinion that feeding the system data is the only way to resolve it. I agree with that, but I'd add that we'd get a
good number
quicker with one rating to feed.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't....
We should take Matt's advice and go sailing.
Looking forward to next weekend and watching your transoms disappear into the distance.
Maybe if someone (using the F16U 67.1) beat bob (NF17U 66.7) on corrected time then he would have some motivation to use his volunteer position on the committee to change the rating
<img src=
alt=
/>
Well put Robi. I could not get that point across ver well. I hope the Tampa/Gulfport move goes well.
If we use the 67.1 as F16U, we face the potential animosity of other sailors and violate class rules or swap trophies in the parking lot (theoretically).
If we use the 65.2 as a general F16 rating, we are
circumventing
the system as long as the F16U rating is on the books. Again, pissing people off.
I don't see a way to win.
Either way, next weekend should be fun 5 F16s to play with.
<img src=
alt=
/>
Well, F16 guy's get your arses in gear and do so !
Tom,
The structure of the proposals by Mark and myself are not complicated, but they do require some knowledge about the internals of the PN system.
First of all Mark states that data submitted to the US PN committee (on which handicaps are adjusted) is INDEPENDENT on which handicap was used to make the final score listing of that race.
In effect, for adjusting the numbers it really doesn't matter one bit whether the F16 uni's ask to scored against the 1-up handicap or the 2-up handicap. The basic ELAPSED TIME data send to the committee is unaffected by this choice.
Secondly my proposal revolves around the RESETTING the initial value of the F16 ratings on which the data of the last few years is effected. Basically it means that a rerun of all the adjustment calculations are done but now beginning with a different starting value. This starting value that was used was most likely arbitrary anyway, so there is no real reason against chosen a more accurate one.
A third element of the proposals is to reset the initial value of both F16 ratings (1-up and 2-up) to the same number. With the very limited data that is available at the PN committee this may be expected to keep both numbers equal or nearly equal, which in turn would solve the issues related to that.
Basically, but proposals are great compromises where all parties get to keep their
pet-peeves
and I think we therefor should give both a try. Additionally both proposals are complementary and can therefor be effected simultaniously.
Pursuing these proposals is indeed the Corinthian thing to do.
With respect to some other points raised. There simply is no
circumventing the 1-up rating
, no-one can be angree about the fact that the F16 sailors have themselves scored against a faster rating. If any party is disadvantages by this then it is the F16 sailors who requested this themselves. Again It should be noted that the raw data the US PN uses for adjusting the ratings in totally UNAFFECTED by how the event listing is composed (requested handicap numbers).
Wouter