• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
plywoodboy

2017 Australian Multihull Championships

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Tony Considine said:

not abnormally good ratings Rob, abnormally well sailed 

1) The top/best/most competitive crews aren't naive. They will always gravitate to the types of boat and modifications which are perceived to get the best rating benefit.

2) "Sports" boats designed for day sailing and short races will always beat boats designed to be for multipurpose/offshore use. IRC recognised that decades ago.

3) The latest designs should always beat (significantly) older boats. That is evolution. IRC recognised that decades ago.

4) T foil rudders, curved foils, lifting foils are still all "free lunches"? Even the extra weight involved is a rating benefit.

 

How does OMR deal with the last three points? The first point also usually gives a clue about what might need to be addressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/10/2017 at 10:48 AM, honestjohn said:

Something funny with those Pulses, never get out where the believers can see them, Invisible to cameras in anything over 10 kts of wind, the internet is totally empty of anything but Corsair sales hype, no real useful info. Someone should lend me one,i'll sort it out,with my GoPro's on!  I"m sort of half interested in buying one, especially the cheaper one for sale now on boat sales. Still waiting to see or hear what they can do.  Is the Dealer reading this??!!!

Contact me, we can make that happen

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't you contact him! Sheesh, sales 101. Waiting for people to turn at your door with cash are we? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, PIL007 said:

Great pics......

Love the look of Time Machine.... 

How much is a Diam 24 ...  on a trailer .... sail away...?

 

a brand new Diam 24 complete with sails etc ready to sail is about A$85K landed with freight, duty and GST included and a used one is probably about A$70K landed  and a trailer is anywhere from a few 1000 used to $10K new with all the bells and whistles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time Machine, what's the story? It looks a lot like Timber Woolf from NZ. Cool looking boat, and quick (judging by a quick look at the results).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/10/2017 at 0:00 AM, honestjohn said:

check out the spelling of "Multihull", in the original post, Lionisland, it will make more sense

Eh?

1) which original post? I don’t see the word “multihull”in Plywood’s original post of Jan 30 if that’s what you refer to and,

2) what will make more sense? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 11:07 PM, LionIsland said:

Not sure,Alan, but there's another Nationals in 3 months time if your keen. Might have to pull out my OUI OUI!!

This one LionIsland, look at Alans post #75 ,the one you quoted.  Something fishy there!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ALL@SEA said:

Time Machine, what's the story? It looks a lot like Timber Woolf from NZ. Cool looking boat, and quick (judging by a quick look at the results).

From Grainger Design's facebook page:

Quote

TIME HAS COME
This is one pretty damn interesting piece of sailing machinery. She started life as a Grainger 075 (our first design). She has longer floats, an electrically driven canting mast, C foils and some other interesting features. 
Time Machine took out first place under OMR in Race 2 of the Australian Multihull Championships just two minutes behind Ullman Sails across the line. We're going to be talking with owner Matt von Bibra and taking a closer look at Time Machine in an upcoming article for the LAB. Thanks to Matt for the photo.

Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, honestjohn said:

This one LionIsland, look at Alans post #75 ,the one you quoted.  Something fishy there!

Ok. Finally I see. Funny. Gee. The devil is in the detail. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The week and racing was enjoyable and well organised.

Observations from Rushour were as follows:

Diams have a very favorable rating but were also very well sailed. However it depends on what you compare a very favorable rating too?? They were no match for the old Mad max which is sailing much faster at a lower OMR rating than it used to be, but then the Airlie boys are probably the best team as well.

Rushour was no match for any of them but trying to handicap a 50' cruising cat against a few beach cats and tris is always going to be hard. We were however very happy to be in Div 1 as we had close racing with the Diams, and the Nacra 36 all of which helped us learn more about the boat always plenty of scope for improvement!!!!

It would be nice to have a bridgedeck offshore division but unfortunately not enough boats.

Windward Leeward races on a 50' boat suck and will always advantage a small boat.

If I was not poor from building a new boat I would consider a Diam, awesome boat, fast stable and best of all one design..... sort of.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, bushsailor said:

The week and racing was enjoyable and well organised.

Observations from Rushour were as follows:

Diams have a very favorable rating but were also very well sailed. However it depends on what you compare a very favorable rating too?? They were no match for the old Mad max which is sailing much faster at a lower OMR rating than it used to be, but then the Airlie boys are probably the best team as well.

Rushour was no match for any of them but trying to handicap a 50' cruising cat against a few beach cats and tris is always going to be hard. We were however very happy to be in Div 1 as we had close racing with the Diams, and the Nacra 36 all of which helped us learn more about the boat always plenty of scope for improvement!!!!

It would be nice to have a bridgedeck offshore division but unfortunately not enough boats.

Windward Leeward races on a 50' boat suck and will always advantage a small boat.

If I was not poor from building a new boat I would consider a Diam, awesome boat, fast stable and best of all one design..... sort of.

 

If those controlling OMR want it to be a no limits development rule (with or without mizzen masts) and with no allowance for age or alternative uses and just be expensive carbon dayboat rockets on short race courses so be it.

If as I suspect most multihull owners in Australia can't/don't want to fit this category, maybe it is time to have a separate division using something like the MOCRA system, which has a very clear intent and structure, and is used in the UK even for the Fastnet Race and which does give age allowances and requires headroom, a minimum of 3 bunks etc, etc. It already rates T Foil rudders and lifting foils, unlike OMR, but not mizzens,  AFAICT.

http://www.mocra-sailing.org.uk/home/racing

I see little point in just setting up a "cruising" division of OMR because eventually all the obsolete Diam mk1's and the like will end up there when they are sufficiently outclassed by Diam mk'X or whatever, repeating the problem all over again.

Nothing against the Diam..... Lovely boat.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Rob Zabukovec said:

If those controlling OMR want it to be a no limits development rule (with or without mizzen masts) and with no allowance for age or alternative uses and just be expensive carbon dayboat rockets on short race courses so be it.

If as I suspect most multihull owners in Australia can't/don't want to fit this category, maybe it is time to have a separate division using something like the MOCRA system, which has a very clear intent and structure, and is used in the UK even for the Fastnet Race and which does give age allowances and requires headroom, a minimum of 3 bunks etc, etc. It already rates T Foil rudders and lifting foils, unlike OMR, but not mizzens,  AFAICT.

http://www.mocra-sailing.org.uk/home/racing

I see little point in just setting up a "cruising" division of OMR because eventually all the obsolete Diam mk1's and the like will end up there when they are sufficiently outclassed by Diam mk'X or whatever, repeating the problem all over again.

Nothing against the Diam..... Lovely boat.

 

 

All good points. Sadly history shows that the clowns that have presided over the demise of multihull racing in Australia  are still asleep at the wheel.

The 2 cruising divisions at Hamilton Island  Race Week  attracted a total of 33 entrants. The rule favoured race class attracted 5.

Pretty much says it all.

Quite obviously the multihulls with decent accommodation want to race , just stay well clear of the petty self interest protecting bullshit of the DAY SAILORS.( NO THEY ARE NOT OFFSHORE MULTIHULLS.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OMR rule is way more refined than Mocra or any other multihull rule.

Mad max is the first boat to ever show significant gains from T foils, which is the reason that they have not been added to the rule in the past.

I believe one of the purposes of the rule is to encourage development not penalize it.

Having a cruising boat that is not competitive in OMR is no excuse for not participating in a race series. If this were the case only 3 or 4 sailors would ever turn up to any nationals no matter if was lasers, hobie 16, A class, whatever.

There are probably 20 competitive fast cruiser racer multihulls around that could race and potentially win but very difficult to get them to turn up.

As mentioned above PHS racing is popular at Hammo and Airlie because anyone can win. It rewards poor performance at the beginning of the regatta. Boats can sandbag to manipulate the results.

Phs has its place within an OMR regatta to reward improving boats etc.

We would have had a cruising division at the nationals if more boats had entered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I believe one of the purposes of the rule is to encourage development not penalize it. "

I thought it was  about evening up the performance of the boats so the competition is between the crews not the designers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^ BINGO

BushSailor lives in a fantasy world. You just have to compare OMR and MOCRA preambles and rating rules to see that. 

OMR can't even get ratings right. How many curved foil boats are there currently racing OMR? At least 3 at a guess. How many are there on the current OMR ratings spreadsheet. Only one, the G32? And how about the Ad Hoc cowboy nonesense of the weighting fiasco at Airlie last year? Most of us can live without that sophistication.

If it is a development rule, why penalise/rate curved and canted boards, and give a free lunch to other things like T foil rudders and, I forgot, canting rigs? Why penalise/rate anything? OMR will become a type forming rule. No cabins, no bunks, T foil rudders, canting rigs, etc.

It is not about penalising, just applying an appropriate rating to anything which should/does make a performance difference. They can all be reviewed annually. MOCRA does formally and also has a formal appeals procedure. Does OMR? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rob Zabukovec said:

^^^^ BINGO

BushSailor lives in a fantasy world. You just have to compare OMR and MOCRA preambles and rating rules to see that. 

OMR can't even get ratings right. How many curved foil boats are there currently racing OMR? At least 3 at a guess. How many are there on the current OMR ratings spreadsheet. Only one, the G32? And How about the Ad Hoc cowboy nonesense of the weighting fiasco at Airlie last year? Most of us can live without that sophistication.

If it is a development rule, why penalise/rate curved and canted boards, and give a free lunch to other things like T foil rudders and, I forgot, canting rigs? Why penalise/rate anything?

It is not about penalising, just applying an appropriate rating to anything which should/does make a performance difference. They can all be reviewed annually. MOCRA does formally and also has a formal appeals procedure. Does OMR? 

OMG Rob and Overlay, you guys have so much negative energy on these championships, can you get it positive and actually come sailing so you get a feel for what is really happening?

Bushie and I live in a fantasy world that involves getting our very different boats on to the startline and he and I had a FUCKING AWESOME TIME!!!

Get off your keyboard warrior trolldom and get wet.

My response numerically so you can shoot numbered arrows:

1. OMR run by volunteers responds to variations in boats when the proof is there. Your theoretical world might penalize a device when you think it should be but there is NO CONSISTENT EVIDENCE yet that foils, canting, alfoil hats improve OVERALL performance. Trilogy looked like they got the best out of canting, but did not stay around long enough in that mode for good data. Time Machine has foils and cants, still plenty of development coming but no definite performance improvement yet. The SA F32srx foils and cants and water ballast, plenty of regattas but not winning so no improvement noted. Bare Essentials foils and cants, no massive improvement. Rushour T-rudders seem better but one smashed off already in an impact heading south from Airlie. F-bomb reports longer T-rudders are helping reduce boat jiggle, and better speed but the blades smashed the boxes under load. The old Max seems to go well with T-rudders but with all the improvements they have made like the decksweeper main, can you quantify that for us? GC32 could be a consistent winner, only been here for a couple of weeks and you want us to rebuild the formula on that data? Did you design the Hubble Telescope?

2. The weighing "fiasco" has complicated history going back for years you can ring me about, not going into that detail here. It really is difficult for our volunteers all around the country to weigh accurately and fairly little home built boats as well as big condomorans, but to address the recent issues MYCQ forked out cash for a new remote read out crane hung load cell to be regularly calibrated.  It was offered and used during 2 days leading up to this series and it was with a sigh of relief that a lot of skeletons were pulled out of cupboards and smashed into weightless powder. This cell now will do the rounds of the country and other volunteers at regular time intervals and events will add more boats to a collectively improved data pile. Refreshingly, weight was not mentioned ONCE in all the bar time I enjoyed at RQ. Happy? YOU could have even volunteered to help us on those days and will be always welcome.

3.  You want a formal appeals procedure for a bunch of volunteers to be subjected to? Come sailing.

4.  When all the bullshit is sifted out, this regatta came down to the guys in the boat. You would have far more agreement from the sailors out on the water if you added a rock star column penalty of .03 to the formula for a Ben Kelly skipper on Wilparina 3 or a Morticia-blooded crew on Ullman Sails, or the skiff and hobie champs that yanked on my sails in the series than for the bits you have fixated on.

5.   When enough Diam data is collected, they may very well be at the top of the discussion list in the next review. IMHO It may well require some extra measurements to hit the Diams and not the other little chubby boats.

 

Peter H

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, plywoodboy said:

OMG Rob and Overlay, you guys have so much negative energy on these championships, can you get it positive and actually come sailing so you get a feel for what is really happening?

Bushie and I live in a fantasy world that involves getting our very different boats on to the startline and he and I had a FUCKING AWESOME TIME!!!

Get off your keyboard warrior trolldom and get wet.

My response numerically so you can shoot numbered arrows:

1. OMR run by volunteers responds to variations in boats when the proof is there. Your theoretical world might penalize a device when you think it should be but there is NO CONSISTENT EVIDENCE yet that foils, canting, alfoil hats improve OVERALL performance. Trilogy looked like they got the best out of canting, but did not stay around long enough in that mode for good data. Time Machine has foils and cants, still plenty of development coming but no definite performance improvement yet. The SA F32srx foils and cants and water ballast, plenty of regattas but not winning so no improvement noted. Bare Essentials foils and cants, no massive improvement. Rushour T-rudders seem better but one smashed off already in an impact heading south from Airlie. F-bomb reports longer T-rudders are helping reduce boat jiggle, and better speed but the blades smashed the boxes under load. The old Max seems to go well with T-rudders but with all the improvements they have made like the decksweeper main, can you quantify that for us? GC32 could be a consistent winner, only been here for a couple of weeks and you want us to rebuild the formula on that data? Did you design the Hubble Telescope?

2. The weighing "fiasco" has complicated history going back for years you can ring me about, not going into that detail here. It really is difficult for our volunteers all around the country to weigh accurately and fairly little home built boats as well as big condomorans, but to address the recent issues MYCQ forked out cash for a new remote read out crane hung load cell to be regularly calibrated.  It was offered and used during 2 days leading up to this series and it was with a sigh of relief that a lot of skeletons were pulled out of cupboards and smashed into weightless powder. This cell now will do the rounds of the country and other volunteers at regular time intervals and events will add more boats to a collectively improved data pile. Refreshingly, weight was not mentioned ONCE in all the bar time I enjoyed at RQ. Happy? YOU could have even volunteered to help us on those days and will be always welcome.

3.  You want a formal appeals procedure for a bunch of volunteers to be subjected to? Come sailing.

4.  When all the bullshit is sifted out, this regatta came down to the guys in the boat. You would have far more agreement from the sailors out on the water if you added a rock star column penalty of .03 to the formula for a Ben Kelly skipper on Wilparina 3 or a Morticia-blooded crew on Ullman Sails, or the skiff and hobie champs that yanked on my sails in the series than for the bits you have fixated on.

5.   When enough Diam data is collected, they may very well be at the top of the discussion list in the next review. IMHO It may well require some extra measurements to hit the Diams and not the other little chubby boats.

 

Peter H

 

Good on you Peter and Bushsailor I agree completely, I would like to point out I had a fantastic week and given the spread of boats in the fleet I think there was something for everyone.

I have won over 8+  OMR div 1 national titles on three different boats with a whole bunch of very good sailors, I think the OMR rule is fantastic and I am currently building a boat with a bunch of mates with the main intent being to compete in OMR events. If we can design and build our own boat and have success under the rule we will have achieved our aim.

Are we then to be called assholes because we took the development rule and came up with the best solution to get results in our eyes?

Will the rule be changed if certain aspects of our boat give us advantages, quite likely but if it is proven and is applied fairly across the fleet with significant notice then all good.

We will have a distinct possible advantage given we are drawing on all designs of the past, and trying to get the best out of the rule, is that unfair?

Maybe an age allowance could work but the massive changes boats make to improve over the years really makes this hard.

It could be a complete shitter and never quite perform under the rule, that will be our fault not the OMR rule.

We have enjoyed racing other boats of all shapes and sizes under OMR so much over the years we are putting our money into a project  to sail under this rule.

I suggest anyone having a big whinge about the OMR rule must make sure they have first got out there and competed properly under it!

When I first raced against Mad Max aboard Trilogy it struggled to beat us over the line and was knowhere on OMR, ten years later and with the exact same hull shape she is a F@#king weapon due to 10yrs of development and always being on the race course and being sailed extremely well.

You get VPLP to design a 30ft Tri with the same set of numbers Lukim yu had in 2000 and identical rating and the thing would be years ahead, that is just how it is and there is nothing wrong with that in my eyes.

Lukim yu is a fantastic boat that is light in weight and has enough horespower and still competes to this day but design moves on and this is a development rule...

Most boats with some optimizing, enough sailing hours and effort can significantly improve their OMR results, but it takes time and effort and you cannot simply sail one or two events, blame the rule and run away and bitch about it for years to come!

Thanks to all who competed in this years Nationals, thanks  to the volunteers and thanks to the OMR rule, we had a blast and we didn't win because we didn't sail well enough!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you say you've only ever sailed other peoples boats which must have been top end boats and funded by owners who could afford to put their boats on the water and were constantly changed to meet the rule changes. We'll be interested to follow your progress when you start tearing up your own cash to remain on top of the rule as it changes and then you can back up your claim about getting out there and competing, "but at your own expense".

From what I hear the winners usually pour heaps of cash into boats to keep them current, Mad Max/Ullaman Sails is a very good example of an endless spend and time modifying to get it to where it is and theres plenty more like Morticia, Indian Chief, Trilogy and the others that were previous Div 1 winners over the years that spent plenty to keep at the top.

It's the owners that back up year after year i respect, not the freeloaders that just turn up to sail other peoples boats and then talk up how good they are. 

As for OMR, it has some way to go if you want growth of multi racing, IMO. If one looks at what the mono fleets do, sports boats don't race against ocean going IRC boats on handicap or around the course for that matter. Surely that method should be looked at for multis if you are to attract all types because i cant see the likes of Rushhour competing against a stripped out foiling race tri on OMR if both are sailed well.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, I wonder where "go out and enjoy your sailing young/old man" fits into all this? Call me old fashioned, behind the times, silly old fart, whatever, but I can tell you hardly anyone here at RMYC Pittwater gives a rat's arse about OMR because the primary motivation each week is to enjoy a sail around the Pittwater puddle, sink a few ales back at the club, collect (or not) a PHS winner's bottle of vino, relive the race through individual post-mortems or "if onlys", then go home happy -  having enjoyed a nice day out on the water and a few beers with mates, ready to do it all again next week.

So endeth the lesson!

Cheers

Alan

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Zorro2 said:

Hmmm, I wonder where "go out and enjoy your sailing young/old man" fits into all this? Call me old fashioned, behind the times, silly old fart, whatever, but I can tell you hardly anyone here at RMYC Pittwater gives a rat's arse about OMR because the primary motivation each week is to enjoy a sail around the Pittwater puddle, sink a few ales back at the club, collect (or not) a PHS winner's bottle of vino, relive the race through individual post-mortems or "if onlys", then go home happy -  having enjoyed a nice day out on the water and a few beers with mates, ready to do it all again next week.

So endeth the lesson!

Cheers

Alan

 

Could not agree with you more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Zorro2 said:

Hmmm, I wonder where "go out and enjoy your sailing young/old man" fits into all this? Call me old fashioned, behind the times, silly old fart, whatever, but I can tell you hardly anyone here at RMYC Pittwater gives a rat's arse about OMR because the primary motivation each week is to enjoy a sail around the Pittwater puddle, sink a few ales back at the club, collect (or not) a PHS winner's bottle of vino, relive the race through individual post-mortems or "if onlys", then go home happy -  having enjoyed a nice day out on the water and a few beers with mates, ready to do it all again next week.

So endeth the lesson!

Cheers

Alan

 

I'm sorry Alan, I don't agree, at the Nationals we had 2 divisions to cater for both, cruisers under PHF and racers under OMR http://results.rqys.com.au/amc2017/series.htm and you seem to be saying you can't understand why someone would want to race .  We're not interested  in cruising, we love racing and we love trying to beat the other crews trying to beat us.

When I sold Mad Max last year (now Ullman Sails) we  bought a stock standard Diam 24 and proved that you could win in a stock standard boat if you sailed it well. We were second in OMR  at Airlie Beach and the Nationals at RQ and won the Mulihulls Racing Division at Hamilton Island and anyone could do the same in a boat that costs a bit over $80K new.

regards

Tony

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the arms race has already begun. Are you going for the upwind screecher? Next someone will use the "cheap" base @ 80k & go foils, then maybe a higher rating to contend with. It never ends, maybe DIAM 24 OD is the answer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Zorro2 said:

Hmmm, I wonder where "go out and enjoy your sailing young/old man" fits into all this? Call me old fashioned, behind the times, silly old fart, whatever, but I can tell you hardly anyone here at RMYC Pittwater gives a rat's arse about OMR because the primary motivation each week is to enjoy a sail around the Pittwater puddle, sink a few ales back at the club, collect (or not) a PHS winner's bottle of vino, relive the race through individual post-mortems or "if onlys", then go home happy -  having enjoyed a nice day out on the water and a few beers with mates, ready to do it all again next week.

So endeth the lesson!

Cheers

Alan

 

And you wonder why you can't attract serious racers to your events. 

Nothing wrong with having fun and drawing the winner out of a hat, but can you name any class or type of boat that runs their National titles on PHS ?

PHS rewards poor sailing and penalises the good sailors, there is no incentive to improve. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tony Considine said:

I'm sorry Alan, I don't agree, at the Nationals we had 2 divisions to cater for both, cruisers under PHF and racers under OMR http://results.rqys.com.au/amc2017/series.htm and you seem to be saying you can't understand why someone would want to race .  We're not interested  in cruising, we love racing and we love trying to beat the other crews trying to beat us.

When I sold Mad Max last year (now Ullman Sails) we  bought a stock standard Diam 24 and proved that you could win in a stock standard boat if you sailed it well. We were second in OMR  at Airlie Beach and the Nationals at RQ and won the Mulihulls Racing Division at Hamilton Island and anyone could do the same in a boat that costs a bit over $80K new.

regards

Tony

 

 

 

Hi Tony, I'm not questioning why people want to race, we do it here every week and if I'm not mistaken we may be the only multihull club in the country that has a regular (weekly) race program right throughout the year. All I am saying is the majority of our sailors are perfectly happy with what we do and don't feel the need to race under a rating system. In fact we did run OMR each week in parallel with PHS a few years ago, and rather than being a positive thing it became rather divisive as the same boat seemed to win under OMR each week. One might hope this would encourage other racers to look to "optimise" or improve or whatever the appropriate term is, but it actually had the opposite effect with some people mumbling behind their hands questioning the legitimacy of the ratings in general or one or two boats in particular, thereby becoming divisive rather than inclusive and instructive, removing a lot of the pleasure we enjoy of just being out on the water which is really the point I was trying to make in my earlier post.

I personally have no objection to OMR as a concept but I do have some issues of detail with it (as do many others). At the end of the day it's fine for championships but it isn't the be all and end all of enjoying getting out on the water and racing around the cans. As I said above, this is what we do here each week. My personal opinion is that once the focus and pre-occupation becomes all about getting the "number" as low as possible so you can optimise your chances of winning, a lot of the fun and enjoyment of sailing gets lost.

Regards

Alan 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cynophobe said:

And you wonder why you can't attract serious racers to your events. 

Nothing wrong with having fun and drawing the winner out of a hat, but can you name any class or type of boat that runs their National titles on PHS ?

PHS rewards poor sailing and penalises the good sailors, there is no incentive to improve. 

I suspect the issue of whether or not we can attract serious racers to our events has little to do with OMR but more to do with the vagaries and challenges/frustrations of the pittwater wind patterns. Something  Tony Considine  knows all about!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/10/2017 at 10:05 AM, square top said:

As you say you've only ever sailed other peoples boats which must have been top end boats and funded by owners who could afford to put their boats on the water and were constantly changed to meet the rule changes. We'll be interested to follow your progress when you start tearing up your own cash to remain on top of the rule as it changes and then you can back up your claim about getting out there and competing, "but at your own expense".

From what I hear the winners usually pour heaps of cash into boats to keep them current, Mad Max/Ullaman Sails is a very good example of an endless spend and time modifying to get it to where it is and theres plenty more like Morticia, Indian Chief, Trilogy and the others that were previous Div 1 winners over the years that spent plenty to keep at the top.

It's the owners that back up year after year i respect, not the freeloaders that just turn up to sail other peoples boats and then talk up how good they are. 

As for OMR, it has some way to go if you want growth of multi racing, IMO. If one looks at what the mono fleets do, sports boats don't race against ocean going IRC boats on handicap or around the course for that matter. Surely that method should be looked at for multis if you are to attract all types because i cant see the likes of Rushhour competing against a stripped out foiling race tri on OMR if both are sailed well.  

Square Top, How much do you charge your crew? I had enough trouble getting free loaders, that I turned into one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shane beyer said:

The only problem with OMR is the best sailors always win and some people don't like that .

You could say the same about any rule, including IRC, the most global rule, with the longest track record and where sports/day boats have been specifically excluded for good reason.

But the "best" OMR sailors have and will increasingly gravitate to sports/dayboats where all the "free lunches" like T foil rudders, curved foils, canting rigs, carbon spars etc work best. And where (movable) crew weight for trim is a much larger proportion of the overall sailing displacement. And the reduced windage and lower CG with less pitching  because they don't provide any real headroom or any significant internal volume. And they are more manoeuvrable for short tactical racing. And none of them stay in the water so don't need to be antifouled. And are more recent design with no age allowance for old designs. And......

It is a trend which will make the bulk of the existing OMR fleet, the multi purpose accommodation carriers, obsolete. Which will suit the "best" sailors in their sports boats no doubt, but is it good for multihull racing overall? How many "best" sailors would race OMR in a brand new multipurpose accommodation carrying design with those inherent handicaps? Now there is a challenge for you...... Never mind the cost. Good Luck with it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't want to be beaten by racing boats in a race, enter your cruiser in a cruising division. 

It is not possible to fairly rate vastly different boats built for different purposes. 

OMR is a very good rule, it is designed to even out the BOATS as best as possible over all conditions. 

Do you think we need to look into rating the crews square top? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree with your second sentence. Your third sentence is a complete contradiction.....

Carrying on from my earlier comments above, I could have also said that Sports/Dayboats, due to not having to provide hull freeboard, cabins, bunks, heads, cookers and all the other paraphernalia for cruising and offshore use are abnormally light, which means they have abnormally good Displ/Length and Sail Area/Displ ratios. The former being beneficial off wind and the latter good in the lighter conditions you normally gets for inshore championship conditions.

So, some words of advice to owners of older multihulls and even condos who want to try their luck against the "best" sailors, it is dead easy, all you have to do is update your boats, including, but not limited to:

1) Rip out all your bunks, heads, sink, galley, cabin tops (especially aft ones) and put in an oversized ergonomic carbon cockpit for efficient crew work, lighter weight and lower CG.

2) Chuck you short low displacement amas and get full length carbon high displacement ones. Reinforced to take curved foils. And make them ergonomic while you are at it, so that the whole crew can hike out hard on them.

3) Chuck all your foils and replace with carbon curved centreboards and T rudders.

3) Chuck your aluminium mast and go for a carbon mast, preferably ultra high modulus carbon.

4) Scrape off all the antifouling and polish the hulls.

5) Get new optimised sails including upwind screechers.

6) Best to pay experts like VLPL, Grainger or a top sailmaker to advise and oversee the updating process.

Or it might be simpler and cheaper to just to go out and buy something like a Diam and have two boats. At least you will still have one you can cruise in and go offshore with.

And finally, I know of one well known racing multi who has a certificate listed as carrying 2 anchors, a try sail, a life raft, and possibly, an oversized battery and spare or specialist "legal" sails. All to get the weight up (low in a good place) and the rating down. Should it turn up to the next Australian Multihull (Inshore) National Championships, who knows and who checks that they are all on board as per measurement condition? Or do you just blame a load cell?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rob Zabukovec said:

I totally agree with your second sentence. Your third sentence is a complete contradiction.....

Carrying on from my earlier comments above, I could have also said that Sports/Dayboats, due to not having to provide hull freeboard, cabins, bunks, heads, cookers and all the other paraphernalia for cruising and offshore use are abnormally light, which means they have abnormally good Displ/Length and Sail Area/Displ ratios. The former being beneficial off wind and the latter good in the lighter conditions you normally gets for inshore championship conditions.

So, some words of advice to owners of older multihulls and even condos who want to try their luck against the "best" sailors, it is dead easy, all you have to do is update your boats, including, but not limited to:

1) Rip out all your bunks, heads, sink, galley, cabin tops (especially aft ones) and put in an oversized ergonomic carbon cockpit for efficient crew work, lighter weight and lower CG.

2) Chuck you short low displacement amas and get full length carbon high displacement ones. Reinforced to take curved foils. And make them ergonomic while you are at it, so that the whole crew can hike out hard on them.

3) Chuck all your foils and replace with carbon curved centreboards and T rudders.

3) Chuck your aluminium mast and go for a carbon mast, preferably ultra high modulus carbon.

4) Scrape off all the antifouling and polish the hulls.

5) Get new optimised sails including upwind screechers.

6) Best to pay experts like VLPL, Grainger or a top sailmaker to advise and oversee the updating process.

Or it might be simpler and cheaper to just to go out and buy something like a Diam and have two boats. At least you will still have one you can cruise in and go offshore with.

And finally, I know of one well known racing multi who has a certificate listed as carrying 2 anchors, a try sail, a life raft, and possibly, an oversized battery and spare or specialist "legal" sails. All to get the weight up (low in a good place) and the rating down. Should it turn up to the next Australian Multihull (Inshore) National Championships, who knows and who checks that they are all on board as per measurement condition? Or do you just blame a load cell?

Haha. That's funny. You've basically described Mojo. Just go and buy it. It's for sale. Doubles up as a very nice condomaran when not winning races!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see why you think I'd be contradicting myself unless you are trying to be an argumentative dickhead.

il try and make my 3rd sentence clearer;

While it is not possible for OMR to be perfect, it does a very good job of attempting to create a level field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, cazza said:

I can't see why you think I'd be contradicting myself unless you are trying to be an argumentative dickhead.

il try and make my 3rd sentence clearer;

While it is not possible for OMR to be perfect, it does a very good job of attempting to create a level field.

If anyone is interested, here is the text of some correspondence I had with the Texel committee a couple of years ago. I was particularly interested in their views about how well OMR catered for big/small, new design/old designs racing together.  Here's what was said:

 

From: nico boon [mailto:nicoboon1926@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 18 March 2015 5:21 AM
To: Alan Brand
Cc:
edith langens; geert ruesink; pentcho bodegom; renzo van der plas; zieger driezen; Maarten Bakker; arno molenaar; garym; klaas parrel
Subject:
Re: Question about Texel Rating Formula

 
Dear Alan,
 
Your interesting reaction requires more than a short answer. Your email and my answer I pass on to our members of the RC (rating committee) and some others to inform them. From the start of the handicap system it was clear that any system will not do for a very wide range of designs. A Hobie 14 cannot race well on handicap against, say the modern Olympic Nacra17 design. The same is the case when you compare the performance of a light, but relatively small trimaran like you mention and a heavier much longer catamaran. A lot then depends on the weather system too. With strong winds and heavy waves, the bigger boat will have an advantage. In Holland on partly inland waters with less waves, the lighter trimarans actually show more advantages. Both boats being well sailed. Neither a yardstick system nor a rating rule based on measurements will change these facts. We always explain people that the only way to find real winners is to let them sail one designs yachts, big or small. They do now, with the big round the world racers. Any rating is not only called handicapping, but they are a handicap too. Then, more developed designs generally perform better with the same length, sail area and weight. Especially better hull forms as well as more developed rigs made modern boats more competitive. Then these modern designs attract the better crews too. 
 
All these aspects are illustrated best by analyzing results of races like the round Texel with hundreds of cats. This I do each year. Even in a most popular class, the formula 18 designs, the spread in the results is very high. The last one in a group of 63 boats in 2012 takes  53.7 % more time to complete the race. It pleases me to include the analysis of that race in 2012 The remarkable fact is that graphs of the sailed times or corrected times quite well look like a straight line. For that purpose the winner in each (one design) class is given an index nr. of 100.0 to compare with all other finishers. That the rating formula works well is demonstrated by the fact that the graph of the overall list, with all 210 boats sorted on corrected times according to their individual rating numbers produces the most horizontal line, with the lowest factor a in the straight line formula. ((0.22).  These elements atoned me with the limits of any rating system. But I still prefer handicap sailing because one design racing I find boring to look at. Variety in boats is more pleasant to observe.
 
I hope you find the race analysis as interesting as I do. For bigger boats such an analysis is hardly practical for the number of boats of each class generally is too small for conclusions.
 
My best wishes
Nico
 
2015-03-17 5:02 GMT+01:00 Alan Brand <ajbrand@optusnet.com.au>:
Nico, many thanks for your detailed reply. Yes my main interest in this is as race secretary at RMYC multihulls where after an absence of a couple of years, we are now about to re-introduce a MYCQ-based  OMR rating series to complement  our weekly PHS series.
 
I say "re-introduce" because previously OMR was not diligently or professionally managed in this club leading to dissatisfaction and questioning of results on a regular basis due to boats using unrated sails etc and suspicions that one particular boat who was a consistent winner each week must be somehow "manipulating the rule". I then put a stop to all such unpleasantness and insisted that we will only run OMR again if it is managed to the full intent and degree of attention to detail required for full tranparency and integrity. We are now working to do this.
 
Another concern I have about OMR is how well the current system manages mixed fleet racing across very different boats - which in our case comprizes boats ranging from a F-22R weighing 710kg to a 50' Grainger cat weighing 4960kg. Boats with significantly different performance potentials, but oddly enough, only about 7% difference in OMR whereas in reality, over the past summer series the 50' cat was about 12% faster in the same races as one might fully expect. Both boats in this example are very well sailed. There are other RMYC fleet examples I could quote with more extreme "theoretical vs actual" performances than this.
 
Hence this is the very reason I was interested in the basis for the rating factors which I understand are designed to provide a meaningful relationship between power to weight (RSA/RW) and waterline length (RL) in an effort to generate ratings which reasonably,  sensibly and fairly estimate a boat's performance potential.
 
I would be particularly interested in your views about how well the ratings achieve this across boats of significant difference in length, weight and sail area?
 
Thanks and regards
Alan
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rob Zabukovec said:

Or it might be simpler and cheaper to just to go out and buy something like a Diam and have two boats. At least you will still have one you can cruise in or go offshore with

Now your onto something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, WetnWild said:

Haha. That's funny. You've basically described Mojo. Just go and buy it. It's for sale. Doubles up as a very nice condomaran when not winning races!

Haha. Thats funny, You've basically shown no understanding of the conversation. A boat like Mojo is great until a Mojo clone turns up with the new fuck all headroom  cabin, lower freeboard , new lifting foils and the latest sails made from unobtanium.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny. Ive only ever heard people who don't race on a regular basis complain about OMR. 

 

I sailed the the week on Hasta la Vista. We had a great week, and were quite competitive in div 1, despite being the slowest rated boat, and one of two boats in div 1 that could be genuinely considered able to race offshore. We lost our chances at a podium during the 2nd day of windward leeward racing. It is definitely difficult to race a 36 foot tri, with sinks and windows against overgrown off the beach boats, but the Diam's had issues staying far enough in front over the long light air work to the Sandhills.

 

in the end, a single number formula will always end up with conditions favouring one boat over another. The same happens in IRC. Unless someone is willing to come up with an IMS style formula for multihulls that takes conditions into account, and comes up with a reliable way to measure the conditions across a fleet during an ocean race, single number ratings are what we got

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, F15 AUS said:

 

 

in the end, a single number formula will always end up with conditions favouring one boat over another. The same happens in IRC. Unless someone is willing to come up with an IMS style formula for multihulls that takes conditions into account, and comes up with a reliable way to measure the conditions across a fleet during an ocean race, single number ratings are what we got

Or you decide what type of boats you want to favour , for the future of  the sport and bias the rule accordingly.

Why a few INSHORE racers are favoured over thousands of comfortable performance cruisers is pretty short term thinking by a the OFFSHORE rules custodians.  But hey , its their rule and they can F@@@ it up nowever they like , but FFS don't call it an AUSTRALIAN MULTIHULL CHAMPIONSHIPS when it clearly isn't a level playing field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What rule does YA (or whatever it is now called) intend to run their 2018 Australian Multihull Championship at Sandringham under??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, overlay said:

Or you decide what type of boats you want to favour , for the future of  the sport and bias the rule accordingly.

Why a few INSHORE racers are favoured over thousands of comfortable performance cruisers is pretty short term thinking by a the OFFSHORE rules custodians.  But hey , its their rule and they can F@@@ it up nowever they like , but FFS don't call it an AUSTRALIAN MULTIHULL CHAMPIONSHIPS when it clearly isn't a level playing field.

Im not sure "thousands" of comfortable performance cruises are holding back on entering the Nationals because of a rating rule,actually not sure thousands want to enter at all but hey, lets not let facts interfere with a good shit fight. So how many of the participants in this discussion actually own/race a multihull,and is it the much hyped  "beachcat' type or a "proper Winebago". don't hold back boys declare your interests. If you don't have a dog(or cat) in the fight I suggest you go back to filing your nails and leave the discussion to the affected partys.(keyboard warriors are oxygen thieves) Lets also look at now and the future not dredge up old prejudices and events, the volunteers that administer OMR are doing this I believe, A load cell has been purchased to fix the previous shit fight about weight. Are one of you volunteering to be the OMR police and check each boat prior to each race and make sure everything is on board? I think the volunteers are also sailing ,not checking some ratty old Dacron jib in the bilge is, "as measured".Most of us know what our competition haveor should have board,and would point out to the friends we race against if they "inadvertently" forgot to carry the correct equipment. Where you carry it in most cases is unregulated.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 HJ

The rating whingers are generally those who don't turn up and certainly don't volunteer to help develop or improve systems. 

The condomarans generally like the winter northern regattas because it fits in with cruising season and it's a fine part of the world. I doubt the rating system would influence any of that. 

Just go sailing people and enjoy it - and I do have dogs in the game!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, DtM said:

What rule does YA (or whatever it is now called) intend to run their 2018 Australian Multihull Championship at Sandringham under??

OMR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if I brought a condomaran with a great crew that could squeeze every last ounce of speed out of her and I spend big on sails. Can I win against Ullman and the Diams?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, DtM said:

So, if I brought a condomaran with a great crew that could squeeze every last ounce of speed out of her and I spend big on sails. Can I win against Ullman and the Diams?

Not sure if you could but we beat all comers on MOJO at ABRW in 2015. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, overlay said:

Haha. Thats funny, You've basically shown no understanding of the conversation. A boat like Mojo is great until a Mojo clone turns up with the new fuck all headroom  cabin, lower freeboard , new lifting foils and the latest sails made from unobtanium.  

I understand exactly. Boats improve and designs improve over time. Measurement systems also improve over time. None of the promised performance improvement for things like canting rigs and lifting foils has been evident yet in our fleets. When it is I'm sure OMR will address it. The biggest performance improvers I see are crispy new well designed sails, good skippering, crew work and navigation. No rating system changes those. They require looking in the mirror. It's called development. Get used to it or take up marbles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, DtM said:

So, if I brought a condomaran with a great crew that could squeeze every last ounce of speed out of her and I spend big on sails. Can I win against Ullman and the Diams?

Don't die wondering buddy! only 1 way to test that theory.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For mine I’m a pretty big advocate of OMR but it’s always quite a pain administering it for weekly racing and at this time RMYC races are just running scratch and phs.

I wish we could run OMR weekly but the main obstacle is not measuring, not getting people to sail their boats in the measured configuration but to convince people that the RULE WORKS and that it’s fair and thus have enthusiasm for it. 

I certainly would like to see a lot more discussions about the intricacies of the rule rather than the usual “its good/ it’s bad/ you suck” banter.

It’s about mathematics. General discussions are fine but we need data.

 I think it’s formula has by and large come up with tcf’s that have rewarded well sailed and well designed (for racing performance), well optimised boats (and I don’t think that necessarily means getting the lowest number possible otherwise they’d be a lot of tubby (heavy) boats with small low aspects sail plans winning). 

Omr wise the really interesting thing from recent regattas (although the numbers have been dismal- 20 for Nationals, 16 for LCMR - they are both well down to previous)  is seeing the change (or not) in results when crews change boats. I haven’t looked closely yet but that must say stuff about the rule. 

But, alas, within boat racing there are so many variables (eg sailing abilities, boat set up and in our racing boat design and quality of sails) even strict one design fleets often have such huge distances between the top boats and the middle runners.

However we shouldnt throw out the baby with the bath water because the rule has generally worked well for us but we must keep developing and refining the rule from data not whims.  

Does that mean we need a review committee? Do we thus need an administration body? That old chestnut. 

I’m stoked that QLD bought a single point hanging weigh cell and I’ll hopefully be able to utilise it down here and need to talk to you about that. Eg Cost and it’s weigh capabilities. Eg there’s a 60 ‘tri being relaunched down here for one. 

SB. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OTB racer like the DIAM will almost always  have lower windage than a boat with accommodation.

You can do what you like with the sail area, boat length and weight,  if  windage is not accounted for in the

calculation ,  you run the risk of the fleet members that want to be  competitive all moving  towards the Off The Beach racer.

The owners that don't want to give up their accom will quite possibly just drop out.

Is this worth considering?

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And for those who still want  a proven multipurpose competitive offshore multi to race against the (inshore) OMR sportsboats, get an M32 cat, current record holder of the 750 mile Race to Alaska. Complete with "unproven" T rudders and curved foils (0:05 to 0:15 secs into video).
 
The off watch crew sleep/rest on the racks in bivvy bags with a knife in hand, so that they can cut themselves out quick if the boat flips and the zip jams. You could also trapeze off the racks to make more room for the offwatch crew, especially when cruising. Nothing specific on the OMR website that I can see says you can't.....
 
Downside is that the design is pretty old compared to the latest modified Diam type and will need an optimising upgrade to stay on top of the game. Too much windage in the bows for starters..... And if it can survive 750 miles offshore, it is obviously overbuilt for (Inshore) OMR and will need to lose some weight.
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, SCANAS said:

All the accomodation = weight. Asking for windage is, well....

That is the problem, biasing the rule with a bit more weight for accommodation doesn't work. OMR was there before. You can still have an (artificially) overweight sportsboat and do well. Make that sportsboat have a minimum headroom, at least 3 bunks, galley, heads water tanks etc and see how much extra windage vertical CG shift and pitching you get.

Never mind the weight, try fitting all that into a Diam. In the MOCRA rule, a Diam would carry a 5% penalty for the lack of headroom alone. In the Texel"cabin" multihull rule, (as opposed to the "open" cat/tri rule) it looks to be around 6%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rob Zabukovec said:

That is the problem, biasing the rule for a bit more weight for accommodation doesn't work. OMR was there before. You can still have an (artificially) overweight sportsboat and do well. Make that sportsboat have a minimum headroom, at least 3 bunks, galley, heads water tanks etc and see how much extra windage vertical CG shift and pitching you get.

Never mind the weight, try fitting all that into a Diam. 

Rob, I have raced numerous multihulls over the past 40+ years and mainly under OMR and I've made a lot of friends and we do it because we like sailing fast boats and we enjoy  the friendship and competition and we're very happy to work within the current OMR framework. There's a lot of people who work behind the scene to make this handicap system fair but as the boats vary so much it is impossible to to produce a handicap that works for all boats  in all conditions. If you don't like it, buy an Etchell.

I assume you race your proa , how do you go there on handicap?

regards

 

Tony Considine 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tony,

My own VPP tells me that my 9.5 metre boat should be roughly the same speed as your Diam. But over an average 20 mile race, your Diam would beat me by over four and a half minutes on OMR. Bearing in mind that my boat has 3 bunks, full (for me and my wife) headroom, a galley, heads, what do you think the reality would be?

OMR for me will never happen. But I do care for the bulk of existing OMR fleet and where OMR is heading. I have raced for over 30 years under IOR and IRC and sports boats including Melges 24s and have seen all of this happen before. And a lot more.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/10/2017 at 9:05 AM, square top said:

As you say you've only ever sailed other peoples boats which must have been top end boats and funded by owners who could afford to put their boats on the water and were constantly changed to meet the rule changes. We'll be interested to follow your progress when you start tearing up your own cash to remain on top of the rule as it changes and then you can back up your claim about getting out there and competing, "but at your own expense".

From what I hear the winners usually pour heaps of cash into boats to keep them current, Mad Max/Ullaman Sails is a very good example of an endless spend and time modifying to get it to where it is and theres plenty more like Morticia, Indian Chief, Trilogy and the others that were previous Div 1 winners over the years that spent plenty to keep at the top.

It's the owners that back up year after year i respect, not the freeloaders that just turn up to sail other peoples boats and then talk up how good they are. 

As for OMR, it has some way to go if you want growth of multi racing, IMO. If one looks at what the mono fleets do, sports boats don't race against ocean going IRC boats on handicap or around the course for that matter. Surely that method should be looked at for multis if you are to attract all types because i cant see the likes of Rushhour competing against a stripped out foiling race tri on OMR if both are sailed well.  

Been up north off the grid for a while and nice to come back to some healthy debate mixed with a few chunks of NFI, so will clean that up first.

I never said I only sailed other people's boats only that it works well on big cats for me in the often rough waters of the increasingly expensive northern regattas on wonderful boats like McMoggy, Mojo, Pecadillo, Rushour. All great owners and crew, so the cost is a fraction of taking my own little tri's and busting them up there. Otherwise I sail my own (chronologically) little TT720 Try Flying, F24 Intrigue, F27 IntrIIgue, F22 Boom, and currently F28R Trinity. All on a budget, and some have been on the northern regattas. The F27 had a big year and did ABRW and MIRW with significant costs involved by the time you tow and sort accommodation and berthing. I have never charged my own crew a cent for any regatta or berthing fees, but many have helped with fuel, and all shout me more drinks than I can remember...

So calling me a freeloader is probably the dumbest thing you have said here.

As for the rest of your dribble, the fantastic crew on all of these boats have pushed me up onto the podium for plenty of gold stars, including a narrow div 2 win in the nationals this month in my beautiful bog-standard 20 year old F28 R with bog standard, plan specified sails. No optimisation, no big dollars, tons of fun hitting above 19 knots in all the passage races.

And again, OMR is not perfect but beats the PCHRF whatever chook raffle hands down. It will certainly struggle when foiling on the new breed of boats becomes idiot-proof, in the same way that IRC struggles with the motor-sailers. As for Sports Boat ratings, just say SMS to any of them and get ready for the verbal dump. All of my old skiff mates have lost faith in it and some who sail with me reckon we are miles ahead of it.

 

Peter Hackett

(My name, and perhaps if you are going to keep basing your data on "From what I hear" you should change your data source and put your name here too) 

 

    

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rob Zabukovec said:

Tony,

My own VPP tells me that my 9.5 metre boat should be roughly the same speed as your Diam. But over an average 20 mile race, your Diam would beat me by over four and a half minutes on OMR. Bearing in mind that my boat has 3 bunks, full (for me and my wife) headroom, a galley, heads, what do you think the reality would be?

OMR for me will never happen. But I do care for the bulk of existing OMR fleet and where OMR is heading. I have raced for over 30 years under IOR and IRC and sports boats including Melges 24s and have seen all of this happen before. And a lot more.

 

This puzzles me a bit. I think most people understand that it is a very difficult task to devise a rating system which encompasses boats with such wide design purposes and size ranging from full on racing to laid back cruising. I doubt any system would ever be able to evenly rate a maxi to a foiling moth in all sea states. 

In a practical sense OMR does a  job in sorting out who the good sailors are in the well prepared boats. Interestingly in the Nationals just held at RQ, both divisions were won on OMR by old boats which were well prepared and well sailed. They are both around 20 years old and aren't the latest designs or unobtainium. IMHO the system is working as well as could be expected given the task it is being given. I don't think it is feasible to ask it to rate oddball designs before they actually participate in a good number of significant regattas so that it can be determined what if anything needs to be addressed. Specifically, lifting foils, canting rigs, foiling foils and proas haven't shown anything yet at major regattas that need attention. They might in the future but we haven't seen any performance leaps from them yet. 

On the condomaran issue, if enough turn up they get their own division and problem solved. The ones who fancy themselves as racers seem very happy to race against the rocketships. 

Disclaimers:

1 I have no involvement in administering OMR

2 I'd rather the OMR for my boat was better

3 My golf handicap is grossly unfair

4 I don't get paid enough

5 Etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/10/2017 at 6:46 PM, overlay said:

Or you decide what type of boats you want to favour , for the future of  the sport and bias the rule accordingly.

Why a few INSHORE racers are favoured over thousands of comfortable performance cruisers is pretty short term thinking by a the OFFSHORE rules custodians.  But hey , its their rule and they can F@@@ it up nowever they like , but FFS don't call it an AUSTRALIAN MULTIHULL CHAMPIONSHIPS when it clearly isn't a level playing field.

Don't know where to start on this psychotic stuff, but suggest overlay that you read the OMR preamble. A committee of guys who sail all sorts of multihulls look at all the data and if it looks like anything is benefiting without a suitable factor applied, then that is done. Propellors and types were a little blurry so have been fixed for example. If you think that we could sit down and decide what type of boat we were trying to bias against or for, you must think we are geniuses. So did we bias towards the dams before they were born? Wow!

We all think the AMC was a great name. As for your level playing field, winners of both divisions were 20 years old and there is no age allowance in our rule. Seems pretty level to me that in div 1 the Ullman Sails old but sweetened boat was close to performance of the new diams in this regatta, and in div 2 a 20 year old standard F28r was so close to a Dash half its age that they deadheated on OMR, and narrowly ahead of a new OAK F-Bomb with Tornado floats (that could well have won overall with fewer breakages).

 

Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, plywoodboy said:

Don't know where to start on this psychotic stuff, but suggest overlay that you read the OMR preamble. A committee of guys who sail all sorts of multihulls look at all the data and if it looks like anything is benefiting without a suitable factor applied, then that is done. Propellors and types were a little blurry so have been fixed for example. If you think that we could sit down and decide what type of boat we were trying to bias against or for, you must think we are geniuses. So did we bias towards the dams before they were born? Wow!

We all think the AMC was a great name. As for your level playing field, winners of both divisions were 20 years old and there is no age allowance in our rule. Seems pretty level to me that in div 1 the Ullman Sails old but sweetened boat was close to performance of the new diams in this regatta, and in div 2 a 20 year old standard F28r was so close to a Dash half its age that they deadheated on OMR, and narrowly ahead of a new OAK F-Bomb with Tornado floats (that could well have won overall with fewer breakages).

 

Peter

Yes yes, the rule is perfect we hear you;). As multihull ownership increases , the percentage racing under OMR reduces. Keep sculling the cool-aid Peter.

Those rose coloured glasses are working a treat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, overlay said:

Yes yes, the rule is perfect we hear you;). As multihull ownership increases , the percentage racing under OMR reduces. Keep sculling the cool-aid Peter.

Those rose coloured glasses are working a treat.

I think you will like minded people here http://sailinganarchy.com/2017/10/17/poles-on-parade/ I think you'd fit right in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is just as basic as .If you suck at sailing you like PHS ,IF you are good at sailing you like OMR .Just stop the excuses the PHS lovers , admit it and move on 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Overlay,or Rob Z, please upload the system either or both of you have devised to replace OMR. You both seem  to spend a lot of time researching, commenting, criticizing it, but to date you are not really offering up any constructive solution. You guys may have the solution you think we all need, please enlighten us, you must have an answer.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two new names for them,

Daimsub or

SubDiam

But they were fast boats sailed fast.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the only OMR part I found surprising is the top half, girth measurement of the spin is not measured.

Pretty clear in light air when its fat its a huge advantage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • SL1 - The longest luff of a spinnaker whether it be symmetrical or not, from tack to head along the edge
  • SL2 - The length of the second luff or leech of the spinnaker measured along the edge
  • SF - The length of the foot of the spinnaker measured along the edge.
  • SMG- The mid girth of the spinnaker measured between the midpoint of SL1 and SL2.
  • 12.4 Measured sail area spinnaker,

    MSASp = SF*(SL1+SL2)/4 + (SMG-SF/2)*(SL1+SL2)/3

The above is from OMR preamble on MYCQ website.  

What part of that makes Sailabout think girth of spinnaker is not measured??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He specifically described an additional girth measurement higher up that he thinks is important.  He did not say at all that girth was not measured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/19/2017 at 1:27 PM, Sailabout said:

the only OMR part I found surprising is the top half, girth measurement of the spin is not measured.

Pretty clear in light air when its fat its a huge advantage

Fat kites do not work at all on racing multihulls, especially in light air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bushsailor said:

Fat kites do not work at all on racing multihulls, especially in light air.

are you sailing a beach cat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, from a reliable source the Pulse 600 did one race unofficially. How did it perform? Should be a good package in the right hands just don't hear anything of them in racing circles. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Crazy Horse said:

So, from a reliable source the Pulse 600 did one race unofficially. How did it perform? Should be a good package in the right hands just don't hear anything of them in racing circles. 

 

It looked pretty good upwind, a wet ride in chop though. It also looked like a decent bowsprit might help the kite work better, as noted on the other Pulse forum.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First up I would like to congratulate Dale and his crew on their win. I have raced at many regattas in a different class to Dale but seen enough to know that he certainly knows how to drive a boat so am not surprised with the result.

In regard to all of the guff over the omr rule I think many people are missing the point. In my opinion the purpose of any rating rule is to accurately represent the performance potential of a boat and represent that potential in a numerical scale that can be used to calculate results that create a level playing field. Ie The best sailed boat should always win. The fact that a rating can be "optimised" proves that this is not yet the case with omr. A boats' speed potential is theoretically simple to calculate. That is calculate the power it generates and take into account its resistance to being driven.  Calculating power generated is simply represented by sail area. It is the resistance part that is hard and where most rating rules including omr fall down. Omr only measures waterline length and weight. It pays no regard to length to beam ratio prismatic ratio and several other naval design factors that my brief reading failed to comprehend. The trouble is that the texcel rule was designed for off the beach cats before foils etc came along so Lwl:wlb ratios were pretty similar so the rule worked reasonably well. With modern designs pushing out easily driven hull forms with very high lwl:wlb ratios it is very hard for any rating to achieve accuracy over the full spread of designs.

So what can we do?  It is plain to see that owners of boats with more robust designs are dissatisfied as the rule can be optimised by easily driven pure racing hulls where the fatter hulls require grunt to get moving and don't generate the apparent velocity to take advantage of the "optimised" flatter sails. I think we need to take into account hull form of the primary driven hull to complete the equation and make a fairer representation of a boats' speed potential. This could be taken to the crazy pedantic levels of the old irc rating but I think for our boats a simple addition to the existing equation with a sliding scale for the lwl:wlb ratio would at least go some way toward this aim. This would only require one more measurement (maximum waterline beam). 

Regards all 

Shane

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, plywoodboy said:

It looked pretty good upwind, a wet ride in chop though. It also looked like a decent bowsprit might help the kite work better, as noted on the other Pulse forum.

 

Thanks Peter, would be good to see at least one completing a series with a good crew to see how they would go against the other more established tri's. Will see what the summer brings

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dunno, Peter Baker was sticking his cameras on boats and heads all week. Wish I had ours on for the exciting days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎21‎/‎2017 at 11:10 PM, wangiboy said:

First up I would like to congratulate Dale and his crew on their win. I have raced at many regattas in a different class to Dale but seen enough to know that he certainly knows how to drive a boat so am not surprised with the result.

In regard to all of the guff over the omr rule I think many people are missing the point. In my opinion the purpose of any rating rule is to accurately represent the performance potential of a boat and represent that potential in a numerical scale that can be used to calculate results that create a level playing field. Ie The best sailed boat should always win. The fact that a rating can be "optimised" proves that this is not yet the case with omr. A boats' speed potential is theoretically simple to calculate. That is calculate the power it generates and take into account its resistance to being driven.  Calculating power generated is simply represented by sail area. It is the resistance part that is hard and where most rating rules including omr fall down. Omr only measures waterline length and weight. It pays no regard to length to beam ratio prismatic ratio and several other naval design factors that my brief reading failed to comprehend. The trouble is that the texcel rule was designed for off the beach cats before foils etc came along so Lwl:wlb ratios were pretty similar so the rule worked reasonably well. With modern designs pushing out easily driven hull forms with very high lwl:wlb ratios it is very hard for any rating to achieve accuracy over the full spread of designs.

So what can we do?  It is plain to see that owners of boats with more robust designs are dissatisfied as the rule can be optimised by easily driven pure racing hulls where the fatter hulls require grunt to get moving and don't generate the apparent velocity to take advantage of the "optimised" flatter sails. I think we need to take into account hull form of the primary driven hull to complete the equation and make a fairer representation of a boats' speed potential. This could be taken to the crazy pedantic levels of the old irc rating but I think for our boats a simple addition to the existing equation with a sliding scale for the lwl:wlb ratio would at least go some way toward this aim. This would only require one more measurement (maximum waterline beam). 

Regards all 

Shane

 

 

 

Ullman Sails  is now owned by Paul Mitchell not Dale his brother .Better get this right as our going to see a lot more of Paul at the top in the future 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/13/2017 at 4:10 PM, Zorro2 said:

Hmmm, I wonder where "go out and enjoy your sailing young/old man" fits into all this? Call me old fashioned, behind the times, silly old fart, whatever, but I can tell you hardly anyone here at RMYC Pittwater gives a rat's arse about OMR because the primary motivation each week is to enjoy a sail around the Pittwater puddle, sink a few ales back at the club, collect (or not) a PHS winner's bottle of vino, relive the race through individual post-mortems or "if onlys", then go home happy -  having enjoyed a nice day out on the water and a few beers with mates, ready to do it all again next week.

So endeth the lesson!

Cheers

Alan

 

When I went back to sailing in 1980 I started with the Olympic 470 class - one-design racing.

At Woollahrah Sailing Club we used a crude but effective PHS for the weekly races and club pointscore. We had a Club Championship which had no handicap, designed to sort out the best 470 sailors in the club. Of course at state, national and world championships in the 470 class there were no handicaps as we were sorting out champion sailors.

PHS is great for club racing, with the purpose of getting boats out on the water and sailors of all levels of ability and dedication out there having fun. It is totally unsuitable for a championship where we are trying to sort out our champion sailors.

What we need for a championship is to try to emulate one-design racing. This is the aim of OMR. It is designed and developed to achieve just that and though far from perfect it gets better with each revision.

So let's be thankful that we have a bunch of people prepared to do the hard work involved in the continued development of OMR.

Instead of bagging it lets make polite submissions for what we perceive as a possible improvement.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/21/2017 at 12:34 AM, Sailabout said:

are you sailing a beach cat?

No he is sailing a performance cruiser.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites