Jubblies

Can you make a "PHRF cheater"?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Meat Wad said:

How does anyone know how they rate going into a race?

 

Need to know basis only. And you don't need to know!

Share this post


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

I had a Tripp 33 and was never out of the top 3 in any Regatta we did on lake Ontario for 8 years. Great boat but a very fine groove.

3b405f71f605efa4846d7d3d508b4698.jpg

you really needed 9 ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Crooked Beat said:

The J22 and J24 are up again for a rating review (sailing faster than they should against the rest of the PHRF-Lo Fleet) for 2020 on Lake Ontario. 

 

what do they rate now?

183, 174??

Share this post


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

This is a problem that ORC eliminated IMO. Because all certs are publicly available, its pretty cut and dry whether someone is sailing outside of their declared or measured configuration.

Reduced perhaps, but I don't think eliminated.  I've pulled up some awfully weird looking ORC generated sail plans.  One had an impossibly shaped mainsail  leech (almost Z shaped IIRC).  May have been a Club ORC IDK, it was several years ago.   Lots of other ones I found highly suspect.

Not a whole lot different than PHRF - you have the declared measurements and you can usually tell if they are off significantly out of touch with reality. 

The thing is in either ORC or PHRF, someone has to have the cajones to report them, or whatever the process is.  There have been several cases in the local PHRF fleet where the owners of offside boats have been told by other competitors that they believe their declared measurements are wrong in quite heated terms, but no one reports them, leaving it up to the owner to self report.  Which never happens.

Having said that, there have been a few who have been busted.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, dacapo said:

what do they rate now?

183, 174??

171 and 162. Which I think are the fasted rated J22s and J24s in North America. Quite a difference from 183 and 174

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, dacapo said:

you really needed 9 ?

We were racing in Kingston where it blows hard pretty much every day. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The J22 and J24 are up again for a rating review (sailing faster than they should against the rest of the PHRF-Lo Fleet) for 2020 on Lake Ontario.

Any one-design, raced in sufficient numbers and for sufficient time, will lead to well-developed sails and sailing techniques. These two things should not be considered cause to change a rating.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Meat Wad said:

How does anyone know how they rate going into a race?

 

That's the point... We have a similar race for Octoberfest where the ratings are "Adjusted" according to random whims of the RC, so everyone "wins" their stein

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Somebody Else said:

Any one-design, raced in sufficient numbers and for sufficient time, will lead to well-developed sails and sailing techniques. These two things should not be considered cause to change a rating.

 

Agreed.

Things are different for the PHRF-LO fleet. Most of the fleet is north of the border where many old boats keep on going.

And PHRF-LO lets some boats change the rudder (the Hinterholler Shark) and not change the rating, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just remember PHRF is like handicap Golf. It is fun to do, on a good day you look good, on a bad day you look bad. If you win you can't really claim to be the best. If you lose...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Somebody Else said:

Oh great! Participation awards!

you_tried.png.a0e381decfaf7dfeb36f49e15c17a1b0.png

You imply you think that's a bad thing :)

There is a place for participation awards, there is also a place for a 'You tried too hard' award, when you go to unreasonable lengths to win a 'competition' that really does not warrant it. Like bringing a ringer to the rec league softball game, dropping one of your regulars to do it, screaming at the ump when a call goes against you, and then trash talking the opposition.

I have awarded myself the 'you tried too hard' once (and possibly deserved it on other occasions.) Whenever i start taking myself too seriously I remind myself of that occasion and resolve not to be such an arsehole (sometimes I don't remind myself in time :) ).

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

IMHO the business of protesting ratings is a large part of what's killing racing in NA. It's extremely distasteful to go before a committee (with some dubious credentials and obvious prejudices) to say, "Waaaah, I need a new raaaating 'cuase I don't win enough." It's humiliating, I've done that with a much more thoughtful presentation than "Waaaah" and it was humiliating. It's even less distasteful to protest your competitor's rating for obvious reasons. And NONE of it is conducive to any kind feel of community in the fleet, it just causes distress. This thread is about the boat, not protesting ratings, but this is a pall over the entire subject.

PHRF has no rating formula, there is no secret algorithm that they punch in the specs of your boat and come out with a number. The process is have other PHRF regions rated this type of boat? Answer="Oh good we don't have to make a decision" Do we have ratings for other models similar, define similar? Answer= Is the boat fast looking? 20 guys have a quick chat and someone proposes a rating, the group votes on the rating. ...and now you are stuck with a bad rating. 

If you come in and make a  good case based on the boats attributes, ratings from other rating systems (that do have formulas), sister boats results (not yours), Sail Measurements that may differ from specs found on internet, Mast Measurement... Don't come in and say we get beat so we need a better rating when your crew can't get the spinnaker set without a calamity on deck or you are never on the on the lifted tack. I voted against every rating protest based on their own results, but if there was merit to their argument I was more open to changing the rating. 

As far as protesting a rating I agree it is ugly work but you can also protest the boat during a race. If a boat has a OD PHRF rating and that rating includes only 100% jib only and you see him fly a 150% during the race, protest! Get him tossed on the race, that makes a much louder statement than belly crawling into the PHRF committee. Never make a solo attempt to protest another boats rating in front of the committee, get a few boats involved. Now this won't help for a boat with a gift rating...

As far as your comment that "this is a thread about the boat and not the rating", not so. The tread is about cheating under a rating system, you need to include and analysis of the system. There are many ways of cheating. 

FRENZY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hitchhiker said:

Need to know basis only. And you don't need to know!

Actually, I do need to know. I am involved with our Ventura YC Wet Wednesday scoring and I have told many that I will adjust your rating for the event because the So Cal PHRF rating is BS. We do  not require a Cert for entry, so we do have some discretion.

With a Mast Head Kite the Wabbit rates 153 in So Cal. Since the class has adopted the 1 Trap class legal, no Wabbit has been rated. In Nor Cal I have seen them rated at 126.

So for our Wet Wednesday, I rated them at 126. We adjust boats that win with a -6 sec/mile adj for the next race. the Wabbit went to a rating of 111 before it stopped winning and started getting second or third. I should have given him an extra 12 sec/mile for the MH Kite.

SO, YES some of us would really like to know and it would be nice to  share if you have some really good data. Many of us are not engineers or designers and are left to our own devices. I think it is pretty selfish, unless he is hoping to get a payoff, but it sounds like he did it out of frustration of the Nor Cal PHRF Board.
 

1 hour ago, LionessRacing said:

That's the point... We have a similar race for Octoberfest where the ratings are "Adjusted" according to random whims of the RC, so everyone "wins" their stein

 

I can see that for one race. It's a beer drinking fun event. make it a fund raiser for the Youth Sailing and I'm in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Meat Wad said:

How does anyone know how they rate going into a race?

 

You don’t.  Rating is Dynamic.

SHC

Share this post


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

Hinterholler Shark) and not change the rating, 

Um, when was the last boat built by Hinterholler ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, LionessRacing said:

Um, when was the last boat built by Hinterholler ? 

Maybe Hinterholler's last Shark was 1980? But Shark's were produced until around 1990 in North America. A few more built overseas after 1990. There are still huge numbers of Sharks on the Canadian shore of Lake Ontario.

My point is that PHRF-LO allowed the Shark owners to change their rudder design WITHOUT taking a change in PHRF ratings.

Why would a boat change a rudder design if it were not to enhance safety and/or performance?  A "Beam of Destiny" gets a PHRF hit, but a rudder does not? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Crooked Beat said:

Maybe Hinterholler's last Shark was 1980? But Shark's were produced until around 1990 in North America. A few more built overseas after 1990. There are still huge numbers of Sharks on the Canadian shore of Lake Ontario.

My point is that PHRF-LO allowed the Shark owners to change their rudder design WITHOUT taking a change in PHRF ratings.

Why would a boat change a rudder design if it were not to enhance safety and/or performance?  A "Beam of Destiny" gets a PHRF hit, but a rudder does not? 

Read the Shark class rules. The rudder must measure in based on the formula. There is a minimum weight and a number of measurement points it needs to adhere to. I'm guessing PHRF-LO is aware of these requirements.

6.5 Rudder 
 
a) The Rudder shall be constructed of solid hardwood or alternately of fibre reinforced plastic over an optional core. The core must be suitable for the applied loads.  b) The minimum weight including pintles or pins but less tiller and extension shall be 7.7 kg. (17 lbs.). A maximum of 0.9 kg of corrector weights may be added.  c) The blade thickness shall be 40 mm 5 mm (1-9/16” 3/16”).  This thickness is to comply for a minimum distance of 711 mm (2’4”) below the transom. d) The depth of rudder below the lowest point of the transom shall be a minimum of 813 mm (2’8”). e) The rudder width between the bottom of the transom and 711.mm (2’4”) below the transom, shall not be more than 432 mm (17”) and not less than 178 mm (7”).  Also it must at some point be 279 mm (11”) wide.  The width below the 711 mm (2’4”) point is unrestricted. f) Rudder blades shall be fixed relative to the pintles.  Neither rudder depth nor rudder profile shall be adjustable.  The line of the gudgeons may be set at the vertical.  g) The rudder or transom shall be fitted with a suitable means of preventing the rudder from becoming detached from the hull. h) No other foils are allowed above or below the waterline, i.e. endplates, winglets. 
 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2020 at 6:01 PM, dacapo said:

errrr, you haven;t read the phrf regs recently have ya?   O30   was dinged if they have a BOD...same with E32  and the S33 in LI. it MUST be reported to phrf committee That requirement was made specific last year in the regs. Boats with struts and and mod like the BOD will get a hit. The problem is cheaters will still be cheaters and find a way

He's pulling your chain. The J29 doesn't need a BOD as its got a full main bulkhead which ties the chainplates, and mast step all together from the factory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a change in the rudder design of the Shark. The class rules quoted reflect that change.

PHRF-LO was aware of the change in design and yet did NOT change the PHRF-LO rating for a Shark. 

PHRF-LO appears to favour some boats over others. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most racing boats are in plane sight of the competition and committees. Just take a look. If the team is working on the yacht and other teams are standing around watching your team work....guess who is going to win. Hey , why were you guys out sailing yesterday for 5 hours....the regatta starts in two days? 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2020 at 7:06 PM, FRENZY said:

As far as your comment that "this is a thread about the boat and not the rating", not so. The tread is about cheating under a rating system, you need to include and analysis of the system. There are many ways of cheating. 

 

Actually this thread was about fixing your god-damned boat instead of bitching about the ratings of boats that have put their time into prep. "Making a PHRF cheater" was my attempt at making a funny towards those that don't put their boat in the best possible setup to perform, but then circle around the club complaining and some even going as far as protesting someone else's rating.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2020 at 3:13 PM, 12 metre said:

Reduced perhaps, but I don't think eliminated.  I've pulled up some awfully weird looking ORC generated sail plans.  One had an impossibly shaped mainsail  leech (almost Z shaped IIRC).  May have been a Club ORC IDK, it was several years ago.   Lots of other ones I found highly suspect.

Not a whole lot different than PHRF - you have the declared measurements and you can usually tell if they are off significantly out of touch with reality. 

The thing is in either ORC or PHRF, someone has to have the cajones to report them, or whatever the process is.  There have been several cases in the local PHRF fleet where the owners of offside boats have been told by other competitors that they believe their declared measurements are wrong in quite heated terms, but no one reports them, leaving it up to the owner to self report.  Which never happens.

Having said that, there have been a few who have been busted.

Ya gotta be a real lowlife to lie on your cert.  What is the point of that?  For club racing? Fer crissakes.

A simple way to check sail dimensions is with a camera.  Main is easy, take a pic at hoisting and scale it using known boat dimensions, if things are significantly out of whack, it will be readily apparent.  Jib almost as easy, scale the clew position when trimmed upwind.  Spin is tough.

The way to stop that kind of cheating is stiff penalties.  Back in the 70s on the Chesapeake, there was a sailmaker, head of a local loft, who had a mid 30s ft boat.  Lied on his cert, saying he had a fixed prop.  His boat was hauled mid season, and one of the raters saw it out of the water with a folding prop.  Guy got banned for life as an example, and was socially ostracized.  His sailmaker franchise got taken away and he eventually moved out of town.  That's how you deal with that.

Don't protest someone's rating half cocked.  If you question dimensions get data.  Data is really hard to argue, and you can check it with nobody being the wiser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2020 at 7:11 PM, axolotl said:

Been down that road, a set of scales at the dock and everybody gets weighed.  The trick is lots of sauna time  with no drinking water to dehydrate, then rehydrate after weigh in.  MMA fighters do the same to drop a weight class, then show up for the fight 15 pounds over to their advantage.  Just don't pass out.

Walking directly of the scales and straight to the table loaded with food and water was the normal practice.........what a farce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/13/2020 at 10:57 AM, Crooked Beat said:

There was a change in the rudder design of the Shark. The class rules quoted reflect that change.

PHRF-LO was aware of the change in design and yet did NOT change the PHRF-LO rating for a Shark. 

PHRF-LO appears to favour some boats over others. 

CrookedB, your comments illustrate the worst type of PHRF complainer - the uninformed one who spouts fake news...

Yes, the Shark class has allowed different rudder shapes within defined class regulations as RetBN outlined above.  This is nothing new and has been ongoing for many years within the confines of the one design rules.

Yes, the rudder allowance was an effort by the class to improve the handling and performance of the boat.

NO, you are absolutely wrong to say the PHRF-LO rating has not changed.  The Shark 24's rating was initially assigned as 243 in 1985, and the base has been adjusted downwards eight times since then due to race results analysis and observed performance.  It is currently 222 which is then adjusted to 219 with OD sails.  Three of those base adjustments were made in the last ten years: -9 in 2012, -3 in 2014, and another -3 in 2017, reflecting the observed and actual performance of Sharks when racing under PHRF-LO handicap (not OD).

Most Shark sailors who participate in one design class racing are sailing at a level far higher than most PHRF warriors.  Their performance is due to experience in close OD competition, significant crew and boat prep, equipment optimization, and advanced sail designs (even in low tech applications like the Shark).  It's not unusual to see OD racers performing 15-20 seconds faster than their handicap counterparts.  That's what makes the difference...

Cheers!

PS:  Hinterhoeller built their last Shark around 1970, there were three other Canadian builders until the late 80s, and the design is still in production in Europe.  Theboat wasn't originally intended to be a one design class, as evidenced by the different construction techniques utilized over the years.  The class has done it's best to keep competition equitable between the different versions.  The association has allowed some latitude in rudder design while keeping the class vital and sorta up-to-date.  For better or worse, PHRF-LO's rating reflects the current (and recent) performance of the design.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, CriticalPath said:

CrookedB, your comments illustrate the worst type of PHRF complainer - the uninformed one who spouts fake news...

Yes, the Shark class has allowed different rudder shapes within defined class regulations as RetBN outlined above.  This is nothing new and has been ongoing for many years within the confines of the one design rules.

Yes, the rudder allowance was an effort by the class to improve the handling and performance of the boat.

NO, you are absolutely wrong to say the PHRF-LO rating has not changed.  The Shark 24's rating was initially assigned as 243 in 1985, and the base has been adjusted downwards eight times since then due to race results analysis and observed performance.  It is currently 222 which is then adjusted to 219 with OD sails.  Three of those base adjustments were made in the last ten years: -9 in 2012, -3 in 2014, and another -3 in 2017, reflecting the observed and actual performance of Sharks when racing under PHRF-LO handicap (not OD).

Most Shark sailors who participate in one design class racing are sailing at a level far higher than most PHRF warriors.  Their performance is due to experience in close OD competition, significant crew and boat prep, equipment optimization, and advanced sail designs (even in low tech applications like the Shark).  It's not unusual to see OD racers performing 15-20 seconds faster than their handicap counterparts.  That's what makes the difference...

Cheers!

PS:  Hinterhoeller built their last Shark around 1970, there were three other Canadian builders until the late 80s, and the design is still in production in Europe.  Theboat wasn't originally intended to be a one design class, as evidenced by the different construction techniques utilized over the years.  The class has done it's best to keep competition equitable between the different versions.  The association has allowed some latitude in rudder design while keeping the class vital and sorta up-to-date.  For better or worse, PHRF-LO's rating reflects the current (and recent) performance of the design.

 

The year the new Shark rudder design came into the class rules, PHRF-LO DID NOT change the rating. I stand by that comment.  A boat changes the design and the PHRF-LO rating did not change.

While J22s and J24s do not change the boat and their ratings do change. Fact

 

What will be interesting is if PHRF-L0 decides to use a J24 as a Base Boat rating, as has been suggested, what will the rating be? Will it be similar to the North American  PHRF rating of a J24? Or will it be a special fast PHRF-LO rating? The J35 PHRF-LO rating is used as a Base Boat.  And that J35 PHRF-LO rating is in line with other PHRF ratings in North America. Why is the J35 PHRF-LO in line with other PHRF ratings in North America, while the PHRF-LO J22 and J24 are not? The difference or delta in PHRF ratings between the J22 and J24 and a J35 is quite different from the rest of North America. 

Shark PHRF-LO ratings seem to ebb and flow. I believe that Shark ratings have also gone up (slower) in recent memory.  It was explained to my club's PHRF rep that Shark PHRF-LO ratings change with the overall wind speed of a particular PHRF rating season. If a rating season had low average wind speeds, then the Shark will get a slower rating (the Shark is slow in light winds).  If there are relative high winds in a season, the Shark will do better in PHRF and get a faster rating. As we know, the Shark is a giant killer in high winds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2020 at 10:17 AM, Jubblies said:

Can you make a "PHRF cheater"?

I would say yes. Over the years it's been my observation that most boats are sailing at or below their ratings, and occasionally a few boats are way out performing their ratings. The question is why?

Now we all know that there are some boats out there that are flat out not rated accurately. There are reasons these anomalies exist such as lack of data points on low production boats, but Im not talking about these. I'm talking about the high production boat with a well established rating.

Let's first look at "a well established rating". This is a problematic statement. Take look at a random boat that fits this category. Say a J-30. This boat was in production for 7 years ending in 1986. This means that the NEWEST J-30 is now 34 years old. When was the last time your local PHRF board re-assessed the rating for a J-30. My guess would be 34 years ago!

Why is this important?

Looking around at the PHRF fleets I've sailed in over the last 30 years, there is something consistent. The average age of the fleet tends to be stuck in 20 year old boats. I would venture to guess this is largely based on the affordability of 20 year old boats. Well with this in mind we have to remember that things happen to a boat in 20 years.

Decks get wet,
Blisters form,
As a result of a wet'ish - wet boat, the boat flexes more,
Sail design and technology changes,
Bottom and foils get sanded on so many times, they are no where near their original shape (if they ever were to begin with)

These are just a few things I can think of off the top of my head that will slow down the performance of the boat. If you can think of more, I'd love to hear.

What does this all have to do with making a PHRF cheater? I would think it's pretty obvious...

  1. Buy any well established 20-30 year old boat
  2. Fix the shit...
    Re-core the deck, long board the bottom, template the foils, and replace, glass in,  and/or reinforce all the areas of the boat that may have been fatigued and flexing over the years. This will be easy once you start the process, because as you fix one area the loads will start transferring to the next weakest point until you reach the transom! Done right it will probably flex less than when it was first delivered.
  3. It's pretty obvious that you will never sail at or above your rating if you're putting up 20 year old rags. I would contend that there are significant differences between the sails we used even as recent as ten years ago and the sails we use now. They simply stretch significantly less, and are significantly lighter. Directly translating to more power and less heel. Chances are the guy winning in your PHRF fleet has them.
  4. Upgrade your gear. Again technology has changed. Modern hardware handles more load and handles easier, with the added bonus of being more than likely lighter in weight.
  5. Upgrade your cordage. If you don't think it's a big deal, do yourself a favor. Change one halyard from polyester to vectran, then report back to me.

Again, I think the list could be much larger. This is just the start, and again would love to hear the feedback. The point being you can start to see how one could start transforming that old (insert whichever 30 year old boat) into a "PHRF cheater", simply based on the fact that PHRF generally either has not, or does not adjust ratings over time for how a boat degrades, but most importantly how peak maintenance  and new technology can effect older designs.

Stop looking for the ultimate cheater...
MAKE YOUR OWN!

I dunno about a cheater, but I've got a 47 yr old Ranger 33 that was always 1or 2 in every race back in the day when the boat was well set up. Still 1or 2 now with a roller furler and 110 jib.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about this for PHRF cheats.  Sailing any boat with a rating based on it being a one design,  but sailing it outside the OD rules.  Some hypothetical examples:

  • racing a OD boat in breeze with total crew weight over the OD mandated max
  • racing any OD sprit boat with an Code zero that would not measure in under the class rules
  • racing a Melges 20 in breeze with crew hiking legs out, or a J70 with crew at full hiking position

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2020 at 2:01 PM, Crooked Beat said:

The year the new Shark rudder design came into the class rules, PHRF-LO DID NOT change the rating. I stand by that comment.  A boat changes the design and the PHRF-LO rating did not change.

While J22s and J24s do not change the boat and their ratings do change. Fact

What will be interesting is if PHRF-L0 decides to use a J24 as a Base Boat rating, as has been suggested, what will the rating be? Will it be similar to the North American  PHRF rating of a J24? Or will it be a special fast PHRF-LO rating? The J35 PHRF-LO rating is used as a Base Boat.  And that J35 PHRF-LO rating is in line with other PHRF ratings in North America. Why is the J35 PHRF-LO in line with other PHRF ratings in North America, while the PHRF-LO J22 and J24 are not? The difference or delta in PHRF ratings between the J22 and J24 and a J35 is quite different from the rest of North America. 

Shark PHRF-LO ratings seem to ebb and flow. I believe that Shark ratings have also gone up (slower) in recent memory.  It was explained to my club's PHRF rep that Shark PHRF-LO ratings change with the overall wind speed of a particular PHRF rating season. If a rating season had low average wind speeds, then the Shark will get a slower rating (the Shark is slow in light winds).  If there are relative high winds in a season, the Shark will do better in PHRF and get a faster rating. As we know, the Shark is a giant killer in high winds. 

Yeah...  No.

I disagree with some PHRF-LO policies and decisions, and I'm not an advocate of the organization, but have been involved on and off for nearly 35 years (currently off).  Nonetheless, I can't stand misinformation, so here goes...

1)  There is no "new Shark rudder design".  In 1992, the Shark CA defined a set of rudder specifications.  Since that time, there have been countless designs produced by naval architects, boat builders and repair/restoration shops, and backyard creators.  Back in those days PHRF-LO also had OD ratings whereby any boat which met the requirements of it's class association's rules was assigned the OD rating.  All Sharks with measurement certificates were automatically eligible for the same PHRF-LO OD rating as long as their rudder was class legal.

2)  You are correct, there was no adjustment made to the Shark's PHRF-LO rating in 1992.  The first adjustment was five years later.  See my comments in #6 below for a possible explanation of why it took five years to change.

3)  J/22's PHRF-LO rating has been adjusted downwards five times since 1987 and upwards once (in 2017).  Race results from the past five years show over 20 boats racing almost 500 races and averaging performances 8 seconds faster than their average rating.  They don't seem to have any difficulty performing at their current rating in handicap races.

4)  J/24's PHRF-LO rating has been adjusted downwards three times since 1987.  The rating has remained unchanged since 2006.  Race results from the past five years show almost 50 boats racing nearly 1250 races and averaging performances at 5 seconds faster than their average rating.  They don't seem to have any difficulty performing at their current rating in handicap races.

5)    PHRF-LO has used the J/24 for many years as one of about 20 base boats (designs with significant historical race data on LO and other PHRF districts used to compare rating differentials between designs of similar speed potential).  Attempting to compare individual PHRF ratings from one district to another is pointless, as are ratings differentials between boats with large performance variations.  Best to stick to comparisons in differences between designs of similar speed potentials.  NB:  This is not my opinion, but resonates through PHRF districts everywhere trying to protect their own data and assumed integrity.

6)  PHRF-LO's Shark ratings do not "ebb and flow".  The SP for the design has NEVER been adjusted slower.  Your PHRF rep's information is false.  PHRF-LO reviews the previous five years' race results (if available) when considering rating adjustments.  I don't even know what a "PHRF rep" is.  If it's your club handicapper, please direct him to the handicappers' section of the PHRF-LO website to educate himself.

7)  I recently bought a Shark to rejoin the one design fun (it's been 38 years since I raced in the fleet!), so I may be a bit biased, but it's a sad day for our sport when someone proclaims that a low tech 61 year old keelboat design is a "giant killer" in any conditions.  Many designs excel in specific conditions, but Sharks win consistently because they're well prepped, well understood, and well sailed by their owners and crew.  One Design racing is the surest recipe to increase the performance level of a boat and crew.  It has nothing to do with any PHRF rating..

Cheers!

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

The Hinterholler Shark class (as opposed to that other twin hulled Shark we have around here) allowed  in 1992, to change/modify the rudder. PHRF-LO was aware of the change yet it took 5 years to change (rudder related or not) the PHRF-LO rating. Other boats change/modify and that boat gets a rating change a lot quicker. That was my point: A PHRF-LO boat that has obviously changed did not get a change in rating, other boats would/will get an immediate change.

Any other thoughts about the delta or difference (subtraction) between the PHRF-LO J35, J24, J22 ratings?

My PHRF rep is indeed officially called the club's PHRF handicapper. He has spoke at length about the Shark PHRF-LO rating going up and down according to the speed of the wind. I guess he is mis-informed. He has also said the the J24 is now suggested to become a base boat like the J35. Words to that effect are on the PHRF-LO website.

The Shark is a giant killer in high winds; remember that famous LYRA high wind race across Lake Ontario to the north shore? Ancient history I guess.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Crooked Beat said:

My mistake, the J22, not the J24 is now a Benchmark Boat, not a base boat. 

 

https://phrf-lo.org/index.php/about-us/meetings/central-council/661-february-2019

J/24's been a benchmark boat for as long as PHRF-LO has used BBs, as you've noted they added the J/22 in 2019.  And your correct terminology (benchmark not base) is noted - my bad!

Share this post


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

I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

The Hinterholler Shark class (as opposed to that other twin hulled Shark we have around here) allowed  in 1992, to change/modify the rudder. PHRF-LO was aware of the change yet it took 5 years to change (rudder related or not) the PHRF-LO rating. Other boats change/modify and that boat gets a rating change a lot quicker. That was my point: A PHRF-LO boat that has obviously changed did not get a change in rating, other boats would/will get an immediate change.

Any other thoughts about the delta or difference (subtraction) between the PHRF-LO J35, J24, J22 ratings?

My PHRF rep is indeed officially called the club's PHRF handicapper. He has spoke at length about the Shark PHRF-LO rating going up and down according to the speed of the wind. I guess he is mis-informed. He has also said the the J24 is now suggested to become a base boat like the J35. Words to that effect are on the PHRF-LO website.

The Shark is a giant killer in high winds; remember that famous LYRA high wind race across Lake Ontario to the north shore? Ancient history I guess.

 

Crooked B, I provided info in previous posts on the items you've listed (again) above.  There's no point in repeating what you're unwilling to accept or don't understand.

I'm amused that your "giant killer in high winds" comment regarding the Shark's performance is based on published recollections of Freeman Cup and Blockhouse Bay races from the early 1960s.  Keelboat design and performance has progressed a bit since then.

Sorry my facts didn't persuade you to reconsider your belief in false news and misinformation.  You may choose to think we've agreed to disagree, but I've come to a different conclusion...

Cheers!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2020 at 7:42 AM, Cristoforo said:

Why dosnt the phrf call for a physical inspection?  Retroactive inspections/actions are permitted in the regs. 

No balls?  

U gonna volunteer??  If not well......  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, shaggy said:
On 2/12/2020 at 9:42 AM, Cristoforo said:

Why dosnt the phrf call for a physical inspection?  Retroactive inspections/actions are permitted in the regs. 

No balls?  

U gonna volunteer??  If not well......  

Plesae respectte Crisco, he hase done muche to drane the swampe caulled WLIS.  Butte needes forgivinesse fo rre hisse bullishe behaiviore on 'pukkeng on the dinghey' tipe of infractioneds.  Hesae 'cne do' guye butte offten gettes loste in the theorecticalle.   Thackes Shaggey!                                           :)                          

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most racing boats are in plane sight of the competition and committees. Just take a look. If the team is working on the yacht and other teams are standing around watching your team work....guess who is going to win. Hey , why were you guys out sailing yesterday for 5 hours....the regatta starts in two days? 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you ever notice how hard it is to sell a winning PHRF boat in the same district? The sport is egocentric....lot's of dorks all over the place. SCOTW like successful earthlings. They have the pick of the party....8-2 Guy/Girl ratio ...at best. 

Max out your PHRF boat if you want to win. If you just want to mess around, don't waste the organizers and proper yacht owners time with your lame rating appeals. It costs a few bucks, get over it! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2020 at 3:13 PM, 12 metre said:

Reduced perhaps, but I don't think eliminated.  I've pulled up some awfully weird looking ORC generated sail plans.  One had an impossibly shaped mainsail  leech (almost Z shaped IIRC).  May have been a Club ORC IDK, it was several years ago.   Lots of other ones I found highly suspect.

Not a whole lot different than PHRF - you have the declared measurements and you can usually tell if they are off significantly out of touch with reality. 

The thing is in either ORC or PHRF, someone has to have the cajones to report them, or whatever the process is.  There have been several cases in the local PHRF fleet where the owners of offside boats have been told by other competitors that they believe their declared measurements are wrong in quite heated terms, but no one reports them, leaving it up to the owner to self report.  Which never happens.

Having said that, there have been a few who have been busted.

I have also found quite a few errors in the certs, but thats why I like the system better than phrf. I can see in detail if someone is making crap claims when the file for a rating or sailing out of configuration with 5 minutes on my computer. Theres a lot less he said/she said and the corrected changes are clear cut, no arguing over performance gained or lost.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The PHRF Swamp will never be drained.  For some reason it runs like the LIRR with wet leaves on the track.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2020 at 6:02 PM, dacapo said:

ps, thanks for letting the phrf committee know about your mod the next time you get a cert and decide to go sailing again B)

That won't be happening, the boat is for sale;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/17/2020 at 11:06 PM, Pollination said:

Did you ever notice how hard it is to sell a winning PHRF boat in the same district?

In my neck of the woods there are not many winning PHRF boats for sale. However there are always a handful of not winning PHRF boats on the market.

On 2/17/2020 at 11:06 PM, Pollination said:

Max out your PHRF boat if you want to win. If you just want to mess around, don't waste the organizers and proper yacht owners time with your lame rating appeals. It costs a few bucks, get over it! 

The precise point of my original post!

Share this post


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

That won't be happening, the boat is for sale;) 

that's too bad..someone will have a great boat........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Full disclosure; I am an Assistant Chief Handicapper for PHRF-LO.

 

Cheating at PHRF racing is like cheating at Solitare, or cheating at Monopoly with pre-teens.

Sure you can, but do you really need to boost your self image that way?

Go race one design and help support the fleet, you will be a better sailor and a better person for it.

 

PHRF-LO runs a yearly day long workshop open to all handicappers, certificate holders, and other interested parties and has been for a few years (this year it is on March 28th at Genesee Yacht Club in Rochester New York). Mostly to explain how the process works and educate everyone. Time is allowed for questions, some years there are sail measurement classes, usually changes and how to handicap a boat are covered. There is a FREE lunch (you do need to register ahead so the there is enough lunch).

They also allow any Handicapper or owner though their club handicapper to request a review of a class of boat at the yearly review.

Perhaps if other PHRF organizations did the same there would be less biased decisions in dark rooms.

I would suggest both Crooked Beat and their club Handicapper should attend a workshop.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Kirby Nitwit said:

Full disclosure; I am an Assistant Chief Handicapper for PHRF-LO.

 

Cheating at PHRF racing is like cheating at Solitare, or cheating at Monopoly with pre-teens.

Sure you can, but do you really need to boost your self image that way?

Go race one design and help support the fleet, you will be a better sailor and a better person for it.

 

PHRF-LO runs a yearly day long workshop open to all handicappers, certificate holders, and other interested parties and has been for a few years (this year it is on March 28th at Genesee Yacht Club in Rochester New York). Mostly to explain how the process works and educate everyone. Time is allowed for questions, some years there are sail measurement classes, usually changes and how to handicap a boat are covered. There is a FREE lunch (you do need to register ahead so the there is enough lunch).

They also allow any Handicapper or owner though their club handicapper to request a review of a class of boat at the yearly review.

Perhaps if other PHRF organizations did the same there would be less biased decisions in dark rooms.

I would suggest both Crooked Beat and their club Handicapper should attend a workshop.

Thank you for commenting.

We hope that PHRF-LO will never again have the situation where a Class/boat (Shark keelboat) changes a fundamental part of the boat (rudder) and NOT change the PHRF-LO rating. While other boats do NOT change any part of their boat and do get rating changes. Perception of inequity and some boats are more equal than others.

 

Share this post


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

Thank you for commenting.

We hope that PHRF-LO will never again have the situation where a Class/boat (Shark keelboat) changes a fundamental part of the boat (rudder) and NOT change the PHRF-LO rating. While other boats do NOT change any part of their boat and do get rating changes. Perception of inequity and some boats are more equal than others.

 

Oh for christ sake!  GET INVOLVED or stop whining.  You might actually learn a thing or two.  Jeezus, its not like it's the international galactic championship of the free world.  

OBTW, it is totally possible to change the shape of a rudder, and improve control or boat handling without nominally making the boat any faster...If you can't go out and beat a boat first designed in 1959 with a design of a newer vintage (say a J-24, or Kirby 25, etc, etc), than that's because the Shark sailors do a better job prepping their boats, equipping their boats and SAILING their boats than you do.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Crash said:

Oh for christ sake!  GET INVOLVED or stop whining.  You might actually learn a thing or two.  Jeezus, its not like it's the international galactic championship of the free world.  

OBTW, it is totally possible to change the shape of a rudder, and improve control or boat handling without nominally making the boat any faster...If you can't go out and beat a boat first designed in 1959 with a design of a newer vintage (say a J-24, or Kirby 25, etc, etc), than that's because the Shark sailors do a better job prepping their boats, equipping their boats and SAILING their boats than you do.

The question is, is the Shark keelboat the only instance of a boat changing and not getting a PHRF-LO change. Or are there other boats that are not so well known?

It is not about beating a Shark. It is about equity. Are all PHRF-LO boats treated fairly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So based on reading the Shark Class rules, there is no "one defined rudder."  The rudder is a "box rule," but within that box, shape, width and thickness can vary.  Looking at the web at pictures of Sharks and their rudders, there is the original shape, there are some "J-24" straight blade styles, and there are some semi-elliptical designs.  Do I have that right?

If so, and if all those rudders are OD legal, and all the Sharks race in an OD configuration, then PHRF-LO has something of a quandary on it hands.  Does it make each owner submit their particular rudder design, then try to say this one is 3 or 6 secs faster than the original?  Do they say, we will rate the fastest shape, and assign the OD rating based on this shape?  What if the next guy designs a "faster" shape?  The theoretically fastest rudder would have the least wetted surface...but such a rudder probably offers poor control when reaching in high wind.  The rudder that offers theoretically the greatest amount of control would have the most surface area, but that would be slowest in light air.

PHRF only makes you report the mod.  Just because a rudder is shaped differently, doesn't mean from an Observed Performance standpoint it necessarily faster in all conditions.  A Shark rates 225 on Lake Ontario according to my 2017 PHRF Fleet Handbook.  If they imposed a 6 sec penalty, would you be happy?  Thats only a 2.6% difference in the boat's rating.  Can you realistically observe a 2.6% difference.  Maybe over years, but certainly not right away.  Most boats throw 2.6% of their performance away in a less than perfect bottom, or two bad tacks, or missing a shift...

Can you go back to the rule change, and show an increase in Observed Performance of 2.6% since the change to the class rules?  IF you can, then you should appeal the Sharks rating.  In this case it seems you feel there must be a rating change purely because they changed the shape of the rudder.  But the "box rule" is pretty limiting, and I'm guessing (I'm not a Naval Architect nor an Aero/Hydrodynamic Engineer) that within the box rule that constrains rudder shape, that there is no one shape that is consistently faster than another shape across the range of wind/sea conditions the fleet typically races in.  After all with the box, constraints, its not like they went from a Catboat style barn door rudder to a TP-52 deep, narrow chord design.  So, that's likely why there was no change to the rating.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, dacapo said:

that's too bad..someone will have a great boat........

Yes, Maybe someone from your neck of the woods might want it, then I can still go sailing on it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, jesposito said:

Yes, Maybe someone from your neck of the woods might want it, then I can still go sailing on it

send me info I'd gladly post it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, dacapo said:

send me info I'd gladly post it

Email?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jesposito said:
40 minutes ago, dacapo said:

send me info I'd gladly post it

Email?

Yeahe, E-maille or if you in Fracne curielle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cal40 allows the Schumacher rudder for class events and PHRF does not ding them for it. It is deemed to not contribute to speed but it makes the boat easier to handle. It could be argued that "easier to handle" contributes to better speed but neither the class nor PHRF seem too worried about it. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you simply put on new sails, new rigging and potentially replacement spars, that were not available at the time of the original rating, is that "cheating" ? 

My boat was originally equipped by the Hood Loft in Marblehead with the old narrow panel inhouse dacron miter cuts, and probably had similar vintage lines to the bronze shackles through the composite snatch blocks back to the Barients 28's 

We took off the wire halyards and guys, and upgraded to modern (Vectran) sails, though we still have the ancient tapered single spreader tree trunk of an aluminum mast, with the massive SS welded masthead and the halyards external. Swapped the roller furling Spruce boom for aluminum. 

Would putting in a modern aluminum mast mandate a change to the rating?  How much? 

How about if it was Carbon? 

What if we upgraded from the 1x19 wire to composite shrouds? 

 

Share this post


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

If you simply put on new sails, new rigging and potentially replacement spars, that were not available at the time of the original rating, is that "cheating" ? 

My boat was originally equipped by the Hood Loft in Marblehead with the old narrow panel inhouse dacron miter cuts, and probably had similar vintage lines to the bronze shackles through the composite snatch blocks back to the Barients 28's 

We took off the wire halyards and guys, and upgraded to modern (Vectran) sails, though we still have the ancient tapered single spreader tree trunk of an aluminum mast, with the massive SS welded masthead and the halyards external. Swapped the roller furling Spruce boom for aluminum. 

Would putting in a modern aluminum mast mandate a change to the rating?  How much? 

How about if it was Carbon? 

What if we upgraded from the 1x19 wire to composite shrouds? 

 

Do you sail in a light air venue?  If so, lightening the rig won't do much for you with respect to the rating hit you'd likely take.  Lightening aloft only pays when the boat is heeling, ie upwind or close reaching in a breeze.  Or maybe getting lightweight to plane downwind in breeze, but I doubt that's what your boat can do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, bgytr said:

Do you sail in a light air venue?  If so, lightening the rig won't do much for you with respect to the rating hit you'd likely take.  Lightening aloft only pays when the boat is heeling, ie upwind or close reaching in a breeze.  Or maybe getting lightweight to plane downwind in breeze, but I doubt that's what your boat can do?

We sail on SFBay in the summer and the Estuary in the winter... 15-20 or 2-10 take your season...

Reducing weight aloft reduces energy loss in pitching.

It may also reduce heeling moment once the boat's past a few degrees. A hundred pound savings at half "J" would be about a 2000 ft-lb change in righting moment, or ~1  degree at practical heel angles (~30 degree)  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, LionessRacing said:

We sail on SFBay in the summer and the Estuary in the winter... 15-20 or 2-10 take your season...

Reducing weight aloft reduces energy loss in pitching.

It may also reduce heeling moment once the boat's past a few degrees. A hundred pound savings at half "J" would be about a 2000 ft-lb change in righting moment, or ~1  degree at practical heel angles (~30 degree)  

So it might be worth lightweight rigging and spars in your case.  Check you rating folks and see how they'd change your rating and compare your new rating with other boats and see how you'd fair.  You could also run your rating through ORC for both configurations and compare that to new phrf and see if it would be worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Somebody Else said:

Cal40 allows the Schumacher rudder for class events and PHRF does not ding them for it. It is deemed to not contribute to speed but it makes the boat easier to handle. It could be argued that "easier to handle" contributes to better speed but neither the class nor PHRF seem too worried about it. 

 

So Cal would ding them 1 sec/mile. It would be a symbolic gesture that any mod is made to improve the boats ability which would mean a faster finish time.

I agree that making a boat more controllable is a safety on the course issue. Did PHRF rate the boat originally with the design flaw in mind? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2020 at 10:59 AM, Crash said:

So based on reading the Shark Class rules, there is no "one defined rudder."  The rudder is a "box rule," but within that box, shape, width and thickness can vary.  Looking at the web at pictures of Sharks and their rudders, there is the original shape, there are some "J-24" straight blade styles, and there are some semi-elliptical designs.  Do I have that right?

If so, and if all those rudders are OD legal, and all the Sharks race in an OD configuration, then PHRF-LO has something of a quandary on it hands.  Does it make each owner submit their particular rudder design, then try to say this one is 3 or 6 secs faster than the original?  Do they say, we will rate the fastest shape, and assign the OD rating based on this shape?  What if the next guy designs a "faster" shape?  The theoretically fastest rudder would have the least wetted surface...but such a rudder probably offers poor control when reaching in high wind.  The rudder that offers theoretically the greatest amount of control would have the most surface area, but that would be slowest in light air.

PHRF only makes you report the mod.  Just because a rudder is shaped differently, doesn't mean from an Observed Performance standpoint it necessarily faster in all conditions.  A Shark rates 225 on Lake Ontario according to my 2017 PHRF Fleet Handbook.  If they imposed a 6 sec penalty, would you be happy?  Thats only a 2.6% difference in the boat's rating.  Can you realistically observe a 2.6% difference.  Maybe over years, but certainly not right away.  Most boats throw 2.6% of their performance away in a less than perfect bottom, or two bad tacks, or missing a shift...

Can you go back to the rule change, and show an increase in Observed Performance of 2.6% since the change to the class rules?  IF you can, then you should appeal the Sharks rating.  In this case it seems you feel there must be a rating change purely because they changed the shape of the rudder.  But the "box rule" is pretty limiting, and I'm guessing (I'm not a Naval Architect nor an Aero/Hydrodynamic Engineer) that within the box rule that constrains rudder shape, that there is no one shape that is consistently faster than another shape across the range of wind/sea conditions the fleet typically races in.  After all with the box, constraints, its not like they went from a Catboat style barn door rudder to a TP-52 deep, narrow chord design.  So, that's likely why there was no change to the rating.

Good comments!

The perception of equity in how ratings are obtained/assessed amongst all PHRF-LO boats took a big hit when the rudder was "changed". 

If a boat increases the headsail size beyond a certain percentage, a 3 second penalty is assessed. That is a 1.3% difference. Somehow PHRF can observe that slight change in observed performance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
1
32 minutes ago, Crooked Beat said:

Good comments!

The perception of equity in how ratings are obtained/assessed amongst all PHRF-LO boats took a big hit when the rudder was "changed". 

If a boat increases the headsail size beyond a certain percentage, a 3 second penalty is assessed. That is a 1.3% difference. Somehow PHRF can observe that slight change in observed performance?

we recently took a 6 sec/mile penalty from  168 --> 162 to run a 30% larger headsail downwind. 

Below 5 TWS it's definitely worthy of the penalty, above 10 TWS we would not use the larger sail, so the judgment is what are your circumstances? 

Share this post


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

So Cal would ding [the Cal40] 1 sec/mile. It would be a symbolic gesture that any mod is made to improve the boats ability which would mean a faster finish time.

Good idea!

 

I agree that making a boat more controllable is a safety on the course issue. Did PHRF rate the boat originally with the design flaw in mind? 

I think it's a little extreme to call the original spade rudder a "design flaw" in 1963. More like a nascent design philosophy. There were still new boats designed in the 21st century (38 years later!) with this same planform, for goodness sake!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2020 at 10:59 AM, Crash said:

Can you go back to the rule change, and show an increase in Observed Performance of 2.6% since the change to the class rules?  IF you can, then you should appeal the Sharks rating.

The Shark24's PHRF-LO rating has been adjusted -27 (11.1%) since the class developed the rudder specifications in 1992.

Cheers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, CriticalPath said:

The Shark24's PHRF-LO rating has been adjusted -27 (11.1%) since the class developed the rudder specifications in 1992.

Cheers!

But the PHRF-LO rating was not changed for the first five years following the change.

That is the issue. 

Share this post


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

I think it's a little extreme to call the original spade rudder a "design flaw" in 1963. More like a nascent design philosophy. There were still new boats designed in the 21st century (38 years later!) with this same planform, for goodness sake!

Well then, should PHRF hit any boat from the 60's to the 80's making a rudder mod ? God knows I need a new rudder but my class is dead thanks to PHRF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Crooked Beat said:

But the PHRF-LO rating was not changed for the first five years following the change.

That is the issue. 

Again, you haven't shown any data showing that the OBSERVED PERFORMANCE of the Shark 24 improved by so much as one sec/mile.  ABSENT THAT data, all you are doing is whining.  There is no requirement to change a rating UNLESS there is strong evidence that the change resulted in a PERFORMANCE ADVANTAGE.  Show that, and I am on YOUR SIDE.  But so far all you've done is said they changed the shape, THEREFORE they must (should) be penalized.  And that is not true!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be a whine, but:

i) A boat changes their keel: from wing to fin (there are no fin keels of this boat in the PHRF-LO database). Immediate PHRF-LO change for the next season.

ii) An old MORC one off boat changes their rudder and mast (height). Immediate PHRF-LO change for the next season.

No past data to show a performance advantage in either case, but a rating change for the next season. 

Share this post


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

It may be a whine, but:

i) A boat changes their keel: from wing to fin (there are no fin keels of this boat in the PHRF-LO database). Immediate PHRF-LO change for the next season.

ii) An old MORC one off boat changes their rudder and mast (height). Immediate PHRF-LO change for the next season.

No past data to show a performance advantage in either case, but a rating change for the next season. 

Of course its a whine,  more its a whine about a change that happened over 20 years ago. Its a whine about a rating that has been changed substantially since then.

I applaud your tenacity on this. most rating whiners would have given up long ago about a 20 year old discrepancy, or would have tried to make a more current argument relating to the relative performance of the boat in question. Only the true whiner would still be banging on about this 20 years later. You are raising the humble PHRF rating whine to a form of performance art. I wonder if your purpose is to demonstrate the futility of the whine as a process, or the absurdity of the rating system, each seems a reasonably valid interpretation, it may be that this is merely an extension of DADA into the realm of internet forums and you are simply pointing out the meaninglessness of forum discourse as an attempt to resolve any real life issue.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/21/2020 at 10:12 AM, Gumbercules said:

So Cal would ding them 1 sec/mile. It would be a symbolic gesture that any mod is made to improve the boats ability which would mean a faster finish time.

I agree that making a boat more controllable is a safety on the course issue. Did PHRF rate the boat originally with the design flaw in mind? 

On 2/21/2020 at 2:08 PM, Somebody Else said:

I think it's a little extreme to call the original spade rudder a "design flaw" in 1963. More like a nascent design philosophy. There were still new boats designed in the 21st century (38 years later!) with this same planform, for goodness sake!

By modern standards many older boats have severe design flaws. Just because it was cutting edge in 63 means nothing other than it is old Tech. How many of you use a 386 16 (if you even know what that is)?

What would Nor Cal do to an SC 27 with a new rudder?


Modified Rudder – Elliptical
Santa Cruz 27 – Rudder better balanced, deeper and 1 sf (25%) more area. Recommend (W/L, RLC, OW)  -1/-1/0 for 137/137/138

To me RLC and OW it would be a benefit (more control in a breeze). Upwind just extra drag.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Of course its a whine,  more its a whine about a change that happened over 20 years ago. Its a whine about a rating that has been changed substantially since then.

I applaud your tenacity on this. most rating whiners would have given up long ago about a 20 year old discrepancy, or would have tried to make a more current argument relating to the relative performance of the boat in question. Only the true whiner would still be banging on about this 20 years later. You are raising the humble PHRF rating whine to a form of performance art. I wonder if your purpose is to demonstrate the futility of the whine as a process, or the absurdity of the rating system, each seems a reasonably valid interpretation, it may be that this is merely an extension of DADA into the realm of internet forums and you are simply pointing out the meaninglessness of forum discourse as an attempt to resolve any real life issue.

I never thought of it as an art form. I am truly humbled.

A performance art to state the facts?

PHRF-LO is still continuing the same form of "handicapping" this past season, in 2019, as they did, not 20 years ago, but almost 30 years ago. Boats get an arbitrary PHRF-LO hit with no observed performance data to back up the hit.

Indeed,  it is the absurdity of the rating process demonstrated. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Crooked Beat said:

It may be a whine, but:

I should have said "There is no requirement to change a rating UNLESS there is strong evidence that the change will result in or has resulted in a PERFORMANCE ADVANTAGE"

i) A boat changes their keel: from wing to fin (there are no fin keels of this boat in the PHRF-LO database). Immediate PHRF-LO change for the next season. 

So the boat now has a deeper keel, with either a lower CG or less ballast (or maybe both).  It also likely has less wetted surface area.  So those changes will result in a performance advantage, and so yes, you'll take a rating hit.

ii) An old MORC one off boat changes their rudder and mast (height). Immediate PHRF-LO change for the next season.

OK, so you haven't said what the change to the rudder was.  Did the new rudder have a greater span and shorter chord?  I.e. its deeper and skinner?  If so then that is different than the Sharks change.  So apples to oranges.  Did the change to mast height increase the luff of the main sail?  If yes, then it either added more sail area, or resulted in a higher aspect ratio, which is more efficient/produces less drag.  So again, those changes would result in an increase in a boats performance, and deserve a rating hit.

No past data to show a performance advantage in either case, but a rating change for the next season. 

The bar for taking a rating hit is the expectation of better performance as a result of the changes.  If I change from a deep, skinny keel to a short fat keel, PHRF will not penalize me for that.  In fact, they likely would give me time.  Just the fact of a change doesn't, all by itself, tigger a change in rating.  What triggers a change in rating is the expectation of improved performance as a result of a change.  If you can show that there is no expectation of improved performance, then there should be no change to the rating...

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a simple rule. Just answer all of the questions and send in the application. Any issues with the new certificate, then you can appeal in front of your piers with all of the data to support your argument. Heck all of your competition can too? But watch out, for some, the upper lip quivers when they lie!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2020 at 9:13 PM, Crash said:

If yes, then it either added more sail area, or resulted in a higher aspect ratio, which is more efficient/produces less drag.

While it is true that a narrow/short chord length foils can be highly efficient, compared to a long chord length (e.g. sailplanes) especially at speed, high aspect ratio triangular mains (i.e. pinheads) create more drag vs. less lift due to vortex shedding at the head.  Ribbon mains were a flaw, not a feature of the IOR. 

Which is why every contemporary race boat (e.g. TP52s, Volvo 65s, off shore trimarans and Comanche) has a fat head main.  

(The image doesn't really prove my point since it doesn't actually show the head, but it's a cool image anyway.)

th.jpeg.e68d3cfd9d1df397d0d349ca9a1504ec.jpeg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guy out of West Van with a Hanse 400e with a very favourable PHRF rating wins shit loads of races. His division switches to ORC last year; doesn't win shit. Boat's for sale on Craigslist now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One way to cheat is to have multiple kites all the same colour, but one of them is oversize and not declared.  How can anyone tell which kite you had up?  If questioned, produce the kites that measure in.  

I have suspected this on a few boats, but given that it is PHRF and doesn't really matter, not worth the trouble to formally investigate, and if the kites do all measure in you would look like a complete dick.  

Share this post


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

One way to cheat is to have multiple kites all the same colour, but one of them is oversize and not declared.  How can anyone tell which kite you had up?  If questioned, produce the kites that measure in.  

I have suspected this on a few boats, but given that it is PHRF and doesn't really matter, not worth the trouble to formally investigate, and if the kites do all measure in you would look like a complete dick.  

A self policing sport like sailing is an impossible dream in the Age of Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, glass said:

A self policing sport like sailing is an impossible dream in the Age of Trump.

oh, you're back.  hi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that it is a lot to ask for, but try not to be an asshole.

If you have anything to say to me, I'll give you my phone number.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Na, I'll just write it here.  What was your previous log-in name?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2020 at 8:59 AM, Crash said:

So based on reading the Shark Class rules, there is no "one defined rudder."  The rudder is a "box rule," but within that box, shape, width and thickness can vary.  Looking at the web at pictures of Sharks and their rudders, there is the original shape, there are some "J-24" straight blade styles, and there are some semi-elliptical designs.  Do I have that right?

If so, and if all those rudders are OD legal, and all the Sharks race in an OD configuration, then PHRF-LO has something of a quandary on it hands.  Does it make each owner submit their particular rudder design, then try to say this one is 3 or 6 secs faster than the original?  Do they say, we will rate the fastest shape, and assign the OD rating based on this shape?  What if the next guy designs a "faster" shape?  The theoretically fastest rudder would have the least wetted surface...but such a rudder probably offers poor control when reaching in high wind.  The rudder that offers theoretically the greatest amount of control would have the most surface area, but that would be slowest in light air.

PHRF only makes you report the mod.  Just because a rudder is shaped differently, doesn't mean from an Observed Performance standpoint it necessarily faster in all conditions.  A Shark rates 225 on Lake Ontario according to my 2017 PHRF Fleet Handbook.  If they imposed a 6 sec penalty, would you be happy?  Thats only a 2.6% difference in the boat's rating.  Can you realistically observe a 2.6% difference.  Maybe over years, but certainly not right away.  Most boats throw 2.6% of their performance away in a less than perfect bottom, or two bad tacks, or missing a shift...

Can you go back to the rule change, and show an increase in Observed Performance of 2.6% since the change to the class rules?  IF you can, then you should appeal the Sharks rating.  In this case it seems you feel there must be a rating change purely because they changed the shape of the rudder.  But the "box rule" is pretty limiting, and I'm guessing (I'm not a Naval Architect nor an Aero/Hydrodynamic Engineer) that within the box rule that constrains rudder shape, that there is no one shape that is consistently faster than another shape across the range of wind/sea conditions the fleet typically races in.  After all with the box, constraints, its not like they went from a Catboat style barn door rudder to a TP-52 deep, narrow chord design.  So, that's likely why there was no change to the rating.

Simple fix, go OD or take what you get..  PHRF sucks, when you must, with a OD boat, well.....  u gonna get fucked regardless unless you get better sails and take the rating hit. Otherwise, use your mad OD skills and blow up the PHRF guys minds......  

Share this post


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

One way to cheat is to have multiple kites all the same colour, but one of them is oversize and not declared.  How can anyone tell which kite you had up?  If questioned, produce the kites that measure in.  

I have suspected this on a few boats, but given that it is PHRF and doesn't really matter, not worth the trouble to formally investigate, and if the kites do all measure in you would look like a complete dick.  

Until you get blackmailed by the sailmaker.

FB- Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always find it quite interesting that when folks look at the results of most every PHRF race, the discussion of "rating" is always a topic.   Yet take a look at the time spreads for SF bay fleets like the J-105 or the Express 27,  you will see finished time difference far larger than the corrected time results for many PHRF fleets.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

unskilled one-design owners sometimes buy PHRF boats just to give themselves an excuse for sucking

skilled one-design owners sometimes buy PHRF boats to make themselves feel better by seal clubbing their club mates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2020 at 11:23 AM, Kirby Nitwit said:

Full disclosure; I am an Assistant Chief Handicapper for PHRF-LO.

 

Cheating at PHRF racing is like cheating at Solitare, or cheating at Monopoly with pre-teens.

Sure you can, but do you really need to boost your self image that way?

Go race one design and help support the fleet, you will be a better sailor and a better person for it.

Completely agree.

I too have been a handicapper in an extremely diverse fleet.  Some people go all out with a sports boat to get over the line first, then cry foul if they don't get corrected time.  I never ends.

I recall the same thing in a small multihull club decades ago.  Some people invested in a bigger vessel of a different class just the cross the line first.  I asked if they felt good getting back on the beach first against all the other smaller boats.  He thought for a couple of second and said "Of course!"

Same guy was mid-fleet at best in the one-design fleet.

But about PHRF ... it's what you have to do when there isn't a big enough one-design fleet.  I never valued PHRF wins, I binned those trophies, except one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

unskilled one-design owners sometimes buy PHRF boats just to give themselves an excuse for sucking

skilled one-design owners sometimes buy PHRF boats to make themselves feel better by seal clubbing their club mates.

Or because you can take more friends sailing and all they have to do is sit on the high side (or the low one) and pull a colored rope once in a while.

A 30 ft PHRF boat can be daysailed and cruised fairly comfortably, for a lot less money than you can campaign a 20-ish ft one-design.

FB- Doug

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PHRF ratings are inevitably suspect because to quote the US Sailing website:

"PHRF handicaps are assigned by individuals or committees associated with specific fleets. Handicaps are assigned to a given production class considering predominant local conditions and the handicapper’s experience in handicapping similar boats. These ratings are based on observed performance and any requisite adjustments generally become evident after 5-10 races have been sailed."

PHRF racing should not use the same approach as OD or VPP based racing where science and measurement are applied. Calculated PHRF results are no better than the made up ratings, so there is no reason to take them seriously. I've found a much more satisfying approach since I retired from GP sailing: 

  1. Skipper and Crew should be friends and family. Especially kids and females.
  2. Sail only random leg courses and do so as fast and efficiently as the conditions and skills aboard allow safely.
  3. Learn new things. Sailors with more knowledge and experience have to share what they know because it makes it more fun.
  4. If the crew feels they sailed the boat well, acknowledges areas for improvement and all want to do it again, the race was won, regardless of handicap results.

With just an addition or two, these also make a good outline for post Covid racing:

  • Add "Healthy" to #1 above. No need to get regulatory, we're all aware of local guidelines and we don't need more telling us what to do.
  • Courses around fixed marks, rabbit or pursuit starts within 10m of a fixed  mark. 
  • Take your own finish time and post to a shared Google sheet. Anyone who cares can figure out results , but #4 above prevails. 

The world needs less tension and for a while, just being on a boat, unplugged and in nature should be plenty of reward. Another pickle dish, t-shirt and hat I can live without.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with @A3A. We had a nice "competitive cruise" last weekend that was a lot less serious but people took their own time and someone did scoring. Would love to see more "competitive cruising" to/from destinations on weekends with an overnight anchor. If people want to take it super seriously and sleep in pipe berths and risk dragging their 9oz race anchor go for it; I'll be towing my dinghy and drinking mimosas Sunday morning before the race home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites