FWIW, stating what I learned. The PHRF is a rating based on projected boat speeds in multiple wind speeds on every angle of the wind. They use one number for a typical boat in all wind and sea conditions. This works OK for triangle races which provide upwind, reaching, downwind legs and if a season of races offers low wind and high wind races, the ratings are fair. My boat excels upwind and we did well in triangle races jib and main, held our own reaching, and suffered a little downwind without a spinnaker.
More recently I started racing in distance races and the majority have had a short leg upwind to allow a clean start, and then a turn downwind for 90% of the race. I was racing solo against crewed boats and after a timid start because I have to keep clear, I'll typically pass four to five boats going the 30 minutes upwind. Then they pass me with their genekers or spinnakers on the 4 hour downwind course to the finish. One race turned back upwind at the finish and I was able to pass a boat on that final leg so I wasn't the last of 60 boats across the line. I have flown my spinnaker alone, but not during a race yet. I'm working on that. All in all, racing PHRF made us better sailors and I pushed some other skippers and they got better too so we all benefited. Chuck S, Resolute, 1990 C&C 34R > On June 11, 2019 at 10:49 AM "Matthew L. Wolford via CnC-List" > <cnc-list@cnc-list.com> wrote: > > 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 mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com > Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 10:18 AM > To: CnClist mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com > Cc: Dennis C. mailto:capt...@gmail.com > 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 < > cnc-list@cnc-list.com mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com > 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 mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com > > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2019 4:42 PM > > To: cnc-list@cnc-list.com mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com > > Cc: Edd Schillay mailto:e...@schillay.com > > 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 http://enterpriseb.blogspot.com/ > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 10, 2019, at 4:25 PM, Randy Stafford via CnC-List < > > cnc-list@cnc-list.com mailto:cnc-list@cnc-list.com > 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 > >
_______________________________________________ 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
