Rick, to clarify, PHRF of the Chesapeake does not have the NS and S boats in the same class with different ratings.
They have a different NS rating for boats which have something about their spinnaker which makes it different than a 'stock' boat. So, the J-24 that I raced, which had a masthead spinnaker (stock is a fractional), was rated as 171 in non spinnaker configuration (the standard J-24 OD rating) and 165 in spinnaker. But we would have to race in a JAM race to get that 171 rating. Similarly, a J-30 or C&C 115 with an oversized pole would have a different JAM rating than a spin rating, usually a 3 second difference. Gary Nylander ----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Brass To: cnc-list@cnc-list.com Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 9:26 AM Subject: Re: Stus-List PHRF ratings - Spin vs non-spin Just for clarification, the race in question is a middle distance (about 16 nm) pursuit race run on a course that has 8 legs of varying lengths and directions. Last year we had a fleet of 37 PHRF boats that ranged from a Farrier 31 tri at 59 to a Menger 18 catboat at 330+. The 6 boats in the spin fleet all started in the second half of the fleet (the Farrier started well over an hour after the Menger) but all the spin boats finished in the first 8 or 9 boats over the line. Lots of local clubs with small fleets (and some PHRF organizations like Chesapeake Bay PHRF) have non-spin ratings that let spin and non-spin boats compete in the same race. No question that having separate spin and non-spin fleets is preferable to a single fleet, and that one design racing eliminates all the arguments about PHRF ratings being fair or not. But separate fleets are not always possible. What I'm asking for is suggestions for a rating adjustment that lets disparate boats compete fairly in a small fleet. Rick Brass Washington, NC From: CnC-List [mailto:cnc-list-boun...@cnc-list.com] On Behalf Of Josh Muckley Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 6:14 AM To: cnc-list@cnc-list.com Subject: Re: Stus-List PHRF ratings - Spin vs non-spin Agreed Dwight. I can't envision a way that this would turn out well. Seems like you need two fleets or a course that has little or no downwind legs. You could also just say no handicap for non-spin or just not allow any spinnakers. I'm thinking very few, short, downwind legs is the best answer if a mixed fleet is the only option. Josh Muckley S/V Sea Hawk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ This List is provided by the C&C Photo Album http://www.cncphotoalbum.com CnC-List@cnc-list.com
_______________________________________________ This List is provided by the C&C Photo Album http://www.cncphotoalbum.com CnC-List@cnc-list.com
