Correct (as usual) about sport boats.  It’s hard to beat a boat capable of 
doing sport-boat speeds in moderate to heavy air.

From: Dennis C. via CnC-List 
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 10:18 AM
To: CnClist 
Cc: Dennis C. 
Subject: Re: Stus-List 30 MK I PHRF Rating

The imperfections of handicap systems have been discussed a lot.  You just have 
to accept them with all their warts. 

One protection against local politics is to race a boat which has several 
sisterboats.  If your boat is the only one like it in the fleet and you win a 
lot, you probably will be hit.  On the other hand, if there are one or more 
boats like yours in the fleet and the others are not well raced, you have a 
small "buffer" against an adjustment. 

Another protection is to be a member of the club with a local handicapper or a 
club with clout.  Hence, the politics.

PHRF (Punishing Hard Racing Folks) is not a perfect system.  On the other hand, 
there are racers who stretch the system.  They'll buy a "sleeper" boat, trick 
it out to the max, win a few races then sell it when the handicappers hit it.

IMHO, the biggest problem with PHRF is when there is a mixed fleet with sport 
boats and displacement boats.  The system just doesn't have the capability to 
handle the significant differences in performance in varying conditions for 
disparate boat types.

Personally, I think the Portsmouth TOT system is better than PHRF.  I'm 
monitoring my area's venture into ORR-EZ.

Dennis C.
Touche' 35-1 #83
Mandeville, LA

On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 8:56 AM Matthew L. Wolford via CnC-List 
<[email protected]> wrote:

  What Edd refers to as “corruption” I referred to in my earlier note as “local 
politics.”  In my view Edd is correct – corrupt local politics is probably the 
biggest factor in rating anomalies.

  From: Edd Schillay via CnC-List 
  Sent: Monday, June 10, 2019 4:42 PM
  To: [email protected] 
  Cc: Edd Schillay 
  Subject: Re: Stus-List 30 MK I PHRF Rating

  Randy, 

  As someone who was Commodore of a Western Long Island Sound yacht racing 
association for over 12 years and who has had access to ratings data from all 
over the USA, there is, simply, a one-word answer:

  Corruption

  First of all, the P in PHRF is Performance. So, if there is a a few C&C 30s 
that race in a particular area that do very well, one of their competitors will 
go to the PHRF committee and ask for a rating review stating it’s unfair 
racing, which may result in a change in that rating. The more someone 
complains, the more likely a change will be made, just to shut them up. The 
squeaky wheel gets the oil. That alone is corrupt. 

  Now here is where the BIG corruption comes in to play: Quite often the 
members of the PHRF committees are people in the sailing industry, usually 
sailmakers. Give them business and changes will probably come in your favor. 

  In some areas, it’s gotten better, but it’s still a mess. Real racing factors 
such as sail area, displacement, waterline, etc. are not part of any PHRF 
calculation, except maybe when faced with a one-off new boat -- they’ll rate it 
similar to another boat with the same specs. 

  As you can tell, I’m not a fan. But other systems are either super expensive 
or have gone extinct (Americap had such promise). 

  What racing needs is a mathematician with some extra time on his hands that 
can create a formula that will calculate a rating system based solely on the 
boat’s characteristics. 


  All the best,

  Edd


  Edd M. Schillay
  Captain of the Starship Enterprise
  C&C 37+ | Sail No: NCC-1701-B
  City Island Yacht Club | City Island, NY 
  Venice Yacht Club | Venice, FL

  Starship Enterprise's Captain's Log







  On Jun 10, 2019, at 4:25 PM, Randy Stafford via CnC-List 
<[email protected]> wrote:

  Listers- 

  Looking at US Sailing’s “History of US PHRF Affiliated Fleet Handicaps” 
(https://www.ussailing.org/competition/offshore/phrf/phrf-handicaps/), you can 
see that there is a range of ratings for the 30 MK I across different fleets, 
from 168 to 186 seconds per nautical mile.  Note I believe that the “C&C 30” 
and “C&C 30 (1-506)” models are the same boat in that document’s tables.

  I’m trying to understand why that is.  The mode, or most often occurring 
rating, is 174.  That’s with spinnaker, and generally assumes a folding prop, 
from what I understand.  But why would the Newfoundland fleet rate the boat at 
168 sec/nm, for example, and the Northwest fleet rate it at 186?

  If we have any listers from those fleets / Regional Sailing Associations who 
can shed light on this question, I’d be very interested.

  When my boat was first rated by my RSA (https://rmsail.org, in US Sailing’s 
Area F) back in 2016, she was given a rating of 186, with a fixed two-blade 
prop.  Her rating stayed at 186 after I got a folding prop for the 2017 season 
and beyond.

  Now my RSA is re-rating all boats in the region.  I believe the handicapper 
is primarily looking at the above US Sailing document, and probably choosing 
the most-often occurring rating as the base.  So I believe my boat’s rating 
will probably change to 174.

  Can anyone explain the range of ratings?

  Thank You,
  Randy Stafford
  S/V Grenadine
  C&C 30-1 #7
  Ken Caryl, CO
  _______________________________________________

  Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  _______________________________________________

  Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray


  _______________________________________________

  Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

_______________________________________________

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Reply via email to