Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Recently I spoke with several 35s5 owners who told me they had mostly
abandoned racing their boats because ratings (under 120) were unfair for the boat. They claimed that very experienced crews could sail a perfectly tuned 35s5 to 120 or better, but that most people couldn't and a rating should be based on typical performance ratios rather than a hard to achieve combo of excellent crew and rig tuning. Is this bellyaching? When do boats get an unfair rating? A boat we sailed on rated at 129 and did well in races, but perhaps the owner was fanatical about it. He claimed he was a lazy racer and still won, but this conflicts with other comments. How do some boats, such as an Elite 326 get a rating that is so easy to sail to or beat, while others have an uphill battle? A local J24 racer told me that a boat should NOT be rated to anything less than it's best possible performance. Does this make sense and how often and fairly is it applied? RB 35s5...the better boat NY |
#2
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
RB,
I have a great deal of experience with several PHRF groups. Yes, the initial PHRF rating is assigned to be a best guess based on similar boats and it expected to be performance based on a well campaigned boat that is properly setup and has a good crew. The PHRF committees I have had dealings with have always done their best to be fair. All PHRF committees have an appeal protocol. But, do not go to them just to complain. If you go there, go armed with data. (Case stories omitted for brevity.) Know before you go; does anybody any where sail this boat to the same rating you are assigned? There is no way a PHRF committee could rate boats so those that were not well tuned and sailed with a less than good crew could be accommodated. Yes, some boats ratings are unfair both ways and I could cite examples of both easily. If you want to be competitive: First - sign up a dedicated crew of at least one man per ton (minimum 3 for spinnaker classes and one less of non-spin). Second - make sure that the mast is over the boat and straight at the dock. Third - have two full crew tune up days: - one for the rig (is the mast straight on both boards and is the prebend correct. - one for the crew (does each man know his job, is your weight distribution good). Fourth - do your homework: - make sure that all the race information is in an easily handled form. - have all the race marks loaded as waypoints (it may be advantageous to route the race). Fifth - you can't be skipper and crewchief(coach) and helmsman and tactician: - the skipper calls the shots. - the crewchief organizes maneuvers and assigns the crew to tasks as required. - the helmsman has to have no other responsibilities - the tactician must understand what and where any information is and what the boat can do. Good Luck Matt Colie A.Sloop “Bonne Ide’e” S2-7.9 #1 Lifelong Waterman, Licensed Mariner and Pathological Sailor Capt. Rob wrote: Recently I spoke with several 35s5 owners who told me they had mostly abandoned racing their boats because ratings (under 120) were unfair for the boat. They claimed that very experienced crews could sail a perfectly tuned 35s5 to 120 or better, but that most people couldn't and a rating should be based on typical performance ratios rather than a hard to achieve combo of excellent crew and rig tuning. Is this bellyaching? When do boats get an unfair rating? A boat we sailed on rated at 129 and did well in races, but perhaps the owner was fanatical about it. He claimed he was a lazy racer and still won, but this conflicts with other comments. How do some boats, such as an Elite 326 get a rating that is so easy to sail to or beat, while others have an uphill battle? A local J24 racer told me that a boat should NOT be rated to anything less than it's best possible performance. Does this make sense and how often and fairly is it applied? RB 35s5...the better boat NY |
#3
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Matt Colie wrote:
I have a great deal of experience with several PHRF groups. Yes, the initial PHRF rating is assigned to be a best guess based on similar boats and it expected to be performance based on a well campaigned boat that is properly setup and has a good crew. Right, the PHRF rating is supposed to be based on a well-tuned boat, with a crew good enough to win at least local one-design champs. The PHRF committees I have had dealings with have always done their best to be fair. Somewhat agreed, the PHRF rating sturcture is a good-ol'-boy network. For the most part, they don't set out to deliberately screw over some competitors. OTOH most of them also approach their job with an idea of who the winners "ought" to be. .... All PHRF committees have an appeal protocol. But, do not go to them just to complain. If you go there, go armed with data. (Case stories omitted for brevity.) Know before you go; does anybody any where sail this boat to the same rating you are assigned? A rating appeal is like any other protest- you should appproach it seriously and with all homework done. There is no way a PHRF committee could rate boats so those that were not well tuned and sailed with a less than good crew could be accommodated. Yes, some boats ratings are unfair both ways and I could cite examples of both easily. Most sportsboats have an unfair rating in most conditions. However, this is the nature of the beast, when the boat is blazing fast under some conditions, that must be averaged in with it's performance the rest of the time. If you want to be competitive: First - sign up a dedicated crew of at least one man per ton (minimum 3 for spinnaker classes and one less of non-spin). Second - make sure that the mast is over the boat and straight at the dock. Third - have two full crew tune up days: - one for the rig (is the mast straight on both boards and is the prebend correct. - one for the crew (does each man know his job, is your weight distribution good). Fourth - do your homework: - make sure that all the race information is in an easily handled form. - have all the race marks loaded as waypoints (it may be advantageous to route the race). Fifth - you can't be skipper and crewchief(coach) and helmsman and tactician: - the skipper calls the shots. - the crewchief organizes maneuvers and assigns the crew to tasks as required. - the helmsman has to have no other responsibilities - the tactician must understand what and where any information is and what the boat can do. Good Luck I would also say -get excess dead weight off the boat -scrupulously clean the bottom -practice basic maneuvers so that you don't lose boatlengths on every tack, set, gybe, & douse. Most PHRF boats are laughably poorly sailed... bad starts, slow & low upwind, missing shifts, making abysmal tacks, taking forever to get the spinnaker set, etc etc. Often the guys whining about their rating are the ones carrying a lawnmower in their lazarette, and letting the genoa flap for ten minutes after every tack. OTOH it is a fun social event and a lot more people can play. Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
#4
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Capt. Rob wrote:
Recently I spoke with several 35s5 owners who told me they had mostly abandoned racing their boats because ratings (under 120) were unfair for the boat. They claimed that very experienced crews could sail a perfectly tuned 35s5 to 120 or better, but that most people couldn't and a rating should be based on typical performance ratios rather than a hard to achieve combo of excellent crew and rig tuning. Is this bellyaching? When do boats get an unfair rating? A boat we sailed on rated at 129 and did well in races, but perhaps the owner was fanatical about it. He claimed he was a lazy racer and still won, but this conflicts with other comments. How do some boats, such as an Elite 326 get a rating that is so easy to sail to or beat, while others have an uphill battle? A local J24 racer told me that a boat should NOT be rated to anything less than it's best possible performance. Does this make sense and how often and fairly is it applied? RB 35s5...the better boat NY So what you are saying is "I can't sail or rig a yacht properly so it isn't fair. Everything should be based around me and my ineptitude." You want the boat to be handicapped by the standard of the crew, not rated at its potential. Why don't you just learn to sail? Janet |
#5
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Janet wrote:
Capt. Rob wrote: Recently I spoke with several 35s5 owners who told me they had mostly abandoned racing their boats because ratings (under 120) were unfair for the boat. They claimed that very experienced crews could sail a perfectly tuned 35s5 to 120 or better, but that most people couldn't and a rating should be based on typical performance ratios rather than a hard to achieve combo of excellent crew and rig tuning. Is this bellyaching? When do boats get an unfair rating? A boat we sailed on rated at 129 and did well in races, but perhaps the owner was fanatical about it. He claimed he was a lazy racer and still won, but this conflicts with other comments. How do some boats, such as an Elite 326 get a rating that is so easy to sail to or beat, while others have an uphill battle? A local J24 racer told me that a boat should NOT be rated to anything less than it's best possible performance. Does this make sense and how often and fairly is it applied? RB 35s5...the better boat NY So what you are saying is "I can't sail or rig a yacht properly so it isn't fair. Everything should be based around me and my ineptitude." You want the boat to be handicapped by the standard of the crew, not rated at its potential. Why don't you just learn to sail? Janet We've all been asking that question for years.... |
#6
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
We've all been asking that question for years....
Hey, look! An actual sailing thread and it's trolled by two "women." RB 35s5 NY |
#7
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Capt. Rob wrote:
We've all been asking that question for years.... Hey, look! An actual sailing thread and it's trolled by two "women." RB 35s5 NY Truth hurts, huh, crybabu? You sxpect the whole world to revolve around you. Grow up. |
#8
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You sxpect the whole world to revolve
around you. Nope...just this group. Grow up. Why? So I can end up like you with some crappy boat and a life philosphy of "more of the same." No thanks, I'll pass on growing up! RB 35s5 NY |
#9
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I could comment, but I comparing you to women would
be an insult to women. "Swabbie Robbie" wrote Hey, look! An actual sailing thread and it's trolled by two "women." |
#10
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
SLAM! One point to to the astute Janet.
"Janet" wrote Capt. Rob wrote: Recently I spoke with several 35s5 owners who told me they had mostly abandoned racing their boats because ratings (under 120) were unfair for the boat. They claimed that very experienced crews could sail a perfectly tuned 35s5 to 120 or better, but that most people couldn't and a rating should be based on typical performance ratios rather than a hard to achieve combo of excellent crew and rig tuning. Is this bellyaching? == HAVE SOME CHEESE WITH YOUR WHINE! So what you are saying is "I can't sail or rig a yacht properly so it isn't fair. Everything should be based around me and my ineptitude." You want the boat to be handicapped by the standard of the crew, not rated at its potential. Why don't you just learn to sail? Janet |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Lookin over phrf | ASA | |||
OT A serious question to all | General | |||
What is phrf? | ASA | |||
Mercruiser outdrive question | General | |||
Newbie Question: 40' Performance Cruiser question (including powerplant) | Cruising |