First; the F16 rating debocle was not the failure of Portsmouth. It was a failure of the people running it at the time. The launch of the F16 coincided at the time the management of the Portsmouth Handicap numbers transitioned to new management. Very few people understood the software, it was old and difficult (nearly impossible) to run on a modern computer, and the new management was not able to respond quickly. Ergo, the F16 existed with an unadjusted number for an extended period before Ms. Hobock reclaimed the role and immediately started updating Portsmouth which saw a quick and steady correction on the F16 number. Now that she has passed on (God bless her), there is new management in place that looks like they're getting a good (and very responsive) handle on things.

Some of you guys think a handicap system should be perfect - fact is that it is not possible to make a handicap system perfect in sailing or any other sport. The world just doesn't work that way. It's not the nature of any handicap system. We have two basic types of handicap systems available; Portsmouth - based on performance data and Texel - which is based upon strict math using boat design parameters. Both have strengths, both have weaknesses. With Portsmouth, the weakness is establishing a rating on a new boat with no performance data and rating creep for boats that age and don't have top sailors on them (although there is some statistical math in the formula to reduce this effect). With Texel, the weakness is a rigid formula that can't account for small differences between boat designs and the potential that manufacturers can start designing boats to leverage weaknesses in the formula (like monohulls do with all their measurement based rating systems). Both have strengths; for Portsmouth, it's potentially a more accurate system as it is flexible and accommodates small design differences between similar boats and is designed to change over time. For Texel, it is easy to establish a rating for a new boat. Both systems are quite accurate as far as handicap systems go.

Which is better? It's a personal preference. I personally feel like they both are good systems and take no issue with either. When I race under handicap I expect there to be differences in the ratings that I need to overcome. It's part of the program...hell, it is in the brochure.

Do I have a problem with the Portsmouth Rating on the F20? No. It will shake itself out - it's how the system works. It's how it was designed to work. Is it an accurate rating? Hell if I know - the design has barely even hit the water in Europe. I just want to see the sucker fly and if it beats me it won't be any different than when Mike beat me out of 1st place by two points two weeks ago on A-cats.