Hi all,
My blood is boiling right about now, so bear with me...

I just today noticed that they deleted the rating for the FX-1 without spinnaker. According to an E-mail I just got from Darline Hobock, I am supposed to use the spinnaker rating and adjust it using the modification tables*. That makes me a 69.9!!! Just as a comparison, the Nacra 17 (formerly Inter 17) with spinnaker is 66.7 and without is 73.2. The Hobie 17 is 74.0 The FX-1 is fast, but not THAT fast! I just sent her another E-mail in the hopes that this wil be changed back to the way it was, so I am awaiting her reply.

Another interesting thing about the modification table is that if you carry a spinnaker on a boat normally without one, you multiply by .972. However, the vice-versa is not the inverse of .972 (which is 1.029) but 1.01. If it were the 1.029 (as I think it should be - at least for a uni boat), my number would be to 71.2 - exactly what it was last year!!!

I purchased my boat, brand new without a spinnaker. That was (and still is?) a standard class for the boat. Just like the Nacra 17 without spinnaker.
It's not like I bought it one way and am now racing it "modified".

I'm sure Darline will do the right thing (I hope...)

Steve
Hobie FX-1
Sail #211

P.S. Don't reply by saying "time to get a spinnaker man" or something. I think the spinnaker on cats was one more nail in the coffin for cat sailing. I liked it better when sailing was simple....

I think you have looked at the wrong table for modifications to Portsmouth numbers. The Multihull modifications table shows 0.96 if a spin is fitted to a boat not normally equipped with one and 1.02 if a spinnaker boat is sailed without spin. That implies less of a penalty fitting a spin than taking one off (the reciprocal of 0.96 is 1.04). I think you looked at the table for mono-slugs

The base number of the FX-1 w/spi is 69.2. Correcting for no spin (multiply by 1.02) gives 70.584. The 2004 Multihull tables show the Hobie FX-One 1-up no spi as [71.2] - the square brackets indicate less than 5 data points submitted.

Page 19 of the hobie class rules sure reads like the FX-one is a spinnaker class boat...



Have to disagree with you there. Spinnakers make sailing downwind fun. Pretty much all the newbies in our local group are on non-spin boats, and as soon as they get a ride on spin boats they all want one

Chris.

Steve, the numbers are still there [bracketed]. Here's a direct copy/paste:

Hobie FX-One 1-up no spi HFX1U [71.2] [74.5] [73.0] [71.2] [69.1]

I must say, I'm a little puzzled about your negative comment about spinnakers, though...For many people spinnakers have reignited their interest in cat sailing. And there are still plenty of ACTIVE cat classes without spinnakers still, like the H16, A-cat, H20. The decrease in cat sailing has a lot more to do with the advent of personal water craft and wake boarding than spinnakers on cats.

Hi Steve

69.2 * 1.02 = 70.6 for the FX1 one up without spin.

By comparison, a Nacra 5.5 uni is 69.7

This does not seem out of bounds for comparable boats given that your configuration has not been actively raced (IN ANY configuration) in the USA.

I disagree with you that the boat should be listed in the ratings table as a class boat because where would you stop. Should Tornado’s with square top mains and classic jibs have their own separate rating?

Portsmouth has always followed the lead of the builders. Performance is constantly renaming their boats… eg I17R is now Nacra F17…. Inter 20 became Nacra Inter 20 and now its Nacra 20 and the tables reflect their wishes. Hobie Cat has decided the class rules and the class will be a main and spin rigged boat and that’s what they tell the Portsmouth Committee. (But they will sell the thing in any number of configurations) The PN Committee wants to accommodate the sailors as well and lists boats that are NOT supported by the builders… eg the Nacra 6.0 NA with NE chute! They do their best to make sure that no matter who defined a class, the ratings are accurate and fair.

Scorekeepers like the fact that boat configurations are named in the PN table… It makes their life a whole lot easier to register a boat with a known configuration. For example, the Taipan 4.9 is a PIA. The boat races… Main only (uni), Main and Jib two up, Main and Jib one up, Main, Jib, Spin (F16)… Main Jib Large Spin NON F16, Main Spin (uni). The NIGHTMARE is the Hobie Tiger, Is it racing as an F18, eg complies with the jib and spin sizes and crew weight rules. Is it racing as a Tiger. Large sails… smaller crew weight… AND it’s impossible to just look at the boat and tell…. (Basically you let the other F18 sailors police their own) At least with the Taipan it’s easy to count sails and people.

Should your boat FX1 uni be listed separately?

No, I don’t think so because you don’t have a class boat. My definition of CLASS with respect to Portsmouth racing is the following. The term class applies to a boat configuration that is raced by several sailors in the same race against other class rated designs. EG. the race will take the top FX1 finish time of several sailors and compare it to the top Nacra 5.5u finish time of several sailors for calculating the rating and this process over time separates the crew performance from the boat performance and generates a solid rating. The assumptions are that these boats are in good racing shape with adequate racing sails and actively raced. Personally, I believe that in order for the boat to be rated as a class boat that it be actively sailed during the year and evidence would be if it had participation at some kind of "nationals" at least every other year. This criteria is a way of saying the boat rating is dynamic and it’s rating should be adjusted annually in comparison with other racing boats using the statistical procedures that are the Portsmouth system.

Previously we discussed the creep that dead boat ratings suffered… EG 15 year old boat with 15 year old sails and a new racer data starts to RAISE the rating of a once popular boat (EG supercat 20). Your problem is the other tail of the distribution.

Boat configurations like the FX1 without spin or the CFR 20 are not a class by my definition. (The CFR is a one off prototype) The race data should be handled separately when it’s used to generate ratings on an ongoing basis. If the boat configuration appears in race data frequently, then as a matter of convenience to the scorekeeper and the sailing community the boat configuration should be listed…. But the data should not be weighted the same as the popular racing classes and this should be noted in the ratings.
There is a practical issue of listing the boat in the PN ratings in that unlisted boats or boats with modifications (eg yours) would not be eligible for use in an Area Alter qualifier. (Whether this is fair or not is subject of another thread)

Take Care
Mark

Thats weird - when I checked earlier this afternoon I could have sworn there was no entry in the 2005 table for the FX-1 without spin. Now it's clearly there and in blue colored text vs. black for all the other entries. I wonder if someone added it back in?

Chris.

check the date top right corner.. Yes, Darline updated the listing.

As a matter of service, the rating is now listed... As a policy matter, once the brackets come off... How do you evaluate the rating?

Darlene is a very reasonable person - relax...she'll make it right. However, I tend to agree with the other statements (no offense intended) but you are probably the only main-only non-spin FX1 in the United States sailing under Portsmouth. To have a specific rating for such a rare configuration should be quite an honor!

Hi, Yes Darline is very reasonable and of course she did do the right thing. That is why it is listed now and wasn't earlier yesterday.
However, she did warn me that without results, it will be gone again next year.
I race as frequently two-up with jib as I do solo without. It was advertised as a one-man, two-man boat, and it sails equally well in both configurations.

And Chris, you are correct! I was looking at the mono-slug tables. (This is what happens when I react on impulse). I agree that 1.02 make my rating somewhat fair.

I don't like spinnakers for a few reasons: It intimidates possible new-commers; It's one more thing to pack, unpack, rig, etc. I want to spend more time sailing, less time setting up. I've sailed many a spinnaker cat, and yes, while it's up, it is a blast - but once again lenghtens your time on land and shortens your time on the water. I think the sunfish may be the perfect boat - the least time on the land, the most on the water - think about it....

Thanks to all (especially Darline Hobock, USSA Multihull Council).

Steve
Hobie FX-1
Sail #211

A lot of truth in what you say. The Tiger does take quite some time to rig, while my 8ft Walker Bay dinghy is in the water and off sailing in 5 minutes....if I'm dawdling!

I'm not sure this is a fair assessment as far as rigging times are concerned.

Trey and I are able to rig the I20 in less time than it took me to rig the H17 by myself.

Also, "packing" and "storing" and "using" are all so simple using a snuffer setup. Its just as easy as handling the mainsail IMO.

Steven,

I kind of see where you are coming from regarding the spin, but rigging the spin on my boat adds all of 5 minutes to the rig time. As far as launching and dousing, with the snuffer, I measure in seconds, not minutes. Happy sailing, glad you got your numbers.

Kip
Boise, ID
FX-1 with spin

Well, for simplicity, you cannot beat a Wave. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> Just yank on the halyard a few times, apply downhaul and go sailing. And it is the ONLY pure, one-design boat going at this time -- nothing you can do to trick one out. You can only win by having good starts, playing shifts well, good tactics, good mark roundings and finishing on the favored end of the line.

We have a fleet now at Put-in-Bay and are sailing a weekday series and weekend series and all sailors are having a blast. More club members are trying to get boats to add to the fleet.
Maybe sailing is alive and well after all.

Rick

Rick, while you mention shifts, a question..

Just after the start, with fairly well set marks where no sides give a clear advantage. How large a shift would you accept before you tack?
What about midways to the top mark, and just before the top mark?

This all depends on how often it shifts, other boats, strategy and tactics of course, but I wonder what your experience is?

If it's just after the start, and we believe the shift to last for a while, we tack (if possible, tactics/strategy applies) even on small shifts. We also tend to tack fairly quick midways up to the top mark, be we dont like to tack just before the top mark, so we accept shifts there (unless it makes us miss the layline, then it's just a tactical question).

Buy an A cat.

Maybe, but if I were to guess what is reducing our numbers from the 80's I would say the invention of video games is the nail in the coffin.
80's Kid: "mom, I'm bored, there is nothing to do"
80's Mom: "take the sunfish and go sailing"
2000 kid: "I'm bored, I think I'll go kill aliens with a super blaster, and turbo gun."
2000 mom: "I got to go to work, see you kids tonight for a few minutes before bed time."
Just one point of view.

Unfortunately that is too true.