Have modern, high - aspect mainsails jumped out of the box and now require rating adjustments to build a new box for fairness?
The 'Box Rule" was discussed during the MHC meeting this past fall. Carl Reigart, Portsmouth Committee Chair, expressed concern regarding fair ratings for designs under 'freedom of development.' Following an informal discussion we moved on with no concensus as to whether 'Box' boats should continue to be protected by "Class Rules," or whether they should be penalized according to the current USSA Portsmouth rating modifiers.
My stand is that if an A Cat or "Formula" sailor buys a boat with a used main, he gets a base rating. If he replaces the main with a shiny new mainsail with a different shape, he gets a MN @.995. Unless he/she has an unlimited budget line, he/she better make a wise choice. Eventually, the Class Rating will be controlled, for all Class designs, in fairness under the PN Committee.
Check out the real meaning of 'Corinthian Sailing' sometime. You might agree that the AC is the purest example of "Corinthian Sailing." How many of us can afford that arms race?
PHRF and PN handicappers need to be at home now.
Errrr...I have a problem with that. Because my sails are shiny doesn't mean I'm any faster. Portsmouth is a rule to establish a handicap on the boat's demonstrated potential...i.e. if Randy Smyth / Matt Struble / etc. were sailing that class of boat on a boat in great shape. There are a lot of examples of Portsmouth getting things right here. Your proposal is to further complicate things by considering Portsmouth as an number based on mediocre / average result...and that's not what it's intended to do or be. Nor is it how a handicap system should work. A handicap system should rate a boat's absolute potential so that if it is sailed to 100% of that number, it will likely win. Development classes are not progressing at such an incredible rate that the system can't keep up....rather, chances are that some of the better sailors in each area are sailing in these classes.
