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

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?


My boat can do that on most all POS, depending on where my
destination is.

Scotty

I notice no one, even your buddy Larry isn't sticking up for
you, *CAPT.* ROB.

BWahahahahahahahah


--
Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa _/)__/)_/)_
"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
oups.com..
..
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

I notice no one, even your buddy Larry isn't sticking up for
you, *CAPT.* ROB.


I don't know who larry is, but I seem to have some nice support, not to
mention 3 regulars who won't join in, but are having a blast watching
Jeff flail away.
I can always tell when the hook is in deep. It's when Scotty jumps in
and tries to help. Sadly, Scotty is too late to save him!

Maybe you can still save the spamster, Bart and his dated Dutchman
system??


RB
35s5
NY

Capt. Rob wrote:
I notice no one, even your buddy Larry isn't sticking up for
you, *CAPT.* ROB.


I don't know who larry is, but I seem to have some nice support, not to
mention 3 regulars who won't join in, but are having a blast watching
Jeff flail away.
I can always tell when the hook is in deep. It's when Scotty jumps in
and tries to help. Sadly, Scotty is too late to save him!

Maybe you can still save the spamster, Bart and his dated Dutchman
system??


RB
35s5
NY

Yes, you were hook pretty badly on this one. You're the one who had
admit the he screwed the pooch on this.



Capt. Rob wrote:
I notice no one, even your buddy Larry isn't sticking up for
you, *CAPT.* ROB.


I don't know who larry is, but I seem to have some nice support, not to
mention 3 regulars who won't join in, but are having a blast watching
Jeff flail away.
I can always tell when the hook is in deep. It's when Scotty jumps in
and tries to help. Sadly, Scotty is too late to save him!

Maybe you can still save the spamster, Bart and his dated Dutchman
system??


RB
35s5
NY

"Jeff" wrote in message
. ..


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.

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

I notice no one, even your buddy Larry isn't sticking up
for
you, *CAPT.* ROB.


you should be stripped of your rank .....if you had a real
one.



I don't know who larry is, but I seem to have some nice
support, not to
mention 3 regulars who won't join in, but are having a
blast watching


Oh, did I mention that I recieved 82 e-mails stateing that
you are a jerk?




I can always tell when the hook is in deep.


hurts your gums?


SwabRob, buy the book 'Sailing For Dummies', look up VMG,
take a few days, then get back to us.


--
Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa _/)__/)_/)_

Capt. Rob wrote:
Maybe you can still save the spamster, Bart and his dated Dutchman
system??

You DATE call someone else a spammer when you have spammed this group
with your boats for salen your Ebay commercials, and your name-dropping?
I'd say you have a lot of cajones, but we all know that couldn't be,
biggest pot/kettle/black....back into your black hole you go....you only
made it out for 4 days this time....

Show me one such claim.


Go look for them. Much has been written about the 1st series boats and
the conservative polars for them.


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

This is not the case headed for a mark that his not exactly to
windward. Sorry. You seem to be amazingly thick about this.



I never figured out your number system.


Yeah, not surprisingly, 3 clips numbered 1, 2 & 3 gave you some
trouble.


Why should they help?


Seriously???


Are you sure? How old are mine?

I don't know, but I doubt you bought them in the last three months.
You've hardly used your boat.


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


Yep, we were scared to death! Can't you tell from the video?


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

Seriously?


I hardly looked at the videos at all.

Clearly!

You seem to be obsessed with
them, but they really weren't that good.

And yet you "hardly looked at them!" Boy oh boy!

I reacted entirely to you
obvious blunder in using the term "VMG to Windward."


And even after I explained what I meant you continue to "react" much to
my amusement!


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.


Hmmm. I mentioned that the course was to the mark quite early on. It's
just fitting in with your silly POV to admit how clear I was. That's
why no one has jumped to your defense on this.


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 was on a windward course for a mark. That has MANY meanings to a
sailor. Your sad focus on my phrasing is meaningless, since you
obviously KNOW what I meant. I suspect that you even know I have a
grasp of VMG. In fact your whole focus is on my phrasing! Hilarious!


Why would anyone misuse a precise term so blatantly?

Well, I STILL don't think I misused it in any important way...except to
you. What's odd is that you could not deduce what I meant.

You had plenty of time to
correct it if it was a misunderstanding.

Uhh...I did.

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.

It's not a meaningless statement when you're on a boat shooting for a
mark. That was dumb of you, Jeff!


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

And therin lies the only error I made, which I then corrected. But
NOPE. Old man Jeff hangs on doggedly to that because his whole castle
of frustration is built on it!


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.


Anyone who reads what you just wrote will know YOU'RE confused. You
can't even tell the clips apart and confused a hypothetical question
with the facts on a clip that didn't even relate to this discussion!


Its right here in this post.

You SAID that I admitted it. Please show everyone where I "admitted it"
so we know you're not a liar. In fact, you've repeatedly misquoted me
to support you sad excuse for a point. I have not.

You're now claiming the VMG to Windward
doesn't mean directly into the wind,

I like the way you changed my phrasing, but I think others will spot
this, Jeff. Nice try.

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).


Oh, well then we all know that we follow how things are done in books!
And that NEVER changes or is altered by anyone, right? LOL!



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


Wow, you either have an awful grasp of English or you have no problem
with lying again and again. Here's my EXACT comment:

"The 35s5 does a fine job
of cutting leeway with her wing. "

That statement stands on it's own. It in now way infers a comparison
with a deep draft 35s5 or a CB C&C 36 or a WB Maxi 60. Stop lying and
you might get some respect around here.


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.

I guess what I said after that to further describe the situation can't
possibly matter, right Jeff???? Hmmmm?


No support??? Every other person who has contributed to this thread

has taken my side.


Uh, Jeff....news flash. You could claim that your boat sails better
with peanut butter on the sails and your lovers would still support
you. Doesn't mean much. Take the recent thread on Dutchman vs.
Stackpack for example. Most people know the Doyle is better, they just
won't admit to it because I said it.


Much later you tried to change it.

Much later? Is it April?


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.

Now THAT'S funny, Jeff. everyone sees you on yet another one of my
hooks and I should feel embarassed? Not likely, dude!


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.

And technically they'd be wrong, Jeff. And that's because anything
higher than a beam reach IS windward work. It doesn't matter at all if
people don't use the term in that way. I'm still correct.
And you're still wrong.

Face the truth old man! You saw my video of my boat sailing like a
bird, moving fine and fast and it ****ED YOU OFF!!!!

RB
35s5
NY

Scotty wrote:
"Swab Rob" wrote in message
ups.com...
I notice no one, even your buddy Larry isn't sticking up
for
you, *CAPT.* ROB.


you should be stripped of your rank .....if you had a real
one.



I don't know who larry is, but I seem to have some nice
support, not to
mention 3 regulars who won't join in, but are having a
blast watching


Oh, did I mention that I recieved 82 e-mails stateing that
you are a jerk?



I can always tell when the hook is in deep.


hurts your gums?


SwabRob, buy the book 'Sailing For Dummies', look up VMG,
take a few days, then get back to us.


--
Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa _/)__/)_/)_





I think he's pretty rank...but let's take pity on Suzy...the idea of RB
stripped?????ew...