Handicaps...

[Terry]

I have been sailing for many years and used and compared many handicap systems. (Although by no means claim to be the most knowledgeable on the topic)

The best thing I have heard is that, when comparing handicap systems, the system where the difference in corrected times for the slowest and the fastest yacht in the fleet is the least, should be considered to be the fairest. This is because, if the handicap worked as it should, all the boats should be finishing on the same corrected time (or as near as possible to it)

A system like that sounds great, as it will also give the inexperienced sailors a chance to win occasionally (but unfortunately that does mean their sailing skills are handicapped and not the boat)

More recently when I had a closer look at another system, which used lots of various measurements the thought occurred to me that once the rating is calculated, it only produces a single rating number. That same number is subsequently used for all events, whether the wind is stronger or lesser, or the tide is with you or against you.

It occurred to me, and I have often heard people saying that no handicap system takes account of the wind and tide. (Okay I have seen some systems using average wind on the day)

Now with modern GPS systems one can obtain a Yachts Polar Plot that shows the ultimate speed a boat can sail in various wind conditions.

At the same time true wind speed and direction , can be recorded throughout the event by each vessel, provided suitable electronic equipment are aboard the vessel.

Current speed and direction can also be recorded by vessels during the race

With modern computer technology, it should then be possible to input this data into a computer onto a system like “Virtual Skipper”.

The idea is that after a race, the recorded information is then handed to the race office by each competitor. Each yachts data is then put through the paces in the Virtual environment and the computer determines what the optimum time should have been for the yacht to sail round the course.

The difference in what the computer calculated for each yacht and the actual times it took them to complete the course would then be a clear indication on which of the crews made the least mistakes in sailing their boat round the course and can allow positions to be allocated on this basis.

Now I am in no position to develop or completely put together a system like this, but I thought I would plant the concept and perhaps one day a system like this will be available.

At the very least, I think it will produce a fairer system and stop this “When I loose, it is because of a crap handicap, but when I win its because I am such a good sailor” scenarios.

Regards

Terry Naude

[Art_Engel2]

You've essentially described the Offshore Racing Rule or ORR. It uses a
VPP (velocity prediction program) to determine what a boat's predicted
speed should be, based on the windstrength and wind angle. A VPP is
essentially a very sophisticated version of the simpler formulas usually
used to generate ratings. The difference is that it takes far more
measurements and makes far more calculations. The original VPP was
developed at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) in the late
'60s or early '70s. The ORR VPP is pretty much what you describe, a
"virtual" boat sailing a mock race to generate time predictions, which
are then used to generate ratings.

ORR is developed and owned by the Offshore Racing Association (ORA) with
certificates issued and administered by US Sailing. It is most often
used for distance races. In the US, there are about twice as many boats
with ORR certificates as have IRC certificates (560 vs 265, as of the
end of Aug.). So, it is the more popular system in the US, especially
for distance races.

Much of ORR racing uses wind-indexed ratings (with a single TCF for each
windstrength range). However, it also has more sophisticated two-number
ratings that are a combination of both TOD and TOT - the result is that
the windstrength is calculated based on the course distance and the
elapsed time and the RC need not make any decisions. This can be used
for a long offshore race where the RC is not present throughout the race
to make measurements.

In the US, there is a new rule called the High Performance Rule or HPR.
I believe it also makes use of a VPP that is an offshoot of the original
MIT VPP. The ORR VPP is secret so designers cannot "design to the rule."
The HPR VPP is publicly available to naval architects so one should
expect boats to be designed to the rule and older boats to potentially
become obsolete within a few years (think IMS).

By the way, I don't think "spread of corrected times" is necessarily a
good criteria for measuring a rating or handicap system IF you are
trying to rate or handicap boats (as opposed to skippers). In horse-race
handicapping it is assumed that the jockey makes very little difference
to the results of races. That is certainly not true but the jockey is
probably only 1-2% of the results among the top horses in a race. In
sailboat racing, the skill level of the crew (tactics, boatspeed and
crew-handling) are going to be worth at least 20-30% of the result. So,
you would NEVER expect (or want) a rating or handicap system to produce
the same corrected time for every boat unless your fleet was pretty
small and your skill level very high OR unless you were trying to
handicap skippers as well as boats.

I did some calculations from a Farr 40 worlds a while back and the
average difference between the slowest and fastest boats was about 35
sec/mi. If your spread is less than that then I would tend to be suspicious.

Art

···

On 9/5/2013 11:46 AM, Terry wrote:

I have been sailing for many years and used and compared many handicap
systems. (Although by no means claim to be the most knowledgeable on the
topic)

The best thing I have heard is that, when comparing handicap systems, the
system where the difference in corrected times for the slowest and the
fastest yacht in the fleet is the least, should be considered to be the
fairest. This is because, if the handicap worked as it should, all the boats
should be finishing on the same corrected time (or as near as possible to
it)

A system like that sounds great, as it will also give the inexperienced
sailors a chance to win occasionally (but unfortunately that does mean their
sailing skills are handicapped and not the boat)

More recently when I had a closer look at another system, which used lots of
various measurements the thought occurred to me that once the rating is
calculated, it only produces a single rating number. That same number is
subsequently used for all events, whether the wind is stronger or lesser, or
the tide is with you or against you.

It occurred to me, and I have often heard people saying that no handicap
system takes account of the wind and tide. (Okay I have seen some systems
using average wind on the day)

Now with modern GPS systems one can obtain a Yachts Polar Plot that shows
the ultimate speed a boat can sail in various wind conditions.

http://myhanse.com/uploads/20080328_210806_polar_430.jpg

At the same time true wind speed and direction , can be recorded throughout
the event by each vessel, provided suitable electronic equipment are aboard
the vessel.

Current speed and direction can also be recorded by vessels during the race

With modern computer technology, it should then be possible to input this
data into a computer onto a system like "Virtual Skipper".

The idea is that after a race, the recorded information is then handed to
the race office by each competitor. Each yachts data is then put through the
paces in the Virtual environment and the computer determines what the
optimum time should have been for the yacht to sail round the course.

The difference in what the computer calculated for each yacht and the actual
times it took them to complete the course would then be a clear indication
on which of the crews made the least mistakes in sailing their boat round
the course and can allow positions to be allocated on this basis.

Now I am in no position to develop or completely put together a system like
this, but I thought I would plant the concept and perhaps one day a system
like this will be available.

At the very least, I think it will produce a fairer system and stop this
"When I loose, it is because of a crap handicap, but when I win its because
I am such a good sailor" scenarios.

Regards

Terry Naude

[Terry]

If that's what you think I have described then my description has not been
very good, although I can see how the similarities can be confused.

The method I propose, does not require any measurements of sails boat length
etc. It relies on the electronic data provided by boat instruments, to
record and draw up the polar curve of the vessel. Records the wind strength
throughout the race uses recorded currents.

The idea is to feed this into a computer after each race for each of the
competing boats to give a more accurate result instead of a single rating.

I guess all I am saying is that the technology is there to provide such a
system today. It does rely on electronics which are becoming more and more
reliable these days and I can see a way in which handicaps can be improved.

Not sure what you would be suspicious of if the spread is less between
slowest and fastest, it would depend on conditions and how closely vessels
and teams are matched.

Appreciate your input.

Kind Regards
Terry

···

-----Original Message-----
From: sailwave@yahoogroups.com [mailto:sailwave@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Art Engel
Sent: 05 September 2013 20:41
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [sailwave] Handicaps...

You've essentially described the Offshore Racing Rule or ORR. It uses a VPP
(velocity prediction program) to determine what a boat's predicted speed
should be, based on the windstrength and wind angle. A VPP is essentially a
very sophisticated version of the simpler formulas usually used to generate
ratings. The difference is that it takes far more measurements and makes far
more calculations. The original VPP was developed at MIT (Massachusetts
Institute of Technology) in the late '60s or early '70s. The ORR VPP is
pretty much what you describe, a "virtual" boat sailing a mock race to
generate time predictions, which are then used to generate ratings.

ORR is developed and owned by the Offshore Racing Association (ORA) with
certificates issued and administered by US Sailing. It is most often used
for distance races. In the US, there are about twice as many boats with ORR
certificates as have IRC certificates (560 vs 265, as of the end of Aug.).
So, it is the more popular system in the US, especially for distance races.

Much of ORR racing uses wind-indexed ratings (with a single TCF for each
windstrength range). However, it also has more sophisticated two-number
ratings that are a combination of both TOD and TOT - the result is that the
windstrength is calculated based on the course distance and the elapsed time
and the RC need not make any decisions. This can be used for a long offshore
race where the RC is not present throughout the race to make measurements.

In the US, there is a new rule called the High Performance Rule or HPR.
I believe it also makes use of a VPP that is an offshoot of the original MIT
VPP. The ORR VPP is secret so designers cannot "design to the rule."
The HPR VPP is publicly available to naval architects so one should expect
boats to be designed to the rule and older boats to potentially become
obsolete within a few years (think IMS).

By the way, I don't think "spread of corrected times" is necessarily a good
criteria for measuring a rating or handicap system IF you are trying to rate
or handicap boats (as opposed to skippers). In horse-race handicapping it is
assumed that the jockey makes very little difference to the results of
races. That is certainly not true but the jockey is probably only 1-2% of
the results among the top horses in a race. In sailboat racing, the skill
level of the crew (tactics, boatspeed and
crew-handling) are going to be worth at least 20-30% of the result. So, you
would NEVER expect (or want) a rating or handicap system to produce the same
corrected time for every boat unless your fleet was pretty small and your
skill level very high OR unless you were trying to handicap skippers as well
as boats.

I did some calculations from a Farr 40 worlds a while back and the average
difference between the slowest and fastest boats was about 35 sec/mi. If
your spread is less than that then I would tend to be suspicious.

Art

[Art_Engel2]

Sorry - I was mostly assuming the same as you except that in the real
world today 99%+ of polars are generated by VPPs. If you generated a
polar based on a boat's actual performance then your polar will also be
based on the crew's skill in trimming the sails. I believe the term
"polars" is mostly used to mean "boat potential without regard to crew
skill."

Your idea (as amplified) is interesting. In theory it would mean that a
boat gets a handicap for the ability of the crew to make the boat go
fast but not for tactics. So, you could be really lousy at making the
boat go fast but still win if your ability to pick shifts and position
your boat was better. Sailmakers would hate that is there would be
almost no incentive to buy new sails to make your boat go faster.

Of course, if you used the data from a race to score a race you'd mostly
be doing a circular calculation but the data could be used for future
races without that problem.

I don't think most people would accept your implicit premise - that sail
trimming ability should be handicapped so everyone is equal. But, some
certainly would.

As for narrow versus wide spreads, my example of the Farr 40 worlds is a
race where the boats are identical (really strict class rules) and every
boat had a paid professional tactician. The boats are the same and the
crew skills are all going to be very high level (although not the same,
obviously). Most fleets and races are going to have a significantly
wider range of crew skills. In the fleet I sail in locally (10-12 boats
per race), first to last averages around 120 sec/mi (that's TWO minutes
per mile difference in corrected times).

The reason I mentioned the spreads is because many people have a false
perception that narrow differences in corrected time always mean a more
competitive race. Take the corrected times from any race and divide all
the times by 3. The difference from first to last is going to be just
1/3 of the original about but the percentage difference is exactly the
same so the race is exactly the same in terms of competitiveness even
though the corrected times are narrower by 67%.

Art

···

On 9/5/2013 2:52 PM, Terry wrote:

If that's what you think I have described then my description has not been
very good, although I can see how the similarities can be confused.

The method I propose, does not require any measurements of sails boat length
etc. It relies on the electronic data provided by boat instruments, to
record and draw up the polar curve of the vessel. Records the wind strength
throughout the race uses recorded currents.

The idea is to feed this into a computer after each race for each of the
competing boats to give a more accurate result instead of a single rating.

I guess all I am saying is that the technology is there to provide such a
system today. It does rely on electronics which are becoming more and more
reliable these days and I can see a way in which handicaps can be improved.

Not sure what you would be suspicious of if the spread is less between
slowest and fastest, it would depend on conditions and how closely vessels
and teams are matched.

Appreciate your input.

Kind Regards
Terry

-----Original Message-----
From: sailwave@yahoogroups.com [mailto:sailwave@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Art Engel
Sent: 05 September 2013 20:41
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [sailwave] Handicaps...

You've essentially described the Offshore Racing Rule or ORR. It uses a VPP
(velocity prediction program) to determine what a boat's predicted speed
should be, based on the windstrength and wind angle. A VPP is essentially a
very sophisticated version of the simpler formulas usually used to generate
ratings. The difference is that it takes far more measurements and makes far
more calculations. The original VPP was developed at MIT (Massachusetts
Institute of Technology) in the late '60s or early '70s. The ORR VPP is
pretty much what you describe, a "virtual" boat sailing a mock race to
generate time predictions, which are then used to generate ratings.

ORR is developed and owned by the Offshore Racing Association (ORA) with
certificates issued and administered by US Sailing. It is most often used
for distance races. In the US, there are about twice as many boats with ORR
certificates as have IRC certificates (560 vs 265, as of the end of Aug.).
So, it is the more popular system in the US, especially for distance races.

Much of ORR racing uses wind-indexed ratings (with a single TCF for each
windstrength range). However, it also has more sophisticated two-number
ratings that are a combination of both TOD and TOT - the result is that the
windstrength is calculated based on the course distance and the elapsed time
and the RC need not make any decisions. This can be used for a long offshore
race where the RC is not present throughout the race to make measurements.

In the US, there is a new rule called the High Performance Rule or HPR.
I believe it also makes use of a VPP that is an offshoot of the original MIT
VPP. The ORR VPP is secret so designers cannot "design to the rule."
The HPR VPP is publicly available to naval architects so one should expect
boats to be designed to the rule and older boats to potentially become
obsolete within a few years (think IMS).

By the way, I don't think "spread of corrected times" is necessarily a good
criteria for measuring a rating or handicap system IF you are trying to rate
or handicap boats (as opposed to skippers). In horse-race handicapping it is
assumed that the jockey makes very little difference to the results of
races. That is certainly not true but the jockey is probably only 1-2% of
the results among the top horses in a race. In sailboat racing, the skill
level of the crew (tactics, boatspeed and
crew-handling) are going to be worth at least 20-30% of the result. So, you
would NEVER expect (or want) a rating or handicap system to produce the same
corrected time for every boat unless your fleet was pretty small and your
skill level very high OR unless you were trying to handicap skippers as well
as boats.

I did some calculations from a Farr 40 worlds a while back and the average
difference between the slowest and fastest boats was about 35 sec/mi. If
your spread is less than that then I would tend to be suspicious.

Art

------------------------------------

-!- http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/ -!- http://www.sailing.org/ -!- http://www.sailwave.com/ -!- On-Line Sailwave help...http://sailwave.com/help/HTML ~ Mark Townsend's Sailwave User Guide is available from http://www.abyc.org/upload/Sailwave_ABYC_User_Guide.pdf ~ Convert to daily digest of emails send blank email to sailwave-digest@yahoogroups.com ~ To unsubscribe from the SUG please send blank email to sailwave-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links

[Archie_Su]

I hope you don’t mind a personal observation regarding this excellent and informative discussion. I regard a low spread (not including known unreliable performers) as a wonderful encouragement to try harder. If you know that one fluffed tack will cost you a position, this takes you back to competitive one design dinghy sailing in which the competition is all the more enjoyable since it is achievable. In local Club Racing personal/performance handicaps make it more enjoyable for the regular racers.
archie97

···

---

From: Art Engel artengel123@earthlink.net
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2013 11:32 PM
Subject: Re: [sailwave] Handicaps…

Sorry - I was mostly assuming the same as you except that in the real

world today 99%+ of polars are generated by VPPs. If you generated a

polar based on a boat’s actual performance then your polar will also be

based on the crew’s skill in trimming the sails. I believe the term

“polars” is mostly used to mean "boat potential without regard to crew

skill."

Your idea (as amplified) is interesting. In theory it would mean that a

boat gets a handicap for the ability of the crew to make the boat go

fast but not for tactics. So, you could be really lousy at making the

boat go fast but still win if your ability to pick shifts and position

your boat was better. Sailmakers would hate that is there would be

almost no incentive to buy new sails to make your boat go faster.

Of course, if you used the data from a race to score a race you’d mostly

be doing a circular calculation but the data could be used for future

races without that problem.

I don’t think most people would accept your implicit premise - that sail

trimming ability should be handicapped so everyone is equal. But, some

certainly would.

As for narrow versus wide spreads, my example of the Farr 40 worlds is a

race where the boats are identical (really strict class rules) and every

boat had a paid professional tactician. The boats are the same and the

crew skills are all going to be very high level (although not the same,

obviously). Most fleets and races are going to have a significantly

wider range of crew skills. In the fleet I sail in locally (10-12 boats

per race), first to last averages around 120 sec/mi (that’s TWO minutes

per mile difference in corrected times).

The reason I mentioned the spreads is because many people have a false

perception that narrow differences in corrected time always mean a more

competitive race. Take the corrected times from any race and divide all

the times by 3. The difference from first to last is going to be just

1/3 of the original about but the percentage difference is exactly the

same so the race is exactly the same in terms of competitiveness even

though the corrected times are narrower by 67%.

Art

On 9/5/2013 2:52 PM, Terry wrote:

If that’s what you think I have described then my description has not been

very good, although I can see how the similarities can be confused.

The method I propose, does not require any measurements of sails boat length

etc. It relies on the electronic data provided by boat instruments, to

record and draw up the polar curve of the vessel. Records the wind strength

throughout the race uses recorded currents.

The idea is to feed this into a computer after each race for each of the

competing boats to give a more accurate result instead of a single rating.

I guess all I am saying is that the technology is there to provide such a

system today. It does rely on electronics which are becoming more and more

reliable these days and I can see a way in which handicaps can be improved.

Not sure what you would be suspicious of if the spread is less between

slowest and fastest, it would depend on conditions and how closely vessels

and teams are matched.

Appreciate your input.

Kind Regards

Terry

-----Original Message-----

From: sailwave@yahoogroups.com [mailto:sailwave@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf

Of Art Engel

Sent: 05 September 2013 20:41

To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com

Subject: Re: [sailwave] Handicaps…

You’ve essentially described the Offshore Racing Rule or ORR. It uses a VPP

(velocity prediction program) to determine what a boat’s predicted speed

should be, based on the windstrength and wind angle. A VPP is essentially a

very sophisticated version of the simpler formulas usually used to generate

ratings. The difference is that it takes far more measurements and makes far

more calculations. The original VPP was developed at MIT (Massachusetts

Institute of Technology) in the late '60s or early '70s. The ORR VPP is

pretty much what you describe, a “virtual” boat sailing a mock race to

generate time predictions, which are then used to generate ratings.

ORR is developed and owned by the Offshore Racing Association (ORA) with

certificates issued and administered by US Sailing. It is most often used

for distance races. In the US, there are about twice as many boats with ORR

certificates as have IRC certificates (560 vs 265, as of the end of Aug.).

So, it is the more popular system in the US, especially for distance races.

Much of ORR racing uses wind-indexed ratings (with a single TCF for each

windstrength range). However, it also has more sophisticated two-number

ratings that are a combination of both TOD and TOT - the result is that the

windstrength is calculated based on the course distance and the elapsed time

and the RC need not make any decisions. This can be used for a long offshore

race where the RC is not present throughout the race to make measurements.

In the US, there is a new rule called the High Performance Rule or HPR.

I believe it also makes use of a VPP that is an offshoot of the original MIT

VPP. The ORR VPP is secret so designers cannot “design to the rule.”

The HPR VPP is publicly available to naval architects so one should expect

boats to be designed to the rule and older boats to potentially become

obsolete within a few years (think IMS).

By the way, I don’t think “spread of corrected times” is necessarily a good

criteria for measuring a rating or handicap system IF you are trying to rate

or handicap boats (as opposed to skippers). In horse-race handicapping it is

assumed that the jockey makes very little difference to the results of

races. That is certainly not true but the jockey is probably only 1-2% of

the results among the top horses in a race. In sailboat racing, the skill

level of the crew (tactics, boatspeed and

crew-handling) are going to be worth at least 20-30% of the result. So, you

would NEVER expect (or want) a rating or handicap system to produce the same

corrected time for every boat unless your fleet was pretty small and your

skill level very high OR unless you were trying to handicap skippers as well

as boats.

I did some calculations from a Farr 40 worlds a while back and the average

difference between the slowest and fastest boats was about 35 sec/mi. If

your spread is less than that then I would tend to be suspicious.

Art

---

-!- http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/ -!- http://www.sailing.org/ -!- http://www.sailwave.com/ -!- On-Line Sailwave help…http://sailwave.com/help/HTML ~ Mark Townsend’s Sailwave User Guide is available from http://www.abyc.org/upload/Sailwave_ABYC_User_Guide.pdf ~ Convert to daily digest of emails send blank email to sailwave-digest@yahoogroups.com ~ To unsubscribe from the SUG please send blank email to sailwave-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links

[Terry]

When a polar curve is generated by boats actual performance, throughout a
race, the best speed achieved for a specific wind speed and direction is
plotted on the curve. In my view, poor sail trimmers will pay attention to
what they are doing at least once on a tack and can often hit the optimum
boat speed in a specific direction (or as near as dammit to it) at least
once in a race. Good Trimming allows you to keep optimum speed most of the
way and should make you win.

As you state, I would expect data from the generated polar curve of the
vessel to be kept and updated in future events so that the data merely
becomes more and more accurate.

I can see that initially with little data of the vessel being sailed badly,
she might be at an advantage but as more data is recorded this advantage
should soon be removed. (If that proves to be a problem, an adjustment could
be put in place for lack of data to avoid the new guy always upsetting the
seasalts by walking off with their trophies.)

However as the data used for each race corrects the polar curve, if the poor
trimmers suddenly improve their skills, their polar curve will be updated
accordingly and they will be scored accordingly. It might cause a problem in
a series if at the end of a series the curve is corrected. This could cause
the series to be re-calculated and results for the first few races being
re-issued. This will however avoid somebody sailing the first half of the
series with a junk set of sails and a dirty bottom, and then the second half
of the series with a brand new set of laminate sails and a clean bottom.

I agree that Sailmakers will not be pleased as incentive for buying new or
laminate sails could be reduced. On the other hand, I believe that the best
sailors should win the race, not those with the most money. (Those with the
most money will still be able to afford having their boats scrubbed and
polished before each event)

A problem might occur when a yacht surfs down a wave and reaches speeds
greater than she is meant to. Updating the curve immediately would suggest
she is capable of much more and in future she will never come anywhere near
such a speed. Perhaps there is a clever way in which such irregularities
could be filtered out. (possibly by comparing these to VPP)

Another problem might be were a vessel needs to be downgraded. For example,
say she sailed a perfect first race. On race she blows all her laminate
sails out. For the rest of the series she sails on cruising sails. I would
suggest she cannot be downgraded in the middle of a series. Data from race
three onwards will in affect be valid data for submission to the next
downgraded polar curve to start the next series.

As for the Farr 40 worlds... Are they handicapped or sailed as a one design
fleet. I have raced one design classes before (not just sailing either) and
also often found that he who has the most money often has an advantage.

With regard to spreads, I take your point and % would be a better comparison
than difference in corrected time. However my comparison would not to
compare different races to determine which is more competitive sailors.
Instead, compare the corrected times from the same race with different
handicap systems. If one system consistently comes out with a lower
difference in corrected times (or % in difference if you prefer) then it
most likely is the better handicap system.

An easy way to test this is to simply run the data from a previously
completed series through another rating system and to compare the results.

Kind regards
Terry

···

-----Original Message-----
From: sailwave@yahoogroups.com [mailto:sailwave@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Art Engel
Sent: 05 September 2013 23:32
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [sailwave] Handicaps...

Sorry - I was mostly assuming the same as you except that in the real world
today 99%+ of polars are generated by VPPs. If you generated a polar based
on a boat's actual performance then your polar will also be based on the
crew's skill in trimming the sails. I believe the term "polars" is mostly
used to mean "boat potential without regard to crew skill."

Your idea (as amplified) is interesting. In theory it would mean that a boat
gets a handicap for the ability of the crew to make the boat go fast but not
for tactics. So, you could be really lousy at making the boat go fast but
still win if your ability to pick shifts and position your boat was better.
Sailmakers would hate that is there would be almost no incentive to buy new
sails to make your boat go faster.

Of course, if you used the data from a race to score a race you'd mostly be
doing a circular calculation but the data could be used for future races
without that problem.

I don't think most people would accept your implicit premise - that sail
trimming ability should be handicapped so everyone is equal. But, some
certainly would.

As for narrow versus wide spreads, my example of the Farr 40 worlds is a
race where the boats are identical (really strict class rules) and every
boat had a paid professional tactician. The boats are the same and the crew
skills are all going to be very high level (although not the same,
obviously). Most fleets and races are going to have a significantly wider
range of crew skills. In the fleet I sail in locally (10-12 boats per race),
first to last averages around 120 sec/mi (that's TWO minutes per mile
difference in corrected times).

The reason I mentioned the spreads is because many people have a false
perception that narrow differences in corrected time always mean a more
competitive race. Take the corrected times from any race and divide all the
times by 3. The difference from first to last is going to be just
1/3 of the original about but the percentage difference is exactly the same
so the race is exactly the same in terms of competitiveness even though the
corrected times are narrower by 67%.

Art

On 9/5/2013 2:52 PM, Terry wrote:

If that's what you think I have described then my description has not
been very good, although I can see how the similarities can be confused.

The method I propose, does not require any measurements of sails boat
length etc. It relies on the electronic data provided by boat
instruments, to record and draw up the polar curve of the vessel.
Records the wind strength throughout the race uses recorded currents.

The idea is to feed this into a computer after each race for each of
the competing boats to give a more accurate result instead of a single

rating.

I guess all I am saying is that the technology is there to provide
such a system today. It does rely on electronics which are becoming
more and more reliable these days and I can see a way in which handicaps

can be improved.

Not sure what you would be suspicious of if the spread is less between
slowest and fastest, it would depend on conditions and how closely
vessels and teams are matched.

Appreciate your input.

Kind Regards
Terry

-----Original Message-----
From: sailwave@yahoogroups.com [mailto:sailwave@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Art Engel
Sent: 05 September 2013 20:41
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [sailwave] Handicaps...

You've essentially described the Offshore Racing Rule or ORR. It uses
a VPP (velocity prediction program) to determine what a boat's
predicted speed should be, based on the windstrength and wind angle. A
VPP is essentially a very sophisticated version of the simpler
formulas usually used to generate ratings. The difference is that it
takes far more measurements and makes far more calculations. The
original VPP was developed at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of
Technology) in the late '60s or early '70s. The ORR VPP is pretty much
what you describe, a "virtual" boat sailing a mock race to generate time

predictions, which are then used to generate ratings.

ORR is developed and owned by the Offshore Racing Association (ORA)
with certificates issued and administered by US Sailing. It is most
often used for distance races. In the US, there are about twice as
many boats with ORR certificates as have IRC certificates (560 vs 265, as

of the end of Aug.).

So, it is the more popular system in the US, especially for distance

races.

Much of ORR racing uses wind-indexed ratings (with a single TCF for
each windstrength range). However, it also has more sophisticated
two-number ratings that are a combination of both TOD and TOT - the
result is that the windstrength is calculated based on the course
distance and the elapsed time and the RC need not make any decisions.
This can be used for a long offshore race where the RC is not present

throughout the race to make measurements.

In the US, there is a new rule called the High Performance Rule or HPR.
I believe it also makes use of a VPP that is an offshoot of the
original MIT VPP. The ORR VPP is secret so designers cannot "design to the

rule."

The HPR VPP is publicly available to naval architects so one should
expect boats to be designed to the rule and older boats to potentially
become obsolete within a few years (think IMS).

By the way, I don't think "spread of corrected times" is necessarily a
good criteria for measuring a rating or handicap system IF you are
trying to rate or handicap boats (as opposed to skippers). In
horse-race handicapping it is assumed that the jockey makes very
little difference to the results of races. That is certainly not true
but the jockey is probably only 1-2% of the results among the top
horses in a race. In sailboat racing, the skill level of the crew
(tactics, boatspeed and
crew-handling) are going to be worth at least 20-30% of the result.
So, you would NEVER expect (or want) a rating or handicap system to
produce the same corrected time for every boat unless your fleet was
pretty small and your skill level very high OR unless you were trying
to handicap skippers as well as boats.

I did some calculations from a Farr 40 worlds a while back and the
average difference between the slowest and fastest boats was about 35
sec/mi. If your spread is less than that then I would tend to be

suspicious.

Art

------------------------------------

-!- http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/ -!- http://www.sailing.org/ -!-
http://www.sailwave.com/ -!- On-Line Sailwave
help...http://sailwave.com/help/HTML ~ Mark Townsend's Sailwave User
Guide is available from
http://www.abyc.org/upload/Sailwave_ABYC_User_Guide.pdf ~ Convert to
daily digest of emails send blank email to
sailwave-digest@yahoogroups.com ~ To unsubscribe from the SUG please
send blank email to sailwave-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups
Links

------------------------------------

-!- http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/ -!- http://www.sailing.org/ -!-
http://www.sailwave.com/ -!- On-Line Sailwave
help...http://sailwave.com/help/HTML ~ Mark Townsend's Sailwave User Guide
is available from http://www.abyc.org/upload/Sailwave_ABYC_User_Guide.pdf ~
Convert to daily digest of emails send blank email to
sailwave-digest@yahoogroups.com ~ To unsubscribe from the SUG please send
blank email to sailwave-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links

[Art_Engel2]

Some comments interlineated.

When a polar curve is generated by boats actual performance, throughout a
race, the best speed achieved for a specific wind speed and direction is
plotted on the curve. In my view, poor sail trimmers will pay attention to
what they are doing at least once on a tack and can often hit the optimum
boat speed in a specific direction (or as near as dammit to it) at least
once in a race. Good Trimming allows you to keep optimum speed most of the
way and should make you win.

I generally would tend to think that poor sail trimmers are always poor.
Think of a genoa and the 5 major adjustments that effect speed - sheet
tension, fore-aft sheeting position, inboard-outboard sheeting position,
halyard tension and headstay tension (I ignore mast rake as most boats
probably don't adjust that). There are some sail trimmers that only
consider the first or first two of those. They will never get the
optimum driving force out of the sail, meaning that their boat will
never go as fast as its potential allows. If you use their actual polars
as opposed to the speed potential then you are handicapping the trimmer.

Now, a significant part of genoa force also depends on the helmsman -
Are they pointing too high or too low? Are they able to sail through the
waves smoothly or do they plow straight ahead? These are also important
elements of actual boatspeed. Again, if you use actual polars you are
going to be handicapping the ability of the helmsman.

As you state, I would expect data from the generated polar curve of the
vessel to be kept and updated in future events so that the data merely
becomes more and more accurate.

I can see that initially with little data of the vessel being sailed badly,
she might be at an advantage but as more data is recorded this advantage
should soon be removed. (If that proves to be a problem, an adjustment could
be put in place for lack of data to avoid the new guy always upsetting the
seasalts by walking off with their trophies.)

However as the data used for each race corrects the polar curve, if the poor
trimmers suddenly improve their skills, their polar curve will be updated
accordingly and they will be scored accordingly. It might cause a problem in
a series if at the end of a series the curve is corrected. This could cause
the series to be re-calculated and results for the first few races being
re-issued. This will however avoid somebody sailing the first half of the
series with a junk set of sails and a dirty bottom, and then the second half
of the series with a brand new set of laminate sails and a clean bottom.

This kind of discussion assumes an ideal world. We know that doesn't
exist but we have to assume it. So, I mostly ignore the sand-bagging or
improving performance issues. The one thing I would comment on is to say
that I doubt many sailors would like the races from the beginning of a
season to be rescored at the end of that season.

I agree that Sailmakers will not be pleased as incentive for buying new or
laminate sails could be reduced. On the other hand, I believe that the best
sailors should win the race, not those with the most money. (Those with the
most money will still be able to afford having their boats scrubbed and
polished before each event)

If you were to use actual polars then you wouldn't need to have a clean
smooth bottom as that would be taken into account in setting your
rating. Same with the quality of your sails. In that context, buying new
sails might be considered as a kind of "cheating." Presumably, having
better sailors on board might fall into the same category. I believe the
ECHO takes some account of that.

A problem might occur when a yacht surfs down a wave and reaches speeds
greater than she is meant to. Updating the curve immediately would suggest
she is capable of much more and in future she will never come anywhere near
such a speed. Perhaps there is a clever way in which such irregularities
could be filtered out. (possibly by comparing these to VPP)

Another problem might be were a vessel needs to be downgraded. For example,
say she sailed a perfect first race. On race she blows all her laminate
sails out. For the rest of the series she sails on cruising sails. I would
suggest she cannot be downgraded in the middle of a series. Data from race
three onwards will in affect be valid data for submission to the next
downgraded polar curve to start the next series.

In the ideal world, we have enough data going back years so minor recent
changes won't have a significant impact although maybe they should.

As for the Farr 40 worlds... Are they handicapped or sailed as a one design
fleet. I have raced one design classes before (not just sailing either) and
also often found that he who has the most money often has an advantage.

The Farr 40 is a strict one-design boat. Limited number of pros and you
can only replace hardware with the same model from the same maker in the
same position. Plus, annual sail limits. Pretty much everyone in the
fleet is some kind of millionaire so while I'm sure the top boats all
spend a lot I doubt it is as simple as the one who spends the most wins.

With regard to spreads, I take your point and % would be a better comparison
than difference in corrected time. However my comparison would not to
compare different races to determine which is more competitive sailors.
Instead, compare the corrected times from the same race with different
handicap systems. If one system consistently comes out with a lower
difference in corrected times (or % in difference if you prefer) then it
most likely is the better handicap system.

My point was about comparing one race under multiple systems. Again,
take any system you want and have a new system that initially calculates
the corrected times in the same way but then divides by 3. The spread
for the new system has a spread just 1/3 of the original - the spread
has been narrowed by 2/3s. So, the new system will consistently have a
lower differences in corrected times by 2/3s. But the competitiveness of
the times is unchanged if you analyze in terms of percentage. You cannot
simply compare the spread of corrected times without also considering
the bigger picture of the absolute size of the corrected times. You CAN
compare the percentage spread of corrected times, however, without that
concern.

Now consider the system we are discussing - use of actual polars so that
boats get rating benefit for poor crew work or boat condition (or,
alternatively, boats are penalized for better crew work and boat
preparation; they are opposite sides of the same coin). There is no
question that percentage differences in corrected times would be
reduced. It is a "different" handicap system but it isn't necessarily a
"better" one unless your goal is to have all boats cross the finish line
at the same time REGARDLESS OF CREW SKILL. If that is your goal then
drawing names out of hat for trophies would be equally fair and possibly
the "best" handicap system. In my view, most people want the better
sailors to win most of the time so long as they can win every once in a
while.

An easy way to test this is to simply run the data from a previously
completed series through another rating system and to compare the results.

This is "double scoring" and what inevitably happens is 1/3 are
benefited, 1/3 are worse off and 1/3 are unchanged. So the pressures to
change and stay the same are about equal. People rarely change on that
basis. Generally, they are willing to change when the new system is
perceived to be "fairer" for other reasons. For example, measurement
systems tend to be popular because the boat owner's personality or
personal popularity doesn't go into the rating. Also, you can do things
to make yourself faster (like reading books or getting a coach) without
being penalized. Empirical systems often have those flaws.

···

On 9/7/2013 3:37 PM, Terry wrote:

Kind regards
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: sailwave@yahoogroups.com [mailto:sailwave@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Art Engel
Sent: 05 September 2013 23:32
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [sailwave] Handicaps...

Sorry - I was mostly assuming the same as you except that in the real world
today 99%+ of polars are generated by VPPs. If you generated a polar based
on a boat's actual performance then your polar will also be based on the
crew's skill in trimming the sails. I believe the term "polars" is mostly
used to mean "boat potential without regard to crew skill."

Your idea (as amplified) is interesting. In theory it would mean that a boat
gets a handicap for the ability of the crew to make the boat go fast but not
for tactics. So, you could be really lousy at making the boat go fast but
still win if your ability to pick shifts and position your boat was better.
Sailmakers would hate that is there would be almost no incentive to buy new
sails to make your boat go faster.

Of course, if you used the data from a race to score a race you'd mostly be
doing a circular calculation but the data could be used for future races
without that problem.

I don't think most people would accept your implicit premise - that sail
trimming ability should be handicapped so everyone is equal. But, some
certainly would.

As for narrow versus wide spreads, my example of the Farr 40 worlds is a
race where the boats are identical (really strict class rules) and every
boat had a paid professional tactician. The boats are the same and the crew
skills are all going to be very high level (although not the same,
obviously). Most fleets and races are going to have a significantly wider
range of crew skills. In the fleet I sail in locally (10-12 boats per race),
first to last averages around 120 sec/mi (that's TWO minutes per mile
difference in corrected times).

The reason I mentioned the spreads is because many people have a false
perception that narrow differences in corrected time always mean a more
competitive race. Take the corrected times from any race and divide all the
times by 3. The difference from first to last is going to be just
1/3 of the original about but the percentage difference is exactly the same
so the race is exactly the same in terms of competitiveness even though the
corrected times are narrower by 67%.

Art

On 9/5/2013 2:52 PM, Terry wrote:

If that's what you think I have described then my description has not
been very good, although I can see how the similarities can be confused.

The method I propose, does not require any measurements of sails boat
length etc. It relies on the electronic data provided by boat
instruments, to record and draw up the polar curve of the vessel.
Records the wind strength throughout the race uses recorded currents.

The idea is to feed this into a computer after each race for each of
the competing boats to give a more accurate result instead of a single

rating.

I guess all I am saying is that the technology is there to provide
such a system today. It does rely on electronics which are becoming
more and more reliable these days and I can see a way in which handicaps

can be improved.

Not sure what you would be suspicious of if the spread is less between
slowest and fastest, it would depend on conditions and how closely
vessels and teams are matched.

Appreciate your input.

Kind Regards
Terry

-----Original Message-----
From: sailwave@yahoogroups.com [mailto:sailwave@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Art Engel
Sent: 05 September 2013 20:41
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [sailwave] Handicaps...

You've essentially described the Offshore Racing Rule or ORR. It uses
a VPP (velocity prediction program) to determine what a boat's
predicted speed should be, based on the windstrength and wind angle. A
VPP is essentially a very sophisticated version of the simpler
formulas usually used to generate ratings. The difference is that it
takes far more measurements and makes far more calculations. The
original VPP was developed at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of
Technology) in the late '60s or early '70s. The ORR VPP is pretty much
what you describe, a "virtual" boat sailing a mock race to generate time

predictions, which are then used to generate ratings.

ORR is developed and owned by the Offshore Racing Association (ORA)
with certificates issued and administered by US Sailing. It is most
often used for distance races. In the US, there are about twice as
many boats with ORR certificates as have IRC certificates (560 vs 265, as

of the end of Aug.).

So, it is the more popular system in the US, especially for distance

races.

Much of ORR racing uses wind-indexed ratings (with a single TCF for
each windstrength range). However, it also has more sophisticated
two-number ratings that are a combination of both TOD and TOT - the
result is that the windstrength is calculated based on the course
distance and the elapsed time and the RC need not make any decisions.
This can be used for a long offshore race where the RC is not present

throughout the race to make measurements.

In the US, there is a new rule called the High Performance Rule or HPR.
I believe it also makes use of a VPP that is an offshoot of the
original MIT VPP. The ORR VPP is secret so designers cannot "design to the

rule."

The HPR VPP is publicly available to naval architects so one should
expect boats to be designed to the rule and older boats to potentially
become obsolete within a few years (think IMS).

By the way, I don't think "spread of corrected times" is necessarily a
good criteria for measuring a rating or handicap system IF you are
trying to rate or handicap boats (as opposed to skippers). In
horse-race handicapping it is assumed that the jockey makes very
little difference to the results of races. That is certainly not true
but the jockey is probably only 1-2% of the results among the top
horses in a race. In sailboat racing, the skill level of the crew
(tactics, boatspeed and
crew-handling) are going to be worth at least 20-30% of the result.
So, you would NEVER expect (or want) a rating or handicap system to
produce the same corrected time for every boat unless your fleet was
pretty small and your skill level very high OR unless you were trying
to handicap skippers as well as boats.

I did some calculations from a Farr 40 worlds a while back and the
average difference between the slowest and fastest boats was about 35
sec/mi. If your spread is less than that then I would tend to be

suspicious.

Art

------------------------------------

-!- http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/ -!- http://www.sailing.org/ -!-
http://www.sailwave.com/ -!- On-Line Sailwave
help...http://sailwave.com/help/HTML ~ Mark Townsend's Sailwave User
Guide is available from
http://www.abyc.org/upload/Sailwave_ABYC_User_Guide.pdf ~ Convert to
daily digest of emails send blank email to
sailwave-digest@yahoogroups.com ~ To unsubscribe from the SUG please
send blank email to sailwave-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups
Links

------------------------------------

-!- http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/ -!- http://www.sailing.org/ -!-
http://www.sailwave.com/ -!- On-Line Sailwave
help...http://sailwave.com/help/HTML ~ Mark Townsend's Sailwave User Guide
is available from http://www.abyc.org/upload/Sailwave_ABYC_User_Guide.pdf ~
Convert to daily digest of emails send blank email to
sailwave-digest@yahoogroups.com ~ To unsubscribe from the SUG please send
blank email to sailwave-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links

------------------------------------

-!- http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/ -!- http://www.sailing.org/ -!- http://www.sailwave.com/ -!- On-Line Sailwave help...http://sailwave.com/help/HTML ~ Mark Townsend's Sailwave User Guide is available from http://www.abyc.org/upload/Sailwave_ABYC_User_Guide.pdf ~ Convert to daily digest of emails send blank email to sailwave-digest@yahoogroups.com ~ To unsubscribe from the SUG please send blank email to sailwave-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links

[George_Morris]

Single number handicaps are a mirage. There are so many variables that it is impossible to take them all into consideration. The most important of these is wind, and, by extension, clear air. A Topper sailing in a fleet that consists mainly of Mirrors and Toppers will get clear air, a Topper sailing in a slow handicap fleet which includes Fevas and Topazes probably won’t and if there are Lasers involved it might just as well start five minutes late and let the air clear. Actually, people don’t want ‘fair’ handicaps, they want handicaps that allow them to win once in a while. if handicaps were ‘fair’ the same two or three people would win every cup in the club. If ,on the other hand, you handicap skill (ie personal handicap) what are you actually measuring? A ‘fair’ personal handicap would always give a dead heat. It is a murky subject but people like its imperfections otherwise they would all sail identical one designs and swop boats after each race. Apart from the WMRT they don’t do this because they like to think that their boat has some superior characteristics such as a 'favorable (ie unfair) rating.

Rgds

George Morris

···

----- Original Message -----

From:
Terry

To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2013 7:46 PM

Subject: [sailwave] Handicaps…

I have been sailing for many years and used and compared many handicap systems. (Although by no means claim to be the most knowledgeable on the topic)

The best thing I have heard is that, when comparing handicap systems, the system where the difference in corrected times for the slowest and the fastest yacht in the fleet is the least, should be considered to be the fairest. This is because, if the handicap worked as it should, all the boats should be finishing on the same corrected time (or as near as possible to it)

A system like that sounds great, as it will also give the inexperienced sailors a chance to win occasionally (but unfortunately that does mean their sailing skills are handicapped and not the boat)

More recently when I had a closer look at another system, which used lots of various measurements the thought occurred to me that once the rating is calculated, it only produces a single rating number. That same number is subsequently used for all events, whether the wind is stronger or lesser, or the tide is with you or against you.

It occurred to me, and I have often heard people saying that no handicap system takes account of the wind and tide. (Okay I have seen some systems using average wind on the day)

Now with modern GPS systems one can obtain a Yachts Polar Plot that shows the ultimate speed a boat can sail in various wind conditions.

At the same time true wind speed and direction , can be recorded throughout the event by each vessel, provided suitable electronic equipment are aboard the vessel.

Current speed and direction can also be recorded by vessels during the race

With modern computer technology, it should then be possible to input this data into a computer onto a system like “Virtual Skipper”.

The idea is that after a race, the recorded information is then handed to the race office by each competitor. Each yachts data is then put through the paces in the Virtual environment and the computer determines what the optimum time should have been for the yacht to sail round the course.

The difference in what the computer calculated for each yacht and the actual times it took them to complete the course would then be a clear indication on which of the crews made the least mistakes in sailing their boat round the course and can allow positions to be allocated on this basis.

Now I am in no position to develop or completely put together a system like this, but I thought I would plant the concept and perhaps one day a system like this will be available.

At the very least, I think it will produce a fairer system and stop this “When I loose, it is because of a crap handicap, but when I win its because I am such a good sailor” scenarios.

Regards

Terry Naude

[Terry]

Well I certainly enjoy your view on this.

I can see that there might be (in my view) a very small degree of
handicapping the crew in the system I propose. The real point I am trying to
make, is that no one rating figure (as produced by most rating systems) can
cover the different circumstances encountered in each and every race.

The system I am thinking of will by no means be perfect, but I reckon it
will be worth a try to see what the outcome is before simply rubbishing it.
Once in place and tried by others, further problems might be encountered and
can only be improved upon. You will be unable to do that if you resist
trying it to start with.

I'd be more interested in hearing from people that are keen to see such a
system implemented. Especially those who know they have a good strong crew
that regularly win one design fleets, but then find when they sail in
certain rating systems they often find themselves at the back of the fleet
after correction.

Regards
Terry

[Mike1]

“Apart from the WMRT they don’t do this because they like to think that their boat has some superior characteristics such as a 'favorable (ie unfair) rating.”

Drifting OT, but I don’t think many classes are chosen just on rating, more that they are the ‘right’ weight for the crew, or the boat’s just nicer to sail than others they tried
Mike
Lancing SC

···

— In sailwave@yahoogroups.com, sailwave@yahoogroups.com wrote:

[Art_Engel2]

I googled "WMRT" and got nothing. Some explanation?

···

On 9/8/2013 9:23 AM, mike.croker@phonecoop.coop wrote:

--- In sailwave@yahoogroups.com, <sailwave@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

"Apart from the WMRT they don't do this because they like to think that their
boat has some superior characteristics such as a 'favorable (ie unfair) rating."

Drifting OT, but I don't think many classes are chosen just on rating, more that
they are the 'right' weight for the crew, or the boat's just nicer to sail than
others they tried
Mike
Lancing SC

[Art_Engel2]

I think it would be a great experiment BUT we haven't even discussed the
single biggest impediment - cost.

The boat-generated polars are going to require sophisticated instruments
and calibration for each boat. That is going to be on the order of
3,000-10,000 US dollars per boat. The boats in the America's Cup have
easily spent 100,000+ US dollars to get the kind of sophisticated
systems we are discussing. [ORR uses VPP-generated polars, it costs
100-400 US dollars to get measured and get a certificate.]

The question at this point is "Who can we get to try this out?" The very
top end of the handicapping world have these types of sophisticated
systems on their boats already so they are probably the only practical
potential market at this point. The problem is they are also the part of
the racing world that would least like to see handicapping of skill,
boat prep, sails, etc. These are the guys that spend lots of dollars to
get the best of the best of everything and they aren't going to want to
use a system which tries to negate some or all of the advantages (real
or perceived) that they feel they have paid good money for.

But, having said that, I see a trend toward the use of polar-based
ratings. They are definitely more accurate. The big issue is whether we
see their implementation on a moderately widespread basis in 10 years or
30-40 years. The polar-based systems (IMS, Americap, ORR) have been
around for about 40 years and yet aren't widespread today. Yes, they are
used extensively in some small segments of the sport (like distance
races) but they really haven't captured the vast majority of the
rating/handicap marketplace. In the '80s and '90s IMS was used somewhat
extensively. However, I think it fair to say the use of polar-based
systems is no wider today then it was back then (and possibly not as wide).

We could try a simplified version of this idea and use time around the
course as opposed to polars. That would get you a lot of the benefit
without any of the cost. We could even have a catchy name like
"Portsmouth." Oh, wait, we already have such system.

It has not been my experience that good one-design sailors are in the
back of a handicap fleet. In fact, my experience is the exact opposite.
Good one-design sailors are forced to become better sailors to win in
their one-design fleet. Then, when winning one-design sailors move to a
handicap fleet they tend to dominate since the general level of skill in
a handicap fleet is virtually always lower than in a one-design fleet.
I've often seen mid-pack OD sailors become consistent winners by moving
to a handicap fleet.

It is possible your experience might be with a severe type-forming
system like IRC. If your boat is under 40 feet (13 meters) then IRC
heavily penalizes modern light displacement boats. That is an
intentional part of that system (it is even listed as an "advantage" in
the PR material I've seen). The solution is to sail under some other
system or petition the IRC leaders to remove or reduce the penalty. I
suspect a significantly more expensive system isn't going to be a
popular replacement for IRC (ORR and IRC have comparable costs so ORR
could, in theory, be a possible replacement).

I suspect we are the only two discussing this because there wouldn't be
widespread popular support for such a system as you have described
(plus, to be fair, this group is about scoring, not ratings or
handicaps). In my local area we used ORR for day-races about 10 years
ago but the experiment ultimately fizzled after a few years for two
reasons - it cost more and it was too accurate. The "cost" problem needs
no explaining, ORR costs about twice what the alternative (PHRF) does.

The "too accurate" problem is more subtle. Sailors like a system that
allows them to win every once in a while, even if they aren't the best
sailor. A polar-based system like ORR is more accurate at all windspeeds
so the better sailors are virtually always going to win. A single number
system will be accurate in the mid-range of windspeeds but less and less
accurate as you get farther from that range. So, some boats are going to
be significantly advantaged while others are significantly
disadvantaged. The result - on extreme days you can get a winner outside
the better-sailors group.

Art

···

On 9/8/2013 7:22 AM, Terry wrote:

Well I certainly enjoy your view on this.

I can see that there might be (in my view) a very small degree of
handicapping the crew in the system I propose. The real point I am trying to
make, is that no one rating figure (as produced by most rating systems) can
cover the different circumstances encountered in each and every race.

The system I am thinking of will by no means be perfect, but I reckon it
will be worth a try to see what the outcome is before simply rubbishing it.
Once in place and tried by others, further problems might be encountered and
can only be improved upon. You will be unable to do that if you resist
trying it to start with.

I'd be more interested in hearing from people that are keen to see such a
system implemented. Especially those who know they have a good strong crew
that regularly win one design fleets, but then find when they sail in
certain rating systems they often find themselves at the back of the fleet
after correction.

Regards
Terry

------------------------------------

-!- http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/ -!- http://www.sailing.org/ -!- http://www.sailwave.com/ -!- On-Line Sailwave help...http://sailwave.com/help/HTML ~ Mark Townsend's Sailwave User Guide is available from http://www.abyc.org/upload/Sailwave_ABYC_User_Guide.pdf ~ Convert to daily digest of emails send blank email to sailwave-digest@yahoogroups.com ~ To unsubscribe from the SUG please send blank email to sailwave-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links

[Terry]

"The problem is they are also the part of the racing world that would least
like to see handicapping of skill, boat prep, sails, etc"

In my experience, no matter what handicap system you use, half the fleet
complain that the handicap used is ineffective, whilst the other half claim
they are skilled at sail trimming. Those that claim they are skilled at sail
trimming, soon complain about the handicap system when they move to another
class and suddenly find themselves in the bottom 50% of the fleet.

For a guy that sails in the Far 40 Millionaires team, I am surprised that
you would be worried about cost.

I have produced a polar curve for my boat with nothing more than a handheld
GPS connected to Wind Transducer via NMEA. Both of these instruments and
NMEA is already available on many boats today by default at no additional
cost. The only part that needs a bit more work, is getting more accurate
information about current speed and direction as I am forced to seek non
tidal waters to produce an accurate curve.

If this project can be approached in an open source manner (unlike
Portsmouth), one should be able to get a specific app created on a
smartphone to create a polar curve for next to nothing

You must remember that in the 80 and 90's there were no cheap GPS units
available and electronics were very expensive. Hell the internet had not
even been invented. I bet there were also a lot of sarcasm and critics
around when they suggested to connect all networks into one.

As you agree that polar based ratings appears to be the way forward, I can
only hope the others might pick up on this and help towards building a
system.

It seems contradictory that you suggest on the once side in your experience
the good sailors always appear to do well in whether one design or
handicapped, but then suggest that people are happy for not to have a "too
accurate" handicap system where even the poor sailors get a chance to win.

I have seen many, very good sailors put off sailing in club handicap races,
because they consistently lost due a poor rating for their boat, that
consistently made them loose races, whilst at the same time they
outperformed others in one design fleets that ran alongside on alternate
weekends..

Funny that you think we are the only two conversing. I have certainly noted
a few other emails on the forum and had several others directly to me.

I do apologise if anybody takes any offence in discussing this on the
sailwave forum. I do believe this is related to sailwave as most people
working in sailwave tend to understand the mechanics behind handicap systems
and expected to have some good and bad feedback as I have received.

Regards
Terry

···

-----Original Message-----
From: sailwave@yahoogroups.com [mailto:sailwave@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Art Engel
Sent: 08 September 2013 21:24
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [sailwave] Handicaps...

I think it would be a great experiment BUT we haven't even discussed the
single biggest impediment - cost.

The boat-generated polars are going to require sophisticated instruments and
calibration for each boat. That is going to be on the order of
3,000-10,000 US dollars per boat. The boats in the America's Cup have easily
spent 100,000+ US dollars to get the kind of sophisticated systems we are
discussing. [ORR uses VPP-generated polars, it costs
100-400 US dollars to get measured and get a certificate.]

The question at this point is "Who can we get to try this out?" The very top
end of the handicapping world have these types of sophisticated systems on
their boats already so they are probably the only practical potential market
at this point. The problem is they are also the part of the racing world
that would least like to see handicapping of skill, boat prep, sails, etc.
These are the guys that spend lots of dollars to get the best of the best of
everything and they aren't going to want to use a system which tries to
negate some or all of the advantages (real or perceived) that they feel they
have paid good money for.

But, having said that, I see a trend toward the use of polar-based ratings.
They are definitely more accurate. The big issue is whether we see their
implementation on a moderately widespread basis in 10 years or
30-40 years. The polar-based systems (IMS, Americap, ORR) have been around
for about 40 years and yet aren't widespread today. Yes, they are used
extensively in some small segments of the sport (like distance
races) but they really haven't captured the vast majority of the
rating/handicap marketplace. In the '80s and '90s IMS was used somewhat
extensively. However, I think it fair to say the use of polar-based systems
is no wider today then it was back then (and possibly not as wide).

We could try a simplified version of this idea and use time around the
course as opposed to polars. That would get you a lot of the benefit without
any of the cost. We could even have a catchy name like "Portsmouth." Oh,
wait, we already have such system.

It has not been my experience that good one-design sailors are in the back
of a handicap fleet. In fact, my experience is the exact opposite.
Good one-design sailors are forced to become better sailors to win in their
one-design fleet. Then, when winning one-design sailors move to a handicap
fleet they tend to dominate since the general level of skill in a handicap
fleet is virtually always lower than in a one-design fleet.
I've often seen mid-pack OD sailors become consistent winners by moving to a
handicap fleet.

It is possible your experience might be with a severe type-forming system
like IRC. If your boat is under 40 feet (13 meters) then IRC heavily
penalizes modern light displacement boats. That is an intentional part of
that system (it is even listed as an "advantage" in the PR material I've
seen). The solution is to sail under some other system or petition the IRC
leaders to remove or reduce the penalty. I suspect a significantly more
expensive system isn't going to be a popular replacement for IRC (ORR and
IRC have comparable costs so ORR could, in theory, be a possible
replacement).

I suspect we are the only two discussing this because there wouldn't be
widespread popular support for such a system as you have described (plus, to
be fair, this group is about scoring, not ratings or handicaps). In my local
area we used ORR for day-races about 10 years ago but the experiment
ultimately fizzled after a few years for two reasons - it cost more and it
was too accurate. The "cost" problem needs no explaining, ORR costs about
twice what the alternative (PHRF) does.

The "too accurate" problem is more subtle. Sailors like a system that allows
them to win every once in a while, even if they aren't the best sailor. A
polar-based system like ORR is more accurate at all windspeeds so the better
sailors are virtually always going to win. A single number system will be
accurate in the mid-range of windspeeds but less and less accurate as you
get farther from that range. So, some boats are going to be significantly
advantaged while others are significantly disadvantaged. The result - on
extreme days you can get a winner outside the better-sailors group.

Art

On 9/8/2013 7:22 AM, Terry wrote:

Well I certainly enjoy your view on this.

I can see that there might be (in my view) a very small degree of
handicapping the crew in the system I propose. The real point I am
trying to make, is that no one rating figure (as produced by most
rating systems) can cover the different circumstances encountered in each

and every race.

The system I am thinking of will by no means be perfect, but I reckon
it will be worth a try to see what the outcome is before simply rubbishing

it.

Once in place and tried by others, further problems might be
encountered and can only be improved upon. You will be unable to do
that if you resist trying it to start with.

I'd be more interested in hearing from people that are keen to see
such a system implemented. Especially those who know they have a good
strong crew that regularly win one design fleets, but then find when
they sail in certain rating systems they often find themselves at the
back of the fleet after correction.

Regards
Terry

------------------------------------

-!- http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/ -!- http://www.sailing.org/ -!-
http://www.sailwave.com/ -!- On-Line Sailwave
help...http://sailwave.com/help/HTML ~ Mark Townsend's Sailwave User
Guide is available from
http://www.abyc.org/upload/Sailwave_ABYC_User_Guide.pdf ~ Convert to
daily digest of emails send blank email to
sailwave-digest@yahoogroups.com ~ To unsubscribe from the SUG please
send blank email to sailwave-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups
Links

------------------------------------

-!- http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/ -!- http://www.sailing.org/ -!-
http://www.sailwave.com/ -!- On-Line Sailwave
help...http://sailwave.com/help/HTML ~ Mark Townsend's Sailwave User Guide
is available from http://www.abyc.org/upload/Sailwave_ABYC_User_Guide.pdf ~
Convert to daily digest of emails send blank email to
sailwave-digest@yahoogroups.com ~ To unsubscribe from the SUG please send
blank email to sailwave-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links

[Art_Engel2]

If you get a trial of the system I, for one, would be very interested in
any feedback.

Art

···

On 9/8/2013 3:56 PM, Terry wrote:

"The problem is they are also the part of the racing world that would least
like to see handicapping of skill, boat prep, sails, etc"

In my experience, no matter what handicap system you use, half the fleet
complain that the handicap used is ineffective, whilst the other half claim
they are skilled at sail trimming. Those that claim they are skilled at sail
trimming, soon complain about the handicap system when they move to another
class and suddenly find themselves in the bottom 50% of the fleet.

For a guy that sails in the Far 40 Millionaires team, I am surprised that
you would be worried about cost.

I have produced a polar curve for my boat with nothing more than a handheld
GPS connected to Wind Transducer via NMEA. Both of these instruments and
NMEA is already available on many boats today by default at no additional
cost. The only part that needs a bit more work, is getting more accurate
information about current speed and direction as I am forced to seek non
tidal waters to produce an accurate curve.

If this project can be approached in an open source manner (unlike
Portsmouth), one should be able to get a specific app created on a
smartphone to create a polar curve for next to nothing

You must remember that in the 80 and 90's there were no cheap GPS units
available and electronics were very expensive. Hell the internet had not
even been invented. I bet there were also a lot of sarcasm and critics
around when they suggested to connect all networks into one.

As you agree that polar based ratings appears to be the way forward, I can
only hope the others might pick up on this and help towards building a
system.

It seems contradictory that you suggest on the once side in your experience
the good sailors always appear to do well in whether one design or
handicapped, but then suggest that people are happy for not to have a "too
accurate" handicap system where even the poor sailors get a chance to win.

I have seen many, very good sailors put off sailing in club handicap races,
because they consistently lost due a poor rating for their boat, that
consistently made them loose races, whilst at the same time they
outperformed others in one design fleets that ran alongside on alternate
weekends..

Funny that you think we are the only two conversing. I have certainly noted
a few other emails on the forum and had several others directly to me.

I do apologise if anybody takes any offence in discussing this on the
sailwave forum. I do believe this is related to sailwave as most people
working in sailwave tend to understand the mechanics behind handicap systems
and expected to have some good and bad feedback as I have received.

Regards
Terry

-----Original Message-----
From: sailwave@yahoogroups.com [mailto:sailwave@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Art Engel
Sent: 08 September 2013 21:24
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [sailwave] Handicaps...

I think it would be a great experiment BUT we haven't even discussed the
single biggest impediment - cost.

The boat-generated polars are going to require sophisticated instruments and
calibration for each boat. That is going to be on the order of
3,000-10,000 US dollars per boat. The boats in the America's Cup have easily
spent 100,000+ US dollars to get the kind of sophisticated systems we are
discussing. [ORR uses VPP-generated polars, it costs
100-400 US dollars to get measured and get a certificate.]

The question at this point is "Who can we get to try this out?" The very top
end of the handicapping world have these types of sophisticated systems on
their boats already so they are probably the only practical potential market
at this point. The problem is they are also the part of the racing world
that would least like to see handicapping of skill, boat prep, sails, etc.
These are the guys that spend lots of dollars to get the best of the best of
everything and they aren't going to want to use a system which tries to
negate some or all of the advantages (real or perceived) that they feel they
have paid good money for.

But, having said that, I see a trend toward the use of polar-based ratings.
They are definitely more accurate. The big issue is whether we see their
implementation on a moderately widespread basis in 10 years or
30-40 years. The polar-based systems (IMS, Americap, ORR) have been around
for about 40 years and yet aren't widespread today. Yes, they are used
extensively in some small segments of the sport (like distance
races) but they really haven't captured the vast majority of the
rating/handicap marketplace. In the '80s and '90s IMS was used somewhat
extensively. However, I think it fair to say the use of polar-based systems
is no wider today then it was back then (and possibly not as wide).

We could try a simplified version of this idea and use time around the
course as opposed to polars. That would get you a lot of the benefit without
any of the cost. We could even have a catchy name like "Portsmouth." Oh,
wait, we already have such system.

It has not been my experience that good one-design sailors are in the back
of a handicap fleet. In fact, my experience is the exact opposite.
Good one-design sailors are forced to become better sailors to win in their
one-design fleet. Then, when winning one-design sailors move to a handicap
fleet they tend to dominate since the general level of skill in a handicap
fleet is virtually always lower than in a one-design fleet.
I've often seen mid-pack OD sailors become consistent winners by moving to a
handicap fleet.

It is possible your experience might be with a severe type-forming system
like IRC. If your boat is under 40 feet (13 meters) then IRC heavily
penalizes modern light displacement boats. That is an intentional part of
that system (it is even listed as an "advantage" in the PR material I've
seen). The solution is to sail under some other system or petition the IRC
leaders to remove or reduce the penalty. I suspect a significantly more
expensive system isn't going to be a popular replacement for IRC (ORR and
IRC have comparable costs so ORR could, in theory, be a possible
replacement).

I suspect we are the only two discussing this because there wouldn't be
widespread popular support for such a system as you have described (plus, to
be fair, this group is about scoring, not ratings or handicaps). In my local
area we used ORR for day-races about 10 years ago but the experiment
ultimately fizzled after a few years for two reasons - it cost more and it
was too accurate. The "cost" problem needs no explaining, ORR costs about
twice what the alternative (PHRF) does.

The "too accurate" problem is more subtle. Sailors like a system that allows
them to win every once in a while, even if they aren't the best sailor. A
polar-based system like ORR is more accurate at all windspeeds so the better
sailors are virtually always going to win. A single number system will be
accurate in the mid-range of windspeeds but less and less accurate as you
get farther from that range. So, some boats are going to be significantly
advantaged while others are significantly disadvantaged. The result - on
extreme days you can get a winner outside the better-sailors group.

Art

On 9/8/2013 7:22 AM, Terry wrote:

Well I certainly enjoy your view on this.

I can see that there might be (in my view) a very small degree of
handicapping the crew in the system I propose. The real point I am
trying to make, is that no one rating figure (as produced by most
rating systems) can cover the different circumstances encountered in each

and every race.

The system I am thinking of will by no means be perfect, but I reckon
it will be worth a try to see what the outcome is before simply rubbishing

it.

Once in place and tried by others, further problems might be
encountered and can only be improved upon. You will be unable to do
that if you resist trying it to start with.

I'd be more interested in hearing from people that are keen to see
such a system implemented. Especially those who know they have a good
strong crew that regularly win one design fleets, but then find when
they sail in certain rating systems they often find themselves at the
back of the fleet after correction.

Regards
Terry

------------------------------------

-!- http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/ -!- http://www.sailing.org/ -!-
http://www.sailwave.com/ -!- On-Line Sailwave
help...http://sailwave.com/help/HTML ~ Mark Townsend's Sailwave User
Guide is available from
http://www.abyc.org/upload/Sailwave_ABYC_User_Guide.pdf ~ Convert to
daily digest of emails send blank email to
sailwave-digest@yahoogroups.com ~ To unsubscribe from the SUG please
send blank email to sailwave-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups
Links

------------------------------------

-!- http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/ -!- http://www.sailing.org/ -!-
http://www.sailwave.com/ -!- On-Line Sailwave
help...http://sailwave.com/help/HTML ~ Mark Townsend's Sailwave User Guide
is available from http://www.abyc.org/upload/Sailwave_ABYC_User_Guide.pdf ~
Convert to daily digest of emails send blank email to
sailwave-digest@yahoogroups.com ~ To unsubscribe from the SUG please send
blank email to sailwave-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links

------------------------------------

-!- http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/ -!- http://www.sailing.org/ -!- http://www.sailwave.com/ -!- On-Line Sailwave help...http://sailwave.com/help/HTML ~ Mark Townsend's Sailwave User Guide is available from http://www.abyc.org/upload/Sailwave_ABYC_User_Guide.pdf ~ Convert to daily digest of emails send blank email to sailwave-digest@yahoogroups.com ~ To unsubscribe from the SUG please send blank email to sailwave-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links