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