USPHRF Appeal Process

C

cjsalustro

Member
468
0
musicman said:
That's a pretty broad statement: "We.... everyone outside your entourage."

Care to elaborate?
Click to expand...
You are fishing for an answer... like a criminal trying to find a house to break into. Or a bully at a bar looking for a fight.

Respectfully I am going to end this.

Thank you.

 
C

cjsalustro

Member
468
0
sailman said:
Luca, a debate assumes that both sides argue in good faith. Spreading lies and maligning someone's character is not debate. You have no way to support any of your assertions because they are false. You have not even seen the boat.
Click to expand...
Both sides are discussing this matter in good faith... a proper rating and YES there is an obvious disagreement.

Being accused of creating lie's and character assassination.. I am fed up hearing about and reading, its completely disrespectful and incorrect.

False assertions... then explain all the work that was done over the winter in the shed up in RI in detail.

 
Snaggletooth

Snaggletooth

SA's Morrelle Compasse
35,259
6,110
Thisse threade ist brakeng my hartte, to see alle my frendes at tacking eache orthere. You guyes neede gette togthere drick, disucusse, and mabey paunche eache orthere in nosse. Threade issente helpig sailling or youse getteng anny bettere.

 
Hitchhiker

Hitchhiker

Hoopy Frood
4,752
1,400
Saquo-Pilia Hensha
Snaggletooth said:
Thisse threade ist brakeng my hartte, to see alle my frendes at tacking eache orthere. You guyes neede gette togthere drick, disucusse, and mabey paunche eache orthere in nosse. Threade issente helpig sailling or youse getteng anny bettere.
Click to expand...
No no. This thread is pure brilliance. Some of the most entertaining PHRF bitching I have heard in a while, and really, isn't that the inherent beauty of PHRF?

I don't know who any of these people are, or what has been done to the boat in question, or even what sort of boat it is other than a MORC boat. But, it is the proverbial slow motion train wreck.

Can someone maybe provide a backstory? Although it is not entirely necessary.

 
J

jesposito

Super Anarchist
7,192
227
somewhere where your not
sailman said:
Luca, a debate assumes that both sides argue in good faith. Spreading lies and maligning someone's character is not debate. You have no way to support any of your assertions because they are false. You have not even seen the boat.
Click to expand...
No, I think we do know the facts, it's how you and John look at getting over on the PHRF comm.

Kinda the way we all argued what had been done to the Ev 32. Unfortunately the PHRF comm dropped the ball on that one, but seems to have gotten the rating correct or maybe 108 was correct this time around.

I read what I comprehend just fine, what I don't comprehend is that when I ask John and Vince several times if he made any modifications to the boat I was told no. Then I come to find out by the owner of the shop where the boat was worked on that the keel, rudder and mast was changed to me those are modifications. {maybe someone else on here can chime in and confirm that}.

What the best thing was 3 weeks ago today I had lunch with Vince Nanni and I gave him one last time to answer me face to face about the modifications while I was texting him the old keel and new keel pics, his answer again was NO mods.

When I told him to look at his phone the look on his face was PRICELESS. His answer was yeah he changed the keel. WHAT AM I MISSING??? That is fact!

Met with George Samalot, he admits to seeing pics of the 2 keels but was told the keel HAD been changed, unless he lying to me he was unaware that John changed the keel, he thought it HAD been changed in the past. He was also unaware, again unless he is lying to me, that the rudder and mast was changed.

These are facts.

 
J

jesposito

Super Anarchist
7,192
227
somewhere where your not
musicman said:
jesposito said:
sailman said:
The color of the sky in your world must be bright an rosie! You should probably check your meds though. Nothing's been dropped, not sure how you would know any details unless....

The only parts of this equation that have been dishonest stares back at you in the mirror every morning, that and the other little individual that has trouble remaining employed.

You have forgotten a fair amount about sailboat racing; integrity and honesty come to mind.
Click to expand...
Honesty starts with actually telling the PHRF comm in both Western LIS and ECSA that you changed the keel, rudder, and mast from a stock MORC 30 that is suppose to be as slow as a Santana 30/30 with a keel, mast and rudder from a sistership to the MORC Maxi Cowboy. Not just telling them that hey look at the morc rating this boat should rate even with a S2 9.1. then saying here are specs give me a measurement when the comm, has no idea the new owner made those changes.

I am sure there has been lead added to this boat since all this started

What's funny is a few years back when we spoke about lightening up Hustler, you went into whine mode about adding back in what ever weight would have come out, and now you are involved with this modified cheater boat.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

My integrity is fine, others you are involved with may not be.

I think you might of inhaled to much resin.
Click to expand...

The constant "drip drip drip" of character assassination you have been playing out against me goes back a long way to when I had the E 32. In some ways it's nice that you are fully public about it now vs back room chatter and behind the scenes action (although we both know you and your friend are working behind the scenes on this as well). The 32 I owned was not at all illegal and was inspected several times, I'm sorry that that doesn't fit the story you'd like to tell.

As to the proposed work to Hustler, lets talk about that. You in fact asked me what to do with the boat. I was very clear to you based on what your goals were what could be done to make the boat better. You made it very clear to me that the class was dead and that you were hoping to see more smaller boats race IRC (you in fact got an cert and did some IRC racing). The suggestions I made to you were for better optimizing the boat for IRC and they were not to make the boat radically light as you suggest, in fact they were to make it heavier but more with better weight centralization. A great example of the fact that we were looking to make it heavier is that you were very close to converting your boat on an inboard.

As to my boat the committees were not given old MORC certs to base the new rating against because that would not be fair, that is not what happened. The MORC certs I have are all different in that they have a wide range of weights due to the owners at the time trying to optimize for the rule. The committees were all given the specs of what the boat is as it sits right now, because that is what they were being asked to rate. Old MORC results and class splits were submitted to further help understand the range of boats and classes they sailed in. 2 of the 3 groups that have rated the boat see it very similarly the third way far off.

Your statement that I claim "the boat should rate the same as an S2 9.1" is false. I did not say this, I have said that the boat was designed to race in a group of MORC boats like the: 30/30, Capo 30, S2 9.1 etc. I did however say that I feel the boat should rate near the two 30/30 versions, and having sailed it against a 30/30 GP this summer that seems to be about right.

For the record in YRALIS the 30/30 RC has a base rating of 132, I did not ever ask for 132.

In my written summary of the boat I suggested that given the delta to known standard boats in YRALIS & other regions that the NY rating should be around 126. Considering the base rating of the MHOB J 29 is slower in NY at 114 this would be a reasonable delta and agree with the RI committee & be slightly less favorable than the CT group. If you were at the meeting you would know this.

It's interesting that a person who claims not to care about sailing any more is so fixated on this and attacking another persons character. Does not sound at all like someone who doesn't care or has no agenda....
Click to expand...
I really don't care anymore, but I also as in the past don't like to see competitors getting screwed or myself. I do want to make sure if I do come out of retirement that we have fair racing. Not sure why the idiots up in ECSA who lost those races are not complaining, you always told me Prescott was a good sailor and would give me fits if he showed up to Block. you beat him by 8 minutes in a race where the wind was between 8-12 knots. Not sure why you where looking for someone in the 3rd race that you did to drive the boat and throw the race. Maybe to preserve the rating?

In regards to the Ev 32 I never said anything about Remedy, It was the guys from Bloody Hell in KW that wrote cheater boat on the keel. {Maybe they knew something, nobody else knew about the boat}

Matter of fact I defended you,if you remember.

Regarding Hustler, yes we spoke about things, but I would never change the boat from a stock configuration. As it is I'm always being accused of something or being inspected. God could you imagine what the PHRf comm would do to me?

In our conversations you told me the boat was built to sail against the S2 9.1 and Santana in MORC and the ratings were real close under MORC. That is how you got the rating in ECSA, YRA didn't buy it.

I spoke to a friend of mine in CA who actually sailed on the Details when it was new and sailed a lot against it. He said in the right hands the boat is a 114 rater and can complete with the J29, that was before your modifications, I was also told the boat had lead pigs to get it to rate under MORC. I also found out that the boat was close to 100K new, like I said nobody goes to a designer and says build me a boat as slow as a S2 9.1 or 30/30, but would say I will pay you to design a boat to rate as slow as those 2 boats but go as fast as a 114 rater, hence the reason all measurement rules die. I am sure the lead that Peter was delivering back to you 3 weeks ago was that lead. The Mauri Pro specs show original boat specs ballast at 3400lbs and displacement at 7125, but the YRA PHRF cert show the ballast with the new keel at 2500lbs and displacement at 7200lbs, I was never good at math but those numbers don't add up and I think the comm might have missed that?

I sorry it turned out this way, but like with the Ev 32 not yours, you and will seem to interpret things differently than the rest and was able to get the PHRF comm believe that what was done was for safety.

How could anyone get penalized for safety.

There is a j24 guy named Jeep who thinks he's smarter than everyone else or others around him are idiots, it catches up to you after awhile.

I'm Done, have fun sailing around with a gift rating.

 
Parma

Parma

Super Anarchist
3,073
434
here
Exactly how many seconds are these modifications worth under the most liberal interpretation possible?

Just curious.

 
musicman

musicman

Anarchist
735
0
Waterford CT
jesposito said:
musicman said:







It's interesting that a person who claims not to care about sailing any more is so fixated on this and attacking another persons character. Does not sound at all like someone who doesn't care or has no agenda....
Click to expand...
In regards to the Ev 32 I never said anything about Remedy, It was the guys from Bloody Hell in KW that wrote cheater boat on the keel. {Maybe they knew something, nobody else knew about the boat}
Click to expand...
"Maybe they knew something, nobody else knew about the boat" again you're pretty consistent with the "drip-drip" character assassination theme.

With regards to some of the statements you have made about the boat, please allow me to clear them up with some facts:

1) The boat DID NOT cost 100k to build. This should not matter even if it did, but to address your fixation on it after speaking to the designer it was a bit over 60k ready to sail with electronics and sails.

2) The boat did not ever have 3400 lbs of ballast. I have measured certs that show all the ballast weights in various configurations. None of them are 3400. With regards to using "Mauri Pro" or "Sailboat Data" for your research on a custom boat this will be (and is) wildly inaccurate. Great examples of how inaccurate they are, just look at "Sailboat" data listing the P dimension as 38.25' it was never this and is not now, it is 37.4 or the 11 foot E. The E of my boat has been 12.6 since the mid 80's.

3) "In our conversations you told me the boat was built to sail against the S2 9.1 and Santana in MORC and the ratings were real close under MORC" That is correct and as I pointed out earlier this was to help people understand where the boat raced class wise and what it raced against. As I also pointed out to you I did NOT ask for a rating equal to that of an S2 9.1, what I asked for was a rating between the two 30/30 variants which based on FACTUAL comparison between the boats appears to be about right. 2 of the 3 committees involved in this agree.

4) I have heard from several sources that you & others insist there are photos of the boat with a double spreader rig and that the boat is not in fact "1 of 1". Both of these statements are false. The boat since day 1 has had a triple spreader rig. The mast we are using is in fact HEAVIER than the original mast and is not helping performance but hurting it, the designer urged us to reconsider but we had no choice as the mast we received failed survey. We did not ever ask for any rating credit for using the heavier mast and have no intention to even though it is hurting not helping. The mast we are using was given to us by a friend who wanted to see the boat be completed vs scrapped.

As to the "mold" issue, to the best of my knowledge the only Andrews 30's that were built in female molds were the Star 30 & Star 30 Turbo. With that said they seem to all have some variation. These were designed and built a number of years after my boat.

5) "in the right hands the boat is a 114 rater and can complete with the J29, that was before your modification" Another interesting tid-bit that there are no facts to prove. I did speak to the designer in detail about how the boat stacked up against the J 29, he confirmed the boat was slower through the water but competitive on handicap. This is shown in the MORC classes and also backed up by the current rating assigned by 2 of the 3 groups that have rated it in 2016.

I realize that none of this fits the story you would like to tell, but you are not basing your story on any facts.

The only person who was kept "out of the loop" was you, the committees were all given the same information.

 
C

cjsalustro

Member
468
0
musicman said:
jesposito said:
musicman said:







It's interesting that a person who claims not to care about sailing any more is so fixated on this and attacking another persons character. Does not sound at all like someone who doesn't care or has no agenda....
Click to expand...
In regards to the Ev 32 I never said anything about Remedy, It was the guys from Bloody Hell in KW that wrote cheater boat on the keel. {Maybe they knew something, nobody else knew about the boat}
Click to expand...
"Maybe they knew something, nobody else knew about the boat" again you're pretty consistent with the "drip-drip" character assassination theme.

With regards to some of the statements you have made about the boat, please allow me to clear them up with some facts:

1) The boat DID NOT cost 100k to build. This should not matter even if it did, but to address your fixation on it after speaking to the designer it was a bit over 60k ready to sail with electronics and sails.

2) The boat did not ever have 3400 lbs of ballast. I have measured certs that show all the ballast weights in various configurations. None of them are 3400. With regards to using "Mauri Pro" or "Sailboat Data" for your research on a custom boat this will be (and is) wildly inaccurate. Great examples of how inaccurate they are, just look at "Sailboat" data listing the P dimension as 38.25' it was never this and is not now, it is 37.4 or the 11 foot E. The E of my boat has been 12.6 since the mid 80's.

3) "In our conversations you told me the boat was built to sail against the S2 9.1 and Santana in MORC and the ratings were real close under MORC" That is correct and as I pointed out earlier this was to help people understand where the boat raced class wise and what it raced against. As I also pointed out to you I did NOT ask for a rating equal to that of an S2 9.1, what I asked for was a rating between the two 30/30 variants which based on FACTUAL comparison between the boats appears to be about right. 2 of the 3 committees involved in this agree.

4) I have heard from several sources that you & others insist there are photos of the boat with a double spreader rig and that the boat is not in fact "1 of 1". Both of these statements are false. The boat since day 1 has had a triple spreader rig. The mast we are using is in fact HEAVIER than the original mast and is not helping performance but hurting it, the designer urged us to reconsider but we had no choice as the mast we received failed survey. We did not ever ask for any rating credit for using the heavier mast and have no intention to even though it is hurting not helping. The mast we are using was given to us by a friend who wanted to see the boat be completed vs scrapped.

As to the "mold" issue, to the best of my knowledge the only Andrews 30's that were built in female molds were the Star 30 & Star 30 Turbo. With that said they seem to all have some variation. These were designed and built a number of years after my boat.

5) "in the right hands the boat is a 114 rater and can complete with the J29, that was before your modification" Another interesting tid-bit that there are no facts to prove. I did speak to the designer in detail about how the boat stacked up against the J 29, he confirmed the boat was slower through the water but competitive on handicap. This is shown in the MORC classes and also backed up by the current rating assigned by 2 of the 3 groups that have rated it in 2016.

I realize that none of this fits the story you would like to tell, but you are not basing your story on any facts.

The only person who was kept "out of the loop" was you, the committees were all given the same information.
Click to expand...
So you are saying this is not accurate? Even though at the bottom in the notes it clearly references your boat. I am wrong?

And the link:... http://sailboatdata.com/viewrecord.asp?class_id=7103

[SIZE=13.5pt]Hull Type:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] Fin w/spade rudder[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Rig Type:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] Masthead Sloop[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]LOA:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 29.97' / 9.13m[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]LWL:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 25.29' / 7.71m[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Beam:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 10.00' / 3.05m[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Listed SA:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 458 ft2[/SIZE] [SIZE=13.5pt]/ 42.55 m2[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Draft (max.)[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 5.50' / 1.68m[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Draft (min.)[/SIZE]​

[SIZE=13.5pt]Displacement:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 7125 lbs./ 3232 kgs.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Ballast:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 3400 lbs. / 1542 kgs.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Sail Area/Disp.1:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 19.85[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Bal./Disp.:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 47.71%[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Disp./Len.:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 196.65[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Designer:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] Alan Andrews[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Builder:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] Dencho Marine (USA)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Construction:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] FG[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Bal. type:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] Lead[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]First Built:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 1983[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Last Built:[/SIZE]​

[SIZE=13.5pt]# Built:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 1[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]AUXILIARY POWER (orig. equip.)[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt]Make:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] Volvo[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Model:[/SIZE]​

[SIZE=13.5pt]Type:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] Diesel[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]HP:[/SIZE]​

[SIZE=13.5pt]RIG AND SAIL PARTICULARS[/SIZE] [SIZE=13.5pt]KEY[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt]I(IG):[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 41.30' / 12.59m[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]J:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 11.84' / 3.61m[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]P:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 38.25' / 11.66m[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]E:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 11.00' / 3.35m[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]PY:[/SIZE]​

[SIZE=13.5pt]EY:[/SIZE]​

[SIZE=13.5pt]ISP:[/SIZE]​

[SIZE=13.5pt]SPL/TPS:[/SIZE]​

[SIZE=13.5pt]SA(Fore.):[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 244.50 ft2[/SIZE] [SIZE=13.5pt]/ 22.71 m2[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]SA(Main):[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 210.38 ft2[/SIZE] [SIZE=13.5pt]/ 19.54 m2[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Sail Area (100% fore+main triangles):[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 454.87 ft2[/SIZE] [SIZE=13.5pt]/ 42.26 m2[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Sail Area/Disp.2:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 19.72[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]Est. Forestay Length.:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] 42.96' / 13.10m[/SIZE]

[SIZE=13.5pt]BUILDERS (past & present)[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt]More about & boats built by:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt] Dencho Marine[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt]DESIGNER[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt]More about & boats designed by:[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=13.5pt]NOTES[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=12pt]MORC class B. Synonymous with 'Details', winner of the 1982 International MORC Championships. [/SIZE]

Slated for production as the Islander 30A but the builder went out of business.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts





Top