US Portsmouth v2

[Foredeck Shuffle]

Why not pump the numbers for some US classes in and see? Large wings can just attract the same ratings hit as trapezes - there are three winged boats in the graph above and they fit the model quite well. Plugging the formula + trap and kite corrections + yardsticks into a multiple regression may at least give you a ballpark figure that will allow you to make other corrections.

The Australian and NZ yardsticks were created when there were lots of "skiff types". They aren't perfect, for the reasons you give, but they keep most people fairly happy; everyone knows that some boats cannot be beaten in some winds and others cannot win in other winds, and that's just the way it has to go.

Even with very similar boats, no yardstick system can work perfectly as well all know. Something like a Laser versus OK duel can just get down to how square the square run actually is. At least it's not like my job of trying to work out local modifications for an unusual sailing area with a fleet that includes two multiple world champs on foilers, windsurfers, wings, cats, trailerable yachts and Optimists.

I'm doing that now though I feel our club numbers are low and will not have the desired impact.

If a club would like to have PY numbers I would be willing to transfer them to Sailwave and submit them as a shadow rating. This is something I wish USS had engaged in.

 

[Foredeck Shuffle]

Well, PYOnline will accept prior years of data. Not that I love entering multiple years of data but this will expedite getting reasonably confident ratings on boats centric to our club.

 

[Tcatman]

Well, PYOnline will accept prior years of data. Not that I love entering multiple years of data but this will expedite getting reasonably confident ratings on boats centric to our club.

I am curious... How many boats are in the fleet of the class of boats that you need ratings on?

 

[John D]

My $.02..... Where this all goes will have a large effect on dingy sailing in the US. There are more small boats sitting unused than ever (fiberglass dosent rot). Individual clubs have to get involved in handicapping boats to make skippers and crews feel as though are accomplishing something while enjoying their efforts. OD is very obviously not for everyone. The clubs need some ideas, tools (maybe software) that allow easy recording, handicapping, history and results that will allow RC volunteers to be more willing to participate. There is such a large selection of owned unused dingys out there that dont meet the norm to fit into the clubs OD framework. Without an easy entry to participation, small boat sailing and racing will continue to decline. Sailing clubs have the facilities and organizations to make progress

 

[Tcatman]

small boat sailing and racing will continue to decline.

I think you have to be crystal clear about what problem you want to solve... small boat sailing... or racing small boats?
Small boat sailing is managed by the dealers at boat shows selling boats to casual recreational sailors. They will get a boat, park it on their waterfront property or on a trailer in their back yard and trailer to the water and use it with family and friends. They really don't have much of a reason to interact with any other small boat owners... seeing another boat just like theirs on the water is not a big deal. The desire to be part of a community is fulfilled by the owners association. IMO, the problem to solve with this group is to figure out what is needed for these owners to want to join a small boat club for the social aspects and ultimately participate in some level of racing. I have never seen any data on how many of these recreational sailors join clubs and then participate in racing.

The steady decline in racing participation is a fact of life for the past 40 years. A perfect handicap table that was transparant, accurate, managed the non linearity inherent in multiple designs and enjoyed the stamp of approval from a national authority is probably not going to solve the problem. The reports from non US sailors seems to indicate that for them... an imperfect handicap table is "what it is "and not a big problem that needs immediate and far better solutions then what we have now. So... back to the core issue... what does it take to revitalize racing. I think the answer is to be found in how we manage competition. Maybe the future is found in something like golf handicaps...

 

[Prism]

Some of this good but if the boat is what is traditionally defined as a skiff or sportboat the basic numbers here are inadequate in capturing a rating. Boats with large wings are essentially trapeze boats. Some boats are over powered in light air and do not continue speeding up as much as others do until they plane, then the rating again hops rather than gradually increase. This makes creating a mean average more challenging.

It was a lot easier when most boats had similar SA/D and D/L numbers but those averages keep improving.

Chasing wind dependent ratings is a fool‘s errand. Whether from a simple regression formula or a fit to field results, KISS is the way to go. For non spinnaker boats the formula above is just as good as a sample of 30 boats racing a few times a year.

 

[eyeshotpar]

I think you have to be crystal clear about what problem you want to solve... small boat sailing... or racing small boats?
Small boat sailing is managed by the dealers at boat shows selling boats to casual recreational sailors. They will get a boat, park it on their waterfront property or on a trailer in their back yard and trailer to the water and use it with family and friends. They really don't have much of a reason to interact with any other small boat owners... seeing another boat just like theirs on the water is not a big deal. The desire to be part of a community is fulfilled by the owners association. IMO, the problem to solve with this group is to figure out what is needed for these owners to want to join a small boat club for the social aspects and ultimately participate in some level of racing. I have never seen any data on how many of these recreational sailors join clubs and then participate in racing.

The steady decline in racing participation is a fact of life for the past 40 years. A perfect handicap table that was transparant, accurate, managed the non linearity inherent in multiple designs and enjoyed the stamp of approval from a national authority is probably not going to solve the problem. The reports from non US sailors seems to indicate that for them... an imperfect handicap table is "what it is "and not a big problem that needs immediate and far better solutions then what we have now. So... back to the core issue... what does it take to revitalize racing. I think the answer is to be found in how we manage competition. Maybe the future is found in something like golf handicaps...

I know of no other sport that handicaps by equipment.

 

[Bored Stiff]

I know of no other sport that handicaps by equipment.

Horse racing.

 

[The Q]

Motor racing of all types, almost, reverses the system by handicapping the equipment by rules, then allowing level racing.

 

[Bill5]

Motor racing of all types, almost, reverses the system by handicapping the equipment by rules, then allowing level racing.

Isn’t this pretty much what development classes like the Moth and IC do?

 

[BrightAyes]

USS tossed all US dinghy sailing to RYA. So far no one in the US seems to be using the RYA PY system for various reasons. Anyone tired of this enough to consider reviving the D-PN, call it US-PN, and start accepting numbers to caclulate ratings over time? Painful, but with the US still using the D-PN which has not been updated since 1999-2001 time frame, there is a need.

Dr. Chat Bot has considered your pathetic human posting and graciously responds with the following genius-level diatribe:

It's understandable that some sailors in the United States may be frustrated by the decision of US Sailing to adopt the RYA Portsmouth Yardstick system for dinghy sailing. However, it's worth noting that the RYA PY system is widely used and well-established in other parts of the world, and it has been developed and refined over many years based on extensive data and feedback from sailors.

While it's possible that some sailors in the US may not be using the RYA PY system for various reasons, it's also possible that there are efforts underway to promote its adoption and use. It may be worth reaching out to local sailing clubs or organizations to see if they are using the RYA PY system or if they have any plans to do so in the future.

As for the idea of reviving the D-PN system, it's certainly possible to do so and to create a new rating system based on updated data and feedback from sailors. However, this would require a significant amount of time and resources to develop and implement, as well as widespread adoption and use in order to be effective.

In the end, the choice of which rating system to use is ultimately up to individual sailors and organizations. It may be worth exploring the pros and cons of various rating systems and working with local sailing communities to determine the best approach for your specific needs and priorities.

 

[Major Tom]

Motor racing of all types, almost, reverses the system by handicapping the equipment by rules, then allowing level racing.

Many motor racing formula use handicapping similar to horse racing, ie, adding ballast to cars that do well. The German touring cars definitely use this system and it seems to allow a wide range of manufacturers to compete on fairly level terms.

 

[Curious2]

I know of no other sport that handicaps by equipment.

What other sport has rules that allow equipment to weigh from 7kg (small windsurfer) to over 200 tons (big classic yachts); from under 1m (kiteboard) to 55m (classic schooner); and in age of design from still to be launched to 1913?

The clubs people to use to shoot par are vastly more restricted than the boats they sail with, so of course handicapping options are different.

 

[Foredeck Shuffle]

I am curious... How many boats are in the fleet of the class of boats that you need ratings on?

Four without question but really seven...

Two that have made up in the yard ratings with no obvious equivalents, one is based on some quick math, the other is a complete guesstimate that is too different from anything with a rating to feel good about its numbers. Another was given a rating by the maker/class nearly a decade ago when it was introduced and the rating has never changed. We have another that has a more recent rating inherited from another location but that has never changed since introduced.

Another three use a DPN rating though one received its rating when DPN was nearly dead in the late 90's so it was not a rating that changed over time. Another boat uses a DPN that USS gave it when introduced and before it was raced and then never changed. Another boat using a DPN that was calculated from PY in the 90's and has never changed as there are nearly no examples of it in the US.

There are 7 boats with questionable ratings that are stuck without more race analysis. Getting the results into PY and letting the fleet look at and discuss what PY says including what the converted DPN looks like, versus what existing DPN's are, is a good place to start. Maybe it will go no where but at least a results and math based conversation will occur.

 

[Tcatman]

Four without question but really seven...

Two that have made up in the yard ratings with no obvious equivalents, one is based on some quick math, the other is a complete guesstimate that is too different from anything with a rating to feel good about its numbers. Another was given a rating by the maker/class nearly a decade ago when it was introduced and the rating has never changed. We have another that has a more recent rating inherited from another location but that has never changed since introduced.

Another three use a DPN rating though one received its rating when DPN was nearly dead in the late 90's so it was not a rating that changed over time. Another boat uses a DPN that USS gave it when introduced and before it was raced and then never changed. Another boat using a DPN that was calculated from PY in the 90's and has never changed as there are nearly no examples of it in the US.

There are 7 boats with questionable ratings that are stuck without more race analysis. Getting the results into PY and letting the fleet look at and discuss what PY says including what the converted DPN looks like, versus what existing DPN's are, is a good place to start. Maybe it will go no where but at least a results and math based conversation will occur.

lets use the same definitions... Class... means et ILCA, 420, Hobie 16, Unique class 1. Fleet means the number of boats in Hobie 16s on the line. (I placed 5th in the 10 boat ILCA fleet). It sounds to me that your starting line has 7 classes racing with fleets of 1 boat in each class. US Portsmouth could have 100 years of data from your club and not be able to generate accurate ratings for the 7 unique classes. The core assumption is that you have a fleet of "Unique class 1" boats racing... and 1 boat is not a fleet. I don't believe RYA portsmouth can do anything meaningful with this 100 year data set either. USPN Portsmouth wants a fleet of unique class boats on the water competing against a fleet of yardstick or secondary yardsticks. The larger the fleets the stronger the data set is. In your data set, sail number 1122 always wins the fleet race of "Unique class 1" . What you can get out of this data is personal handicaps for Mark sailing boat # 1122, and Janet, Bill, Cathy, Harry, Maureen and John get personal handicaps racing their class boat. You cant expect USPN to undermine the integrity of their system by pretending that your personal handicap is what should be used in the table. Maybe the brits have a better way to deal with your situation ???

 

[Foredeck Shuffle]

lets use the same definitions... Class... means et ILCA, 420, Hobie 16, Unique class 1. Fleet means the number of boats in Hobie 16s on the line. (I placed 5th in the 10 boat ILCA fleet). It sounds to me that your starting line has 7 classes racing with fleets of 1 boat in each class. US Portsmouth could have 100 years of data from your club and not be able to generate accurate ratings for the 7 unique classes. The core assumption is that you have a fleet of "Unique class 1" boats racing... and 1 boat is not a fleet. I don't believe RYA portsmouth can do anything meaningful with this 100 year data set either. USPN Portsmouth wants a fleet of unique class boats on the water competing against a fleet of yardstick or secondary yardsticks. The larger the fleets the stronger the data set is. In your data set, sail number 1122 always wins the fleet race of "Unique class 1" . What you can get out of this data is personal handicaps for Mark sailing boat # 1122, and Janet, Bill, Cathy, Harry, Maureen and John get personal handicaps racing their class boat. You cant expect USPN to undermine the integrity of their system by pretending that your personal handicap is what should be used in the table. Maybe the brits have a better way to deal with your situation ???

What you are describing in your conclusion is exactly what we are using. We will be driving PY numbers via PYOnline. If we decide it works the PY rating will be converted to a DPN base rating, then the boat and its characteristics and past performance reviewed to create the four wind ratings.

Even using PY, a single boat's results will become an amalgamated rating of personal handicap, boat preparation, and boat performance. If the sailor of the boat improves the personal handicap changes and the boat handicap improves overall. If the sailor were to fall into ill health and/or let the boat preparation degrade but continue racing the rating would become higher and easier, degrading its value. But that's what it has to be because there is no other solution.

Even with these issues this is more accurate than guessing at a handicap and then never changing it, which is what USS effectively did telling everyone to move to PY, and then abandoning Portsmouth entirely and folding up the USS Portsmouth board. A few clubs are submitting results, if there are copies of a class of boat in those locations, the rating for all will be changed, presumably.

Ideally there would be several boats that represent a known bar of performance in the way that the Snipe used to do this for DPN. These boats would be from classes with a large number of boats used to compare performance against boats with lower numbers in their class and one offs.

Or as one friend who likes to poke fingers at obvious holes stated that all boats should have full hull measurements with a VPP calculated and then given an ORC type certificate. Obviously with similar VPP measurement costs inflicted upon the certificate seeking owners. There is a lot of value to this, perhaps if classes were to submit for a source certificate from which all other boats within the class derive their certificate, the costs could be reduced. VPP and arguably ORC has become one of the better data driven ratings system yet, fixing the mistakes within the IMS measurement system from which modern VPP's originated.

If a measurement system is too onerous, it will smother handicap racing with costs and effort. If it is too lenient, it will disenfranchise participants.

Let's agree to stop mentioning USS. USS abandoned dinghy racing for any purpose outside of Olympic pathways. It has no interest in the average sailor racing a dinghy class boat unless that class supports USS financially or is a direct pathway class.

 

[JimC]

If you have a lot of singleton boats racing at different clubs then you can certainly get a usable number out of it. This is the sort of thing statistics are good for. Its a question of normalising results so they are broadly comparable. Each sailor produces results across a range as we all have good races and bad races, and all the sailors in a class produce results across a range, which looks to me like a skewed normal distribution curve. I haven't tried plotting individual sailors, but I'd expect the same.

Its a little unfair to suggest USS has abandoned dinghy racing for any purpose, when they have signed up to use UK Portsmouth Yardstick. I presume that the RYA is getting paid, although I never heard. RYA PY is funded out of general RYA funds as a service to clubs, who in practice of course are paying for it as part of their club affiliation fees. There are two RYA staff members involved in PY as part of their jobs, plus the development of the web site is outsourced to outside coders.

 

[Tcatman]

What you are describing in your conclusion is exactly what we are using. We will be driving PY numbers via PYOnline. If we decide it works the PY rating will be converted to a DPN base rating, then the boat and its characteristics and past performance reviewed to create the four wind ratings.

...

Even with these issues this is more accurate than guessing at a handicap and then never changing it, which is what USS effectively did telling everyone to move to PY, and then abandoning Portsmouth entirely and folding up the USS Portsmouth board.

I don't really understand your position. Why would you care HOW you get a current and fair rating table that is sanctioned by the countries national authority? You seem to want a statistical process. I suggest that what you want is more like this solution

"A. Performance Handicap Racing Fleet (PHRF) ratings are based on the speed potential of the boat, determined as far as possible on observations of previous racing experiences. It is the intent of PHRF handicapping that any well equipped, well maintained, and well sailed boat has a good chance of winning. Handicaps are adjusted as needed on the boat's performance so that each well sailed boat has an equal opportunity to win. This is the fundamental concept. PHRF ratings are not intended to reflect skipper and crew capability. Ratings are not adjusted to encourage a poor or careless skipper, and conversely, no rating adjustment is made to penalize proficiency. Intensity of competition and the influx of new and aggressive sailors require each skipper to maintain consistently high performance in order to place well.' PHRF of the Chesapeake

This philosophy is similar to the USPN set of principles (PHRF is about the speed potential of the boat) and fundamentally different then the RYA philosophy (much more about the fleet racing that boat).

 

[Tcatman]

If you have a lot of singleton boats racing at different clubs then you can certainly get a usable number out of it. This is the sort of thing statistics are good for. Its a question of normalising results so they are broadly comparable. Each sailor produces results across a range as we all have good races and bad races, and all the sailors in a class produce results across a range, which looks to me like a skewed normal distribution curve. I haven't tried plotting individual sailors, but I'd expect the same.

Its a little unfair to suggest USS has abandoned dinghy racing for any purpose, when they have signed up to use UK Portsmouth Yardstick. I presume that the RYA is getting paid, although I never heard. RYA PY is funded out of general RYA funds as a service to clubs, who in practice of course are paying for it as part of their club affiliation fees. There are two RYA staff members involved in PY as part of their jobs, plus the development of the web site is outsourced to outside coders.

How does the RYA process the singleton boats? My understanding was that they had fairly rigorous standard for Fleet. What does it take to get assigned a provisional number in the rya system. Last and prhaps most relevant question... in foredecks situation... what should his expectation be about updates to the initial provisonal rating using the RYA engine.

 

[Foredeck Shuffle]

I don't really understand your position. Why would you care HOW you get a current and fair rating table that is sanctioned by the countries national authority? You seem to want a statistical process. I suggest that what you want is more like this solution

"A. Performance Handicap Racing Fleet (PHRF) ratings are based on the speed potential of the boat, determined as far as possible on observations of previous racing experiences. It is the intent of PHRF handicapping that any well equipped, well maintained, and well sailed boat has a good chance of winning. Handicaps are adjusted as needed on the boat's performance so that each well sailed boat has an equal opportunity to win. This is the fundamental concept. PHRF ratings are not intended to reflect skipper and crew capability. Ratings are not adjusted to encourage a poor or careless skipper, and conversely, no rating adjustment is made to penalize proficiency. Intensity of competition and the influx of new and aggressive sailors require each skipper to maintain consistently high performance in order to place well.' PHRF of the Chesapeake

This philosophy is similar to the USPN set of principles (PHRF is about the speed potential of the boat) and fundamentally different then the RYA philosophy (much more about the fleet racing that boat).

There is no getting away from the performance of the sailor impacting the rating if the rating system uses past performance and the class is small, or a single boat.

I'm familiar with how several of the persons previously involved in rating Ches-PHRF and that experience implied of lot of prejudice based upon the personal experience of the persons assigning the rating. Never in those conversations did anyone indicate that they ran large statistical analysis of various boats against other boats and had an overall system to ingest boat measurements and past performance and spit out adjusted ratings on a year to year basis.

After I learn more from PY and DPN I'll look into doing more but I feel like I need to gain more experience and improve my statistical skills without purchasing something like SPSS or STATA, yet...