Jeff and others,
The Australian VYC system is a YARDSTICK system just like USPN; is not at all like the measurement based Texel and ISAf systems. Still this VYC system rates the Taipans alot faster as the USPN system just the same. I'm quite sure the VYC has more than a huge amount of race data since the Taipans have been actively raced over there for more than 15 years now.
Also the USPN number for the F16's hasn't been chanced since 2002; while the F16 class was first formed halve way into 2001. This suggests to me that not much converging is going on in the USPN system with respect to F16's.
Now, this all means that physical models (force to drag); rating models like Texel and ISAF and also (Statistical) yardstick systems like (australian) VYC (similar to USPN) are susposed to be ALL wrong just because the USPN system got it somehow first-time-right in 2002; only 9 months after the F16's were created ? Who else finds this a little hard to believe ?
I hear that Gulfport and Taipan / F16 sailors have been sending in data ever since the beginning but no chance has ever come of it.
In addition; the rest of the world is sailing of the F18 and A-cat ratings and is WINNING events with bigger start fleets then in the US.
This all sure doesn't convince me that USPN is right. It is either that combined with the fact that f16 crews are simply a shitload faster than all other crews or the F16 rating is fair at the F18 and A-cat level.
I think we have stumbled on the real issue here. What will it take to convince the US sailors and the USPN system that the boats are faster the the current USPN ratings ? All we bring in as signals to this is simply swept of the table because USPN "must-be-right".
Now I sure that the standard Taipan with spi is fairly rated just slightly slower than the newest F18's; afterall the F18's became faster over the last 4 years with the new mainsail cuts and sorts. So 63.5 to 64 is probably right for the older standard Taipan 4.9's hen fitted with spi. But the newer fully optimized boats like the Blade and the upgraded Taipans F16 are totally expected to be at USPN = 62.5
Of course the fact that F16's have been put on the kiddies course with 1 or 2 H17's and other grandpa's didn't help the statistical analyses much.
Mind you I'm not blaming Darline or the USPN system for anything intentional. I'm quite sure that there are very normal causes for this discrepancy. But that doesn't make it any less wrong.
Again the best comparison I have it the (statistical) VYC yardstick number between the Taipans and F18's. Both are actively raced in Aus and are expected to have a dependable number by now. The ration is (Standard Taipan +spi)/F18 = (71.7/70.0) = 102.4 % with this the USPN number for the standard Taipan + spi should be 102.4 % * 62.5 = 64 or 4.5 % faster than it is now.
Actually under the statistical VYC yardstick system a standard Taipan 4.9 without a spi is rated at 74/70 = 105.7 to the F18's that is actually LESS than the USPN system gives for the same boat but now with spi ( uspn 66.9/62.5 = 107 % )
I mean just look at it ! How on earth can this be right !
Back in 1999 Glenn Ashby raced the standard Taipan (NO spi) to 24th overall in Round Texel of a rating of 105 (=105/102 = 103 % to the F18).
Call this all Wouter math if you have too but these are all indications that VYC, Texel, ISAF are probably correct while USPN isn't.
Now Jennifer Lindsay will beat me hands down and she is with distance the fastest sailor on the Taipan in the USA but even she is not of the caliber that many Aussie Taipan sailors and quite a few F18's sailors are. If we are converging the USPN F16 data on her skills alone than were will we end up ?
At the DCC here in Netherlands in 2004 Daniel van Kerckhof and Anna-liese Byrne wipped all our clocks. They were lapping I-20's !
I simply don't understand why many of the US sailors keep clining to a rating that is arguably discredited. And I don't understand the distrust of mathematics. This stuff puts satelites in orbit and men on the moon. Not to mention CD and DVD players that read data that is enclosed in little hills and vallies that are no bigger than 10 micron large. Why do many people trust gutt feelings over science and mathematics so much ?
It beats me.
Anyways we'll just race anyone on the F18 and A-cat ratings; it is not as if this is unfair to the others right ?
First over the line wins; and no handicap or Frankenboat bitching afterwards.
If you can't win of those rating (like the Aussies and Europeans are doing) than it is you that is not fast enough, not the F16 boat.
Wouter Jeff and others,
The Australian VYC system is a YARDSTICK system just like USPN; is not at all like the measurement based Texel and ISAf systems. Still this VYC system rates the Taipans alot faster as the USPN system just the same. I'm quite sure the VYC has more than a huge amount of race data since the Taipans have been actively raced over there for more than 15 years now.
Also the USPN number for the F16's hasn't been chanced since 2002; while the F16 class was first formed halve way into 2001. This suggests to me that not much converging is going on in the USPN system with respect to F16's.
Now, this all means that physical models (force to drag); rating models like Texel and ISAF and also (Statistical) yardstick systems like (australian) VYC (similar to USPN) are susposed to be ALL wrong just because the USPN system got it somehow first-time-right in 2002; only 9 months after the F16's were created ? Who else finds this a little hard to believe ?
I hear that Gulfport and Taipan / F16 sailors have been sending in data ever since the beginning but no chance has ever come of it.
In addition; the rest of the world is sailing of the F18 and A-cat ratings and is WINNING events with bigger start fleets then in the US.
This all sure doesn't convince me that USPN is right. It is either that combined with the fact that f16 crews are simply a shitload faster than all other crews or the F16 rating is fair at the F18 and A-cat level.
I think we have stumbled on the real issue here. What will it take to convince the US sailors and the USPN system that the boats are faster the the current USPN ratings ? All we bring in as signals to this is simply swept of the table because USPN "must-be-right".
Now I sure that the standard Taipan with spi is fairly rated just slightly slower than the newest F18's; afterall the F18's became faster over the last 4 years with the new mainsail cuts and sorts. So 63.5 to 64 is probably right for the older standard Taipan 4.9's hen fitted with spi. But the newer fully optimized boats like the Blade and the upgraded Taipans F16 are totally expected to be at USPN = 62.5
Of course the fact that F16's have been put on the kiddies course with 1 or 2 H17's and other grandpa's didn't help the statistical analyses much.
Mind you I'm not blaming Darline or the USPN system for anything intentional. I'm quite sure that there are very normal causes for this discrepancy. But that doesn't make it any less wrong.
Again the best comparison I have it the (statistical) VYC yardstick number between the Taipans and F18's. Both are actively raced in Aus and are expected to have a dependable number by now. The ration is (Standard Taipan +spi)/F18 = (71.7/70.0) = 102.4 % with this the USPN number for the standard Taipan + spi should be 102.4 % * 62.5 = 64 or 4.5 % faster than it is now.
Actually under the statistical VYC yardstick system a standard Taipan 4.9 without a spi is rated at 74/70 = 105.7 to the F18's that is actually LESS than the USPN system gives for the same boat but now with spi ( uspn 66.9/62.5 = 107 % )
I mean just look at it ! How on earth can this be right !
Back in 1999 Glenn Ashby raced the standard Taipan (NO spi) to 24th overall in Round Texel of a rating of 105 (=105/102 = 103 % to the F18).
Call this all Wouter math if you have too but these are all indications that VYC, Texel, ISAF are probably correct while USPN isn't.
Now Jennifer Lindsay will beat me hands down and she is with distance the fastest sailor on the Taipan in the USA but even she is not of the caliber that many Aussie Taipan sailors and quite a few F18's sailors are. If we are converging the USPN F16 data on her skills alone than were will we end up ?
At the DCC here in Netherlands in 2004 Daniel van Kerckhof and Anna-liese Byrne wipped all our clocks. They were lapping I-20's !
I simply don't understand why many of the US sailors keep clining to a rating that is arguably discredited. And I don't understand the distrust of mathematics. This stuff puts satelites in orbit and men on the moon. Not to mention CD and DVD players that read data that is enclosed in little hills and vallies that are no bigger than 10 micron large. Why do many people trust gutt feelings over science and mathematics so much ?
It beats me.
Anyways we'll just race anyone on the F18 and A-cat ratings; it is not as if this is unfair to the others right ?
First over the line wins; and no handicap or Frankenboat bitching afterwards.
If you can't win of those rating (like the Aussies and Europeans are doing) than it is you that is not fast enough, not the F16 boat.
Wouter Jeff and others,
The Australian VYC system is a YARDSTICK system just like USPN; is not at all like the measurement based Texel and ISAf systems. Still this VYC system rates the Taipans alot faster as the USPN system just the same. I'm quite sure the VYC has more than a huge amount of race data since the Taipans have been actively raced over there for more than 15 years now.
Also the USPN number for the F16's hasn't been chanced since 2002; while the F16 class was first formed halve way into 2001. This suggests to me that not much converging is going on in the USPN system with respect to F16's.
Now, this all means that physical models (force to drag); rating models like Texel and ISAF and also (Statistical) yardstick systems like (australian) VYC (similar to USPN) are susposed to be ALL wrong just because the USPN system got it somehow first-time-right in 2002; only 9 months after the F16's were created ? Who else finds this a little hard to believe ?
I hear that Gulfport and Taipan / F16 sailors have been sending in data ever since the beginning but no chance has ever come of it.
In addition; the rest of the world is sailing of the F18 and A-cat ratings and is WINNING events with bigger start fleets then in the US.
This all sure doesn't convince me that USPN is right. It is either that combined with the fact that f16 crews are simply a shitload faster than all other crews or the F16 rating is fair at the F18 and A-cat level.
I think we have stumbled on the real issue here. What will it take to convince the US sailors and the USPN system that the boats are faster the the current USPN ratings ? All we bring in as signals to this is simply swept of the table because USPN "must-be-right".
Now I sure that the standard Taipan with spi is fairly rated just slightly slower than the newest F18's; afterall the F18's became faster over the last 4 years with the new mainsail cuts and sorts. So 63.5 to 64 is probably right for the older standard Taipan 4.9's hen fitted with spi. But the newer fully optimized boats like the Blade and the upgraded Taipans F16 are totally expected to be at USPN = 62.5
Of course the fact that F16's have been put on the kiddies course with 1 or 2 H17's and other grandpa's didn't help the statistical analyses much.
Mind you I'm not blaming Darline or the USPN system for anything intentional. I'm quite sure that there are very normal causes for this discrepancy. But that doesn't make it any less wrong.
Again the best comparison I have it the (statistical) VYC yardstick number between the Taipans and F18's. Both are actively raced in Aus and are expected to have a dependable number by now. The ration is (Standard Taipan +spi)/F18 = (71.7/70.0) = 102.4 % with this the USPN number for the standard Taipan + spi should be 102.4 % * 62.5 = 64 or 4.5 % faster than it is now.
Actually under the statistical VYC yardstick system a standard Taipan 4.9 without a spi is rated at 74/70 = 105.7 to the F18's that is actually LESS than the USPN system gives for the same boat but now with spi ( uspn 66.9/62.5 = 107 % )
I mean just look at it ! How on earth can this be right !
Back in 1999 Glenn Ashby raced the standard Taipan (NO spi) to 24th overall in Round Texel of a rating of 105 (=105/102 = 103 % to the F18).
Call this all Wouter math if you have too but these are all indications that VYC, Texel, ISAF are probably correct while USPN isn't.
Now Jennifer Lindsay will beat me hands down and she is with distance the fastest sailor on the Taipan in the USA but even she is not of the caliber that many Aussie Taipan sailors and quite a few F18's sailors are. If we are converging the USPN F16 data on her skills alone than were will we end up ?
At the DCC here in Netherlands in 2004 Daniel van Kerckhof and Anna-liese Byrne wipped all our clocks. They were lapping I-20's !
I simply don't understand why many of the US sailors keep clining to a rating that is arguably discredited. And I don't understand the distrust of mathematics. This stuff puts satelites in orbit and men on the moon. Not to mention CD and DVD players that read data that is enclosed in little hills and vallies that are no bigger than 10 micron large. Why do many people trust gutt feelings over science and mathematics so much ?
It beats me.
Anyways we'll just race anyone on the F18 and A-cat ratings; it is not as if this is unfair to the others right ?
First over the line wins; and no handicap or Frankenboat bitching afterwards.
If you can't win of those rating (like the Aussies and Europeans are doing) than it is you that is not fast enough, not the F16 boat.
Wouter
what? You can not have my Bud Light....
