Point taken, noted in results. Suggest it is up to Class Associations or Race Organizers to work out who sails the boats, ie. ISAF Cat 1 v Cat 3, Industry Professionals, ...

Mr. Jobson said something about encouraging boats to get on the water and making it easier to get a rating. Fair winds, S-->

You're right. He is devoting his time and attention to something that seems, at best, marginally supported by his peers and making the rest apathetic. (if you haven't guessed, I'm in the latter)

But whatever helps him sleep at night. I'm still laughing at the "PHRF is great" comment.



Until someone finds the "hole" in the formula that is. Its happened before.

Apathey set in a long time before Mark started working on this.

Apathey is our biggest problem. The dozen or so willing to lead are tired of carrying the rest.

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't SCHRS require an ISAF certified measurer, if so this is a deal breaker for SCHRS, if not then it is clearly a front runner.

ref.1 SCHRS Objectives

Your ISAF Measurer question is good; I don't know the answer.

"Certified Ratings" will have enough production to matter. Normal procedures, real class rules, real measured weights, ... Class Rules need to specify all the factors required in the formula, same for Texel and SCHRS.

The F18 rules are ISAF protocol: platform weight, sailing weight, sail.specs, crew weight metrics, mast circumference, ...

Provisional Ratings (Texel or SCHRS) may be issued by local rating volunteers, or assigned by the Race Organizer if required (ie: spin size change).

Some people weigh their boats. Some One-Design boats are heavier than the manufacturer's weight and others in the class. I suggest those overweight boats deserve and get a rating credit (Texel/SCHRS), but defer to what the sailors think is fair.

To get a full rating where not manufacturer certified; yes.

Are you saying that the US does not have any?

I only know of one and she is four hours away, the US is a very big place. I've also looked into becoming an ISAF certified measurer but the process appears to be quite involved. For SCHRS to work an ISAF certified measurer would have to be easily accessible and the price would have to right, very right. If Texel has the same requirement it has the same issue. If any measurement rating system requires an ISAF certified measurer I just don't see it working in the US.

ref.1 ISAF International Measurers
Suggest there are no ISAF SCHRS Measurers listed above, without regards to the United States.

ref.2 NA F18 Measurers
The North American F18 Class uses ISAF protocols & processes within the context of Class Rules (not a subject matter expert, just reading). I suggest other North American Multihull Classes may or may not have "measurers", depending on the class, let alone ISAF Certified.

Portsmouth, Texel, SCHRS rely on somebody (volunteers) to measure the boats as regionally administered. The Measurer under Texel and/or SCHRS uses ISAF Equipment Rules of Sailing (ERS) to supplement Class Rules, as Dick Rose pointed out a couple of years ago to the US Sailing One-Design Council ( link ).

The ISAF ERS sail areas come out correctly, not hiccuped by Class Rules.

I'm sorry but I don't know what you are trying to tell us here. From the links it only appears that class measures are recommended to use the ISAF ERS, which is easily done. The issue remains does SCHRS and Texel require ISAF certified measurers. From what I can tell Portsmouth has no such requirement for it's measurer, although I seriously doubt any DPN has been assigned based on the measurement formula contained in the DPN protocal in the last two decades.

Dave
The OA must determine the level of rigor for the measurement rule. SCHRS provides for 4 levels.

There are alternative routes to achieving certification:

1. Class Rules: If these are drawn sufficiently tightly, in that they specify all the factors required in the formula, then these are acceptable. Where tolerances are permitted, SCHRS will take the least favourable, rather than the average, on the basis that those keenest on winning may be expected to exploit them.
2. Type-Approved Class Certificate: A sample of standard boats may be officially measured at random. This is likely to be the means for rating mass market classes. If the builder can only provide new boats, then the certification is subject to subsequent review.
3. Individual Certification: Classes of boats where the class rules do not control the appropriate items to allow SCHRS to grant type approval, One-off, experimental and new designs require individual certificates. If these designs contain features with which the formula is not intended to cope then the boat cannot be certified, unless it is raced in a version that excludes these features. Where possible, the formula may subsequently be modified to incorporate such features. If a standard boat is raced with a non-standard modification, e.g. extra trapeze, spinnaker, class-illegal sails, then the entire boat requires an individual certificate. Individual certificates should only qualify a boat for the Open class of an event.
4. Provisional Rating: Where it may not be economically viable to obtain certification for some out-of-production designs, a provisional rating may be calculated based on un-certified data. Where such ratings are all that is available, they will be indicated as such in the SCHRS ratings table. Organisers should specify whether their event include or exclude "Provisionally Rated" boats.

There are many ISAF certified measurers in the states but only one has been used with respect to Catamarans. Carla stepped up for the Tornado Class when the long time measurer passed away.

I would anticipate the unrated US boats would be issued provisional ratings. If an owner knows the boat is heavy (for example) and wants a softer rating... they can go get their boat measured in their area. It's their problem.

A complete table of ratings equivalent to the USPN would be constructed with Official and Provisional ratings.

One off boat owners (CFR 20)would have their specific boat measured and eliminate all of the chatter associated with their rating.

Okay Mark, nothing in your post addresses the question "Does SCHRS require an ISAF certified measurer?"

Are you saying the Organizing Authority of a particular regatta determines if a measurer needs to be ISAF certified? Or the OA of a particular region has the authority to enforce the measurement criteria? This sounds a LOT like PHRF and no matter what you say PHRF if the WORST of all of them and it's NOT a regional phenomenon. The sh!t fights that happen with PHRF make us and DPN look like we are making hot monkey love.

So, for me I need a clear set a rules that are enforced consistently across the board globally or at the very minimum nationally. Everyone plays by the same set of rules regardless what OA we fall under.

What is the definition of un-certified data?

Wait...

we aren't?

For SCHRS... Simon and or his successor is the final answer.

But... the measurement of a boat is a measurement. If an ISAF certified person holds the tape measure.... they can give you an ISAF certified measurement form... good world wide for THAT BOAT.... AND the numbers are entered into the SCHRS system as certified.

If the numbers are submitted by some one else (third party)... you get the same rating but not the good house keeping seal of approval. SCHRS keeps your rating for your boat but doesn't certify it.

So, the majority of regatta OA's will use the SCHRS rating table as their standard. If some one shows up with a measurement form for their boat that is stamped ISAF certified... they use that rating for their personal modifications to their formerly class legal boat ... Otherwise they use the table ratings. If the measurement form is not certified... No good.... As always,... if they are cheating on equipment... they will be found out in a protest.

You could relax the standard as well.
Your OA could accept any third party rating certificate at their discretion.

At the extreme end... some events may say... We will measure crew weight and use that in the formula for a regatta specific rating for that boat and crew.... (PIA... but somebody might want to do it.)

At any rate... its the same formula and the same metric rule of the same boat parameters....

That's my read.

regarding measurement.

Mark has it right; BUT, you could agree that for your US events, until you catch up on ISAF measurers, you can appoint measurers; You might decide to use the qulaified F18 measurers in your locale; they know how to do it as you measure an F18 in the same way!

As Mark states you can also decide to allow people to race on a provisional rating.

SCHRS is there to be used; you can download the calc engine from the website and then those that feel there are holes in the formula can go and try and find them; those that prefer to go sailing can go sailing!

You could get people together at the next Alter cup and do some training on how to measure boats - it is not difficult; you just need to plan it out and be rigorous.

You still have to remember that all ratings are subject to protest; it is the owner/representatives responsibility to ensure that the boat conforms to the claimed rating.

http://www.schrs.com/thesystem.php


H.3 Responsibility of the owner or his representative
It is the owner's or his representative's inescapable responsibility to ensure that his hulls, spars, sails, foils and equipment comply with the rules of the class in which he enters and these rules at all times, and that alterations, replacements or repairs to the hulls, spars, sails, foils and equipment do not contravene the class rules and these rules and are reported to the measurement form.
If someone doubts it; get it measured at the regatta and then if required refer it to a authorised measurer.

We have enough trouble getting people to just submit results from a regatta that happened and are already on paper - by adopting a different system now we need to support measurers?

Or not. The measuring requirement is arbitrary. You could drop it all together or have a challenge provision.

I wonder what would happen if you dropped the measurement requirement, someone tried to cheat, and the rest of the fleet refused to sail?

Some years back there was a Hawiian paddling canoe competition. Those boats have rounded bottoms. A Tahitian, V-bottomed boat paddled out onto the course and the Hawiians promplty went back to the beach.

I'm just sayin'...

Nice, you beat me to it. What Jake said!!!

And Pete I don't have a clue what you're saying.

The Texel rating has an extensive list of precalculated ratings which covers 99% of cats sailing today.
Unless a boat has been heavily modified I dont see why every boat needs a certificate.

How many frankenboats are there, really? Most of the boats that I've ever seen showing up have been class-legal one-designs, just not enough for their own class.

I would imagine that these measurement systems already have enough data to deal with the normal classes, so you're really just needing to measure a handful of freakshows?

EDIT: Great minds think alike, apparently. We posted at the same time with the same basic idea...

Mike

The sport is either corinthian or it isn't. If you must rigorously check to make sure no one is cheating you've lost some part of that.

Checking measurements is not a law of nature. It is done because it is customary and a rule. If any class chose they could do away with the rule all together.

You would then be left with a purely democratic enforcement rule. If you don't trust your competitor, go to the beach.

I don't think many cheaters could tolerate that type of censure for very long.