Miami Race Week 2009 -Official repository for any information/results

[MR.CLEAN]

Exactly. In just two legs. There was plenty of time to be found on the course. Unless everything you do is perfect, the ratings are mathematically perfect, and your competition is perfect, there's always a couple of minutes to be found. Most of the M32 races had 4+ minutes from first to last, and most of them had multiple pros, olympians, and world champs aboard their one-design boats.

You are cherry picking examples. Over an average, a few minutes of time is impossible to find amongst top teams. The average deltas are in the seconds comparing team who sail at a top level and have top level decision makers. Anybody can pickup a minute or two in a particular race just by catching a shift. Doing it over the course of a series is completely different. You said Soozal averaged beating you by a couple of minutes.

I agree that finding a couple of minutes may be impossible among top teams with perfectly sorted out boats that have no major brainfarts. But handicap boats are almost never sailed at that level - they tend to not have anywhere near enough boat-on-boat sail, rig, and boathandling development to make it possible, and certainly we didn't sail our boat anywhere near that level. Hence the conclusion that we could easily have cut 3% off our time during most races. It is awfully easy to give away a minute on a lousy start, 5 seconds on a hoist, 20 seconds on a douse, 30 seconds on a shift...

CLEAN, so your saying 'if only we had a sorted boat, together crew, sailed it well, the mast man had hair, and generally didn't f**ck up, we'd have won' Isn't that the idea?

Doesn't racing to a couple of minutes (for the top of the fleet in your opinion, less in mine) equate to a reasonable account for a handicap system?

From the front page -

"For a distance race, I get it (a mixed handicap fleet) - in fact, our Archambault 40 had a brilliant deck layout and very kindly motion, and a big interior with easy headroom for 'my 6 feet, 2 inches. I plan on trying to sail with Philippe and the boys later this year on a distance race - clearly something the boat will excel at (along with getting women)."

IRC offshore/distance is going to better though? Surely variable tide/weather conditions are going to favour one end of the class split more or less? Might balance out over the course of a long race, but unlikely IMO.

Again from the front page:-

"They are silly downwind on a windward leeward course, with tactics largely taken out of the equation since they point almost directly at the gates once the kite is set."

Which element of tactics exactly is this? The winds not shifting because you're sailing 165 TWA? You're not worried about clean air/giving others shit? A corner is still a corner and laylines are still laylines, just narrower, and you're not thinking about positioning at the gate? And on the other hand, upwind, you can't work out how to get off the start clean in a slower boat or avoid a lee bow? Admittedly IRC emphasisies strategy over tactics, but in a short W/L race, with small splits, not entirely.

I'm not suggesting that IRC is better than OD for top level racing, but that shouldn't be what IRC is about. I think most of your complaints are due to a low turn out/wide split, not IRC, a point you've made, subsequent to the front page rant.

You're right, and I've never ranted about IRC in general - just as it applied to the fleet in Miami. I've done almost zero IRC racing, which was a big part of why I wanted to go down there anyway - to see what it was all about.

I definitely have a problem with the kinds of boats that it encourages in this size range, as I'm a speed freak and I like to see fast, exciting boats have a chance to win. But I also understand that lots of people aren't and don't, and this rule seems to work for many of them, which can't be a bad thing.

 

[Dixie]

You have much catching up to do. You were aboard, right? Well good. Now you can come here and find out what really happened.

Quote of the day.

 

[L Z]

Enema blew two chutes? Awww, poor poor boys and their toys. God, one would think with all those paid slaves on board that you could get that piece of crap around the race course. What were they thinking??

They were probably thinking that you would you had been one of those "poor boys" (or with one of them) and be sailing that boat.

But since you were not... you wouldn't know a "piece of crap" from a TP52.

p.s. just catching up with this thread...

You have much catching up to do. You were aboard, right? Well good. Now you can come here and find out what really happened.

Aaaahhhh... the beauty of SA...

Where were you this past weekend? Didn't get to see you there for a few cocktails.

 

[MSG]

Aaaahhhh... the beauty of SA...
Where were you this past weekend? Didn't get to see you there for a few cocktails.

He's not allowed out of Broward County since the incident.

 

[Sol Rosenberg]

Aaaahhhh... the beauty of SA...
Where were you this past weekend? Didn't get to see you there for a few cocktails.

Low profile/had to work. When are you coming down next? Lauderdale to Charleston? We have to get you to the Bimini Bay Bar now that they are playing cooterball again.

 

[Smylesca]

Just trying to pull my weight, bro. What do you think of my synopsis of the racing?

Basically accurate in that distinctive Mr. Clean style, your rundown of the anatomy of an IRC race was enjoyed by all (it's funny because it's true). Honestly is wasn't all that exciting, especially in our fleet (IRC2). We plowed around the course in a fairly predictable order enjoying the sunshine and eating the odd wave, much like IRC1 but without the sexy trailer. The results were set by day two and solidified by day three. We know the IRC fleet can offer good racing because we had that in Key West, even when the boat was seriously sub-par. For handicap racing you do need a critical mass of boats and we just didn't have that this time around. Charleston is the next stop on the tour and hopefully we'll see enough boats to have a good rumble. We'll be all fixed up and pretty by then too, the Flying Ashtray will return!

 

[MR.CLEAN]

Just did a more detailed analysis of the times that is actually a hell of a selling point for the Archambault 40 if you're in the market for an IRC racer/cruiser.

I did it a bit differently than the first calculation I did - and I haven't been able to recreate the number I had for that one. All I did was add up total corrected times and divided by ten.

Keeping in mind that the owner of Soozal told me they spent a lot of time and money fairing the foils on the King 40 to perfection, and that Robbie Haines (olympic gold medalist, of course) and Tom Lihan (local knowledge par excellence, and sure, he knows a thing or two about trimming) were aboard, and that Ciao! didn't really have that level of commitment, this number bodes well for the A40 at her next IRC event.

Soozal's average corrected time for ten races: 79:21

Ciao's average corrected time for ten races: 80:38

 

[MR.CLEAN]

Just did a more detailed analysis of the times that is actually a hell of a selling point for the Archambault 40 if you're in the market for an IRC racer/cruiser.
I did it a bit differently than the first calculation I did - and I haven't been able to recreate the number I had for that one. All I did was add up total corrected times and divided by ten.

Keeping in mind that the owner of Soozal told me they spent a lot of time and money fairing the foils on the King 40 to perfection, and that Robbie Haines (olympic gold medalist, of course) and Tom Lihan (local knowledge par excellence, and sure, he knows a thing or two about trimming) were aboard, and that Ciao! didn't really have that level of commitment, this number bodes well for the A40 at her next IRC event.

Soozal's average corrected time for ten races: 79:21

Ciao's average corrected time for ten races: 80:38

That post was very sportsmanlike of you. The fact still remains, even with all of their skill and polished foils, that if you SWITCHED boats with them, you would have instead beat them under the IRC system. The truth is the truth.

I'm not sure that is the case at all, but it would probably have been closer given the conditions in the seven races they won. When the breeze was highest, on Thursday, we beat them in two of three races.

 

[doghouse]

Just did a more detailed analysis of the times that is actually a hell of a selling point for the Archambault 40 if you're in the market for an IRC racer/cruiser.
I did it a bit differently than the first calculation I did - and I haven't been able to recreate the number I had for that one. All I did was add up total corrected times and divided by ten.

Keeping in mind that the owner of Soozal told me they spent a lot of time and money fairing the foils on the King 40 to perfection, and that Robbie Haines (olympic gold medalist, of course) and Tom Lihan (local knowledge par excellence, and sure, he knows a thing or two about trimming) were aboard, and that Ciao! didn't really have that level of commitment, this number bodes well for the A40 at her next IRC event.

Soozal's average corrected time for ten races: 79:21

Ciao's average corrected time for ten races: 80:38

That post was very sportsmanlike of you. The fact still remains, even with all of their skill and polished foils, that if you SWITCHED boats with them, you would have instead beat them under the IRC system. The truth is the truth.

I'm not sure that is the case at all, but it would probably have been closer given the conditions in the seven races they won. When the breeze was highest, on Thursday, we beat them in two of three races.

Corrected? You were on the SC37 weren't you.

He was on the A40. If he was on the SC37 you would be correct.

 

[MR.CLEAN]

He was on the A40. If he was on the SC37 you would be correct.

Or the Sydney 36, or the Mills 43, or the Swan 42...

There were only three boats with a chance. If the breeze stayed where it was on Thursday, it would have been battle between Gold Digger, the A40 and Soozal. When the breeze dropped down below 16, the King 40 kept moving well while we slowed down relative to them, and sped up relative to the J.

 

[doghouse]

He was on the A40. If he was on the SC37 you would be correct.

Or the Sydney 36, or the Mills 43, or the Swan 42...

There were only three boats with a chance. If the breeze stayed where it was on Thursday, it would have been battle between Gold Digger, the A40 and Soozal. When the breeze dropped down below 16, the King 40 kept moving well while we slowed down relative to them, and sped up relative to the J.

Ed Zachary.

 

[L Z]

Just did a more detailed analysis of the times that is actually a hell of a selling point for the Archambault 40 if you're in the market for an IRC racer/cruiser.
I did it a bit differently than the first calculation I did - and I haven't been able to recreate the number I had for that one. All I did was add up total corrected times and divided by ten.

Keeping in mind that the owner of Soozal told me they spent a lot of time and money fairing the foils on the King 40 to perfection, and that Robbie Haines (olympic gold medalist, of course) and Tom Lihan (local knowledge par excellence, and sure, he knows a thing or two about trimming) were aboard, and that Ciao! didn't really have that level of commitment, this number bodes well for the A40 at her next IRC event.

Soozal's average corrected time for ten races: 79:21

Ciao's average corrected time for ten races: 80:38

So in essence what you are saying is that the IRC ratings aren't off as originally "viewed". Considering that this is the 2nd event for this boat, the unfortunate issues it had, the different levels of crew experiences and program preparation, they beat you by an average of 1:17 minutes. So let's see, lumpy, one bad tack, a slow kite set, a wrong side of the course, a few seconds on the take down, etc (not saying you guys did any of that but that's where times are lost and we've all been there) and you could have easily beaten them too.

Sounds to me that IRC numbers are OK and the A40 will do just fine too. Good to know and good report.

FYI, there will be another A40 for you guys to sail against in IRC along with a J122 (40 footer) and a Farr 60 (vintage '98).

See you in Charleston is a few weeks.

 

[MR.CLEAN]

Just did a more detailed analysis of the times that is actually a hell of a selling point for the Archambault 40 if you're in the market for an IRC racer/cruiser.
I did it a bit differently than the first calculation I did - and I haven't been able to recreate the number I had for that one. All I did was add up total corrected times and divided by ten.

Keeping in mind that the owner of Soozal told me they spent a lot of time and money fairing the foils on the King 40 to perfection, and that Robbie Haines (olympic gold medalist, of course) and Tom Lihan (local knowledge par excellence, and sure, he knows a thing or two about trimming) were aboard, and that Ciao! didn't really have that level of commitment, this number bodes well for the A40 at her next IRC event.

Soozal's average corrected time for ten races: 79:21

Ciao's average corrected time for ten races: 80:38

So in essence what you are saying is that the IRC ratings aren't off as originally "viewed". Considering that this is the 2nd event for this boat, the unfortunate issues it had, the different levels of crew experiences and program preparation, they beat you by an average of 1:17 minutes. So let's see, lumpy, one bad tack, a slow kite set, a wrong side of the course, a few seconds on the take down, etc (not saying you guys did any of that but that's where times are lost and we've all been there) and you could have easily beaten them too.

Sounds to me that IRC numbers are OK and the A40 will do just fine too. Good to know and good report.

FYI, there will be another A40 for you guys to sail against in IRC along with a J122 (40 footer) and a Farr 60 (vintage '98).

See you in Charleston is a few weeks.

Yep, that's pretty much what I said with respect to the A40 and King 40 and to a lesser extent, the J/44 in those conditions. In my uneducated view, IRC did an unfair job of handicapping the four other boats, who never even got close on handicap. Again, if we were in lighter conditions, it probably would have been a whole different ballgame - but that's not necessarily an IRC problem - more of a one-number-handicap problem (not that the alternative doesn't have its own big flaws). The problem I saw with the way IRC applied to the Class is that it was a pretty conventional set of conditions - no crazy waves, no extremes of wind - just mid-range W/L racing, and four boats had zero chance of winning, even with superb sailors on most of them. And not a single one of them could be called anything like an extreme design. Can you explain why that is?

 

[MR.CLEAN]

I'm really not in this shitfight at all, Polaris, and I'm still on the fence about IRC, knowing how shitty the alternatives can be. I can understand the difficulty of rating planing vs. non-planing designs, but this regatta didn't really have planing conditions - even the SC37 was having more like very long surfs rather than getting up and boogying, and their VMG was maybe a knot faster downwind - so why did IRC have so much trouble rating them? Pretty much the whole fleet had shiny new sails, solid tacticians, and quality crews. I would really like to give Luiz a chance to make me a believer.

 

[MR.CLEAN]

From the front page - "For a distance race, I get it (a mixed handicap fleet) - in fact, our Archambault 40 had a brilliant deck layout and very kindly motion, and a big interior with easy headroom for 'my 6 feet, 2 inches. I plan on trying to sail with Philippe and the boys later this year on a distance race - clearly something the boat will excel at (along with getting women)."

IRC offshore/distance is going to better though? Surely variable tide/weather conditions are going to favour one end of the class split more or less? Might balance out over the course of a long race, but unlikely IMO.

Distance will be better because it's more fun than W/L in heavy boats where boat-on-boat tactics aren't as much of an issue. Distance racing is an entirely different challenge, and longer races do tend to have enough variation that more options in sail selection and navigational/tactical choices are available. How many options do you have when a faster boat picks the correct side, sails out from underneath you or rolls you, and makes you eat their shit for a quarter of a leg? A 20 mile, or 200 mile leg is a different story, even with a small class.

 

[MR.CLEAN]

I'm really not in this shitfight at all, Polaris, and I'm still on the fence about IRC, knowing how shitty the alternatives can be. I can understand the difficulty of rating planing vs. non-planing designs, but this regatta didn't really have planing conditions - even the SC37 was having more like very long surfs rather than getting up and boogying, and their VMG was maybe a knot faster downwind - so why did IRC have so much trouble rating them? Pretty much the whole fleet had shiny new sails, solid tacticians, and quality crews. I would really like to give Luiz a chance to make me a believer.

I just wanted to see the answer. "the boats didn't fit the typeform". Like bringing a knife to a gunfight.

But that's the thing - none of these boats except the SC37 are really outside any modern cruiser/racer box - and even that boat is no Cone of Silence. So what is the deal? I guess this is the problem with a secret rule.

 

[Smylesca]

But that's the thing - none of these boats except the SC37 are really outside any modern cruiser/racer box - and even that boat is no Cone of Silence. So what is the deal? I guess this is the problem with a secret rule.

If the secret rule is a problem how come at least two designers/builders have gotten it right? And how do you explain the success of a boat built before the rule was conceived (J44)? I can only comment on the SC37 since I don't know the construction details of the other boats. The SC guys made choices that would have obvious penalties in the IRC rule for reasons of their own. Actually, the King guys made some similar choices in some areas but obviously either offset them with other ones or built a boat that's fast enough to overcome the rating hits. I don't think, in the case of the SC37, that it's a problem with the rule or the particular conditions/race setup, it's just that the boat was not optimized for IRC. As was suggested earlier, it'd be better to question why someone would race an SC37 under IRC at all, at least for short course stuff.

Archambault have built two boats that work very well under IRC (A35 &A40RC) with the A31 another likely candidate. However they produce another three designs (Sprinto, Suprise & Grand Surprise) that, frankly, suck under almost any rating system. They were designed as one design boats and are raced in Europe as such. Feel free to take one in a handicap race but don't complain when you struggle with a shitty handicap, either to me or to the designers/builders. They weren't built for that and I think the same could be said for the SC (and most likely to the Swan 42). You wanna race IRC? Wouldn't it make sense to use a boat that at least tries to make use of the rule?

 

[MR.CLEAN]

You wanna race IRC? Wouldn't it make sense to use a boat that at least tries to make use of the rule?

Of course it does - but the proclaimed goal of the rule isn't to fairly handicap only IRC-optimized boats and J/boats, and the promoters of the rule tell us that it is more fair than other options. I'm just looking for evidence one way or another, and an explanation of the results that we saw. We already know about the SC37's shortcomings under IRC W/L races - but what about the Mills 43, Sydney 36, and Swan 42 - what's wrong with them? They're not carbon offwind machines. Plus, I thought the Swan was designed at least partially with IRC in mind - if the NYYC (who has embraced IRC) not only picked the most expensive, least attractive of their design contest submissions but also an uncompetitive IRC machine, their choice looks even stupider than it already did.

Like I said, I really have no side in this at all. With all of PHRF's shortcomings, it can be a wonderful rule when administered by smart, non-political people because it is adaptable. IRC's secrecy makes it tough to actually analyze when corrected times are consistently far apart in a single class of roughly similar-sized boats.

 

[Smylesca]

saw. We already know about the SC37's shortcomings under IRC W/L races - but what about the Mills 43, Sydney 36, and Swan 42 - what's wrong with them?

Dunno. As I said, I don't know enough about the design and construction to have an opinion.

They're not carbon offwind machines. Plus, I thought the Swan was designed at least partially with IRC in mind - if the NYYC (who has embraced IRC) not only picked the most expensive, least attractive of their design contest submissions but also an uncompetitive IRC machine, their choice looks even stupider than it already did.

Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity. You might have hit the nail on the head. Maybe the Swan was playing with a pickup crew this week, I dunno. I was quite surprised by their performance as well, maybe I should have a look at these boats so I can say something productive?

Like I said, I really have no side in this at all. With all of PHRF's shortcomings, it can be a wonderful rule when administered by smart, non-political people because it is adaptable. IRC's secrecy makes it tough to actually analyze when corrected times are consistently far apart in a single class of roughly similar-sized boats.

I think you need a bigger database. If you want to analyze the rule you need more boats in different conditions with varying crew levels. Seven boats in four days with basically the same weather each day isn't going to give you a very good sample size. Try crunching Key West, see if that helps any.

 

[Shife]

Corrected? You were on the SC37 weren't you.

You are as observant as a deaf guy in a concrete room with no windows.