Catsailor.com

Portsmouth DP-N

Posted By: Ventucky Red

Portsmouth DP-N - 11/03/15 03:17 PM

Anyone have this in a spread sheet format along with the Multihull modification factors? Can pull them off of US Sailing without a membership...


Thanks
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/03/15 03:42 PM

Join and support us. Be counted as a cat sailor.

Have you tried the website? I just got to all of the info you seek without a password...

Mike
Posted By: mikekrantz

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/03/15 04:03 PM

Try this link - http://www.ussailing.org/racing/offshore-big-boats/portsmouth-yardstick/current-tables/

I agree it was password protected earlier
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/03/15 07:31 PM

In case Mikes link does not work PM me your email address and I'll send you the tables and modification factors.

Posted By: dartfast

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/04/15 08:42 PM

Thanks for the site info! Another piece of great info to be found on Catamran Sailor.
Posted By: RickWhite

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/05/15 12:21 PM

I have had a hot link on this site www.catsailor.com for eons in the left index
Rick
Posted By: catman

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/06/15 01:57 PM

I tried using it a couple days ago and while your link worked the site required a password (membership) to access the tables.
Posted By: RickWhite

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/07/15 12:37 PM

It didn't a week or so ago. Strange
Rick
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/09/15 12:46 AM

It's neither your imagination nor a glitch. They have put password protection on this at times. While I agree that people should pay to join and support the effort, this is like anything else rules-related: once it's out there, anyone can reproduce and use it, and any attempt to lock it down can only backfire.

Mike
Posted By: RickWhite

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/09/15 11:01 PM

Why? It should be public informationa?
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/10/15 01:22 AM

No clue, Rick. Just confirming for people here that they weren't imagining things when they were asked for passwords.

Mike
Posted By: David Parker

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/10/15 04:13 AM

I get right to the tables here - no password. Are you looking for something different than the Portsmouth tables in on-screen presentation?
Portsmouth tables for multihulls
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/10/15 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by RickWhite
Why? It should be public informationa?


USSailing (the employees) are always looking to increase membership without increasing value or services. It's cheap and easy to lock down a useful part of the website in an effort to drive up membership.

The DPN system is public domain but I'm sure USSailing considers it intellectual property of USSailing therefore they can distribute it as they wish.

Looks like the link is now broken, whistle
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/10/15 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by David Ingram
Originally Posted by RickWhite
Why? It should be public informationa?


USSailing (the employees) are always looking to increase membership without increasing value or services. It's cheap and easy to lock down a useful part of the website in an effort to drive up membership.

The DPN system is public domain but I'm sure USSailing considers it intellectual property of USSailing therefore they can distribute it as they wish.

Looks like the link is now broken, whistle


I have the tables in Excel format if anyone needs them....but I believe the last thing they need is to give anyone more incentive to use a different rating system. laugh
Posted By: Ventucky Red

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/11/15 10:51 PM

Originally Posted by Jake
Originally Posted by David Ingram
Originally Posted by RickWhite
Why? It should be public informationa?


USSailing (the employees) are always looking to increase membership without increasing value or services. It's cheap and easy to lock down a useful part of the website in an effort to drive up membership.

The DPN system is public domain but I'm sure USSailing considers it intellectual property of USSailing therefore they can distribute it as they wish.

Looks like the link is now broken, whistle


I have the tables in Excel format if anyone needs them....but I believe the last thing they need is to give anyone more incentive to use a different rating system. laugh


Seems the link to the tables works sporadically... I was able to get in there and get hem onto an excel sheet...

But I agree.... why make it hard when there are alternatives out there...
Posted By: TeamChums

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/17/15 06:51 PM

Anyone know where I can find the Portsmouth rating for the Nacra F20 Carbon? It's not listed in the petroglyphs (Portsmouth tables).
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/17/15 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by TeamChums
Anyone know where I can find the Portsmouth rating for the Nacra F20 Carbon? It's not listed in the petroglyphs (Portsmouth tables).


Is this a trick question? It received a provisional rating at one time that I remember did not draw a lot of confidence in the Portsmouth system - or am I thinking about the foiling 20?
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/17/15 08:45 PM

Originally Posted by Jake
Originally Posted by TeamChums
Anyone know where I can find the Portsmouth rating for the Nacra F20 Carbon? It's not listed in the petroglyphs (Portsmouth tables).


Is this a trick question? It received a provisional rating at one time that I remember did not draw a lot of confidence in the Portsmouth system - or am I thinking about the foiling 20?


Both!
Posted By: Will_R

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/17/15 08:51 PM

Originally Posted by TeamChums
Anyone know where I can find the Portsmouth rating for the Nacra F20 Carbon? It's not listed in the petroglyphs (Portsmouth tables).


I knew the number since it's the same as the CFR (WTH), but wanted to verify first. Luckily I just happen to have a copy of the tables from the middle of last year (6/10/2014)....

D-PN = 57.9, they didn't have wind range factors as of that time.
Posted By: TeamChums

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/17/15 11:51 PM

Thanks. I was meaning the curved board 20.
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/18/15 12:23 AM

Um.... do you really believe that number?
Is that number fair to the fleet?

You would be better off taking the SCHRS tables and the Texel Tables and deciding what you want to set the DPN to...relative to your fleet.

This way... the fleet and the nacra owner can hunt you down and bitch... They will buy you many many more beers this way...
If all you can tell them is ... well.... I looked it up on US Sailing.... No beer for you.
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/18/15 01:03 AM

It still only has a provisional rating which is 57.9. It only comes with curved boards. I have tried to get them to post it for a year and a half now and gave up dealing with them. I am thinking about switiching to SCHRS. They have ratings for production foiling boats and will return emails.
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/18/15 12:21 PM

Originally Posted by cyberspeed
It still only has a provisional rating which is 57.9. It only comes with curved boards. I have tried to get them to post it for a year and a half now and gave up dealing with them. I am thinking about switiching to SCHRS. They have ratings for production foiling boats and will return emails.


I support switching to SCHRS for the FL300.
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/18/15 02:19 PM

Thanks for the feedback.
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/18/15 05:59 PM

I don't know anyone on the current PN committee however.... I can say they are following the letter of the rule in the system.

They are NOT going to be able to publish a PN number for a boat without a one design fleet actively racing in handicap buoys races. They need valid data and the reality is that the US does not generate it. It is a conservative position. Back in the day.... you would have had to prove that you at least 5 or 10 boats actively racing handicap and OD just to get a provisional rating published in the table. Two boats in the country are not a fleet....

There are very good reasons for this level of rigor.... It stops a rating that is essentially a personal handicap from substituting for the boat class.

Yes its a change from the Darline Hobock era and sailors have to take this into account when they adopt the system.

In portsmouth... it was an honor system that bound each owner to saying that their boat was a completely class legal XXX.

SCHRS and Texel can also operate on the honor system... AND it can also use individual rating certificates for Stock OD, One offs or highly modified OD boats. It's up the OA to spell it out in the NOR what standard is in play.

Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/19/15 12:04 PM

Originally Posted by Mark Schneider
I don't know anyone on the current PN committee however.... I can say they are following the letter of the rule in the system.



Otherwise known as malicious compliance. It is the responsibility of the committee to recognize the issues with the system and develop an action plan to address those issues. Maybe the committee is concerned USSailing will invite them to leave if they color outside the lines. No that can't be it that would be crazy talk.
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/19/15 03:48 PM

sssssh.... a us sailing conspiracy? really?

People Volunteer to do the job....(it is thankless) When you look at US situation with respect to new cat designs... plus all of the modifications to one design boats and the very very small number of qualified buoy races that give you data... You have to make a decision. Does it work? Is it transparent? is it fair?

How far can you stretch the rules of the PN system?...

We have been making **** up for years AND... no one design fleet wants to take on getting data on their class relative to the yardstick boats. So.. Do you continue just making up new ratings.... AND wind adjustments.... just because you take a SCHRS rating and now GUESS what the US dpn rating should be is not a solution to the problem.

If the OA wants to do that... nothing will stop them.... just don't ask the US PN committee to participate in the flim flam to cover your butt.. You don't get the seal of approval when you want to race your N17 against an F18 fleet.

So... It is quite responsible to say.. .. ... Nah... it is better to preserved the rating tables for the boats (dinghies and cats) that data exist for. Clubs can use the data and pn system as designed... or they can change and make up their own table or pick a different system.

I have been telling you that the system for cats was BROKEN... not repairable and cat fleets should move on for over 5 years.

ITS TIME TO MOVE ON!

The PN committee is just preserving the integrity of the tables as designed.
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/19/15 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by Mark Schneider
sssssh.... a us sailing conspiracy? really?

People Volunteer to do the job....(it is thankless) When you look at US situation with respect to new cat designs... plus all of the modifications to one design boats and the very very small number of qualified buoy races that give you data... You have to make a decision. Does it work? Is it transparent? is it fair?

How far can you stretch the rules of the PN system?...

We have been making **** up for years AND... no one design fleet wants to take on getting data on their class relative to the yardstick boats. So.. Do you continue just making up new ratings.... AND wind adjustments.... just because you take a SCHRS rating and now GUESS what the US dpn rating should be is not a solution to the problem.

If the OA wants to do that... nothing will stop them.... just don't ask the US PN committee to participate in the flim flam to cover your butt.. You don't get the seal of approval when you want to race your N17 against an F18 fleet.

So... It is quite responsible to say.. .. ... Nah... it is better to preserved the rating tables for the boats (dinghies and cats) that data exist for. Clubs can use the data and pn system as designed... or they can change and make up their own table or pick a different system.

I have been telling you that the system for cats was BROKEN... not repairable and cat fleets should move on for over 5 years.

ITS TIME TO MOVE ON!

The PN committee is just preserving the integrity of the tables as designed.


USSailing seal approval, ask the DPN commmitee to participate in the flim flam to cover our butt. What are you talking about!? Nobody cares about the USSailing seal of approval! Just because it's on the USSailing site doesn't give it any more cred than another handicap system. I kinda doubt anyone (except me, I'm a bit slow) is asking the DPN committee to do anything because we learned years ago the answer is always no and there will be no action taken.

And the whopper of them all..."The PN committee is just preserving the integrity of the tables as designed." did you really type that with a straight face Mark? Come on, you can tell me we are buddies.
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/19/15 06:49 PM

Quote

USSailing seal approval, ask the DPN commmitee to participate in the flim flam to cover our butt. What are you talking about!? Nobody cares about the USSailing seal of approval! Just because it's on the USSailing site doesn't give it any more cred than another handicap system.


Dave....are you the reactionary to anything US Sailing or just the conventional one design nazi and opposed to all handicap racing in general.. I get the frustration with unrelated past US Sailing issues... but .... its time to let it go. I have punted on getting you to see the value of handicap racing in a dying sport.

um to the point... ... Of course you care about the Sanction of US Sailing.. If you go to Steeplechase with your ragged out N17 half baked foiler... You have no rating. So... you now get to race under the Rick White Steeplechase modified PN system. He does his best to make up a rating... BUT the fact that your N17 regatta budget includes buying drinks for Rick White to discuss your rating does raise some questions in the minds of others..

US Sailing is not going to sanction the N17 rating. EVEN IF they have a perfect crystal ball and can guess the exact fair rating for the half baked POS N17.

So...Do you care about the Rick White handicap system? probably not.... do the competitors in the Steeplechase care?... perhaps. Why race if you don't have 100% buy in to the rules?

The fact that they could see you at the bar buying drinks for the handicaper is not what transparency means.


The whole point of a national rating system is that for good or bad... It is sanctioned and transparent in following the design rules of the rating system..

Perhaps I should remind you of when we had alter cup qualifiers...eg somebody cared about the final results... and the rating based on bad data gave you a really high F16 rating relative to the fleet. Suddenly Bob Curry and others demanded a modification. And so it was done ...
Bottom line... this was not portsmouth.... we PHRFd the rating to make it fair for the fleet.


The integrity of the tables... YUP... I did write that with a straight face... I participated in guestimatting ratings for things like the F16. We did not follow the PN system....because we had no quality data... (and I doubt there is a uniformly good set of data to date). Did we know what we were doing... YUP!!! we punted on the transparency of the handicap system to meet the demand of a fair table for the upcoming Area D qualifier


The new foiling boats make this approach a bridge too far.

The choice is simple.... don't race the new boats under US sailing Portmsouth handicap. Make up a local rating....eg.. The Rick White Steeplechase Rating system...Transparency means that you sort it out at the bar with plenty of drinks at hand...and tell the competitors what the rating will be....
or change to a more robust handicap system.


So...I agree with the PN committee to tell you to buzz off unless you have race data of at least 25 buoy races from a fleet of at least 5 boats competing against a fleet of 5 yardstick boats. if you give them that data... they will give you a provisional rating... This is what I mean by preserving the integrity of the PN table.

otherwise... go make it up on your own a Steeplechase rating system and let the competitors know what the deal is before they sign up for the race. Stop supporting the whining about US sailing not doing what you want...
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/19/15 10:24 PM

Originally Posted by Mark Schneider


The integrity of the tables... YUP... I did write that with a straight face... I participated in guestimatting ratings for things like the F16. We did not follow the PN system....because we had no quality data... (and I doubt there is a uniformly good set of data to date). Did we know what we were doing... YUP!!! we punted on the transparency of the handicap system to meet the demand of a fair table for the upcoming Area D qualifier



I think we're ignoring the possibility that nobody since Darlene has been able to run the math required to update the tables even if there was data to work with....hence the need for some of the guestimation.
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/20/15 03:32 AM

Jake, Why would that matter?

the old boats that have ratings with tons of data behind them will not change. You only have to run the program for new boats... and you have no data..

So... until you have a data set of 25 races with a fleet of un rated boats racing a fleet of yardsticks...... not a problem.

(I think they actually can run the program... they just can't modify the code or want to rewrite the thing for the 21st century.)
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/20/15 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by Mark Schneider

So... until you have a data set of 25 races with a fleet of un rated boats racing a fleet of yardsticks...... not a problem.


which boats are considered "yardsticks"? And what if that boat's design changes (as part of an OD rule, etc.)?

Say the F18 is the "yardstick" and they allow a modified sailplan as part of their OD rule... or a carbon stick. If either of these change the sailing characteristics (speed, angles, etc) wouldn't it move the entire PHRF table?

I think there was a blog about this issue discussing the Farr 40 along with Time on Distance vs. Time on Time systems.

Being relegated to PHRF myself (not a fan, but not sure I can convince anyone of the merits of another system) and rarely racing OD events, which system best combines both monohull and multihull fleets? I'm not even going to touch foilers at this point because I doubt I'd see a Moth, G4 or N17 anywhere I sail...

I think in my PHRF area I rate about the same as a Melges 24 and a Hobie 16 non-spin. Which seems a little odd?
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/20/15 03:11 PM

Originally Posted by Mark Schneider
Jake, Why would that matter?

the old boats that have ratings with tons of data behind them will not change. You only have to run the program for new boats... and you have no data..

So... until you have a data set of 25 races with a fleet of un rated boats racing a fleet of yardsticks...... not a problem.

(I think they actually can run the program... they just can't modify the code or want to rewrite the thing for the 21st century.)


It matters because if anyone puts in the effort to collect data that can't be processed they would be wasting their time. In the bigger sense, if the numbers are able to still be compiled then it would be nice to know what the committee feels is needed in order to update numbers or assign new numbers so the system can remain relevant to our sport. If they are fixed and unchangeable then it is more motivation to start looking at something like SCHRS that can adapt as our sport changes.

There IS data available and the statistics will work on a relatively small sample size because it's weighted. I could probably dig back into three or four years of EMSA F16/F18/Acat single fleet handicap racing and provide a dozen regattas of data but I seriously don't think anyone since Jamie/Darlene has had a chance of processing it. I have a Fortran background and took a stab at understand it a long time ago but the statistics are really advanced and I concluded that I needed more of a statistics background (or the time to gain the knowledge) to be able to modify it in any meaningful/reliable way.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/20/15 03:15 PM

Jake, if I understand what you and others are saying is that the DP-N system is not being actively managed since the passing of Darlene's era?

If this is indeed the case, is there a more actively managed handicap system? I would suspect if there isn't much activity on the DP-N system (or no one knows how to update it) it will eventually prove to be of little use as boats/designs evolve. Even strict OD boats often allow some changes (maybe not in Star or Etchells..)?
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/20/15 04:15 PM

Originally Posted by waterbug_wpb
Jake, if I understand what you and others are saying is that the DP-N system is not being actively managed since the passing of Darlene's era?


I don't have any factual information about whether or not that is a true statement. I do know that the system is very specialized and when I was involved, just before Darlene's passing, there was not anybody else able to run it although others had tried to pick it up and take that off Darlene. Jamie Diamond got involved at some point but I'm not sure he got it into a workable fashion either - I think he too had intended to make some modifications to it. However, I'm not clear whether Jamie was trying to just run it or modify it. I looked at it for a brief period and quickly learned that it was over my head in trying to modify it but I never tried to compile it as it was. The Fortran compiler was expensive at the time but it looks like you can get free compilers now. Darlene eventually took it back up in a limited fashion. I do not know of anyone that has actually compiled numbers using the actual system since Darlene but I have not been involved in several years.

The software (Fortran) is tricky to run and requires a good deal of specialization with old programming / compiling software. My experience with Fortran originated in the time when it was running on IBM mainframes and you would interface with a command line green monochrome terminal station and had to schedule compiling time with the university. Someone on the committee today may well be able to compile the software and statistics as it stands but it's not something that just anyone could pick up and run with. It's definitely not an excel spreadsheet. ;-)
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/20/15 05:24 PM

Originally Posted by Mark Schneider
Quote

USSailing seal approval, ask the DPN commmitee to participate in the flim flam to cover our butt. What are you talking about!? Nobody cares about the USSailing seal of approval! Just because it's on the USSailing site doesn't give it any more cred than another handicap system.


Dave....are you the reactionary to anything US Sailing or just the conventional one design nazi and opposed to all handicap racing in general.. I get the frustration with unrelated past US Sailing issues... but .... its time to let it go. I have punted on getting you to see the value of handicap racing in a dying sport.

um to the point... ... Of course you care about the Sanction of US Sailing.. If you go to Steeplechase with your ragged out N17 half baked foiler... You have no rating. So... you now get to race under the Rick White Steeplechase modified PN system. He does his best to make up a rating... BUT the fact that your N17 regatta budget includes buying drinks for Rick White to discuss your rating does raise some questions in the minds of others..

US Sailing is not going to sanction the N17 rating. EVEN IF they have a perfect crystal ball and can guess the exact fair rating for the half baked POS N17.

So...Do you care about the Rick White handicap system? probably not.... do the competitors in the Steeplechase care?... perhaps. Why race if you don't have 100% buy in to the rules?

The fact that they could see you at the bar buying drinks for the handicaper is not what transparency means.


The whole point of a national rating system is that for good or bad... It is sanctioned and transparent in following the design rules of the rating system..

Perhaps I should remind you of when we had alter cup qualifiers...eg somebody cared about the final results... and the rating based on bad data gave you a really high F16 rating relative to the fleet. Suddenly Bob Curry and others demanded a modification. And so it was done ...
Bottom line... this was not portsmouth.... we PHRFd the rating to make it fair for the fleet.


The integrity of the tables... YUP... I did write that with a straight face... I participated in guestimatting ratings for things like the F16. We did not follow the PN system....because we had no quality data... (and I doubt there is a uniformly good set of data to date). Did we know what we were doing... YUP!!! we punted on the transparency of the handicap system to meet the demand of a fair table for the upcoming Area D qualifier


The new foiling boats make this approach a bridge too far.

The choice is simple.... don't race the new boats under US sailing Portmsouth handicap. Make up a local rating....eg.. The Rick White Steeplechase Rating system...Transparency means that you sort it out at the bar with plenty of drinks at hand...and tell the competitors what the rating will be....
or change to a more robust handicap system.


So...I agree with the PN committee to tell you to buzz off unless you have race data of at least 25 buoy races from a fleet of at least 5 boats competing against a fleet of 5 yardstick boats. if you give them that data... they will give you a provisional rating... This is what I mean by preserving the integrity of the PN table.

otherwise... go make it up on your own a Steeplechase rating system and let the competitors know what the deal is before they sign up for the race. Stop supporting the whining about US sailing not doing what you want...


Iíd stop harping on USSailing if they made some positive changes that actually supported the sailing community. The fact that you defend DPN committeeís lack of action is indicative of what USSailing is all about! Then to defend the DPNís committee lack of action as maintaining the integrity of the system when they clearly and by your own admission willfully violated that integrity leaves me scratching my head.

Please donít put words in my mouth or tell me what Iím thinking! I never put any value in DPN results I clearly understand what the results represent and know they arenít worth the paper they are printed on. So DPN, SCHRS, Texel it matters not! I just draw the line at completely fabricating numbers, geesh! Please try to pay closer attention itís not the first time Iíve said this.

Because there is NO integrity with the DPN system the fact it is USSailing sanctioned means nothing, you only have to read your own words to see that statement is true.

Of course you support USSailing telling me or anyone else to go pound sand, thatís kinda your thing.

Only you would tell someone in the sailing community who you pretend to represent to piss off. This position invites the community to move on without USSailing.

Iíll stop whining when you stop being a sock puppet for USSailing. No that's not true, I'll stop whining when I stop caring.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/20/15 08:53 PM

Originally Posted by David Ingram

Please donít put words in my mouth or tell me what Iím thinking!



Dave.... you are thinking about a rum....and kitten videos...
Posted By: Bob_Curry

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/21/15 10:59 PM

The US Sailing DP-N system is dead to me.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/22/15 12:41 AM

It's dead because there is no data.

The fact that most of you refuse to join, then publicly rant about no support doesn't help your case.

No one, and I mean absolutely no one, at US Sailing cares if you use a different system.

We've had these debates for eons here. A standard system is necessary for credibility. No one has crunched numbers to prove that there is a better system.

If one of the other systems is better to use, and has the support of the fleet, I will fully support it as the MHC chair.

Mike
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/22/15 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by brucat
It's dead because there is no data.

The fact that most of you refuse to join, then publicly rant about no support doesn't help your case.

No one, and I mean absolutely no one, at US Sailing cares if you use a different system.

We've had these debates for eons here. A standard system is necessary for credibility. No one has crunched numbers to prove that there is a better system.

If one of the other systems is better to use, and has the support of the fleet, I will fully support it as the MHC chair.

Mike


We have (I have personally), on multiple occasions, compared the systems with number crunching. Regardless, it's all handicap racing - it's never going to be perfect. It's a comparison of "worse" or "less worse".
Posted By: dartfast

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/22/15 09:25 PM

Darlene bless her heart was easily manipulated by a few grudging sailors back in 2002 to aid their scores in the numbers by having her implement false to no-logic theories to be integrated in to the US Sailing DP-N System. That was my problem then but now it looks like the new numbers have been corrected.
As I recall the Portsmouth System went downhill back in the Ď90s when it was taken over by US Sailing from the guy out in the west when he just got tired of running the system. I remember speaking with him back in 1989 when he was beyond ready to quit.
Then after the heyday of big numbers of Cat sailing races and participants in the 80ís and 90ís there was never enough good data to support the fundamental theory of computation used in the DP-N system.
Since the DP-N method using limited race result data and results from sailors with non-uniform abilities really never has been a reliable method (Garbage in Garbage out) I think a more Boat Measurement based configuration calculation should be used.
The new analytic calculations being used by the Americas Cup guys could probably tell to a whisker how a change of one half millimeter to any parameter or angle could predict a change in performance of the boat not the sailor. Make the boat numbers to be equated not the sailorís abilities. The abilities should be the score result of a race.
That is why I like One Design Racing but since we have to use Handicap Racing sometimes because this is a dying sport and there are many configurations of boats that want to race at least US Sailing or someone should look at incorporating new technologies to equate dissimilar boats performance. Let only the sailor performance dictate the race results.
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/22/15 10:05 PM

Originally Posted by dartfast
Darlene bless her heart was easily manipulated by a few grudging sailors back in 2002 ...



Lol. If there is one thing that Darlene wasn't, she WASN'T easily manipulated. That woman was sharp as a tack and wise to any alternate motivations.
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/23/15 03:55 AM

Terry

Herb Malm was the west coast fellow and his system was called NAMSA.... which was decidedly NOT portsmouth. NAMSA used his proprietary algorithm that he would fine tune with race data. Every time he got some race data.... he would recalculate his PN Table.... and presto... your ratings would change. You might remember the large NAMSA handicap table posted at Wroten Point Yacht Club, that was a copy of one of his versions.

In the late 90s... the problem boats were Dart 18s. Darts Like the F16s had two configurations one up main only and two up sloop. Darts were struggling to meet the fleet metrics for US Sailing Portsmouth inclusion since the fleet was more recreational in orientation.... while Herb would happily work with Brian to generate a fair rating since he had his prediction equation. Eventually catamaran clubs decided to switch from NAMSA to US Portmsouth. As you say... cat racing declined rapidly in the 90s and to to move forward and attempt to serve the public, Darline sought other ways to include boats in the tables without all of the criteria required by the PN Standard. So..Darline and the Committee (did my best as did bob) and made the best of the situation to serve the cat racing community.

In 2015, the europeans have the lead in using measurement based system that fine tune the math with race data. SCHRS and Texel. I doubt Oracle is going to solve this problem.
Unlike Herb's NAMSA system... SCHRS and Texel are completely transparent (formulaes are public) and they are managed by a public committee). SCHRS uses English as the base language.

US Portsmouth has decided to return to the letter of the standard. In their view its better to have the tables serve the OD classes that meet the criterion with out compromise. The committee could choose to PHRF estimate the ratings for new designs and include them in the table but is choosing not to. So... if you are racing Hobie 16s against Hobie 18s.... no worries... If you are racing N17s or Carbon20s.... it will be impossible under US Portsmouth.

So... what goes around comes around... Our choice now is a measurement system using a formula tuned with race data!

OR US Portsmouth Somebody will have to champion a fleet of N17s racing other boats including lots of yardsticks to have enough data to get a statistical rating. It may not be an accurate rating however since there are lots of other assumptions made by the PN system that may not be currently valid. (to reprise... garbage in... garbage out)

Bottom line... its time for the US cat fleets to move on.... fleets with the new boats coming to play should plan accordingly.
Part 2,
Sailors who want to improve the OD configuration should just get their stuff measured and use the calculators to generate your specific SCHRS rating.

Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/23/15 04:20 AM

[quote]it's all handicap racing - it's never going to be perfect. It's a comparison of "worse" or "less worse"[.quote]

MOST of the big boat racing in the country happens under PHRF Handicap racing.... NOT one design. Catamarans need a viable handicap system just to have a race these days.

What is the purpose of characterizing the racing as "worse" or "less worse"

Handicap and One design involve tradeoffs... if an organizer leaves a rump group of disparate boats in handicap fleet ... chances are they go home... don't get a one design boat and just day sail. So... choices to be made.

Now picking handicap systems. also are not a matter of worse and less worse..

You could compare them on accuracy
You could compare them on the wind ranges where they are accurate.
You could compare them on the transparency under the hood of the tables.
You could compare them on how quickly they can generate a fair rating for a new boat.
You can compare them on the amount of effort needed to maintain them and their governance.

ah... choices!
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/23/15 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by Jake
Regardless, it's all handicap racing - it's never going to be perfect. It's a comparison of "worse" or "less worse".


I'm fine with the flaws of handicap racing (i'm just there for the bar, anyway... you've seen my sailing). What I posit is using a handicap system that is actively being managed/updated.

I get the feeling that DP-N may not be as actively managed as other systems for a number of reasons (regattas not sending info, boat/classes too small, no one knows the system, etc).

Based on the actively managed criteria alone, which handicap system is most used?

P.S. I am a current USS member.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/23/15 02:27 PM

I'd also venture a guess that designing or updating a handicap system (for any sport) would make an awesome statistics Ph.D. dissertation.

Surely there are some statistics genius types in the global sailing community?

And with the ability to generate VPPs on just about any boat (pretty soon I'd figure someone will make a smartphone app and crowd-source that), it might just help generate the needed data with statistical significance?

Since they are using various platforms for the Hobie Alter Cup, do they digest any of that information for use in the DP-N calculations?
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/23/15 03:15 PM

Quote

Surely there are some statistics genius types in the global sailing community?


There is a fundamental disagreement in handicap world between stats guys and measurement guys. The measurement guys will argue... If you had perfect data betweeen two fleets... One of them the N17 where the sailors are practicing 200 days a year and the F18 fleet (Yardstick) where the sailors are practicing a whole lot less... this basic asymmetry will skew your stats so that the N17 rating will be too fast. In the real world....for other classes, a rock star sailor competing in a carboard box will beat the top rec sailor on his 5 year old boat. The stats are screwed! The stats guys will say... Hey... you are trying to model a nonlinear performance curve of classes that span 4 generations... No chance in hell!
YMMV.

A VPP application does not give you a ratings table.... it gets you polars to sail to for your design. VPP approaches inform handicapers who create rating sytems like the latest failure (HPR) which lasted for a few years before the owners decided it was not for them. So... no pot of gold at the end of the VPP rainbow.

The Alter cup... is just a one design regatta. No other boats are on the course to compare with. So... it is of no use to the stats based guys or the measurement guys.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/23/15 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by Mark Schneider

The Alter cup... is just a one design regatta. No other boats are on the course to compare with. So... it is of no use to the stats based guys or the measurement guys.


Sure, but would it not give information on the actual performance of the design platform? Since you're rotating crews and it is a race under somewhat controlled conditions (how the course is set, etc). I would figure no one is really sand-bagging at Alter Cup.

But I suspect using this information would require the RC to take times, rather than just score finish positions?

I am happy to set my goal as sailing to my actual PHRF number or VPP speed. This would tell me I'm pretty flawless at turns and straightline speed.
Posted By: Will_R

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/23/15 06:53 PM

http://www.schrs.com/
Posted By: Bob_Curry

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/23/15 10:24 PM

Here yee, here yee, here yee. Look who go it right!

A Class Classic and A Class Flying. BRAVO!!

MarkS I finally agree with you, SCHRS is the way to go!

Bob
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/23/15 11:01 PM

Originally Posted by Bob_Curry
Here yee, here yee, here yee. Look who go it right!

A Class Classic and A Class Flying. BRAVO!!

MarkS I finally agree with you, SCHRS is the way to go!

Bob


I'm not sure what side he is arguing for anymore...but he did make some valid points about Portsmouth being a set in stone kind of rating system. If that's truly the approach of those currently running the Portsmouth tables, the un-flexible nature won't suit any new (or small) classes, so I'm in favor of scooting over to SCHRS.
Posted By: rehmbo

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/24/15 11:55 AM

One thing that the Portsmouth system seems to have going for it is different numbers for various wind conditions. I imagine all boats are non-linear in their wind-speed/boat-speed performance. Some more than others. Seems like DPN captures that - at least empirically.

So my question - are there any predictive systems that accommodate this?
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/24/15 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by Jake
Originally Posted by brucat
It's dead because there is no data.

The fact that most of you refuse to join, then publicly rant about no support doesn't help your case.

No one, and I mean absolutely no one, at US Sailing cares if you use a different system.

We've had these debates for eons here. A standard system is necessary for credibility. No one has crunched numbers to prove that there is a better system.

If one of the other systems is better to use, and has the support of the fleet, I will fully support it as the MHC chair.

Mike


We have (I have personally), on multiple occasions, compared the systems with number crunching. Regardless, it's all handicap racing - it's never going to be perfect. It's a comparison of "worse" or "less worse".


Thanks Jake.

I think the one thing that we can all agree upon is that we need a handicap system that is fair to the sailors, and easy for the organizers.

If we want to propose to move to a new system, it would be good if it had a champion, if not an administrator. Not in the number management sense, but in the sense of helping OAs use it.

Having recently tried to help Craig and some others get numbers for new designs, I agree that DPN is not working in today's environment.

In my experience with US Sailing, nothing happens without a proposal, and even less without an actionable plan, with leadership. Wildly demanding change, then sitting back waiting for someone else to solve the problem, falls upon deaf ears.

Mike
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/24/15 03:15 PM

First I want to thank Brucat for helping me try working with Portsmouth committee. I have also been chatting with Mark in the background trying to see if SCHRS is viable for Sail Series. Below is the only issue I see with switching and thought this would add to the current discussions.

The only problem I see with SCHRS is getting individual numbers for modified boats which is fairly common. You would need to submit the changes to get the correct new number. To even make this more difficult, you would have to get sails measured etc... To compound this, a lot of sailors don't register and just show up which would make getting them a number impossible. It would also require a lot of work for those running the ratings system on an individual boat basis.

The only way I can really see this working accross all races would be to have some sort of temporary or even permanent correction factor similar to what Portsmouth uses. Any input would be helpful.
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/24/15 03:48 PM

Originally Posted by brucat

In my experience with US Sailing, nothing happens without a proposal, and even less without an actionable plan, with leadership. Wildly demanding change, then sitting back waiting for someone else to solve the problem, falls upon deaf ears.

Mike


You needed to stop at nothing happens. If you have a plan and a proposal it gets shot down by people like Mark and Mark has many like minded friends at USSailing.

Isn't the DPN Committee chair a leadership position? Why would it take someone from the outside to do all the heavy lifting and solve all the problems? How about getting the folks that agreed to take the position do something other than keep the seat warm!

Wildly demainding change? Really? Asking that a system be maintained and numbers not be pulled out of thin air is wildly demanding change!? Sorry, I didn't realize I was being unreasonable. Please carry on doing whatever you where doing...

Oh and I'd be happy to take point on this but you know there is that whole ďWe're going a different directionĒ thing so...
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/24/15 03:50 PM

Quote

One thing that the Portsmouth system seems to have going for it is different numbers for various wind conditions.


Just because you publish a table with a rating for a N17 at Beaufort 4 does not mean that you have data (100 qualified races of a fleet of N17s racing against a fleet of yardsticks, (Hobie 16s and F18s). However a table with ? Holes is not useful. Behind the scenes, all race data are tabulated by wind speed (each Beufort number) and boat class. The software calculates the DPN as a weighted average of all the windspeed ratings and I think amounts to 70% of the B4 rating. The wind tables were generated with fixed percentages when needed because a table with holes is useless.
The committee split out B4 ratings for multihulls and not dinghies for a reason. Newer multi designs flew hulls much earlier then older designs. Of course dinghies are either on plane or making a big hole in the water from B4 on up. Now, the latest cat designs are even more efficient and some boats are flying hulls in B3. But Once again... you need a TON of data to have a valid ratings table... and that just doesn't exist.

Second point. Handicappers have found that Users, both sailors and organizing authorities hate the complexity of multiple number handicaps. Often, their favorite scoring program won't easily manage a matrix of ratings. Race committees are not good at determining a SINGLE Average windspeed for a 45 minute race... (oh... the wind was 6 to 12 over the race... well... that data can only go into one bin... B2 or B 3) Only the good pro's record this data during a race to have an actual objective basis. .. Texel published two ratings for their table for one or two seasons; Trapezzing and non trapeezing conditions. Most euro clubs did not bother and used the single number rating. So... they went back to managing the wind speed with a single number rating.

Next point, the precision by which two boats are scored on the race course is very different between one design and handicap racing. You can win a OD race by a boat length... In a handicap race... the difference between them is lost in the noise and they would be tied on points. That's why it is silly to use a timing system with 10ths of seconds measured and you truncate the rating.

Moreover, Handicap ratings can't resolve finish positions any finer then the noise added by the racing rules of sailing of the game. So, take a fleet of 10 identical boats 30 feet in length. 10 get perfect starts on a square line. One goes off on port and the rest on starboard. At the weather mark... 9 30 foot boats will have right of way on the single port tacker. that means he will be 270 feet behind... depending on boats speed, x amount of seconds behind... his sailed rating will be slower then the other boats. Bottom line... He sailed perfectly but NOT to his class rating... he really should be tied for first in handicap world and he is actually last on the water. Basically this looks like noise but is really just a bias in favor of boats on starbord. It takes a lot of qualified data to average out all of the sailing noise from the bias in the data and you still can't get around the bias for starbord around the race track. Bottom line... handicap is not as precise as one design and determining a rating table can only be an approximation with limited resolution.

The good news is that most racing does not require that much precision. Even in a one design race of Olympic sailors... Identical boats will finish 10 minutes apart on the race course... translation the winner sailed their boat to their rating... eg 65.0.... the last place boat sailed to a rating of 80 or higher. Rut ro! ... You can't expect more from a handicap system rating different designs.

Measurement systems take wind speed into account with their righting moment factor. (I don't know the specifics off hand).
DPN Portsmouth takes wind speed by biasing the rating to the B4 condition.
Portsmouth Tables of ratings for windspeed attempt to manage windspeed directly .. however, YMMV as to how good the basis of the table actually is for your fleets.

Personally, I used to think that wind rating handicaps help the game of racing because every sailor has a story when at some windspeed a boat class just flies a hull and leaves the fleet behind .... The idea is that the RATINGS should reflect this reality. One more knot and the fleet can fly a hull and ratings work again... The wind ratings were an obvious recognition of this realty. I liked using wind ratings to pretend to solve the issue AND I thought the time was coming to have rating for B2 and B3 split out.

When I relaxed a bit and take handicap for what it is... we are probably better off with a single number system that manages the non linearity internally. This is the approach of SCHRS and Texel.
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/24/15 04:06 PM

Originally Posted by cyberspeed
First I want to thank Brucat for helping me try working with Portsmouth committee. I have also been chatting with Mark in the background trying to see if SCHRS is viable for Sail Series. Below is the only issue I see with switching and thought this would add to the current discussions.

The only problem I see with SCHRS is getting individual numbers for modified boats which is fairly common. You would need to submit the changes to get the correct new number. To even make this more difficult, you would have to get sails measured etc... To compound this, a lot of sailors don't register and just show up which would make getting them a number impossible. It would also require a lot of work for those running the ratings system on an individual boat basis.

The only way I can really see this working accross all races would be to have some sort of temporary or even permanent correction factor similar to what Portsmouth uses. Any input would be helpful.


Craig,

For the FL300 the modified boats won't be a problem. Measuring sails is not difficult and we aren't talking an entire fleet... one boat, correct? Please don't let the unknowns spook you. Psssst.... it's your freaking regatta you can do pretty much anything you want. Isn't there a regatta in Holland that created a handicap system specifically for their regatta?

It's time to move on DPN simply isn't the way to go anymore. You want help cracking this nut let me know. If you want to use Steeplechase as dry run we can do that too, the fleet will probably be identical. Dude we can do this!

It's time to solve this problem or at the very least make it less bad.

Dave
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/24/15 04:11 PM

Quote
It would also require a lot of work for those running the ratings system on an individual boat basis.


Craig... Every other form of handicap racing puts the responsibility on the owner to get their damn boat measured for the race. Only beach catamran world tolerates a bunch of beach bums who show up on the day of the race with a boat and expect to race without prior paperwork or registration.

Yes, it is more trouble to get your changes measured before you go racing. ... IMO... since you made the changes.... you own the responsibility to the fleet to get a fair rating.

There are people who measure and it costs you a fee to have your boat done. You also have the option of being a corinthian sailor and measure your own gear and calculate your rating.. Corinthian Sailing runs on the honor system.

Still, It is the OWNERS responsibility... not the OA or the person running the US ratings service.. At best... his job is to hunt down the owner with the measured changes and a one of a kind rating and make sure a copy gets sent to ISAF SCHRS or Dutch Texel.
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/24/15 05:09 PM

Originally Posted by David Ingram

For the FL300 the modified boats won't be a problem. Measuring sails is not difficult and we aren't talking an entire fleet... one boat, correct? Please don't let the unknowns spook you. Psssst.... it's your freaking regatta you can do pretty much anything you want. Isn't there a regatta in Holland that created a handicap system specifically for their regatta?

It's time to move on DPN simply isn't the way to go anymore. You want help cracking this nut let me know. If you want to use Steeplechase as dry run we can do that too, the fleet will probably be identical. Dude we can do this!

It's time to solve this problem or at the very least make it less bad.

Dave


I am not "spooked", that is why we are discussing now. Not just considering for Florida 300 but also Hiram's Haul and recommending to other distance races in the series.

I need to put together a proposal for the Sail Series board to approve and you know some of the board hates change. Most of my time before and during the event is tied up with website and content. If you are willing to help us implement, it might be the factor to swing votes.

Mark, here is an interesting case:
Hans Geisler has shown strong interest in the full Florida 300 for next year. His G-Cat 5.0m has a square top main and just ordered a reacher type sail that will not use a spin pole but be attached to the front bows with a traveler system to switch sides. What would we need from him to get a rating?
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/24/15 05:23 PM


FYI: Sail Series Promotions is a paid US Sailing member in good standing. I was willing to help with providing results from all Endurance Series events but haven't receved a reply from any of my emails this year (except Brucat). I also recall distance races are not applicable for portsmouth.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/24/15 06:33 PM

Ding, you make some good points, and have some great ideas on how to move forward. I'm not a political guy, so spare me the excuses. Let's get something that works, and implement it.

Mike
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/24/15 07:27 PM

Originally Posted by cyberspeed
Originally Posted by David Ingram

For the FL300 the modified boats won't be a problem. Measuring sails is not difficult and we aren't talking an entire fleet... one boat, correct? Please don't let the unknowns spook you. Psssst.... it's your freaking regatta you can do pretty much anything you want. Isn't there a regatta in Holland that created a handicap system specifically for their regatta?

It's time to move on DPN simply isn't the way to go anymore. You want help cracking this nut let me know. If you want to use Steeplechase as dry run we can do that too, the fleet will probably be identical. Dude we can do this!

It's time to solve this problem or at the very least make it less bad.

Dave


I am not "spooked", that is why we are discussing now. Not just considering for Florida 300 but also Hiram's Haul and recommending to other distance races in the series.

I need to put together a proposal for the Sail Series board to approve and you know some of the board hates change. Most of my time before and during the event is tied up with website and content. If you are willing to help us implement, it might be the factor to swing votes.

Mark, here is an interesting case:
Hans Geisler has shown strong interest in the full Florida 300 for next year. His G-Cat 5.0m has a square top main and just ordered a reacher type sail that will not use a spin pole but be attached to the front bows with a traveler system to switch sides. What would we need from him to get a rating?


Options are:

a) ask Hans to go through SCHRS to establish a number (which he probably wouldn't want to do - knowing him a little bit, I suspect he's not really that concerned with it)

B) ask Hans to look at the SCHRS tables and recommend a number. Convene a three person group of sailors that won't be competing directly against him, consider his recommended number/justification, and come up with a reasonable number to use.

Lastly, I don't think Hans will be overly concerned with the arithmetic behind the scoring.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/24/15 08:56 PM

Originally Posted by Mark Schneider

Craig... Every other form of handicap racing puts the responsibility on the owner to get their damn boat measured for the race. Only beach catamaran world tolerates a bunch of beach bums who show up on the day of the race with a boat and expect to race without prior paperwork or registration.


Tru-dat. I had to send in PHRF measurements to the committee at least 60 days prior to needing the certificate (for a regatta).

If I did show up out-of-measurement (like a new sail not measured) I could be protested out of the race, or go Corinthian and take the hit based on any sail design change from the original PHRF cert.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/24/15 09:00 PM

the measurement options I had to complete were somewhat onerous (not just I,J,P numbers, but spin mid-girth, foot length, mast to sprit, blah, blah, blah) but I was able to measure all that stuff myself (the cert was online and described how to take each measurement)
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/25/15 12:46 AM

Originally Posted by waterbug_wpb
Originally Posted by Mark Schneider

Craig... Every other form of handicap racing puts the responsibility on the owner to get their damn boat measured for the race. Only beach catamaran world tolerates a bunch of beach bums who show up on the day of the race with a boat and expect to race without prior paperwork or registration.


Tru-dat. I had to send in PHRF measurements to the committee at least 60 days prior to needing the certificate (for a regatta).

If I did show up out-of-measurement (like a new sail not measured) I could be protested out of the race, or go Corinthian and take the hit based on any sail design change from the original PHRF cert.


But there is a pretty stark difference! Jay, the certificate process you are talking about is for a relatively serious boat that cost a pretty penny when compared to a 15 year old Prindle 18-2. You just can't expect the guy that spent $1200 on his entire boat to go through a two month certification process (possibly involving the cost to have stuff measured) to get a piece of paper that he really doesn't care about. I would rather assign the guy a rough handicap number and have a better chance that he shows up to a regatta every now an then instead of making it MORE difficult for him to do so.
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/25/15 06:21 PM

Quote
Hans Geisler has shown strong interest in the full Florida 300 for next year. His G-Cat 5.0m has a square top main and just ordered a reacher type sail that will not use a spin pole but be attached to the front bows with a traveler system to switch sides. What would we need from him to get a rating?

Craig
He is going to have to weigh the boat and measure the sails at the minimum. It's the OA 's call if can do the honor system or you require an official measurement from an ISAF measurer.. (eg Carla Schiffer)

Alternatively...Jake's Plan B. Guestimate a SCHRS hard rating for the Gcat.. and let him race with that rating. (Its the same as using Portsmouth for a one off boat.... except that it will be the Florida 300 rating... not a US Sailing Portsmouth committee rating) Again... its the OA's call. You have to balance the fleet interest versus the individual sailors interest.

You have to remember... US Portsmouth requires a Fleet of Gcat 5.0s to have competed against other yardsticks... This is probably not the history of the G cat rating... so.. Modifying the rating of a gcat with cookie cutter corrections is a bit silly. You are strictly into PHRF world now... where your committee does its best.

In reply to Jake.. I agree, there is no harm in a handing a guy a stiff rating PHRF guestimate for a non one design configuration of a boat he just bought. Now... if goes out and gets a new non OD sail.... You can ask him to have the sailmaker measure the new thing and report those numbers.

As always... it's the OA who balances the interests of the fleet versus an individual sailor.

Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/25/15 11:46 PM

Originally Posted by Jake

But there is a pretty stark difference! Jay, the certificate process you are talking about is for a relatively serious boat that cost a pretty penny when compared to a 15 year old Prindle 18-2. You just can't expect the guy that spent $1200 on his entire boat to go through a two month certification process (possibly involving the cost to have stuff measured) to get a piece of paper that he really doesn't care about. I would rather assign the guy a rough handicap number and have a better chance that he shows up to a regatta every now an then instead of making it MORE difficult for him to do so.


That right there is a real world post! Craig, I'm happy to help and if you need me to present something to the board I'm happy to do that too. This really isn't that complicated or costly to the participants. We just need the board to be willing to try something different and they have clearly demonstrated that they/you are there for the sailors so I don't think it will be that difficult to sell.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/30/15 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by Jake
Jay, the certificate process you are talking about is for a relatively serious boat that cost a pretty penny when compared to a 15 year old Prindle 18-2. You just can't expect the guy that spent $1200 on his entire boat to go through a two month certification process (possibly involving the cost to have stuff measured) to get a piece of paper that he really doesn't care about. I would rather assign the guy a rough handicap number and have a better chance that he shows up to a regatta every now an then instead of making it MORE difficult for him to do so.


Thank you for stroking my fragile ego, Jake. To consider me "relatively serious boat" and inferring the same about my racing ability is enjoyable.

But yes, the $75 cost for the PHRF cert was a bit bothersome. At least I could measure (with the instructions) my own stuff (and get some off the OD specs when it was built in 2006) to save that money.

Still, if you're going to "race" you can't expect to do it at no cost.

They don't call racing "standing in a cold shower tearing up $100 bills" for nothing... Sailors are a parsimonious lot, but c'mon...

In Hans' case I think he's got all the specs you need (and probably could come up with his own SCHRS or DP-N number) but the dude with a frankenboat one-off probably would overwhelm the measurer at the regatta?

Like if Randy shows up with Scissors and wants you to come up with a number for him... (yeah, that's probably a stretch...)

I do appreciate the comments from those who help out with OA and measuring. To see that you are willing to do that much for someone just to get them out on the course is admirable. It still makes me think the sailor is being a little lazy in that respect (not getting a rating prior to showing up)... especially if they actually are wishing to win...
Posted By: Timbo

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/30/15 04:40 PM

Isn't there a measuring/rating system somewhere in Europe that uses weight/sail area/hull length/beam/mast height measurements and then some math, to come up with a theoretical speed?

This ain't rocket surgery, it's basic physics, seems to me any good marine architect should have a formula for speed predictions using the basic measurements of weight/sail area/ hull length.

After that, it comes down to the 'quality' of the hull design/sail design and most importantly, the crew sailing the boat!

I'll be Pete Melvin and most other boat designers knows the 'speed formula' why don't we just ask them?
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/30/15 07:36 PM

US Sailing was talking about a program to certify measurers at one point. That would help alleviate OA work (regatta resources) while adding a level of fairness if we do find a workable measurement-based system.

Mike
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/30/15 08:01 PM

Originally Posted by brucat
US Sailing was talking about a program to certify measurers at one point. That would help alleviate OA work (regatta resources) while adding a level of fairness if we do find a workable measurement-based system.

Mike


SCHRS isn't rocket science and waiting for some kind of USSailing certification for measurers could be a long wait. Also to hint that SCHRS isn't workable demonstrates a lack of understanding.

http://www.schrs.com/measurements.php
http://www.schrs.com/rules.php
http://www.schrs.com/downloads.php

Lead, follow or get out of the way! I think a general that was difficult to manage said that.
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/30/15 08:13 PM

measurers? At least 95% of the numbers already exist in SCHRS based on the known sailing classes. This isn't PHRF - we're not a bunch of rich a$$holes trying to find loopholes in the measurement system to gain a 30 second advantage on the other guy who also spent $350,000 on his boat and pays a crew. Let's not fix a problem that doesn't exist. We don't need measurers for beach cat racing. We just need a decently representative handicap number and a system that can accommodate the occasional frankenboat while also being able to integrate new boat designs.

If you are trying to get an additional 3% of accuracy out of a handicap system, you're doing it wrong. No handicap system will be close to that kind of accuracy. I would expect most handicap systems are, at best, 90% accurate when just considering varying conditions.
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 11/30/15 10:15 PM

" We don't need measurers for beach cat racing."

True... you don't NEED a measurer... but if you are a non technical sailor.... would it be worth some cash to get your sails measured and your boat weighed when you get your sailmaker to build a new set of sails for your Hobie 21?

A nationwide list of small cat measurers would be a nice resource to have.

AND the USA could generate ratings for the unique north american classes like the Isotope via an honor system of their owners.

Moreover, the SCHRS committee would be delighted to accept certificates from qualified and certified measurerers to add to the official table.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/01/15 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by David Ingram
Originally Posted by brucat
US Sailing was talking about a program to certify measurers at one point. That would help alleviate OA work (regatta resources) while adding a level of fairness if we do find a workable measurement-based system.

Mike


SCHRS isn't rocket science and waiting for some kind of USSailing certification for measurers could be a long wait. Also to hint that SCHRS isn't workable demonstrates a lack of understanding.

http://www.schrs.com/measurements.php
http://www.schrs.com/rules.php
http://www.schrs.com/downloads.php

Lead, follow or get out of the way! I think a general that was difficult to manage said that.


Um, yeah. Maybe you should read some of that before spouting off at me.

Those rules, echoed by comments here, speak to the requirement to measure and grant ratings for non-production boats (and new boats). Several cat sailors here have voiced concern with the resource load this would place on organizers.

Doesn't take a rocket surgeon to see that all systems have weaknesses with non-rated boats. They all have strengths, and to be workable means that it will be widely accepted and respected, and not seen as another difficult program. Hopefully, SCHRS can clear these hurdles.

I offered a solution, not an excuse, and didn't mention any specific system. Not sure how that led to your comment.

Mike
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/01/15 02:16 PM

Originally Posted by Jake
This isn't PHRF - we're not a bunch of rich a$$holes trying to find loopholes in the measurement system to gain a 30 second advantage on the other guy


I don't know if I'd go that far.... I've seen some really crazy sail shapes that appear to take advantage of the very moderate DPN hit for oversize or fathead?

And could a foiling boat be considered a "loophole"? The N17 wasn't originally considered a foiling boat, and the AC Rule last iteration was designed to eliminate potential foiling, correct? (but we all know how that worked...). And then that Chupacabra sail on the T boat at the China olympics (had that thing worked in those conditions, imagine the sh*tstorm it would have caused)

As far as spending clams on boats, I would posit that beachcat racers are slipping down that slope as we speak... With the exception of some venerable classes (H-16, Wave, etc) I can't think of any new boats in most of today's fleets that cost under $30k...

So why wouldn't an enterprising sailor/racer pick up a cheap-o N5.5 or Dart and "turbo" it up? or add a Spin/Screecher to a non-spin boat. I think that would benefit the sailor far more than the DPN hit would indicate on paper, right?

with all of today's technology (like those chips runners use on their shoes, Kattack, RaceQ, smartphones, etc) you'd think it would be straightforward to automatically record time/distance on race courses, continuous weather/water conditions and upload that data nation/worldwide to adjust both design speeds as well as individual skipper handicaps...

Would be a fine example of crowdsourcing. Toss a few Google or high school nerds at parsing out the data, a few statisticians to set up confidence parameters, and Dr. Evil to head up the program...

I make it sound so easy... which is why I'm still poor.
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/01/15 03:41 PM

Sure, but let's look at the reality of that "rule beater" situation. In most cases, the "rule beater" scenario is only a function of a poorly derived rating and not a sailor trying to work the system. There ARE cases where some sailors have put a boat together with the intent of winning a handicap race by working the rating system. I expect that if I knew all of the cases this happened that I could count the occurrences in the last decade easily on one hand - it's very rare. While this is certainly undesirable I look at this way 1) That person is spending a ridiculous amount of effort to win a handicapped race. 2) if it matters that much, he can just take all of the $ winnings.

PHRF is a completely different animal. There are a lot more boats with wildly varying configurations being managed by people who might actually win something or have a large enough investment / ego that they wish to win at all cost. The occurrence of the "rule beater" attempts is much more prevalent under PHRF and the whole thing even generates it's own politics. We are not in that situation. The significant majority of our boats are raced to a one design configuration and only a very small % of them are being modified and customized (and an even smaller percentage are being modified and customized successfully).

The other situation is where we get a new boat / configuration and there is some debate about its rating. IMHO, the rating, if not derived strictly from a parameter/measurement based system, should lean on the stiff side until proven otherwise. That has been our recent failing in that the provisional ratings have been issued as a pretty soft number making it easy for the new design to win. While the guy that owns the new shiney boat with the soft rating is smiling, he really wasn't the guy lobbying for that number (I'm giving the benefit of the doubt here).

With regards to foilers, I've said it before; it's silly to try and race handicap with a foiler against a displacement boat. The capabilities are so wildly different in varying conditions that you can't assign any reasonable number to define the capabilities between the two boats. It would be like trying to assign a number between a J22 and an F18. Trying to race those two boats against each other is silly. The J22 is fast in light air but quickly falls off as it hits hull speed at around 6.5knots. The F18 has a completely different set of capabilities in wind and water conditions. By the same token, there is no reasonable way to rate and race a non-foiler against a foiler.

Handicap racing is what it is - it's never going to be perfectly accurate. We just need a system that is reasonably accurate and has a system to update to accommodate new boat designs and have simple modification factors. IMHO, there is not enough money involved or cheating taking place to justify a national measurer system.


Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/01/15 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by waterbug_wpb
[quote=Jake]
So why wouldn't an enterprising sailor/racer pick up a cheap-o N5.5 or Dart and "turbo" it up? or add a Spin/Screecher to a non-spin boat. I think that would benefit the sailor far more than the DPN hit would indicate on paper, right?

with all of today's technology (like those chips runners use on their shoes, Kattack, RaceQ, smartphones, etc) you'd think it would be straightforward to automatically record time/distance on race courses, continuous weather/water conditions and upload that data nation/worldwide to adjust both design speeds as well as individual skipper handicaps...

I make it sound so easy... which is why I'm still poor.


Then do it Jay! Stop talking about it and just do it! Nobody is surfing the internet looking for something that is a lot of work for 0 return so... it's on you buddy!
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/01/15 04:09 PM

Originally Posted by Mark Schneider

Moreover, the SCHRS committee would be delighted to accept certificates from qualified and certified measurerers to add to the official table.


Correction, the SCHRS committee would be delighted to accept certifications (period). Qualified and certified measurerers, says who, USSailing? Give me a break Mark. Seriously look at the damn site, look at the diagrams, if you can read a tape you can measure a beachcat including the sails! For f#@$ sake you don't even have to do the math there is a spreadsheet for that! WHY do we go out of our way to complicate and over think EVERYTHING!
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/01/15 06:45 PM

No one said the measurers HAD to be certified. ROs don't HAVE to be certified either. But, there is perceived value amongst the sailors, and it's one more benefit that we can get from US Sailing.

I know that certification alone doesn't make you a good official, so let's not go down that rat hole.

Mike
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/01/15 07:46 PM

So if folks who don't have a DPN already plug in their measurements into SCHRS system and get a number, is there a way to convert to DPN?

As to the new handicap system initiative, I'll have to look in to how you effectively crowd-source things... Maybe it's already on the RaceQs and Kattack apps?
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/01/15 08:36 PM

The USS website seems to infer that they're already doing what I suggested (the crowdsourcing thing) albeit in a slightly 1990's way:

A second tool is a Graphic Display of Imputed Handicaps as an Analysis Tool that allows sailors and handicappers to develop a picture of whether a given boat is sailing well above its handicap, within expectations, or well below its handicap. By plugging fleet data into a spreadsheet for a series of races, handicappers can develop a picture of how a given boat is performing by calculating an imputed handicap and tracking that in a graph format. - See more at: http://www.ussailing.org/racing/offshore-big-boats/phrf/#sthash.z3T6v253.dpuf
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/01/15 08:54 PM

Originally Posted by Jake
The other situation is where we get a new boat / configuration and there is some debate about its rating. IMHO, the rating, if not derived strictly from a parameter/measurement based system, should lean on the stiff side until proven otherwise. That has been our recent failing in that the provisional ratings have been issued as a pretty soft number making it easy for the new design to win. While the guy that owns the new shiney boat with the soft rating is smiling, he really wasn't the guy lobbying for that number (I'm giving the benefit of the doubt here).


But I suspect that's important for the boat designer/builder to have that 'soft' number and show that this new widget "dominates the fleet"

So while the sailor may not push hard for the rating, perhaps the builder does?

If I understand you correctly, Jake, I would agree that DPN would be better than PHRF because we're comparing beachcat designs, rather than "apples to basketballs" in the mono- vs. multi PHRF system.
Posted By: Isotope235

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/01/15 09:29 PM

Originally Posted by David Ingram
Seriously look at the damn site, look at the diagrams, if you can read a tape you can measure a beachcat including the sails! For f#@$ sake you don't even have to do the math there is a spreadsheet for that!

I just spent most of the day measuring my Isotope to generate a SCHRS handicap for it. I agree that it isn't "rocket science", but it is not as simple as you make it out to be either. There's no guidance on how to take measurements, and many of the calculations (all the mast, boom, and sail areas) must be done outside of the SCHRS spreadsheet.

I took some values from the factory specs, measured what I could, used some measurements that were taken in slightly different ways than diagrammed, and guesstimated one (I didn't want rig the boat in the rain). I'm not sure I got things right, but if so, the Isotope is faster than I thought. According to Portsmouth DPN, an Isotope (1-up) is 2.3% faster than a Hobie 16 (2-up). According to the SCHRS number I derived, I owe a 2-up H16 11.3% According to DPN, A Hobie 18 is about 4% faster than an Isotope, but SCHRS says I owe a TheMightyHobie18 almost 2%. On DPN, I've always sailed nearly even against a Hobie 17, but SCHRS says I owe an H17 over 12%.

Maybe I got the measurements wrong. I'd be happy to measure my boat with someone experienced with SCHRS. If, however, an Isotope really is that much faster than other sloop-rig catamarans, then I'm less skilled than I thought.

Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/02/15 02:45 AM


Excellent feedback, Eric. I applaud your initiative.


Originally Posted by waterbug_wpb
So if folks who don't have a DPN already plug in their measurements into SCHRS system and get a number, is there a way to convert to DPN?


This is indeed one of the ways the Portsmouth Committee generates the provisional numbers, as I confirmed while helping Craig navigate this.

I've said it before, the best path forward may be to just get someone (here) to step up and join that committee. It's ultimately a volunteer job regardless of which system is used. People do like to just jump online and use the tried and true system, so there's something to be said for that.

Of course, that would add a step and require a dedicated volunteer.

No easy answers, but maybe we should put together a concise list of pros and cons of each system and publish that. We can add tips and tricks as they develop. Thoughts?

Mike
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/02/15 06:15 AM

Mike... My understanding in reading the committe's correspondence was... you can generate all of the provisional numbers you want... he won't publish a number without race data. They know how to generate a provisional number... that is not the issue... Race data is their issue. A volunteer cat sailor can't solve that limitation unless you think that this individual should be hunting down race data from OA's that don't send it in. In my opinion... getting race data collected to support a provisional number is the job for the Builder/OD Class association. This was the way it was done in years past. Why the OD organization?... because they are supporting their members going racing. If the class association doesn't care and won't support their members... Oh well... I guess they are on their own here.

Not sure what role the MHC should play in evaluating handicap systems. I would leave that up to each cat club and OA running a regatta.

What we could do is work with handicap committee to get a list of measurers who are willing to measure beach cats according to the ISAF SCHRS standards and some examples of pricing. Then publish this custom list on the MHC portion of the web site.
You could also inform the public on the status of unrated new boatsin portsmouth and SCHRS.


Alternatively... you leave it up to the builder to get the boat measured and generate a base OD rating.... Then sailors who make modifications to the OD config get those changes measured and incorporated into their one off rating.
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/02/15 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by brucat

I've said it before, the best path forward may be to just get someone (here) to step up and join that committee. It's ultimately a volunteer job regardless of which system is used. People do like to just jump online and use the tried and true system, so there's something to be said for that.

Of course, that would add a step and require a dedicated volunteer.

Mike


I'll do it, here are my terms:

DPN is reviewed against SCHRS and any numbers significantly out of balance are adjusted. Because Mark is full of BS and the DPN committee does use SCHRS to create numbers (good on them!) this shouldn't be a big deal.

Current committee has no jurisdiction over the beachcat tables

The Multihull Council may observe and feedback will be accepted and the feedback may on may not be acted upon

SCHRS is offically offered.

Yes I'm a member I had to join to take the Instructor Training class.

Oh, and I'll have this knocked out by the end of the year.

So, when do I start?
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/02/15 03:10 PM

Quote
Because Mark is full of BS and the DPN committee does use SCHRS to create numbers (good on them!) this shouldn't be a big deal.


Dave.... move on.... Never said this...

What is a fact is that the PN system requires 5 race points to get a provisional entry. You seed the program with a number.... of course the PN committe uses texel and SCHRS and their butt to generate a portsmouth number... (that is called PHRF...)

It ain't portsmouth until it gets data... you need 15 data points to remove the brackets in all the windspeeds.

Why do you want to bust the balls of the PN committe. They are just running the system as designed.

Quote

DPN is reviewed against SCHRS and any numbers significantly out of balance are adjusted.


Cool.... now we just need a snappy title for your personally tested and approved table...
How about Cranky Old Ugly Fart Handicap Table. or COUGH for short.

I'm not so good at the branding.... I am sure some one else will give your system a better title.

Of course... most people would just use SCHRS since they clearly don't have the wisdom, insight, foresight or the sheer chutzpah that you clearly have.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/02/15 05:38 PM

Ding,

Most of that sounds good. However, per the regs, we don't own the system, we work with other committees, on an advisory level.

Regrouping the Alter Cup committee took a long time, and a lot of convincing due to this, but we got what we needed, have a diversified committee of cat sailors running the championship, and are viewed as a success for taking this approach.

Mike
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/02/15 06:38 PM

Originally Posted by Isotope235
Originally Posted by David Ingram
Seriously look at the damn site, look at the diagrams, if you can read a tape you can measure a beachcat including the sails! For f#@$ sake you don't even have to do the math there is a spreadsheet for that!

I just spent most of the day measuring my Isotope to generate a SCHRS handicap for it. I agree that it isn't "rocket science", but it is not as simple as you make it out to be either. There's no guidance on how to take measurements, and many of the calculations (all the mast, boom, and sail areas) must be done outside of the SCHRS spreadsheet.

I took some values from the factory specs, measured what I could, used some measurements that were taken in slightly different ways than diagrammed, and guesstimated one (I didn't want rig the boat in the rain). I'm not sure I got things right, but if so, the Isotope is faster than I thought. According to Portsmouth DPN, an Isotope (1-up) is 2.3% faster than a Hobie 16 (2-up). According to the SCHRS number I derived, I owe a 2-up H16 11.3% According to DPN, A Hobie 18 is about 4% faster than an Isotope, but SCHRS says I owe a TheMightyHobie18 almost 2%. On DPN, I've always sailed nearly even against a Hobie 17, but SCHRS says I owe an H17 over 12%.

Maybe I got the measurements wrong. I'd be happy to measure my boat with someone experienced with SCHRS. If, however, an Isotope really is that much faster than other sloop-rig catamarans, then I'm less skilled than I thought.



Boat measurement is indeed a very underestimated task. The diagrams in the various "how to measure" documents may look simple but there are different ways to interpret them from different configurations and the accuracy of the measurement is a direct correlation of the measurer's ability to understand the intent of the measurement. It's not something that I would trust to just anyone. This is where you set yourself up for silly stuff like foot-strap-gate at a world championship.


Originally Posted by brucat

I know that certification alone doesn't make you a good official, so let's not go down that rat hole.


You got that right. In fact, a significant number of certified officials that I have come across on the smaller-than-national level suffer from a real lack of practical application. The same would be true if you set up a measurer certification system where nobody fails to make the cut. A measurer certification process should also include standard tools to carry out the measurements and a real world qualification tests where a certain number will fail...but then you will have a hard time finding the people willing to submit themselves to such a critical process.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/02/15 10:10 PM

I'd like to think that the number of folks willing to undergo this type of scrutiny would be low enough to keep out riff-raff, but who knows?

BTW, I haven't heard recent discussions on this, so it may not have reached critical mass yet (to become a real program), but it had high-level interest about a year ago.

The idea was to certify local measurers, who would then be able to work across systems and classes. Mark, were you involved with any of these discussions?

Mike
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/02/15 10:23 PM

Mike... about the measurement program... No... I heard about the idea from the local guy doing an HPR measurement that I was involved with.

It seems like a bit of a unicorn tho...

In my area... we are back to PHRF and IRC for the higher performing big boats.. the beach cat fleet uses SCHRS.

They guestimate the Supercat 22 rating and go racing... no flying boats that want to go racing.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/02/15 11:16 PM

Thanks Mark.

All this talk about no race data. Isn't there data available from Europe? All we need are the boat types and times, correct? Why can't we solve the DPN dilemma with data mining?

I know that the Portsmouth Committee does not see this as their role (not even for US data), but since it's in our best interest to make this work, maybe we should own that task (assembling and reporting data sets).

Mike
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/03/15 12:54 PM

One of the challenges with "data" is format and getting the information both in a complete and consistent configuration. The creator of Sailwave was willing, at one time, to put an "Upload to US Sailing" link in the software that dumps the data to an FTP site. This would solve both of those issues for people that score their events using Sailwave. Collin did this with a couple of handicap organizations already within the software. Regatta Network, who is already in bed with US Sailing, should EASILY be able to do the same and their scoring tool is getting easier to use (if regattas can swallow the fees to do so - most of those fees are tied to registration and money handling, though).

I went down this path previously but hit a roadblock at trying to have an FTP site setup to receive the data at US Sailing. It's a big "EASY" button if you genuinely think they can do something with race data once it's collected.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/03/15 01:40 PM

The excuse/complaint from Carl is that people request numbers (usually with short notice), but never follow up with race data after their event. As Mark mentions, there are other factors (like the fleet sizes), but the main thing is data reporting.

I've asked why they don't proactively download it themselves from online results, which turns into a dead end (volunteer resources, etc.).

Your FTP solution seems like a logical solution to end that excuse. What was the roadblock?

It's certainly not the entire solution, as not everyone uses those programs or will remember to push the results, which is why I think we need a motivated data junkie to join the committee and solve it from the inside. Can't be a bull in the china closet, that won't be tolerated.

Mike
Posted By: wildtsail7

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/03/15 01:58 PM

Mike, a good place to start. A very reliable source told me a few months ago that Jack Giehart (Executive Director of US Sailing) had told him that he was completely unaware of the status of the Portsmouth system and who ran it. They continued to talk about how there should be handicap racing in dinghies in the U.S.

I've tried to obtain Portsmouth numbers for 3 boats this year, one Nacra, 2 RS Sailboats.
I started with the email on the U.S. Sailing Website "PortsmouthNA@att.net), those kept getting bounced.
I reach out to a friend of mine at U.S. Sailing, Nate Titcomb who is in charge of PHRF and etc, apparently he is supposed to oversee Portsmouth to some extent.
Nate tried to help me get in touch with Carl Reigart (in charge of system) several times with no luck.
I finally ended up doing some research, found Carl's number andI spoke with him. He admitted that the system is out of date because no one sends him data to update it. He told me to send him data from another email address of mine, he received it and acknowledged it but I never heard back.
I actually just sent the email again now, but I have to admit my bandwith for dealing with this is low.
If someone could take this up the ladder at US Sailing it would be awesome.
Personally I think the US needs to move on from Portsmouth and adopt something that rest of the world (starting with Europe) with a system such as Texel or PY.
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/03/15 02:01 PM

Mike

Before you solve the data REPORTING problem.... First you should ID the Data.

Who are the 5 owners of N17s that have competed in a handicap race on their 17 and what are those events? Assuming the data is qualified... Just that data alone would get you a bracketed entry into the table.

Note... Paying Randy Smyth to race a boat 5 times and be first to finish will not get you a rating... All you have done is generate Randy's personal handicap on that new boat.

Now you can bend the rules... say by deciding not to adjust the PHRF seed rating with Randy's statistics and publish the seed number... BUT it's not portsmouth.... It is a complete ratings table of many but not all portsmouth ratings.

You could ask the Nacra dealers for this data. If they hope to sell the boat in the US.... Recreational Racers will start out in open fleets.

Reporting data on Hobie 16s racing F18s (if such data actually existed) does not move the ball.

I agree with Todd.... Its time to move on... Sailors and their clubs should pick a Euro based measurement system and go racing.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/03/15 02:37 PM

how about the next Alter Cup be Phantoms? Then take times and you can get the provisional DPN. Of course, that means a lot of folk have to buy the boats (or mfg. supplied)...
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/03/15 03:06 PM

Jay... The alter cup is a one design championship. It contributes nothing to any handicap analysis or system.

You need a race with two different classes of boats.

IF you collected times on the fleet of phantoms... you would then calculate the rating for each helm and notice just how poorly the third place team sailed to its rating. My point... for portsmouth to work... you need A LOT of quality data.

Just for grins... try to get a 2015 list of WL buoy races with a Handicap class
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/03/15 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by waterbug_wpb
how about the next Alter Cup be Phantoms? Then take times and you can get the provisional DPN. Of course, that means a lot of folk have to buy the boats (or mfg. supplied)...


They have to race against other known values in the rating system, otherwise the data is meaningless.
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/03/15 03:35 PM

Originally Posted by brucat

Your FTP solution seems like a logical solution to end that excuse. What was the roadblock?


It was US Sailing. Didn't want to setup the FTP site.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/03/15 04:37 PM

Who at US Sailing, Jake?

Todd, sadly, that's not new news. Carl is a really nice guy and is dedicated to Portsmouth, and I usually have dinner with him at the meetings, but I think he needs our help (maybe more than he knows). Nate and I used to race H16s before he and Chris bailed to bigger boats (N6.0 IIRC), maybe he can be our lifeline to fix this.

Let's take a different stab at this. Who here is willing to serve on a task force under the Multihull Racing Committee? Help me come up with a solid plan (NOT limited to DPN) to present at the annual meeting in Feb.

Mike
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/03/15 11:04 PM

Originally Posted by brucat
Who at US Sailing, Jake?


Mike, It was about 9 to 11 years ago and something that I was working on with Darline. The US Sailing website was undergoing a rebuild at that time and, though we thought it would be a great time to incorporate it, it wasn't seen as such by whomever was responsible for the site at the time. I can't recall who we were working with then.
Posted By: catman

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/04/15 12:08 AM

Originally Posted by cyberspeed


Mark, here is an interesting case:
Hans Geisler has shown strong interest in the full Florida 300 for next year. His G-Cat 5.0m has a square top main and just ordered a reacher type sail that will not use a spin pole but be attached to the front bows with a traveler system to switch sides. What would we need from him to get a rating?


By the way, add a wing mast with w/spreaders instead of a tear drop w/out spreaders and boomless now vs stock w/boom. Oh yea, He's planning on having T-foils built into the hull for the 300. I've seen the mock-up.

Posted By: Team_Cat_Fever

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/04/15 02:34 AM

Originally Posted by catman
Originally Posted by cyberspeed


Mark, here is an interesting case:
Hans Geisler has shown strong interest in the full Florida 300 for next year. His G-Cat 5.0m has a square top main and just ordered a reacher type sail that will not use a spin pole but be attached to the front bows with a traveler system to switch sides. What would we need from him to get a rating?


By the way, add a wing mast with w/spreaders instead of a tear drop w/out spreaders and boomless now vs stock w/boom. Oh yea, He's planning on having T-foils built into the hull for the 300. I've seen the mock-up.



There are DPN multipliers you use for each additional/upgraded item and sail.Foils would be different boards. They are in the charts or used to be.
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/04/15 05:37 AM

Well, I was hoping Rick would be the one to break the news but we have been talking and Rick is willing to step up to the plate and score the Steeplechase using SCHRS this year. I will work with Rick on scoring to try to make it seamless.

Dave Ingram also stepped up to the plate and offered to help with sorting out ratings and I will help out where needed. A good concerted effort from posters on this thread willing to step up to the plate to try and make competition as fair as possible.

Mark has also been beneficial and as the North American SCHRS representative, I am sure I will be looking to him for help as well.

Between Hans Geisler, Ralph Cole and Dave Ingram, we are close to getting a rating nailed down for the G-Cat. This will be a very specific rating becuase only two were ever made. Hans Also sent us additional info on his other G-Cat models. I am going to go through the process for my Supercat 20 hopefully at the Miami-Key Largo.

My personal opinion on foiling is that it is a different animal from other cats and should be scored as such but should have their own class. Even though SCHRS incorporates foiling into ratings, they also state that foilers should have their own class.


Quote
From: http://www.schrs.com/rules.php
E.3 Foiling catamarans
An event organiser or race committee should consider scoring foiling boats separately. Foiling boats are defined as boats with lifting foils of non-constant radius that are capable of flight above the water.
Posted By: catman

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/04/15 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by cyberspeed
Well, I was hoping Rick would be the one to break the news but we have been talking and Rick is willing to step up to the plate and score the Steeplechase using SCHRS this year. I will work with Rick on scoring to try to make it seamless.

Dave Ingram also stepped up to the plate and offered to help with sorting out ratings and I will help out where needed. A good concerted effort from posters on this thread willing to step up to the plate to try and make competition as fair as possible.

Mark has also been beneficial and as the North American SCHRS representative, I am sure I will be looking to him for help as well.

Between Hans Geisler, Ralph Cole and Dave Ingram, we are close to getting a rating nailed down for the G-Cat. This will be a very specific rating becuase only two were ever made. Hans Also sent us additional info on his other G-Cat models. I am going to go through the process for my Supercat 20 hopefully at the Miami-Key Largo.

My personal opinion on foiling is that it is a different animal from other cats and should be scored as such but should have their own class. Even though SCHRS incorporates foiling into ratings, they also state that foilers should have their own class.


Quote
From: http://www.schrs.com/rules.php
E.3 Foiling catamarans
An event organiser or race committee should consider scoring foiling boats separately. Foiling boats are defined as boats with lifting foils of non-constant radius that are capable of flight above the water.


But will the G-cat 5.0 be able to fly? How does that figure in?

Look the word here is fair, not perfect. Not sure how the rest of you do it but we normally split boat classes up so they are not more than 10 dpn points apart. When they are or when the race is run as a single class the highest number almost always wins. I am talking distance racing.

Maybe the best way to do this is to get the average of the dpn numbers of the stock boats and give it a number not more than 10 away. Or maybe take the scratch boat number and do 10. Just a thought.


Posted By: catman

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/04/15 03:13 PM

Originally Posted by Team_Cat_Fever
Originally Posted by catman
Originally Posted by cyberspeed


Mark, here is an interesting case:
Hans Geisler has shown strong interest in the full Florida 300 for next year. His G-Cat 5.0m has a square top main and just ordered a reacher type sail that will not use a spin pole but be attached to the front bows with a traveler system to switch sides. What would we need from him to get a rating?


By the way, add a wing mast with w/spreaders instead of a tear drop w/out spreaders and boomless now vs stock w/boom. Oh yea, He's planning on having T-foils built into the hull for the 300. I've seen the mock-up.



There are DPN multipliers you use for each additional/upgraded item and sail.Foils would be different boards. They are in the charts or used to be.


Certainly, however if the talk is about how the system isn't being updated or accurate, etc. Can we say the mod's are fair?
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/04/15 06:32 PM

Originally Posted by catman
But will the G-cat 5.0 be able to fly? How does that figure in?

Look the word here is fair, not perfect. Not sure how the rest of you do it but we normally split boat classes up so they are not more than 10 dpn points apart. When they are or when the race is run as a single class the highest number almost always wins. I am talking distance racing.

Maybe the best way to do this is to get the average of the dpn numbers of the stock boats and give it a number not more than 10 away. Or maybe take the scratch boat number and do 10. Just a thought.


I am not exactly sure what level of foiling Hans is planning. I am not even sure if he intends to us his foils for competition. He loves building boats and playing with design ideas.

Not sure why you quoted me on your statements. Your statements revolve around DPN and I just stated we are going to be using a measurement based system for the Steeplchase.
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/04/15 09:35 PM

I have been doing a little research. It appears Portsmouth has not been updated since at least 2010.

An interesting thread:
http://www.catsailor.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=209310&page=1

All of the points are still valid today. It is also interesting to see the personal viewpoints then and now. Without Portsmouth being updated before next years season starts, it is hard to justify using a system that has not been updated in over 5 years. US Sailing either needs to update Portsmouth or switch to a different system.
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/04/15 10:11 PM

Quote
US Sailing either needs to update Portsmouth or switch to a different system.


Craig.... You have this backwards... Sailors and Clubs need to choose.

US sailing ONLY had a say in what handicap system to use when the were the co OA for the Alter cup qualifiers....

So... You as the OA for the Florida 300 get to pick what ever handicap system you want... Hell you can even get Ding to spit out his ratings table and that becomes the final word.

I will say it again... Sailors and Catamaran Clubs simply need to choose.

(in defense of the PN commmitte... what would you have them do... PHRF some numbers and pretend they have a portsmouth table?)
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/04/15 10:43 PM

Hi Mark,
You are correct but we also administer a series where we are not in charge of all events. I work directly with the event organizers on specific items but in the end it is their race and many hate change especially when it is a lot more work.

Sail Series Promotions is also a member of US Sailing and makes sense to have our races use the same scoring system as the organization we are a member of.

It is great that Rick has agreed to use SCHRS for the Steeplechase but other event organizers might not be so willing. I have already gotten a little push back from some sailors not wanting change and asking why change. If US Sailing declared Portsmouth dead and switched to SCHRS, there would be no need for discussions. From a series stand point, it makes more sense having all events use the same rating system as the rest of the country instead of going rouge but if the only system has not been updated in five years and doesn't have ratings for any of the new boats, it really leaves you no choice unless you make up your own ratings for new boats like the Nacra 17 olympic boat.

There is also the fact that we are going to have to measure a lot more boats if we are the only ones to use SCHRS. By using the same system globally, that load would be shared by other events. So far, we need get ratings for the G-Cat 6.1 and ARC 22. That is assuming the N-20 is stock. I seriously doubt the MKL and Mug Cup would switch unless US Sailing switches.
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/04/15 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by cyberspeed
Hi Mark,
You are correct but we also administer a series where we are not in charge of all events. I work directly with the event organizers on specific items but in the end it is their race and many hate change especially when it is a lot more work.

Sail Series Promotions is also a member of US Sailing and makes sense to have our races use the same scoring system as the organization we are a member of.

It is great that Rick has agreed to use SCHRS for the Steeplechase but other event organizers might not be so willing. I have already gotten a little push back from some sailors not wanting change and asking why change. If US Sailing declared Portsmouth dead and switched to SCHRS, there would be no need for discussions. From a series stand point, it makes more sense having all events use the same rating system as the rest of the country instead of going rouge but if the only system has not been updated in five years and doesn't have ratings for any of the new boats, it really leaves you no choice unless you make up your own ratings for new boats like the Nacra 17 olympic boat.

There is also the fact that we are going to have to measure a lot more boats if we are the only ones to use SCHRS. By using the same system globally, that load would be shared by other events. So far, we need get ratings for the G-Cat 6.1 and ARC 22. That is assuming the N-20 is stock. I seriously doubt the MKL and Mug Cup would switch unless US Sailing switches.


N20 "european" had some sail area differences, fyi...smaller spinnaker if I remember correctly.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/04/15 11:56 PM

Craig is right, there will be confusion and resistance. That's no reason for us to sit back and do nothing, we just need to ensure that we approach this with a solid plan and good communication.

The fact that the table hasn't changed is both a cause and effect of the lack of handicap racing.

Mike
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/05/15 04:24 AM

I understand the concerns...

but you can't tell the Portsmouth chair and committee to ignore the Portsmouth structure and make up ratings.... (been there... done that... It does not end particularly well) Without data... there is nothing that they should do....

re US Sailing sanction... well... you are also a member of ISAF through US Sailing. I think the authority issue is managed by using ISAF SCHRS.

Ah... change is always tough...but the OA's will listen to the sailors..... It is hardly more work for them. It's the owner of the non rated boat's responsibility to get an accurate rating. Peer pressure will ensure they do a fair job of it.... or they can buy the service.

Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/05/15 05:18 PM

It's a sea change that not all sailors will embrace. We need to help them understand the need for the change, and convince them of the fairness.

Saying it's a boat owners responsibility is probably the biggest change, and if that becomes a hurdle, you just trade one problem for another.

That's our challenge. I actually think there's an easy way to manage this. If anyone wants to collaborate, let me know. Post here, PM or email me.

Mike
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/05/15 08:57 PM

The more work the less likely someone will participate. If you are saying that someone cannot participate in a race unless they have their boat certified, many of the weeekend warriors will just not race. Distance racing numbers are low as it is, adding another hurdle will definitely not help.

Always interested in making things easier. If we could develop some sort of semi standard adjustment that could be used provisionally similar to Portsmouth's, that would go a long way in making implementation easier for smaller races. If it can be done for portsmouth, it should be able to be done for SCHRS.

I am fine with keeping open discussion on this forum. It gives more transparency, others might have good ideas and always looking for someone to help reduce the workload.
Posted By: Anonymous

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/05/15 09:05 PM

wildtsail7 - I am pretty sure it is your avitar is causing pop up boxes/errors - it is because it is uploaded to a secure folder - it would be nice if you re-upload it so we don't all ge the pop up box every time we are on a page with you. Please disregard if i am incorrect, but i am pretty sure ...
Originally Posted by wildtsail7
Mike, a good place to start. A very reliable source told me a few months ago that Jack Giehart (Executive Director of US Sailing) had told him that he was completely unaware of the status of the Portsmouth system and who ran it. They continued to talk about how there should be handicap racing in dinghies in the U.S.

I've tried to obtain Portsmouth numbers for 3 boats this year, one Nacra, 2 RS Sailboats.
I started with the email on the U.S. Sailing Website "PortsmouthNA@att.net), those kept getting bounced.
I reach out to a friend of mine at U.S. Sailing, Nate Titcomb who is in charge of PHRF and etc, apparently he is supposed to oversee Portsmouth to some extent.
Nate tried to help me get in touch with Carl Reigart (in charge of system) several times with no luck.
I finally ended up doing some research, found Carl's number andI spoke with him. He admitted that the system is out of date because no one sends him data to update it. He told me to send him data from another email address of mine, he received it and acknowledged it but I never heard back.
I actually just sent the email again now, but I have to admit my bandwith for dealing with this is low.
If someone could take this up the ladder at US Sailing it would be awesome.
Personally I think the US needs to move on from Portsmouth and adopt something that rest of the world (starting with Europe) with a system such as Texel or PY.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/07/15 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by cyberspeed
If you are saying that someone cannot participate in a race unless they have their boat certified, many of the weeekend warriors will just not race.


funny, but I considered any sailor who doesn't feel the need for an official measurement/rating a "cruising" sailor.

So, how about a "cruising" class in your event where you can just sail whatever the heck you want (as long as it's seaworthy) for the pure joy of completing the event. If the cruisers want to side-bet rum amongst themselves so be it.

Those hell-bent on seeing their name in lights must go get their boats measured, etc.

By entering the cruising group, people can try out various tweaks, franken designs, or just classic boats within a structured event (with some boundaries so as not to tax OA and RC, of course) without the need for measurements, etc. Those that aren't "racers" can still benefit from the race/series and possibly provide additional publicity/revenue for the events.

Didn't you try out something similar in the last 300 with day-races for those not entering the entire event? How did that fare?
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/07/15 11:57 PM

Originally Posted by Jake

N20 "european" had some sail area differences, fyi...smaller spinnaker if I remember correctly.


Rumor or real Jake? If real it takes 10 minutes to measure a kite and the number can be plugged into the formula for a modified number.
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/08/15 01:46 AM

Originally Posted by waterbug_wpb
Didn't you try out something similar in the last 300 with day-races for those not entering the entire event? How did that fare?

No, we had a separate race for the last day of the Florida 300 called the "Dogfight". Race committees don't tend to want cruisers in distance races. Makes for a longer day.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/08/15 02:02 AM

The answer to that is easy, give them a shorter course. Difficult for point-to-point, of course, but can be done.

Mike
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/08/15 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by brucat
Ding,


Regrouping the Alter Cup committee took a long time, and a lot of convincing due to this, but we got what we needed, have a diversified committee of cat sailors running the championship, and are viewed as a success for taking this approach.

Mike


Not sure I'd hold up the Alter Cup as the poster child of a reorg success story. Turning the Atler Cup into just another weekend regatta and then calling it a success is substantially lowering the bar. I really hope that isn't the approach for solving this problem too.
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/08/15 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by brucat
The answer to that is easy, give them a shorter course. Difficult for point-to-point, of course, but can be done.

Mike


Using your logic I have suggestion for the Alter Cup.

Bring back the Alter Cup format using supplied boats. Difficult yes, but can be done.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/08/15 03:48 PM

Ding, do we really need to rehash this four years later?

First post: The new committee is viewed as a success by US Sailing. See below for why the format changed (along with lots of other mismanagement of the qualifiers, etc.).

Second post: It's 100% financial. I dropped this goal when Bert reported that it would cost $20,000 to get 10 F-16s.

While I sought out and respect the opinions of the former committee volunteers, had I stuck to demanding that we continue under the old format (and in the unlikely event the US Sailing BOD went along with this), the Hoyt-Jolley fund would be depleted by now, and the event would be dead.

So yes, I'd say working with US Sailing, to keep the championship alive, while being viewed as a cooperative group, is a success. YMMV...

Mike
Posted By: mikekrantz

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/08/15 05:52 PM

I'm sorry, I'm in Ding's camp. No disrespect to the winners of the new format. But to me it really meant something when you had to win your area qualifier, and then go on to a round robin event competing on identical platforms.

The current format is just another "open" regatta...
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/08/15 06:09 PM

Originally Posted by cyberspeed
Race committees don't tend to want cruisers in distance races. Makes for a longer day.


Only if the cruisers are significantly slower than the "race" fleet. In this case, your "cruising" fleet may be foilers...

And cruisers typically just take their own times (or should be required to post their track or photo of GPS showing time & coordinates. They're not getting trophies anyway...
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/08/15 06:14 PM

Originally Posted by mikekrantz
...But to me it really meant something when you had to win your area qualifier, and then go on to a round robin event competing on identical platforms.


I fully agree with this, and would prefer that as well. I came into the "job" trying to make that happen.

The history of the event told a different story, especially in the later years. Most qualifiers were either not properly run or did not garner significant attendance. Hence the large number of invitations.

Again, this did not happen overnight, and was not done without a lot of thought and effort.

The reality was not as rosy as the rearview mirror. Even if we could fund it, we'd need to overcome the qualifier issues.

Mike
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/08/15 07:03 PM

how many USS members are multi-sailors?

If there were enough members, perhaps an additional $10 dues per year would fund 20 boats for the Alter Cup. Which could then be sold after the event, proceeds going toward the next Alter Cup boat purchase?

The Cup would get boats, the mfg. could probably get them built efficiently (since the order would be for 20), the selection of boat design would be made 1-2 years prior so the mfg.(s) would have lead time.

And my dues would go to something we can all see/participate in.

Maybe with the option of not having to supply your own boat, the participation in the feeder qualifiers would be higher?

sorry to hijack yet another thread...
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/08/15 07:13 PM

Originally Posted by waterbug_wpb
Only if the cruisers are significantly slower than the "race" fleet. In this case, your "cruising" fleet may be foilers...

And cruisers typically just take their own times (or should be required to post their track or photo of GPS showing time & coordinates. They're not getting trophies anyway...


This is really off the topic and if they are cruising but sailing with the racers, what's the point in doing a race other than possibly getting in the way. Please focus on ratings systems not cruising.
Posted By: Bob_Curry

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/09/15 01:29 AM

I agree with Ding and Mike.
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/09/15 02:35 AM

Unfortunetely:
Quote
Steeplechase Update:
With the Key Largo Steeplechase just days away, there are a lot of late entries bringing the field up to 13 boats with more last minute entries expected. There is an interesting mix of boats with six Formula 18's, three Nacra 20's, two Marstrom 20's, one G-Cat 6.1 and an ARC 22. A great mixture of boats which should make for a great race.

Unfortunately most of the late entries do not have a SCHRS ratings and need to be measured to be accurately scored. Due to the time constraints and the late registration of so many boats that are not SCHRS rated, we are switching back to the Portsmouth rating system for the Key Largo Steeplechase. We hated making the move but we did not want the ratings system to interfere with the race.

The updated weather forecast is also changing to make for a faster race with winds predicted to be 10-20 mph both days and only a 30% chance of rain forecasted for Sunday.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/09/15 04:52 AM

Which of those boats don't have SCHRS numbers, and DO have DPN numbers?

Let me know if/how I can help.

Mike
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/09/15 05:15 AM

Too late for this event. I have had a prior work engaguement and wasn't scheduled to be there till late Saturday anyway.

We will look toward getting boats rated for future events. I will hopefully have my 12'6" wide Supercat 20 with many changes measured at the Miami-Key Largo.

Thanks for offering help!
Posted By: cyberspeed

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/09/15 05:46 AM

Originally Posted by brucat
I think the one thing that we can all agree upon is that we need a handicap system that is fair to the sailors, and easy for the organizers.

If we want to propose to move to a new system, it would be good if it had a champion, if not an administrator. Not in the number management sense, but in the sense of helping OAs use it.

Having recently tried to help Craig and some others get numbers for new designs, I agree that DPN is not working in today's environment.

Mike

After admitting defeat, I went back through the thread and the quote above summed everything up. This is the hell I am living in right now. Change is tough and the politics and implementation does not make it any easier. We need change but it is not going to be easy and there will always be pushing from all sides.

The last thing I wanted to do this month was to try to take on switching systems. Now that I have tried it, I have a better idea of what is needed from all sides. I have a lot better understanding what it will take to make it work and what it will take to do correctly. Unfortunatly to do it correctly will take money.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/09/15 01:27 PM

Mark and I had a good chat last night.

My conclusion is that we almost need a third/hybrid system. At the very least, some changes to the existing rules (with the challenge of not diminishing their integrity).

Of course, that's going to take volunteer time. If money can solve the problem, even better.

That, and I need to start spending more time on the phone with more of you.

Mike
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/10/15 02:26 AM

Originally Posted by David Ingram
Originally Posted by Jake

N20 "european" had some sail area differences, fyi...smaller spinnaker if I remember correctly.


Rumor or real Jake? If real it takes 10 minutes to measure a kite and the number can be plugged into the formula for a modified number.


Real.Mischa showed up with one at one of the tybee 500s he competed in though I don't recall if he actually used it or not. It created a rule edit for the next year specifying the NA sails only for the N20. Just need to be aware of using an existing SCHRS number that might use that smaller kite.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 12/10/15 08:23 PM

That sounds right. We had a small fleet of them in New England for a while, and I vaguely remember some discussions about sail area differences with the NA boats.

In any case, this is just one more consideration to share with OAs/RCs looking to implement the systems: be sure you are looking at the correct rating.

Mike
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 04/05/16 01:20 PM

Originally Posted by brucat
Ding, do we really need to rehash this four years later?

First post: The new committee is viewed as a success by US Sailing. See below for why the format changed (along with lots of other mismanagement of the qualifiers, etc.).

Second post: It's 100% financial. I dropped this goal when Bert reported that it would cost $20,000 to get 10 F-16s.

While I sought out and respect the opinions of the former committee volunteers, had I stuck to demanding that we continue under the old format (and in the unlikely event the US Sailing BOD went along with this), the Hoyt-Jolley fund would be depleted by now, and the event would be dead.

So yes, I'd say working with US Sailing, to keep the championship alive, while being viewed as a cooperative group, is a success. YMMV...

Mike


Found this post looking for something else.

The fact that US Sailing considers the current format a success speaks volumes about US Sailing.

What is the balance of the HJ fund?

Why does the AC have to be every year? Why can't it be held when the funds are there to support it? I know the answer but I want the MHC chair to say it out loud. You're still the chair, right?

Going along with US Sailing's wishes and diminishing the AC into a weekend regatta is just sad and you calling it a success because US Sailing is happy is a huge disappointment. I think you forget who you are supposed to be representing.

So what's the status of:

Safety at see recommendations for long distance offshore multihull races.

A handicap system that reflects the platform updates that have occurred in the last decade... the LAST DECADE!

Clearly going along with US Sailing is not moving these issues forward. Maybe playing nice isn't all it's cracked up to be?





Posted By: Bob_Curry

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 04/06/16 02:06 PM

"Maybe playing nice isn't all it's cracked up to be?"

It took awhile but you finally figured it out! D-PN is dead and the AC needs to be when funds can accommodate it.
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 04/06/16 04:19 PM

Do you have something to offer Ding, or are you just content to fire off demands from "the good old days?"

Actually, the MHRC has very little to do with running the championship. We are officially in an advisory role per the bylaws.

Having said that...

None of the championships have to be held every year. Lots of things have been evolving with other disciplines. Ours was viewed as a success, at least until this past year when attendance dropped when hosted on the F18s.

When we looked at the budget to run this as a provided-boat event on F16s (when Bert was running the AC committee), the cost was $2k per boat. To go back to the provided boat format would mean running the event once every 10 years.

Many comments, from many sailors, told us that another week-long event (on top of OD class NAs and/or Worlds) was not sustainable, as people only have so much vacation time.

These economic and time constraints really haven't changed much over the past few years, we just took action to work within them to try and benefit our sailors. It's a vast minority that feels like we need to run it the old way or not at all.

As for the safety stuff, we're working on that as well. Progress has been slow, primarily due to trying to get agreement on what "requirements" are vs "recommendations" and even getting agreement among sailors and OAs on what particular safety items are a good idea in the first place.

Mike
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 04/07/16 05:31 PM

Dave and all

I agree with Bob here
Quote


Posts: 741
"Maybe playing nice isn't all it's cracked up to be?"

It took awhile but you finally figured it out! D-PN is dead


It is UP TO EACH REGATTA CHAIR and Open Class fleet to pick something else.

A) Continue with the flawed and dated USPN portsmouth

or Change to....

B) ISAF run SCHRS measurement system.

C) Texel round the island measurment System.

D) Britsh RYA portsmouth system.

E) Australian VIC system.

IF US Sailing and the MHC were to run a handicap regatta they would have to choose a system from the ones above or make up something new. Otherwise, they have nothing to do with this choice.

Now, are you actually asking that US sailing pick one and recommend it?
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 04/07/16 08:55 PM

which one is best suited for factory boats on a windward/leeward course?

Which one is best suited for distance course which may NOT involve all points of sail equally?

Which one is best suited for "ratings beater" modifications?
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 04/08/16 02:40 AM

Hmm.... what game do you want to play....

Do you want to stand at the bar and say
"I won the race with exactly the right rating system which favors my boat?"


Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 04/08/16 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by Mark Schneider
Hmm.... what game do you want to play....

Do you want to stand at the bar and say
"I won the race with exactly the right rating system which favors my boat?"




Sadly, there are quite a few of those.
Posted By: rehmbo

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 04/08/16 04:46 PM

FWIW, CRAM will be evaluating SCHRS this summer for our Portsmouth fleet races. Official results will remain with DPN but will be scored via both methods. We'll review the impact and make a decision at the end of the season whether to adopt for 2017.

Of course our scoring officer sails an older Nacra F17 with a sweet DPN number so he might be a bit reluctant laugh
Posted By: Mark Schneider

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 04/08/16 06:26 PM

So the assumptions NECESSARY for portsmouth to work..

There is a FLEET of Nacra F17s..
So... is there a fleet... was there a fleet and how big of a fleet of F17s was there ever?


This Fleet of F17s races against a fleet of Yardstick boats... (Hobie 16s, Nacra 5.8's Prindle 19s and now F18s..) So... lets be generous and say... that a fleet is 3 to 5 boats.... Show us race results for 20 races of nacra F17s... racing a fleet of one of these yardsticks. (That is 1/5th the number used to determine a PN rating by portsmouth.... for a wind range.... eg B2 / B3.

Otherwise... you are making an educated guess. In that case, the Portsmouth/PHRF board should meet yearly and guestimate a new rating table that the board believes is "fair".

The pitfall in saying... you will evaluate the handicap system by comparing the results at the end of the year is that you wind up goring somebody's ox with the choice ...based on their season results.

It would be wiser to agree on some criteria before hand and then measure the season against your essential factors.

Another thing you might consider is take the times on your one design classes and then use Sailwave to calculate the rating each boat in the one design fleet sailed to. It will give you some valuable perspective in evaluating ratings tables.

It really sucks when you realize that you just turned in a 4 th place performance on your nacra F17 that equals what a well sailed Hobie 16 would have done. (Bottom line... its the sailor... not the rating that matters)

Perspective on the numbers matters.

Good luck
Posted By: brucat

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 04/08/16 06:29 PM

In a way, Jay hit the nail on the head. I think the most valuable thing the MHC can do is provide a list of the systems, the pros and cons of each (for OAs and competitors), some helpful tips to use them, and publish that.

We don't own, and cannot force, these systems to change. We can help our constituents navigate the existing systems, and provide feedback to the system owners for future consideration.

Mike
Posted By: rehmbo

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 04/08/16 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by Mark Schneider
It would be wiser to agree on some criteria before hand and then measure the season against your essential factors.


Good Point. As we primarily do W/L races, I wonder what those factors would be... Gonna have to think about this a bit more.

I think we have a general consensus (at least in our CRAM officers discussion) that hanging on to a system that is no longer properly maintained is a bad direction. I only see SCHRS or Texel as the legitimate options. Its a least of evils situation I suppose.

Anyway, looking forward to hearing opinions on the pluses and minuses of each.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 04/11/16 02:16 PM

Originally Posted by Mark Schneider

Do you want to stand at the bar and say
"I won the race with exactly the right rating system which favors my boat?"




Well it seems there are plenty who say the opposite:

"I LOST the race today because the rating system favors (insert name) boat"

So I wouldn't enter my 1984 Yugo beater into NASCAR event and expect them to come up with a handicap number to allow me to win.

It only makes sense to me that I figure out which rating system favors (or at least doesn't penalize) my particular boat's nuances (off-wind beast, downwind sled, pinching machine, etc) if I wish to stay near the top of the finishers, right?

Because learning to sail better, paying for coaching, and maintaining my equipment certainly won't put me up near the podium, right?

Would we see gravitation by sailors to events using this thinking if different rating systems were used by different events? So one class of boats may prefer DPN, another PHRF, a third SCHRS.. and only attend those functions?
Posted By: Will_R

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 04/13/16 04:10 PM

I was asked to be part of the SCHRS Technical Committee near the end of 2015 and agreed to help. Since I'm new to the process, I still have a lot to learn about what goes into the model and how ratings are produced and adjusted; however there were a couple of items that I think are useful in this discussion.

- SCHRS is actively managed, a lot of data is gathered, compiled and analyzed in order to validate current ratings and develop changes
- The process to update ratings is very methodical; both the reasons for, and the impact of changes are analyzed and reviewed by the committee prior to being finalized
- When changes occur, they are done via small, incremental steps so as to avoid "knee jerk" reactions and over corrections while continuing to move everyone closer to the middle

The document that I reviewed was very thorough in its analysis, explanations of changes, reasons for the proposed changes and contained plenty of supporting documentation. I would argue that they are doing a very good job of fairly rating boats in such a way as to provide the most level playing field possible. They have a model and are using statistical analysis of race data to validate the model and make minor changes as necessary... Are there outliers? Probably, but you're going to find that anywhere.

At the end of the day though, I think this is a more sound approach than the 100% statistical analysis approach of DPN. There would likely be little for the USSA to do in order to adopt SCHRS; heck, it might save some time and money to adopt this system as there would no longer be a need for the effort which is currently put into DPN. Additionally, from a statistical perspective, you now have a larger data set to work against; by increasing the width and depth of the data, the confidence goes up and the model gets better.
Posted By: Jake

Re: Portsmouth DP-N - 04/13/16 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by Will_R
I was asked to be part of the SCHRS Technical Committee near the end of 2015 and agreed to help. Since I'm new to the process, I still have a lot to learn about what goes into the model and how ratings are produced and adjusted; however there were a couple of items that I think are useful in this discussion.

- SCHRS is actively managed, a lot of data is gathered, compiled and analyzed in order to validate current ratings and develop changes
- The process to update ratings is very methodical; both the reasons for, and the impact of changes are analyzed and reviewed by the committee prior to being finalized
- When changes occur, they are done via small, incremental steps so as to avoid "knee jerk" reactions and over corrections while continuing to move everyone closer to the middle

The document that I reviewed was very thorough in its analysis, explanations of changes, reasons for the proposed changes and contained plenty of supporting documentation. I would argue that they are doing a very good job of fairly rating boats in such a way as to provide the most level playing field possible. They have a model and are using statistical analysis of race data to validate the model and make minor changes as necessary... Are there outliers? Probably, but you're going to find that anywhere.

At the end of the day though, I think this is a more sound approach than the 100% statistical analysis approach of DPN. There would likely be little for the USSA to do in order to adopt SCHRS; heck, it might save some time and money to adopt this system as there would no longer be a need for the effort which is currently put into DPN. Additionally, from a statistical perspective, you now have a larger data set to work against; by increasing the width and depth of the data, the confidence goes up and the model gets better.


Portsmouth also handles dingy racing in the US so it would be a situation where a system is put in place along side portsmouth in the US. SCHRS is strictly catamaran handicaps. There is an english portsmouth system that is maintained (RYA), I believe that also handles dingies.

This isn't necessarily a problem - just pointing that aspect of Portsmouth out.
© 2021 Catsailor.com Forums