Jump to content

It’s time to replace PHRF once and for all!


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Frogman56 said:

Yeah but, there are plenty of +/_ in the hull wanding...

 

5 hours ago, bgytr said:

Don't need hull wanding if you got the lines drawing!

Care to explain what hull wanding is? Google doesn't show anything that clarifies to a noob.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, climenuts said:

 

Care to explain what hull wanding is? Google doesn't show anything that clarifies to a noob.

It's using a tool that maps the surface of the hull in 3D space, so x-y-z coordinates can be digitized.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of questions about ORC.

Are the foils wanded as well?

Does ORC us the foil sectional shape  and t/c ratios as input?  That is NACA four digit or 6 series for example.  Say an 0012 vs 64012A  Same t/c but different shapes.

The keel on my boat transitions from a 64008A at the root to a 64012A at the tip.  So is sectional taper accounted for as well?

These are all parameters that impact performance.  Not huge impacts, but they impact nonetheless.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10th tonner, 12m,

The 3d shape produced by the wanding or hull shape digitization is the basis for the 'mesh' on which the velocity prediction software ('vpp') caculates lift and drag for the hull. Cannot recall the sizes for the mesh, but fine enough that vertical changes in foil section are accounted for.

The reason orc is type forming is that it attempts to predict everything, so that, for example, it historically over predicted for drag arising from large mast sections and for smooth water at least, under predicted the performance of relatively low RM designs.

For contrast, irc ignores mast section size and assumes efficient design without penalties or credit for 'inefficient design'

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Frogman56 said:

10th tonner, 12m,

The 3d shape produced by the wanding or hull shape digitization is the basis for the 'mesh' on which the velocity prediction software ('vpp') caculates lift and drag for the hull. Cannot recall the sizes for the mesh, but fine enough that vertical changes in foil section are accounted for.

The reason orc is type forming is that it attempts to predict everything, so that, for example, it historically over predicted for drag arising from large mast sections and for smooth water at least, under predicted the performance of relatively low RM designs.

For contrast, irc ignores mast section size and assumes efficient design without penalties or credit for 'inefficient design'

I disagree that ORC is more type forming than IRC.  ORC is a continually evolving public rule.  Every algorithm is public domain, and should any weaknesses become exposed that type-forms, it can quickly and transparently be changed.  IRC is secret, just like IMS was and ORR currently is.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought, but I'm not convinced that a 100% "fair" rating will improve participation.  One of the best (and worst) things about PHRF is that over the course of a season, at least some of the time the conditions should favor your boat and you have a nice shot at a win.  And that keeps teams coming back again and again.

But if the rating always accounts for every potential wx condition, then the only teams that will win are those with the most pros, best bottoms, newest sails, and designs that are optimized for the rule.  And that doesn't leave much for anyone else.

 

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

I disagree that ORC is more type forming than IRC.  ORC is a continually evolving public rule.  Every algorithm is public domain, and should any weaknesses become exposed that type-forms, it can quickly and transparently be changed.  IRC is secret, just like IMS was and ORR currently is.

No secrets.  That is what I think what will make ORC have staying power.  If a boat somehow goes faster then what the VPP says it will get corrected.  It will take a year but it will get fixed. Also it is kind of cool to be able to do things like plug in a bigger sail yourself and see instantly what it does to your rating.   Now the hard part is what has been said previously, getting the PHRF people to buy in. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Frogman56 said:

Just remember, orc is only reheated ims.

Why did ims come to a sad end?

ORR is evolved IMS.  ORC is vpp based, but independent and public, different from ORR and IMS.

IMS lost out for a few reasons.  Designers gamed the rule with more sophisticated physics analysis than was present in IMS.  IMS was too slow to respond.  Local RCs weren't on the ball enough to use the rule properly.  

ORC has the wherewithal and computing power now to address the weaknesses in performance prediction much more quickly, and the public can see what they are doing.

The wild card is if the RCs will adapt and use the rule properly- that has the potential to send the use of ORC down the drain if it isn't used correctly.

I hope ORC works out, but it will take active interaction with rule makers, RCs, and competitors to make it stick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Robalex,

It is difficult to share your enthusiasm for the human driven, update on the run for orc. There remains, even after several decades, some aspects of the sail force coefficients that are a fair way from reality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, robalex117 said:

No secrets.  That is what I think what will make ORC have staying power.  If a boat somehow goes faster then what the VPP says it will get corrected.  It will take a year but it will get fixed. Also it is kind of cool to be able to do things like plug in a bigger sail yourself and see instantly what it does to your rating.   Now the hard part is what has been said previously, getting the PHRF people to buy in. 

Anyone can download the ORR hand book with Definitions, Measurement guide and equations. I believe ORR is VPP also.

The problem is not getting PHRF to buy in. it is US Sailing. They are the stewards of PHRF and ORR (I believe). USS has completely abdicated their responsibility to the PHRF Sailor by not having a standard set of equations for the basic calculations.

The standard is different  in all the areas. When I was on the So Cal board, I tried to get So Cal and Nor Cal to get some  commonality. There was some interest but I think the power bases (both areas) were entrenched. It will take US Sailing to get off their asses to force the issue. I think the West Coast Region should separate from US Sailing and do it's own thing.

 

15 hours ago, bgytr said:

ORR is evolved IMS.  ORC is vpp based, but independent and public, different from ORR and IMS.

IMS lost out for a few reasons.  Designers gamed the rule with more sophisticated physics analysis than was present in IMS.  IMS was too slow to respond.  Local RCs weren't on the ball enough to use the rule properly.  

ORC has the wherewithal and computing power now to address the weaknesses in performance prediction much more quickly, and the public can see what they are doing.

The wild card is if the RCs will adapt and use the rule properly- that has the potential to send the use of ORC down the drain if it isn't used correctly.

I hope ORC works out, but it will take active interaction with rule makers, RCs, and competitors to make it stick.

I've been told that ORC is better for Shorter Course racing where ORR is better for longer events.

I think this country (USA) is just too big for one entity like US Sailing to govern. Just like Google, FB and Twitter, are just too big.............Break US Sailing up into 4 or 5 regions that are members of World Sailing. The US Sailing Rule Book is just rebranded WS rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing you will deal with whether it's ORCi/club or ORR/ez is that PHRF rating organizations will do everything in their power to spread misinformation and outright lies to their membership to try to keep their system relevant. Ask me how I know. 

The fact is that the VPP systems have a lot to offer to PHRF organizations to help them smooth out the anomalies in some of their ratings. Ultimately the simplicity of PHRF means that for some types of racing it will be in use for a long time.

As far as the OP, there is a lot of misinformation about the ORC and ORR differences. I've got a comprehensive list, but 100+ posts into the thread, it's probably not worth pointing them out as the rating argument has devolved as usual.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, ryley said:

One thing you will deal with whether it's ORCi/club or ORR/ez is that PHRF rating organizations will do everything in their power to spread misinformation and outright lies to their membership to try to keep their system relevant. Ask me how I know. 

The fact is that the VPP systems have a lot to offer to PHRF organizations to help them smooth out the anomalies in some of their ratings. Ultimately the simplicity of PHRF means that for some types of racing it will be in use for a long time.

As far as the OP, there is a lot of misinformation about the ORC and ORR differences. I've got a comprehensive list, but 100+ posts into the thread, it's probably not worth pointing them out as the rating argument has devolved as usual.

I would like to hear what you have to say.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ryley said:

One thing you will deal with whether it's ORCi/club or ORR/ez is that PHRF rating organizations will do everything in their power to spread misinformation and outright lies to their membership to try to keep their system relevant. Ask me how I know. 

The fact is that the VPP systems have a lot to offer to PHRF organizations to help them smooth out the anomalies in some of their ratings. Ultimately the simplicity of PHRF means that for some types of racing it will be in use for a long time.

As far as the OP, there is a lot of misinformation about the ORC and ORR differences. I've got a comprehensive list, but 100+ posts into the thread, it's probably not worth pointing them out as the rating argument has devolved as usual.

It’s looking like one of the clubs I sail out of is taking the baby steps from PHRF to ORR-EZ. It’s a good start. I can fully understand why most laid back clubs have no desire to add the cost to go all the way to ORR. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/2/2020 at 9:38 AM, bgytr said:

It's likely more accurate using the float measurements and hull lines than a scale on a lift to get the weight of a boat.  Calibration of a weight scale requires use of a lot of standard weights that have been verified to have any confidence, and that sure as hell is not likely to ever happen.

In engineering we use calibrated load cells. If you pick the right one for what you are weighing then the yearly calibration cert is adequate. More variance is found in how dry the boat is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one of the factors that made IOR as popular as it was, was the tonner principle.

Yea, I know... -_- But seriously: Why don’t we just pick some (admittedly arbitrary) ORC thresholds and allow every boat with a rating below these to compete without correction? Back in the days it let the designers go wild, and it let the crews have fun (I am told). 

Why doesn’t ORC adopt that principle? It’s an open-source formula, so it should be perfectly suited for it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve just submitted my full-measurement ORR rating to NorCal PHRF. Looking at similar ORR rated boats gets me somewhere in the 30-45 PHRF. NorCal will review and let me know what my new PHRF is (currently a 12)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Our Wednesday night fleet changed over from PHRF ToD to ORRez in 2018 looking to mix things up. Loudest complainers were the boats who won their fleets the previous year, and the year before that, and the year before that.... Either way we held a vote and decided to make the change. 

The engineer side of me wanted to crunch some data and see if the new rating system was making a difference, so I scored a handful of races under both systems. It turned out ORRez was indeed making most of the races closer. Finish positions weren't changing too much but finish deltas between boats were on average much closer than under PHRF. 

The data I collected ended up showing a picture of some really competitive racing happening in the 'medium' wind rating bands and some oddities where massive swings were occurring when races were scored in the 'light' wind range. As it turned out ORRez must have noticed too and the following year split the 'light' wind category into 'very light' and 'light' and provided updated ratings for every boat. 

In this COVID shortened year we only had 10 races decide the season championship, but under ORRez the racing at the top of A fleet was so tight 1st, 2nd, and 3rd positions overall were not secured till the final race! How fun is that for handicap racing?!

For anyone out there thinking I only like ORRez over PHRF because my boat does better, it doesn't. In all the Wednesday night races I've rescored my finish position only ever stayed the same or dropped under ORR. 

PHRF is fine if you want to score a bunch of similar style boats within a small rating band, but it absolutely falls apart when you have to score racer/cruisers from the 1980's against newer designs using a single number system. PHRFNEs own website even admits it is not good a scoring "sport boats" against "conventional boats".

I don't even want to get into PHRF blanket handicap adjustments... Adding a 155% genoa to ANY boat ever results in a 3 second adjustment... please. 

 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/3/2020 at 1:06 PM, ryley said:

One thing you will deal with whether it's ORCi/club or ORR/ez is that PHRF rating organizations will do everything in their power to spread misinformation and outright lies to their membership to try to keep their system relevant. Ask me how I know. 

The fact is that the VPP systems have a lot to offer to PHRF organizations to help them smooth out the anomalies in some of their ratings. Ultimately the simplicity of PHRF means that for some types of racing it will be in use for a long time.

As far as the OP, there is a lot of misinformation about the ORC and ORR differences. I've got a comprehensive list, but 100+ posts into the thread, it's probably not worth pointing them out as the rating argument has devolved as usual.

What is ORCi/club?

If as you say PHRF is spreading misinformation, then you have a people problem.

Once again as I have stated. This is a US Sailing issues as they are the stewards of PHRF and have abdicated their stewardship of the program.

People need to start banging on USS for not being in charge.

All you guys do is complain, when you are the problem for not directing your complaints to US Sailing. Why the F do you pay dues???????

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Meat Wad said:

What is ORCi/club?

If as you say PHRF is spreading misinformation, then you have a people problem.

Once again as I have stated. This is a US Sailing issues as they are the stewards of PHRF and have abdicated their stewardship of the program.

People need to start banging on USS for not being in charge.

All you guys do is complain, when you are the problem for not directing your complaints to US Sailing. Why the F do you pay dues???????

 

Why would I complain (if I had a complaint) to US Sailing when my handicap is set by NorCal YRA?

Link to post
Share on other sites

PHRF is "one size fits all" and it just doesn't work well.  For example, I raced against a Melges 32 and a Flying Tiger (FT) this weekend up in Dana Point.  On Saturday, there was less than 6 kts of wind most of the day and the significantly lighter Melges and FT walked away from me.  (The Melges had the same W/L rating as my boat and I owed 24s/nm to the FT).  On Sunday under 10kts of wind, we beat both boats by several minutes.  Did we really sail that badly on Saturday or was something else in play?  I was curious how ORC would have rated my boat on Saturday compared to the Melges in less than 6kt and how it would have rated against the Melges on Sunday at 10knots.  So I pulled up some ORC certs for Melges 32 and they are about 60s/nm faster than me at 6knots or less.  In 10 knots of wind, they are still 20 seconds faster according to ORC, but the important point is that under PHRF my boat has no business racing against a Melges 32 in 6knots or less of wind.  However, under an ORC rating system I would have at least a fighting chance against a Melges 32 in light winds.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Meat Wad said:

What is ORCi/club?

If as you say PHRF is spreading misinformation, then you have a people problem.

Once again as I have stated. This is a US Sailing issues as they are the stewards of PHRF and have abdicated their stewardship of the program.

People need to start banging on USS for not being in charge.

All you guys do is complain, when you are the problem for not directing your complaints to US Sailing. Why the F do you pay dues???????

 

Let's hear your comprehensive list of errors

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Streetwise said:

Every PHRF region is different. Many complaints can be alleviated with thoughtful class divisions.

This really improved things in our small club.  We finally had enough participants this season (what covid?) to have a split that made sense.  We had an Open, Spin and non-spin split.  While the rating band was bigger in the Open fleet, the boats were similar in design and age.  The rating band was tighter in the spin fleet and while there was a lighter boat they were all older displacement boats.  The non-spin fleet was pretty competitive a few races as well.

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

All you guys do is complain, when you are the problem for not directing your complaints to US Sailing. Why the F do you pay dues???????

If all we did was complain then we wouldn't be examining VPP systems like ORR and ORC in the first place, right? And to your point, one of the reasons Mass Bay decided on the ORR-ez experiment was because it was the ONLY system in the US that had no US Sailing involvement, and therefore no US Sailing markup. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim,

Mass Bay has been using ToT for years, first under PHRF and then under ez. I can count on the fingers of one finger how many times the B factor has been changed to reflect conditions. It's part of my argument when OA's or the NE leadership complain that it's too hard to choose a wind speed for ORR-ez. Sure it is, if you haven't been doing it under PHRF like you're supposed to either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...