Source : http://www.1design.net/scoring/JPOR05.htm

However this page is pretty unreadable as the listing are NOT sorted to final placings. Meaning the winner is often not at the top of the listings.

So I threw the bunch in my excel program and did some processing :

I will only show the spi fleet results as if it was a scoring class. Of course each class listing is the same as the total listing with the other boats deleted.

Mind you [color:"red"] JPOR REGATTA DOES NOT ENDORSE THIS COMBINED RESULT [/color]. The regatta was run along class lines and so winners and prizes were awarded to each class individually. So the combined results of the spinnaker fleet here are [color:"red"] JUST FOR REFERENCE [/color] and some personal enjoyment. Please do not present then as anything different, we don't want to frustrate any RC in giving out this time info in the future.





But lets see what we can learn from this combined listing (JUST FOR FUN). Note first how that A-cat+spi rating is very close to the F16 ratings. 64.8/65.3 = 99.2 % so A-cat with spi is regarded to be about 27 seconds per hour of bouy racing faster. Texel gives about 3 % difference = 100 second per hour bouy racing.

F18 to F16 ratings are 62.6/65.3 = 95.9 % or F18;s are regarded to be 144 seconds per hour of bouy racing faster (under US sailing handicap). Texel and ISAF assume equality or the F16 being 1 % slower = 36 seconds per hour.

The top 3 placers did so by sailing consistantly. A big thing in light weather racers as you can throw away lots of points by a single bad result. Anyway in this race the crews could use 1 strike-out. The strike-out placings are written in red and in italics.

Are there a few interesting funnies ?

Personally I think that Ingram should be placed second and Shafer 3rd but probably I'm used to a difference tie breaker rule. Shafer and Ingram tied for 2nd place.



Now just as an indication ; The finishing orders when racing F18's and F16's "first in wins" (=elapsed time; NO handicap corrections)





So in race 1 and race 4 the spread between F18 and F16's is rather even. In races 2 and 3 however the F16's seem to be in the bottom halve of this particular scoring fleet.

Personally I think this to be a rather good result. Why, because "no wind" + "considerable chop" is definately not the strong point of the F16's. The lightweightness of the boats are a drawback in chop when there is insufficient wind to keep the rig under power. As soon as you are stalled by a wave the flow over the rig collapses and you have to reattach it again. A heavy boat that uses its momentum to punch through a waves (instead of its sail drive) is less challenged to keep optimal flow. Second point; the shorter mast of the F16's is disadvantaged in the very light winds. In no wind everybody drifts with the same speed and at 5 knots of wind or more the turbulent nature of the wind gives enough power to F16 rigs to give them speed, BUT that (laminair wind) zone between 0 knots and 5 knots of wind is where tall masted boats are noticeably advantaged. There is just more wind higher up. This was the one thing we couldn't overcome when we established the F16 class.

But on handicap the results are mixed again so even in races 2 and 3 the differences in finishing times was not too big.

All the other points could be corrected by doing something smart with the F16 design, but this "tall mast-very light winds" syndrome is just uncorrectable. Only solution here is to have taller masts. I say the damage is kept small enough to not be of any serious concern. Most racers in such light winds are lotteries anyway because of the wind shifts and holes.



Wouter