1, It is not my measurement system, I am not a member if the team that admin's it, I just believe in it (with some tweaking)

2, SCHRS measures a number of things to come up with a rating.
2.1 Mainsail area
2.2 Aspect ratio of Mainsail
2.3 Jib
2.4 Aspect ratio of Jib
2.5 Area of mast
2.6 Area and aspect ratio of the plates or centre boards
2.7 LOA
2.8 LWL
2.9 Area of kite if applicable
2.10 weight of boat

3 however The F18 rules do not measure all these and so it is possible (beneficial?) to build an F18 that measures lower that the original rating 0f 1.01.

You have totally missed my point about the SCHRS rule, it is the fact that the classes that don't fit the rule are developent classes and their class rules are more open than those of SCHRS (or wouters formula for that matter)

I'll take the A class first.

The A class rules allow a very free hand on what you can do. No maximum mast height for example, just a max sail area. So you could (if you like) have an A class with a mast at 15m high (or more) if you wanted, it would be VERY quick if you were a good enough sailor to keep it upright when the wind came up - However you would have to be VERY good - hence why most NEW A classes are now using 9.5M masts (I think they got up to about 10.5M before they decided this was too high)

Everyone knows the current (say Flyer) A class is VERY quick in the light stuff - it is a light boat with a tall mast (around 9.5m I believe) and it is still quick (in the right hands) in a blow.

Considering this some more, would An A class tipping the scales at 200kg (as an example) win many races - No(but it is still an A class); would an A class with a 15m mast win many races (yes if there was little wind), so if the A class worlds were at a "light wind" location, everyone would be quite legal to turn up with 20M masts (ok so they would not be practicle, but do you get my point?), they then go down the road to a handicap regatta and clean up as they are still on the "old" A class regatta.



So, what has happened in the years since SCHRS was launched? Well, A classes have got quicker by having taller masts (this effects the SCHRS rating), BUT most of the A class sailors have been saying, "I sail an A class, thus I must sail using SCHRS 100 which was defined some time ago" (this is wrong, as I have said above. Go and look up the A class rating here, notice it says "See measurement certificate". This is because the A class rules do not FIX the same paramaters that the SCHRS rule fixes in order to produce a rating. Thus if you were to measure all the A classes in the UK, not all come out with the same number.

If you (currently) look up the F18, you will see it says 101; I would think this will change.

I've been told not by an SCHRS Measurer, but by someone who measured a Flyer to see what it came out at that the Flyer A class measures at 0.97 and that a Capricorn measures at 0.98, I am not sure what the paramaters are that effect the Capricorn Rating, but it may well be that the dagger boards make a difference, SCHRS (as stated above) uses boards as part of the calcualtion, the F18 measurement rules here state that there is a max weight for boards, but no max size.

Lastly, to re-visit this (again)



Because they are racing to a box rule that allows development; it is no different than International 14's; The F18's are racing to their class rules at an F18 regatta. The fact that an old Dart Hawk will never now win always gets fogotten then we have this argument.

If you ask people what they think of the Dart Hawk (the boat I believe was measured for the initial SCHRS number for F18) people will say, nice boat at the time, but slow now.


F18's have quicker over the years.

If the Tigers / Capricorns and Nacra Infusions were not racing as F18's (hang on, let me finish) and it was found that the (say) the Capricorn was considerably faster would you expect them to have the same rating - I would not.

you say this above so, if (again) the Capricorn is faster, is it fair to people who do not have F18's that when racing on Portsmouth handicap (or SCHRS or Wouters system) they are at a disadvantage because the F18 Handicap does not indicate that the class as a whole (i.e. the Capricorn (and one assumes the Fusion) being quicker) has an advantagous handicap.

If we want handicap racing to be fair (and I agree it is difficult and we need to try and not end up with an IMS type rule) then we need to indicate where there are problems (the F18 being the current hot topic along with the A class) and address it.

If they want to go race as F18's on equal terms then so be it. I'm not going to stop them, but my money would be on a Capricorn/Fusion (as long as the quality of the crews was equal).

Classic example of this is the fact that (so far, I believe) that no Spitfires have come along to an F16 event as they are rated slower and so feel that there is no point. It's only 1% between F16 2up and Spitfire, however it is about 6% between F16 1up and Spitfire.

[color:"red"] There is a fundemental problem with SCHRS which I believe is being addressed, that a development class (or box rule if you prefer to call it that) was "given" a rating when it should have a "refer to measurement certificate" as the F18 rule (and others) do not measure the same things as the SCHRS rule [/color]