Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF

Imported from Yahoo
1

Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF. The corrected time is rounded
to the nearest second, which it should not be per RRS A3. Is there an
option within Sailwave to specify if the corrected time should be
rounded, and to display the unrounded corrected time on the results?

ISAF changed Rule A3 in the 2005-2008 rules to remove the
words "corrected to the nearest second". Therefore the corrected
time should no longer be rounded unless the individual handicaping
system specifies as such. IRC, Portsmouth specify rounding to the
nearest second, but PHRF does not, or at least not that I have ever
been able to find.

There is a document on the US Sailing website "What's New for Race
Management in the 2005-2008 Racing Rules" that supports not rounding
the corrected time unless specified by the class rules.

http://www.ussailing.org/racemgt/documents/RRS_Changes_2005-2008.pdf

The relevant text is as follows.

Appendix A3 (Starting Times and Finishing Places): An error in
describing how finishing places for handicapped boats are determined
has been corrected--"…when a handicap or rating system is used a
boat's corrected time shall determine her finishing place." The
reference to correcting times to the nearest second has been removed,
leaving the level of precision to be determined by the rules of the
handicap or rating system.

2

Mark,

We discussed already about this point, personally I think this was a wrong decision of ISAF, related to electronic time keeping. Accuracy of corrected times is never better than that of elapsed time.

With manual time keeping, you cannot record times better than to the secon, hence there is already an inaccuracy of 0.5 second. Rounding to the 1/10, 1/100 or to full decimals is illogical and can even rank the boats in reverse order if times are recorded to the second. In that case, better a tie than a wrong ranking.

The problem is that when changes occur in the RRS, it takes time to change the Class Rules and the Handicap Rules in accordance.

So I can advise you to specify it in the notice of race.

In some cases and only with PH > 1000, it can happen that identical boats, timed with 1 second time difference, are ranked as ties.

It happened once in my life, and with agreement of both helmsmen, the elapsed time of the boat finishing second was altered by a further second to discriminate them.

Philippe De Troy

Federation Francophone Belge du Yachting

···

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

From:
s_mark_townsend

To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 10:20 PM

Subject: [sailwave] Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF

Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF. The corrected time is rounded
to the nearest second, which it should not be per RRS A3. Is there an
option within Sailwave to specify if the corrected time should be
rounded, and to display the unrounded corrected time on the results?

ISAF changed Rule A3 in the 2005-2008 rules to remove the
words “corrected to the nearest second”. Therefore the corrected
time should no longer be rounded unless the individual handicaping
system specifies as such. IRC, Portsmouth specify rounding to the
nearest second, but PHRF does not, or at least not that I have ever
been able to find.

There is a document on the US Sailing website “What’s New for Race
Management in the 2005-2008 Racing Rules” that supports not rounding
the corrected time unless specified by the class rules.

http://www.ussailing.org/racemgt/documents/RRS_Changes_2005-2008.pdf

The relevant text is as follows.

Appendix A3 (Starting Times and Finishing Places): An error in
describing how finishing places for handicapped boats are determined
has been corrected–“… when a handicap or rating system is used a
boat’s corrected time shall determine her finishing place.” The
reference to correcting times to the nearest second has been removed,
leaving the level of precision to be determined by the rules of the
handicap or rating system.

3

Philippe and Mark,
Let me add some additional insight.
I was a supporter of this change (I cannot remember if it came from the US but it may have - I am on the Racing Rules Committee for the US).
Old rule A3 (pre-2005) said “corrected to the nearest second”. That was deleted because there seemed no reason for the RRS to try and dictate how corrected times should be calculated. I believe Mark is wrong when he says that US Sailing thinks times should NOT be rounded unless supported by the class rules. As he notes, the document he refers to says: “The reference to correcting times to the nearest second has been removed, leaving the level of precision to be determined by the rules of the handicap or rating system.” This is correct in that it says a handicap or rating system may decide rounding is or is not appropriate. It doesn’t say anything about what to do when the handicap or rating system is silent.
I think that the current wording means that (1) a handicap or rating system may specify accuracy, (2) if not determined by a handicap or rating system then it is up to the Sailing Instructions to say something and (3) if neither a system nor the SIs say what to do then it is up to the scorer for a club or event to adopt a policy and consistently stick to it.
Some clubs (not many) still take times in fractional hours, which means they are actually using fractional seconds. Forcing them to round to full seconds was throwing away accuracy. In addition, using fractional seconds (at least, tenths) is acceptable to many competitors as a perfectly fair way to break ties even though scientists and statisticians might argue that it is false accuracy.
Bottom line: you can certainly use fractional seconds as part of your corrected times BUT you should have the option in your scoring program. I think Mark is wrong when he says Sailwave wrongly scores PHRF because that implies that it is always wrong to round. However, he is correct that it is going to be wrong some of the time. If the handicap or scoring system says nothing and the SIs are silent then Sailwave will be correct so long as all of a club’s races use the Sailwave default of rounding.
This should be an option.

Art Engel

···

— In sailwave@yahoogroups.com, “FFYB Web Manager” <webmanager@…> wrote:

Mark,

We discussed already about this point, personally I think this was a wrong decision of ISAF, related to electronic time keeping. Accuracy of corrected times is never better than that of elapsed time.

With manual time keeping, you cannot record times better than to the secon, hence there is already an inaccuracy of 0.5 second. Rounding to the 1/10, 1/100 or to full decimals is illogical and can even rank the boats in reverse order if times are recorded to the second. In that case, better a tie than a wrong ranking.

The problem is that when changes occur in the RRS, it takes time to change the Class Rules and the Handicap Rules in accordance.

So I can advise you to specify it in the notice of race.

In some cases and only with PH > 1000, it can happen that identical boats, timed with 1 second time difference, are ranked as ties.
It happened once in my life, and with agreement of both helmsmen, the elapsed time of the boat finishing second was altered by a further second to discriminate them.

Philippe De Troy
Federation Francophone Belge du Yachting

----- Original Message -----
From: s_mark_townsend
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 10:20 PM
Subject: [sailwave] Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF

Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF. The corrected time is rounded
to the nearest second, which it should not be per RRS A3. Is there an
option within Sailwave to specify if the corrected time should be
rounded, and to display the unrounded corrected time on the results?

ISAF changed Rule A3 in the 2005-2008 rules to remove the
words “corrected to the nearest second”. Therefore the corrected
time should no longer be rounded unless the individual handicaping
system specifies as such. IRC, Portsmouth specify rounding to the
nearest second, but PHRF does not, or at least not that I have ever
been able to find.

There is a document on the US Sailing website “What’s New for Race
Management in the 2005-2008 Racing Rules” that supports not rounding
the corrected time unless specified by the class rules.

http://www.ussailing.org/racemgt/documents/RRS_Changes_2005-2008.pdf

The relevant text is as follows.

Appendix A3 (Starting Times and Finishing Places): An error in
describing how finishing places for handicapped boats are determined
has been corrected–".when a handicap or rating system is used a
boat’s corrected time shall determine her finishing place." The
reference to correcting times to the nearest second has been removed,
leaving the level of precision to be determined by the rules of the
handicap or rating system.

4

Corrected times carry the decimal precision of the handicap formula. In the case of PHRF TOD it’s the decimal precision of the distance (e.g. seconds per mile x 0.88 nm). There was a protest at Miami Race Week a few years back (with the protestor having the same viewpoint as Phillipe) on the same thing and the decimal precision was upheld by the jury.

Look at the results from Key West Race Week

http://www.premiere-racing.com/08_KW_Results/kw08_div2_R2.htm

Mark Townsend s_mark_townsend@hotmail.com

···

To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
From: artengel123@earthlink.net
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 08:39:35 +0000
Subject: [sailwave] Re: Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF

Philippe and Mark,
Let me add some additional insight.
I was a supporter of this change (I cannot remember if it came from the US but it may have - I am on the Racing Rules Committee for the US).
Old rule A3 (pre-2005) said “corrected to the nearest second”. That was deleted because there seemed no reason for the RRS to try and dictate how corrected times should be calculated. I believe Mark is wrong when he says that US Sailing thinks times should NOT be rounded unless supported by the class rules. As he notes, the document he refers to says: “The reference to correcting times to the nearest second has been removed, leaving the level of precision to be determined by the rules of the handicap or rating system.” This is correct in that it says a handicap or rating system may decide rounding is or is not appropriate. It doesn’t say anything about what to do when the handicap or rating system is silent.
I think that the current wording means that (1) a handicap or rating system may specify accuracy, (2) if not determined by a handicap or rating system then it is up to the Sailing Instructions to say something and (3) if neither a system nor the SIs say what to do then it is up to the scorer for a club or event to adopt a policy and consistently stick to it.
Some clubs (not many) still take times in fractional hours, which means they are actually using fractional seconds. Forcing them to round to full seconds was throwing away accuracy. In addition, using fractional seconds (at least, tenths) is acceptable to many competitors as a perfectly fair way to break ties even though scientists and statisticians might argue that it is false accuracy.
Bottom line: you can certainly use fractional seconds as part of your corrected times BUT you should have the option in your scoring program. I think Mark is wrong when he says Sailwave wrongly scores PHRF because that implies that it is always wrong to round. However, he is correct that it is going to be wrong some of the time. If the handicap or scoring system says nothing and the SIs are silent then Sailwave will be correct so long as all of a club’s races use the Sailwave default of rounding.
This should be an option.

Art Engel

— In sailwave@yahoogroups.com, “FFYB Web Manager” <webmanager@…> wrote:

Mark,

We discussed already about this point, personally I think this was a wrong decision of ISAF, related to electronic time keeping. Accuracy of corrected times is never better than that of elapsed time.

With manual time keeping, you cannot record times better than to the secon, hence there is already an inaccuracy of 0.5 second. Rounding to the 1/10, 1/100 or to full decimals is illogical and can even rank the boats in reverse order if times are recorded to the second. In that case, better a tie than a wrong ranking.

The problem is that when changes occur in the RRS, it takes time to change the Class Rules and the Handicap Rules in accordance.

So I can advise you to specify it in the notice of race.

In some cases and only with PH > 1000, it can happen that identical boats, timed with 1 second time difference, are ranked as ties.
It happened once in my life, and with agreement of both helmsmen, the elapsed time of the boat finishing second was altered by a further second to discriminate them.

Philippe De Troy
Federation Francophone Belge du Yachting

----- Original Message -----
From: s_mark_townsend
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 10:20 PM
Subject: [sailwave] Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF

Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF. The corrected time is rounded
to the nearest second, which it should not be per RRS A3. Is there an
option within Sailwave to specify if the corrected time should be
rounded, and to display the unrounded corrected time on the results?

ISAF changed Rule A3 in the 2005-2008 rules to remove the
words “corrected to the nearest second”. Therefore the corrected
time should no longer be rounded unless the individual handicaping
system specifies as such. IRC, Portsmouth specify rounding to the
nearest second, but PHRF does not, or at least not that I have ever
been able to find.

There is a document on the US Sailing website “What’s New for Race
Management in the 2005-2008 Racing Rules” that supports not rounding
the corrected time unless specified by the class rules.

http://www.ussailing.org/racemgt/documents/RRS_Changes_2005-2008.pdf

The relevant text is as follows.

Appendix A3 (Starting Times and Finishing Places): An error in
describing how finishing places for handicapped boats are determined
has been corrected–".when a handicap or rating system is used a
boat’s corrected time shall determine her finishing place." The
reference to correcting times to the nearest second has been removed,
leaving the level of precision to be determined by the rules of the
handicap or rating system.

Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail®-get your “fix”. Check it out.

5

Here is the interpretation that was used in denying a redress during the Miami races two years ago:

The basic time-on-distance formula is: TA = ( D x PHRF ) / 60

TA = Time Allowance in minutes

D = course length in miles

PHRF = rating in seconds per mile

Subtracting the time allowance (TA) from the actual time it took the boat to sail the race (elapsed time or ET) equals the corrected time (CT).

···

Since the term corrected to seconds has been removed in the rules, the rules of significant digits applies:

When multiplying and dividing, the number of significant digits in an answer should equal the least number of significant digits in any one of the numbers being used in the calculation.

When adding or subtracting numbers, the result is rounded off to the decimal place of the least accurate component.

This all indicates that seconds should be used until you consider the rule:

The only time significant digits must be considered is when dealing with measured quantities. Exact or defined numbers should be considered to have an infinite number of significant digits. These are numbers that would not affect the accuracy of a calculation.

PHRF rating is defined, the seconds for elapsed time can be considererd exact (seconds is as exact as we can get for our start and finish times), then the only value that can affect the accuracy of a calculation is the distance. Therefore, the corrected time should be calculated to the accuracy of the distance since it is the only measured quantity.

Mark Townsend s_mark_townsend@hotmail.com

To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
From: artengel123@earthlink.net
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 08:39:35 +0000
Subject: [sailwave] Re: Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF

Philippe and Mark,
Let me add some additional insight.
I was a supporter of this change (I cannot remember if it came from the US but it may have - I am on the Racing Rules Committee for the US).
Old rule A3 (pre-2005) said “corrected to the nearest second”. That was deleted because there seemed no reason for the RRS to try and dictate how corrected times should be calculated. I believe Mark is wrong when he says that US Sailing thinks times should NOT be rounded unless supported by the class rules. As he notes, the document he refers to says: “The reference to correcting times to the nearest second has been removed, leaving the level of precision to be determined by the rules of the handicap or rating system.” This is correct in that it says a handicap or rating system may decide rounding is or is not appropriate. It doesn’t say anything about what to do when the handicap or rating system is silent.
I think that the current wording means that (1) a handicap or rating system may specify accuracy, (2) if not determined by a handicap or rating system then it is up to the Sailing Instructions to say something and (3) if neither a system nor the SIs say what to do then it is up to the scorer for a club or event to adopt a policy and consistently stick to it.
Some clubs (not many) still take times in fractional hours, which means they are actually using fractional seconds. Forcing them to round to full seconds was throwing away accuracy. In addition, using fractional seconds (at least, tenths) is acceptable to many competitors as a perfectly fair way to break ties even though scientists and statisticians might argue that it is false accuracy.
Bottom line: you can certainly use fractional seconds as part of your corrected times BUT you should have the option in your scoring program. I think Mark is wrong when he says Sailwave wrongly scores PHRF because that implies that it is always wrong to round. However, he is correct that it is going to be wrong some of the time. If the handicap or scoring system says nothing and the SIs are silent then Sailwave will be correct so long as all of a club’s races use the Sailwave default of rounding.
This should be an option.

Art Engel

— In sailwave@yahoogroups.com, “FFYB Web Manager” <webmanager@…> wrote:

Mark,

We discussed already about this point, personally I think this was a wrong decision of ISAF, related to electronic time keeping. Accuracy of corrected times is never better than that of elapsed time.

With manual time keeping, you cannot record times better than to the secon, hence there is already an inaccuracy of 0.5 second. Rounding to the 1/10, 1/100 or to full decimals is illogical and can even rank the boats in reverse order if times are recorded to the second. In that case, better a tie than a wrong ranking.

The problem is that when changes occur in the RRS, it takes time to change the Class Rules and the Handicap Rules in accordance.

So I can advise you to specify it in the notice of race.

In some cases and only with PH > 1000, it can happen that identical boats, timed with 1 second time difference, are ranked as ties.
It happened once in my life, and with agreement of both helmsmen, the elapsed time of the boat finishing second was altered by a further second to discriminate them.

Philippe De Troy
Federation Francophone Belge du Yachting

----- Original Message -----
From: s_mark_townsend
To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 10:20 PM
Subject: [sailwave] Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF

Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF. The corrected time is rounded
to the nearest second, which it should not be per RRS A3. Is there an
option within Sailwave to specify if the corrected time should be
rounded, and to display the unrounded corrected time on the results?

ISAF changed Rule A3 in the 2005-2008 rules to remove the
words “corrected to the nearest second”. Therefore the corrected
time should no longer be rounded unless the individual handicaping
system specifies as such. IRC, Portsmouth specify rounding to the
nearest second, but PHRF does not, or at least not that I have ever
been able to find.

There is a document on the US Sailing website “What’s New for Race
Management in the 2005-2008 Racing Rules” that supports not rounding
the corrected time unless specified by the class rules.

http://www.ussailing.org/racemgt/documents/RRS_Changes_2005-2008.pdf

The relevant text is as follows.

Appendix A3 (Starting Times and Finishing Places): An error in
describing how finishing places for handicapped boats are determined
has been corrected–".when a handicap or rating system is used a
boat’s corrected time shall determine her finishing place." The
reference to correcting times to the nearest second has been removed,
leaving the level of precision to be determined by the rules of the
handicap or rating system.

Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser! Learn more.

6

I stand by my earlier posting. Just because some protest committee/jury
rulead one way on an issue doesn't make that decision correct.

Art

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

Corrected times carry the decimal precision of the handicap formula.

In the case of PHRF TOD it's the decimal precision of the distance (e.g.
seconds per mile x 0.88 nm). There was a protest at Miami Race Week a
few years back (with the protestor having the same viewpoint as
Phillipe) on the same thing and the decimal precision was upheld by the
jury.

Look at the results from Key West Race Week

http://www.premiere-racing.com/08_KW_Results/kw08_div2_R2.htm

Mark Townsend s_mark_townsend@...

To: sailwave@...: artengel123@...: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 08:39:35

+0000Subject: [sailwave] Re: Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF

Philippe and Mark,Let me add some additional insight.I was a supporter

of this change (I cannot remember if it came from the US but it may have
- I am on the Racing Rules Committee for the US).Old rule A3 (pre-2005)
said "corrected to the nearest second". That was deleted because there
seemed no reason for the RRS to try and dictate how corrected times
should be calculated. I believe Mark is wrong when he says that US
Sailing thinks times should NOT be rounded unless supported by the class
rules. As he notes, the document he refers to says: "The reference to
correcting times to the nearest second has been removed, leaving the
level of precision to be determined by the rules of the handicap or
rating system." This is correct in that it says a handicap or rating
system may decide rounding is or is not appropriate. It doesn't say
anything about what to do when the handicap or rating system is silent.I
think that the current wording means that (1) a handicap or rating
system may specify accuracy, (2) if not determined by a handicap or
rating system then it is up to the Sailing Instructions to say something
and (3) if neither a system nor the SIs say what to do then it is up to
the scorer for a club or event to adopt a policy and consistently stick
to it.Some clubs (not many) still take times in fractional hours, which
means they are actually using fractional seconds. Forcing them to round
to full seconds was throwing away accuracy. In addition, using
fractional seconds (at least, tenths) is acceptable to many competitors
as a perfectly fair way to break ties even though scientists and
statisticians might argue that it is false accuracy.Bottom line: you can
certainly use fractional seconds as part of your corrected times BUT you
should have the option in your scoring program. I think Mark is wrong
when he says Sailwave wrongly scores PHRF because that implies that it
is always wrong to round. However, he is correct that it is going to be
wrong some of the time. If the handicap or scoring system says nothing
and the SIs are silent then Sailwave will be correct so long as all of a
club's races use the Sailwave default of rounding.This should be an
option.Art Engel--- In sailwave@yahoogroups.com, "FFYB Web Manager"
webmanager@ wrote:>> Mark,> > We discussed already about this point,
personally I think this was a wrong decision of ISAF, related to
electronic time keeping. Accuracy of corrected times is never better
than that of elapsed time.> > With manual time keeping, you cannot
record times better than to the secon, hence there is already an
inaccuracy of 0.5 second. Rounding to the 1/10, 1/100 or to full
decimals is illogical and can even rank the boats in reverse order if
times are recorded to the second. In that case, better a tie than a
wrong ranking. > > The problem is that when changes occur in the RRS, it
takes time to change the Class Rules and the Handicap Rules in
accordance. > > So I can advise you to specify it in the notice of race.

> In some cases and only with PH > 1000, it can happen that identical

boats, timed with 1 second time difference, are ranked as ties. > It
happened once in my life, and with agreement of both helmsmen, the
elapsed time of the boat finishing second was altered by a further
second to discriminate them.> > Philippe De Troy> Federation Francophone
Belge du Yachting> > ----- Original Message ----- > From:
s_mark_townsend > To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, February
03, 2008 10:20 PM> Subject: [sailwave] Sailwave does not correctly score

> > Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF. The corrected time is

rounded > to the nearest second, which it should not be per RRS A3. Is
there an > option within Sailwave to specify if the corrected time
should be > rounded, and to display the unrounded corrected time on the
results?> > ISAF changed Rule A3 in the 2005-2008 rules to remove the >
words "corrected to the nearest second". Therefore the corrected > time
should no longer be rounded unless the individual handicaping > system
specifies as such. IRC, Portsmouth specify rounding to the > nearest
second, but PHRF does not, or at least not that I have ever > been able
to find.> > There is a document on the US Sailing website "What's New
for Race > Management in the 2005-2008 Racing Rules" that supports not
rounding > the corrected time unless specified by the class rules.> >
http://www.ussailing.org/racemgt/documents/RRS_Changes_2005-2008.pdf> >
The relevant text is as follows.> > Appendix A3 (Starting Times and
Finishing Places): An error in > describing how finishing places for
handicapped boats are determined > has been corrected--".when a handicap
or rating system is used a > boat's corrected time shall determine her
finishing place." The > reference to correcting times to the nearest
second has been removed, > leaving the level of precision to be
determined by the rules of the > handicap or rating system.>

_________________________________________________________________
Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your

Hotmail®-get your "fix".

···

http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx

7

I believe that Paul Ansfield, the chair of the US PHRF Committe, was involved in the Miami protest that provided the decimal precision ruling.

Mark Townsend s_mark_townsend@hotmail.com

···

To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com
From: artengel123@earthlink.net
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 15:24:58 +0000
Subject: [sailwave] Re: Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF

I stand by my earlier posting. Just because some protest committee/jury
rulead one way on an issue doesn’t make that decision correct.

Art

— In sailwave@yahoogroups.com, Mark Townsend <s_mark_townsend@…>
wrote:

Corrected times carry the decimal precision of the handicap formula.
In the case of PHRF TOD it’s the decimal precision of the distance (e.g.
seconds per mile x 0.88 nm). There was a protest at Miami Race Week a
few years back (with the protestor having the same viewpoint as
Phillipe) on the same thing and the decimal precision was upheld by the
jury.

Look at the results from Key West Race Week

http://www.premiere-racing.com/08_KW_Results/kw08_div2_R2.htm

Mark Townsend s_mark_townsend@…

To: sailwave@…: artengel123@…: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 08:39:35
+0000Subject: [sailwave] Re: Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF

Philippe and Mark,Let me add some additional insight.I was a supporter
of this change (I cannot remember if it came from the US but it may have

  • I am on the Racing Rules Committee for the US).Old rule A3 (pre-2005)
    said “corrected to the nearest second”. That was deleted because there
    seemed no reason for the RRS to try and dictate how corrected times
    should be calculated. I believe Mark is wrong when he says that US
    Sailing thinks times should NOT be rounded unless supported by the class
    rules. As he notes, the document he refers to says: “The reference to
    correcting times to the nearest second has been removed, leaving the
    level of precision to be determined by the rules of the handicap or
    rating system.” This is correct in that it says a handicap or rating
    system may decide rounding is or is not appropriate. It doesn’t say
    anything about what to do when the handicap or rating system is silent.I
    think that the current wording means that (1) a handicap or rating
    system may specify accuracy, (2) if not determined by a handicap or
    rating system then it is up to the Sailing Instructions to say something
    and (3) if neither a system nor the SIs say what to do then it is up to
    the scorer for a club or event to adopt a policy and consistently stick
    to it.Some clubs (not many) still take times in fractional hours, which
    means they are actually using fractional seconds. Forcing them to round
    to full seconds was throwing away accuracy. In addition, using
    fractional seconds (at least, tenths) is acceptable to many competitors
    as a perfectly fair way to break ties even though scientists and
    statisticians might argue that it is false accuracy.Bottom line: you can
    certainly use fractional seconds as part of your corrected times BUT you
    should have the option in your scoring program. I think Mark is wrong
    when he says Sailwave wrongly scores PHRF because that implies that it
    is always wrong to round. However, he is correct that it is going to be
    wrong some of the time. If the handicap or scoring system says nothing
    and the SIs are silent then Sailwave will be correct so long as all of a
    club’s races use the Sailwave default of rounding.This should be an
    option.Art Engel— In sailwave@yahoogroups.com, “FFYB Web Manager”
    webmanager@ wrote:>> Mark,> > We discussed already about this point,
    personally I think this was a wrong decision of ISAF, related to
    electronic time keeping. Accuracy of corrected times is never better
    than that of elapsed time.> > With manual time keeping, you cannot
    record times better than to the secon, hence there is already an
    inaccuracy of 0.5 second. Rounding to the 1/10, 1/100 or to full
    decimals is illogical and can even rank the boats in reverse order if
    times are recorded to the second. In that case, better a tie than a
    wrong ranking. > > The problem is that when changes occur in the RRS, it
    takes time to change the Class Rules and the Handicap Rules in
    accordance. > > So I can advise you to specify it in the notice of race.

In some cases and only with PH > 1000, it can happen that identical
boats, timed with 1 second time difference, are ranked as ties. > It
happened once in my life, and with agreement of both helmsmen, the
elapsed time of the boat finishing second was altered by a further
second to discriminate them.> > Philippe De Troy> Federation Francophone
Belge du Yachting> > ----- Original Message ----- > From:
s_mark_townsend > To: sailwave@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, February
03, 2008 10:20 PM> Subject: [sailwave] Sailwave does not correctly score

Sailwave does not correctly score PHRF. The corrected time is
rounded > to the nearest second, which it should not be per RRS A3. Is
there an > option within Sailwave to specify if the corrected time
should be > rounded, and to display the unrounded corrected time on the
results?> > ISAF changed Rule A3 in the 2005-2008 rules to remove the >
words “corrected to the nearest second”. Therefore the corrected > time
should no longer be rounded unless the individual handicaping > system
specifies as such. IRC, Portsmouth specify rounding to the > nearest
second, but PHRF does not, or at least not that I have ever > been able
to find.> > There is a document on the US Sailing website “What’s New
for Race > Management in the 2005-2008 Racing Rules” that supports not
rounding > the corrected time unless specified by the class rules.> >
http://www.ussailing.org/racemgt/documents/RRS_Changes_2005-2008.pdf> >
The relevant text is as follows.> > Appendix A3 (Starting Times and
Finishing Places): An error in > describing how finishing places for
handicapped boats are determined > has been corrected–".when a handicap
or rating system is used a > boat’s corrected time shall determine her
finishing place." The > reference to correcting times to the nearest
second has been removed, > leaving the level of precision to be
determined by the rules of the > handicap or rating system.>

Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your
Hotmail®-get your “fix”.
http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx

Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail®-get your “fix”. Check it out.

8

Yes, but do we know which side of the issue he was on?

Actually, Paul called me earlier this week or last week asking me for my
interpretation on exactly this issue (presumably he was just home from
Key West Race Week). I think it was the day after I had posted here. I
don't know what his opinion may have been in the past but he said he
agreed with the interpretation I voiced here earlier [class rules may
determine accuracy; if not, then SIs may determine it; if neither does,
then scorer should pick a method, any method, and be consistent]. Paul
says he intends to send that out to PHRF handicappers around the US as
"best practices."

Art

PS - I was at your club a few weeks back for the ISAF Youth Worlds
qualifier regatta but missed you. I guess you were at KWRW. All the best
in 2008!!

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

I believe that Paul Ansfield, the chair of the US PHRF Committe, was

involved in the Miami protest that provided the decimal precision
ruling.

···

Mark Townsend s_mark_townsend@...