Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

Gilligan wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...
Gilligan wrote:
RB......the greatest troll who ever lived!

Trollus magnus!
Is he the same one that was in "Billy Goats Gruff"?

What is your favorite color?

Green, no wait - blue!

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh!


both....

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

However, the highest VMG is always beating to
windward. And the highest that your boat has is well under 6 knots.
Thus, your claim of 6 knots is bogus.


So...you NOW admit that sailing upwind or to windward is not
necessarily beating.
We were not beating as I CLEARLY stated, therefore the VMG of 6 knots
to windward was 100% accurate and certainly possible and you just shot
your own argument in the head and backed over it with your car.
Someone call 911!!! I saw Jeff do it!

BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!!!

Now I'm going to sleep. I'll check in the morning for Jeff's feeble
mule kick.

G'night to ASA.



RB
35s5
NY

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

Capt. Rob wrote:
Sorry, Bob, you may think the racers and designers


So let's get this straight, Jeff. We're sailing upwind, but certainly
not beating. Our knotmeter is showing over seven knots nudging near 8
at times. We have a mark set on the GPS about a mile off and we're on a
starboard tack (again, for example). Now, the mark is about 10 degrees
off our starboard bow.

In other words, its not to windward.

GPS is reporting our VMG fluctuating between 5.6
and 6.1 knots as we close on the mark.

Since the mark is not to windward, this is not your "VMG to Windward,"
or as you said in the OP "to windward at just over 6 knots VMG." You
claimed it was VMG to Windward, and now you're claiming its the VMG to
a mark 10 degrees off the bow. You really don't know the difference,
do you?

Water is quite flat and the boat
is nicely in the groove, giving up very little. The fellow at the helm
has about 8 times more sailing experience than you.

You mean he has 400 years of sailing experience??? I'm impressed! But
what does this have to do with your obvious ignorance? Don't blame
him because you didn't understand what was happening.

I asked what our
VMG was and he said about 6 knots.

That may have been the VMG to that mark, but you can't pick an
arbitrary point and then use that for you VMG to Windward. You could
have just as easily picked a point dead ahead and claimed a VMG of 7
to 8 knots, but that isn't the VMG to Windward, now would it?
Remember, your GPS doesn't know where the wind is, so it can't tell
you the VMG to Windward unless you give a mark directly upwind.

He was VERY impressed with the
35s5's windward performance. But he's not the only one. So is about
every review on the boat.

yada yada yada. You're still an idiot. Whenever you've lost an
argument you try to claim you won because someone else is impressed
with your boat. What a jackass!

She easily beats her polars.

Right. Just like she easily beats her PHRF. Unless of course, you're
explaining that the reason she's beat by other boats is the tough PHRF
rating she got.

Yes, sometimes boats beat their polars by a tad. Usually its because
of new hi-tech sails, a smooth bottom, a quality crew, and some luck.
But you're claiming you beat the polars by a huge margin, with old
sails, and you weren't even trying to go upwind.

A French review
called her "the triumphant 35s5" and noted that they were also climbing
upwind with a VMG of over 5 and 1/2 knots.

And this is why you think you can easily to 6 knots with old sails?
Maybe you should be giving lessons to the French.


Heart of Gold's original
name was "Windward First" as her abilities to weather are well
established. Read the owner reviews if you like.
I don't know what to tell you, dude. You're obviously upset.

I'm not upset. You're just stupid.

I said we
made 6 knots and 8....hardly crazy numbers.

But here you just admitted it wasn't upwind, its was just the VMG to a
mark up ahead. You just don't seem to get what "to Windward" really
means.

I've seen monohuls do it
before and will again.

sure, but not yours.

Making 8 knots at 45 is hardly impossible, so 6
of VMG is also there.

Holy Bat****! You mean those French reviewers don't know how to sail
the boat??? You just said they were impressed that they got 5.5! But
you seem to have no problem doing better than that. You weren't even
trying to go upwind. At yet, magically, you outperformed your polars
and the reviewers. With old sails, not less.

And BTW, 8 knots at 45 is only a VMG of 5.6 knots. And that's not
including leeway, which drops it to 5.3.

The problem is that you simply don't know what
upwind means. You "think" it means only beating and that's just not the
case.

Bob, you've just admitted over and over that you don't know what
you're talking about. Why don't you have your friend, if he really
exists, explain it to you? He can go real slow, and include pictures.

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

So now you're claiming that you had a VMG to Windward of 6 knots while
you were on a close reach and spilling wind? And you don't realize
how stupid that sounds? What a Putz!


Nope. You're soooo old and comfused! They are two different clips. In
this clip we're making 7.4 knots on a reach...sort of a close reach if
you like...hit 8 knots a few times. I have no idea what the VMG was at
that time. The clip in question is sailing closer to the wind and
that's the one that has you wringing out your Depends.
Jeepers...you are one TRULY confused guy! Are you on meds?



RB
35s5
NY

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

Capt. Rob wrote:
So now you're claiming that you had a VMG to Windward of 6 knots while
you were on a close reach and spilling wind? And you don't realize
how stupid that sounds? What a Putz!


Nope. You're soooo old and comfused! They are two different clips. In
this clip we're making 7.4 knots on a reach...sort of a close reach if
you like...hit 8 knots a few times. I have no idea what the VMG was at
that time. The clip in question is sailing closer to the wind and
that's the one that has you wringing out your Depends.
Jeepers...you are one TRULY confused guy! Are you on meds?


So are you still claiming that on any of your clips the "VMG to
Windward" was 6 knots? Remember, your polar says you can't do it.
The French review that you quote says you can't do it. You admitted
that when your friend told you the VMG he was referring not "to
windward" but to a mark 10 degrees off your bow.

All you're left with is the realization that in fact you didn't
understand the meaning of the term "VMG to Windward" when you used it.
In other words, any claim you have to understanding sailboat
performance is bogus. Be we all knew that already.

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

So are you still claiming that on any of your clips the "VMG to
Windward" was 6 knots? Remember, your polar says you can't do it.
The French review that you quote says you can't do it. You admitted
that when your friend told you the VMG he was referring not "to
windward" but to a mark 10 degrees off your bow.



1st of all, GOOD MORNING, Jeff. I hope you slept well.
True, the polars (at our point of sail showing closer to 5.2 knots. The
Frenchy sail rag reported 5.5. And I'm reporting .7 and .5 knots
faster.
Keep this in mind: The fellow at the helm is a full time sailor. He
retired at 40 and has been sailing full time aboard some of the fastest
sailboats in production. Is it so impossible that he could have found
that extra half knot or better? He can certainly sail his J24 and J30
better than anyone I've ever seen and does Atlantic crossings almost
every year on performance yachts. He was pushing my boat to see what
she could do and was impressed (not so dead downwind).
If you choose to believe that he, his GPS and I are lying so be it. I
gave my report, included pics and video. Maybe next time I'll shoot
video of the GPS, compass and wind instruments.

RB
35s5
NY

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

"Capt. Rob" wrote:

Sorry, Bob, you may think the racers and designers ???

So let's get this straight, Jeff. We're sailing upwind, but certainly
not beating. Our knotmeter is showing over seven knots nudging near 8
at times. We have a mark set on the GPS about a mile off and we're on a
starboard tack (again, for example). Now, the mark is about 10 degrees
off our starboard bow. GPS is reporting our VMG fluctuating between 5.6
and 6.1 knots as we close on the mark.

Finally you admit that you used the term "VMG to windward" incorrectly,
thank you.


Cheers
Marty

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

"Capt" Rob wrote:
... we're making 7.4 knots on a reach...sort of a close reach if
you like...hit 8 knots a few times.

Yawn.

Get back to us when you do spinnaker reaches over 20.


... I have no idea what the VMG was...

Of course not.

DSK

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

DSK wrote:

Jeff wrote:
? How about this: anytime you have a customer ask you about sailing, you
? show them this exchange as a way of proving your credibility? See how
? many buyers you have after that.
?

Then, ask them if they need a surveyor!
nyuk nyuk nyuk!

DSK

Yup, a surveyor who is not a member of The Society of Accredited Marine
Surveyors, or The Association of Certified Marine Surveyors, or any
other accrediting body. Shall we talk about Marine Brokers next? How
about what the New York Harbor Master feels about non licensed persons
undertaking to tow vessels in his jurisdiction for remuneration?

Cheers
Marty

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

Hey, the King of Keels is here!!! Maybe his wife too??? Whore-ray!!!


Get back to us when you do spinnaker reaches over 20.


Bwahahahha! Get back to us when you have a SAILboat!!!
Dumb powerboater comments on a thread without even looking at the
sailing clip!!!! BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!
(Of course we know he did and it's killing him!)



RB
35s5
NY

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

Capt. Rob wrote:
So are you still claiming that on any of your clips the "VMG to
Windward" was 6 knots? Remember, your polar says you can't do it.
The French review that you quote says you can't do it. You admitted
that when your friend told you the VMG he was referring not "to
windward" but to a mark 10 degrees off your bow.



1st of all, GOOD MORNING, Jeff. I hope you slept well.
True, the polars (at our point of sail showing closer to 5.2 knots. The
Frenchy sail rag reported 5.5. And I'm reporting .7 and .5 knots
faster.

Actually, I have some doubt about your reading of the polar, since the
faster 36.5 doesn't do that well, and the wing keel should cost you a
few tenths. In fact, even the 407 is only slightly better. But I'll
accept the 5.2 for the moment.

Keep this in mind: The fellow at the helm is a full time sailor. He
retired at 40 and has been sailing full time aboard some of the fastest
sailboats in production.

Totally irrelevant. You might have something if he had a hand picked
crew, new hi-tech sails, a fresh bottom job, and you lost the A/C.
But boats don't suddenly gain 15% over their optimal VMG to windward
just because a competent hand is on the wheel.

Is it so impossible that he could have found
that extra half knot or better?

Yes, it is. You just don't get it. Its like Road & Track said a
certain car did the quarter in 5 seconds, and you claimed you did it
in 4 seconds. In the snow.

This is another point you fail to grasp. While some boats can
frequently exceed their "theoretical limit" off the wind, upwind it is
much more difficult to beat. The VPP programs are pretty
sophisticated, and tend not to be off by more than a tenth. If you're
reading one from Beneteau, you can be pretty sure its accurate. The
one I quote for the 407 is actually posted at the helm of each boat.
And its optimum VMG in any condition is about 5.4, less if you factor
in leeway.

Further, upwind performance to not vary very much between boats of the
same style. Boats simply don't suddenly go 15% faster than predicted.
In PHRF terms, this is like suddenly going 100 points faster than
then rating. It just doesn't happen. The other day you said any
Benny First would "smoke" an Ericson 35-3, when in fact your boat only
has a couple of points on the Erikson. So when it suits you, 2 points
is huge advantage, but now you're claiming that a proper rating for
your boat should be around 30.

He can certainly sail his J24 and J30
better than anyone I've ever seen and does Atlantic crossings almost
every year on performance yachts. He was pushing my boat to see what
she could do and was impressed (not so dead downwind).

Yes, I remember when a friend who was the local Star champion came on
my Nonsuch and started playing with the sail twist. He made the boat
perform close to the polars, not exceed them by 15%.

If you choose to believe that he,

He probably told the truth. You, being a simpleton, misunderstood.
He told you the VMG to a mark 10 degrees off the bow, that is not the
VMG to Windward.

his GPS

His GPS does NOT report the VMG to Windward. This is the issue here.
In order for the GPS to do that, the mark has to be directly to
windward, preferably far away. You told us it was nearby, off the bow.

and I are lying so be it.

Everyone always assumes that everything you say is a lie.

I
gave my report, included pics and video. Maybe next time I'll shoot
video of the GPS, compass and wind instruments.

I'd rather you took a course on basic sailing so we wouldn't have to
explain the simple concepts to you over and over again,

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

Gilligan wrote:
"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
oups.com...


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Clonk! Where's Gilligan?!



I'm right here RB. I'm a new man - drunk on the euphoria of factual, well
reasoned trolls. I can finally say that I truly understand and appreciate
your steamrolling trolls. You are truly the Juggernaut of Trolls. The global
warming trolls have them in a tizzy, turning themselves inside out over
nothing but hot air! There's a consensus they shout! Show them publications
from respected institutions saying there are still issues to be resolved and
they claim those that do not agree with the "consensus" are sham scientists
or less! We're talking NASA, NOAA, Max Planck Institute, Duke University,
etc. The poor sods with the little minds cannot handle unresolved problems.
They must cling to "consensus" even where one does not exist! If they do not
"have control" they must invent their own reality!

I now understand yet another dimension to your legendary trolling abilities.
Never again will I come at you with swinging mackerals. At worst, I will
stand aside and appreciate your fine trolls from a distance, at best I'll
stand alongside - flinging buckets of chum into the watery frenzy! Because I
have seen the light of the dark side, from this day on, I will never troll
RB. Ever!

Gilligan

Amazing troll Gilligan,

A display of a true artist who hides his bait, by stating it's not
bait, and telling the fish he can not have such tasty non-bait. Making
your bait look non baitish is a master fishermans skill seldom seen. I
bet you use barbless hooks as well...a true sportsman.

How can a man fish so well that lives in Colorado?

Joe

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

"Joe" wrote in message
oups.com...

How can a man fish so well that lives in Colorado?


The fish here are in small rivers. Simply stick a shotgun barrel into the
water, pull trigger.

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

Actually, I have some doubt about your reading of the polar, since the
faster 36.5 doesn't do that well, and the wing keel should cost you a
few tenths. In fact, even the 407 is only slightly better. But I'll
accept the 5.2 for the moment.


Okay.


Totally irrelevant. You might have something if he had a hand picked
crew, new hi-tech sails, a fresh bottom job, and you lost the A/C.

Well, now we're getting somewhere. My boat has the AC, but she's
currently stripped out for the end of season cleaning. No water in the
tanks, gear and even the anchor removed. My bottom is clean and my
tired sails are less of a factor when I'm not hard on the wind.


But boats don't suddenly gain 15% over their optimal VMG to windward

just because a competent hand is on the wheel.


Calling this fellow competent is like saying O.J. Simpson needed a
little therapy. He's a fairly top notch sailor and very respected in
this area.


Yes, it is. You just don't get it. Its like Road & Track said a
certain car did the quarter in 5 seconds, and you claimed you did it
in 4 seconds. In the snow.

Not at all. And Road and Track has gotten a second more/less on cars
compared to other rags. Such tests, along with Polars are rough
estimates at best. For example, my friend "claims" that he clobbers the
published polars of the J30.

This is another point you fail to grasp. While some boats can
frequently exceed their "theoretical limit" off the wind, upwind it is
much more difficult to beat.

I grasp that, but your whole argument still hinges on polars made up
when the boat was first designed and tested...more than 18 years ago.
Optimal trim and sails were yet to be found. In fact, previous owner of
2 35s5's and Heart of Gold, Arthur Rodriguez said that Beneteau had the
35s5 main all wrong and recut it for better upwind performance. Mark P,
at Doyle is looking at the cut of my main next week on this very issue.



Further, upwind performance to not vary very much between boats of the
same style. Boats simply don't suddenly go 15% faster than predicted.
In PHRF terms, this is like suddenly going 100 points faster than
then rating.

That's an exageration. The 35s5 will stay with newer 1st boats upwind
as reported by owners. Her weakness is in the downward leg. Even the
deep keel does poorly dead downwind.

The other day you said any
Benny First would "smoke" an Ericson 35-3, when in fact your boat only
has a couple of points on the Erikson. So when it suits you, 2 points
is huge advantage, but now you're claiming that a proper rating for
your boat should be around 30.


It's funny how you lie again and again and nobody calls you on it. But
I will. I NEVER said my boat would "smoke" a E35 Mk3. I said 1st series
Beneteau's are faster boats and that the E35 would have a hard time
sailing around even a slow cruising Beneteau. You'd need a Mumm 30 for
that! But Bart's silly post went unchallenged until I pointed out how
dumb it was.


Yes, I remember when a friend who was the local Star champion came
on
my Nonsuch and started playing with the sail twist. He made the boat
perform close to the polars, not exceed them by 15%.

Do you REALLY think this is a valid comparison? Your comparing a
Nonsuch with a 1st 35s5 with a far more tunable and variable rig. If he
only came close to the polars, then he must know have known how to sail
your boat.


He probably told the truth. You, being a simpleton, misunderstood.
He told you the VMG to a mark 10 degrees off the bow, that is not the
VMG to Windward.

Actually, when I asked him our speed, he clearly said 6 knots. I then
asked what the VMG was and he repeated six knots and that our speed was
showing over seven. He was impressed and so was I. The mark WAS to
windward at this time. But again, and I'll state it again because you
can't seem to accept it...we were NOT beating. The video clearly shows
this as we are not sheeted for close hauled sailing.


His GPS does NOT report the VMG to Windward. This is the issue
here.
In order for the GPS to do that, the mark has to be directly to
windward, preferably far away.

Sigh.


You told us it was nearby, off the bow.

I gave that as an example for the 3rd clip, not the second. Can't you
keep track of 3 short videos? The mark to windward was a bouy on the
second clip/


Everyone always assumes that everything you say is a lie.


Yup...I lied about buying a 35s5, about sailing it 3-4 times a week,
about pretty girls aboard, about shackles on the dock, even about
selling boats and doing sea trials. And yet each was backed with pics
and even video which drove people like you out of your skull. Even when
I said Bob L. trimmed the main a few minutes later...BAM, you get a
pic. You all tell stories. Big fish tales. I have documentation of my
modest sails. I fish for you all here, but you should see the e-mails I
get. Most people who come in here think the rest of you don't even have
boats!


I'd rather you took a course on basic sailing so we wouldn't have to

explain the simple concepts to you over and over again,


You think they'd teach me that a close reach isn't to windward? That
WAS your claim before you backpedalled like Lance Armstrong from a
testicle biopsy.
Jeff, you really need Gilligan's help on this.


RB
35s5
NY

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

How about what the USCG feels about it....

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Martin Baxter" wrote in message
...
DSK wrote:

Jeff wrote:
? How about this: anytime you have a customer ask you about sailing, you
? show them this exchange as a way of proving your credibility? See how
? many buyers you have after that.
?

Then, ask them if they need a surveyor!
nyuk nyuk nyuk!

DSK

Yup, a surveyor who is not a member of The Society of Accredited Marine
Surveyors, or The Association of Certified Marine Surveyors, or any
other accrediting body. Shall we talk about Marine Brokers next? How
about what the New York Harbor Master feels about non licensed persons
undertaking to tow vessels in his jurisdiction for remuneration?

Cheers
Marty

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

Capt. Rob wrote:
....

Totally irrelevant. You might have something if he had a hand picked
crew, new hi-tech sails, a fresh bottom job, and you lost the A/C.

Well, now we're getting somewhere. My boat has the AC, but she's
currently stripped out for the end of season cleaning. No water in the
tanks, gear and even the anchor removed. My bottom is clean and my
tired sails are less of a factor when I'm not hard on the wind.

So you're saying you were not "hard on the wind"? And yet you
exceeded the optimal VMG to Windward by 15%??? You still don't
understand.




But boats don't suddenly gain 15% over their optimal VMG to windward

just because a competent hand is on the wheel.


Calling this fellow competent is like saying O.J. Simpson needed a
little therapy. He's a fairly top notch sailor and very respected in
this area.

Good for him. Doesn't change anything. You're simply mis-using the
terms.




Yes, it is. You just don't get it. Its like Road & Track said a
certain car did the quarter in 5 seconds, and you claimed you did it
in 4 seconds. In the snow.

Not at all. And Road and Track has gotten a second more/less on cars
compared to other rags. Such tests, along with Polars are rough
estimates at best.

By "rough" you mean off by a few percent. Not 15%. The biggest
variance comes from sails, because the new technology can go beyond
the assumptions of the VPP. However, if your sails are old, you loose
any advantage there. And you've already admitted you weren't pointing
at close to the optimal angle, so you lost any extra pointing ability.


For example, my friend "claims" that he clobbers the
published polars of the J30.

"Clobber" going upwind means beating by 2 or 3 percent, not 15%. And
he probably meant off the wind.


This is another point you fail to grasp. While some boats can
frequently exceed their "theoretical limit" off the wind, upwind it is
much more difficult to beat.

I grasp that, but your whole argument still hinges on polars made up
when the boat was first designed and tested...more than 18 years ago.
Optimal trim and sails were yet to be found. In fact, previous owner of
2 35s5's and Heart of Gold, Arthur Rodriguez said that Beneteau had the
35s5 main all wrong and recut it for better upwind performance. Mark P,
at Doyle is looking at the cut of my main next week on this very issue.


Actually, my argument hinges on the fact that the polars of almost
every boat your size has an optimal VMG to Windward of well under 6
knots. Further, you claimed that you weren't even going upward, that
you weren't hard on the wind. Further, you even claimed that the mark
used for the VMG measurement was off the bow. And finally, you're
claiming that the VMG was measured with GPS, and a handheld unit at
that. All of these thing contradict your claim.




Further, upwind performance to not vary very much between boats of the
same style. Boats simply don't suddenly go 15% faster than predicted.
In PHRF terms, this is like suddenly going 100 points faster than
then rating.

That's an exageration.

No. Its not an exaggeration, its called basic math. At 5 knots
you're doing 12 minutes per mile, or 720 seconds. At 6 knots, that's
600 seconds per mile. That's a difference of 120 second per mile,
which translates directly into 120 points on the PHRF rating. Maybe
its a bit less if you really get 5.2 knots, but its still up near 100
points.

So what you're saying is that a quality skipper can make a Westsail 32
go upwind faster, that is, get better boat speed, than an average
skipper on a 35s5.

The 35s5 will stay with newer 1st boats upwind
as reported by owners. Her weakness is in the downward leg. Even the
deep keel does poorly dead downwind.

It can stay close because in fact the differences are pretty small,
only a few tenths. So when you sail nearby you can deceive yourself
into thinking you're going almost as fast.



The other day you said any
Benny First would "smoke" an Ericson 35-3, when in fact your boat only
has a couple of points on the Erikson. So when it suits you, 2 points
is huge advantage, but now you're claiming that a proper rating for
your boat should be around 30.


It's funny how you lie again and again and nobody calls you on it. But
I will. I NEVER said my boat would "smoke" a E35 Mk3.

Sorry, you didn't say "smoke," you said "toast":

"As you might know, 1st series Beneteau's will toast any Ericson 35.
The III from Bruce King was a fast boat, but 1 & 2 were pretty slow.
The Mark III version is still outrun by the older Beneteau 1st 345 for
example"

So who's the liar? In fact the rating for the Ericson Mk III is 123,
SD is 132, the Benny 345 TM is 120, and the 35s5 TM WK is 123. These
are all pretty close, only a few seconds a mile for the comparison you
said would "outrun."

I said 1st series
Beneteau's are faster boats and that the E35 would have a hard time
sailing around even a slow cruising Beneteau. You'd need a Mumm 30 for
that! But Bart's silly post went unchallenged until I pointed out how
dumb it was.

Actually, we all assumed he was talking about the sailing ability of
Benny owners, but you seemed to have missed that.



Yes, I remember when a friend who was the local Star champion came
on
my Nonsuch and started playing with the sail twist. He made the boat
perform close to the polars, not exceed them by 15%.

Do you REALLY think this is a valid comparison? Your comparing a
Nonsuch with a 1st 35s5 with a far more tunable and variable rig. If he
only came close to the polars, then he must know have known how to sail
your boat.

Actually, if you knew anything, you'd understand that the Nonsuch rig
is quite adjustable. Why don't you explain to us how often you adjust
your outhaul or topping lift while underway? I tweaked mine at every
point of sail.



He probably told the truth. You, being a simpleton, misunderstood.
He told you the VMG to a mark 10 degrees off the bow, that is not the
VMG to Windward.

Actually, when I asked him our speed, he clearly said 6 knots. I then
asked what the VMG was and he repeated six knots and that our speed was
showing over seven. He was impressed and so was I. The mark WAS to
windward at this time. But again, and I'll state it again because you
can't seem to accept it...we were NOT beating. The video clearly shows
this as we are not sheeted for close hauled sailing.

Perhaps I should be more explicit: The mark has to be directly to
windward. Not slightly to windward of your centerline. There is a
huge difference.

And one more time you're claiming that you weren't even close to the
wind, you weren't sheeted in, and yet you were going upwind faster
than the polars predict! You really don't understand the meaning of
these words, do you?




His GPS does NOT report the VMG to Windward. This is the issue
here.
In order for the GPS to do that, the mark has to be directly to
windward, preferably far away.

Sigh.

indeed.



You told us it was nearby, off the bow.

I gave that as an example for the 3rd clip, not the second. Can't you
keep track of 3 short videos? The mark to windward was a bouy on the
second clip/

So what was it, directly upwind or 10 degrees off the bow? You said:

"We have a mark set on the GPS about a mile off and we're on a
starboard tack (again, for example). Now, the mark is about 10 degrees
off our starboard bow. GPS is reporting our VMG fluctuating between
5.6 and 6.1 knots as we close on the mark. "

This sure sounds like it was not directly upwind. Nor was it far away.




Everyone always assumes that everything you say is a lie.


Yup...I lied about buying a 35s5, about sailing it 3-4 times a week,
about pretty girls aboard, about shackles on the dock, even about
selling boats and doing sea trials. And yet each was backed with pics
and even video which drove people like you out of your skull. Even when
I said Bob L. trimmed the main a few minutes later...BAM, you get a
pic. You all tell stories. Big fish tales. I have documentation of my
modest sails. I fish for you all here, but you should see the e-mails I
get. Most people who come in here think the rest of you don't even have
boats!

yada yada yada.




I'd rather you took a course on basic sailing so we wouldn't have to

explain the simple concepts to you over and over again,


You think they'd teach me that a close reach isn't to windward? That
WAS your claim before you backpedalled like Lance Armstrong from a
testicle biopsy.

So once again you're claiming that even while on a close reach you had
a faster VMG to Windward than the polar predicts or the touted review.
You simply don't understand the meaning of the terms.

Jeff, you really need Gilligan's help on this.

Gilly has gone over to the dark side!

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

So you're saying you were not "hard on the wind"? And yet you
exceeded the optimal VMG to Windward by 15%??? You still don't
understand.


Never did I say I was hard on the wind or beating, which is why it's
totally believable that I topped the polars for VMG on that POS.




Yes, it is. You just don't get it. Its like Road & Track said a
certain car did the quarter in 5 seconds, and you claimed you did it
in 4 seconds. In the snow.


Not at all. And Road and Track has gotten a second more/less on cars
compared to other rags. Such tests, along with Polars are rough
estimates at best.


By "rough" you mean off by a few percent. Not 15%. The biggest
variance comes from sails, because the new technology can go beyond
the assumptions of the VPP.

You're still going under the assumption that the polars remain current.
Most people would agree that polars are a starting point.

However, if your sails are old, you loose
any advantage there. And you've already admitted you weren't pointing
at close to the optimal angle, so you lost any extra pointing ability.


Once again "windward" does not suggest that I was clawing my way
upwind. As I said we were NOT beating.


"Clobber" going upwind means beating by 2 or 3 percent, not 15%.
And
he probably meant off the wind.

Actually he's claimed he beats his polars upwind with his recut main by
about 10%. But he also thinks the original polars were far to
conservative. Who's to say the same isn't true for the 35s5?


This is another point you fail to grasp. While some boats can
frequently exceed their "theoretical limit" off the wind, upwind it is
much more difficult to beat.


Actually, my argument hinges on the fact that the polars of almost
every boat your size has an optimal VMG to Windward of well under 6
knots. Further, you claimed that you weren't even going upward, that
you weren't hard on the wind.

Nope, as I already established windward does not always mean hard on
the wind. It's ANY POS above a beam reach.

Further, you even claimed that the mark
used for the VMG measurement was off the bow.


Again this was for clip #3.

And finally, you're
claiming that the VMG was measured with GPS, and a handheld unit at
that.


Is a Garmin handheld inferior to my charting GPS??? Who knew?


No. Its not an exaggeration, its called basic math. At 5 knots
you're doing 12 minutes per mile, or 720 seconds. At 6 knots, that's
600 seconds per mile. That's a difference of 120 second per mile,
which translates directly into 120 points on the PHRF rating. Maybe
its a bit less if you really get 5.2 knots, but its still up near 100
points.

All based on your still solid assumption that we were at 35 degress or
something like that...which we were not. You've failed to make any
argument at all because I'm not claiming 6 knots at 35 degrees. I said
we were making 6 knots VMG to windward and you wrongly assumed that
this meant we were beating. Can the 35s5 make 6 knots of VMG to
windward, which is ANY POS above a beam reach. How about 45%? Hmmmmjm?
Better have another look at the video and try to look at the trim of
the sails.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=RivCUMzy4xc

FYI, when beating, the genny is sheeted in well inside the lifelines.


So what you're saying is that a quality skipper can make a Westsail
32
go upwind faster, that is, get better boat speed, than an average
skipper on a 35s5.


Nope....the Westsail is far more locked into it's performance limits
than a performance boat.


It can stay close because in fact the differences are pretty small,
only a few tenths. So when you sail nearby you can deceive yourself
into thinking you're going almost as fast.

I've sailed side by side with a 36.7, Jeff. It's faster upwind, but not
in the way that my 35s5 is faster than a Catalina 36 upwind. Small
differences that matter more for racers.


So who's the liar?


You are. I never mentioned my boat in the comparison with the 35s5. You
said that I did, The E35 is rated at 135 here. Do you think Bart's
freind is literally sailing circles around Beneteau's, Jeff?


Actually, we all assumed he was talking about the sailing ability of

Benny owners, but you seemed to have missed that.

Oh, so you believe THAT as well? I see. Sailors around here don't
usually worry about such things.


Actually, if you knew anything, you'd understand that the Nonsuch
rig
is quite adjustable. Why don't you explain to us how often you adjust
your outhaul or topping lift while underway?

Is that how Nonsuch promoted it's boats? Do you know who Anthony
Serling is and how is Nonsuch sank in the early 90's crossing the
Atlantic? He's a good friend of mine.


Perhaps I should be more explicit: The mark has to be directly to
windward. Not slightly to windward of your centerline. There is a
huge difference.


Agreed. I'm giving you the bouy location to best of my ability. I was
not standing behind the pedestal to line up the mark.

And one more time you're claiming that you weren't even close to the

wind, you weren't sheeted in, and yet you were going upwind faster
than the polars predict!


About .5 knot faster than what's shown on the polars.


So what was it, directly upwind or 10 degrees off the bow?

In clip #2 it's directly to windward. Do you know what that means?


Nor was it far away.


It was NOT far away and THERE you have a bone to seriously pick, but
nowhere else since I never said we were beating.


So once again you're claiming that even while on a close reach you
had
a faster VMG to Windward than the polar predicts or the touted review.


We're probably just below what most folks would call a close reach in
clip #2. VMG was .5 faster than reported by the French magazine and
that was in the early 90's with stock sails.


You simply don't understand the meaning of the terms.


Well then...if that's true, why bang your head against the wall, sir?
It seems I have just enough grasp to keep you on your toes. You're
welcome.


Gilly has gone over to the dark side!

Yeah. I think I prefer he slips back. I'm perfectly fine without him.



RB
35s5
NY

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

How can a man fish so well that lives in Colorado?



Gilligan wrote:
The fish here are in small rivers. Simply stick a shotgun barrel into the
water, pull trigger.


Phooey!
MANLY men use bayonets!

DSK

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

"Capt. Rob" wrote:


Well, now we're getting somewhere. My boat has the AC, but she's
currently stripped out for the end of season cleaning. No water in the
tanks, gear and even the anchor removed.


Hold on there! Is it not a USCG requirement that a vessel of your size
carry an anchor? It's certainly a Canadia Coast Guard requirment.

Cheers
Marty
------------ And now a word from our sponsor ------------------
For a quality usenet news server, try DNEWS, easy to install,
fast, efficient and reliable. For home servers or carrier class
installations with millions of users it will allow you to grow!
---- See http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_dnews.htm ----

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

DSK wrote:
How can a man fish so well that lives in Colorado?



Gilligan wrote:
The fish here are in small rivers. Simply stick a shotgun barrel into
the water, pull trigger.

Phooey!
MANLY men use bayonets!

DSK

....and here I thought they tickled trout....

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

"Capt. Rob" wrote:
I said
we were making 6 knots VMG to windward and you wrongly assumed that
this meant we were beating. Can the 35s5 make 6 knots of VMG to
windward, which is ANY POS above a beam reach. How about 45%? Hmmmmjm?
Better have another look at the video and try to look at the trim of
the sails.

Bob, would kindly go out on the street and see if you find someone with
a big stick to beat you soundly about the head? Perhaps then you will
be able to grasp the concept that "VMG to windward" is the vector
component of your vessels velocity that points directly upwind of your
vessel. It is not a point of sail. It reaches a maximum somewhere around
hard on the wind for most boats. As you fall of, your speed will
increase, but the rate at which your boat is moving to windward becomes
less and less until you reach a broad reach, when the wind is on your
beam and leeway is causing your boat to move downwind, at that point,
even though your boat may be doing 10 knots, your "VMG to windward"
becomes negative. Hope that's clear.

Where's Jax when you need him?

Cheers
Marty

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

There's no requirement for an anchor. But, if there were, it would have to
be chrome.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Martin Baxter" wrote in message
...
"Capt. Rob" wrote:


Well, now we're getting somewhere. My boat has the AC, but she's
currently stripped out for the end of season cleaning. No water in the
tanks, gear and even the anchor removed.


Hold on there! Is it not a USCG requirement that a vessel of your size
carry an anchor? It's certainly a Canadia Coast Guard requirment.

Cheers
Marty
------------ And now a word from our sponsor ------------------
For a quality usenet news server, try DNEWS, easy to install,
fast, efficient and reliable. For home servers or carrier class
installations with millions of users it will allow you to grow!
---- See http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_dnews.htm ----

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

katy wrote:

DSK wrote:
??? How can a man fish so well that lives in Colorado?
???
??
?
? Gilligan wrote:
?? The fish here are in small rivers. Simply stick a shotgun barrel into
?? the water, pull trigger.
?
? Phooey!
? MANLY men use bayonets!
?
? DSK
?
...and here I thought they tickled trout....

That's for Scotsmen, purportedly they're too cheap to buy tackle! ;-)

Cheers
Marty

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

Martin Baxter wrote:
katy wrote:
DSK wrote:
??? How can a man fish so well that lives in Colorado?
???
??
?
? Gilligan wrote:
?? The fish here are in small rivers. Simply stick a shotgun barrel into
?? the water, pull trigger.
?
? Phooey!
? MANLY men use bayonets!
?
? DSK
?
...and here I thought they tickled trout....

That's for Scotsmen, purportedly they're too cheap to buy tackle! ;-)

Cheers
Marty
Yes...but they are the manliest men around....nothing better than Sean
Connery in a kilt....

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

Capt. Rob wrote:
Never did I say I was hard on the wind or beating, which is why it's
totally believable that I topped the polars for VMG on that POS.

Wrong - this is exactly why its totally impossible that you VMG to
Windward was better than optimal.


You're still going under the assumption that the polars remain current.
Most people would agree that polars are a starting point.

Wrong. I'll grant you that polars have been refined upward, mainly
because new hi-tech sails outperform the old assumptions. But polars
made now are quite accurate for todays boats. Do you really think
todays designers are off by 15% on their speed predictions?

Once again "windward" does not suggest that I was clawing my way
upwind. As I said we were NOT beating.

All the more reason why your VMG to Windward could not have been that
high. Are you saying that beating to windward is not the best way to
go to windward, a close reach is better? (Actually, that's true on my
boat, but that's why my optimal VMG is 50 degrees in light air,
instead of 40.)

Actually he's claimed he beats his polars upwind with his recut main by
about 10%. But he also thinks the original polars were far to
conservative. Who's to say the same isn't true for the 35s5?

Me. And I thought you said you had old sails.

Actually, my argument hinges on the fact that the polars of almost
every boat your size has an optimal VMG to Windward of well under 6
knots. Further, you claimed that you weren't even going upward, that
you weren't hard on the wind.

Nope, as I already established windward does not always mean hard on
the wind. It's ANY POS above a beam reach.

And yet you fail to grasp that when you sail lower than the "optimal
point" your VMG to Windward goes down. What part of not sailing at
the "optimal point" do you not understand?

....


Is a Garmin handheld inferior to my charting GPS??? Who knew?


Yes, but the subtlety of this you will not understand. The GPS by
itself does not know where the wind is, and therefore cannot report
the VMG with respect to the wind direction. Thus, when your friend's
GPS displayed VMG, it was not VMG to Windward. If however, you have
an integrated system, then the wind direction is known, and a pretty
fair guess of the true VMG can be computed.



No. Its not an exaggeration, its called basic math. At 5 knots
you're doing 12 minutes per mile, or 720 seconds. At 6 knots, that's
600 seconds per mile. That's a difference of 120 second per mile,
which translates directly into 120 points on the PHRF rating. Maybe
its a bit less if you really get 5.2 knots, but its still up near 100
points.

All based on your still solid assumption that we were at 35 degress or
something like that...which we were not.

Nope. I made no such assumption. I only might have said that the
best VMG you could obtain was at about 40 degree, if you were sailing
lower than that your VMG to Windward would fall off.

You've failed to make any
argument at all because I'm not claiming 6 knots at 35 degrees. I said
we were making 6 knots VMG to windward and you wrongly assumed that
this meant we were beating.

Nope. I made no assumption. The real basis for my claim is that I
don't think your boat, without new sails and a racing crew, could
achieve 6 knots VMG to Windward under any circumstance.

Can the 35s5 make 6 knots of VMG to
windward, which is ANY POS above a beam reach. How about 45%? Hmmmmjm?

Nope. In fact, you'd have a much better shot of doing it at 38-40
degrees.

Better have another look at the video and try to look at the trim of
the sails.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=RivCUMzy4xc

At 45 degrees, you'd have to be doing 8.6 knots (actually 9 knots,
including leeway) to have a VMG to Windward of 6 knots.

I know 9 knots. I often sail at 9 knots. And you weren't doing 9 knots.


FYI, when beating, the genny is sheeted in well inside the lifelines.

So you were footed well off. How much do you figure - 50 degrees? 55
degrees?



So what you're saying is that a quality skipper can make a Westsail
32
go upwind faster, that is, get better boat speed, than an average
skipper on a 35s5.


Nope....the Westsail is far more locked into it's performance limits
than a performance boat.

So lets look at it the other way - are you claiming you can go upwind
as fast as a Frers 45, or a Swan 51?

BTW, do you know what a 12-meter polar looks like? It says that the
optimal VMG to windward is about 5.5 knots, at about 42 degrees in 14
knots wind.



It can stay close because in fact the differences are pretty small,
only a few tenths. So when you sail nearby you can deceive yourself
into thinking you're going almost as fast.

I've sailed side by side with a 36.7, Jeff. It's faster upwind, but not
in the way that my 35s5 is faster than a Catalina 36 upwind. Small
differences that matter more for racers.


Isn't that just what I said?


So who's the liar?

You are. I never mentioned my boat in the comparison with the 35s5. You
said that I did, The E35 is rated at 135 here. Do you think Bart's
freind is literally sailing circles around Beneteau's, Jeff?

I don't know about that. I do know that you said "Any First (which I
assume includes yours) would toast an Ericson 35." Since the ratings
are only a few points different, I don't think "toast" is the correct
verb. Especially when you're claiming that a good helmsman can
suddenly make a difference of 100 points!


Actually, we all assumed he was talking about the sailing ability of
Benny owners, but you seemed to have missed that.

Oh, so you believe THAT as well? I see. Sailors around here don't
usually worry about such things.

But what about you?


Actually, if you knew anything, you'd understand that the Nonsuch
rig
is quite adjustable. Why don't you explain to us how often you adjust
your outhaul or topping lift while underway?

Is that how Nonsuch promoted it's boats?

Actually, yes. Though it may not have been part of the original
design priority. The adjustable rig was actually a bit of a
breakthrough in wishbone technology. I routinely did major sail shape
adjustments while underway, sometimes several times an hour. Have
you done any this year? How often do you change the outhaul?

Do you know who Anthony
Serling is and how is Nonsuch sank in the early 90's crossing the
Atlantic? He's a good friend of mine.

The only sinking I've heard about involved an owner who panicked and
started throwing gear overboard, including his hatch boards. There
was also a dismasted N30 that was abandoned and found a year later
being used as a fishing boat in the Caribbean, having drifted over a
thousand miles.


Perhaps I should be more explicit: The mark has to be directly to
windward. Not slightly to windward of your centerline. There is a
huge difference.

Agreed. I'm giving you the bouy location to best of my ability. I was
not standing behind the pedestal to line up the mark.

Then your understanding is faulty. But, you haven't been very
reliable in the past.


And one more time you're claiming that you weren't even close to the
wind, you weren't sheeted in, and yet you were going upwind faster
than the polars predict!

About .5 knot faster than what's shown on the polars

So what was it, directly upwind or 10 degrees off the bow?

In clip #2 it's directly to windward. Do you know what that means?

I know what it means. Do you?

And why did you insist it was off the bow?:

"So let's get this straight, Jeff. We're sailing upwind, but certainly
not beating. Our knotmeter is showing over seven knots nudging near 8
at times. We have a mark set on the GPS about a mile off and we're on
starboard tack (again, for example). Now, the mark is about 10
degrees off our starboard bow. GPS is reporting our VMG fluctuating
between 5.6 and 6.1 knots as we close on the mark."

Are you sure this mark was actually attached to the bottom?


Nor was it far away.

It was NOT far away and THERE you have a bone to seriously pick, but
nowhere else since I never said we were beating.

If it was really close than your whole argument is bogus. It was to
be at least far enough away so that the angle doesn't change during a
reasonable measuring period, say one minute. Since you're doing about
200 yards a minute, if you're within a quarter mile there's no way it
can be used to determine the VMG to Windward.

We're probably just below what most folks would call a close reach in
clip #2. VMG was .5 faster than reported by the French magazine and
that was in the early 90's with stock sails.

Just below a close reach would be about 60 degrees off the true wind.
So are you now saying you were doing 12 knots through the water?

I know 12 knots. I sail at 12 knots. And you weren't doing 12 knots.

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

Wrong - this is exactly why its totally impossible that you VMG to
Windward was better than optimal.


And yet your next comment admits that older polars could be off.


But polars
made now are quite accurate for todays boats. Do you really think
todays designers are off by 15% on their speed predictions?


Sure they could, but mine are from 1988, Jeff. Could the polars be
conservative or just off, combined with other modern advantages? When
they tested Hull #1 how many people were on board? Did they have the
rig tunes right. Now it's well known that the 35s5 has a hard-to-tune
rig. Did they get it right...all of it?


All the more reason why your VMG to Windward could not have been
that
high. Are you saying that beating to windward is not the best way to
go to windward

It depends where you're headed, Jeff. VMG to windward optimal is WHAT
on my boat, Jeff....make a guess.


Me. And I thought you said you had old sails.


My old sails still have some good shape left. They are delaminating and
won't last, but they're not blown the way dacron would be. Sadly, they
can't be saved.


And yet you fail to grasp that when you sail lower than the "optimal

point" your VMG to Windward goes down. What part of not sailing at
the "optimal point" do you not understand?

VMG to a mark is exactly that, Jeff. Our VMG to our windward mark was 6
knots.


Yes, but the subtlety of this you will not understand.


Nonsense. Garmin themselves reports that handheld GPS units give up no
accuracy to larger units so long as they have good contact.

The GPS by
itself does not know where the wind is, and therefore cannot report
the VMG with respect to the wind direction.

I have wind instruments, Jeff.


Thus, when your friend's
GPS displayed VMG, it was not VMG to Windward.

I have wind instruments, Jeff.


If however, you have
an integrated system, then the wind direction is known, and a pretty
fair guess of the true VMG can be computed.


Yes.


Nope. I made no such assumption. I only might have said that the
best VMG you could obtain was at about 40 degree, if you were sailing
lower than that your VMG to Windward would fall off.

Jeff, listen carefully. CAREFULLY. Our VMG to the WINWARD MARK was 6
knots. Do you understand that this is correct terminology even on a
reach?


At 45 degrees, you'd have to be doing 8.6 knots (actually 9 knots,
including leeway) to have a VMG to Windward of 6 knots.

Jeff, we topped 8 knots a few times. The 1st clip I posted was 7.2 to
7.5. We went faster with some trimming.
I don't think we hit 9 knots. I've been aboard this boat with a crew in
Florida and topped 10 knots and I know what THAT felt like. But I think
the video shows we're moving pretty fast. We spent a lot of time
between 7 and 8 knots.


So you were footed well off. How much do you figure - 50 degrees?
55
degrees?

That's a good question. I could not tell you with any acuraccy for this
discussion.


So lets look at it the other way - are you claiming you can go
upwind
as fast as a Frers 45, or a Swan 51?

Nope.


BTW, do you know what a 12-meter polar looks like? It says that the

optimal VMG to windward is about 5.5 knots, at about 42 degrees in 14
knots wind.

We were not in 14 knots of wind. Do you think that those 12 meter
polars are also carved in stone?


Isn't that just what I said?


Yep, but I'm trying to keep you entertained.


I don't know about that. I do know that you said "Any First (which
I
assume includes yours) would toast an Ericson 35."

My comment is no less vague than Bart's comment about sailing circles
around Beneteaus. I made no mention of my boat.


But what about you?

I'm only worried about the cost of my new sails.


Actually, yes. Though it may not have been part of the original
design priority. The adjustable rig was actually a bit of a
breakthrough in wishbone technology.

Nonsuch had always promoted the ease of sailing thier boats and the
forgiving nature of the rig underway, even in their ads.

I routinely did major sail shape
adjustments while underway, sometimes several times an hour. Have
you done any this year? How often do you change the outhaul?


Not too often. It was adjusted only once on Monday to help flatten the
sail....why do you ask? I re-tuned the lowers today and will hoist
someone small to do the uppers on Friday.


The only sinking I've heard about involved an owner who panicked and

started throwing gear overboard, including his hatch boards.

That's THE ONE. Anthony was the captain of the boat. It's a great
story, but I should not post it here. I can e-mail you the facts if you
have any interest. But the key element of the story is that Anthony was
considering the idea of abandoning the Nonsuch before that happened.
She had already rolled several times and was very slow to recover. BTW,
the owner collected his insurance and bought a Nonsuch 30, which was
here for quite a while. CBS also courted them for the story for a
possible TV movie, but it never came together.


Then your understanding is faulty. But, you haven't been very
reliable in the past.


I though I could be counted on to lie?



And why did you insist it was off the bow?:


because in clip # 3 it was.


Are you sure this mark was actually attached to the bottom?


You mean a Coors bottle doesn't count?



Nor was it far away.


if you're within a quarter mile there's no way it
can be used to determine the VMG to Windward.


About a 3/4 a mile away, Jeff.


Just below a close reach would be about 60 degrees off the true
wind.

We were a bit higher. Hul speed was exceeded.


So are you now saying you were doing 12 knots through the water?

Nope.


RB
35s5
NY

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

Capt. Rob wrote:
Sure they could, but mine are from 1988, Jeff. Could the polars be
conservative or just off, combined with other modern advantages? When
they tested Hull #1 how many people were on board? Did they have the
rig tunes right. Now it's well known that the 35s5 has a hard-to-tune
rig. Did they get it right...all of it?


So why don't you find us the polars from any 35 foot boat that claims
a VMG to windward of 6 knots in any wind condition?

While you're at it, find us one that does it without going higher than
45 degrees. Oh, and catamarans don't count! My PDQ actually does
have a VMG of 6.2 at 47 degrees in 20 knots true wind. I guess that
means I would toast you upwind!


All the more reason why your VMG to Windward could not have been
that
high. Are you saying that beating to windward is not the best way to
go to windward

It depends where you're headed, Jeff. VMG to windward optimal is WHAT
on my boat, Jeff....make a guess.

At 14 knots, perhaps 38 degrees.



And yet you fail to grasp that when you sail lower than the "optimal
point" your VMG to Windward goes down. What part of not sailing at
the "optimal point" do you not understand?

VMG to a mark is exactly that, Jeff. Our VMG to our windward mark was 6
knots.

Wrong answer. VMG to a mark is quite different from VMG to Windward.
Both have very specific meanings, well understood and used
properly by real sailors. This could explain why you don't seem to
know the difference.




Yes, but the subtlety of this you will not understand.

Nonsense. Garmin themselves reports that handheld GPS units give up no
accuracy to larger units so long as they have good contact.

Accuracy is not the issue. I said the subtlety would be lost on you.


The GPS by
itself does not know where the wind is, and therefore cannot report
the VMG with respect to the wind direction.

I have wind instruments, Jeff.

So now you're claiming that you connected your instruments to your
friend's handheld? Why would you do that?



Thus, when your friend's
GPS displayed VMG, it was not VMG to Windward.

I have wind instruments, Jeff.

I don't know all of the features of the latest handheld Garmins, but I
don't believe they will pick up the wind data from your instruments.
Perhaps you can enlighten us as to how this works.

Nope. I made no such assumption. I only might have said that the
best VMG you could obtain was at about 40 degree, if you were sailing
lower than that your VMG to Windward would fall off.

Jeff, listen carefully. CAREFULLY. Our VMG to the WINWARD MARK was 6
knots. Do you understand that this is correct terminology even on a
reach?


But you said, many times, that you were talking about "VMG to
Windward," not the VMG to a mark. I guess the light has finally
dawned in your tiny mind as you've realized your blunder. And so the
Grand Backpedal begins.


At 45 degrees, you'd have to be doing 8.6 knots (actually 9 knots,
including leeway) to have a VMG to Windward of 6 knots.

Jeff, we topped 8 knots a few times. The 1st clip I posted was 7.2 to
7.5. We went faster with some trimming.
I don't think we hit 9 knots. I've been aboard this boat with a crew in
Florida and topped 10 knots and I know what THAT felt like. But I think
the video shows we're moving pretty fast. We spent a lot of time
between 7 and 8 knots.


So you were footed well off. How much do you figure - 50 degrees?
55
degrees?

That's a good question. I could not tell you with any acuraccy for this
discussion.

Spoken like a true novice. You can assure us absolutely that the mark
was directly to windward, and the speeds, but you have no idea what
point of sail you were on!

Its very doubtful that you were at 45 degrees, but if you were, the 8
knots speed through the water yields a VMG of 5.65 knots. At 50
degrees this becomes 5.1, at 55 degrees its 4.6, and at 60 its 4
knots. This doesn't include leeway, which the GPS would pick up, so
you have to add 3 to 4 degrees and degrade the performance accordingly.

That's the problem you have, you kept insisting that you weren't "hard
on the wind" or beating, and that I couldn't predict your speed
without knowing the exact point of sail. But I don't have to, because
by your own admission, the best you could have been doing is maybe 5.2
knots and it goes downhill from there.




So lets look at it the other way - are you claiming you can go
upwind
as fast as a Frers 45, or a Swan 51?

Nope.

So what do you mean when you insist that your boat can outperform its
polars by 15%?



BTW, do you know what a 12-meter polar looks like? It says that the
optimal VMG to windward is about 5.5 knots, at about 42 degrees in 14
knots wind.

We were not in 14 knots of wind. Do you think that those 12 meter
polars are also carved in stone?

For upwind performance, the speed and angle changes very little above
14 knots for many monohulls. For the Twelves, it goes up maybe 1 or 2
tenths in 20 knots of wind. And I got this from Steve Killing's book
where he explains how the polar predictions are extremely accurate,
assuming the hull shapes are within the range that has been well
modeled. He does go on at some length about some spectacular failures
in the '70s, but that's another story. However, these failures led to
the extensive modeling studies that resulted in the VPP software.

He also jokes that whenever owners say their boats' performance
doesn't match the predictions, it always turns out the instrumentation
is not calibrated properly.

You do know who Steve Killing is, I assume.


Actually, yes. Though it may not have been part of the original
design priority. The adjustable rig was actually a bit of a
breakthrough in wishbone technology.

Nonsuch had always promoted the ease of sailing thier boats and the
forgiving nature of the rig underway, even in their ads.

True, but they also emphasized that it was easy to make major sail
shape adjustments while underway. In fact, much easier than most any
other boat. Most Nonsuch owners that I knew routinely tweaked their
outhauls (called "chokers" by Ellis) as the wind changed, or they
changed point of sail.



I routinely did major sail shape
adjustments while underway, sometimes several times an hour. Have
you done any this year? How often do you change the outhaul?

I re-tuned the lowers today and will hoist
someone small to do the uppers on Friday.

Underway??? I'm impressed!

if you're within a quarter mile there's no way it
can be used to determine the VMG to Windward.

About a 3/4 a mile away, Jeff.

Still probably too close, in one minute the angle would change around
6 degrees, so it really isn't directly upwind.

However, your observations simply don't work. If you were footing off
to say, 55 degrees, even a speed of 8.5 knots gives you a VMG of 4.8.
Your insistence that you were not beating simply created a hole for
you that you can't crawl out of. There is simply no way that you had
a VMG to Windward of 6 knots. It probably wasn't 5 knots. And rather
than claim it, you should have realized immediately that it was
impossible. All you've done here is demonstrate that you don't
understand the basic terminology of sailing.

Busted!

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
oups.com..
..
What you perhaps should have said is that you were sailing
upwind,
making a VMG of 6 knots towards a buoy.



Well, Martin....in all honesty I knew the video clips of
Heart of Gold
sailing nicely would upset folks like Jeff and Doug. On
the other
hand...ZOWEE! Jeff really went zonko!
For a pathological liar, I'm sure good at coming up with
photos and
video that back what I say in every case. Poor Scotty
still thinks I
went around and put shackles on all the boats at my club!


No, just the ones you photoed.

BTW, who shot those videos, your kid?

Scotty

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

"Swab Rob" wrote in message
oups.com..

So here it is again, Doug. You're probably do green with
envy to
watch...but here's Heart of Gold clipping along nicely....

http://youtube.com/watch?v=d0nSgsgOApg

Vrooommmm!!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHHA!!


Vrooom indeed, so goes the motor. Why didn't you show your
knotmeter?

SV

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

"Swab Rob" wrote in message
ps.com...

...hit 8 knots a few times. I have no idea what VMG is

yes, that's apparent.

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

So why don't you find us the polars from any 35 foot boat that claims
a VMG to windward of 6 knots in any wind condition?

I've read time and again about vessels beating their polars, Jeff and I
bet you have as well. Polars are like hull speed....they're there to be
surpassed!


While you're at it, find us one that does it without going higher
than
45 degrees.


You still are commenting without knowing my POS, which is really the
probem here!


Oh, and catamarans don't count! My PDQ actually does
have a VMG of 6.2 at 47 degrees in 20 knots true wind. I guess that
means I would toast you upwind!

Your cat is not a monohull and is about twice the size overall of my
boat! I'd need two slips for it here! The comparison is about as
relevant as comparing your boat to a F boat.


At 14 knots, perhaps 38 degrees.


Not that high at all, and winds were actually closer to 17 knots at
times where we were.


Wrong answer. VMG to a mark is quite different from VMG to Windward.



The mark WAS to WINDWARD.



So now you're claiming that you connected your instruments to your
friend's handheld? Why would you do that?

Never claimed that, but he's an experienced navigator and had all the
info in front of him.


I don't know all of the features of the latest handheld Garmins, but
I
don't believe they will pick up the wind data from your instruments.
Perhaps you can enlighten us as to how this works.

Are you now claiming that if you have a compass, wind instruments, GPS,
mechanical knotmeter, you can't make a good estimate on VMG?


But you said, many times, that you were talking about "VMG to
Windward," not the VMG to a mark.

Nope. But that's pretty creative! I have maintained that the MARK was
to WINDWARD and WINDWARD is any course above a beam reach.


That's the problem you have

I knew it!!!!

, you kept insisting that you weren't "hard
on the wind" or beating, and that I couldn't predict your speed
without knowing the exact point of sail.

I wasn't beating, the video shows that clearly.

But I don't have to, because
by your own admission, the best you could have been doing is maybe 5.2
knots and it goes downhill from there.

I admitted I was doing a VMG of 5.2 knots with my speed over ground at
8 knots or higher?



So what do you mean when you insist that your boat can outperform
its
polars by 15%?

It depends on the polars, who made them and how the aspects of a given
design have been learned since. A 35s5 can do better than the polars
made when she was built


You do know who Steve Killing is, I assume.

Didn't he make one of the ugliest boats ever in the Express 30?


Most Nonsuch owners that I knew routinely tweaked their
outhauls (called "chokers" by Ellis) as the wind changed, or they
changed point of sail.

The Nonsuch is not a twin spreader fractional sloop designed for
cruising and around the bouys racing.


Underway??? I'm impressed!


Outside of using a guage and best guess tuning, how else would I do it
except underway?


Still probably too close, in one minute the angle would change
around
6 degrees, so it really isn't directly upwind.

Well, you didn't say this before. You said 1/4 mile would be too close.

Your insistence that you were not beating simply created a hole
for
you that you can't crawl out of.

I think I've done rather well.


Busted!

Yep, but don't beat yourself up over it. Now ask yourself, at what POS
can a quick monohull make 6 knots VMG in 17 knots of wind?



RB
35s5
NY

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

Capt. Rob wrote:

So why don't you find us the polars from any 35 foot boat that claims
a VMG to windward of 6 knots in any wind condition?

I've read time and again about vessels beating their polars, Jeff and I
bet you have as well. Polars are like hull speed....they're there to be
surpassed!

Yes, they can be surpassed by small amounts, and hi-tech sails can
raise the bar a notch. However, the 15% improvement you're claiming
would imply a 100 point PHRF improvement. Are you claiming that boats
are routinely outperforming their PHRF by 100 points? When I asked if
that meant a Westsail could go as fast as your benny or if your benny
could go as fast as a Frers 45, and you said no.

So it would appear that your major burst of speed only works on boats
that are not racing, when no one is watching. What a pity. As
always, you've demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of the
way boats work.


While you're at it, find us one that does it without going higher
than
45 degrees.

You still are commenting without knowing my POS, which is really the
probem here!

You kept saying you weren't pointing that high. However, you actually
admitted several times that you have no idea what your point of sail
actually was. So tell us Bob, were you even there? Its looking like
you loaned your boat to someone else and asked them to take some
videos. Then you tried to make up a lame story about it.


Oh, and catamarans don't count! My PDQ actually does
have a VMG of 6.2 at 47 degrees in 20 knots true wind. I guess that
means I would toast you upwind!

Your cat is not a monohull and is about twice the size overall of my
boat! I'd need two slips for it here! The comparison is about as
relevant as comparing your boat to a F boat.

I mentioned it only because you and others are always so quick to
point out the poor upwind performance of my cat. However, with a wind
over 12-14 knots, my VMG to Windward exceeds that of even performance
monohulls with the same length and sail area. Actually, my leeway
will be higher so that advantage might be lost, but cats with boards
(including the "express" version of mine) don't have that problem, and
easily walk away from monohulls upwind in a breeze.


Wrong answer. VMG to a mark is quite different from VMG to Windward.


The mark WAS to WINDWARD.


Sometime you say that, other times you don't. You don't know what the
words mean or what your boat was doing. You probably weren't even there.


So now you're claiming that you connected your instruments to your
friend's handheld? Why would you do that?

Never claimed that, but he's an experienced navigator and had all the
info in front of him.

You said several times he was reading off his GPS. A GPS alone simply
can't report an accurate VMG to Windward, especially set to a nearby
mark. Frankly I'm skeptical as to whether a basic system like Ray
ST60 can do it, I certainly take my instruments with a huge grain of salt.

Actually, that's one of the basic issues of the discussion; you should
have realized immediately that a VMG to Windward of 6 knots was bogus.
Its even possible that you could have momentarily hit that when
close to the wind (but even then it would be bogus), but doing it when
footing off (as you claim, sometimes) is a physical impossibility.
Every sailor knows that, so its not surprising that you don't.


Are you now claiming that if you have a compass, wind instruments, GPS,
mechanical knotmeter, you can't make a good estimate on VMG?

Sure, within about 15%. That's a pretty good estimate. (Actually,
I'm not sure you could even do that good unless you had a quality
setup and ideal conditions.) This is actually one of the most
difficult things to measure. Think about what happens if you get a 5
degree header: Your instantaneous VMG to windward jumps half a knot,
but if you don't react the boat starts to slow down. In a shifty
wind, its quite easy to have a high VMG to the *average* wind, simply
by playing the wind shifts. This, however, is not the same thing as
VMG to Windward.


But you said, many times, that you were talking about "VMG to
Windward," not the VMG to a mark.

Nope. But that's pretty creative! I have maintained that the MARK was
to WINDWARD and WINDWARD is any course above a beam reach.

You also claimed it was "directly to windward." So are you now
claiming that "directly to windward" means anything on the windward
side of your boat? Of course, you don't understand the meaning of
these words, do you?

I wasn't beating, the video shows that clearly.

which video? Frankly, all of them are so poor that very little can be
deduced about the performance. Why can't you actually tell use how
close to the wind you were sailing? Weren't you there?


But I don't have to, because
by your own admission, the best you could have been doing is maybe 5.2
knots and it goes downhill from there.

I admitted I was doing a VMG of 5.2 knots with my speed over ground at
8 knots or higher?

Yes, you did. Again, you're showing your ignorance. I outlined the
VMG to Windward that was implied by your claim of 8 knots. Since you
were unable to tell point of sail (Gawd, are you that stupid???) I did
the simple eighth grade math, to generate the VMG to Windward. Its
apparent that you don't understand that VMG to Windward is actually
defined mathematically from your course with respect to the true wind
and your speed through the water. You gave the speed, I computed the
VMG to Windward for different courses.

Here it is again. Remember, this is what you told us, not some
abstraction that could be debated.

The 8 knots speed through the water, at 45 degrees to the wind, yields
a VMG of 5.65 knots. At 50 degrees this becomes 5.1, at 55 degrees
its 4.6, and at 60 its 4 knots. This doesn't include leeway, which
the GPS would pick up, so you have to add 3 to 4 degrees and degrade
the performance accordingly.

So this is what you told us. You insisted that you were not "hard on
the wind" and that your sails were not sheeted in. The closest you
could have been pointing, and still moving efficiently, is 50 degrees.
Thus, by your own admission, you best VMG to Windward was actually
about 5 knots, probably even less with leeway. Then you seemed to be
saying maybe it was 55 degrees, so the VMG to Windward was really well
under 5 knots.

So what do you mean when you insist that your boat can outperform
its polars by 15%?

It depends on the polars, who made them and how the aspects of a given
design have been learned since. A 35s5 can do better than the polars
made when she was built

Maybe a bit, but not 15% upwind.



You do know who Steve Killing is, I assume.

Didn't he make one of the ugliest boats ever in the Express 30?

The Express is a beauty compared to your boat. I usually don't talk
much about the aesthetics of modern boats, but since you brought it
up, I always thought yours was uglier than a mud fence.

Most Nonsuch owners that I knew routinely tweaked their
outhauls (called "chokers" by Ellis) as the wind changed, or they
changed point of sail.

The Nonsuch is not a twin spreader fractional sloop designed for
cruising and around the bouys racing.

yada yada yada. Whenever you lose an argument, you start using terms
that you don't understand so you sound important. What a putz!


Still probably too close, in one minute the angle would change
around
6 degrees, so it really isn't directly upwind.

Well, you didn't say this before. You said 1/4 mile would be too close.

Yes I did. What about it? It doesn't change the math. And you
should have known it. I did say that to be valid, the mark would have
to be far away, directly upwind. Clearly, at 3/4 of a mile, a mark
doesn't stay directly upwind for very long. Its also true the the
wind would have to be steady, especially in direction, but also in
strength.

Moreover, you've said the mark was directly upwind, that it was 3/4 of
a mile away, that you were closing on it, and that you weren't
beating. Please explain how all of this could be true. Its looking
more and more like your weren't even out there that day.


Your insistence that you were not beating simply created a hole
for
you that you can't crawl out of.

I think I've done rather well.

If your goal was to demonstrate total ignorance about sailing, you've
succeeded admirably!



Busted!

Yep, but don't beat yourself up over it. Now ask yourself, at what POS
can a quick monohull make 6 knots VMG in 17 knots of wind?

Directly To Windward? None, for your boat. But you seem to be
confused about the term "VMG to Windward." Ask your friend about it
and tell him to draw a picture and use small words. Maybe it will
sink in.

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

However, the 15% improvement you're claiming
would imply a 100 point PHRF improvement.

Only if the polars were correct. Quite a few boats have prove abilities
well beyond the polars originally drawn up.

So it would appear that your major burst of speed only works on
boats
that are not racing, when no one is watching.

Nope, it appears on a coarse which you refuse to acknowledge.


You kept saying you weren't pointing that high. However, you
actually
admitted several times that you have no idea what your point of sail
actually was.

That is to say I don't know the specific number you'd demand for this
discussion.

So tell us Bob, were you even there?

Now you're just being silly. I shot the clips with my Casio.

Oh, and catamarans don't count! My PDQ actually does
have a VMG of 6.2 at 47 degrees in 20 knots true wind. I guess that
means I would toast you upwind!


I mentioned it only because you and others are always so quick to
point out the poor upwind performance of my cat.

Actually, your cat is quite fast, roomy and very practical as a
floating home. It's just missing the fun and romance of sailing as many
of us prefer.


However, with a wind
over 12-14 knots, my VMG to Windward exceeds that of even performance
monohulls with the same length and sail area.

Uh, okay. Jetskis are also faster.

Sometime you say that, other times you don't.


I have always maintained that the mark was to windward in clip #2, but
that we weren't beating.

You probably weren't even there.

Oh no!


You said several times he was reading off his GPS. A GPS alone

Who said GPS alone? Were the other instruments to be ignored?

Frankly I'm skeptical as to whether a basic system like Ray
ST60 can do it, I certainly take my instruments with a huge grain of
salt.


Well, they're your instruments. Trust them or don't.


Actually, that's one of the basic issues of the discussion; you
should
have realized immediately that a VMG to Windward of 6 knots was bogus.


Except that you still refuse to admit that VMG to windward is ANY
course above a beam reach. That's a fact.


Its even possible that you could have momentarily hit that when
close to the wind

We weren't very close to the wind.


Sure, within about 15%. That's a pretty good estimate.

Estimate means GUESS, educated or not.


You also claimed it was "directly to windward." So are you now
claiming that "directly to windward" means anything on the windward
side of your boat? Of course, you don't understand the meaning of
these words, do you?


Uh, Jeff. Let's try to be honest for a second. Here's my exact quote:
"Second clip, still some nice air and off to windward at just over 6
knots VMG.... "
OFF TO WINDWARD is not directly to windward, now is it??? Hmmmm? Where
is the word DIRECTLY???
Looks like you read my post and inferred what you needed to draw out
this entertaining debate! But the fact is that you got it
wrong....which is what you wanted to do anyway.


which video? Frankly, all of them are so poor that very little can
be
deduced about the performance.

Really? The folks on the Beneteau lists liked them. Can I see one of
your video clips that you generously posted to this or some other
group?


Why can't you actually tell use how
close to the wind you were sailing? Weren't you there?

Sure I was there. Will you take an estimate?



The 8 knots speed through the water, at 45 degrees to the wind,
yields
a VMG of 5.65 knots. At 50 degrees this becomes 5.1, at 55 degrees
its 4.6, and at 60 its 4 knots. This doesn't include leeway, which
the GPS would pick up, so you have to add 3 to 4 degrees and degrade
the performance accordingly.

Sure, read all that...and as I also indicated we TOPPED 8 knots and
winds were higher than 14 knots on the water. The 35s5 does a fine job
of cutting leeway with her wing. With that in mind my 6 knot claim
doesn't appear to be the gross error you make it out to be. And in all
of this, knowing we were on the LIS you utterly failed to take into
account a favorable current. I did not check, but that also could play
a part. You've hardly been complete in your examination of the videos,
the facts as presented and so on.


Maybe a bit, but not 15% upwind.


Are you sure?


The Express is a beauty compared to your boat.

Not many...and no one I know thinks the Express is a good looking boat.
Then again, if you got past the looks of a PDQ 36, anything is
possible. I've had nothing but compliments.


yada yada yada. Whenever you lose an argument, you start using
terms
that you don't understand so you sound important.

Oh no! Jeff says I lost the argument, so it must be true!


What a putz!

A putz who sails more than you and has a ton of fun! Doing a short
cruise this weekend starting tomorrow afternoon, then delivering a
Catalina 34 from Mystic to my club. How much sailing are you getting
in? And I'm not even retired!


Yes I did. What about it?


So you lied. Exactly.


It doesn't change the math.

And yet you change the numbers when they fail to support you!


Moreover, you've said the mark was directly upwind

Another lie. I said it was to windward, which is NOT directly to
windward regarding course.


If your goal was to demonstrate total ignorance about sailing,
you've
succeeded admirably!

Yes, I've exposed you. But I do feel sad about it.


Directly To Windward? None, for your boat. But you seem to be
confused about the term "VMG to Windward."

There he goes again with the "directly" stuff. It's his ace in the
a-hole!



RB
35s5
NY

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

"Capt. Rob" wrote:


Except that you still refuse to admit that VMG to windward is ANY
course above a beam reach. That's a fact.


Wrong! How many times must this be explained to you before it sinks in?
I'm not going to try again, maybe someone els would like to have a go?


Cheers
Marty

RB Admits Defeat!
 

The Grand Backpedal Continues. Booby is now denying everything he
said. I guess he talked to his friend who set him straight. Let's see
if we can count the number of times he contradicts what he said
before, or otherwise demonstrates that he really doesn't understand
the basic terminology. (Don't bother counting; the answer is every
time he speaks.)


Capt. Rob wrote:
However, the 15% improvement you're claiming
would imply a 100 point PHRF improvement.

Only if the polars were correct. Quite a few boats have prove abilities
well beyond the polars originally drawn up.

So let's see one that was done in the last 15 or 20 years that was off
by 15% in upwind prediction. What you're claiming is that Beneteau
shipped a boat that the polars predicted was as slow upwind as a
Westsail.



So it would appear that your major burst of speed only works on
boats
that are not racing, when no one is watching.

Nope, it appears on a coarse which you refuse to acknowledge.

What course is that? You're the one who doesn't know what course he
was on. I've only said it doesn't matter.

You kept saying you weren't pointing that high. However, you
actually
admitted several times that you have no idea what your point of sail
actually was.

That is to say I don't know the specific number you'd demand for this
discussion.

I'm not demanding anything. I've only suggested that any sailor who
was on the boat at the time might know what point of sail the boat was
on. You don't seem to fit that description.


So tell us Bob, were you even there?

Now you're just being silly. I shot the clips with my Casio.

That does not appear to be true. You can't tell us the point of sail.


Sometime you say that, other times you don't.


I have always maintained that the mark was to windward in clip #2, but
that we weren't beating.

Actually you said it was directly to windward. Except for the time
when you said it was 10 degrees off the centerline. Of course, after
the fact, you changed you mind and said that wasn't so.



You said several times he was reading off his GPS. A GPS alone

Who said GPS alone? Were the other instruments to be ignored?

No, but they don't help that much. You asked if a handheld GPS was
inferior, and I said yes it is because it is not integrated with the
other instruments. You're just babbling here to cover up your little
blunder.



Frankly I'm skeptical as to whether a basic system like Ray
ST60 can do it, I certainly take my instruments with a huge grain of
salt.

Well, they're your instruments. Trust them or don't.

I trust them, within their limitations. But then, I use them when
making actual trips, sometimes offshore. When you never leave sight
of your slip you don't have to learn how your instruments work. You
can just make up numbers to impress your "friends."


Actually, that's one of the basic issues of the discussion; you
should
have realized immediately that a VMG to Windward of 6 knots was bogus.

Except that you still refuse to admit that VMG to windward is ANY
course above a beam reach. That's a fact.

WRONG! Ask any sailor with experience. "VMG to Windward" has a very
specific meaning. It is "the velocity made good in the direction the
wind is coming from." It is not the VMG to some other arbitrary point
that might happen to be somewhat to windward. If that's what you
mean, then you have to VMG to some point. In fact, that is what the
GPS reports, it is not "VMG to Windward."


Its even possible that you could have momentarily hit that when
close to the wind

We weren't very close to the wind.

You keep saying that. And that's why it is impossible that your VMG
to Windward was 6 knots. When you figure out what "VMG to Windward"
really means, you might understand this.


Sure, within about 15%. That's a pretty good estimate.

Estimate means GUESS, educated or not.

Do you have a point?



You also claimed it was "directly to windward." So are you now
claiming that "directly to windward" means anything on the windward
side of your boat? Of course, you don't understand the meaning of
these words, do you?


Uh, Jeff. Let's try to be honest for a second. Here's my exact quote:
"Second clip, still some nice air and off to windward at just over 6
knots VMG.... "
OFF TO WINDWARD is not directly to windward, now is it??? Hmmmm? Where
is the word DIRECTLY???

The concept of directly is implied by "to windward at just over 6
knots VMG." If you hadn't said VMG, it would have been understood as
speed through the water by most sailors. But by using "VMG" and "to
windward" together, you imply the VMG directly into the wind.


Looks like you read my post and inferred what you needed to draw out
this entertaining debate! But the fact is that you got it
wrong....which is what you wanted to do anyway.

I inferred exactly what every sailor would infer. In fact, I
explained exactly what the meaning of the phrase was and essentially
admitted that you didn't understand the fundamental concept.



Why can't you actually tell use how
close to the wind you were sailing? Weren't you there?

Sure I was there. Will you take an estimate?

Given your ability, it would have to be a very coarse estimate.

The 8 knots speed through the water, at 45 degrees to the wind,
yields
a VMG of 5.65 knots. At 50 degrees this becomes 5.1, at 55 degrees
its 4.6, and at 60 its 4 knots. This doesn't include leeway, which
the GPS would pick up, so you have to add 3 to 4 degrees and degrade
the performance accordingly.

Sure, read all that...and as I also indicated we TOPPED 8 knots and
winds were higher than 14 knots on the water. The 35s5 does a fine job
of cutting leeway with her wing.

Ooops! You've just opened up another area where you can demonstrate
ignorance. Here's a hint: your wing keel does not improve your
performance to windward. It allows you to have performance almost as
good as the normal keel with a smaller draft. Not too many boats have
better upwind performance with a wing keel than with a deep keel.

With that in mind my 6 knot claim
doesn't appear to be the gross error you make it out to be.

Nonsense. Its a pretty gross error. There's almost no 35 footers
that can do 6 knots "VMG to Windward" while on a close reach. And
since you're not claiming extreme speeds, its a physical impossibility.

And in all
of this, knowing we were on the LIS you utterly failed to take into
account a favorable current.

Actually, I mentioned "through the water" several times. And it takes
a real jackass to try to explain off a blunder like this by saying you
might have been confused by the current!

I did not check, but that also could play
a part. You've hardly been complete in your examination of the videos,
the facts as presented and so on.

Why should I? I was very specific about the meaning of "VMG to
Windward." I even included "speed through the water." The videos
were irrelevant. They only serve to show your ignorance, such as
labeling a shot when you're on a close reach as "windward work."


What a putz!

A putz who sails more than you and has a ton of fun! Doing a short
cruise this weekend starting tomorrow afternoon, then delivering a
Catalina 34 from Mystic to my club. How much sailing are you getting
in? And I'm not even retired!

You have to sail another 50,000 miles or so to catch up to me.

And if we just count to on the boat away from the dock, you don't even
come close to me nowadays. For instance, I've averaged 70 full 24
hour days a year on aboard for the last 14 years. You probably don't
do 70 day sail


Yes I did. What about it?


So you lied. Exactly.

I lied? How you you figure that? I said 1/4 mile would be obviously
too close, because I could do the math in my head. You said it was
more like 3/4 of a mile - that took me a few seconds to do the
calculation and it turns out that's also too close. You were there -
you should have been able to eyeball it and say its too close because
the bearing was shifting. You shouldn't need me to do this for you.

And this is central to the discussion. Because you have never learned
the fundamentals of sailing, you don't appreciate how stupid you sound
when you make your claims. Your VMG of 6 knots was clearly bogus from
the beginning, simply because this is extremely high, especially for a
35 foot boat. Once you said you weren't close to the wind, it became
a physical impossibility. Everyone except knew that, except for you.
And you should have realized immediately that any VMG described in
your conditions clearly could not be the correct VMG to Windward. You
desperately want everyone to think that you're knowledgeable about
sailing, you certainly blown any chance of that with this thread!


It doesn't change the math.

And yet you change the numbers when they fail to support you!

What numbers fail to support me?


Moreover, you've said the mark was directly upwind

Another lie. I said it was to windward, which is NOT directly to
windward regarding course.

Oh really??? When I said "Perhaps I should be more explicit: The
mark has to be directly to windward. Not slightly to windward of your
centerline. There is a huge difference."
you replied:
"Agreed. I'm giving you the bouy location to best of my ability."

And when I said:
"So what was it, directly upwind or 10 degrees off the bow?"
you said:
"In clip #2 it's directly to windward. Do you know what that means?"

That certainly sounds like you were saying "directly to windward" to
me. So now you're going to claim that "directly to windward" does not
mean in the directly from which the wind is blowing, aren't you? You
think you can weasel out of this by inventing new definitions of the
terms. But no one is buying that. Its painfully clear that you
simply didn't know the meaning of the terms until Bob educated you
last night.


Directly To Windward? None, for your boat. But you seem to be
confused about the term "VMG to Windward."

There he goes again with the "directly" stuff. It's his ace in the
a-hole!

No. It what sailors care about. You've just admitted that you really
did not understand the meaning of the terms. I hope you thanked Bob
for cluing you in on what sailors really talk about.

RB Admits he has two feet!!
 

So let's see one that was done in the last 15 or 20 years that was off
by 15% in upwind prediction. What you're claiming is that Beneteau
shipped a boat that the polars predicted was as slow upwind as a
Westsail.


35s5 owners claim to beat the polars by 7-10%.


What course is that? You're the one who doesn't know what course
he
was on. I've only said it doesn't matter.


You keeping begging for the exact course, but it doesn't matter? Oh.



I'm not demanding anything. I've only suggested that any sailor who

was on the boat at the time might know what point of sail the boat was
on.


Roughly between 50-60 degrees. How's that?


That does not appear to be true. You can't tell us the point of
sail.


Probably because I was enjoying myself and shooting some nice vids for
the group. Someone else was sailing. But I gave you a ROUGH estimate.


Actually you said it was directly to windward.

Nope, never said that...and if I construed it as such it's wrong. The
mark was to windward, but not directly.

Except for the time
when you said it was 10 degrees off the centerline.

For clip #3, yes. Not what we're talking about.


No, but they don't help that much.

Oh my!



I trust them, within their limitations.

But then even you must essentially guess at those. By and large modern
instruments are pretty good and mine are newer than yours.


When you never leave sight
of your slip you don't have to learn how your instruments work.

You can't see my slip from Execution rocks.

You
can just make up numbers to impress your "friends."

And show a video that impressed them even more....though it upset you
for reasons we all understand!


WRONG! Ask any sailor with experience. "VMG to Windward" has a
very
specific meaning.

But I clearly made it clear so it would be clear that I was refering to
a mark windward of us. How many times can I say it? You don't want to
listen to that because then you have nothing left to stew about.

You keep saying that. And that's why it is impossible that your VMG

to Windward was 6 knots.

See above, genius. You really are arguing a point based on something I
never said. I know what VMG to windward means, but I was talking about
a mark windward of us. The only backpedal here is YOU refusing to
acknowledge this little point. Our VMG to the mark, was 6 knots. We
were on a windward tack to get there. Can't you figure this out? Three
people e-mailed me and THEY understand! Sheesh!


Do you have a point?


It's at the top of your head. Read above. But I think you're sort of
like a mad bull at this point, working hard to keep this debate within
the confines of a definition rather than an easy to see reality...both
in my statements and in the clip.


The concept of directly is implied by "to windward at just over 6
knots VMG." If you hadn't said VMG, it would have been understood as
speed through the water by most sailors. But by using "VMG" and "to
windward" together, you imply the VMG directly into the wind.


Except that I then made it clear that I was sailing for a mark. AGAIN!
Oh boy!


I inferred exactly what every sailor would infer.

Do you think any sailor would continue to make such an inference based
on the facts as I gave them? Would they basically choose to ignore the
fundamental details? Would they just get it as mind bleedingly wrong as
you have??? I hope not!!!


and essentially
admitted that you didn't understand the fundamental concept.

More lies from Jeff the Drunk. Please provide the link to my comment!



Ooops! You've just opened up another area where you can
demonstrate
ignorance. Here's a hint: your wing keel does not improve your
performance to windward. It allows you to have performance almost as
good as the normal keel with a smaller draft. Not too many boats have
better upwind performance with a wing keel than with a deep keel.


BZZZZT!!! A perfect example of why you're losing this debate! I never
said it outperformed the deep keel version. The Deep keel sails 3-4
points higher and has less leeway. Once again you infered idiocy
conjured from your own depths. I simply said the wing does a good job,
which it does. A wingless 4.9 draft of the same boat would not perform
as well. And by the way, owners that have sailed BOTH versions have
claimed less leeway with the wing on a reach all the way to a close
reach. Heresay, but there it is.


Nonsense. Its a pretty gross error. There's almost no 35 footers
that can do 6 knots "VMG to Windward" while on a close reach.

Luckily I never made such a claim. You DID!

And
since you're not claiming extreme speeds, its a physical impossibility.


Just like beating hull speed. Guess why there's so little support for
you on this, Jeff. Because most folks with experience know polars are
often topped by significant margins.


Actually, I mentioned "through the water" several times. And it
takes
a real jackass to try to explain off a blunder like this by saying you
might have been confused by the current!


Oooooo! Just pointing out that you're incapable of grasping both the
gross and finer aspects of this discussion!


Why should I?

Why should you? Why make all this effort then?

I was very specific about the meaning of "VMG to
Windward."

And I was VERY specific about my comment and what I meant. Why choose
to ignore it? So you can argue about an intangible event? And let's not
forget that you now claim I wasn't even aboard! You sure are working
hard for someone who doesn't care! Wanna get on the phone and talk
about it?


They only serve to show your ignorance, such as
labeling a shot when you're on a close reach as "windward work."

Yep, I guess that was downwind work!


You have to sail another 50,000 miles or so to catch up to me.

I'm 43, Jeff. Lots of time and boats and sails ahead.

And if we just count to on the boat away from the dock, you don't
even
come close to me nowadays. For instance, I've averaged 70 full 24
hour days a year on aboard for the last 14 years. You probably don't
do 70 day sail

Again with the lame "I sailed further, slept aboard and cooked brownies
in the boom" crap. Play with your toys as you please.



I lied? How you you figure that?


Your VMG of 6 knots was clearly bogus from
the beginning, simply because this is extremely high, especially for a
35 foot boat.

And you're still wrong, Jeff. Because you've built your position on
ignoring the facts.


Everyone except knew that, except for you.

Huh? Dude, calm down. Take a pill!!


And you should have realized immediately that any VMG described in
your conditions clearly could not be the correct VMG to Windward.

Which is why I explained we were heading for a mark which was upwind
and our VMG to that mark was 6 knots. NOTHING you're saying contradicts
this. You're hanging onto the "VMG to windward" term for dear life, but
you KNOW that's not what I was talking about. You've known it for 20
posts and yet you still prattle on. I think I have a great
understanding of VMG. In fact, anyone with some clear understanding
would have known what I meant. But even after I explained it...as if
you're a two year old...you STILL can't grasp the events!


What numbers fail to support me?


All of them since you've created an event for my boat that I never
described.


"In clip #2 it's directly to windward. Do you know what that
means?"

THAT STATEMENT is in error. I meant that the mark was to windward.


That certainly sounds like you were saying "directly to windward" to

me. So now you're going to claim that "directly to windward" does not
mean in the directly from which ...

Nope....and again I think you clearly understand what I meant and I was
clear that I was sailing on a windward course for a mark at 6 knots
VMG. You don't want to admit to that because it destroys all of your
hard work here!
But it's much appreciated, Jeff. Last night I looked up a lot of polars
online and refined my understanding of them.

Now seriously, dude. Calm the F down!

I'm sorry you lost this debate. Nothing you said was flawed, but your
ability to adapt to my refined assertions were dreadful. And so you
lost. Good try though!



RB
35s5
NY

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
oups.com..
..

. But again, and I'll state it again because you
can't seem to accept it...we were NOT beating. The video
clearly shows
this as we are not sheeted for close hauled sailing.

Wouldn't that drop your VMG to windward a lot?

SBV

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

Jeff, remember that saying about teaching pigs to sing?



Scotty


"Jeff" wrote in message
. ..
Capt. Rob wrote:
...

Totally irrelevant. You might have something if he
had a hand picked
crew, new hi-tech sails, a fresh bottom job, and you
lost the A/C.

Well, now we're getting somewhere. My boat has the AC,
but she's
currently stripped out for the end of season cleaning.
No water in the
tanks, gear and even the anchor removed. My bottom is
clean and my
tired sails are less of a factor when I'm not hard on
the wind.

So you're saying you were not "hard on the wind"? And yet
you
exceeded the optimal VMG to Windward by 15%??? You still
don't
understand.




But boats don't suddenly gain 15% over their optimal
VMG to windward

just because a competent hand is on the wheel.


Calling this fellow competent is like saying O.J.
Simpson needed a
little therapy. He's a fairly top notch sailor and very
respected in
this area.

Good for him. Doesn't change anything. You're simply
mis-using the
terms.




Yes, it is. You just don't get it. Its like Road &
Track said a
certain car did the quarter in 5 seconds, and you
claimed you did it
in 4 seconds. In the snow.

Not at all. And Road and Track has gotten a second
more/less on cars
compared to other rags. Such tests, along with Polars
are rough
estimates at best.

By "rough" you mean off by a few percent. Not 15%. The
biggest
variance comes from sails, because the new technology can
go beyond
the assumptions of the VPP. However, if your sails are
old, you loose
any advantage there. And you've already admitted you
weren't pointing
at close to the optimal angle, so you lost any extra
pointing ability.


For example, my friend "claims" that he clobbers the
published polars of the J30.

"Clobber" going upwind means beating by 2 or 3 percent,
not 15%. And
he probably meant off the wind.


This is another point you fail to grasp. While some
boats can
frequently exceed their "theoretical limit" off the
wind, upwind it is
much more difficult to beat.

I grasp that, but your whole argument still hinges on
polars made up
when the boat was first designed and tested...more than
18 years ago.
Optimal trim and sails were yet to be found. In fact,
previous owner of
2 35s5's and Heart of Gold, Arthur Rodriguez said that
Beneteau had the
35s5 main all wrong and recut it for better upwind
performance. Mark P,
at Doyle is looking at the cut of my main next week on
this very issue.


Actually, my argument hinges on the fact that the polars
of almost
every boat your size has an optimal VMG to Windward of
well under 6
knots. Further, you claimed that you weren't even going
upward, that
you weren't hard on the wind. Further, you even claimed
that the mark
used for the VMG measurement was off the bow. And
finally, you're
claiming that the VMG was measured with GPS, and a
handheld unit at
that. All of these thing contradict your claim.




Further, upwind performance to not vary very much
between boats of the
same style. Boats simply don't suddenly go 15% faster
than predicted.
In PHRF terms, this is like suddenly going 100 points
faster than
then rating.

That's an exageration.

No. Its not an exaggeration, its called basic math. At 5
knots
you're doing 12 minutes per mile, or 720 seconds. At 6
knots, that's
600 seconds per mile. That's a difference of 120 second
per mile,
which translates directly into 120 points on the PHRF
rating. Maybe
its a bit less if you really get 5.2 knots, but its still
up near 100
points.

So what you're saying is that a quality skipper can make a
Westsail 32
go upwind faster, that is, get better boat speed, than an
average
skipper on a 35s5.

The 35s5 will stay with newer 1st boats upwind
as reported by owners. Her weakness is in the downward
leg. Even the
deep keel does poorly dead downwind.

It can stay close because in fact the differences are
pretty small,
only a few tenths. So when you sail nearby you can
deceive yourself
into thinking you're going almost as fast.



The other day you said any
Benny First would "smoke" an Ericson 35-3, when in fact
your boat only
has a couple of points on the Erikson. So when it suits
you, 2 points
is huge advantage, but now you're claiming that a proper
rating for
your boat should be around 30.


It's funny how you lie again and again and nobody calls
you on it. But
I will. I NEVER said my boat would "smoke" a E35 Mk3.

Sorry, you didn't say "smoke," you said "toast":

"As you might know, 1st series Beneteau's will toast any
Ericson 35.
The III from Bruce King was a fast boat, but 1 & 2 were
pretty slow.
The Mark III version is still outrun by the older Beneteau
1st 345 for
example"

So who's the liar? In fact the rating for the Ericson Mk
III is 123,
SD is 132, the Benny 345 TM is 120, and the 35s5 TM WK is
123. These
are all pretty close, only a few seconds a mile for the
comparison you
said would "outrun."

I said 1st series
Beneteau's are faster boats and that the E35 would have
a hard time
sailing around even a slow cruising Beneteau. You'd need
a Mumm 30 for
that! But Bart's silly post went unchallenged until I
pointed out how
dumb it was.

Actually, we all assumed he was talking about the sailing
ability of
Benny owners, but you seemed to have missed that.



Yes, I remember when a friend who was the local Star
champion came
on
my Nonsuch and started playing with the sail twist. He
made the boat
perform close to the polars, not exceed them by 15%.

Do you REALLY think this is a valid comparison? Your
comparing a
Nonsuch with a 1st 35s5 with a far more tunable and
variable rig. If he
only came close to the polars, then he must know have
known how to sail
your boat.

Actually, if you knew anything, you'd understand that the
Nonsuch rig
is quite adjustable. Why don't you explain to us how
often you adjust
your outhaul or topping lift while underway? I tweaked
mine at every
point of sail.



He probably told the truth. You, being a simpleton,
misunderstood.
He told you the VMG to a mark 10 degrees off the bow,
that is not the
VMG to Windward.

Actually, when I asked him our speed, he clearly said 6
knots. I then
asked what the VMG was and he repeated six knots and
that our speed was
showing over seven. He was impressed and so was I. The
mark WAS to
windward at this time. But again, and I'll state it
again because you
can't seem to accept it...we were NOT beating. The video
clearly shows
this as we are not sheeted for close hauled sailing.

Perhaps I should be more explicit: The mark has to be
directly to
windward. Not slightly to windward of your centerline.
There is a
huge difference.

And one more time you're claiming that you weren't even
close to the
wind, you weren't sheeted in, and yet you were going
upwind faster
than the polars predict! You really don't understand the
meaning of
these words, do you?




His GPS does NOT report the VMG to Windward. This is
the issue
here.
In order for the GPS to do that, the mark has to be
directly to
windward, preferably far away.

Sigh.

indeed.



You told us it was nearby, off the bow.

I gave that as an example for the 3rd clip, not the
second. Can't you
keep track of 3 short videos? The mark to windward was a
bouy on the
second clip/

So what was it, directly upwind or 10 degrees off the bow?
You said:

"We have a mark set on the GPS about a mile off and we're
on a
starboard tack (again, for example). Now, the mark is
about 10 degrees
off our starboard bow. GPS is reporting our VMG
fluctuating between
5.6 and 6.1 knots as we close on the mark. "

This sure sounds like it was not directly upwind. Nor was
it far away.




Everyone always assumes that everything you say is a
lie.


Yup...I lied about buying a 35s5, about sailing it 3-4
times a week,
about pretty girls aboard, about shackles on the dock,
even about
selling boats and doing sea trials. And yet each was
backed with pics
and even video which drove people like you out of your
skull. Even when
I said Bob L. trimmed the main a few minutes
later...BAM, you get a
pic. You all tell stories. Big fish tales. I have
documentation of my
modest sails. I fish for you all here, but you should
see the e-mails I
get. Most people who come in here think the rest of you
don't even have
boats!

yada yada yada.




I'd rather you took a course on basic sailing so we
wouldn't have to

explain the simple concepts to you over and over again,



You think they'd teach me that a close reach isn't to
windward? That
WAS your claim before you backpedalled like Lance
Armstrong from a
testicle biopsy.

So once again you're claiming that even while on a close
reach you had
a faster VMG to Windward than the polar predicts or the
touted review.
You simply don't understand the meaning of the terms.

Jeff, you really need Gilligan's help on this.

Gilly has gone over to the dark side!

RB Admits he has two feet in his mouth!!
 

Capt. Rob wrote:
So let's see one that was done in the last 15 or 20 years that was off
by 15% in upwind prediction. What you're claiming is that Beneteau
shipped a boat that the polars predicted was as slow upwind as a
Westsail.


35s5 owners claim to beat the polars by 7-10%.

Show me one such claim. And we're talking upwind, here, not off the
wind. If this were upwind, it would be an improvement of 50-70 points
on the PHRF



What course is that? You're the one who doesn't know what course
he
was on. I've only said it doesn't matter.


You keeping begging for the exact course, but it doesn't matter? Oh.

Why do you think it matters? I only ask for the course so I can
provide a more accurate value for the VMG to Windward. I've already
given the formula:
VMG to Windward = cosine(angle to the true wind) x speed through water.



I'm not demanding anything. I've only suggested that any sailor who

was on the boat at the time might know what point of sail the boat was
on.


Roughly between 50-60 degrees. How's that?

At 55 degrees, a speed a 8.5 yields a VMG of only 4.8 knots. And that
doesn't count leeway.



That does not appear to be true. You can't tell us the point of
sail.


Probably because I was enjoying myself and shooting some nice vids for
the group. Someone else was sailing. But I gave you a ROUGH estimate.


Actually you said it was directly to windward.

Nope, never said that...and if I construed it as such it's wrong. The
mark was to windward, but not directly.

Except for the time
when you said it was 10 degrees off the centerline.

For clip #3, yes. Not what we're talking about.

I never figured out your number system.


No, but they don't help that much.

Oh my!

Why should they help? Other than demonstrating that you weren't close
to the wind, but you had already stated that. Since you gave upper
limits for how high you were pointing, and how fast you were going,
there was no further info needed.

I trust them, within their limitations.

But then even you must essentially guess at those. By and large modern
instruments are pretty good and mine are newer than yours.

Are you sure? How old are mine?



When you never leave sight
of your slip you don't have to learn how your instruments work.

You can't see my slip from Execution rocks.

Its only three miles. I'm sure that's very scary for you, Bob.

Actually, IIRC Hart Island is not very high, you can probably see your
slip from the masthead, or maybe with the radar.



You
can just make up numbers to impress your "friends."

And show a video that impressed them even more....though it upset you
for reasons we all understand!

I hardly looked at the videos at all. You seem to be obsessed with
them, but they really weren't that good. I reacted entirely to you
obvious blunder in using the term "VMG to Windward."



WRONG! Ask any sailor with experience. "VMG to Windward" has a
very
specific meaning.

But I clearly made it clear so it would be clear that I was refering to
a mark windward of us. How many times can I say it? You don't want to
listen to that because then you have nothing left to stew about.

And when I said that that doesn't work unless the mark was exactly to
windward you then said it was. You screwed up. You didn't know the
meaning of the term. You're now trying to weasel out. You're Busted!


You keep saying that. And that's why it is impossible that your VMG

to Windward was 6 knots.

See above, genius. You really are arguing a point based on something I
never said.

Of course you said it. Its right there, in your first post: "to
windward at just over 6 knots VMG." That only has one meaning to a
sailor.

I know what VMG to windward means, but I was talking about
a mark windward of us.

No, now you're obviously lying.

The only backpedal here is YOU refusing to
acknowledge this little point.

Why would anyone misuse a precise term so blatantly? Its very clear
you didn't understand the difference. You had plenty of time to
correct it if it was a misunderstanding. No, you screwed up and now
you're lying to to cover it up.

Our VMG to the mark, was 6 knots. We
were on a windward tack to get there. Can't you figure this out? Three
people e-mailed me and THEY understand! Sheesh!

Bull****. You're lying again. They may have understood that you were
confused and misused the term. No competent sailor says "to windward
with a VMG of 6 knots" when they mean a VMG to an arbitrary point.
Its a meaningless statement.


The concept of directly is implied by "to windward at just over 6
knots VMG." If you hadn't said VMG, it would have been understood as
speed through the water by most sailors. But by using "VMG" and "to
windward" together, you imply the VMG directly into the wind.


Except that I then made it clear that I was sailing for a mark. AGAIN!
Oh boy!

And yet, when I insisted that the mark had to be directly to windward
you said it was.



I inferred exactly what every sailor would infer.

Do you think any sailor would continue to make such an inference based
on the facts as I gave them? Would they basically choose to ignore the
fundamental details? Would they just get it as mind bleedingly wrong as
you have??? I hope not!!!

What facts? What details? You didn't know the course, you seemed
confused about where the mark was. First off the bow, then directly
upwind, now somewhere else but you don't know where.




and essentially
admitted that you didn't understand the fundamental concept.

More lies from Jeff the Drunk. Please provide the link to my comment!

Its right here in this post. You're now claiming the VMG to Windward
doesn't mean directly into the wind, it can mean to some random point
somewhere upwind. I can certainly find numerous references that
support my side, can you find a single one that supports yours? Every
book on yacht design uses VMG almost exclusively to mean either
directly upwind or directly downwind (actually, they are the same,
just a sign change).



Ooops! You've just opened up another area where you can
demonstrate
ignorance. Here's a hint: your wing keel does not improve your
performance to windward. It allows you to have performance almost as
good as the normal keel with a smaller draft. Not too many boats have
better upwind performance with a wing keel than with a deep keel.


BZZZZT!!! A perfect example of why you're losing this debate! I never
said it outperformed the deep keel version. The Deep keel sails 3-4
points higher and has less leeway. Once again you infered idiocy
conjured from your own depths. I simply said the wing does a good job,
which it does. A wingless 4.9 draft of the same boat would not perform
as well. And by the way, owners that have sailed BOTH versions have
claimed less leeway with the wing on a reach all the way to a close
reach. Heresay, but there it is.

A complete performance package report (not just the polar part) would
tell, but the difference would be pretty small, I'm not sure how any
owner could actually detect it. The leeway on a beam-close reach
would be in the order of 2-3 degrees, so to claim one is better would
imply measuring a difference of maybe one degree or less on different
boats with different sails and setup. How can such a comment be
meaningful?

You implied that because of the wing your boat has less than normal
leeway; that's simply not the case.



Nonsense. Its a pretty gross error. There's almost no 35 footers
that can do 6 knots "VMG to Windward" while on a close reach.

Luckily I never made such a claim. You DID!

Gee, you made the claim that you were going "to windward at just over
6 knots VMG." And you showed a video, and then verified that you were
on a close reach. Sounds to me like you made the claim.


And
since you're not claiming extreme speeds, its a physical impossibility.

Just like beating hull speed. Guess why there's so little support for
you on this, Jeff. Because most folks with experience know polars are
often topped by significant margins.

No support??? Every other person who has contributed to this thread
has taken my side. Maybe someone else will jump in and claim they
frequently exceed their upwind polar by 15%, for more than a few
seconds. I'm waiting.


I was very specific about the meaning of "VMG to
Windward."

And I was VERY specific about my comment and what I meant.

Yes. And you had it wrong. Much later you tried to change it.

Why choose
to ignore it? So you can argue about an intangible event? And let's not
forget that you now claim I wasn't even aboard! You sure are working
hard for someone who doesn't care! Wanna get on the phone and talk
about it?

No, I'm happy to have everyone watch you embarrass yourself. You must
know that every claim you make in the future is tainted by your
blunder here.




They only serve to show your ignorance, such as
labeling a shot when you're on a close reach as "windward work."

Yep, I guess that was downwind work!

And again you mis-use a common phrase. Every sailor would understand
"windward work" to imply going upwind, not reaching slightly higher
than a beam reach.




You have to sail another 50,000 miles or so to catch up to me.

I'm 43, Jeff. Lots of time and boats and sails ahead.

And if we just count to on the boat away from the dock, you don't
even
come close to me nowadays. For instance, I've averaged 70 full 24
hour days a year on aboard for the last 14 years. You probably don't
do 70 day sail

Again with the lame "I sailed further, slept aboard and cooked brownies
in the boom" crap. Play with your toys as you please.

And I will. You're the one who insists that surely everyone must be
envious of you. Personally, I don't envy your boat or your sailing
area, and given a choice between daysailing 4 or 5 days a week, or
cruising 6-7 weeks every summer with an occasional full year cruise,
I'll take my life style every time.





Your VMG of 6 knots was clearly bogus from
the beginning, simply because this is extremely high, especially for a
35 foot boat.

And you're still wrong, Jeff. Because you've built your position on
ignoring the facts.

And what fact is that? The only defense you've stated is that you
mis-used the term "VMG to Windward." Stupidity is not a great defense.




Everyone except knew that, except for you.

Huh? Dude, calm down. Take a pill!!


And you should have realized immediately that any VMG described in
your conditions clearly could not be the correct VMG to Windward.

Which is why I explained we were heading for a mark which was upwind
and our VMG to that mark was 6 knots. NOTHING you're saying contradicts
this. You're hanging onto the "VMG to windward" term for dear life, but
you KNOW that's not what I was talking about. You've known it for 20
posts and yet you still prattle on.

Of course I knew that's the mistake you were making. I claim that you
didn't understand the difference until someone explained it to you
last night.

I think I have a great
understanding of VMG. In fact, anyone with some clear understanding
would have known what I meant. But even after I explained it...as if
you're a two year old...you STILL can't grasp the events!

The event is simply that you mis-used a very precise and commonly used
term, and failed to see your blunder for about 20 posts.




What numbers fail to support me?


All of them since you've created an event for my boat that I never
described.


"In clip #2 it's directly to windward. Do you know what that
means?"

THAT STATEMENT is in error. I meant that the mark was to windward.

In other words, when the essential issue was whether the mark was
directly to windward, or just somewhere to windward of the course, you
got it wrong and then failed to correct yourself. It sure looks like
you really didn't understand what was going on here.




That certainly sounds like you were saying "directly to windward" to

me. So now you're going to claim that "directly to windward" does not
mean in the directly from which ...

Nope....and again I think you clearly understand what I meant and I was
clear that I was sailing on a windward course for a mark at 6 knots
VMG.

Your original post did not mention a mark. When you then mentioned a
mark I assumed it must be a distant mark directly upwind.


You don't want to admit to that because it destroys all of your
hard work here!
But it's much appreciated, Jeff. Last night I looked up a lot of polars
online and refined my understanding of them.

Actually, why don't you share them here - I always like to check them out.


Now seriously, dude. Calm the F down!

I'm sorry you lost this debate. Nothing you said was flawed, but your
ability to adapt to my refined assertions were dreadful.

Especially when you insisted the mark was directly upwind. We're
still waiting for any reference that supports your claim that "to
windward with a VMG of 6 knots" would commonly be taken as anything
other than "VMG to Windward." Until then, this is a big win for me.

Heart of Gold clip to windward
 

What's that noise I hear, sounds like someone backpedaling.



"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
oups.com..
..




The mark WAS to WINDWARD.