Maybe if I new which Horses have the advantage I would avoid racing them. If it's common knowledge that certain
boats have a advantage why not change there #. Maybe US
sailing would listen.
Doug Ramsey
Doug,
Naturally it's a little more complicated than that. The system is a reliable statistical calculation based on actual results and to start making 'rule of thumb' corrections would open up a nasty political mess. However, the weak link is us...the sailors and the regatta organizers. In order for the Portsmouth number to be computed correctly, it needs the largest possible field of data. However, regatta results aren't always submitted (I would say 'rarely'). The best way we can help make these numbers more acurate is very simple: Send in your regatta results to US Sailing Portsmouth Committee!
Although there may be some ways to improve the system, it is not broken. Ask around at your next regattas if the results are sent in - offer to take care of that task if it's something that the organizers aren't very interested in. All the submission forms can be found here:
http:/
That's the point...
Nobody is standing up and claiming XXX boat is a ratings beater!
The tough part of this game is to keep things equal. For instance, if you run unbalanced race courses eg WLWL and then finish up at the weather mark for a last windard. Boats with spins are not favored. Hell, if the RC sets a small course with several laps on a breezy day ... two things will happen, your I20 crew will die and you will have a hell of time sailing to your number because all of the sail change transitions cost you time and are a significant percentage of the race.
Bottom line. Any handicap system (Texel, ISAF Portsmouth) is most accurate when similar boats are rated and raced. EG all spin boats.
Mark,
Totally agree with you there...spin and non-spin boats are difficult to handicap together because of they are so dissimilar in the performance range. Whenever possible they should (and usually are) scored separately...at least around here.
Mary remembers the Hobie 18 SX Nationals just like I do and I sailed in it: this new tall rig tended to pitchpole much more readily than the stock TheMightyHobie18 that everyone was used to- 20+ knot air. Having no picnic tables did not help much, but I never did get blown over- it was pitchpoling that was the bloody nuisance. The bottom of the bay at Erie must have 500 battens on the bottom, as the new sail design had just a strap across the batten end. These straps tore off on the first tack in a breeze because the battens were so long, and some boats nearly lost every batten on the first capsize. Not much development time was involved, I think, eh? Lots of breeze that regatta! Good job that no new spinnakers were available for the regatta. Boy, would that have been fun! I never saw a H18SX beat a stock TheMightyHobie18 round the cans, but nobody much tried. Thus the PN#s that are posted.
You're right -- pitchpoles. I was really glad I wasn't crewing in that regatta.
Hi Mark hi Jake
just wanted to take a few minutes to politely point out contradictory concepts of P rating per your own examples provided -
lets start with the most current provided ,-the horse example --
Handicaping for horses is to applied betting odds only --horses are not given time because they run slowly ,-or have an H or P brand ,--
are they? .
this would only promote poorly trained inferior horses .
Many catsailors would be willing to scrap the boat brand handicap as a result of P rating and replace it with a betting handicap for all regattas in 05 -- 
{joking}
and instead race all in similar length beam weight sail area classifications .
To answer Mark,s previous last post directly ,-there are numerous examples beyond the T provided earlier of unfair rating numbers as is true of all current rating systems ,-
All rating systems are inherantly unfair in some form due to the need to generalize and simplify rating systems .-One can scroll through the P rating and find numerous examples of older cat designs in particular with similar Length beam weight and sail areas rated much slower in P rating only due to the fact that they are not equiped with new sails or raced competitively -and crews are not trained to sail them near there true potential.} New rating numbers are inconsistant and often in conflict with design measurement rating also , again none are fair in all aspects.
You both agree that quote --
"Mark,
Totally agree with you there...spin and non-spin boats are difficult to handicap together because of they are so dissimilar in the performance range. Whenever possible they should (and usually are) scored separately...at least around here" --
So most concer that boats racing need to be grouped and started in similar groups based on speed potential.--Mark previously provided the example of larger boat rating systems using a base model to achieve a model rating number and modifying a boats rating from that base model ,-this idealy in each length based classification for starts --
It would seem the ideal model in cats would be based on the accepted Formula class in each Length category ,-then a non spin classification added in each Length category.
This best achieves the stated goal by both Mark and Jake of grouping boats in similar performing classes for racing .
The F-18 class was concieved by a group of sailors using the design measurement ISAF rating system and forming the ideal specifications for a base model 18 ft length catamaran .
This illustrates the compatability of having a systematic design measurement based approach to rating and the benifits of it -again which serves to promote equal general classes of boats for racing in very similar base model groups ,-as per Mark,s example now widely accepted and used .
When a rating system is needed for smaller groups only
it seems a combination rating system based in design measurement with a time to distance yardstick factor added would be more benificial to promote sport in the true sence and intent of sport.
The ideal or best type of racing is as pirate tx stated to begin the thread --quote -"I think a fair race could really only be done 1 design. Because all the boats perform different under different conditions & Different Level's of sailors
set the #'s by there racing results. Most of the regatta's
I go to its 8-20 boats all different makes and models.
Maybe 1 day the the sport will make a come back and
there will be enough boats at a regatta's that there can be 1 design fleets racing one another. Until then its a #'s game thats really not a fair playing field. But its what we got!"--end quote
Instead of stating its flawed and all we got ,-racing cat sailors should be stating lets improve the sport for all and race when possible in larger groups of similar designs,--not based on brand name ,-but instead with similar length beam weight and sail area base models -in spin and non spin classes , and lets adopt a means of rating boats that promotes and encourages this to occur over time ,-with room for new development and inclusive of all cat and or multihull types .
Outline recommendations for a combination rating system would use ISAF and Texel base rating formulas {both being very similar} refined with a wind speed modification factor added at trapping speed ,this would allow design factors of beam -non board types, aspect ratio of sail area inc spin , and other measurement factors to improve the theoretic comparative speed potential of similar cat design , and also the needed chang from the general 100 base scale used in ISAF to the time to distance traveled scale used in P rating for real comparative annalysis.
Again ,the goal should be to promote the true intent and ideals of sport by racing very similar boats based on basic design measurement specifications and there by over time assisting the promotion of and helping creat larger classes and class groups of racing catamarans.
all the best
Carl
I found the same thing sailing the SX in 20+ downwind without the chute. We were way in the lead on one race when we caught a big puff and began to stuff. I jerked the steering to head dead down but she just dug in and slowly flipped over forwards - turtling with me under the tramp!
We learnt to uncleat the jib at the first sign of digging in after this incident. This saved us on a number of occasions. It seems the jib really drives the bows down.
We never pitchpoled with the chute up - mostly capsizes whilst learning to sail with one hull out the water or getting over ambitious carrying it on a reach in light air.
Chris.
Both SCHRS(ISAF) and Texel differentiate between board types, and aspect ratio of the sails and mast.
The only one missing is beam (and the last time I talked to anyone closely associated with SCHRS, this (including beam) was under discussion)
Hi Scoob
interesting subject --ratings ,--finding, creating or development of the ideal rating system has eluded all so far ,it has been a problem throughout sailing history in all sailing classes ,-see the history of the Americas Cup as one example of ever changing rating systems , yet the intent and sport has remained much the same .
The quote was from a post below on an outline of ideas or a recomended method of combining rating systems , design measurement and yardstick types together,which seems possible.
Adding a windspeed category to ISAF -Texel design measurement type rating systems would be the ideal means of factoring in beam ,as beam becomes a major factor only when the wind picks up to trapping speed ,-for many modern cat designs around 8 mph winds . 2 windspeed categories may be the solution to add the beam equation to the rating system . Texel originally intended to use 2 windspeeds ,If this approach were added Texel can easily adjust its equation to reflect lighter wind speeds in which the actual ELAPSED time differences of various boats are greater, then use the lower number in the upper wind range along with certain design factors that change more in the upper range .
Believe the total power equation was factored originally by 100 then revised to 102,-but this may simply reflect most regattas being held in higher windspeeds ,again where varied designs finish more closely in actual elapsed time around the course than in lighter winds at slower speeds where speed differences and elapsed times between them are greater.
Non board types [H-16S etc. }are given a handicap factor in ISAF -Texel,but this average factor becomes lesser in the higher wind speed range . As the hulls or assymetric type hulls are depressed further in the water and begin to work at higher speeds they become more effecient and effective At higher speed more upwind lateral resistance is from hull form so again there is the availability by adding a 2nd winspeed based category to adjust the non board types rating to reflect this.
The occurance of non board type cat designs often winning or placing high in Texel rated events in higher wind conditions explains ,and is partially the cause of this and would be remedied with the wind speed non board advantage being reduced in the upper range.
Understand the rated sail area method of measurements that equate main and jib aspect ratio ,-but does not currently consider spin aspect ratio,-only spin sq ft , Texel uses one penalty for all spinnakkers over a certain size in length category , It penalizes any spin over 270 in the 20 ft length category for example. Spin aspect ratio on modern cat design should be a factor in rating .
The whole rated sail area equation may be reviewed and simplified though I,ve been told by noted designers that many modern mainsails could reduce area and maintain the same mast height resulting in a higher aspect ratio mainsail and have nearly identical sailing performance through the mid windspeed range and better once in higher windspeed overpowered conditions encountered. light wind condition are only marginally different with the advantage to sail area .Yet sail area is heavily penalized evan in the upper wind ranges as most know that have traveled to the islands to race under Texel rating in high wind events.
Development type classes like the A class eventually find the ideal mast height and mainsail aspect ratio within a limited sq ft -which is 150 for the A class .
Perhaps this may be applied or simplify the rated sail area aspect of rating.
Reef systems on cats are beginning to be used again, so again maybe a review of rated sail area and rating equation for cats is due if a windspeed category is added .
This higher windspeed category could also allow other design factors to be considered ,but at some point the system becomes too complex for any except a few to fully comprehend so it must at some point deal in generalities and leave it to the designers of sailing craft to develop and perfect design without consideration of artificial handicap aspects that have so often in history shaped undisirable features to beat the rating game .-
That is why the wizdom of the ISAF rating states clearly the preference to race boats when ever possible in OD or Formula classes . That seems the best answer.
I,m no ratings expert or great statistical annalysist or mathmatician but just enjoy the discussion of ideas on the subject and comprehend the basics of design and applied rating systems ,the outline recommendation to attempt to combine the rating systems may try the 2 windspeed approach in some refined form as elaborated on and think it is important to change the scale to the P rating system and factor in actual times in class as a percentage of total final rating number each season. P rating attempts to equate the rating number with real time to distance traveled . This being more easily used for comparative annalysis and verification of final rating numbers accuracy ,and also a means to rate with other sailing types and mono classes if desired.
I,m in the Great Lakes area but try to follow the interesting events and reports and stories in the UK through the catamaran co uk site
all the best scoob
Carl
Carl,
It's late here so I'll be brief,
1, The calculation does take the aspect ratio of the kite into consideration.
(see D.9 Maximum Authorised Spinnaker area)
2, For wind speeds, I assume the OOD / Race officer declares if the race is a "light" or "heavy" race - does this ever get protested in the states ?
3, Agree "sail area / weight" gets hit hard in both systems.
Night all
Mark,
I'll stand up and claim 2 boats as ratings beaters!
1) Supercat 17
2) A-Cats
Hi Keith
I agree with you on the Supercat 17. It joins the IMO, the Nacra 5.0 as a ratings beater. However, the 5.0 was adjusted back to it's earlier numbers when the PN committe decided to recognize that the assumption that the boat was in racing shape (good sails etc) did not apply to these very old members of the dead boat society of cats. Consequently, they turned back the clock to the data set where these assumptions were valid and now use this data for the rating. I don't know if the same thing happend with the Supercat 17 rating.
The A cat rating has two explanations for why I don't think its a ratings beater. First and foremost is the limitation that WRCRA imposes on itself by not using the wind adjusted numbers for the Tuesday night series. The A boat has a very different performance profile as the wind builds when compared to the heavier sloop rigged boats. Its not as fast relative to other boats in breeze! Since, the DPN rating is centered around Beufort 4 conditions, the A boat sailor will consistently be able to match their relatively high rating and win. (I venture to guess that no more then 4 or 5 Tuesday nights a year have breeze in the 13 to 19 mph range! (I know I never saw 12 knots or better in the Big Boat Wed night series on the West River)
Note: measurement rating systems like texel and SCR also have a tough time fairly rating the uni rigs against the sloops.
Secondly, I think the situations is made the worse by the nature of using fixed goverment marks. Frequently, the leg's become reaches... Most boats go about the same speed on a reach and since the A boat is among the slower rated boats (of the newer boats with decent sails) in your fleet it also has a distinct advantage in these conditions.
IMO, the best solution is to use the wind adjusted ratings. The overwhelming number of races will be in Beufort 2 or Beufort 3 (the same rating number) It's pretty clear when you have strong breeze... eg you see some whitecaps and call it a B4 race.
You also have to hope that the wind gods allow you to set a bit more windward leeward courses without the long reaching legs.
Take Care
Mark
>>Note: measurement rating systems like texel and SCR also have a tough time fairly rating the uni rigs against the sloops.
As a matter of fact the reason why these issues exist in both Texel and SCHRS (ISAF) is CHOICE !
About a 1 to 1.5 years ago I worked out two simple modifications that adressed the uni-rig problem, the singlehander problems (less fast at higher speeds) and the unwillingness of the RC to use large list of winddependent numbers. And I shared the result with you Mark. Sadly both sides of the Atlantic shot down the mods mostly by decision. The European side felt that nothing was wrong with the system while the other side never gave an reply.
Fact is that the Texel/SCHRS system can easily be modified to correct the most clearing issues thus making it easily to most easy to maintain and also the most fair system around. That is unless some serious changes to the yardstick systems are made as well. In some cases very serious modifications.
Anyway I have send the system, that is based on real life findings as well as experiments performed by Bethwaite and Marchaj to the Texel committee and there is rests up till now. I've left the Texel committee as an adviser and may launch this system as freeware over the coming weeks. Now it is doing nothing and that is a pitty of all the effort that went into it.
The NMBR (New measurement based) and SMBR (Simulation based Measurement Systems) are both available to everybody that wants to see it and maybe use it for racing.
Both are highly comparable to the Texel (SCHRS) systems and used the same data with the added measurements of width. That is all. The 2 rating numbers generated work in the same way as the all other numbers. You get 1 numbers for sub trapeze conditions and 1 numbers for conditions were crews trapeze out. No windgauges required, any RC can see by looking at the boats what kind of conditions they have on their hands.
By more importantly about this post is the following.
If the sailors want a better mouse trap than they need to campaign for it themselfs. Putting your trust in national organisations will not work. Too much politics and "When I was young, we did it ..." talk.
The solution is available ; do you guys want it or not. If you don't than we can all better shut-up because we are just b!tching for b!tching sake not because we really want a better system.
Regards,
Wouter
How about the I7R? I can't imagine this boat being slower than a Hobie 20 when it carries a spinnaker, yet its P number says it is. At the area C Alter Cup races that boat beat Chris and I in an H20 over the line every race. The young man was very good and deserved to win, but we were nowhere close, even though rated faster...
David
Same with the ARC 17 we raced against at Tradewinds last year,square top and spi... always finished in the top. Actually never brought out the spi and still was fast as #$*^, sailed by Mr. Roberts.
Mark,
Regardless of what we use for race marks, we usually have a healthy dose of upwind/downwind. And looking at the numbers, I'm not sure the wind corrected figures would help much until the highest wind range. Seeing the A's perform boat for boat for two seasons against other different types of boats upwind, downwind, and reaching, I'd still say they have a favorable rating.
With the 6.0, I always hope for a little more wind and wave to see if that evens things up a bit, but those hopes are in vain - the A's perform well in those conditions too.
Come sail with us more often, you'll see what I mean! 
So what everbody is saying is that only "LIKE" boats should
race against one another to make the playing field fair.
NON SPIN & SPIN Boats should not be classed togather
Low # & High # should not be classed togather
And know matter what never ever race a A-Cat
Doug Ramsey
TheMightyHobie18 #4383
yup that's pretty well correct.
we can't beat this horse some more. I want my rating to go past Journeyman.