I found the following note at http://styvechale.net/pdf/chips3.pdf
There are a small number of disagreements, the most notable at S2,10, where GMORA
(undated) has a value of 83.0 and Downing (2005) has 83.6. The latter is more likely to
be correct, the mistake a transcription error of a zero for a six. Other discrepancies can
be ascribed to rounding. Excluding the gross discrepancy of 0.6, out of the 10 differences
in the scores up to a fleet size of 18, all of ±0.1, 6 are positive and 4 are negative. The
differences in the two tables point to the existence of an earlier table from which these
were (ultimately) derived.
I feel that this explains the situation quite well and Sailwave seems to adopt it.
Thank you all for your assistance!
Willi.
···
From: sailwave@yahoogroups.com [mailto:sailwave@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Willi Hugelshofer
Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2011 10:11 AM
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [sailwave] Rinderle B issues
Here are the ones I found that show 83.0:
http://scituatesailing.com/Rinderle%20B%20Table.htm
http://www.csyc.org/rinderle_b_table.pdf
http://origin.library.constantcontact.com/download/get/file/1104247796082-68/Rinderle+B+Table.pdf
So there does not seem to be consensus.
Willi.
From: sailwave@yahoogroups.com [mailto:sailwave@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Calum Polwart
Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2011 10:07 AM
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [sailwave] Rinderle B issues [1 Attachment]
[Attachment(s) from Calum Polwart included below]
And another reference that gives 83.6 - this one is very detailed to the origins and presents a formula…
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 18:01:06 +0100, Calum Polwart wrote:
I’ve got a reference here:
http://www.rmsail.org/Race_Mgt/rinderle-b.htm
that gives 83.6
Is there a definative answer?
C
On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 09:25:45 -0700, Willi Hugelshofer wrote:
Hi Colin,
Thanks for the quick reply!
Your suggestion worked and I now get 0 points for DNF and DSQ:
My 2nd question was regarding the discrepancy on 2nd place in my example where Sailwave awards 83.6 points but the Rinderle B tables I found on the Internet all show a value of 83.0. I also noticed some other values which were different by a smaller .1 point between what Sailwave awards vs the Rinderle B tables (e.g. 8 boats, 2nd place SW=78.4, Rinderle table=78.5). Malcolm Osborne said that he believes that you use a formula rather than a table lookup which could easily explain the .1 difference but the .6 difference seems too big for this explanation. Can your confirm and can this be modified?
Thanks again.
Willi.
From: sailwave@yahoogroups.com [mailto:sailwave@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Colin Jenkins
Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2011 8:30 AM
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [sailwave] Rinderle B issues
Hi,
The selection of teh scoring system and the setup of the codes are independent. One could easily argue that they should be, but they are not
So go to the scoring system, codes tab, click the hand icon and choose high point. That gives you a starting point which you can review and edit each code appropriately if not quite what you want.
Regards,
Colin J
[www.sailwave.com](http://www.sailwave.com)
On 03/09/2011 07:47, Willi Hugelshofer wrote:
I am attempting to use the Rinderle B scoring system on Sailwave 2.02 build 3.
I have noticed 2 inconsistencies:
-
I understood that 0 points should be awarded to DNF etc but Sailwave awards some points to DNF and DSQ:
-
All Rinderle B tables I found on the Internet award 83.0 points to the 2<sup>nd</sup> finisher with 10 boats starting. Sailwave awards 83.6 points. I noticed some other smaller differences for other combinations as well.
Is the Rinderle B table hardcoded inside Sailwave or can it be modified externally?
Why does Sailwave award points to DNF and DSQ?
Thanks,
Willi.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1392 / Virus Database: 1520/3873 - Release Date: 09/02/11