I really don't think we could ever stop the debate and I really don't want too, at the very minimum it keeps people engaged in the process.

I for one need considerably more convincing that replacing DPN with another handicap system presents a 'more fair' result. The few times an event has gone to the trouble of running the results with multiple systems it has had little to no impact to the end result. Now if you want to talk distance races...

I'm not saying to end the debate cold-turkey. I'm saying to actually do the work to get agreement to at least accept one system or another (with all its weaknesses) and move on.

I'd be very interested to see what could actually help distance races (in terms of fairness), if anything. If a distance race is one-way, with a prevailing wind on your back the whole way, how do the numbers get affected when the wind is on the beam, or it becomes an upwind race?

I'd be shocked if any of the ratings systems differed by much on buoy courses, because they at least tend to be windward/leeward (although race management may theoretically affect the results by adding or removing reaching legs).

Mike

The Hawaiian Yachting Association was using a three - way system for PHRF racing from island to island and drop marks (600 ft. plus change). Gil Budar made a presentation at the USSA meeting in Denver - in '08 (circa). They have upwind ratings, downwind ratings, and drop mark base ratings. My report was on the theory of a wind - bracketed PHRF system based on the USSA DPN style adjustments.

The beach cat sailing takes place on Kanehoe Bay, and I have no idea what rating system they are using. I have never seen a more beautiful venue for cat sailing, and surfing North Beach on Kanehoe MCB was a real thrill.

They do not worry as much about ratings out there. They worry about close - out sets across the Ala Moana channel entrance to Ala Wai Harbor and Waikiki Yacht Club:-)

A little multihull luv and networking will pay off down the road if we play our cards well - Together!

Aloha - B

The Portsmouth Committee is irrelevant... The issue at hand is to replace the Portsmotuh Committee product with SCHRS. Of course they would oppose such a change.... They need someone other then DING to defend their work though... his heart is not really in it.



Yes!... thus the solo campaign to raise the issue.



Well you will be waiting for hell to freeze over... for such an argument!

TODAY... the tables of Texel, SCHRS and Portsmouth are more or less in agreement. Tomorrow... who knows what the portsmouth fairy will present.

The race results probably won't change much at all if we switched. (never have in my comparisons of race data ... once the F16 rating was PHRFd into line more or less)

The problem with Portsmouth... is that we must use PHRF to make up new boat ratings (F16 and nF20)... AND we don't have quality data to run the system. Bottom line... the current PN table is a good guess with a shaky basis.

So... if you believe that a non transparent rating system is good enough... (and they have good guessers). I would agree... why change anything.



Turns out the Alter Cup Committee is another independent committee. They can run the qualifiers anyway they wish... including picking the rating system.

What is the history of catamaran Ratings systems?

Back Back in the Day. Catamarans used NAMSA and not US Portsmouth for ratings. CRAM, CRAC, and Roten Pt (which had a huge display board with the ratings in their club house) struggled / fought internally over the switch. CRAC ran all of their own races and made the change to be in alignment with US Sailing and get in alignment with the rest of the sailing world. The creation of the US Sailing Championship and qualifiers pushed us into the USPN world.

USPN was 100% statistical ratings for ALL sailobats... NAMSA was solely run by and used Herb Malm's proprietary (secret) ratings formula for catamarans and then used race data to tweak the ratings.... (frequently). It worked as well as USPN and got to a fair rating a bit quicker.

So... what goes around... comes around if you wait long enough.. Now we use SCHRS and TEXEL formula's to get the rating for the nF20.... take that information and then PHRF (guestimate) it into the Portsmouth ratings table. However... With 2 boats racing in the US... Portsmouth simply can not work...

Take home points of the history lesson... Clubs simply had to choose what process they thought would generate fair ratings into the future.... USSPN won out with the addition of the Alter cup and qualifiers.

It is the same today... if the ONLY Handicap racing that is important chooses USPN.... that is what the majority of the country will fall in behind... Since YC's run all of our races these days... a change of systems needs a good house keeping seal of approval.

As you hinted at... Distance races which want to attract a few EU blokes....have switched to SHCRS. Why.... because its transparent... no back room best of intentions dickering on ratings.



Long report sent to JW last year

Again... remember what started this issue up again.... It was the idea that the PN ratings are unfair and we need MORE PHRF adjusting to the ratings....

This is easy to understand because the ratings are stuck without enough handicap racing to generate good data to adjust ANYTHING...

I always thought Dick Blanchard was the Godfather for open class sailing. I have seen him handscore all the races we ever had on Pensacola Bay for the NAMSA North Americans. That regatta was a real factory "Showdown" for a few years with up to seventy + boats in raging winds.

I believe Dick handed off the NAMSA ratings to Darline when he retired from NAMSA...??? Rick White would know the story, but it surely deserves to be recognized in the US Sailing Hall of Fame and historical collection.

What am I? Chop Suey?

I do admit though, I grow tired of my own repeated points to your repeated points.